Please re-read the same section you quoted in Arabic from Abouna Matta.
He says two things: 1) The kiss of peace is after the litanies and before the Anaphora. This is the current position. 2) The kiss of peace was historically fixed, and it was a call for the catechumens to leave and for the faithful to approach the altar for communion.
Wrong!!!!!!!!
Abouna Matta starts the chapter as what the Eucharistic prayers used to be in the 1st and 2nd century.
[right]الفصل الثاني الصورة العامة للإفخارستيا في القرنين الأول والثاني بحسب كتابات الآباء الرسوليين
[/right]
The phrase [بعدما تعترفون بخطاياكم لكي تكون ذبيحتكم طاهرة] is not in the Coptic liturgy but a quote used in the old liturgical sources.
Unfortunately, you're not understanding what I'm saying here. You are referring to the contemporary liturgy as we have it now. I'm not referring to that at all - I'm referring to the history of how it developed to why we have now, and what remains in the current practice.
Anyway, let me quote THE REST of what abouna Matta wrote, which you didn't care to copy, although it was right after what you quoted. Stop saying I'm wrong, because I know what I'm talking about and I'm not taking random quotes out of their full context as you do. This is dishonest quoting that you're engaging yourself in, and I hope that as a Christian you'd be more honest, rather than jealous. I'm here to help explain something and answer a question asked by a friend who goes to the same church as I do; so I'm not here to show-off my skills and prove you or anyone wrong. That's just childish, and I don't have time for those jealousy games.
Here's what Abouna Matta says (note that this is a copy and paste from a document I have, so it doesn't have page numbers... and I hope the pasting is correct). I can send you the zip file if you like.
- تقديم الصعيدة - الخبز والخمر - (الحَمَل):
وكان موضعه التقليدي منذ القرن الأول بعد القبلة المقدَّسة مباشرةً، ولكن الآن نجد الحَمَل يُقدَّم قبل “قداس الموعوظين” أي قبل خدمة القراءات وسوف نأتي فيما بعد على الأسباب التي أدت إلى ذلك. وقد تبيَّن لنا أن طقس تقديم الحمل هو نفسه طقس عشاء الرب، وهو قدَّاس كامل بذاته وضع ضمن قدَّاس القديس باسيليوس حفظاً له من الضياع.
+++ The Following are from his book titled:
إفخارستيا عشاء الرب
قدَّاس الرسل الأوَّل وهو نواة جميع القدَّاسات
(Chapter 3)
كما لم تجهل أبداً أو تفرِّط أبداً في أي تقليد رسولي آخر؛ بل وأي كلمة رسولية تسلَّمتها. ولكن حدث أنه بعد أن أكمل الرسل صياغة الإفخارستيا التي تصلح لعامة الشعب لتضاف على الخدمة الجمهورية، وذلك على أساس شكل إفخارستية العشاء إنما بمقولات وأوصاف وشرح بدلاً من وضعها الصامت، وذلك في كل حركة، أصبح لدى الرسل إفخارستيتان: إفخارستية أصيلة هي إفخارستية عشاء الرب الخاصة، وإفخارستية مشروحة هي إفخارستية ليتورجية الخدمة الجمهورية في الكنيسة (سواء بالمساء أو بالصباح). ولكن لم يشأ الرسل أن يحذفوا الإفخارستيا الأُولى أو يستغنوا عنها، بل احتفظوا بها كاملة في الوضع الجديد في داخل ليتورجية الخدمة الجمهورية، احتفظوا بها بكل بركاتها المختصرة وحركاتها الصامتة وتسابيحها المحدودة جدًّا، ولكن في أضيق حيِّز ممكن من الإجراءات ومن الوقت أيضاً، وأدخلوها ضمن الليتورجية الصباحية وجعلوها بمثابة تقديم القرابين (الحمل) قبل البدء بالقراءات والوعظ والصلوات، فاعتبرت كأنها مجرَّد “وضع القرابين” على المذبح، ولكنها في الحقيقة هي الطقس الكامل للصعيدة المرفوعة في العشاء الأخير بكل مستلزماتها ونصوصها الليتورجية، وهي التي نسميها الآن في الكنيسة القبطية “تقديم الحمل”. وهذا الإجراء تمَّ مبكِّراً جدًّا وعلى أيدي الرسل أنفسهم، فقد وردت إشارات مبكِّرة جدًّا في الليتورجيات الوصفية الأُولى المعتقد أن أصولها الأُولى من وضع الرسل مثل ليتورجية القديس مرقس الرسول وليتورجية سيرابيون. وقد اعتبروا أن إفخارستية عشاء الرب المبدوء بها في أول الخدمة قبل القراءات هي أساس لليتورجيا التي تجيء بعدها. والمقصود من كلمة “أساس” هو أنها جزء من التقديس الفعلي للقرابين، وهذا سيجيء شرحه بعد ذلك بالتفصيل.
+++
(Chapter 5) : إفخارستية “تقديم الحمل” هي الجزء الأساسي الذي يبتدئ به الكاهن خدمة القداس العام مهما كان هذا القداس، سواء الباسيلي أو الغريغوري أو الكيرلسي (مرقس الرسول)، وهو موجود في الخولاجي (الإفخولوجيون) كبادئة حتمية لا تتبع أي قداس معيَّن. وقد يبدو لأول وهلة للباحث المتخصِّص في دراسة الإفخارستيا إنه عمل إضافي على الإفخارستيا، لأن كل إفخارستية في العالم لها بداية رسمية محدَّدة، كل ما يأتي قبلها يعتبر إضافياً، وهذه البداية الرسمية هي ما يقوله الأسقف (أو الكاهن) وما يرد به الشعب هكذا: - “الرب مع جميعكم، ومع روحك أيضاً”. - “ارفعوا قلوبكم، هي عند الرب”. - “فلنشكر الرب، مستحق وعادل”. ومعلوم أن “طقس تقديم الحمل” الوارد بالخولاجي يأتي كله قبل هذه البداية، إذن فهو في حكم القانون الإفخارستي طقس خارج عن صُلب الإفخارستيا. لذلك وبحكم قانون الدراسة والتحليل الإفخارستي، وضعه العلماء والدارسون كطقس خارج عن الإفخارستيا، وهكذا وبحكم هذا التحديد القانوني انكمش هذا الطقس تحت عنوان “تقديم الحمل”. و“تقديم الحمل” معروف في القانون الليتورجي أنه مجرَّد “وضع القرابين على المذبح”. ولكن برجوع القارئ الدارس إلى جدول المقارنة الذي قدَّمناه في صفحة (19) بين طقس تقديم الحمل وطقس إفخارستية مرقس الرسول، يجد أن الأمر يستحيل بأي حال من الأحوال أن ينطبق عليه مجرَّد وضع قرابين على المذبح. فهو إفخارستية كاملة كمالاً متقناً دقيقاً، [يبدأ بغسل اليدين، واختيار الحمل، ثمَّ إعطاء المجد للثالوث، وتقريب القرابين، ثمَّ أواشي مطابقة لأطول إفخارستية: السلامة - المرضى - المسافرين - المنتقلين - القرابين - الخديم - والموصِّين - الاجتماعات - الطلبة - التسبيح الذي يسبق رسم السر (التأسيس) بالبركة على الخبز وعلى الكأس، ثمَّ الشكر على الكأس، الاستدعاء ليصير الخبز جسداً والخمر دماً، طلب مواهب الجسد والدم - السجود للذبيحة، إحناء الرأس لقبول التحليل، خلصت حقـًّا، أوشية السلامة والآباء والاجتماعات، الاعتراف بالإيمان، صلاة الصلح، القبلة، تقدَّموا (تقرَّبوا) تقدَّموا - ذبيحة التسبيح] انتهى! إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال. ولكن لا ينتهي بالتناول بل يغطِّي الكاهن الذبيحة عند الخروج من الهيكل، بعد أن يغطِّي الأسرار بالستر الخاص المسمَّى خطأ “بالابروسفارين”، في حين أن كلمة بروسفارين تعني في اليونانية “تقرَّبوا. تقرَّبوا”، ولكن بدل أن يتقرَّب الشعب في هذه اللحظة يتوقَّف هذا القداس المختصر أو هذه الإفخارستيا الصغيرة، وتغطَّى الأسرار وتُحرس بواسطة شماسين (لأنها أسرار تقدَّست) لحين البدء بالقداس الشرحي الكبير المسمَّى بالإفخارستيا الكبرى. حيث يحتسب الآن أن كل الذي تمَّ في هذه الإفخارستيا المختصرة هو مجرَّد تقديم الحمل. ولكن من الملابسات التي سنشرحها بدقة سيتضح للدارس أكثر فأكثر سرّ هذه الإفخارستيا الفائقة الكرامة. 2 - موقف إفخارستية تقديم الحمل من
+++
(Chapter 6)
الناقص عبارة “أظهر وجهك على هذا الخبز” بصورة توضيحية هكذا: [اجعل حضرتك تستقر على هذا الخبز وعلى هذه الكأس] ثمَّ تنقطع الصلاة. هنا يكون في الحقيقة قد انتهى قداس الحمل وأصبح جاهزاً للتناول، ولكن أُضيفت إليه القراءات بعد ذلك. لذلك يغطِّي الكاهن الجسد والدم بالغطاء الذي سُمِّي الابروسفارين خطأ. لأن نداء بروسفارين من الشماس يعني تقدَّموا تقدَّموا على هذا الرسم، أي تقدَّموا للتناول. وهي التي قيلت بعد ذلك بعد القراءة للبولس والكاثوليكون والإبركسيس والإنجيل ثمَّ التذكارات: الأواشي والمجمع (أوشية المنتقلين بعد حدوث تضخُّم لها) ثمَّ تلاوة الأمانة. يقول ابروسفارين التي تأخَّرت عن موضعها الصحيح لا ليدخل ويتقرَّب الشعب بل ليبدأ قداس آخر! فالنداء بابروسفارين التي معناها تقرَّبوا تقرَّبوا على هذا الرسم تكشف هنا الإضافات كلها التي حدثت من بعد صلاة فلنشكر صانع الخيرات وصلاة التقدمة. التي ينبغي أن يأتي بعدها “القبلة” ثمَّ التناول.
[quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148331#msg148331 date=1322853614] Unfortunately, you're not understanding what I'm saying here. You are referring to the contemporary liturgy as we have it now. I'm not referring to that at all - I'm referring to the history of how it developed to why we have now, and what remains in the current practice.
Anyway, let me quote THE REST of what abouna Matta wrote, which you didn't care to copy, although it was right after what you quoted. Stop saying I'm wrong, because I know what I'm talking about and I'm not taking random quotes out of their full context as you do. This is dishonest quoting that you're engaging yourself in, and I hope that as a Christian you'd be more honest, rather than jealous. I'm here to help explain something and answer a question asked by a friend who goes to the same church as I do; so I'm not here to show-off my skills and prove you or anyone wrong. That's just childish, and I don't have time for those jealousy games.
Here's what Abouna Matta says (note that this is a copy and paste from a document I have, so it doesn't have page numbers... and I hope the pasting is correct). I can send you the zip file if you like.
- تقديم الصعيدة - الخبز والخمر - (الحَمَل):
وكان موضعه التقليدي منذ القرن الأول بعد القبلة المقدَّسة مباشرةً، ولكن الآن نجد الحَمَل يُقدَّم قبل “قداس الموعوظين” أي قبل خدمة القراءات وسوف نأتي فيما بعد على الأسباب التي أدت إلى ذلك. وقد تبيَّن لنا أن طقس تقديم الحمل هو نفسه طقس عشاء الرب، وهو قدَّاس كامل بذاته وضع ضمن قدَّاس القديس باسيليوس حفظاً له من الضياع.
+++ The Following are from his book titled:
إفخارستيا عشاء الرب
قدَّاس الرسل الأوَّل وهو نواة جميع القدَّاسات
(Chapter 3)
كما لم تجهل أبداً أو تفرِّط أبداً في أي تقليد رسولي آخر؛ بل وأي كلمة رسولية تسلَّمتها. ولكن حدث أنه بعد أن أكمل الرسل صياغة الإفخارستيا التي تصلح لعامة الشعب لتضاف على الخدمة الجمهورية، وذلك على أساس شكل إفخارستية العشاء إنما بمقولات وأوصاف وشرح بدلاً من وضعها الصامت، وذلك في كل حركة، أصبح لدى الرسل إفخارستيتان: إفخارستية أصيلة هي إفخارستية عشاء الرب الخاصة، وإفخارستية مشروحة هي إفخارستية ليتورجية الخدمة الجمهورية في الكنيسة (سواء بالمساء أو بالصباح). ولكن لم يشأ الرسل أن يحذفوا الإفخارستيا الأُولى أو يستغنوا عنها، بل احتفظوا بها كاملة في الوضع الجديد في داخل ليتورجية الخدمة الجمهورية، احتفظوا بها بكل بركاتها المختصرة وحركاتها الصامتة وتسابيحها المحدودة جدًّا، ولكن في أضيق حيِّز ممكن من الإجراءات ومن الوقت أيضاً، وأدخلوها ضمن الليتورجية الصباحية وجعلوها بمثابة تقديم القرابين (الحمل) قبل البدء بالقراءات والوعظ والصلوات، فاعتبرت كأنها مجرَّد “وضع القرابين” على المذبح، ولكنها في الحقيقة هي الطقس الكامل للصعيدة المرفوعة في العشاء الأخير بكل مستلزماتها ونصوصها الليتورجية، وهي التي نسميها الآن في الكنيسة القبطية “تقديم الحمل”. وهذا الإجراء تمَّ مبكِّراً جدًّا وعلى أيدي الرسل أنفسهم، فقد وردت إشارات مبكِّرة جدًّا في الليتورجيات الوصفية الأُولى المعتقد أن أصولها الأُولى من وضع الرسل مثل ليتورجية القديس مرقس الرسول وليتورجية سيرابيون. وقد اعتبروا أن إفخارستية عشاء الرب المبدوء بها في أول الخدمة قبل القراءات هي أساس لليتورجيا التي تجيء بعدها. والمقصود من كلمة “أساس” هو أنها جزء من التقديس الفعلي للقرابين، وهذا سيجيء شرحه بعد ذلك بالتفصيل.
+++
(Chapter 5) : إفخارستية “تقديم الحمل” هي الجزء الأساسي الذي يبتدئ به الكاهن خدمة القداس العام مهما كان هذا القداس، سواء الباسيلي أو الغريغوري أو الكيرلسي (مرقس الرسول)، وهو موجود في الخولاجي (الإفخولوجيون) كبادئة حتمية لا تتبع أي قداس معيَّن. وقد يبدو لأول وهلة للباحث المتخصِّص في دراسة الإفخارستيا إنه عمل إضافي على الإفخارستيا، لأن كل إفخارستية في العالم لها بداية رسمية محدَّدة، كل ما يأتي قبلها يعتبر إضافياً، وهذه البداية الرسمية هي ما يقوله الأسقف (أو الكاهن) وما يرد به الشعب هكذا: - “الرب مع جميعكم، ومع روحك أيضاً”. - “ارفعوا قلوبكم، هي عند الرب”. - “فلنشكر الرب، مستحق وعادل”. ومعلوم أن “طقس تقديم الحمل” الوارد بالخولاجي يأتي كله قبل هذه البداية، إذن فهو في حكم القانون الإفخارستي طقس خارج عن صُلب الإفخارستيا. لذلك وبحكم قانون الدراسة والتحليل الإفخارستي، وضعه العلماء والدارسون كطقس خارج عن الإفخارستيا، وهكذا وبحكم هذا التحديد القانوني انكمش هذا الطقس تحت عنوان “تقديم الحمل”. و“تقديم الحمل” معروف في القانون الليتورجي أنه مجرَّد “وضع القرابين على المذبح”. ولكن برجوع القارئ الدارس إلى جدول المقارنة الذي قدَّمناه في صفحة (19) بين طقس تقديم الحمل وطقس إفخارستية مرقس الرسول، يجد أن الأمر يستحيل بأي حال من الأحوال أن ينطبق عليه مجرَّد وضع قرابين على المذبح. فهو إفخارستية كاملة كمالاً متقناً دقيقاً، [يبدأ بغسل اليدين، واختيار الحمل، ثمَّ إعطاء المجد للثالوث، وتقريب القرابين، ثمَّ أواشي مطابقة لأطول إفخارستية: السلامة - المرضى - المسافرين - المنتقلين - القرابين - الخديم - والموصِّين - الاجتماعات - الطلبة - التسبيح الذي يسبق رسم السر (التأسيس) بالبركة على الخبز وعلى الكأس، ثمَّ الشكر على الكأس، الاستدعاء ليصير الخبز جسداً والخمر دماً، طلب مواهب الجسد والدم - السجود للذبيحة، إحناء الرأس لقبول التحليل، خلصت حقـًّا، أوشية السلامة والآباء والاجتماعات، الاعتراف بالإيمان، صلاة الصلح، القبلة، تقدَّموا (تقرَّبوا) تقدَّموا - ذبيحة التسبيح] انتهى! إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال. ولكن لا ينتهي بالتناول بل يغطِّي الكاهن الذبيحة عند الخروج من الهيكل، بعد أن يغطِّي الأسرار بالستر الخاص المسمَّى خطأ “بالابروسفارين”، في حين أن كلمة بروسفارين تعني في اليونانية “تقرَّبوا. تقرَّبوا”، ولكن بدل أن يتقرَّب الشعب في هذه اللحظة يتوقَّف هذا القداس المختصر أو هذه الإفخارستيا الصغيرة، وتغطَّى الأسرار وتُحرس بواسطة شماسين (لأنها أسرار تقدَّست) لحين البدء بالقداس الشرحي الكبير المسمَّى بالإفخارستيا الكبرى. حيث يحتسب الآن أن كل الذي تمَّ في هذه الإفخارستيا المختصرة هو مجرَّد تقديم الحمل. ولكن من الملابسات التي سنشرحها بدقة سيتضح للدارس أكثر فأكثر سرّ هذه الإفخارستيا الفائقة الكرامة. 2 - موقف إفخارستية تقديم الحمل من
+++
(Chapter 6)
الناقص عبارة “أظهر وجهك على هذا الخبز” بصورة توضيحية هكذا: [اجعل حضرتك تستقر على هذا الخبز وعلى هذه الكأس] ثمَّ تنقطع الصلاة. هنا يكون في الحقيقة قد انتهى قداس الحمل وأصبح جاهزاً للتناول، ولكن أُضيفت إليه القراءات بعد ذلك. لذلك يغطِّي الكاهن الجسد والدم بالغطاء الذي سُمِّي الابروسفارين خطأ. لأن نداء بروسفارين من الشماس يعني تقدَّموا تقدَّموا على هذا الرسم، أي تقدَّموا للتناول. وهي التي قيلت بعد ذلك بعد القراءة للبولس والكاثوليكون والإبركسيس والإنجيل ثمَّ التذكارات: الأواشي والمجمع (أوشية المنتقلين بعد حدوث تضخُّم لها) ثمَّ تلاوة الأمانة. يقول ابروسفارين التي تأخَّرت عن موضعها الصحيح لا ليدخل ويتقرَّب الشعب بل ليبدأ قداس آخر! فالنداء بابروسفارين التي معناها تقرَّبوا تقرَّبوا على هذا الرسم تكشف هنا الإضافات كلها التي حدثت من بعد صلاة فلنشكر صانع الخيرات وصلاة التقدمة. التي ينبغي أن يأتي بعدها “القبلة” ثمَّ التناول.
All these quotations deal with the offeratory not the Greeting.
These quotes do not prove your point that the greeting command changed its place. They only explain what we already know that the offering of the lamb changed from after the liturgy of the word (for the Catechumens) to before it.
No anafora can begin without the greeting command. This is a Tradition from early centuries and agrees with the Holy Bible that we cannot offer our Qurban while we are not reconciled.
Where is your proof that the command of the Holy Kiss changed its place?
To help us see the change you need to point to some manuscript that show the original place of the greeting command in the Coptic rite.
Can't you read man? At least read the very last sentence of the very last quote if you can't read the rest.
It says that the Offertory was a complete Eucharistis rite, and it says very clearly that in this Eucharistic rite, the greeting was given, followed by communion. The kiss of peace was at the end of the service.
I'm tired now of repeating the same thing over and over again. Your failure to read does not mean a failure of providing evidence on my part.
[quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148341#msg148341 date=1322864554] Lord Jesus Christ have mercy!
Can't you read man? At least read the very last sentence of the very last quote if you can't read the rest.
It says that the Offertory was a complete Eucharistis rite, and it says very clearly that in this Eucharistic rite, the greeting was given, followed by communion. The kiss of peace was at the end of the service.
I'm tired now of repeating the same thing over and over again. Your failure to read does not mean a failure of providing evidence on my part.
Seriously, grow up.
Who is now taking quotes out of context. Do you seriously believe that that the greetings were done right before the communion and you can support this theory of yours by these few words.
I can also say that the greeting is done in the anafora followed by communion. Does this mean that the greeting is done right before communion with nothing in between. This is absurd and ridiculous and does not agree with the Biblical commandments. Do you see the error of your misrepresentation or may be your understanding or its lack thereof.
- تقديم الصعيدة - الخبز والخمر - (الحَمَل):
كان موضعه التقليدي منذ القرن الأول بعد القبلة المقدَّسة مباشرةً
How can you reconcile your claim with these words above which mean: Offeratory - Lamb offering .. and its traditional place since the 1st century was directly after the holy kiss.
THERE IS NO SINGLE EUCHARISTIC TRADITION THAT SAYS THAT THE HOLY KISS WAS DONE RIGHT BEFORE COMMUNION.
If you really want us to believe that provide ANY manuscript that shows what you are claiming is true.
Oh, and one more thing you can use in your academic research, conferences and seminars. Do not build up history on few words of explanation taken out of context. After all you say you are an academian so please write as such.
Honestly, I would like to see this manuscript that says the holy kiss was done right before communion which I am sure it does not exist as this is against the our Lord's command.
Other than providing you with an entire source, Fr. Matta el-Meskeen's 2 books on the Eucharist, in which the whole argument of the books was to show that the Offertory was a whole Eucharistic service and in which part that the deacon says "greet one another with a holy kiss" is immediately followed by "approach, approach, approach the holy altar and see the Body and Blood of Christ on it"; and other than the fact that we're talking about why this response still exists in our liturgy in the unusual place for it; and other than explaining to you that this response was the end of the liturgy (which is what this forum thread is about); I'm not sure how else would you like to me to provide more details for you.
It's practically impossible for me to replicate all the information provided in thousands of pages of research in Fr. Matta's books, which he himself spent years to research and write. I gave you the highlights of his arguments, but it's impossible to go through all his arguments, all the references to the Church Fathers, all the references to ancient and contemporary liturgical manuscripts, and all the research done by Western liturgical scholars - all of that in this forum. I can point out to you where you could do further research, and I haven't failed at doing that. But please, be practical and be considerate that a forum isn't the place to do such kind of work.
If anything, the onus is on you to explain why Fr. Matta is wrong with his research on the early Coptic Eucharist. The evidence he provides is plentiful. The fact that there were many Eucharistic traditions is not a surprise: some had the kiss of peace before the offering; some had the kiss of peace immediately before communion (that means after the institution narrative, the litanies, confession); and some today have the kiss of peace right in the middle, after the Offertory, Liturgy of the Word and after a prayer of reconciliation.
And for your information, the kiss of peace is still practiced in the Roman (and other Western) rites after the Lord's Prayer, and immediately before communion. You might argue here that the Coptic rite has nothing to do with the Roman rite, but you already mentioned Hippolytus on your side of the argument, which happens to be a Roman rite.
[quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148343#msg148343 date=1322867292] Other than providing you with an entire source, Fr. Matta el-Meskeen's 2 books on the Eucharist, in which the whole argument of the books was to show that the Offertory was a whole Eucharistic service and in which part that the deacon says "greet one another with a holy kiss" is immediately followed by "approach, approach, approach the holy altar and see the Body and Blood of Christ on it"; and other than the fact that we're talking about why this response still exists in our liturgy in the unusual place for it; and other than explaining to you that this response was the end of the liturgy (which is what this forum thread is about); I'm not sure how else would you like to me to provide more details for you.
It's practically impossible for me to replicate all the information provided in thousands of pages of research in Fr. Matta's books, which he himself spent years to research and write. I gave you the highlights of his arguments, but it's impossible to go through all his arguments, all the references to the Church Fathers, all the references to ancient and contemporary liturgical manuscripts, and all the research done by Western liturgical scholars - all of that in this forum. I can point out to you where you could do further research, and I haven't failed at doing that. But please, be practical and be considerate that a forum isn't the place to do such kind of work.
If anything, the onus is on you to explain why Fr. Matta is wrong with his research on the early Coptic Eucharist. The evidence he provides is plentiful. The fact that there were many Eucharistic traditions is not a surprise: some had the kiss of peace before the offering; some had the kiss of peace immediately before communion (that means after the institution narrative, the litanies, confession); and some today have the kiss of peace right in the middle, after the Offertory, Liturgy of the Word and after a prayer of reconciliation.
And for your information, the kiss of peace is still practiced in the Roman (and other Western) rites after the Lord's Prayer, and immediately before communion. You might argue here that the Coptic rite has nothing to do with the Roman rite, but you already mentioned Hippolytus on your side of the argument, which happens to be a Roman rite.
You cited Abouna Matta El Meskeen to support your theory that the Holy Kiss preceded communion directly. I showed you from that same reference the error of your thinking.
If you truly believe that the Holy Kiss used to directly precede communion and now it is in a different place, then show a single reference that Abouna Matta is using to support your claim.
Again, I am not asking for thousand of proofs, research, just a single reference that supports your claim
ولكن برجوع القارئ الدارس إلى جدول المقارنة الذي قدَّمناه في صفحة (19) بين طقس تقديم الحمل وطقس إفخارستية مرقس الرسول، يجد أن الأمر يستحيل بأي حال من الأحوال أن ينطبق عليه مجرَّد وضع قرابين على المذبح. فهو إفخارستية كاملة كمالاً متقناً دقيقاً، [يبدأ بغسل اليدين، واختيار الحمل، ثمَّ إعطاء المجد للثالوث، وتقريب القرابين، ثمَّ أواشي مطابقة لأطول إفخارستية: السلامة - المرضى - المسافرين - المنتقلين - القرابين - الخديم - والموصِّين - الاجتماعات - الطلبة - التسبيح الذي يسبق رسم السر (التأسيس) بالبركة على الخبز وعلى الكأس، ثمَّ الشكر على الكأس، الاستدعاء ليصير الخبز جسداً والخمر دماً، طلب مواهب الجسد والدم - السجود للذبيحة، إحناء الرأس لقبول التحليل، خلصت حقـًّا، أوشية السلامة والآباء والاجتماعات، الاعتراف بالإيمان، صلاة الصلح، القبلة، تقدَّموا (تقرَّبوا) تقدَّموا - ذبيحة التسبيح] انتهى! إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال.
ولكن برجوع القارئ الدارس إلى جدول المقارنة الذي قدَّمناه في صفحة (19) بين طقس تقديم الحمل وطقس إفخارستية مرقس الرسول، يجد أن الأمر يستحيل بأي حال من الأحوال أن ينطبق عليه مجرَّد وضع قرابين على المذبح. فهو إفخارستية كاملة كمالاً متقناً دقيقاً، [يبدأ بغسل اليدين، واختيار الحمل، ثمَّ إعطاء المجد للثالوث، وتقريب القرابين، ثمَّ أواشي مطابقة لأطول إفخارستية: السلامة - المرضى - المسافرين - المنتقلين - القرابين - الخديم - والموصِّين - الاجتماعات - الطلبة - التسبيح الذي يسبق رسم السر (التأسيس) بالبركة على الخبز وعلى الكأس، ثمَّ الشكر على الكأس، الاستدعاء ليصير الخبز جسداً والخمر دماً، طلب مواهب الجسد والدم - السجود للذبيحة، إحناء الرأس لقبول التحليل، خلصت حقـًّا، أوشية السلامة والآباء والاجتماعات، الاعتراف بالإيمان، صلاة الصلح، القبلة، تقدَّموا (تقرَّبوا) تقدَّموا - ذبيحة التسبيح] انتهى! إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال.
Very good .. now you see in the excerpt that you just provided the reconciliation, the Greetings, then the offerings, then the sacrificial praise. I do not see in this order that the Greetings precedes directly the communion.
This is the same order that the we follow today. No discrepancy whatsoever.
It seems that the more you dig into this the more you disprove your initial claim and instead prove the authenticity of our Coptic rite and its pure Apostolic source.
Basically, your claim that the Greeting Command, or the holy kiss, used to precede the communion directly or that its place had changed has no proof.
The holy kiss has always been at the beginning of the anafora.
It says that the offering was done already, thanksgiving prayer prayed, the litanies prayed, everything done, and the offering has been already changed to the Body and Blood of Christ. Hence, the whole point of calling the Offertory rite a whole Eucharistic prayer. He proves it by comparing the Offertory rite with the whole Anaphora of St. Mark.
In fact, the word "offer, offer, offer" by the deacon is inaccurate. That's why you'll notice that Fr. Matta wrote "approach, [come closer], approach." The response used to be about approaching the altar for communion, not for offering the sacrifice.
Perhaps there's a language barrier? Here's a translation of what that quote says. Let the readers be the judge. I'm tired of writing about this, and it is sufficient what has been presented:
But, if the reader who studies goes back to the table of comparison that we presented on page 19, which compares between the rite of the Offering of the Lamb with the rite of the Eucharist of Mark the Apostle, he will find that the matter absolutely cannot simply be a placing of the offering on the altar. Rather, it [the Offering the of the Lamb] is a full and complete Eucharist, perfect and precise. It begins with: The washing of hands The choosing of the Lamb Followed by giving glory to the Trinity Getting the offerings close to each other Then the litanies of the longest Eucharist: peace, the sick, the travelers, the departed, the servant, those who asked for prayers, the congregations, the request. The praise that precedes the crossing of the mystery (institution) as a blessing on the bread and wine Thanksgiving on the cup Asking that the bread becomes Body and the wine becomes the Blood Asking for the grace of the Body and Blood Worshipping the sacrifice Bowing the head to receive the absolution “Saved Amen” The litanies of the peace, the fathers, the congregations Confession of faith Prayer of reconciliation Kiss of peace Deacon response: “Approach, [come closer], approach” “A sacrifice of praise” response Ending. And so towards the end of this mystical liturgy that is surprisingly so short and so complete.
But, if the reader who studies goes back to the table of comparison that we presented on page 19, which compares between the rite of the Offering of the Lamb with the rite of the Eucharist of Mark the Apostle, he will find that the matter absolutely cannot simply be a placing of the offering on the altar. Rather, it [the Offering the of the Lamb] is a full and complete Eucharist, perfect and precise. It begins with: The washing of hands The choosing of the Lamb Followed by giving glory to the Trinity Getting the offerings close to each other Then the litanies of the longest Eucharist: peace, the sick, the travelers, the departed, the servant, those who asked for prayers, the congregations, the request. The praise that precedes the crossing of the mystery (institution) as a blessing on the bread and wine Thanksgiving on the cup Asking that the bread becomes Body and the wine becomes the Blood Asking for the grace of the Body and Blood Worshipping the sacrifice Bowing the head to receive the absolution “Saved Amen” The litanies of the peace, the fathers, the congregations Confession of faith Prayer of reconciliation Kiss of peace Deacon response: “Approach, [come closer], approach” “A sacrifice of praise” response
Where in this excerpt the communion. We understand the point Abouna Matta is trying to make where Offering of the lamb is a liturgy by itself.
But you are saying that the holy kiss is done then the communion. I do not see the rationale here.
You are assuming that by having the word "Ending", it means that there is communion. This is not so. You are using Abouna's Matta explanation of the liturgical elements of the liturgy of the Word to prove that it has all the elements of the Eucharistic rites. We get that.
My question still stands where does it say that the Holy Kiss precedes directly the communion or the distribution of the sacraments?
Abouna Matta explains:
[right]إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال. ولكن لا ينتهي بالتناول بل يغطِّي الكاهن الذبيحة عند الخروج من الهيكل، بعد أن يغطِّي الأسرار بالستر الخاص المسمَّى خطأ “بالابروسفارين”، في حين أن كلمة بروسفارين تعني في اليونانية “تقرَّبوا. تقرَّبوا”، ولكن بدل أن يتقرَّب الشعب في هذه اللحظة يتوقَّف هذا القداس المختصر أو هذه الإفخارستيا الصغيرة، وتغطَّى الأسرار وتُحرس بواسطة شماسين (لأنها أسرار تقدَّست) لحين البدء بالقداس الشرحي الكبير المسمَّى بالإفخارستيا الكبرى. حيث يحتسب الآن أن كل الذي تمَّ في هذه الإفخارستيا المختصرة هو مجرَّد تقديم الحمل. ولكن من الملابسات التي سنشرحها بدقة سيتضح للدارس أكثر فأكثر سرّ هذه الإفخارستيا الفائقة الكرامة.[/right]
The Lamb offering is Eucharistic liturgy but does not mean it ends with communion. For it is followed by the anafora as the above explains (emphasis is mine). The Coptic rite as it stands today follow what you have presented so far.
Your problem is that you think that by calling the lamb offering lliturgy, it has to end with communion. This is not what Abouna Matta is suggesting at all.
Keep going with the rest of the book. With the quote above, he's talking about the present rite, where the prospherin covers the altar in order to begin the Liturgy of the Word, and through the descriptive Eucharist.
The Ending used to be the communion. He says that in chapter 6, even in the part I quoted:
تأخَّرت عن موضعها الصحيح لا ليدخل ويتقرَّب الشعب بل ليبدأ قداس آخر! فالنداء بابروسفارين التي معناها تقرَّبوا تقرَّبوا على هذا الرسم تكشف هنا الإضافات كلها التي حدثت من بعد صلاة فلنشكر صانع الخيرات وصلاة التقدمة. التي ينبغي أن يأتي بعدها “القبلة” ثمَّ التناول.
Translation: He [the deacon] says "prospherin," which is now late rather than in its correct position, not for the people to approach, but so that another liturgy may begin. For the call of "prospherin," which means "approach, approach in order" shows us here all the additions that came after the Prayer of Thanksgiving and the Prayer of Offering, where instead it should've been followed by the "kiss of peace" and then communion.
Should I interpret that for you?
He's saying that the covering of the altar with the prospherin, which starts off the Liturgy of the Word and continues with the Liturgy of the Believers, was an addition. When the deacon called out "prospherin," which means approach, he was saying to the people to greet one another with a holy kiss and then approach the altar for communion. So, what once followed the Prayer of Thanksgiving and the offering (as listed in the quote previously) was the kiss of peace and communion. END.
Kindly read the whole book, rather than misinterpret what Fr. Matta was saying, say that I'm misinterpreting him, and insisting on your own opinions that are not supported either by history nor the very book we're discussing now.
Translation: He [the deacon] says "prospherin," which is now late rather than in its correct position, not for the people to approach, but so that another liturgy may begin. For the call of "prospherin," which means "approach, approach in order" shows us here all the additions that came after the Prayer of Thanksgiving and the Prayer of Offering, where instead it should've been followed by the "kiss of peace" and then communion.
Should I interpret that for you?
I already addressed this line of reasoning. Here it is for your reference:
I can also say that the greeting is done in the anafora followed by communion. Does this mean that the greeting is done right before communion with nothing in between. This is absurd and ridiculous and does not agree with the Biblical commandments. Do you see the error of your misrepresentation or may be your understanding or its lack thereof.
- تقديم الصعيدة - الخبز والخمر - (الحَمَل):
كان موضعه التقليدي منذ القرن الأول بعد القبلة المقدَّسة مباشرةً
How can you reconcile your claim with these words above which mean: Offeratory - Lamb offering .. and its traditional place since the 1st century was directly after the holy kiss.
If the Traditional place of the lamb offering was after the holy kiss, then how can you say that the lamb offering liturgy was done, the koly kiss, then communion.
As I explained before that the command to greet one another, the current rite, is followed by another command to offer. This agrees with Abouna Matta explanation of where the lamb offering used to be.
So even if we reduce the whole liturgy to the lamb offering, it would still come after the holy kiss.
The very same quote that you're stuck on, quoted in Arabic in red above, should be read in context. Fr. Matta in this section of the book is talking about the liturgy as per the evidence from St. Justin Martyr.
No one denies that the greeting was before the offering in some traditions, including the ones mentioned by Justin Martyr, Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Origen of Alexandria, Cyprian, Augustine, and so on. I didn't deny that, and neither does Fr. Matta deny it - it is one among many traditions and rites around the Christian world. There are other traditions, including the one that's now called the Offertory, which, when it was a whole Eucharistic service in its own right, had the greeting at the end, after the prayers, after the litanies, after the transubstantiation of the elements, and just while the deacon said: "greet one another with a holy kiss, and come approach, approach, approach the altar" for communion - hence, this deacon's response is a relic of the time when people greeted one another and approached for communion. It makes no sense at all today, especially since another liturgy begins right after the deacon's response.
Now, with that said, I refuse to answer any more of your comments, unless you take up the book by Fr. Matta first and read it fully, along with its footnotes. Like I said, the onus is on you to provide evidence that the tradition you think is in place is the only one historically and the only that's valid. So, save yourself the public embarrassment, read and understand the book, do more research (even beyond the book, hence the necessity of reading the footnotes and referring to those sources); and until then, perhaps we could have a more fruitful discussion on the historical development of the Coptic liturgy.
[quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148359#msg148359 date=1322883426] You are more confused than ever.
The very same quote that you're stuck on, quoted in Arabic in red above, should be read in context. Fr. Matta in this section of the book is talking about the liturgy as per the evidence from St. Justin Martyr.
Exactly. This means that since the first century, the Coptic rite is intact.
The only thing that changed is the place of the lamb offering from being after the liturgy of the word to being before it. This has nothing to do withe the place of the Holy Kiss.
As explained, the command "offer, offer, offer" is a separate command from the greeting one as explained in the Koulagy by Abouna Abd Al Messeih printed in 1902. The physical action of the offering changed but the command did not.
There are other traditions, including the one that's now called the Offertory, which, when it was a whole Eucharistic service in its own right, had the greeting at the end, after the prayers, after the litanies, after the transubstantiation of the elements, and just while the deacon said: "greet one another with a holy kiss, and come approach, approach, approach the altar" for communion - hence, this deacon's response is a relic of the time when people greeted one another and approached for communion. It makes no sense at all today, especially since another liturgy begins right after the deacon's response.
What are those traditions you are referring to?
You started your claim saying that the Coptic rite changed the place of the holy kiss. Yet, Fr. Matta is arguing that the Coptic rite is one of the most authentic traditions and uses it to explain the stages of the development of the Eucharistic prayers.
ike I said, the onus is on you to provide evidence that the tradition you think is in place is the only one historically and the only that's valid. So, save yourself the public embarrassment,
What embarrassment you are referring to. I am not embarrassed at all. In fact you are the one who is choosing not to engage anymore of the discussion. You kep bringing up quotes from one source and you try to put them together to prove a theory in your head.
read and understand the book, do more research (even beyond the book, hence the necessity of reading the footnotes and referring to those sources); and until then, perhaps we could have a more fruitful discussion on the historical development of the Coptic liturgy.
No matter where the kiss of peace took place, the fact of the matter is that all liturgies and liturgical traditions (Coptic, Greek, Syriac, Roman etc) are not the exact same as they were in the first centuries. I didn't study the Coptic Rite specifically but I took several in depth courses on Orthodox liturgics and from the evidence we have (such as the Apostolic Constitutions/Teachings of the Twelve) the first liturgies had no texts at all! I always chuckle when I read that St Mark himself handed down the Coptic liturgy as it is today because that's not how liturgy develops. The first liturgies had basic outlines to follow but no texts. The celebrant would pray to the best of his abilities on a particular theme (ex the sacrifice of the Son). After a few of these prayers and hymns and the kiss of peace, communion would indeed follow.
Of course this doesn't happen today because since the 2nd century, all liturgies have developed quite a bit and are still in the process of developing; hence we call this the organic nature of the liturgy. Obviously there was a need at a certain point to change parts of the liturgy for various reasons. All liturgies today east and west have the same basic outline of readings (liturgy of the word), liturgy of the faithful (anaphora) with irini pasi, lift up your hearts etc, the Sanctus (holy holy holy), consecration, Epiclesis (in most cases), the peace, our father and communion.
What Biboboy is saying makes sense if we look at this historically in the ancient church's context. Of course today's liturgy has developed over the centuries so that it's not exactly the same as it was before and this is completely healthy and natural.
One viewpoint is today's liturgy vs the ancient liturgy so I think this is where you guys are not seeing eye to eye
What Biboboy is saying makes sense if we look at this historically in the ancient church's context. Of course today's liturgy has developed over the centuries so that it's not exactly the same as it was before and this is completely healthy and natural.
One viewpoint is today's liturgy vs the ancient liturgy so I think this is where you guys are not seeing eye to eye
Saying that the Holy Kiss used to be right before communion as if it is the last ritualistic act the congregation does is absolutely wrong.
The commandment says: "First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." (Matthew 5:24)
First, the Eucharistic prayers would never disagree with the Bible. How can the Church teaches her children to disobey the Bible by having them offer their gifts while they are not reconciled together? How can we offer ourselves to God and pray all the prayers while we are not reconciled? Does not make sense biblically.
Second, there is no manuscript that shows that the Holy Kiss was practiced right before communion.
Third, all Traditionl liturgies have one source and if we compare them we would find that the Traditional place of the Holy kiss was right before the Anafora.
Fourth, if we study the Coptic liturgy closely we will find that the place of the offerings did change but the command still reflects the original practice while the Holy Kiss still maitains its authentic place which is before the Anafora.
In summary, we have to study the liturgies in light of the Bible since the liturgies are the living practice of the Bible commandments.
What Biboboy is saying makes sense if we look at this historically in the ancient church's context. Of course today's liturgy has developed over the centuries so that it's not exactly the same as it was before and this is completely healthy and natural.
One viewpoint is today's liturgy vs the ancient liturgy so I think this is where you guys are not seeing eye to eye
Saying that the Holy Kiss used to be right before communion as if it is the last ritualistic act the congregation does is absolutely wrong.
The commandment says: "First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." (Matthew 5:24)
First, the Eucharistic prayers would never disagree with the Bible. How can the Church teaches her children to disobey the Bible by having them offer their gifts while they are not reconciled together? How can we offer ourselves to God and pray all the prayers while we are not reconciled? Does not make sense biblically.
Second, there is no manuscript that shows that the Holy Kiss was practiced right before communion.
Third, all Traditionl liturgies have one source and if we compare them we would find that the Traditional place of the Holy kiss was right before the Anafora.
Fourth, if we study the Coptic liturgy closely we will find that the place of the offerings did change but the command still reflects the original practice while the Holy Kiss still maitains its authentic place which is before the Anafora.
In summary, we have to study the liturgies in light of the Bible since the liturgies are the living practice of the Bible commandments.
Oh, now we take Scripture verses out of context too, quoting a part of it and ignoring the rest of the sentence?
"So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go away; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift" (Matt. 5:23-24).
It's a very dangerous thing, both theologically and ritualistically, to stick to one opinion based on half a verse of Scripture.
The law that Christ gives here is not a ritualistic law, but a moral and spiritual law that applies personally (and by extension of this moral expectation, socially as well). If it were a ritualistic law, then people would be obliged to "go away" and leave the church during the Eucharist, as it would be a mandatory rite that Christ initiated by saying "to leave your gift before the altar and go away." The deacon's response wouldn't be "greet one another with a holy kiss; and approach, approach, approach..." but "greet one another with a holy kiss; or get out, get out, get out..." However, the Church has the wisdom to interpret Christ's words in context, and so, if the tradition was to have the kiss of peace at the end of the service just before communion, the rule would still be the same: you shouldn't approach communion before being reconciled with your brother and your sister.
Oh, now we take Scripture verses out of context too, quoting a part of it and ignoring the rest of the sentence?
"So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go away; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift" (Matt. 5:23-24).
I thought you were not going to discuss this any further .. I am glad that you retreated from this attitude so we can all learn.
I a m not sure how is this verse taken out of context in light of what we are talking about. Please, explain what is the proper context you are thinking of.
It's a very dangerous thing, both theologically and ritualistically, to stick to one opinion based on half a verse of Scripture.
How was this so? Theologically we cannot offer our gifts or ourselves unless we are reconciled to one another. Please, let us know if this is incorrect or there is another opinion that says we can offer our gifts without being reconciled to one another.
Rites are the a means to live the bible .. Therefore, rites will not go against the bible. Thus, we see the practice of reconciliation, during the liturgy, through the holy kiss.
The holy kiss used to be practiced before we offer our gifts according to the original rite for two reasons:
1 - Gifts were not accepted from the unbelievers, so they were offered right after the catechumens leave the sanctuary. 2 - The Bible commands that we are reconciled before we offer or Qurban.
Today there are no catechumens, so the practice of accepting the gifts before the anafora got dropped. However, the Church kept the Deaco's command intact with the old practice to remind us that we cannot offer without being reconciled.
The important thing is not just the gifts we offer, but our souls, minds, thoughts, bodies which the priests asks of the congregation. So, unless the believers are reconciled they cannot offer themselves to God.
The priest invokes the Holy Spirit to descend and sanctify the believers before He sanctifies the bread and wine. How can the holy Spirit descends on the believers if ther ere not reconciled.
The law that Christ gives here is not a ritualistic law, but a moral and spiritual law that applies personally (and by extension of this moral expectation, socially as well).
We understand that. But it was put in practice through the rituals and that is why the Holy Kiss is a very important element in the Eucharistic prayers. No liturgy is in existence without the Holy Kiss.
Reconciliation is fundamental to the anafora and that is why it is done prior not after the anafora.
I was refusing to answer anymore of your comments on Fr. Matta's book. Since the subject changed to Scripture, I have no issues engaging in this topic.
The problem with the way you used Scripture was first: 1) Not quoting it in full, which in turn leads to: 2) Taking a command in that verse in the absolute literal sense.
The absolute literal sense in which you saw that Christ said: "reconcile, then offer" made you think that this is a law in the liturgy that must be followed, where first the kiss of peace must be done, followed by offering the gift. The problem lies in the fact that this concept of making a part of the verse a law ignores the rest of the verse, which I doubt anyone would make a law - that is, the part where you go away to reconcile. Do you see what I mean?
As for the second point you made about the greeting being prior to the anaphora - there is no denial that this is the case in some traditions. There are other traditions, that are equally valid, and which still exist to this very day in both Eastern and Western rite churches, where the kiss of peace is done after the Lord's Prayer and just before taking communion.
In BOTH cases, the rule of reconciliation is not tied to the offering of the gifts (as in the Old Testament, and Christ's command in his sermon on the Mount), but in asking for the forgiveness from God without first forgiving your debtors. You cannot go to take communion for the forgiveness of sins without offering the kiss of peace first. That is the Christian liturgical rule.
Just take this scenario as an example: let's say that the bread in church is made through donations that people set through their bank accounts. The church withdraws a monthly amount for the donations to buy the flour, yeast, and bake the bread for the liturgy. That, then, is my gift, which is set and has nothing to do with me being present in the liturgy or offering the kiss of peace to anyone prior to the automatic withdrawal from my bank account. What if there's a liturgy happening tomorrow, and I'm not attending it for whatever reason, whether travel, work, or penance. Does that mean that the offering of bread that was made for that liturgy cannot be used, because I did not personally attend to make sure that I made the kiss of peace with the people in church before the Anaphora began?
I'm just bringing up this example to show you that taking one of the rules too far causes dilemmas. The rule is personal, not ritual: one must be reconciled before personally approaching the altar to take communion of the Holy Mysteries. Whether that's done through the kiss of peace before an offering, or before the Anaphora, or after the Fraction and just before communion, it doesn't matter! Because what matters is that the kiss of peace is the symbol of you forgiving those who are in debt towards you, and only then can you offer yourself before God to partake of the divine and holy Mysteries.
As for the second point you made about the greeting being prior to the anaphora - there is no denial that this is the case in some traditions. There are other traditions, that are equally valid, and which still exist to this very day in both Eastern and Western rite churches, where the kiss of peace is done after the Lord's Prayer and just before taking communion.
[quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148399#msg148399 date=1322948628] I was refusing to answer anymore of your comments on Fr. Matta's book. Since the subject changed to Scripture, I have no issues engaging in this topic.
The problem with the way you used Scripture was first: 1) Not quoting it in full, which in turn leads to: 2) Taking a command in that verse in the absolute literal sense.
The absolute literal sense in which you saw that Christ said: "reconcile, then offer" made you think that this is a law in the liturgy that must be followed, where first the kiss of peace must be done, followed by offering the gift. The problem lies in the fact that this concept of making a part of the verse a law ignores the rest of the verse, which I doubt anyone would make a law - that is, the part where you go away to reconcile. Do you see what I mean?
What I said is the Holy Kiss is a pratical implementation of the verse in Matt 5:24. Then I proceeded to say, as a further evidence, that there is no single Tradition that shows there was a practice where the gifts offering was done after the Holy Kiss.
Putting the two together, we can conclude that the rite as practice today is an implementation of the command.
the rule of reconciliation is not tied to the offering of the gifts
Yes it is ..
The priest asks the forgiveness of his fellow priests before praying He says to them: "Bless me, here is mataina, foregive me" Then he proceeds to kiss each one and asks their permission to pray. (P. 20 of the Koulagy by Abouna Abd Al Messeih 2nd edition 1902)
During the incense procession, the priests asks the hegumen, if present to forgive him so that the Lord may accept his offering.
The instructions to the priest specifically, at the beginning of the holy liturgy, warns him that he must be reconciled with everybody and in peace with everyone. The instructions do mention the verses Matt 5:23, 24) as the reason for being so P. 191.
The instructions also mention the verses Mark 11:25, 26 as a guide for the priest's prayers to be acceptable p.191
The instructions say that if the priest communes without following the verses n Matt 5:24 and Mark 11:25-26, he would commune judgment upon himself.
At the time of the servants absolution, the priests offer matania to each other, and then kiss the altar.
During the Pauline incense procession, the priest takes the congregation confessions and offer them before the Lord (P.240)
During the Praxis, the priests prays: Accept from us the burnt offering of this incense and make us pure from the stench of sin ....
After the veil prayer, the priest offers matania to the other priests and asks their forgiveness
Before praying the long litanies, the priest offers matania to the other priests and asks their forgiveness
The priest washes his hands and warns the people from communing without being pure.
All of these rituals are done before the anafora ....... to allow both the priest and the congregation to be in peace with everybody before offering the prayers of the anafora.
There is no way we can separate the ritualistic prayers from the commandments of the bible for the liturgical prayers put the Bible in practice. The words of the Bible are spirit and life "The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life." John 6:63.
Hope this helps you see the liturgical prayers in a new light.
The liturgical rites reflect the biblical commands and put them in practice and that is why the greeting command, the holy kiss, comes right before the anafora and in no way can be put off as the last ritual act right before communion.
The liturgical rites reflect the biblical commands and put them in practice and that is why the greeting command, the holy kiss, comes right before the anafora and in no way can be put off as the last ritual act right before communion.
I've already mentioned two witnesses: 1) The Coptic rite of the Offertory, which, when it used to be a whole Eucharistic liturgy, would've ended with the deacon telling people to greet one another with a holy kiss and then approach to take communion. 2) Hippolytus' Apostolic Tradition, and Justin Martyr, who do not say anything about the kiss of peace in the Eucharist, but in the context of the ordination rite and the baptism rite, both of which end with the kiss of peace (i.e. it is done after all the prayers).
+++
Here's another three witnesses from the North African and Roman practice, all of which state that the kiss of peace was done after the Lord's Prayer (which was after the Fraction) in the Eucharist: 1) Tertullian (On Prayer, 18): "The kiss of peace, which is a seal set upon the [Lord's] prayer." 2) St. Augustine (Sermon 227, emphasis mine): "Then, after the consecration of the Holy Sacrifice of God, because He wished us also to be His sacrifice, a fact which was made clear when the Holy Sacrifice was first instituted, and because that Sacrifice is a sign of what we are, behold, when the Sacrifice is finished, we say the Lord's Prayer which you have received and recited. After this, the 'Peace be with you’ is said, and the Christians embrace one another with the holy kiss. This is a sign of peace; as the lips indicate, let peace be made in your conscience, that is, when your lips draw near to those of your brother, do not let your heart withdraw from his. Hence, these are great and powerful sacraments. 3) Pope Innocent I (Epistle 25 ad Decentium): "The peace puts its seal on the conclusion of the Eucharistic prayer."
In contemporary practice, the kiss of peace is still done after the Lord's Prayer in all Western rite Masses. So, the Roman Catholic churches still do this, and have been doing so from the very beginning, as attested by the three primary sources of Catholic theology and rites mentioned above.
+++
On another point, I don't like when you take a small section of a sentence I wrote and then write a litany of proofs against me. The example in your last post when you took out "the rite of reconciliation is not tied to the offering of the gifts" is actually very irrelevant, and it still stands true in the way I expressed it in its appropriate context, with the sentence in full.
At any rate, even if you want to take this as a single verse, it still stands true, since there is no liturgical rite of reconciliation that is only tied to offering the gifts. We as a whole congregation still ask the priest to "bless me, bless me, lo the repentance, say the blessing!" even AFTER we took communion. Reconciliation has to be our daily practice, and is not tied to offering the gifts. It's about us standing in prayer before God. Even an ascetic who's been in the desert for 50 years, and doesn't plan on offering a gift on the altar or taking communion, can't stand in prayer in his own cave in the middle of the desert and pray the Lord's Prayer without first forgiving his debtors.
[quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148502#msg148502 date=1323139246] The liturgical rites reflect the biblical commands and put them in practice and that is why the greeting command, the holy kiss, comes right before the anafora and in no way can be put off as the last ritual act right before communion.
I've already mentioned two witnesses: 1) The Coptic rite of the Offertory, which, when it used to be a whole Eucharistic liturgy, would've ended with the deacon telling people to greet one another with a holy kiss and then approach to take communion.
No manuscript shows evidence of that
Provide one single manuscript that shows the Coptic rite used to have the Holy Kiss right before communion. Please, cite the name of the manuscript and where can it be researched.
2) Hippolytus' Apostolic Tradition
The Apostolic Tradition does say that they give the Holy Kiss and then continue with the Anafora.
Justin Martyr, who do not say anything about the kiss of peace in the Eucharist
What did Justin say about the Eucharist? What is the evidence, from Justin the Maretyr, you have that supports your claim that the Holy Kiss used to be right before communion?
Here's another three witnesses from the North African and Roman practice, all of which state that the kiss of peace was done after the Lord's Prayer (which was after the Fraction) in the Eucharist:
1) Tertullian (On Prayer, 18): "The kiss of peace, which is a seal set upon the [Lord's] prayer."
What does this phrase have to do anything with having the Holy Kiss done right before communion and after the anfora prayers?
2) St. Augustine (Sermon 227, emphasis mine): "Then, after the consecration of the Holy Sacrifice of God, because He wished us also to be His sacrifice, a fact which was made clear when the Holy Sacrifice was first instituted, and because that Sacrifice is a sign of what we are, behold, when the Sacrifice is finished, we say the Lord's Prayer which you have received and recited. After this, the 'Peace be with you’ is said, and the Christians embrace one another with the holy kiss. This is a sign of peace; as the lips indicate, let peace be made in your conscience, that is, when your lips draw near to those of your brother, do not let your heart withdraw from his. Hence, these are great and powerful sacraments.
3) Pope Innocent I (Epistle 25 ad Decentium): "The peace puts its seal on the conclusion of the Eucharistic prayer."
How would we understand from this phrase that the Holy Kiss was practiced right before communion?
It is known that the Roman liturgy did not start till the Holy Kiss was done.
In contemporary practice, the kiss of peace is still done after the Lord's Prayer in all Western rite Masses. So, the Roman Catholic churches still do this, and have been doing so from the very beginning, as attested by the three primary sources of Catholic theology and rites mentioned above.
Wrong!!!!
it [The Holy Kiss] was first used in the liturgy by the bishop in welcoming the faithful at the beginning of the Mass before the Collect
Here is what the Apostolic Constitutions say about the Holy Kiss:
Then let the men give the men, and the women give the women, the Lord's kiss. But let no one do it with deceit, as Judas betrayed the Lord with a kiss. After this let the deacon pray for the whole Church, for the whole world, and the several parts of it, and the fruits of it; for the priests and the rulers, for the high priest and the king, and the peace of the universe. After this let the high priest pray for peace upon the people, and bless them, as Moses commanded the priests to bless the people, in these words: The Lord bless you, and keep you: the Lord make His face to shine upon you, and give you peace. Let the bishop pray for the people, and say: Save Your people, O Lord, and bless Your inheritance, which You have obtained with the precious blood of Your Christ, and hast called a royal priesthood, and an holy nation. After this let the sacrifice follow, the people standing, and praying silently; and when the oblation has been made, let every rank by itself partake of the Lord's body and precious blood in order, and approach with reverence and holy fear, as to the body of their king.
Apostolic Constitutions (Book 2:7)
It is very clear from the excerpt above that the Coptic Rite agrees completely with the Apostolic Constitution and preserved the Holy Apostolic Tradion by kepping the Holy Kiss before the Anafora prayers.
Comments
Abouna Matta starts the chapter as what the Eucharistic prayers used to be in the 1st and 2nd century.
[right]الفصل الثاني
الصورة العامة للإفخارستيا في القرنين الأول والثاني
بحسب كتابات الآباء الرسوليين
[/right]
The phrase [بعدما تعترفون بخطاياكم لكي تكون ذبيحتكم طاهرة] is not in the Coptic liturgy but a quote used in the old liturgical sources.
Anyway, let me quote THE REST of what abouna Matta wrote, which you didn't care to copy, although it was right after what you quoted. Stop saying I'm wrong, because I know what I'm talking about and I'm not taking random quotes out of their full context as you do. This is dishonest quoting that you're engaging yourself in, and I hope that as a Christian you'd be more honest, rather than jealous. I'm here to help explain something and answer a question asked by a friend who goes to the same church as I do; so I'm not here to show-off my skills and prove you or anyone wrong. That's just childish, and I don't have time for those jealousy games.
Here's what Abouna Matta says (note that this is a copy and paste from a document I have, so it doesn't have page numbers... and I hope the pasting is correct). I can send you the zip file if you like.
- تقديم الصعيدة - الخبز والخمر - (الحَمَل):
وكان موضعه التقليدي منذ القرن الأول بعد القبلة المقدَّسة مباشرةً، ولكن الآن نجد الحَمَل يُقدَّم قبل “قداس الموعوظين” أي قبل خدمة القراءات وسوف نأتي فيما بعد على الأسباب التي أدت إلى ذلك.
وقد تبيَّن لنا أن طقس تقديم الحمل هو نفسه طقس عشاء الرب، وهو قدَّاس كامل بذاته وضع ضمن قدَّاس القديس باسيليوس حفظاً له من الضياع.
+++
The Following are from his book titled:
إفخارستيا عشاء الرب
قدَّاس الرسل الأوَّل
وهو نواة جميع القدَّاسات
(Chapter 3)
كما لم تجهل أبداً أو تفرِّط أبداً في أي تقليد رسولي آخر؛ بل وأي كلمة رسولية تسلَّمتها.
ولكن حدث أنه بعد أن أكمل الرسل صياغة الإفخارستيا التي تصلح لعامة الشعب لتضاف على الخدمة الجمهورية، وذلك على أساس شكل إفخارستية العشاء إنما بمقولات وأوصاف وشرح بدلاً من وضعها الصامت، وذلك في كل حركة، أصبح لدى الرسل إفخارستيتان: إفخارستية أصيلة هي إفخارستية عشاء الرب الخاصة، وإفخارستية مشروحة هي إفخارستية ليتورجية الخدمة الجمهورية في الكنيسة (سواء بالمساء أو بالصباح).
ولكن لم يشأ الرسل أن يحذفوا الإفخارستيا الأُولى أو يستغنوا عنها، بل احتفظوا بها كاملة في الوضع الجديد في داخل ليتورجية الخدمة الجمهورية، احتفظوا بها بكل بركاتها المختصرة وحركاتها الصامتة وتسابيحها المحدودة جدًّا، ولكن في أضيق حيِّز ممكن من الإجراءات ومن الوقت أيضاً، وأدخلوها ضمن الليتورجية الصباحية وجعلوها بمثابة تقديم القرابين (الحمل) قبل البدء بالقراءات والوعظ والصلوات، فاعتبرت كأنها مجرَّد “وضع القرابين” على المذبح، ولكنها في الحقيقة هي الطقس الكامل للصعيدة المرفوعة في العشاء الأخير بكل مستلزماتها ونصوصها الليتورجية، وهي التي نسميها الآن في الكنيسة القبطية “تقديم الحمل”.
وهذا الإجراء تمَّ مبكِّراً جدًّا وعلى أيدي الرسل أنفسهم، فقد وردت إشارات مبكِّرة جدًّا في الليتورجيات الوصفية الأُولى المعتقد أن أصولها الأُولى من وضع الرسل مثل ليتورجية القديس مرقس الرسول وليتورجية سيرابيون. وقد اعتبروا أن إفخارستية عشاء الرب المبدوء بها في أول الخدمة قبل القراءات هي أساس لليتورجيا التي تجيء بعدها. والمقصود من كلمة “أساس” هو أنها جزء من التقديس الفعلي للقرابين، وهذا سيجيء شرحه بعد ذلك بالتفصيل.
+++
(Chapter 5)
:
إفخارستية “تقديم الحمل” هي الجزء الأساسي الذي يبتدئ به الكاهن خدمة القداس العام مهما كان هذا القداس، سواء الباسيلي أو الغريغوري أو الكيرلسي (مرقس الرسول)، وهو موجود في الخولاجي (الإفخولوجيون) كبادئة حتمية لا تتبع أي قداس معيَّن.
وقد يبدو لأول وهلة للباحث المتخصِّص في دراسة الإفخارستيا إنه عمل إضافي على الإفخارستيا، لأن كل إفخارستية في العالم لها بداية رسمية محدَّدة، كل ما يأتي قبلها يعتبر إضافياً، وهذه البداية الرسمية هي ما يقوله الأسقف (أو الكاهن) وما يرد به الشعب هكذا:
- “الرب مع جميعكم، ومع روحك أيضاً”.
- “ارفعوا قلوبكم، هي عند الرب”.
- “فلنشكر الرب، مستحق وعادل”.
ومعلوم أن “طقس تقديم الحمل” الوارد بالخولاجي يأتي كله قبل هذه البداية، إذن فهو في حكم القانون الإفخارستي طقس خارج عن صُلب الإفخارستيا. لذلك وبحكم قانون الدراسة والتحليل الإفخارستي، وضعه العلماء والدارسون كطقس خارج عن الإفخارستيا، وهكذا وبحكم هذا التحديد القانوني انكمش هذا الطقس تحت عنوان “تقديم الحمل”. و“تقديم الحمل” معروف في القانون الليتورجي أنه مجرَّد “وضع القرابين على المذبح”.
ولكن برجوع القارئ الدارس إلى جدول المقارنة الذي قدَّمناه في صفحة (19) بين طقس تقديم الحمل وطقس إفخارستية مرقس الرسول، يجد أن الأمر يستحيل بأي حال من الأحوال أن ينطبق عليه مجرَّد وضع قرابين على المذبح. فهو إفخارستية كاملة كمالاً متقناً دقيقاً، [يبدأ بغسل اليدين، واختيار الحمل، ثمَّ إعطاء المجد للثالوث، وتقريب القرابين، ثمَّ أواشي مطابقة لأطول إفخارستية: السلامة - المرضى - المسافرين - المنتقلين - القرابين - الخديم - والموصِّين - الاجتماعات - الطلبة - التسبيح الذي يسبق رسم السر (التأسيس) بالبركة على الخبز وعلى الكأس، ثمَّ الشكر على الكأس، الاستدعاء ليصير الخبز جسداً والخمر دماً، طلب مواهب الجسد والدم - السجود للذبيحة، إحناء الرأس لقبول التحليل، خلصت حقـًّا، أوشية السلامة والآباء والاجتماعات، الاعتراف بالإيمان، صلاة الصلح، القبلة، تقدَّموا (تقرَّبوا) تقدَّموا - ذبيحة التسبيح] انتهى!
إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال. ولكن لا ينتهي بالتناول بل يغطِّي الكاهن الذبيحة عند الخروج من الهيكل، بعد أن يغطِّي الأسرار بالستر الخاص المسمَّى خطأ “بالابروسفارين”، في حين أن كلمة بروسفارين تعني في اليونانية “تقرَّبوا. تقرَّبوا”، ولكن بدل أن يتقرَّب الشعب في هذه اللحظة يتوقَّف هذا القداس المختصر أو هذه الإفخارستيا الصغيرة، وتغطَّى الأسرار وتُحرس بواسطة شماسين (لأنها أسرار تقدَّست) لحين البدء بالقداس الشرحي الكبير المسمَّى بالإفخارستيا الكبرى. حيث يحتسب الآن أن كل الذي تمَّ في هذه الإفخارستيا المختصرة هو مجرَّد تقديم الحمل. ولكن من الملابسات التي سنشرحها بدقة سيتضح للدارس أكثر فأكثر سرّ هذه الإفخارستيا الفائقة الكرامة.
2 - موقف إفخارستية تقديم الحمل من
+++
(Chapter 6)
الناقص عبارة “أظهر وجهك على هذا الخبز” بصورة توضيحية هكذا:
[اجعل حضرتك تستقر على هذا الخبز وعلى هذه الكأس] ثمَّ تنقطع الصلاة.
هنا يكون في الحقيقة قد انتهى قداس الحمل وأصبح جاهزاً للتناول، ولكن أُضيفت إليه القراءات بعد ذلك. لذلك يغطِّي الكاهن الجسد والدم بالغطاء الذي سُمِّي الابروسفارين خطأ. لأن نداء بروسفارين من الشماس يعني تقدَّموا تقدَّموا على هذا الرسم، أي تقدَّموا للتناول.
وهي التي قيلت بعد ذلك بعد القراءة للبولس والكاثوليكون والإبركسيس والإنجيل ثمَّ التذكارات: الأواشي والمجمع (أوشية المنتقلين بعد حدوث تضخُّم لها) ثمَّ تلاوة الأمانة. يقول ابروسفارين التي تأخَّرت عن موضعها الصحيح لا ليدخل ويتقرَّب الشعب بل ليبدأ قداس آخر!
فالنداء بابروسفارين التي معناها تقرَّبوا تقرَّبوا على هذا الرسم تكشف هنا الإضافات كلها التي حدثت من بعد صلاة فلنشكر صانع الخيرات وصلاة التقدمة. التي ينبغي أن يأتي بعدها “القبلة” ثمَّ التناول.
Unfortunately, you're not understanding what I'm saying here. You are referring to the contemporary liturgy as we have it now. I'm not referring to that at all - I'm referring to the history of how it developed to why we have now, and what remains in the current practice.
Anyway, let me quote THE REST of what abouna Matta wrote, which you didn't care to copy, although it was right after what you quoted. Stop saying I'm wrong, because I know what I'm talking about and I'm not taking random quotes out of their full context as you do. This is dishonest quoting that you're engaging yourself in, and I hope that as a Christian you'd be more honest, rather than jealous. I'm here to help explain something and answer a question asked by a friend who goes to the same church as I do; so I'm not here to show-off my skills and prove you or anyone wrong. That's just childish, and I don't have time for those jealousy games.
Here's what Abouna Matta says (note that this is a copy and paste from a document I have, so it doesn't have page numbers... and I hope the pasting is correct). I can send you the zip file if you like.
- تقديم الصعيدة - الخبز والخمر - (الحَمَل):
وكان موضعه التقليدي منذ القرن الأول بعد القبلة المقدَّسة مباشرةً، ولكن الآن نجد الحَمَل يُقدَّم قبل “قداس الموعوظين” أي قبل خدمة القراءات وسوف نأتي فيما بعد على الأسباب التي أدت إلى ذلك.
وقد تبيَّن لنا أن طقس تقديم الحمل هو نفسه طقس عشاء الرب، وهو قدَّاس كامل بذاته وضع ضمن قدَّاس القديس باسيليوس حفظاً له من الضياع.
+++
The Following are from his book titled:
إفخارستيا عشاء الرب
قدَّاس الرسل الأوَّل
وهو نواة جميع القدَّاسات
(Chapter 3)
كما لم تجهل أبداً أو تفرِّط أبداً في أي تقليد رسولي آخر؛ بل وأي كلمة رسولية تسلَّمتها.
ولكن حدث أنه بعد أن أكمل الرسل صياغة الإفخارستيا التي تصلح لعامة الشعب لتضاف على الخدمة الجمهورية، وذلك على أساس شكل إفخارستية العشاء إنما بمقولات وأوصاف وشرح بدلاً من وضعها الصامت، وذلك في كل حركة، أصبح لدى الرسل إفخارستيتان: إفخارستية أصيلة هي إفخارستية عشاء الرب الخاصة، وإفخارستية مشروحة هي إفخارستية ليتورجية الخدمة الجمهورية في الكنيسة (سواء بالمساء أو بالصباح).
ولكن لم يشأ الرسل أن يحذفوا الإفخارستيا الأُولى أو يستغنوا عنها، بل احتفظوا بها كاملة في الوضع الجديد في داخل ليتورجية الخدمة الجمهورية، احتفظوا بها بكل بركاتها المختصرة وحركاتها الصامتة وتسابيحها المحدودة جدًّا، ولكن في أضيق حيِّز ممكن من الإجراءات ومن الوقت أيضاً، وأدخلوها ضمن الليتورجية الصباحية وجعلوها بمثابة تقديم القرابين (الحمل) قبل البدء بالقراءات والوعظ والصلوات، فاعتبرت كأنها مجرَّد “وضع القرابين” على المذبح، ولكنها في الحقيقة هي الطقس الكامل للصعيدة المرفوعة في العشاء الأخير بكل مستلزماتها ونصوصها الليتورجية، وهي التي نسميها الآن في الكنيسة القبطية “تقديم الحمل”.
وهذا الإجراء تمَّ مبكِّراً جدًّا وعلى أيدي الرسل أنفسهم، فقد وردت إشارات مبكِّرة جدًّا في الليتورجيات الوصفية الأُولى المعتقد أن أصولها الأُولى من وضع الرسل مثل ليتورجية القديس مرقس الرسول وليتورجية سيرابيون. وقد اعتبروا أن إفخارستية عشاء الرب المبدوء بها في أول الخدمة قبل القراءات هي أساس لليتورجيا التي تجيء بعدها. والمقصود من كلمة “أساس” هو أنها جزء من التقديس الفعلي للقرابين، وهذا سيجيء شرحه بعد ذلك بالتفصيل.
+++
(Chapter 5)
:
إفخارستية “تقديم الحمل” هي الجزء الأساسي الذي يبتدئ به الكاهن خدمة القداس العام مهما كان هذا القداس، سواء الباسيلي أو الغريغوري أو الكيرلسي (مرقس الرسول)، وهو موجود في الخولاجي (الإفخولوجيون) كبادئة حتمية لا تتبع أي قداس معيَّن.
وقد يبدو لأول وهلة للباحث المتخصِّص في دراسة الإفخارستيا إنه عمل إضافي على الإفخارستيا، لأن كل إفخارستية في العالم لها بداية رسمية محدَّدة، كل ما يأتي قبلها يعتبر إضافياً، وهذه البداية الرسمية هي ما يقوله الأسقف (أو الكاهن) وما يرد به الشعب هكذا:
- “الرب مع جميعكم، ومع روحك أيضاً”.
- “ارفعوا قلوبكم، هي عند الرب”.
- “فلنشكر الرب، مستحق وعادل”.
ومعلوم أن “طقس تقديم الحمل” الوارد بالخولاجي يأتي كله قبل هذه البداية، إذن فهو في حكم القانون الإفخارستي طقس خارج عن صُلب الإفخارستيا. لذلك وبحكم قانون الدراسة والتحليل الإفخارستي، وضعه العلماء والدارسون كطقس خارج عن الإفخارستيا، وهكذا وبحكم هذا التحديد القانوني انكمش هذا الطقس تحت عنوان “تقديم الحمل”. و“تقديم الحمل” معروف في القانون الليتورجي أنه مجرَّد “وضع القرابين على المذبح”.
ولكن برجوع القارئ الدارس إلى جدول المقارنة الذي قدَّمناه في صفحة (19) بين طقس تقديم الحمل وطقس إفخارستية مرقس الرسول، يجد أن الأمر يستحيل بأي حال من الأحوال أن ينطبق عليه مجرَّد وضع قرابين على المذبح. فهو إفخارستية كاملة كمالاً متقناً دقيقاً، [يبدأ بغسل اليدين، واختيار الحمل، ثمَّ إعطاء المجد للثالوث، وتقريب القرابين، ثمَّ أواشي مطابقة لأطول إفخارستية: السلامة - المرضى - المسافرين - المنتقلين - القرابين - الخديم - والموصِّين - الاجتماعات - الطلبة - التسبيح الذي يسبق رسم السر (التأسيس) بالبركة على الخبز وعلى الكأس، ثمَّ الشكر على الكأس، الاستدعاء ليصير الخبز جسداً والخمر دماً، طلب مواهب الجسد والدم - السجود للذبيحة، إحناء الرأس لقبول التحليل، خلصت حقـًّا، أوشية السلامة والآباء والاجتماعات، الاعتراف بالإيمان، صلاة الصلح، القبلة، تقدَّموا (تقرَّبوا) تقدَّموا - ذبيحة التسبيح] انتهى!
إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال. ولكن لا ينتهي بالتناول بل يغطِّي الكاهن الذبيحة عند الخروج من الهيكل، بعد أن يغطِّي الأسرار بالستر الخاص المسمَّى خطأ “بالابروسفارين”، في حين أن كلمة بروسفارين تعني في اليونانية “تقرَّبوا. تقرَّبوا”، ولكن بدل أن يتقرَّب الشعب في هذه اللحظة يتوقَّف هذا القداس المختصر أو هذه الإفخارستيا الصغيرة، وتغطَّى الأسرار وتُحرس بواسطة شماسين (لأنها أسرار تقدَّست) لحين البدء بالقداس الشرحي الكبير المسمَّى بالإفخارستيا الكبرى. حيث يحتسب الآن أن كل الذي تمَّ في هذه الإفخارستيا المختصرة هو مجرَّد تقديم الحمل. ولكن من الملابسات التي سنشرحها بدقة سيتضح للدارس أكثر فأكثر سرّ هذه الإفخارستيا الفائقة الكرامة.
2 - موقف إفخارستية تقديم الحمل من
+++
(Chapter 6)
الناقص عبارة “أظهر وجهك على هذا الخبز” بصورة توضيحية هكذا:
[اجعل حضرتك تستقر على هذا الخبز وعلى هذه الكأس] ثمَّ تنقطع الصلاة.
هنا يكون في الحقيقة قد انتهى قداس الحمل وأصبح جاهزاً للتناول، ولكن أُضيفت إليه القراءات بعد ذلك. لذلك يغطِّي الكاهن الجسد والدم بالغطاء الذي سُمِّي الابروسفارين خطأ. لأن نداء بروسفارين من الشماس يعني تقدَّموا تقدَّموا على هذا الرسم، أي تقدَّموا للتناول.
وهي التي قيلت بعد ذلك بعد القراءة للبولس والكاثوليكون والإبركسيس والإنجيل ثمَّ التذكارات: الأواشي والمجمع (أوشية المنتقلين بعد حدوث تضخُّم لها) ثمَّ تلاوة الأمانة. يقول ابروسفارين التي تأخَّرت عن موضعها الصحيح لا ليدخل ويتقرَّب الشعب بل ليبدأ قداس آخر!
فالنداء بابروسفارين التي معناها تقرَّبوا تقرَّبوا على هذا الرسم تكشف هنا الإضافات كلها التي حدثت من بعد صلاة فلنشكر صانع الخيرات وصلاة التقدمة. التي ينبغي أن يأتي بعدها “القبلة” ثمَّ التناول.
All these quotations deal with the offeratory not the Greeting.
These quotes do not prove your point that the greeting command changed its place. They only explain what we already know that the offering of the lamb changed from after the liturgy of the word (for the Catechumens) to before it.
No anafora can begin without the greeting command. This is a Tradition from early centuries and agrees with the Holy Bible that we cannot offer our Qurban while we are not reconciled.
Where is your proof that the command of the Holy Kiss changed its place?
To help us see the change you need to point to some manuscript that show the original place of the greeting command in the Coptic rite.
Can't you read man? At least read the very last sentence of the very last quote if you can't read the rest.
It says that the Offertory was a complete Eucharistis rite, and it says very clearly that in this Eucharistic rite, the greeting was given, followed by communion. The kiss of peace was at the end of the service.
I'm tired now of repeating the same thing over and over again. Your failure to read does not mean a failure of providing evidence on my part.
Seriously, grow up.
Lord Jesus Christ have mercy!
Can't you read man? At least read the very last sentence of the very last quote if you can't read the rest.
It says that the Offertory was a complete Eucharistis rite, and it says very clearly that in this Eucharistic rite, the greeting was given, followed by communion. The kiss of peace was at the end of the service.
I'm tired now of repeating the same thing over and over again. Your failure to read does not mean a failure of providing evidence on my part.
Seriously, grow up.
Who is now taking quotes out of context. Do you seriously believe that that the greetings were done right before the communion and you can support this theory of yours by these few words.
I can also say that the greeting is done in the anafora followed by communion. Does this mean that the greeting is done right before communion with nothing in between. This is absurd and ridiculous and does not agree with the Biblical commandments. Do you see the error of your misrepresentation or may be your understanding or its lack thereof.
- تقديم الصعيدة - الخبز والخمر - (الحَمَل):
كان موضعه التقليدي منذ القرن الأول بعد القبلة المقدَّسة مباشرةً
How can you reconcile your claim with these words above which mean:
Offeratory - Lamb offering .. and its traditional place since the 1st century was directly after the holy kiss.
THERE IS NO SINGLE EUCHARISTIC TRADITION THAT SAYS THAT THE HOLY KISS WAS DONE RIGHT BEFORE COMMUNION.
If you really want us to believe that provide ANY manuscript that shows what you are claiming is true.
Oh, and one more thing you can use in your academic research, conferences and seminars. Do not build up history on few words of explanation taken out of context. After all you say you are an academian so please write as such.
Honestly, I would like to see this manuscript that says the holy kiss was done right before communion which I am sure it does not exist as this is against the our Lord's command.
It's practically impossible for me to replicate all the information provided in thousands of pages of research in Fr. Matta's books, which he himself spent years to research and write. I gave you the highlights of his arguments, but it's impossible to go through all his arguments, all the references to the Church Fathers, all the references to ancient and contemporary liturgical manuscripts, and all the research done by Western liturgical scholars - all of that in this forum. I can point out to you where you could do further research, and I haven't failed at doing that. But please, be practical and be considerate that a forum isn't the place to do such kind of work.
If anything, the onus is on you to explain why Fr. Matta is wrong with his research on the early Coptic Eucharist. The evidence he provides is plentiful. The fact that there were many Eucharistic traditions is not a surprise: some had the kiss of peace before the offering; some had the kiss of peace immediately before communion (that means after the institution narrative, the litanies, confession); and some today have the kiss of peace right in the middle, after the Offertory, Liturgy of the Word and after a prayer of reconciliation.
And for your information, the kiss of peace is still practiced in the Roman (and other Western) rites after the Lord's Prayer, and immediately before communion. You might argue here that the Coptic rite has nothing to do with the Roman rite, but you already mentioned Hippolytus on your side of the argument, which happens to be a Roman rite.
Other than providing you with an entire source, Fr. Matta el-Meskeen's 2 books on the Eucharist, in which the whole argument of the books was to show that the Offertory was a whole Eucharistic service and in which part that the deacon says "greet one another with a holy kiss" is immediately followed by "approach, approach, approach the holy altar and see the Body and Blood of Christ on it"; and other than the fact that we're talking about why this response still exists in our liturgy in the unusual place for it; and other than explaining to you that this response was the end of the liturgy (which is what this forum thread is about); I'm not sure how else would you like to me to provide more details for you.
It's practically impossible for me to replicate all the information provided in thousands of pages of research in Fr. Matta's books, which he himself spent years to research and write. I gave you the highlights of his arguments, but it's impossible to go through all his arguments, all the references to the Church Fathers, all the references to ancient and contemporary liturgical manuscripts, and all the research done by Western liturgical scholars - all of that in this forum. I can point out to you where you could do further research, and I haven't failed at doing that. But please, be practical and be considerate that a forum isn't the place to do such kind of work.
If anything, the onus is on you to explain why Fr. Matta is wrong with his research on the early Coptic Eucharist. The evidence he provides is plentiful. The fact that there were many Eucharistic traditions is not a surprise: some had the kiss of peace before the offering; some had the kiss of peace immediately before communion (that means after the institution narrative, the litanies, confession); and some today have the kiss of peace right in the middle, after the Offertory, Liturgy of the Word and after a prayer of reconciliation.
And for your information, the kiss of peace is still practiced in the Roman (and other Western) rites after the Lord's Prayer, and immediately before communion. You might argue here that the Coptic rite has nothing to do with the Roman rite, but you already mentioned Hippolytus on your side of the argument, which happens to be a Roman rite.
You cited Abouna Matta El Meskeen to support your theory that the Holy Kiss preceded communion directly. I showed you from that same reference the error of your thinking.
If you truly believe that the Holy Kiss used to directly precede communion and now it is in a different place, then show a single reference that Abouna Matta is using to support your claim.
Again, I am not asking for thousand of proofs, research, just a single reference that supports your claim
ولكن برجوع القارئ الدارس إلى جدول المقارنة الذي قدَّمناه في صفحة (19) بين طقس تقديم الحمل وطقس إفخارستية مرقس الرسول، يجد أن الأمر يستحيل بأي حال من الأحوال أن ينطبق عليه مجرَّد وضع قرابين على المذبح. فهو إفخارستية كاملة كمالاً متقناً دقيقاً، [يبدأ بغسل اليدين، واختيار الحمل، ثمَّ إعطاء المجد للثالوث، وتقريب القرابين، ثمَّ أواشي مطابقة لأطول إفخارستية: السلامة - المرضى - المسافرين - المنتقلين - القرابين - الخديم - والموصِّين - الاجتماعات - الطلبة - التسبيح الذي يسبق رسم السر (التأسيس) بالبركة على الخبز وعلى الكأس، ثمَّ الشكر على الكأس، الاستدعاء ليصير الخبز جسداً والخمر دماً، طلب مواهب الجسد والدم - السجود للذبيحة، إحناء الرأس لقبول التحليل، خلصت حقـًّا، أوشية السلامة والآباء والاجتماعات، الاعتراف بالإيمان، صلاة الصلح، القبلة،
تقدَّموا (تقرَّبوا) تقدَّموا - ذبيحة التسبيح] انتهى!
إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال.
ولكن برجوع القارئ الدارس إلى جدول المقارنة الذي قدَّمناه في صفحة (19) بين طقس تقديم الحمل وطقس إفخارستية مرقس الرسول، يجد أن الأمر يستحيل بأي حال من الأحوال أن ينطبق عليه مجرَّد وضع قرابين على المذبح. فهو إفخارستية كاملة كمالاً متقناً دقيقاً، [يبدأ بغسل اليدين، واختيار الحمل، ثمَّ إعطاء المجد للثالوث، وتقريب القرابين، ثمَّ أواشي مطابقة لأطول إفخارستية: السلامة - المرضى - المسافرين - المنتقلين - القرابين - الخديم - والموصِّين - الاجتماعات - الطلبة - التسبيح الذي يسبق رسم السر (التأسيس) بالبركة على الخبز وعلى الكأس، ثمَّ الشكر على الكأس، الاستدعاء ليصير الخبز جسداً والخمر دماً، طلب مواهب الجسد والدم - السجود للذبيحة، إحناء الرأس لقبول التحليل، خلصت حقـًّا، أوشية السلامة والآباء والاجتماعات، الاعتراف بالإيمان، صلاة الصلح، القبلة،
تقدَّموا (تقرَّبوا) تقدَّموا - ذبيحة التسبيح] انتهى!
إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال.
Very good .. now you see in the excerpt that you just provided the reconciliation, the Greetings, then the offerings, then the sacrificial praise. I do not see in this order that the Greetings precedes directly the communion.
This is the same order that the we follow today. No discrepancy whatsoever.
It seems that the more you dig into this the more you disprove your initial claim and instead prove the authenticity of our Coptic rite and its pure Apostolic source.
Basically, your claim that the Greeting Command, or the holy kiss, used to precede the communion directly or that its place had changed has no proof.
The holy kiss has always been at the beginning of the anafora.
It says that the offering was done already, thanksgiving prayer prayed, the litanies prayed, everything done, and the offering has been already changed to the Body and Blood of Christ. Hence, the whole point of calling the Offertory rite a whole Eucharistic prayer. He proves it by comparing the Offertory rite with the whole Anaphora of St. Mark.
In fact, the word "offer, offer, offer" by the deacon is inaccurate. That's why you'll notice that Fr. Matta wrote "approach, [come closer], approach." The response used to be about approaching the altar for communion, not for offering the sacrifice.
Perhaps there's a language barrier? Here's a translation of what that quote says. Let the readers be the judge. I'm tired of writing about this, and it is sufficient what has been presented:
But, if the reader who studies goes back to the table of comparison that we presented on page 19, which compares between the rite of the Offering of the Lamb with the rite of the Eucharist of Mark the Apostle, he will find that the matter absolutely cannot simply be a placing of the offering on the altar. Rather, it [the Offering the of the Lamb] is a full and complete Eucharist, perfect and precise. It begins with:
The washing of hands
The choosing of the Lamb
Followed by giving glory to the Trinity
Getting the offerings close to each other
Then the litanies of the longest Eucharist: peace, the sick, the travelers, the departed, the servant, those who asked for prayers, the congregations, the request.
The praise that precedes the crossing of the mystery (institution) as a blessing on the bread and wine
Thanksgiving on the cup
Asking that the bread becomes Body and the wine becomes the Blood
Asking for the grace of the Body and Blood
Worshipping the sacrifice
Bowing the head to receive the absolution
“Saved Amen”
The litanies of the peace, the fathers, the congregations
Confession of faith
Prayer of reconciliation
Kiss of peace
Deacon response: “Approach, [come closer], approach”
“A sacrifice of praise” response
Ending.
And so towards the end of this mystical liturgy that is surprisingly so short and so complete.
But you are saying that the holy kiss is done then the communion. I do not see the rationale here.
You are assuming that by having the word "Ending", it means that there is communion. This is not so. You are using Abouna's Matta explanation of the liturgical elements of the liturgy of the Word to prove that it has all the elements of the Eucharistic rites. We get that.
My question still stands where does it say that the Holy Kiss precedes directly the communion or the distribution of the sacraments?
Abouna Matta explains:
[right]إلى هنا ينتهي هذا القدَّاس السري العجيب المختصر كل الاختصار والكامل كل الكمال. ولكن لا ينتهي بالتناول بل يغطِّي الكاهن الذبيحة عند الخروج من الهيكل، بعد أن يغطِّي الأسرار بالستر الخاص المسمَّى خطأ “بالابروسفارين”، في حين أن كلمة بروسفارين تعني في اليونانية “تقرَّبوا. تقرَّبوا”، ولكن بدل أن يتقرَّب الشعب في هذه اللحظة يتوقَّف هذا القداس المختصر أو هذه الإفخارستيا الصغيرة، وتغطَّى الأسرار وتُحرس بواسطة شماسين (لأنها أسرار تقدَّست) لحين البدء بالقداس الشرحي الكبير المسمَّى بالإفخارستيا الكبرى. حيث يحتسب الآن أن كل الذي تمَّ في هذه الإفخارستيا المختصرة هو مجرَّد تقديم الحمل. ولكن من الملابسات التي سنشرحها بدقة سيتضح للدارس أكثر فأكثر سرّ هذه الإفخارستيا الفائقة الكرامة.[/right]
The Lamb offering is Eucharistic liturgy but does not mean it ends with communion. For it is followed by the anafora as the above explains (emphasis is mine). The Coptic rite as it stands today follow what you have presented so far.
Your problem is that you think that by calling the lamb offering lliturgy, it has to end with communion. This is not what Abouna Matta is suggesting at all.
The Ending used to be the communion. He says that in chapter 6, even in the part I quoted:
تأخَّرت عن موضعها الصحيح لا ليدخل ويتقرَّب الشعب بل ليبدأ قداس آخر!
فالنداء بابروسفارين التي معناها تقرَّبوا تقرَّبوا على هذا الرسم تكشف هنا الإضافات كلها التي حدثت من بعد صلاة فلنشكر صانع الخيرات وصلاة التقدمة. التي ينبغي
أن يأتي بعدها “القبلة” ثمَّ التناول.
Translation: He [the deacon] says "prospherin," which is now late rather than in its correct position, not for the people to approach, but so that another liturgy may begin. For the call of "prospherin," which means "approach, approach in order" shows us here all the additions that came after the Prayer of Thanksgiving and the Prayer of Offering, where instead it should've been followed by the "kiss of peace" and then communion.
Should I interpret that for you?
He's saying that the covering of the altar with the prospherin, which starts off the Liturgy of the Word and continues with the Liturgy of the Believers, was an addition. When the deacon called out "prospherin," which means approach, he was saying to the people to greet one another with a holy kiss and then approach the altar for communion. So, what once followed the Prayer of Thanksgiving and the offering (as listed in the quote previously) was the kiss of peace and communion. END.
Kindly read the whole book, rather than misinterpret what Fr. Matta was saying, say that I'm misinterpreting him, and insisting on your own opinions that are not supported either by history nor the very book we're discussing now.
I can also say that the greeting is done in the anafora followed by communion. Does this mean that the greeting is done right before communion with nothing in between. This is absurd and ridiculous and does not agree with the Biblical commandments. Do you see the error of your misrepresentation or may be your understanding or its lack thereof.
- تقديم الصعيدة - الخبز والخمر - (الحَمَل):
كان موضعه التقليدي منذ القرن الأول بعد القبلة المقدَّسة مباشرةً
How can you reconcile your claim with these words above which mean:
Offeratory - Lamb offering .. and its traditional place since the 1st century was directly after the holy kiss.
If the Traditional place of the lamb offering was after the holy kiss, then how can you say that the lamb offering liturgy was done, the koly kiss, then communion.
As I explained before that the command to greet one another, the current rite, is followed by another command to offer. This agrees with Abouna Matta explanation of where the lamb offering used to be.
So even if we reduce the whole liturgy to the lamb offering, it would still come after the holy kiss.
Hope this clears up your confusion.
The very same quote that you're stuck on, quoted in Arabic in red above, should be read in context. Fr. Matta in this section of the book is talking about the liturgy as per the evidence from St. Justin Martyr.
No one denies that the greeting was before the offering in some traditions, including the ones mentioned by Justin Martyr, Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Origen of Alexandria, Cyprian, Augustine, and so on. I didn't deny that, and neither does Fr. Matta deny it - it is one among many traditions and rites around the Christian world. There are other traditions, including the one that's now called the Offertory, which, when it was a whole Eucharistic service in its own right, had the greeting at the end, after the prayers, after the litanies, after the transubstantiation of the elements, and just while the deacon said: "greet one another with a holy kiss, and come approach, approach, approach the altar" for communion - hence, this deacon's response is a relic of the time when people greeted one another and approached for communion. It makes no sense at all today, especially since another liturgy begins right after the deacon's response.
Now, with that said, I refuse to answer any more of your comments, unless you take up the book by Fr. Matta first and read it fully, along with its footnotes. Like I said, the onus is on you to provide evidence that the tradition you think is in place is the only one historically and the only that's valid. So, save yourself the public embarrassment, read and understand the book, do more research (even beyond the book, hence the necessity of reading the footnotes and referring to those sources); and until then, perhaps we could have a more fruitful discussion on the historical development of the Coptic liturgy.
You are more confused than ever.
The very same quote that you're stuck on, quoted in Arabic in red above, should be read in context. Fr. Matta in this section of the book is talking about the liturgy as per the evidence from St. Justin Martyr.
Exactly. This means that since the first century, the Coptic rite is intact.
The only thing that changed is the place of the lamb offering from being after the liturgy of the word to being before it. This has nothing to do withe the place of the Holy Kiss.
As explained, the command "offer, offer, offer" is a separate command from the greeting one as explained in the Koulagy by Abouna Abd Al Messeih printed in 1902. The physical action of the offering changed but the command did not. What are those traditions you are referring to?
You started your claim saying that the Coptic rite changed the place of the holy kiss. Yet, Fr. Matta is arguing that the Coptic rite is one of the most authentic traditions and uses it to explain the stages of the development of the Eucharistic prayers. What embarrassment you are referring to. I am not embarrassed at all. In fact you are the one who is choosing not to engage anymore of the discussion. You kep bringing up quotes from one source and you try to put them together to prove a theory in your head. I have already done so. I hope you do the same.
Of course this doesn't happen today because since the 2nd century, all liturgies have developed quite a bit and are still in the process of developing; hence we call this the organic nature of the liturgy. Obviously there was a need at a certain point to change parts of the liturgy for various reasons. All liturgies today east and west have the same basic outline of readings (liturgy of the word), liturgy of the faithful (anaphora) with irini pasi, lift up your hearts etc, the Sanctus (holy holy holy), consecration, Epiclesis (in most cases), the peace, our father and communion.
What Biboboy is saying makes sense if we look at this historically in the ancient church's context. Of course today's liturgy has developed over the centuries so that it's not exactly the same as it was before and this is completely healthy and natural.
One viewpoint is today's liturgy vs the ancient liturgy so I think this is where you guys are not seeing eye to eye
The commandment says:
"First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." (Matthew 5:24)
First, the Eucharistic prayers would never disagree with the Bible.
How can the Church teaches her children to disobey the Bible by having them offer their gifts while they are not reconciled together? How can we offer ourselves to God and pray all the prayers while we are not reconciled? Does not make sense biblically.
Second, there is no manuscript that shows that the Holy Kiss was practiced right before communion.
Third, all Traditionl liturgies have one source and if we compare them we would find that the Traditional place of the Holy kiss was right before the Anafora.
Fourth, if we study the Coptic liturgy closely we will find that the place of the offerings did change but the command still reflects the original practice while the Holy Kiss still maitains its authentic place which is before the Anafora.
In summary, we have to study the liturgies in light of the Bible since the liturgies are the living practice of the Bible commandments.
;)
The commandment says:
"First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." (Matthew 5:24)
First, the Eucharistic prayers would never disagree with the Bible.
How can the Church teaches her children to disobey the Bible by having them offer their gifts while they are not reconciled together? How can we offer ourselves to God and pray all the prayers while we are not reconciled? Does not make sense biblically.
Second, there is no manuscript that shows that the Holy Kiss was practiced right before communion.
Third, all Traditionl liturgies have one source and if we compare them we would find that the Traditional place of the Holy kiss was right before the Anafora.
Fourth, if we study the Coptic liturgy closely we will find that the place of the offerings did change but the command still reflects the original practice while the Holy Kiss still maitains its authentic place which is before the Anafora.
In summary, we have to study the liturgies in light of the Bible since the liturgies are the living practice of the Bible commandments.
Oh, now we take Scripture verses out of context too, quoting a part of it and ignoring the rest of the sentence?
"So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go away; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift" (Matt. 5:23-24).
It's a very dangerous thing, both theologically and ritualistically, to stick to one opinion based on half a verse of Scripture.
The law that Christ gives here is not a ritualistic law, but a moral and spiritual law that applies personally (and by extension of this moral expectation, socially as well). If it were a ritualistic law, then people would be obliged to "go away" and leave the church during the Eucharist, as it would be a mandatory rite that Christ initiated by saying "to leave your gift before the altar and go away." The deacon's response wouldn't be "greet one another with a holy kiss; and approach, approach, approach..." but "greet one another with a holy kiss; or get out, get out, get out..." However, the Church has the wisdom to interpret Christ's words in context, and so, if the tradition was to have the kiss of peace at the end of the service just before communion, the rule would still be the same: you shouldn't approach communion before being reconciled with your brother and your sister.
Oh, now we take Scripture verses out of context too, quoting a part of it and ignoring the rest of the sentence?
"So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go away; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift" (Matt. 5:23-24).
I thought you were not going to discuss this any further .. I am glad that you retreated from this attitude so we can all learn.
I a m not sure how is this verse taken out of context in light of what we are talking about. Please, explain what is the proper context you are thinking of.
How was this so? Theologically we cannot offer our gifts or ourselves unless we are reconciled to one another. Please, let us know if this is incorrect or there is another opinion that says we can offer our gifts without being reconciled to one another.
Rites are the a means to live the bible .. Therefore, rites will not go against the bible. Thus, we see the practice of reconciliation, during the liturgy, through the holy kiss.
The holy kiss used to be practiced before we offer our gifts according to the original rite for two reasons:
1 - Gifts were not accepted from the unbelievers, so they were offered right after the catechumens leave the sanctuary.
2 - The Bible commands that we are reconciled before we offer or Qurban.
Today there are no catechumens, so the practice of accepting the gifts before the anafora got dropped. However, the Church kept the Deaco's command intact with the old practice to remind us that we cannot offer without being reconciled.
The important thing is not just the gifts we offer, but our souls, minds, thoughts, bodies which the priests asks of the congregation. So, unless the believers are reconciled they cannot offer themselves to God.
The priest invokes the Holy Spirit to descend and sanctify the believers before He sanctifies the bread and wine. How can the holy Spirit descends on the believers if ther ere not reconciled.
We understand that. But it was put in practice through the rituals and that is why the Holy Kiss is a very important element in the Eucharistic prayers. No liturgy is in existence without the Holy Kiss.
Reconciliation is fundamental to the anafora and that is why it is done prior not after the anafora.
The problem with the way you used Scripture was first:
1) Not quoting it in full, which in turn leads to:
2) Taking a command in that verse in the absolute literal sense.
The absolute literal sense in which you saw that Christ said: "reconcile, then offer" made you think that this is a law in the liturgy that must be followed, where first the kiss of peace must be done, followed by offering the gift. The problem lies in the fact that this concept of making a part of the verse a law ignores the rest of the verse, which I doubt anyone would make a law - that is, the part where you go away to reconcile. Do you see what I mean?
As for the second point you made about the greeting being prior to the anaphora - there is no denial that this is the case in some traditions. There are other traditions, that are equally valid, and which still exist to this very day in both Eastern and Western rite churches, where the kiss of peace is done after the Lord's Prayer and just before taking communion.
In BOTH cases, the rule of reconciliation is not tied to the offering of the gifts (as in the Old Testament, and Christ's command in his sermon on the Mount), but in asking for the forgiveness from God without first forgiving your debtors. You cannot go to take communion for the forgiveness of sins without offering the kiss of peace first. That is the Christian liturgical rule.
Just take this scenario as an example: let's say that the bread in church is made through donations that people set through their bank accounts. The church withdraws a monthly amount for the donations to buy the flour, yeast, and bake the bread for the liturgy. That, then, is my gift, which is set and has nothing to do with me being present in the liturgy or offering the kiss of peace to anyone prior to the automatic withdrawal from my bank account. What if there's a liturgy happening tomorrow, and I'm not attending it for whatever reason, whether travel, work, or penance. Does that mean that the offering of bread that was made for that liturgy cannot be used, because I did not personally attend to make sure that I made the kiss of peace with the people in church before the Anaphora began?
I'm just bringing up this example to show you that taking one of the rules too far causes dilemmas. The rule is personal, not ritual: one must be reconciled before personally approaching the altar to take communion of the Holy Mysteries. Whether that's done through the kiss of peace before an offering, or before the Anaphora, or after the Fraction and just before communion, it doesn't matter! Because what matters is that the kiss of peace is the symbol of you forgiving those who are in debt towards you, and only then can you offer yourself before God to partake of the divine and holy Mysteries.
I was refusing to answer anymore of your comments on Fr. Matta's book. Since the subject changed to Scripture, I have no issues engaging in this topic.
The problem with the way you used Scripture was first:
1) Not quoting it in full, which in turn leads to:
2) Taking a command in that verse in the absolute literal sense.
The absolute literal sense in which you saw that Christ said: "reconcile, then offer" made you think that this is a law in the liturgy that must be followed, where first the kiss of peace must be done, followed by offering the gift. The problem lies in the fact that this concept of making a part of the verse a law ignores the rest of the verse, which I doubt anyone would make a law - that is, the part where you go away to reconcile. Do you see what I mean?
What I said is the Holy Kiss is a pratical implementation of the verse in Matt 5:24. Then I proceeded to say, as a further evidence, that there is no single Tradition that shows there was a practice where the gifts offering was done after the Holy Kiss.
Putting the two together, we can conclude that the rite as practice today is an implementation of the command. Yes it is ..
The priest asks the forgiveness of his fellow priests before praying He says to them: "Bless me, here is mataina, foregive me" Then he proceeds to kiss each one and asks their permission to pray. (P. 20 of the Koulagy by Abouna Abd Al Messeih 2nd edition 1902)
During the incense procession, the priests asks the hegumen, if present to forgive him so that the Lord may accept his offering.
The instructions to the priest specifically, at the beginning of the holy liturgy, warns him that he must be reconciled with everybody and in peace with everyone. The instructions do mention the verses Matt 5:23, 24) as the reason for being so P. 191.
The instructions also mention the verses Mark 11:25, 26 as a guide for the priest's prayers to be acceptable p.191
The instructions say that if the priest communes without following the verses n Matt 5:24 and Mark 11:25-26, he would commune judgment upon himself.
At the time of the servants absolution, the priests offer matania to each other, and then kiss the altar.
During the Pauline incense procession, the priest takes the congregation confessions and offer them before the Lord (P.240)
During the Praxis, the priests prays: Accept from us the burnt offering of this incense and make us pure from the stench of sin ....
After the veil prayer, the priest offers matania to the other priests and asks their forgiveness
Before praying the long litanies, the priest offers matania to the other priests and asks their forgiveness
The priest washes his hands and warns the people from communing without being pure.
All of these rituals are done before the anafora ....... to allow both the priest and the congregation to be in peace with everybody before offering the prayers of the anafora.
There is no way we can separate the ritualistic prayers from the commandments of the bible for the liturgical prayers put the Bible in practice. The words of the Bible are spirit and life "The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life." John 6:63.
Hope this helps you see the liturgical prayers in a new light.
The liturgical rites reflect the biblical commands and put them in practice and that is why the greeting command, the holy kiss, comes right before the anafora and in no way can be put off as the last ritual act right before communion.
1) The Coptic rite of the Offertory, which, when it used to be a whole Eucharistic liturgy, would've ended with the deacon telling people to greet one another with a holy kiss and then approach to take communion.
2) Hippolytus' Apostolic Tradition, and Justin Martyr, who do not say anything about the kiss of peace in the Eucharist, but in the context of the ordination rite and the baptism rite, both of which end with the kiss of peace (i.e. it is done after all the prayers).
+++
Here's another three witnesses from the North African and Roman practice, all of which state that the kiss of peace was done after the Lord's Prayer (which was after the Fraction) in the Eucharist:
1) Tertullian (On Prayer, 18): "The kiss of peace, which is a seal set upon the [Lord's] prayer."
2) St. Augustine (Sermon 227, emphasis mine): "Then, after the consecration of the Holy Sacrifice of God, because He wished us also to be His sacrifice, a fact which was made clear when the Holy Sacrifice was first instituted, and because that Sacrifice is a sign of what we are, behold, when the Sacrifice is finished, we say the Lord's Prayer which you have received and recited. After this, the 'Peace be with you’ is said, and the Christians embrace one another with the holy kiss. This is a sign of peace; as the lips indicate, let peace be made in your conscience, that is, when your lips draw near to those of your brother, do not let your heart withdraw from his. Hence, these are great and powerful sacraments.
3) Pope Innocent I (Epistle 25 ad Decentium): "The peace puts its seal on the conclusion of the Eucharistic prayer."
In contemporary practice, the kiss of peace is still done after the Lord's Prayer in all Western rite Masses. So, the Roman Catholic churches still do this, and have been doing so from the very beginning, as attested by the three primary sources of Catholic theology and rites mentioned above.
+++
On another point, I don't like when you take a small section of a sentence I wrote and then write a litany of proofs against me. The example in your last post when you took out "the rite of reconciliation is not tied to the offering of the gifts" is actually very irrelevant, and it still stands true in the way I expressed it in its appropriate context, with the sentence in full.
At any rate, even if you want to take this as a single verse, it still stands true, since there is no liturgical rite of reconciliation that is only tied to offering the gifts. We as a whole congregation still ask the priest to "bless me, bless me, lo the repentance, say the blessing!" even AFTER we took communion. Reconciliation has to be our daily practice, and is not tied to offering the gifts. It's about us standing in prayer before God. Even an ascetic who's been in the desert for 50 years, and doesn't plan on offering a gift on the altar or taking communion, can't stand in prayer in his own cave in the middle of the desert and pray the Lord's Prayer without first forgiving his debtors.
The liturgical rites reflect the biblical commands and put them in practice and that is why the greeting command, the holy kiss, comes right before the anafora and in no way can be put off as the last ritual act right before communion. No manuscript shows evidence of that
Provide one single manuscript that shows the Coptic rite used to have the Holy Kiss right before communion. Please, cite the name of the manuscript and where can it be researched. The Apostolic Tradition does say that they give the Holy Kiss and then continue with the Anafora. What did Justin say about the Eucharist? What is the evidence, from Justin the Maretyr, you have that supports your claim that the Holy Kiss used to be right before communion?
What does this phrase have to do anything with having the Holy Kiss done right before communion and after the anfora prayers?
How would we understand from this phrase that the Holy Kiss was practiced right before communion? Wrong!!!!
it [The Holy Kiss] was first used in the liturgy by the bishop in welcoming the faithful at the beginning of the Mass before the Collect
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11595a.htm
Then let the men give the men, and the women give the women, the Lord's kiss. But let no one do it with deceit, as Judas betrayed the Lord with a kiss. After this let the deacon pray for the whole Church, for the whole world, and the several parts of it, and the fruits of it; for the priests and the rulers, for the high priest and the king, and the peace of the universe. After this let the high priest pray for peace upon the people, and bless them, as Moses commanded the priests to bless the people, in these words: The Lord bless you, and keep you: the Lord make His face to shine upon you, and give you peace. Let the bishop pray for the people, and say: Save Your people, O Lord, and bless Your inheritance, which You have obtained with the precious blood of Your Christ, and hast called a royal priesthood, and an holy nation. After this let the sacrifice follow, the people standing, and praying silently; and when the oblation has been made, let every rank by itself partake of the Lord's body and precious blood in order, and approach with reverence and holy fear, as to the body of their king.
Apostolic Constitutions (Book 2:7)
It is very clear from the excerpt above that the Coptic Rite agrees completely with the Apostolic Constitution and preserved the Holy Apostolic Tradion by kepping the Holy Kiss before the Anafora prayers.