› ›

ommited deacon parts in the liturgy?

TimothymTimothym
edited December 1969 in Hymns Discussion
I borrowed a book from my church library entitled the Coptic Orthodox Liturgy of St. Basil composed by Ragheb Moftah. It has all the (western) musical notation of the liturgy...however I noticed that at the time of the Holy Kiss of Reconciliation (Greet one another/qabello ba3d/ aspazeste alilous), the text in english (and greek) is as follows:

"Greet one another with a holy kiss. Amen Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy. He Who is Jesus Christ Son of God, hear and have mercy on us.

Let us stand, let us stand with strength, let us stand together, let us stand with peace, let us stand in the fear of God, and trembling and humility.

O clergy and people, and in quietness and silence. Lift up your eyes to the East: that you may behold the Altar: and the Body and Blood of Emmanuel our God placed on it. And the Angels and Archangels; the Seraphim with Six Wings; and the Cherubim full of eyes; they covered their faces before the splendor of the greatness of this glory invisible and unutterable, praising with one voice, calling out and saying: Holy, holy, holy, Lord of hosts: heaven and earth are full of Thy Holy Glory."

The part about "let us stand" is extremely close to the deacon/priest parts said in the Syriac liturgy of St. James and in the byzantine Greek liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

After the Aspasmos (Rejoice/Ounof emmo), and after Hiten nipresvia/through the intercessions... the deacon continues with the ending we commonly do today (lord have mercyx3, yes Lord Jesus Christ Son of God..offer, offer in order, stand with trembling...). Following this is Eleos Irinis/ a mercy of peace, a sacrifice of praise... which now makes so much more sense, since the deacon has just invited the people to offer their gifts of bread and oil and wine.

Does anyone know why/how this magnificent response got truncated and why the order is seemingly off into what we have today?
«1

Comments

  • george95899george95899
    I believe the response you're talking about is the Great Aspazeste: http://tasbeha.org/hymn_library/view/1440

    I've heard it chanted only a few times usually during Nativity and the Resurrection Liturgies by the Archdeacon in our church so I'm guessing that we reserve it (as well as a lot of other things) for big feasts and occasions but that's just my guess.

    George M.
  • Unknown
    Hey Tim,

    This is actually not fully removed. Th response which you speak of is known as "The Great Aspazeste." It is present, but it is now usually sung on feasts when there is time. It is a large hymn, and so it had to be reduced. We may have  made a smaller version of that hymn in order to make it more practical to sing.

    You can find the text and the audio to the full hymn here.

    ReturnOrthodoxy
  • TimothymTimothym
    thanks for the replies. That clears up my first question but its still interesting to see how when we do not say the full version of the hymn (its actually a deacon response so not technically a hymn) the order of the liturgy changes slightly.
  • Unknown
    To be perfectly honest, the long aspazesta (in my opinion) should not be said. It is not in its proper place in the liturgy of the current time.  I would not have enough time to explain what I mean but ill start of by quoting a part from the hymn.

    Lift up your eyes towards the east to see the Altar and the body and blood of Emmanuel, our God, placed on it.

    As you can tell, the point at which this hymn is sung is not after the transformation of the bread and wine, but rather much before it. How then can we claim that the body and blood of Emmanuel exist in the altar? The answer is that the liturgy has changed in format, and when this hymn was constantly sung, it was in a different point in the liturgy. Now that it is in a different place, it makes sense to make some adjustments to reflect the new nature of its placement.  I will give a full explanation of events on this subject this weekend but I have much studying now. If anyone knows about the whole spiel and would like to post first, you are more than welcome.

    ReturnOrthodoxy
  • RemnkemiRemnkemi
    returnoforthodoxy,

    I know what you're going to say and I'll have to rebut it. Your claim is that the bread and wine is changed in the epiclesis (Invocation of the Holy Spirit) and this hymn occurs before the epiclesis so the bread and wine is not body and blood. This is true. However, you must realize that the process of metaboly or "transubstantiation" of the bread and wine to body and blood starts in the beginning of the liturgy, during the prayer of preparation after the Thanksgiving prayer. (Note this is prayer of preparation or something similar is found in all Orthodox liturgies, not just Coptic) The priest says, "We ask and entreat Your goodness, O Lover of mankind ... Show Your face upon this bread and upon this cup ... Purify them and change them In order that this Bread, on the one hand, may become indeed Your holy Body and the mixture, on the other hand, which is in this cup, indeed Your precious Blood...." It is at this point that the Propsherine covers the altar. This is important because this directly relates to our hymn which I'll describe below. These same words are repeated in the epiclesis: " And we ask You, O Lord, our God, ... that Your Holy Spirit descend upon us and upon these gifts set forth, and purify them, change them, and manifest them as a sanctification of Your saints."

    It is, therefore, reasonable to consider the bread and wine on the altar is "in the process" of metaboly and finalized in the epiclesis. As such, it is not unreasonable to say "lift up your eyes to see the altar and the body and blood of Emmanuel on it"

    You are correct that this hymn was sung in a different part of the liturgy. The hymn was originally placed before the offeratory because of the words, "Offer, offer in order, stand in order" (that is, offer, offer in order your gifts for the korban and wine then stand in order). However, since we are no longer an agricultural society and the bread and wine is made directly in the Church or delegated to certain individuals, there is no need to sing "greet one another and offer your gifts". It makes more sense to say "greet one another and offer your gifts" after the reconciliation prayer. And the gifts we are to offer to God are noetic (again an Orthodox word found in all churches that means intelligent and intellectual, rational and reasoning), not physical.

    It is also after the reconciliation that the prospherine is lifted and we have a window into the noetic, heavenly world. As soon as the prospherine is removed, the deacons says lift up your eyes and see. It makes sense to say "lift up your eyes and see" because the coming part of the anaphora describes that heavenly scene and heavenly order. It starts out with the angels and the archangels standing and singing in one voice "Holy, holy, holy". This hymn includes the same words and images from the anaphora. The anaphora continues about God who created, heaven, sea and earth and everything in them and talks about the creation, the fall of Adam, the sending of the prophets and the Incarnation. This leads into the Institution narrative.  You can see a pattern here. Lift up your eyes and see (1) the angelic order in heaven, (2) the story of creation and the Incarnation and (3) the establishment of the Eucharistic sacrament and finally (4) the metaboly of the bread and wine into body and blood."

    It is precisely because we are experiencing a heavenly scene that the phrase "stand in order, stand in peace, stand in fear, stand in trembling" is added. It is found in many liturgies including the Coptic liturgy of St Gregory, Greek liturgy of St Basil, the liturgy of St John Chyrsostom (in an abbreviated form) and others.

    I hope this helped.
  • Unknown
    Remnkemi,

    It absolutely did help. I see were you are coming from, but then I have to ask how the priest can handle the gifts after the thanksgiving prayer as normally, where as before the epiclesis, the priest must wash his hands in the censor in order to "convert" them into the hands of God. So there is this sort of stress placed on the actual epiclesis. Also, before this point, the priest may sign the body and blood directly by himself. During the institution narrative, the priest signs the cross on the body and blood with his finger, but after the epiclesis, he must sign the blood using the blood (dips his finger in first, then signs it), and the body with the blood (dip his fingers in the blood then sign the body, or dip a piece of body in, bring it out, and sign the rest of the body with it.) What I am trying to say is that there seems to be this distinction between the effect of the prayer after the thanksgiving prayer and that of the epiclesis. So does the metaboly actually occur after the thanksgiving prayer. Apart from the response of the great aspazeste, I see nothing that the liturgy has that hints at the metaboly before the epiclesis. If you know them, please point them out.

    Thank you for the correction, and I look forward to hearing your response.
    -ReturnOrthodoxy
  • imikhailimikhail
    The hymn of "Greet one another  .... offer" changed its place after around the 11th century  when the Church in Egypt had no Catechumens. 

    The offering of the lamb used to be prayed after the liturgy of the word not before it as is done today. The Catechumens used to leave the church right after the Gospel reading, the offerings were collected by the deacon in the Brospharin and then was brough to the priest. The reason for this practice is the greeting and the offering are done only by the believers.

    Nowadays, we do not have catechumens and the greeting was put after the reconciliation prayer.
  • TimothymTimothym
    ahh, these responses are so enlightening about our liturgy! Thanks to everyone here who responded..excuse the pun but I wanted to *offer up* :) a possibility in the deacon referring to the Body and Blood of Christ at this point...besides what others have mentioned, could it be that at this time, there was still a Tabernacle on the altar tables which held inside it a small piece of the Holy Body (dipped in the Blood)? I can't remember exactly which thread it was on, but there was discussion about the tabernacle in the coptic liturgy and how it existed until about the arab invasion when it was removed for safety. So since we know that there was a tabernacle in the ancient rites of the church which did have the Body and Blood of Christ held inside it (as do other Orthodox churches today), this deacon's response could be made in reference to this..just a thought.
  • Unknown
    ^^^^^ Good Point^^^^^
  • imikhailimikhail
    The Oriental Churches do not believe, as other Churches do, that the change of the bead and wine into the body and the blood of our Lord during a certain period in the liturgy.

    The whole liturgy is an actual living of the events our Lord went through "birth","Baptism", "death", "burial", "resurrection". These are actual events that the Church lives just as the disciples lived them 2000 years ago.

    Again, the idea of a single moment where the change occurs is a foreign idea to our Church.
  • Unknown
    imikhail,

    While you are probably right, can you please then identify why the attitude towards the gifts changes at a certain point if they are always the body. If you take a look at the Liturgy Book of the S.U.S. it points to the epiclesis as the point of transubstantiation. While this is not a source, it indicates that the church as of now follows this ideology of a certain point. The understanding of the liturgy changes and is mixed with outside influences (not necessarily a bad thing) but the liturgy must adapt to that. So if the common understanding is that the transubstantiation happens at the epiclesis, then the responses of the liturgy should be revised to suit that idea. Again, I could be wrong, but its just my idea. I am trying my best to keep this from getting into an argument. Please dont take offence to the fact that I am not 100% convinced, but I am more than willing to discuss.

    ReturnOrthodoxy
  • imikhailimikhail
    [quote author=returnorthodoxy link=topic=12526.msg147100#msg147100 date=1320421955]
    imikhail,

    While you are probably right, can you please then identify why the attitude towards the gifts changes at a certain point if they are always the body. If you take a look at the Liturgy Book of the S.U.S. it points to the epiclesis as the point of transubstantiation. While this is not a source, it indicates that the church as of now follows this ideology of a certain point. The understanding of the liturgy changes and is mixed with outside influences (not necessarily a bad thing) but the liturgy must adapt to that. So if the common understanding is that the transubstantiation happens at the epiclesis, then the responses of the liturgy should be revised to suit that idea. Again, I could be wrong, but its just my idea. I am trying my best to keep this from getting into an argument. Please dont take offence to the fact that I am not 100% convinced, but I am more than willing to discuss.

    ReturnOrthodoxy


    First, we, Orthodox, do not use the word "transubstantiation". Instead, we use change, convert.

    Second, the Church does not change its dogmas, belief according to what is common during a certain period of time or because of influences from the outside. After all this is what Orthodoxy is all about.

    I am not sure what you mean by "attitude towards the gifts changes at a certain point". Every part of the liturgy has a meaning and the rituals that personify those meanings. From the moment the priest chooses the Qurbana, the attitude towards the gifts changes that this the blood and the body of Christ. We do not call it Qurbana but lamb. If you follow the liturgical prayers and especially the inaudible ones you will notice that.
  • HolmesHolmes
    + Irini nem ehmot,

    [quote author=imikhail link=topic=12526.msg147092#msg147092 date=1320412881]
    The Oriental Churches do not believe, as other Churches do, that the change of the bead and wine into the body and the blood of our Lord during a certain period in the liturgy.



    This is not correct. The entire liturgy builds up to the transformation of the offerings which become the Body and Blood of Christ after the Epiclesis. This is apparent in the actions of the priest. Before the Epiclesis, when the priest says 'Irini passi' he turns and blesses the people. However, after the Epiclesis, whenever the priest says 'Irini passi' he no longer turns and blesses the people. Instead, he turns and bows before the Holy Gifts because now it is Christ Himself who, being present on the altar, gives the blessing to the people. So there is a period in the liturgy when the bread and wine become the Body and Blood.

    From Hegumen Athanasius Iskander's Understanding the Liturgy

    The Epiclesis:

    Now comes the most solemn moment of the Eucharist, when the whole Church, having of­fered the oblation to God the Father, now pleads with Him to send His Holy Spirit upon the whole congregation and upon the gifts, so that both the congregation and the gifts become sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

    And we ask Thee, O Lord our God_ we, Thy sinful and unworthy servants. We worship Thee by the pleasure of Thy Goodness, that Thine Holy Spirit descend upon us, and upon these gifts set forth, and purify them, change them and manifest them as a sanctification of thy saints.

    Note that the priest uses “we” and not “I” both in “we offer unto Thee” and in “we ask Thee.” For the priest is not offering his own gift, but that of the whole Church. It is also the whole Church that is asking God the Father to send His Holy Spirit upon the congregation and the gifts, the priest is representing the congregation in this petition. The congregation meanwhile, is offering to God praise and blessing, and service and worship.

    The priest then, rising and signing the bread three times with the sign of the cross, says aloud, “And this bread He makes into the holy Body of Him,” to which the people reply, “I believe, Amen” (which means ‘so be it’). Similarly, when the priest says, “And this cup also, the precious blood of the new covenant of Him,” the people reply, “Again I believe, Amen.” Note that the people do not say “we believe,” because, belief in the change of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Him (Christ), has to be declared by every individual, and we will see why later on.

    The nature of the change:

    Now we have to deal with a difficult and little understood problem concerning the change of the elements into the Body and Blood of the resurrected and glorified Lord. The problem arose in the middle ages, when some Roman Catholic “theologians” started teaching that the bread and wine are “physically” changed (or trans_substantiated), so that the bread physically turns into flesh and the wine physically turns into blood!

    The Orthodox never accepted this in­novation and actually condemned it. To us, the change is “mystical” and not “physical.” This is explained to us in the beautiful “Prayer of Reconciliation by the Thrice Blessed John.” [86]

    Exalted above all the power of speech, and all the thoughts of the mind, is the richness of Thy gifts, O our Master. For that which Thou hast hidden from the wise and the prudent, Thou hast revealed unto us babes. And those things which prophets and kings have desired to see and have not, the same didst Thou grant unto us, we the sinners, that we may serve It and be purified thereby, when Thou didst ordain unto us the Economy of Thine Only_Begotten Son, and the hidden mystery of this sacrifice, which has neither the blood of the Law nor the righteous­ness of the flesh roundabout It. Behold the Lamb is spiritual and the knife is verbal and immaterial; that sacrifice which we offer unto Thee!

    What we are told here, is that the change of the gifts is a “hidden mystery” that is exalted far above the limits of human thought or the power of speech. It is hidden from the wise and prudent, who want to explain it in simplis­tic terms and reduce the “hidden mystery” into a physical trans_substantiation. But it is revealed to us, the “babes” who, in faith, believe in the mystery without any probing into the nature of the mystery, the “babes” who cry out aloud, “I believe, so be it.”

    Belief in the trans_substantiation would bring back the “Blood of the Law” into the bloodless sacrifice of the New Covenant. It would reduce the “Epiclesis” into some kind of magical in­cantation that changes the physical nature of the gifts rather than a sanctifying power that changes the essence of the gifts.

    That the “change” surpasses understanding is also confirmed by John of Damascus,

    And now you ask how the bread becomes Christ’s body and the wine and water Christ’s blood, and I say to you: The Holy Spirit comes and does those things which surpass description and understanding. [87]

    The Holy Spirit descends not only on the gifts but on all of us, and by sanctifying us and the gifts, we receive the gifts as truly the very Body that hung on the Cross and the very Blood that came from the side of Christ. It is this double action of the Holy Spirit that makes it possible for the priest to boldly declare, “The holies for the holy!” The bread and wine, sanctified by the Holy Spirit, become holies (Body and Blood of Christ) but only for the holy, who have been sanctified by the de­scent of the Holy Spirit in the Epiclesis, those who believe in the hidden mystery, without doubting or probing. This is emphasized clearly by Mar Ephraem the Syrian: “If any one doubts and eats it, it is plain bread to him.” [88]

    It is for this reason that each one of us has to declare his un-doubting and unquestioning faith in the “hidden mystery” by the individual “I believe, Amen.”

    That we have to accept this transformation by faith only is evident from the following:

    The overshadowing power of the Holy Spirit becomes, through the epiclesis, the rain to this new cultivation. For just as God made all that He made by the energy of the Holy Spirit, so also now the energy of the Spirit performs those things which are above nature, which it is not possible to comprehend except by faith alone. [89]

    . . . and eternal life to those who shall partake of Him:

    The Lord has promised us that “Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life” (John 6: 54). The Fathers of the Church in commenting on this, tell us that since what we partake of is the body of the risen Lord, which had victory over death forever, it be­comes in us like the little leaven which leavens the whole lump (Mat 13:33). Theophilus of Alexandria superimposes the call of Christ for each one of us with this insight: “Receive me as leaven into your mass, that you may partake of the indestructible life that is in me.” [90] Saint Gregory of Nyssa echoes the same senti­ment.

    He plants Himself, by the economy of His grace, in all believers by means of the flesh which derives its substance from both wine and bread, mingling Himself with the body of believers, in order that, by union with that which is immortal, man also might partake of incorruption. [91]

    Source

    From H.G. Bishop Mettaous' The Spirituality of [the] Holy Liturgy

    The Words of the Invocation

    The priest kneels down with his hands on the altar and silently prays the Litany of the Invocation of the Holy Spirit with an air of contrition, saying, "We, the sinners and unworthy servants, ask You, O Lord our God as we kneel down before You, through the pleasure of Your Goodness, that Your Holy Spirit may come down upon us (pointing to himself), and on these oblations (pointing to the bread and the wine), to sanctify them, transform them and manifest them holy to Your saints." The deacon then says, "Let us attend. Amen", calling for absolute silence and utter stillness during the moments of the descent of the Holy Spirit. The priest rises and quickly does the sign of the cross three times and says in a loud voice, "And this Bread, He makes into His Holy Body." He then kneels again and in reverence praying silently, "Our Lord, God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, this Holy Body given for the forgiveness of sins and eternal life to those who receive it." This phrase explains the previously spoken phrase, "And This Bread He makes into His Holy Body", in telling us that the Body of our Lord, God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, is given for the forgiveness of sins, and an eternal life to those who partake of it. The priest then says aloud, "And this Chalice too, He makes into His Honoured Blood of the New Testament." The priest kneels down again and prays silently, "Our God, Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, this Holy Blood given for the forgiveness of sins", this sentence also explaining the nature of the sacrament like the previous statement. Then he says out loud, "An eternal life to those who partake of it." The congregation rises and responds saying, "Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy." The bread has now has become the Body of Christ and the wine has become the Blood of Christ, and remains so for the rest of the Liturgy.

    Some Remarks on the Litany of the Invocation of the Holy Spirit The Liturgy book states that the priest does the sign of the cross three times quickly on the bread and likewise on the Chalice. The reason for the swiftness is that, as he utters the words "He makes it into His Holy Body", it immediately becomes the Body of the Lord which He took from Virgin Mary, and which He gave to His pure disciples; the Body which received the life-giving sufferings and was shrouded and buried; the Body which rose from the dead, in which He ascended to heaven, and in which He will come again to judge the living and the dead. Similarly, as he says, "His Honoured Blood of the New Testament" the wine transforms into the Lord's Blood which was shed on the cross for the salvation of Adam and his offspring. After the transformation the blessings can come only from the Sacraments, therefore the priest can no longer do the sign of the Cross on the Sacraments. Swiftness is therefore necessary as the action of doing the sign of the Cross on the sacraments must be completed before the priest finishes the sentences, "He makes it into His Holy Body... and His honoured Blood of the New Testament." In other words, the signings of the cross must be confined to the words "...this bread...", in the first instance, and, "...this chalice too...", in the second instance. The priest may need to say the words slowly in order that the signs are completed before the transformation takes place.

    Source
  • Unknown

    This is not correct. The entire liturgy builds up to the transformation of the offerings which become the Body and Blood of Christ after the Epiclesis. This is apparent in the actions of the priest. Before the Epiclesis, when the priest says 'Irini passi' he turns and blesses the people. However, after the Epiclesis, whenever the priest says 'Irini passi' he no longer turns and blesses the people. Instead, he turns and bows before the Holy Gifts because now it is Christ Himself who, being present on the altar, gives the blessing to the people. So there is a period in the liturgy when the bread and wine become the Body and Blood.

    That is exactly what I'm trying to say but I decided to just walk out of it. Thanks
  • imikhailimikhail

    This is not correct. The entire liturgy builds up to the transformation of the offerings which become the Body and Blood of Christ after the Epiclesis. This is apparent in the actions of the priest. Before the Epiclesis, when the priest says 'Irini passi' he turns and blesses the people. However, after the Epiclesis, whenever the priest says 'Irini passi' he no longer turns and blesses the people. Instead, he turns and bows before the Holy Gifts because now it is Christ Himself who, being present on the altar, gives the blessing to the people. So there is a period in the liturgy when the bread and wine become the Body and Blood.

    Please clarify .... I do not think you are saying something different than what I or Reminkimi already said.

    If I understood returntoorthodoxy right, he contends that the transformation happens only during the epiclesis. This is not correct.

    We cannot limit the change only to the epiclesis.

  • Unknown
    Hey imikhail,
    I don't know if you understood me right. I'm saying that before the epiclesis, the priest signs the offerings himself with a cross (thanksgiving prayer), or by his fingers (institution narrative). however, after the epiclesis, all signings of the gifts are done by them and through them. In fact, when saying "The Holy Body" and "And your precious Blood" during the epiclesis, the liturgy book of S.U.S. dictates that the signings need to be done before the completion of the phrase. It only seems logical to me to acknowledge that this change in behavior is due to something which happens during the epiclesis. Then I suppose that it is the transformation of the mysteries which happens. It may be that the transformation is a continuous process, but it seems to me that at least the completion of the transformation occurs at the epiclesis. The prayes up to and at this point ask the Holy Spirit to convert them. After this point, there is no request for the Holy Spirit to change them, but rather, we remember that they have been changed, as we say, "O God who has sanctified these gifts by the coming down on them by Your Holy Spirit..."

    While the church may not openly state that they become converted at a certain point, it is clear by the actions done by the priest that there is a change which happens specifically at the epiclesis.

    H.G. Bishop Mettaos says in his book The Spirituality of the Rites of the Holy Liturgy in the Coptic Orthodox Church that, "As he utters the words 'He makes into His Holy Body' it immediately becomes the body of the Lord which he took from the Virgin Mary" (Mettaos, 202). You can read an online copy of this book here and specifically between pages 201-203.

    Looking forward to hear your input.
    ReturnOrthodoxy
  • imikhailimikhail
    [quote author=returnorthodoxy link=topic=12526.msg147145#msg147145 date=1320630630]
    Hey imikhail,
    I don't know if you understood me right. I'm saying that before the epiclesis, the priest signs the offerings himself with a cross (thanksgiving prayer), or by his fingers (institution narrative). however, after the epiclesis, all signings of the gifts are done by them and through them. In fact, when saying "The Holy Body" and "And your precious Blood" during the epiclesis, the liturgy book of S.U.S. dictates that the signings need to be done before the completion of the phrase. It only seems logical to me to acknowledge that this change in behavior is due to something which happens during the epiclesis. Then I suppose that it is the transformation of the mysteries which happens. It may be that the transformation is a continuous process, but it seems to me that at least the completion of the transformation occurs at the epiclesis. The prayes up to and at this point ask the Holy Spirit to convert them. After this point, there is no request for the Holy Spirit to change them, but rather, we remember that they have been changed, as we say, "O God who has sanctified these gifts by the coming down on them by Your Holy Spirit..."

    While the church may not openly state that they become converted at a certain point, it is clear by the actions done by the priest that there is a change which happens specifically at the epiclesis.

    H.G. Bishop Mettaos says in his book The Spirituality of the Rites of the Holy Liturgy in the Coptic Orthodox Church that, "As he utters the words 'He makes into His Holy Body' it immediately becomes the body of the Lord which he took from the Virgin Mary" (Mettaos, 202). You can read an online copy of this book here and specifically between pages 201-203.

    Looking forward to hear your input.
    ReturnOrthodoxy


    I agree with you that the Holy Spirit descends on the offerings during the epiclesis; not  only on the offerings but ON the congregation as well.

    There is a fundamental difference however between having a "formula of consecration" and a journey within the liturgy; a journey to heaven. The epiclesis is the manifestation and the realization of Christ's presence with His people. That is why the priest asks the Holy Spirit to descend not only on the offerings but also on the people so that the unity between Christ, the bridegroom, and the Church, His bride, is realized.

    That is why we call the liturgy a journey with Christ from Bethlehem (the plsce where the Qurban is baked) where He was born, baptism, burial, resurrection and the Pentecost (epiclesis). We cannot limit the consecration to only the epiclesis.

    Hope this helps.
  • TimothymTimothym
    [quote author=imikhail link=topic=12526.msg147146#msg147146 date=1320634424]
    [quote author=returnorthodoxy link=topic=12526.msg147145#msg147145 date=1320630630]


    I agree with you that the Holy Spirit descends on the offerings during the epiclesis; not  only on the offerings but the congregation as well.

    There is a fundamental difference however between having a "formula of consecration" and a journey within the liturgy; a journey to heaven. The epiclesis is the manifestation and the realization of Christ's presence with His people. That is why the priest asks the Holy Spirit to descent not only on the offerings but also on the people so that the unity between Christ, the bridegroom, and the Church, His bride, is realized.

    That is why we call the liturgy a journey ith Christ from Bethlehem (the plsce where the Qurban is baked) where he was born, baptism, burial, resurrection and the Pentecost (epiclesis). We cannot limit the consecration to only the epiclesis.

    Hope this helps.


    This is very Orthodox thought process. Along the same lines, this is why we do not say we have *only* 7 sacraments/mysteries or else we would be limiting God's grace to being only able to work 7 ways which of course is not the case! Thus, while these 7 mysteries are the main 7 points in which the mysteries of God (via the action of the Holy Spirit) work through people's lives, there are hundreds, thousands etc 'sacraments/mysteries' through which we are united to God. A sacrament or a mystery could be the blessing of water, or even a sermon or conversation in which one is inspired by the Holy Spirit. Because of the ambiguous nature of attempting to label such events, it makes sense that we do not label them specifically. So, the grace of God is free to work as God sees fit.
  • BiboboyBiboboy
    Agape,

    The deacon's part mentioned in this thread (the long aspazesthe) is a relic of the older liturgies that used to be prayed on Saturday nights (it was considered Sunday back then). That response was in fact the call by the deacon for the congregation to greet one another and then approach to take communion. The greeting was always at the end of the liturgy, not at the beginning of the Anaphora, and this is still the practice in other Apostolic churches. The old liturgies were non-descriptive - that is, there was no prayer of reconciliation and institution narrative. Whatever was described in the later Anaphora's was actually enacted in the prayer of Thanksgiving (as it is still done today), and during the prayer of Thanksgiving, where the institution narrative is enacted, the bread and wine change to the Body and Blood by the priest's prayers and signing of the cross. The priest addressed Christ to change them. This is evidence that these prayers and practices of the current Offertory are relics of the old liturgy, before the Council of Ephesus (where the Epiclesis became the transubstantiation part of the Liturgy, addressing the Holy Spirit).

    That old liturgy had four parts, where the first three still survive today in the "Offertory":
    1) Offering the bread and wine.
    2) Prayer of Thanksgiving, during which the bread and wine change to the Body and Blood.
    3) Greeting with a holy kiss and communion.
    4) Agape dinner/supper.

    When the Liturgy was celebrated on Sunday mornings (the practice in the larger cosmopolitan cities like Alexandria), where there were catechumens and recent converts, the old liturgy was merged to the beginning of the Liturgy as the Offertory, the Liturgy of the Word started after the Prayer of Thanksgiving, and then it was followed by the greeting and followed by the descriptive Anaphora (St. Basil, St. Gregory, St. Cyril, etc.).

    We being the conservative Copts that we are never changed those prayers after the merge, but they remain as relics. They don't make sense where they are, because of their current place, but just imagine the historicity of the Liturgy that we've kept intact, with ts actions and prayers, which do no survive anywhere else in the world.

    There are many liturgical studies on this very topic, and a good book to consider is Dom Gregory Dix's "The Shape of the Liturgy" (now a classic!). For very technical studies on the Coptic Liturgy, there's nothing more outstanding than the research done by the late Fr. Matta el-Meskeen in his two-volume book "The Eucharist" (only in Arabic).
  • imikhailimikhail

    The deacon's part mentioned in this thread (the long aspazesthe) is a relic of the older liturgies that used to be prayed on Saturday nights (it was considered Sunday back then).

    We still pray the liturgy on Saturday nights on the major feasts of Nativity, Epihany and Pascha. 

    That response was in fact the call by the deacon for the congregation to greet one another and then approach to take communion.

    Not in the Coptic Rite. The Traditional place of Greet one another is exactly at the beginning of the Anaphora just as the Coptic liturgy places it.

    The greeting was always at the end of the liturgy, not at the beginning of the Anaphora, and this is still the practice in other Apostolic churches.

    This is not true according to the Apostolic Traditions by hippolytos.

    The old liturgies were non-descriptive - that is, there was no prayer of reconciliation and institution narrative. Whatever was described in the later Anaphora's was actually enacted in the prayer of Thanksgiving (as it is still done today), and during the prayer of Thanksgiving, where the institution narrative is enacted, the bread and wine change to the Body and Blood by the priest's prayers and signing of the cross.

    This is a confusion of the liturgical prayers. I am not sure where Biboboy got his information from. The liturgical manuscripts we have that date back to the 2nd century do not convey this confusion.

    When the Liturgy was celebrated on Sunday mornings (the practice in the larger cosmopolitan cities like Alexandria), where there were catechumens and recent converts, the old liturgy was merged to the beginning of the Liturgy as the Offertory, the Liturgy of the Word started after the Prayer of Thanksgiving, and then it was followed by the greeting and followed by the descriptive Anaphora

    The ctechumens were considered unbelievers and they left right after the Gospel reading and were not allowed to participate in the holy kiss as it was a sign of communion in the same faith.


    We being the conservative Copts that we are never changed those prayers after the merge, but they remain as relics. They don't make sense where they are, because of their current place, but just imagine the historicity of the Liturgy that we've kept intact, with ts actions and prayers, which do no survive anywhere else in the world.

    This is not correct. The change that took place in the Coptic rite was in the 10th century,  when there were no catechumens attending the liturgy and the offeratory prayer changed its place to come before the liturgy of the word and not after it.
  • BiboboyBiboboy
    [quote author=imikhail link=topic=12526.msg148312#msg148312 date=1322836088]

    The deacon's part mentioned in this thread (the long aspazesthe) is a relic of the older liturgies that used to be prayed on Saturday nights (it was considered Sunday back then).

    We still pray the liturgy on Saturday nights on the major feasts of Nativity, Epihany and Pascha. 

    That response was in fact the call by the deacon for the congregation to greet one another and then approach to take communion.

    Not in the Coptic Rite. The Traditional place of Greet one another is exactly at the beginning of the Anaphora just as the Coptic liturgy places it.


    imikhail, stop making up your own history.
  • imikhailimikhail
    Biboboy,

    Is this the best answer you can come up with concerning my refutations?
  • BiboboyBiboboy
    Well, you asked for it :P

    You brought up Hippolytus' Apostolic Tradition. A careful reading indicates that the reference to the greeting is at the end of the baptismal service. First, there is the bishop who anoints the newly baptized (after the baptism, so this was the chrismation), then gives them the holy kiss, saying "The Lord be with you." The bishop does so with all the newly baptized, and then they say a prayer. AFTER the prayer is done, all the people give each other a kiss of peace (21:22-26). With that, the baptismal service is over, and they move on to what seems to be like a liturgical service of the Eucharist.

    In another context, we are told that after the ordination of the bishop, everyone is to greet the bishop with a kiss of peace, "greeting him because he has been made worthy" (4:1). This, again, is the end of the ordination service, where the people greet their newly ordained bishop. When that part of the service is done, the Eucharist began. Again, there is no indication at all of a greeting with a holy kiss whether in the beginning of the service or the end of the Eucharistic service, so Hippolytus' Apostolic Traditions cannot be used as evidence for the greeting in the Divine Liturgy.

    In relation to the known traditions of the Eucharistic service, the only evidence we have of the kiss of peace being offered is either in the beginning of the Eucharistic Liturgy BEFORE the offering of the gifts ("If you are offering your gift at the altar..." (Matt. 5:23-24), or at the END of the Eucharistic prayers, just before communion, where the kiss of peace is considered a seal of prayers. At the present, in the Coptic Orthodox church the kiss of peace is AFTER the offering (and the Liturgy of the Word), and before the Anaphora, which is an unusual place for it considering the historical evidence. The only reason for it to be there, along with the deacon's response to the congregation to approach the altar and see the Lord's Body and Blood on the altar, is because it is a relic of the older practice where the Offertory was a whole Eucharistic rite on its own, and the kiss of peace was at the end of the service, just before the congregation moved towards the altar for communion.
  • imikhailimikhail
    [quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148316#msg148316 date=1322840714]
    Well, you asked for it :P

    You brought up Hippolytus' Apostolic Tradition. A careful reading indicates that the reference to the greeting is at the end of the baptismal service. First, there is the bishop who anoints the newly baptized (after the baptism, so this was the chrismation), then gives them the holy kiss, saying "The Lord be with you." The bishop does so with all the newly baptized, and then they say a prayer. AFTER the prayer is done, all the people give each other a kiss of peace (21:22-26). With that, the baptismal service is over, and they move on to what seems to be like a liturgical service of the Eucharist.


    Here is my reference for the Eucharistic prayer:

    Notice the kiss of peace given at the beginning of the Anafora just the Coptic rite does and no kiss of peace before communion.

    "When he has been made bishop, everyone shall give him the kiss of peace, and salute him
    respectfully, for he has been made worthy of this. 2Then the deacons shall present the oblation
    to him, and he shall lay his hand upon it, and give thanks, with the entire council of elders, saying:
    3The Lord be with you.
    And all reply:
    And with your spirit.
    The bishop says:
    Lift up your hearts.
    The people respond:
    We have them with the Lord.
    The bishop says:
    Let us give thanks to the Lord.
    The people respond:
    It is proper and just.
    The bishop then continues:
    4We give thanks to you God,
    through your beloved son Jesus Christ,
    whom you sent to us in former timesa
    as Savior, Redeemer, and Messenger of your Will,
    5who is your inseparable Word,
    through whom you made all,
    and in whom you were well-pleased,
    6whom you sent from heaven into the womb of a virgin,
    who, being conceived within her, was made flesh,
    and appeared as your Son,
    born of the Holy Spirit and the virgin.
    7It is he who, fulfilling your will
    and acquiring for you a holy people,
    extended his hands in suffering,
    in order to liberate from sufferings
    those who believe in you.
    8Who, when he was deliveredb to voluntary suffering,
    in order to dissolve death,
    and break the chains of the devil,
    and tread down hell,
    and bring the just to the light,
    and set the limit,
    and manifest the resurrection,
    9taking the bread, and giving thanks to you, said,
    "Take, eat, for this is my body which is broken for you."
    Likewise the chalice, saying,
    This is my blood which is shed for you.
    10Whenever you do this, do this (in) memory of me.

    11Therefore, remembering his death and resurrection,
    we offer to you the bread and the chalice,
    giving thanks to you, who has made us worthy
    to stand before you and to serve as your priests.
    12And we pray that you would send your Holy Spirit
    to the oblation of your Holy Church.
    In their gathering together,
    give to all those who partake of your holy mysteries the fullness of the Holy Spirit,
    toward the strengthening of the faith in truth,
    13that we may praise you and glorify you,
    through your son Jesus Christ,
    through whom to you be glory and honor,
    Father and Son,
    with the Holy Spirit,
    in your Holy Church,
    now and throughout the ages of the ages.
    Amen. "

    http://www.bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html




  • imikhailimikhail

    In relation to the known traditions of the Eucharistic service, the only evidence we have of the kiss of peace being offered is either in the beginning of the Eucharistic Liturgy BEFORE the offering of the gifts ("If you are offering your gift at the altar..." (Matt. 5:23-24), or at the END of the Eucharistic prayers, just before communion, where the kiss of peace is considered a seal of prayers. At the present, in the Coptic Orthodox church the kiss of peace is AFTER the offering (and the Liturgy of the Word), and before the Anaphora, which is an unusual place for it considering the historical evidence.

    Incorrect information.


    How can we offer God our oblations if we are not reconciled to one another? The correct place for the kiss of peace is before the anafora and after the Gospel reading. How can the priest ask the Holy Spirit to descend on the worshipers while they are not reconciled?

    You say that the place of the command Greet one another before the anafora, is unusual .. well may be to you but it is not according the apostolic tradition that was well established in the 2nd and 3rd century (Abouna Matta Al Maskeen Eucharist p.420)

    We have many manuscripts that of St Mark liturgy that date back to the 3rd century which show that the greeting command was in fact right before the anafora.

    Here is what one of your references that you sited above says concerning the holy kiss (emphasis is mine):


    [right]
    القبلة المقدَّسة
    وموضعها بعد الصلوات الجماعية وبعد الاعتراف بالخطايا التي ربما تكون قبل الاجتماع [بعدما تعترفون بخطاياكم لكي تكون ذبيحتكم طاهرة]، وقبل تقديم الصعيدة مباشرةً
    وقد ذُكرت في سفر الأعمال ومعظم الرسائل، وأخذت وضعها التقليدي الطقسي في الإفخارستيا بوضوح في القرنين الأول والثاني، وكانت برهان المصالحة، وعربون الاستحقاق للدخول في شركة الجسد الإلهي، وضماناً لطهارة الذبيحة “حتى لا تتنجَّس ذبيحتكم”. لذلك كان على الكنيسة أن تمنع أيَّ من كان على خلافٍ مع أخيه
    [(وكانت القبلة إيذاناً بخروج الموعوظين خارج الكنيسة واقتراب المؤمنين من المذبح (الهيكل) للتناول، [إن بقي أحد خارج حدود المذبح فإنه لا ينال من الخبز (الإلهي)]
    [/right]




    My advice to you is to read  before you make empty claims and not to site sources that do not support your argument.


  • BiboboyBiboboy
    Habibi,

    The quote you have from the Hippolytus is incomplete, and as such inaccurate. Like I said the greeting with the bishop and the rest of the people is the END of the bishop's ordination rite. The next section that begins the deacons offering the oblation is just that: another rite that follows the ordination rite.

    At any rate, if you still insist that the kiss of peace was given at this point and it's only one whole rite, you will notice that the kiss of peace is still given BEFORE the deacons bring up the offering to the altar. Like I said, the historical evidence is that the kiss was given before the offering or just before communion, and not in the middle of the service before the Anaphora.

    With regards to your references to the Anaphora's, it still proves the point that in some of them (at least in the Alexandrian tradition for our case), the kiss was given before the Anaphora, in which case it was the before the offering. There was no Offertory before that, because what is now the Offertory was a whole Eucharistic service on its own right. The Anaphora was a Eucharistic service on its own right as well.

    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.

    Kindly note the second point clearly. The kiss was a the end of the service and was a call for approaching communion.

    In fact, please continue reading abouna Matta's book, especially his second book (much smaller) on the Eucharist. There, he explains everything I've just said about the Coptic liturgy in greater detail, and explains how the Offertory was a whole Eucharistic liturgy on its own, and it ended with the kiss of peace just before communion. It was later merged with the Liturgy of the Word and the Anaphora, and so the kiss of peace, which was the end of the Eucharistic liturgy (that is now the Offertory) came just before the Anaphora, which is how it is to this day.
  • imikhailimikhail


    You keep repeating the same argument. Give us one proof of your claim that the Greeting was changed in the Coptic rite from its current place. Here what you need to research:

    The manuscript that show the original place,
    A later manuscript that shows the current place so we can determine an approximate date of the change




  • BiboboyBiboboy
    I already referred you to the research done by Fr. Matta. I don't have to go and repeat the same research he did - that is useless. If I have something new to add to what he says in his research, I will do my research and report my new findings, but otherwise I suggest you go through his very well-researched work. Also, a forum isn't a place where I report my research - I do that in academic conferences, seminars, and peer-reviewed journals. I'm here to respond to a question, based on what I've learnt.

  • imikhailimikhail
    [quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148323#msg148323 date=1322846159]
    Habibi,

    The quote you have from the Hippolytus is incomplete, and as such inaccurate. Like I said the greeting with the bishop and the rest of the people is the END of the bishop's ordination rite.

    The ordination of the clergy used to be and still till today before the anaphora and right before the Asbasmos (theh greeting). So,  the excerpt from Hyppolytus is a witness to the authenticity of the Coptic Rite.


    At any rate, if you still insist that the kiss of peace was given at this point and it's only one whole rite, you will notice that the kiss of peace is still given BEFORE the deacons bring up the offering to the altar. Like I said, the historical evidence is that the kiss was given before the offering or just before communion, and not in the middle of the service before the Anaphora.

    You seem to misunderstand the Coptic rite and the Eucharistic rite. The liturgy of the believers starts with the anafora and thus starts with reconcilation between the believers. At that time no catechumens are present.

    As to the offerings, they used to be done after the liturgy of the word and the command (Offer, offer, offer) was a separate command that got merged with the greeting command  when the offerings were done before the liturgy of the word.

    So, the physical action of the offerings changed its place from right before the anafora to before the liturgy of the word. Yet, the command kept its original place and merged with the greeting command that was not touched. The original khoulagy explains that they are separate commands as the asbasmos hymn is supposed to be prayed  before the the deacon says"Offer, Offer,Offer) (Koulagy by Abouna Abd Al Masse7 Al Baramousy 1902)







  • imikhailimikhail
    [quote author=Biboboy link=topic=12526.msg148326#msg148326 date=1322848030]
    I already referred you to the research done by Fr. Matta. I don't have to go and repeat the same research he did - that is useless. If I have something new to add to what he says in his research


    At least site where he specifically says that the place of the holy kiss command changed its place in the Coptic rite ....
Sign In or Register to comment.