

























36 

4 

FORMATION IN RITUAL STUDIES: 
TOWARDS A BETTER APPRECIATION OF 

CATHOLIC SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM 
 

Olumuyiwa Anthony OMODUNBI 
Catholic Diocese of Oshogbo 

thonyiwa@gmail.com 
 

Abstract  
For a long while, the Roman Catholic sacramental understanding has 
been built upon Thomistic philosophy that is foundational on 
Aristotelian metaphysics. This approach to sacraments and sacramentality 
often obscures seeing sacraments as what they really are: rituals. More 
than ever before, there is need, both in understanding and in practice, to 
have recourse to ritual dimensions of sacraments. Liturgical acts are 
essentially ritual actions and as such deserves such a consideration. 
However, In the wake of the post Vatican II liturgical reforms, Romano 
Guardini (one of the fathers of modern liturgical movement), in his 
open letter to a German conference on liturgy in 1964 made an apt 
remark that worths considering in the formation of 21st century priests.  
He remarked that despite the ritual and textual problems that come with 
the reform, “the central problem seems to me to be something else; the 
problem of the cult act or, to be more precise, the liturgical act. As I see 
it, typical nineteenth-century man was no longer able to perform this act; 
in fact he was unaware of its existence.” This essay therefore argues for 
the need of incorporating ritual studies into the formation of 
contemporary seminarians for a better understanding and practice of 
liturgical acts. The essay argues that ritual studies posits an invitation to a 
renewed understanding of sacrament and sacramentality. The ministers 
of the Word and Sacraments must be aware of the rituals they make, the 
inherent symbols, and how the symbols speak to the assembly that 
partake in the ritual actions. Also, needless to say that liturgical catechesis 
will become more common and effective, only if the teachers understand 
deeply the rituals they make, since nemo dat quod non habet. 
 



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    37 

Keywords: Sacrament, sacramentality, rituals, ex opere operato, symbols, 
ritual studies, 
 
Introduction 
One of the major lasting effects of the Second Vatican Council is the call 
for the revision of the rites of celebrating various sacraments in the 
Church. The entire reform of the liturgy – especially the celebration of 
the sacraments - is to emphasise the reality that liturgical acts are ritual 
actions.1  As such the theology of the different sacraments should at the 
same time be directly drawn and inferred from the ritual practice.  Little 
wonder that each general instruction to the various rites establishes the 
significance of the various liturgical celebrations upon the rite with 
which they are practiced.  This is a deliberate move away from the 
scholastic approach to liturgical practices (prior to the Vatican II 
Council) which prioritizes the juridical implications of liturgical 
celebrations.  

However, the reality on ground attests that the development that 
the reform of the liturgy by the conciliar fathers envisaged is still far from 
actualization in many quarters. In many places, the scholastic approach 
(using Thomistic philosophy built on Aristotelian metaphysics) to the 
sacramental system of the Church is still prevalent, and in many cases, 
the only way of understanding sacramental reality.  The purpose of this 
presentation is to argue for another way of looking at the Catholic 
sacramental system – basically the meaning of sacraments and 
sacramental efficacy.  It proposes that formation in ritual studies will 
enhance a better understanding and the practice of liturgy. The need for 
this formation in ritual studies was underscored by Romano Guardini, in 
his open letter to a German conference on liturgy in 1964 (few months 
after the call for revision of various rites) when he remarked that:  

A mass of ritual and textual problems will present 
themselves and long experience has shown how much 
scope there is for a right and a wrong approach.  But the 
central problem seems to me to be something else; the 
problem of the cult act or, to be more precise, the 
liturgical act. As I see it, typical nineteenth-century man 
(sic) was no longer able to perform this act; in fact, he 
was unaware of its existence. Religious conduct was to 
him an individual inward matter which in the “liturgy” 
took on the character of an official, public ceremonial. 
But the sense of the liturgical action was thereby lost. 
The faithful did not perform a proper liturgical act at all, 
it was simply a private and inward act, surrounded by 
ceremonial and not infrequently accompanied by a 



38 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

feeling that the ceremonial was really a disturbing factor. 
From that point of view the efforts of those who 
concerned themselves with the liturgy must have 
appeared as peculiarities of aesthetes who lacked 
Christian sincerity.2 

Guardini did not hesitate to acknowledge the importance of seeing 
liturgical acts as actions performed by sociological entities who are both 
human and spirit. He also pin-points the importance of the various 
elements – the time, place and things - involved in the external action 
called ritual. In these, one can deduce the inevitable call for formation in 
what will later be known as ritual studies for the better appreciation of 
the liturgical reform and the liturgy itself. He argues that the opportunity 
that the reform brings is the opportunity ‘to relearn forgotten way of 
doing things and recapture lost attitudes.’3  This is the same prospect that 
ritual studies offers. 

This presentation will therefore proceed to highlight some 
justifications for the claim that ‘there is a forgotten way’ and ‘lost 
attitude’ to relearn and recapture respectively through formation in ritual 
studies.  This will explore the patristic way of understanding sacramental 
reality vis a vis the renewed understanding of sacramentality today. 
Afterwards, the work will argue for the potency of ritual studies to 
illuminate catholic sacramental system. 
 
Re-learning the Forgotten Way: Sacramentality Renewed 
Before requesting for the revision of the various rites for celebration of 
the sacraments, the conciliar fathers acknowledged that there is a 
problem of a ‘forgotten way’ because ‘with the passage of time, 
(however), there have crept into the rites of the sacramentals and 
sacraments certain features which have rendered their nature and 
purpose far from clear to the people of today.’4 This reality calls for a 
reflection on the history and development of sacramental practice in 
order to highlight what was wrong and at what point.5 While this work 
cannot cover the scope, let it suffice to note that the understanding of 
sacrament and sacramental efficacy in the Church has not been the same 
all through the history of the Church.  Recent scholarship now favours 
the patristic understanding over the rigid and strict scholastic meaning. 

The Second Vatican Council brought with it a new way of 
understanding Sacramental Theology. More than ever before, the 
council emphasised that creation has the capacity to reveal God who is 
both transcendent and immanent. Therefore, the fathers assert that 
‘there is scarcely any proper use of material things which cannot thus be 
directed towards the sanctification of men and the praise of God.’6 This 
teaching ignited a revolution in Sacramental Theology, and ‘Christian 



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    39 

theology today recognises that the ability of all creation to reveal the 
transcendent God is first and foremost through the initiative of God and 
then also because of the willingness of an immanent God to 
communicate that desire and allow it to be known in human heart.’7 
David Brown underscores these two attributes of God – transcendence 
and immanence – as unique ways of mediating divine presence through 
the material world.  For him, transcendence does not mean absence; 
rather it stresses the otherness of God, while immanence makes possible 
his closeness.8 

Sacramentality does not mean that God is in all things, but that 
all things are capable of revealing God (or at least something about 
God).9  It was Rowan Williams, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, 
who remarked that ‘sacramentality is not a general principle that the 
world is full of “sacredness”: it is the very specific conviction that the 
world is full of the life of God whose nature is known in Christ and the 
Spirit.’10  Since all of creation is the handiwork of God, creation possesses 
a bit of ‘God’ in them and are so enabled to ‘reflect’ God. Sacramentality 
thus ‘acts as a prism, a theological lens through which we view creation 
and all that is in this good earth as revelations of God’s presence and 
action among us here and now.’11 Hence, sacramentality is a theological 
concept covering a vast sphere of reality and cannot be narrowed down 
to the ecclesial (seven) sacraments. In the words of Larson-Miller, ‘the 
elusive nature of the term “sacramentality” is its strength, in that it can 
lure Christians beyond the narrowness of ecclesial sacramental 
terminology to a broad context in which other terms can find a home, 
both contextualized and rational and capable of development.’12 

The elusive nature of the term, ‘sacramentality’ recognised by 
Larson-Miller is not a new discovery. From the earlier usage of the term 
sacrament (from which sacramentality is derived), it has always carried a 
variety of meanings.  Though Augustine refers to sacrament as ‘a sign of a 
sacred thing’ it was applied to a variety of realities.13  True to its 
etymological meaning, the Latin word for sacrament, sacramentum is 
derived from the word sacrare meaning ‘to make or be holy.’ It can refer 
to ‘a person or thing constituted holy by divine right, a function reserved 
for public authority to “consecrate,” the one who performs the 
consecration, the consecration itself, the person or thing consecrated, and 
the means used to effect it.’14 Also the word sacrament has a traceable root 
in the Greek term mysterion. In the New Testament, Paul uses mysterion to 
refer to the hidden plan of God (cf. Rom. 16:25-26). Also, in this Greek 
sense, mysterion means something unfathomable, something so 
extraordinary and overwhelming that it cannot be comprehended.15 It is 
in this light that Joseph Martos noted that ‘any ritual or object, person or 



40 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

place, can be considered sacramental if it is taken to be a symbol of 
something that is sacred or mysterious.’16 

Furthermore, Augustine used the term ‘sacrament for three 
classes of things: (1) the religious rites of both the Old and New 
Testaments and rites of paganism, (2) symbols and figures, and (3) 
revealed teaching of the Christian religion.17 These include imposition of 
hands, blessed ashes, holy water, sign of the cross, ordination, religious 
profession, the Lord’s prayer, feasts, and the word Amen among many 
others.  

While the term ‘sacraments’ in the Roman Catholic Church is 
often associated with the seven sacraments as defined by the Council of 
Trent (Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme-
unction[now Anointing of the sick], Holy Orders and Matrimony), the 
renewed understanding of sacramentality has opened up deeper ways of 
understanding sacraments.  Contemporary theology incorporates the 
patristic notion of sacraments into how sacraments should be understood 
today. Hence, we speak today of primordial sacraments – first to describe 
Christ and, second the Church18 -, the seven ecclesial sacraments and 
other sacramentals.19 Indeed, according to Paul Tillich, ‘any object or 
event is sacramental in which the transcendent is perceived to be 
present.’20 

Moreover, the theological principle of sacramentality justifies the 
use of earthly materials as sacred signs in the liturgy. Creation does not 
only reveal God, but also praises God in itself and through the works of 
human hands.  Sacramentality is therefore based on the belief that 
everything God created is good and they can be used in the worship of 
God and the sanctification of humans. According to Irwin, 
‘sacramentality is a worldview that invites us to be immersed fully in the 
here and now, on this good earth, and not to shun matter or avoid the 
challenges that such earthiness will require of us, even as we pray 
through liturgy and sacraments (and other means) to enter into heaven 
when this earthly pilgrimage has ended.’21 The engagement of humans 
with creation in its goodness continues the purpose of God in creation, 
reveals his presence among us and manifest his actions in and on us. 
Hence, ‘holiness, salvation, and redemption are given to us in the 
sacraments because of the principle of sacramentality and mediation.’22 

The fundamental means of mediation of the experience of the 
divine is through the human body.  In recent times theologians pay more 
attention to the role of the human body in sacramental theology, perhaps 
partly because the body is ‘the physical channel of meaning.’23  This 
attention is mainly due to ‘the recognition of the human being, 
inseparable from his or her context-dependence on the living organism 
of the earth, as the conduit through which any and all theology is 



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    41 

constructed.’24 In a sense, ‘sacramental theology is explicably a prayer of 
the body.’25 This centrality of the human body in mediated liturgical 
experience is however not new as Tertullian had earlier asserted that the 
body is the instrument of salvation. For Tertullian, this is linked to the 
mystery of Incarnation.  At the incarnation, the eternal Word of the 
Father took flesh and by so doing, he saved us and we in turn can come 
to worship God through our bodies with which we encounter all of 
creation. Narrating how the mediation works, the comment of 
Tertullian on the Resurrection of the flesh is enlightening:  

The flesh is the hinge on which salvation depends.  As a 
result, when the soul is dedicated to God, it is the flesh 
which actually makes it capable of such dedication. For 
surely the flesh is washed, that the soul may be cleansed; 
the flesh is anointed that the soul may be consecrated; 
the flesh is sealed, so that the soul may be fortified; the 
flesh is shadowed by the imposition of hand, that the 
soul too may be illumined by the Spirit; the flesh feeds 
on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul as well 
may fatten on God.26 
Though the actions Tertullian spoke of are specific to the 

sacraments of initiation, his assertion captures adequately what 
sacramental realities do. In this way, sacraments are seen first and 
foremost as ritual events and not a metaphysical reality. 
 
Recapturing Lost Attitude: The Ritual Studies 
This section of the presentation argues that through a formation in ritual 
studies, the faithful can develop the proper attitude towards the 
sacraments and its celebration. But what does ritual studies entail? In the 
words of Ronald Grimes: 
there is a broad and narrow use of the term “ritual studies.”  On the one 
hand, it means simply “the study of ritual” regardless of discipline and 
regardless of the status, professional or amateur, of those who carry it 
out.  On the other hand, it refers to the study of ritual by scholars who 
devote most of their research time and energy to doing it.  In the former 
sense, many engage in it; in the latter, few.27  

In this work, we shall consider ritual studies from the broad 
dimension. While many liturgical theologians are not schooled in this 
field (ritual studies), the works of experts in this field have been highly 
beneficial to the understanding of Christian rituals and liturgy in general.  
Their works give prominence to the various elements of rituals and that 
the elements are fundamental to understanding the belief of the people 
and their expression of such belief.  Prominent among these are the 
works of Catherine Bell and Ronald Grimes, on which I will largely 



42 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

depend in this section. Our aim here is to show in bits how ritual studies 
can illuminate our understanding of sacrament and sacramental efficacy 
through the interplay of the ritual elements.   

But what is Ritual Studies? Ritual studies is ‘a unified, 
interdisciplinary approach which aims to avoid false conflicts and 
excessively narrow definitions of ritualistic phenomena.’28 It is an 
interdisciplinary field that engages sociology, psychology and cultural 
anthropology. Since sacraments are for people (sacramentum propter 
hominem) who belong to a society (faith community), psychological, 
sociological and anthropological investigation (through ritual studies) 
into sacraments is apt in understanding sacramental efficacy. Michael G. 
Lawler rightly captures this interconnection between ritual studies and 
sacrament when he says: ‘an investigation of human behaviour and 
existence throws light on sacraments, just as sacraments are disclosive of 
the human experience and existence.’29 Understanding what people do 
when they come together and how they make a meaning of what they do 
is key in understanding how what they do works by effecting what they 
intend. According to Louis Bouyer, ‘[I]ndeed, the more perfectly we 
know the human aspects of Christianity, the more perfectly we shall 
understand the part of it which is the result of divine intervention.  This 
is not to say that the human and the divine should be found in it 
separated from one another. It is rather that the divine reveals itself in the 
transformation it effects in what is human.’30 

Every animal – rational, social or irrational – ritualizes. Ritual 
actions range from the actions carried out almost instinctively and 
without any consciousness to those that are planned for and even 
transcend our present situation.31 Ritual is basic to human activities like 
eating, drinking, exchanging pleasantries through handshake, moving 
about, mating, giving birth, dying, praying, celebrating anniversaries and 
so on. We engage in ritualizing to give ‘stability to our behaviours and to serve 
as vehicle of communication.’32 For this reason, Tom F. Driver concludes 
that ‘ritualization is our first language, not our “mother”, but our 
“grandmother” tongue, as such it is something we do not outgrow.’33 

Though rituals are generally human activities, in its technical 
usage, the term is considered to be ‘more fittingly applied to forms of 
religious behaviours associated with social transitions.’34 In this sense, the 
behaviours - events, prayers, gestures and materials - involved in the 
celebration of sacraments fall within the scope of ritual activities. Despite 
the attempt to define ritual, one would admit that ritual is wider in scope 
than the descriptions. Because of this diffuse nature of rituals, scholars 
prefer to speak of family characteristics of rituals rather than giving a 
water-tight definition.  In other words, there are some basic 
characteristics that a particular action should meet before it can be said to 



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    43 

be a ritual action.35 Ronald Grimes highlighted different ways by which 
actions can be ritualized. These include by: 
 Traditionalizing them, for instance, by claiming that they originated 

a long time ago or with the ancestors 
 Elevating them by associating them with sacredly held values, those 

that make people who they are and that display either how things 
really are or how they ought to be 

 Repeating them – over and over, in the same way – thus inscribing 
them in community and/or self 

 Singularizing them, that is, offering them as rare or even one-time 
events 

 Prescribing their details so they are performed in the proper way 
 Stylizing them, so they are carried out with flair 
 Entering them with a non-ordinary attitude or in a special state of 

mind, for example contemplatively or in trance 
 Invoking powers to whom respect or reverence is due – gods, 

royalty, and spirits, for example 
 Attributing to them special powers or influence 
 Situating them in special places and/or times 
 Being performed by specially qualified persons.36 

The celebration of the sacraments (and indeed all liturgy) can 
adequately be regarded as a ritual activity as it meets the characteristics 
laid out above. They are communal events developed over time by the 
Christian community, and are celebrated at particular times to enter into 
a hierophany. They are carried out at specific places by designated 
persons following the prescribed way of doing them. In carrying out 
these actions, meaning and communication become more important than 
mere function.  As Grimes noted, when this happens, ritualization has 
begun to occur.37 

Liturgy, as human and divine action, cannot be spoken of except 
within the context of rituals. Little wonder Lawrence Hoffman considers 
liturgy as ‘acted-out rituals involving prescribed texts, actions, timing, 
persons and things, all coming together in a shared statement of 
communal identity by those who live with, through and by them.’38 
Liturgy, as a ritual event, is also underscored by the principle of 
sacramentality expressed above. To escape ritualization, we will have to 
escape our bodies, which is impossible.39 The body that grounds the 
principle of sacramentality and mediation also makes ritualization an 
inevitable human activity. The reality of our lives is that ritual actions are 
always around us and are unavoidable.  Despite all efforts of modern 
men and women to move away from rituals, we cannot do without 
them.40 



44 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

Kinds/Genres of Rituals 
As pointed out, it is obvious that ritual actions are inevitably numerous 
since different ritual actions perform different roles at different 
moments. However, attempts have been made by scholars in the field to 
categorize the different kind of rituals in their study. For the purpose of 
our work, we shall focus on the six categories of ritual actions proposed 
by Catherine Bell.41 These are: rites of passage, calendrical rites, rites of 
exchange and communion, rites of affliction, feasting, fasting and 
festival; and political rites. 
a) Rites of Passage: These are the ceremonies that accompany and 

dramatize such events as birth, coming-of-age initiation for boys and 
girls, marriage, and death.42 These celebrate both biological and 
socio-cultural changes. These rites celebrate and facilitate real 
changes that take place in people’s lives. In Christian liturgy, the 
celebration of the sacraments of Christian initiation (Baptism, 
Confirmation and Eucharist), matrimony, and holy Orders fall 
within this category, as do the rites of Christian funerals.  

b) Calendrical Rites: These are the ‘rites that give socially meaningful 
definitions to the passage of time, creating an ever-renewing cycle of 
days, months and years.’43 Some occasions are calculated with the 
solar calendar (like Christmas day on December 25 and New Year 
Day on January 1), while others are marked by the lunar calendar 
(e.g. Easter Sunday). The rites are celebrated periodically – annually 
or sometimes weekly (like the Sunday liturgy). 

c) Rites of Exchange and Communion: These are the rituals of 
making offering (often to a divine being) in order to receive a 
blessing in return.  The process of making offering and receiving 
blessing also involves a communion, when there is a union of the 
human and divine worlds.44 To some extent, the seven sacraments of 
the Roman Catholic Church are rites of exchange and communion 
as in them prayers are offered to God who in turn grants his 
blessings (or graces). 

d) Rites of Affliction (Healing and purification): These are ‘the 
rituals that attempt to rectify a state of affairs that has been disturbed 
or disordered.’45 Hence, they are also called rites of healing and 
purification.  In the Christian liturgy, the sacraments of 
Reconciliation and Anointing of the sick readily comes to mind as 
healing rites.  Also, the RCIA contains a number of rites that fall 
under this genre, among which are the anointings, laying on of 
hands, ephphetha, exorcisms and scrutinies. 

e) Rites of Fasting, Feasting and Festivals: These are ‘rituals people 
often use to publicly express – to themselves, each other, and 
sometimes outsiders – their commitment and adherence to basic 



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    45 

religious values.’46 In feasting, sharing of food is involved as a sign of 
solidarity and charity, and in fasting, adherents abstain from food 
often as sign of contrition.  In Roman Catholicism, the seasons of 
Advent and Lent are seasons of fasting.  They are periods of 
preparation for festivals of the birth of the Lords on Christmas day 
and resurrection of Jesus on Easter day respectively. Though none of 
the sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church fall under this ritual, 
the ritual fast is often recommended for the reception of the 
sacraments, especially Eucharist.47 

f) Political Rites: ‘These rituals can be said to comprise those 
ceremonial practices that specifically construct, display and promote 
power of political institutions (such as kings, state, the village elders) 
or the political interests of distinct constituencies and subgroups.’48 
The rites are also called rites of power because they do not only give 
form to power and invest people with power; they also create power 
in the tangible exercise of it.49 The rites by their very nature make 
power both tangible and effective.50 The sacrament of Holy Orders 
celebrates a political rite where men are invested with the power of 
governance, and lay persons can also cooperate with the power of 
governance by the virtue of their baptism.51 

The explanations of the different kinds of rites reveal that there 
are no strict rules demarcating the various rituals or restricting them to 
only a genre.  For instance, the celebration of the sacrament of baptism 
or orders can at the same time reflect the aspect of rites of passage, of 
exchange and communion, of feast, and of power (political).   
 
Elements of Rituals 
In all the genre or kinds of rites discussed above, there are some 
fundamental elements that cut across them and are essential for the 
efficacy of the rites. As such, it is expedient that we analyse the elements 
of ritual in our process of understanding how they work. Ronald Grimes 
underscores the importance of this analysis for two other reasons.52 
Firstly, such analysis guards one against oversimplification of ritual 
process and exposes how each of the elements contribute to or detract 
from the whole process. Secondly, it assists in noticing ritual 
transformation, recognising how the process develops or unfolds. 

Grimes identified seven elements of ritual; viz: ritual actions, 
ritual actors, ritual places, ritual times, ritual objects, ritual language and 
ritual groups. He noted that there are no rigid rules about them or how 
the categories are named. Rather, what matters is how they interact; an 
interaction which is not predetermined by a theory but from observing 
specific ritual events. 



46 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

a) Ritual Actions: Though one can begin analysing a ritual with any 
element, ‘choosing ritual action as a default starting point is both 
pragmatic and a reminder to focus on ritual.’53 It emphasises the fact 
that rituals are, foremost, actions of persons - human or divine. 
Ritual actions are different from mere movements in the sense that 
they are characterized by intention. ‘Things move but people 
act.’54Ritual actions carry with them the force of enacting through 
inter-actions. It is noteworthy that the aim of ritual action is not 
merely to entertain (even though sometimes it does), rather, they are 
designed to achieve an effect. Hence, we can say that ‘people enact 
rituals, especially when a rite seems capable of accomplishing a deed 
or bringing about an effect.’55  Ritual actions do not speak for 
themselves in isolation, but in their interaction with other actions 
that precede or follow them. As such, the meaning of a particular 
action can be modified by the action that precedes or follows it. 

In the context of Christian sacramental rituals of the RCIA, there 
are several ritual actions like kneeling, standing, laying on of hand, 
anointing with oil, profession of faith, movement to the font and 
signing of the senses. All these gestures and postures are not just to 
show something; but work in the ritual system to have a desired 
effect. 

b)  Ritual Actors: Foremost, we must note that ritual actors are 
different from stage actors in that when the term ‘perform’ is used 
for both, they do not mean the same thing. The term ‘perform’ is 
only used for a ritual actor to underscore that his actions are done in 
the presence of people.  In the case of a stage actor, he performs in 
the presence of people and he is supposed to be pretending (although 
they may in fact be).56  Though the ritual actor may or may not be 
aware that he/she is being observed, his ‘performance’ is intended to 
effect something.   

Ritual actors, like actions, do not act alone. As social agents, they 
also interact with other actors either as objects or subjects of various 
actions. Their actions are done among and with other people. 
Though ritual actors are distinguished as leaders or followers, 
ministers or candidates, every participant in a ritual event is 
important irrespective of the role they play. Even those who simply 
show up without ‘doing’ anything, other than observing, contribute 
to the ritual performance. 

In Christian initiation, there are various actors at different stages. 
Prominent among these are the ministers (often the priest and 
catechists), catechumens, sponsors, and the entire congregation.  The 
presence (and sometimes absence) of any of these actors play 
important role(s) at the various celebrations.  



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    47 

c) Ritual Place/Space: Rituals always take place. Rituals are always 
sited in a location, even when ritual actors do not value the location.  
The spatial rootedness of the human life is key to understanding 
ritual places despite the claim that ritual sometimes involves the 
divine and trance experiences.  The human body which makes 
human activities possible is spatio-temporal and cannot be conceived 
without a location, earthly or heavenly. Thus, a ritual place is any 
place where a ritual occurs. It is that ritual environment that 
‘encompasses the totality of what surrounds it and interacts with it.’57 
In this sense, some rituals can only take place at some particular 
places, while others can take place anywhere.  If some rituals are not 
done in the particular places demanded by their rite, they often lose 
their force. 

Ritual space is basically marked by boundaries ‘implied by ritual 
actions, generating a centre and a circumference, both of which can 
fluctuate, the centre receding and advancing or momentarily 
disappearing altogether as subgroups disperse and recongeal.’58 
However, this boundary marks are often delineated by walls forming 
the space into a building like a church or mosque. Ritual places 
should not be confused with sacred places. Grimes cautions that 
‘even though ritual happen in places and make them ritual spaces, 
not all ritual spaces are sacred spaces, and not all sacred spaces are 
permanently so. The sense of a place can change, and a single person 
can hold conflicting attitudes towards a place.’59 

Ritual space/place both speak and act. A baptistry, for instance is 
capable of speaking of the history of salvation through its shape and 
the painting projected on the walls.60 When the ritual place speaks, 
sometimes the meanings are to be inferred from the actions taking 
place there and sometimes it ‘speaks more clearly to those who have 
ears trained to hear what it says.’61 Rituals places can be shaped by 
ritual actions and at the same time they shape ritual actions. When 
people come into a ritual space for a ritual action, they leave with 
feelings, images and impressions of the space. The place gives 
meaning to what they do while what they do also gives meaning to 
the place. 

d) Ritual Time: Ritual actions, like every human activity has its 
starting point as well as its terminating point. Likened to performing 
arts, ‘rituals “eventuate.” They arise, persist for a while, and then 
disappear, perhaps leaving the traces on the environment, in memory 
or in text.’62 Ritual time can be spoken of in various ways. The ritual 
duration (length of a ritual performance measured by clock, bodily 
tiredness or position of the sun) is not always evident. Ritual 
endurance refers to how long a ritual last historically. Ritual timing 



48 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

denotes ‘when’ – the day, hour, week, month, or season- of ritual 
occurrence. The timing of some rituals is fixed while some vary. 
Ritual timing serves various purposes and can affect what is being 
done.  For instance, the same action performed at sunrise and 
midnight impacts the body differently and speaks different meanings. 
Ritual timing is purposeful, and this is evident in the case of Easter 
Vigil emphasising the darkness/light theme very evident in the 
service of the light, the exsultet, the readings and the baptismal 
liturgy. Ritual regularity refers to how often a ritual occurs in terms of 
the evenness of intervals between enactments.63 Ritual phases are 
chronological subunits and can be mechanically marked by sounds or 
even without dividers.  It often demarcates time for various actors to 
start or stop particular actions. 

All these dimensions of ritual time are applicable to Christian 
rituals especially the rites of the Christian initiation.  There are times 
for the different periods and stages of the catechumenate. The days 
for some rites - like acceptance into catechumenate, 
enrolment/election and scrutinies - are spelt out in the RCIA. The 
time for different actions like kneeling, laying on of hands and 
sending out after the liturgy of the Word are also marked. The Easter 
Vigil is the preferred night for the actual celebration of the sacrament 
when candidates journey from darkness into light.  

e) Ritual Objects: These are materials actively used in rituals. An 
object, irrespective of its material, content, beauty or conditions of its 
production, becomes a ritual object when it is used in ritual action or 
ritual space. Regarding the distinction between ritual object and 
sacred object therefore, Grimes noted that ‘“sacred” is about value; 
“ritual” is about use.’64  Among the ritual objects in the RCIA are 
water, oil, white cloth, and candle. 

f) Ritual Language: This includes ritual words, ritual sounds and 
ritual texts. Through these, rituals declare facts, convey meaning and ‘do 
things.’ Like place and actions, words and music have the capacity to 
do work. They are capable to do so because in ritual (by extension in 
liturgy), words are used in symbolic context.65 As symbolic language, 
words are used in ritual as performative utterances. Words, in this 
sense, do not just declare facts and convey meaning, but also 
accomplish tasks.66 In the words of John L. Austin, under the 
necessary conditions, ‘saying it makes it so!’67 For instance, ‘I 
pronounce you husband and wife’ in marriage, is not a mere 
declaration or the description of an action, ‘but the performance of a 
deed.’ In the same way, ‘I baptize you in the name of the Father, and 
of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit’ goes beyond a narration of an 



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    49 

article of faith, but the performance of the action that cleanses the 
soul from sin and brings rebirth. 

Regarding ritual texts (which are words, put in writing), Grimes 
opines that they function to facilitate ritual performance at least in 
two ways. Firstly, texts serve as mnemonic device as an alternative to 
memorization, and secondly, they function as ritual objects when in 
ritual performance they are ‘read aloud by leaders, tracked silently by 
followers, touched, fanned, elevated or revered.’68 While ritual texts 
perform these dual function, it should be noted that performance do 
not always mirror the text, even when the leader is being prompted 
by or claims to be reading from the text. When performance and text 
do not tally, there are spectrums of possibilities of the meaning 
intended and meaning communicated. 

g) Ritual Groups: Rituals are built on affiliations.69  People involved in 
ritual actions do not only do so as individuals but in interaction with 
other actors. Rituals always belong to a cultural home as they are 
created by a cultural group and enshrines the values of the group.70 
The group designs the ritual to meet the immediate and further 
needs of the group. As such, the general outlook of a group is 
reflected in its rituals.  It is in this light that we can speak of the 
sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church or how the Eucharistic 
liturgy of the Roman rite can be distinguished from the Orthodox 
rite. 

 
Ritual Process: How Rituals Work 
In defining what rituals are, Grimes noted that they are ‘designed 
assemblages.’71  They are ‘designed’ because they are planned and 
constructed in a way that enables form and dynamic to flow to one 
another; and they are assemblages because there exist a sculptural 
technique of composing a group of unrelated, fragmentary or discarded 
objects into a work of art.72 The ritual elements create meaningful 
patterns when they overlap and interact with one another.  Taking the 
case of performative utterances (ritual language) for instance, Austin 
noted that to claim ‘saying it makes it so,’ ‘it is always necessary that the 
circumstances in which the words are uttered should be in some way, or 
ways, appropriate, and it is very commonly necessary that either the 
speaker himself or the other persons should also perform certain other 
actions, whether ‘physical’ or ‘mental’ actions or even act of uttering 
further words.’73 In other words, ‘ritual words’ actually work, not on 
their own but within the framework of the ritual process, the interaction 
of the ritual elements. 

A deeper understanding of how ritual works is to consider ritual 
performance as symbolic events.  This is possible because the elements 



50 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

of ritual, (not just ritual language) are capable of being symbolic. Ritual 
actions, places, actors, objects, time, and group, act as symbols when 
interacting in a ritual process.  As such, when we speak about ritual 
performance, we are at the same time speaking of symbolic events. 
 
Symbols and Meaning 
Symbols must be differentiated from signs even though the distinction is 
not clear-cut as it often seems. While a sign is just as much a reference to 
another reality, a symbol in one way or the other refers to itself, because 
it participates in the reality to which it refers.74  While signs makes 
reference through a rational process and thus a product of agreement, 
symbols are perceived intuitively and touches the whole person at the 
level of feeling and the senses, and as such do not rest on agreements.75 
Consequently, while signs can be altered by agreement when its meaning 
is no longer clear, symbols call us to stop, ponder and meditate since it is 
‘the thing without being the thing, and yet is the thing.’76 More 
importantly, signs have one clear meaning while symbols have multiple 
meanings.  Symbols refer to deeper reality, a farther horizon, a wider 
landscape.77 

As an example, the red colour of the traffic light is a sign calling 
road users to stop.  It simply calls them to stop and nothing more.  The 
meaning of this sign is learned and that is why it is expected that all 
drivers should be able to know road signs and these signs are presumed 
to mean the same thing for every road user. To think of another 
meaning, no matter how little it differs, other than a call to stop, is to 
break traffic rule and perhaps cause accidents.  If at a later time, the red 
sign no longer refers to ‘stop,’ it only needs to be changed by agreement. 
On the other hand, water being used in the sacrament of baptism carries 
a polyvalent meaning. It first partakes in the reality of washing which it 
symbolises. It could make reference to the baptism of Jesus and his 
mandate to his apostles to go and make disciples of all nations by 
baptizing in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit (cf.  
Matthew 28:20). It may refer to the deluge in the time of Noah, or the 
exodus experience when the Israelites crossed the Red Sea and River 
Jordan. The immersion in the water could symbolise dying and rising, 
death and rebirth, movement of darkness and light (as the one being 
baptized could not see when immersed in water until he comes out), and 
even becoming a new creature coming out from dirts already washed. 
The sprinkling of holy water at celebrations could bring together all 
these meaning, and the meanings are endless.  Because of its polysemic 
nature, if a symbol seems not to communicate a particular meaning (or 
the meaning is inaccessible to the observer or the observers are unable to 
decode the meaning), it does not call for a change through an agreement.  



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    51 

Rather, it calls us to pause and ponder on the reality unfolding before our 
senses. In relation to the sacramental symbols, ritual s will facilitate the 
ability to ‘pause and ponder’ 

Moreover, it is noteworthy to reiterate that the distinctions made 
between sign and symbol are not always clear as they might seem. Signs 
can become symbols and symbols can be reduced to signs. According to 
Susanne Langer ‘it is the human operation that makes the difference 
between sign(al) and symbol… rather than words and images in 
themselves.’78 Every word, image, object and action has the potential of 
multiple significance and multiple reference of language.  The context in 
which they are employed and the interaction they have with other 
objects, words, image or actions provides the ground for their possibility 
of multiple meanings. The danger for observers or participants in a ritual 
performance (liturgy inclusive) is the temptation to reduce symbols to 
signs.  Symbols are reduced to signs when we tend to restrict them to a 
particular meaning and not beyond that.79 In Christian parlance, we 
should not think that the meaning of a ritual event consists of or is tied 
to the thoughts of a theologian, pastor or the Christian community that 
designed them. Rather, ‘ritual meaning consists just as surely of the 
random thoughts and gestures that occur during the ritual.’80 There is no 
doubt that official meaning provided by the Christian community or 
theologians can aid in giving insight to what is being done at liturgy.  
However, as David Power warns, ‘any effort to tie down the meaning of 
liturgical symbols to a single or preconceived meaning thwarts their 
efficacy.’81 Rather, we are to allow other meanings to complement the 
other predominant meaning(s). 

Sometimes, symbolic actions perform the mediation role. In this 
sense, the ritual process creates the atmosphere for the divine to work.  
The creation of the atmosphere consists in the overlapping of the 
meaning of the ritual space, the actions, objects and/or the performative 
language used. The rituals in the words of Joseph Martos works as ‘doors 
to the sacred’82 leading the participants into an hierophany. Through the 
symbols therefore, we enter into the experience of sacred meaning. 

The other way we can speak of how ritual works is in the light of 
means-end context. While this context may not be applicable to all 
rituals, Grimes argues that some rituals essentially work that way.  
Among these are the rituals of healing and fertility.83 The sacrament of 
Anointing of the sick falls under this category.  The prayers and the 
action of laying on of hands (symbolic action) and actual anointing with 
sacred oil (symbolic object) accompanied with prayers (symbolic words) 
serve the healing purpose through the means-end reasoning.  However, 
this does not exempt the working of the divine agent (God), nor does it 
exclude the assertion that it also creates the atmosphere for the divine 



52 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

work of healing or strengthening (among other meanings) that is 
intended and/or expected. Thus, Grimes says ‘rituals itself is sometimes 
considered a spiritual ecological technology.’84 
 
Conclusion 
With these few tips on some aspects of ritual studies, it is evident that the 
formation of seminarians in ritual studies will go a long way in 
appreciating the Catholic sacramental system. The studies undertaken in 
Sociology, Cultural Anthropology and Psychology can be better directed 
to include how these sciences relate to the celebration of the sacramental 
mysteries. This will inevitably enhance the full, conscious and active 
participation that the Vatican II fathers advocated. In the same way, it 
opens a new way of considering the inculturation project that was 
encouraged by the council.  Also, formation in ritual studies no doubt is 
a formation of the human person, enabling the person to appreciate signs 
and symbols in his environment and in worship. It sharpens one’s sense 
of the sacred and leads one to a hierophany. 
 
Endnotes 
 
                                                      
1 See Vatican Council II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum 

Concilium no.63. 
2 See Romano Guadini, ‘Open Letter’ in Foundation in Ritual Studies: A Reader for 

Students of Christian Worship, eds. Paul Bradshaw & John Melloh, (London: SPCK, 

2007), 4. 
3 Ibid. 
4  Sacrosanctum Concilium, no.62. 
5 For a comprehensive treatment of the topic see Kevin W. Irwin, The Sacraments: 

Historical Foundations and Liturgical Theology, (New York: Paulist Press, 2016), 1 -

116; Joseph Martos, Doors to the Sacred: A Historical Introduction to the Sacrament 

in the Catholic Church (Missouri: Ligouri Publications, 2014) 
6 Sacrosanctum Concilium, no.61. 
7 Lizette Larson-Miller, Sacramentality Renewed: Contemporary Conversations in 

Sacramental Theology, (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2016), 6. 
8 David Brown, God and Enchantment of Place: Reclaiming Human Experience 

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 40. 
9 Far from equating this notion of sacramentality with pantheism, created materials 

are used in worship in relation to words and texts.  It is only within the context of 

the words and texts that we speak of materials as used in the liturgy being means 

of speaking of God, experiencing God and worshipping God. See Kevin W. Irwin, 

The Sacraments: Historical Foundations and Liturgical Theology (New York: Paulist 

Press, 2016), 211-212.  



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    53 

                                                                                                                         
10 Rowan Williams, Foreword to The Gestures of God: Explorations in Sacramentality, 

ed. Geoffrey Rowell and Christian Hall (London: Continuum, 2004), xiii. 
11 Irwin, 210. 
12 Larson-Miller, Sacramentality Renewed, 9. 
13 See Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, Book II, 1:1 (NPNF Vol. II, p. 535) 
14 Irwin, 11. 
15Ibid. 
16 Joseph Martos, Doors to the Sacred: A Historical Introduction to the Sacrament in 

the Catholic Church (Missouri: Ligouri Publications, 2014), 4. 
17 See Irwin, 53. 
18 See Edward Schillebeeckx, Christ the Sacrament of the Encounter with God, 

(London: Sheed & Ward, 1963); Avery Dulles, Models of the Church, (New York: 

Image Books, 2002), 55 -67. 
19 Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC no. 1667) says: Holy Mother Church has, 

moreover, instituted sacramentals. These are sacred signs which bear a 

resemblance to the sacraments. They signify effects, particularly of a spiritual 

nature, which are obtained through the intercession of the Church. By them men 

(sic) are disposed to receive the chief effects of the sacraments. And various 

occasions in life rendered holy. (See also Sacrosanctum Concilium, no. 60). 
20Martos, 3. Quoting Paul Tillich. 
21 Irwin, 210. 
22 Ibid., 214. 
23 Mary Douglas, Implicit Meaning: Essays in Anthropology, (London: Routledge & 

Kegan Paul, 1975), 85. 
24 Siobhan Garrigan, Beyond Ritual: Sacramental Theology After Habermas, 

(Hampshire: Ashgate, 2014), 41. 
25 Nathan D. Mitchell, Meeting Mystery: Liturgy, Worship, Sacrament (New York: 

Orbis Books, 2006), 153. 
26 Tertullian, On Resurrection of the Flesh, Ch. 8. (ANF Vol. III p. 551). 
27 Ronald L. Grimes, The Craft of Ritual Studies (Oxford: University Press, 2014), 7. 
28 Ronald L. Grimes, ‘Modes of Ritual Necessity’ Worship 53, no 2 (1979): 126. 
29 Michael G. Lawler, The Symbol and Sacrament: A Contemporary Sacramental 

Theology (New York: Paulist Press, 1987), 1. 
30 Louis Bouyer, The Rite and Man, Trans. M. Joseph Costelloe (Notre Dame: 

University of Notre Dame Press, 1963), 2. 
31 Ronald L. Grimes refers to them as different modes of ritual sensibilities.  These 

are the attitudes that seem to predominate in a ritual performance. These are 

ritualization, decorum, ceremony, magic, liturgy and celebration. See Ronald L 

Grimes, Beginnings in Ritual Studies, 3rd ed. (Waterloo, ON: Ritual Studies 

International, 2013), 35-50. 
32 Tom F. Driver, The Magic of Ritual: Our Need for Liberating Rites that Transform 

Our Lives and Communities (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991), 23. 
33 Ibid., 13. 
34 Victor W. Turner, The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual (Ithaca, NY: 

Cornell University Press, 1967), 95. 



54 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

                                                                                                                         
35 See Catherine Bell, Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions, (New York: Oxford 

University Press, 1997), 138-169.  Here, Catherine Bell identified six characteristics 

or ritual-like actions as: formalism, traditionalism, disciplined invariance, rule-

governance, sacral symbolism and performance. 
36 Ronald L. Grimes, ‘Religion Ritual and Performance’ in Religion, Theatre and 

Performance: Acts of Faith, ed. Lance Gharavi (New York: Routledge, 2012), 39. Cited 

in Ronald L. Grimes, The Craft of Ritual Studies, 194. 
37 Grimes, ‘Modes of Ritual Necessity,’ 127. 
38 Lawrence Hoffman, Beyond The Text: A Holistic Approach to Liturgy, 

(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987), 3. 
39 Grimes, ‘Modes of Ritual Necessity,’ 127. 
40 See Leonel L. Mitchel, The Meaning of Ritual, (New York: Paulist Press, 1977), xii -

xv.  Here, Mitchel argues about the impoverishment of our age that only looks at 

the natural world and sees only a collection of physical phenomena, and as such 

claims that we can do without ritualization.  For Mitchel, the question is not about if 

we can do without ritualization, but how do we understand religious rituals today. 

See also Mary Douglas, Natural Symbols: Exploration in Cosmology, 2nd ed. (London: 

Barrie & Jenkins, 1973), 19-39. 
41 See Bell, Ritual: Perspective and Dimension, 93-137. Ronald L Grimes highlighted 

twelve categories: rites of passage, funerary rites, marriage rites, festivals, 

pilgrimage, purification, civil ceremonies, rituals of exchange, sacrifice, worship, 

magic, healing rites, interaction rites, meditation rites, rites of inversion, and ritual 

drama. See Ronal L. Grimes, Research in Ritual Studies (Metuchen, N.J: Scarecrow 

Press, 1985), 68 -116. The categories given by Bell are more relevant to our work 

because they usually associated with clearly defined religious traditions, and have 

long been dominant examples and primary data for ritual studies. (Bell, 93). 
42 Bell, 94. 
43 Ibid., 102. 
44 Ibid., 112. 
45 Ibid., 115. 
46 Bell, 120. 
47 Code of Canon Law, no. 919: “One who is to receive the Most Holy Eucharist is to 

abstain from food and drink, with the exception of water and medicine, for at least 

the period of one hour before communion.” 
48 Bell, 128. 
49 Ibid., 136. 
50 Ibid., 129 citing Clifford Geertz, Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth Century 

Bali (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1980), 102, 104, 131. 
51 See Code of Canon Law, no. 129. 
52 See Grimes, The Craft of Ritual Studies, 234-5. 
53 Ibid., 242. 
54 Ibid. 
55 Ibid., 243. 
56 Ibid., 249. 
57 Ibid., 259. 



Section 1: Ecclesiastical/Theological Perspectives And Seminary Formation    55 

                                                                                                                         
58 Ibid., 256. 
59 Ibid., 257. 
60 For further reading on symbolism of baptistries see Robin M. Jensen, Baptismal 

Imagery in Early Christianity: Ritual, Visual, and Theological Dimensions (Grand 

Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012). 
61 Grimes, The Craft of Ritual Studies, 258. 
62 Ibid., 263. 
63 Ibid., 266. 
64 Ibid., 267. 
65 See David N. Power, Unsearchable Riches: The Symbolic Nature of Language, 

(New York: Pueblo Publishing Company, 1984) 64-65. David Power noted that 

words/language can be used in three different contexts. He wrote: ‘There are three 

contexts in which the lexical significance of words, or the primary nature of things 

and actions, receives determination of meaning and designation. The first context 

is the ordinary, everyday affairs.  Here the people are concerned to deal with 

situations and interact among themselves in common sense, practical fashion, and 

so eliminate ambiguity as far as possible.  In this world, it is preferable for words, 

things and actions to have clear purpose and meaning. A jug is meant to hold 

liquids, a knife to cut, announcement of time to eat is clearly an invitation …. In the 

second context, the world of science, meanings are more abstract in character, but 

they are still clearly and technically defined.  Equivocity or polysemy is not 

considered a virtue.  Mathematical symbols, the naming of chemical elements, 

types of experiments, the forms of logical reasoning, all eradicate the multiplicity of 

meanings as far as possible, because the world ruled by science and technology 

runs better when meanings and uses are fixed. In contrast to both the uses of sign 

and language, the world of the symbol, the third context, intentionally deploys the 

multiple possibilities of meaning.  A flag flying on top of a building recalls past 

history, evokes in the passer-by a sense of national pride, and reveals the 

parliament is in session, all at once. In this case, although the immediate obvious 

functional indication is that the country’s legislators have not gone home, the 

whole setting is symbolic in intent.’ 
66 Grime, The Craft of Ritual Studies, 276. 
67 John L. Austin, How To Do Things With Words (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 

1962), 8. 
68 Grimes, The Craft of Ritual Studies, 278. 
69 Ibid., 279. 
70 Ibid., 282.  See also Ronald L. Grimes, Deeply Into the Bone: Re-Inventing Rites of 

Passage (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000), 3-4. 
71 Grimes, The Craft of Ritual Studies, 232. 
72 Ibid. 
73 Austin, How to Do Things With Words, 8. 
74 See Gerard Lukken, Ritual in Abundance: Critical Reflection on the Place, Form and 

Identity of Christian Ritual in Our Culture (Leuven: Peeters, 2005), 19 -20. 
75 Ibid. 
76 Ibid., citing T. Todorov, Théories au symbole (Paris: Le Seuil, 1977), 239. 



56 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

                                                                                                                         
77 Ibid., 18. 
78 David N. Power, Unsearchable Riches, 69. Citing Susanne Langer, Feeling and 

Form: A Theory of Art (New York: Scribner’s, 1957), 26. 
79 For further readings on the fields of meaning, see Lawrence Hoffman, “How 

Ritual Means: Ritual Circumcision in Rabbinic Culture and Today” Studia Liturgica 

23 (1993): 79-84. 
80 Grimes, ‘Mode of Ritual Necessity,’ 140. 
81 Power, Unsearchable Riches, 67. 
82 Martos, 8. 
83 Grimes, The Craft of Ritual Studies, 298. 
84 Ibid. 

 

 


