What has been characterized as the turn to in literary studies has arisen, I believe, at least in part from a recognition among new historicist and cultural studies critics that producing historicized and culturally astute analyses of literary works requires acknowledging more spheres of meaning than those related to race, class, gender, or economics. Under new historicist principles, now also functions legitimately as a component of individual and social formations, while cultural studies finds material religion a significant part of the production and distribution of cultural meaning. Both fields are also interested in as it relates to issues of power. The literary scholar can welcome and learn much from the work now being published on and literature. At the same time, he or she will find that much of this work does not constitute per se, nor does it intend to. On the contrary, because it takes as just one more category of culture or identity formation and not as a transforming vision or central perspective, it leaves plenty of room for a more specifically literary critique--or, since Christian scholarship itself is difficult to define, for the insights of scholars who, because of their own commitments to the faith, are more likely than critics of other persuasions to approach the evidences of in texts and writers in integral rather than reductionist ways. scholars might contribute to the religion-and-literature dialogue in a number of ways, one of which is by focusing on the practices of faith. My own interests lie in the potential intersections between a person's participation in communal practices and his / her practices of writing. Those who are not regular church-goers (and perhaps some who are) may see the weekly church as a rote exercise, stripped of meaning by endless repetition, rendered boring by habitual practice. But careful attention to the meaning, purpose, and perhaps above all, the variety of practices or liturgies in the church can reveal the deep textures of individuals' differing commitments and, in turn, the intricacies of faith writing that arises out of these commitments. Understanding these intricacies can prevent generalizations about writers that do not do justice to their individualities. It can also reveal the extent to which devotional writings are built on carefully deliberated principles derived from or shaped in response to the beliefs and practices of a faith community. In an age that has largely accepted the idea of as a purely personal matter, such attention to the relationships between the and private dimensions of faith might prove startling. I believe in the possibility of integral connections between communal and personal endeavor outside the liturgical experience not least because the word etymologically and historically implies such a movement or relationship. Liturgy means public worship or public service. From the outset, therefore, it differs from that ascription of worth to God (worth-ship = worship) that is more private in nature. Liturgy by definition is devised for and within a worshipping community. But the public service to which aspires is more than a being open to the public. Rather, as has to do with outward movement, from to world through the work of individuals who participate in the liturgy. As Kevin Irwin explains, every is influenced, in however minimal or maximal a way, by the liturgy such that its effects carry over to how one prays, reflects and acts outside the experience of liturgy (14, 16). Liturgy may thus be defined as any habitual practice that, performed regularly, shapes (intentionally or not) the formation of the heart, and, from there, the further activities and aims of the individual. …
Read full abstract
May 20, 2009
Henry Luttikhuizen 
Open Access
