Liturgy Outside Liturgy: The Liturgical Theology of Fr. Alexander Schmemann by David W. Fagerberg

Abstract

Reviewed by: Liturgy Outside Liturgy: The Liturgical Theology of Fr. Alexander Schmemann by David W. Fagerberg Veronica A. Arntz David W. Fagerberg Liturgy Outside Liturgy: The Liturgical Theology of Fr. Alexander Schmemann Hong Kong: Chora Books, 2018 213 pages. Paperback. $24.60. Alexander Schmemann, one of the great Russian Orthodox theologians of the twentieth century, perceived that theology was in a profound crisis. Because theology became restricted to the realm of academia, it was ultimately disconnected from both liturgy and piety, which are essential elements to the Church’s life. Moreover, liturgy itself simply became one more area of theological research. For Schmemann, however, theology is born out of liturgy, and flows from it. His concerns are just as relevant today, in which we find that theology frequently becomes the pursuit of experts, being severed from the practice of liturgy. Thus, David W. Fagerberg’s recent book Liturgy Outside Liturgy: The Liturgical Theology of Fr. Alexander Schmemann, which is a study of the relationship between liturgy, theology, and piety in Schmemann’s writings, could not be timelier. The book is divided into two parts. In the first, Fagerberg studies the works of Schmemann on liturgy, theology, and piety, outlining his unique vision. The second part presents Fagerberg’s own perspective, with reference to Schmemann’s own theology. In this review, I will outline some of the major moments in Schmemann’s theology, with an eye to Fagerberg’s hope for an improved relationship between modern theology and liturgy. The importance of Schmemann’s thought for current academic theology will become clear. Schmemann recognized a tendency in the Church to turn “liturgical theology” into its own discipline. This creates a dangerous bifurcation between liturgy and theology, such that liturgy becomes the thing dissected by the “experts.” In reality, however, as Fagerberg explains, “Liturgy does not receive from theology its meaning, definition, place, and function within the Church. Instead liturgy, in addition to being a potential object of study, is above all the source [End Page 95] of theology. If this is so, then theology is born when the Church gathers at Eucharist” (61). Liturgy is not only an object of study, but is furthermore the place of origin of theology. This is why, for Schmemann, it is not the academic theologian who is truly a theologian, but rather, the simple woman in the pew who immerses herself in liturgy and prayer: “Mrs. Murphy has the charismatic gift of theology” (61)—an illustration used by Aidan Kavanagh (55). These ideas flow into another major theme in Schmemann’s writing, which Fagerberg draws out admirably. Liturgy and theology should not simply be fields in academia. As Schmemann writes, “[theology] today constitutes within the Church a self-centered world, virtually isolated from the Church’s life. It lives in itself and by itself in tranquil academic quarters, well defended against profane intrusions and curiosities by a highly technical language” (52). In other words, Schmemann sees that, because theology is pursued by the academy, it has become wholly separated from the life of the Church. While he is not entirely opposed to academic theology, he does think that theology is facing a crisis because it is separated from the Church and thereby liturgical life. Thus, his solution involves retrieving the idea that theology flows directly from the liturgical life of the Church (69–70). For this reason, Schmemann wants to see a reunion of theology, liturgy, and piety. As Fagerberg explains, “Liturgy will serve as the root and source of a piety that is nevertheless directed outward, toward the world, and not inward, toward itself” (101). Schmemann’s own words could not be more relevant today: “There can be no renewal in any area of Church life or, simply, of the Church herself, without first a spiritual renewal” (101). Liturgical piety then assumes an eschatological dimension, looking outward to the world and to the coming of the Kingdom, which is, indeed, already in our midst (103–104). Fagerberg shows that Schmemann’s understanding of liturgical theology is not ultimately focused on the work of the academy, but rather, on the life of the Church oriented toward the coming Kingdom. In the second part of the...