I have a few friends still yet unconvinced by the necessary truth of lex orandi. I understand. Indeed, no doubt these learned people are entrenched in the historical critical method and other derivatives of the Enlightenment and thus cannot acknowledge the connection between mind-heart-action.
It is true that not everyone with a sound liturgy is spiritually formed by it. But why not?
The faithful Catholic theologian, Hans Urs von Balthasar, declares,
The Enlightenment, which asserted itself first within Anglican and Protestant theology and then more radically in French philosophy, finally penetrated Catholic theology too. There were reactions to it, first from religious Romanticism and then, more energetically, from the revival of Thomism; but they could not prevent Enlightenment principles from forcefully asserting their dominant role in theology. The vanguard of this movement was the purely rational “historico-critical method” of exegesis applied to the inspired texts. Today, therefore, Christian thought is profoundly disturbed and divided. On the one hand, there is an understanding of faith that, in the traditional view, regards the articles of faith as the irreducible object of all Christian theologizing; on the other hand, there is the opposite view, which subjects these very articles—both their content and the act of faith that they elicit—to rationalistic scrutiny and substitutes for most of them a new and essentially reduced content that relies on anthropological plausibility. Church authority, which holds fast to ancient tradition and seeks to bind others to it, finds itself subjected to historico-critical examination and required to present its credentials. Now, firm results on the part of the historico-critical method are few and far between, while there is a superabundance of the question marks it puts over things that were once held to be unshakable; for the most part, accordingly, the “enlightened” Christian’s faith can only hover uncertainly in the air. At best, in the absence of firm foundations, all it can do is cling to the Church’s external forms. This is an unstable and unsatisfactory result, since, for the “enlightened” Christian, the lex orandi can no longer be the lex credendi: he can in no way take literally the words that are prayed in the Canon of the Mass in the parish Eucharist.