Origin of Alternate Text for "Have Mercy Upon Us"

Hello all. I am interested in the origin of the alternate text for the hymn of Have Mercy Upon Us (or Je Nai Nan). The text in the books is:

Have mercy upon us O God Our Savior.
Have mercy upon us O God Our Savior.
Have mercy upon us O God Our Savior.

However, we often end up saying:

Have mercy upon us O God, the Father, the Pantocrator.
Have mercy upon us O God Our Savior.
Have mercy upon us O God, and have mercy upon us.

Why do we do this? Where did it originate?

Thanks,
Michael

Comments

  • I believe the Gregorian Liturgy has:

    "Have mercy upon us O God, our Savior" x3

    and the Cyrillian Liturgy has:

    "Have mercy upon us O God, the Father, the Pantocrator" x3

    So I suppose when we chant it in the Basillian Liturgy, we combine :P
  • The teaching is that St.Basil's liturgy is towards the Holy Trinity, St.Gregory's is towards the Savior and St. Cyril's is towards the Father (the Pantocrator). So Je nai nan was taught to be said, including all three Persons, in St. Basil's. You wanna hear something interesting:
    http://tasbeha.org/mp3/Divine_Liturgies/HG_Late_Bishop_Lukas,_Liturgy_of_St._Gregory.html

    min 45:30
  • Hey tasgeel,

    I always thought that the liturgy of St. Basil is directed to the son, not the trinity. Not that I don't trust you, but do you mind finding me a source indicating that it is in fact directed to the trinity?

    Thanks in advance

    RO
  • RO,

    The Anaphora of St. Basil (whether in its Coptic version used by our church or the Greek version used occasionally by Chalcedonain Orthodox traditions) is addressed to the Father, not the Son.

    In fact, the anaphora of St. Gregory the Theologian used in our church is a unique exception in this regard. I believe most if not all traditional anaphoras are addressed to the Father.
  • [quote author=ReturnOrthodoxy link=topic=13678.msg159606#msg159606 date=1346867215]
    I always thought that the liturgy of St. Basil is directed to the son, not the trinity. Not that I don't trust you, but do you mind finding me a source indicating that it is in fact directed to the trinity?

    Like RamezM said.....but i don't have a specific source, i was always taught this. I did take a quick look at the Muharraq old kholagi but too much info to go through right now but Albair's khidmit shamas has a quick into about that which says St Basil and Cyril is towards the Father and Gregory towards the Son. But i guess i was wrong about Saint Basil's since i said it was for the Trinity.

    St. Gregory's is clear to be towards the Son. The Institution Narrative in itself is clear enough that we are talking to the Son who did gave thanks, broke and sanctified.
  • Thank you Ramez,

    This begs the question though, in the liturgy of St. Basil, why do the decons respond, "And your precious body/blood" "Nem Pe*K*esnof ettayot." Shouldn't it be, "And his precious blood?"

    I just realized that my initial post said the son. I meant Father. No, I am not a modalist lol

    RO
  • The first written source of je nani nan with the three different verses was written in the deacn service book of m3allim farag 3abd el messiah I think. I don't know if this helps
  • [quote author=ReturnOrthodoxy link=topic=13678.msg159609#msg159609 date=1346870942]
    Thank you Ramez,

    This begs the question though, in the liturgy of St. Basil, why do the decons respond, "And your precious body/blood" "Nem Pe*K*esnof ettayot." Shouldn't it be, "And his precious blood?"

    I just realized that my initial post said the son. I meant Father. No, I am not a modalist lol

    RO

    I thought about this before also. The Basilian Liturgy should say "We worship His holy Body and His precious Blood." I'll have to check Burmeister's book. It seems to me that it is a typical grammatical change that doesn't follow the text. As far as I know no book has this response in the third person singular tense. It is always written as "We worship Your holy body and Your precious blood." I'll check around.
  • Very interesting question indeed.

    I too will look into whatever sources I have, which are not many. This section of the Divine Liturgy is really part of what is labeled as post-anaphoral prayers, which are often neglected in scholarly treatments.
  • The book I am looking at, Liturgy Book, Abouna Abdel-Maseih ElMas'oudy, 1903

    The book has "Tenouwst `mpekcwma e;ouab nem pek`cnof ettaiyout." as one response after the priest's part "Nem pi`cnof ettaiyout" BUT there is a comment before it:
    يقول الشعب هذا المرد حسب بعض النسخ الحديثة فقط دون البقية كلها بأنه لا يوجد فيها

    Which translates to:
    The people say this response according to some modern version only without all the others because [the response] cannot be found in them.

    Now I am not sure which are "all the others"
  • This is very interesting.

    The response is mentioned by Burmester in his chapter on the Liturgy of St. Basil, but this does not mean much. Burmester for most part was describing services as they were conducted at his time, so it is merely a record of practice in the first half of the 20th century.
  • After the "We worship Your Holy Body and honoured blood" section, the response from the priest immediately after is: `Nte Pef`,rictoc `nje pipantokatwr P=o=c Pennou] which is "Of His Christ the Pantocrator, the Lord our God."

    "His Christ" must surely be referring to the Father's Son (Christ)? In which case, the Anaphora's mode of address to the Father is upheld. Unless"His Christ" (Pef`,rictoc) be used as an honourific form of address to the Son (like saying "His Grace"?). Maybe Remenkimi or Ramez would be kind enough to weigh in on the language.
  • Two quick comments in response to JG.

    1. Congregation responses typically "interrupt" the priest's prayer mid-sentence. The text you quoted, `nte Pef`,rictoc `nje Pipantokratwr P[oic Pennou] is the second half of the sentence beginning with Picwma e;ouab nem pi`cnof ettaiyout. The congregation response, the text we are discussing is not grammatically or contextually linked to the priest's sentence (the entire sentence).

    2. Even if our congregation response is linked to the text you quoted, it would still be contextually awkward. You can't say "We worship Your holy Body and Your precious Blood of His Christ...." You've switched the subject of the sentence abruptly. It also reiterates what Ramez said in another thread about prayer directed to one person abruptly redirected to another person. This practice of switching prayers and liturgies in the middle has been disapproved by some clergy.

    On a side note to #1 above, the entire priest prayer  Picwma e;ouab nem pi`cnof ettaiyout `nte Pef`,rictoc `nje Pipantokratwr P[oic Pennou] is grammatically wrong with the Coptic copula (subject determiner) "`nje." Traditionally and in all grammarian text books, `nje tells us who is the doer of the verb. This priest prayer has no verb that the Pantocrator (God the Father) is doing to the Holy Body and Precious Blood of His Christ. I have a theory to reconcile this but this is outside the subject at hand.
  • "His Christ" must surely be referring to the Father's Son (Christ)? In which case, the Anaphora's mode of address to the Father is upheld.

    If I say "His Christ," I am not addressing the Father, rather the people about the Father, or so it seems to me.

    RO
  • [quote author=ReturnOrthodoxy link=topic=13678.msg159618#msg159618 date=1346887135]
    If I say "His Christ," I am not addressing the Father, rather the people about the Father, or so it seems to me.


    Or the priest could be addressing us, the congregation, at that point.

    [quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=13678.msg159617#msg159617 date=1346884621]
    1. Congregation responses typically "interrupt" the priest's prayer mid-sentence. The text you quoted, `nte Pef`,rictoc `nje Pipantokratwr P[oic Pennou] is the second half of the sentence beginning with Picwma e;ouab nem pi`cnof ettaiyout. The congregation response, the text we are discussing is not grammatically or contextually linked to the priest's sentence (the entire sentence).

    2. Even if our congregation response is linked to the text you quoted, it would still be contextually awkward. You can't say "We worship Your holy Body and Your precious Blood of His Christ...." You've switched the subject of the sentence abruptly. It also reiterates what Ramez said in another thread about prayer directed to one person abruptly redirected to another person. This practice of switching prayers and liturgies in the middle has been disapproved by some clergy.

    On a side note to #1 above, the entire priest prayer  Picwma e;ouab nem pi`cnof ettaiyout `nte Pef`,rictoc `nje Pipantokratwr P[oic Pennou] is grammatically wrong with the Coptic copula (subject determiner) "`nje." Traditionally and in all grammarian text books, `nje tells us who is the doer of the verb. This priest prayer has no verb that the Pantocrator (God the Father) is doing to the Holy Body and Precious Blood of His Christ. I have a theory to reconcile this but this is outside the subject at hand.


    Thank you very much for your weighing in Remenkimi, I benefited  :)
  • [quote author=ReturnOrthodoxy link=topic=13678.msg159609#msg159609 date=1346870942]
    Thank you Ramez,

    This begs the question though, in the liturgy of St. Basil, why do the decons respond, "And your precious body/blood" "Nem Pe*K*esnof ettayot." Shouldn't it be, "And his precious blood?"

    I just realized that my initial post said the son. I meant Father. No, I am not a modalist lol

    RO


    This response is a new addition and that is why does not follow the prayers of addressing the father.
  • Bump*

    I was speaking to a priest today about those who switch from the Liturgy of St. Basil to that of St. Gregory in order to include the hymn "Je nai nan". . .

    I told him that I didn't think it was appropriate because we are switching from a liturgy addressed to the Father to one addressed to the Son.

    He told me that it is incorrect to say that a liturgy is addressed to the Father, or the Son.

    He said that in past clergy meetings the bishop has said that it is a type of meditation to say this, but when looking at the fraction prayers in the liturgies themselves they may address a different part of the Trinity.

    Thoughts?
  • [quote author=Andrew link=topic=13678.msg160108#msg160108 date=1348441434]
    Bump*

    I was speaking to a priest today about those who switch from the Liturgy of St. Basil to that of St. Gregory in order to include the hymn "Je nai nan". . .

    I told him that I didn't think it was appropriate because we are switching from a liturgy addressed to the Father to one addressed to the Son.

    He told me that it is incorrect to say that a liturgy is addressed to the Father, or the Son.

    He said that in past clergy meetings the bishop has said that it is a type of meditation to say this, but when looking at the fraction prayers in the liturgies themselves they may address a different part of the Trinity.

    Thoughts?


    I am not sure where I heard it or if it is true, but I thought that switching liturgies is against one of the canons.
  • I read that here. . .but we can put that issue on hold for now.

    My question still (somewhat) applies to the OP. This alternate text of "Have mercy upon us. . ." may have been a result of people not thinking that a liturgy is addressed to one person of the Trinity. . .



  • the liturgy is directed towards the father look that the definite articles in each mass for example: he took bread and broke it ( for liturgy of saint basil) we know for a fact that it was the son who took bread and broke it. the gregorian liturgy however says, you took bread and broke it. therefore it must be directed at the son and the only god head left is the holy spirit and the Cyril mass is directed tot he holy spirit because the words used indicate this as it does with the other masses.
Sign In or Register to comment.