we should not misunderstand “lex orandi, lex credendi” as reflecting any causal or directional relationship. the very lack of a conjunction nods at the ubiquity of the via media. the phrase does not indicate a strict ritualism in which the orthoprax performance of the liturgy is identical with piety. but neither does it reflect a purely expressive mode of worship as we see epitomized in the charismatic evangelical traditions. the lex orandi does not create the lex credendi any more than the lex credendi precedes the lex orandi. the relationship, as i understand it, is one of embodiment. the orthopraxy of the liturgy and the orthodoxy of the creed stand together mutually constituting each other, the one manifesting the other in its complementary realm. this resonates with the catechismal definition of a sacrament: “an outward and physical sign [and would add ‘conduit’] of an inward and spiritual grace.” as such, while a common liturgy necessitates some interpretive work to make the liturgy intelligible to a given context, extreme care should be taken in altering the substance of the lex orandi, because it cannot be altered without also impacting its inward manifestation in the creeds.