Let all mortal flesh keep silence, and with fear and trembling stand;
Ponder nothing earthly minded, for with blessing in his hand,
Christ our God to earth descendeth, our full homage to demand.
This lovely hymn is a translation by G Moultie of a formula in the Liturgy of S James; which may be the oldest rite still used in Christendom except, of course, for the immemorially ancient Roman Rite. It is indeed a splendid hymn, and the concept of the Lord's eucharistic epiphaneia is beautifully expressed. Generations of Anglican worshippers have been moved by the picture of the host of heaven spreading its vanguard before the Lord as he descends from the realms of endless day to stand among us on earth upon the altars of our churches. Long may its use continue.
But it it is fun to look back at the Greek original - where it is not in fact a hymn. It is a priestly proclamation uttered by the celebrant before the Great Entrance; and instead of speaking of Christ our God to earth descending, it states 'Christ our God is going forth to be slain in sacrifice' (proerchetai sphagiasthenai). And that is language which causes problems to some people - unnecessarily. Christ did die but once for all upon the cross, as those in the 'reformed' tradition remind us, but his one sacrifice is beyond time in God's everlasting Now. Yet his sacrifice is made sacramentally present on earth, in the plurality of the times and places which the Creator God in his fluent generosity has given us in which to worship him and to work out our salvation. And whenever it is so made present, Christ our God does go forth to be slain in sacrifice. Furthermore, each eucharist is not merely the offering of a monic being, but of Christ in his body, associating with him and in him those who are partaking in that Mass, so that the sacrifice of the Mass is ever one and unchanging and yet for ever new.
So I've never had any problems with the the offertory prayer in the old Sarum Mass, in which the priest referred to hoc sacrifium novum. But, of course, the 'Reformers' did, and the idea of a nova mactatio has been regarded as one of the worst corruptions of medieval Catholicism. It is good for the Rite of S James to remind us that this way of employing language is not only sound and wholesome but is the usage of East as well as West.
Of course, the East does get away with a lot compared with poor old Western Catholicism. It is commonplace to condemn something Western as 'medieval' or 'baroque' while the same thing in Eastern dress is regarded as part of a wonderful mystical tradition which is pretty well beyond criticism. The ARCIC Report on Mary is a case in point. It says many excellent thigs about our Lady, but there is an in-built anti-Western prejudice. If fifth century Greeks write rather extravagant poetry about Mary, this is termed 'flourishing' (p36). But when fifteenth century Latins do the same, it is called 'florid' (p41). The prejudice shown here is all the more entertaining because both of those words come from the same Latin root; but the first has acquired meliorative vibes, the second pejorative.
Taking my cue from something G K Chesterton once said, I will conclude by suggesting that sound Ecumenism means every church in Western Christendom having a large florid baroque statue of our Lady of Victories (he hupermachos strategos, as the Byzantines in their almost puritanical restraint prefer to call her).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
But the thing is that the Easterners oft (not all of them of course) want to have it both ways. So, on the one hand, Mary is held by them to be Panagia, which as Andrew Louth points out, is all but the same as being Immaculately Conceived, but on the other hand, because they have issues with Augustine, accuse us of heresy for holding the same thing.
I have lately been reading some rather sick-making anti-Roman polemics by the Orthodox.
Now, now, Kiran, if you attend TLM circles in Sydney (as perhaps you do) you'll know how good liturgy and doctrinal anxiety can go together; now, the Eastern Rites are far more elaborate than the Western - ergo...
I'm sure if the Pope said - per impossibile- that Our Lady wasn't immaculate, the Orthodox would thereupon declare her so, because it's really about being all contrary.
And how can she be "spotless" (I forget the Greek) if she's not immaculate??
And I recall, Fr H, that during Cromwell's dictatorship, the BCP being banned, a certain Jeremy Taylor composed a liturgy taken from St James, in which he inserts the Sigesato (in a florid version after his own style) after the Sanctus and just before the Epiclesis (which he puts first, before the Post-Sanctus and Consecration)...
"Furthermore, each eucharist is not merely the offering of a monic being, but of Christ in his body, associating with him and in him those who are partaking in that Mass, so that the sacrifice of the Mass is ever one and unchanging and yet for ever new."
Sounds like you should write for the Talumd. You could justify Gentile killing with that skill.
Here's the quotation from Taylor; he calls it an ecphonesis or "Denunciation":
Let all corruptible flesh be silent, and stand with fear and trembling, and think within itself nothing that is earthly, nothing that is unholy. The King of kings, the Lord of lords, Christ our God comes down from heaven unto us, and gives himself to be meat for the souls of all faithful people. All the glorious companies of angels behold this and wonder, and love and worship Jesus. Every throne and dominion, the cherubims with many eyes, and the seraphims with many wings, cover their faces before the majesty of his glory, and sing a perpetual song for ever: Hallelujah, Hallelujah. Glory be to God on high; and in earth, peace; good will towards men. Hallelujah.
(A nice amplification...)
NB Taylor,though he uses the term "sacrifice" in ensuing prayers, avoids it here, just as Moultrie did in his later hymn version.
Dear Fr. Hunwicke,
I do so enjoying reading your writing.
Alas, the text in question is a hymn. I am pretty certain that you have reviewed a translation of a Liturgikon of St. James Liturgy. Liturgika have the celebrant's and deacon's parts.
The order for all Cherubika (hymns accompanying the Great Entrance) is the choir sings the first parts of the hymn, the deacon censes the sanctuary, the iconostasis, and the faithful, and the celebrant reads an apologia for his own sinfulness before offering the Sacrifice. When the deacon has finished the censing the celebrant and the deacon together quietly say the hymn being sung in the nave three times: the celebrant says the first parts of the hymn, and the deacon conludes it. Then they ask forgiveness of eachother and the people, and commence the procession with the Gifts. The singing of the Hymn is interrupted by the procession and completed by the singers afterwards. The text of the hymns is therefore found in Liturgika where the celebrant and deacon recite them. (We do not have a Missale Plenum).
The hymn used by Eastern Orthodox is now almost always the "Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim" (hence the name for all of these hymns: cherubika) But on Holy Thursday it is the Communion Hymn, "Of Thy Mystical Supper, O Son of God, accept me today ..." and on Holy Saturday the hymn from the Liturgy of St. James "Let all mortal flesh..." about which you are blogging. Both on Holy Thursday and and Holy Saturday the Liturgy is that of St. Basil the Great, so to find these texts in modern Orthodox Liturgika ones looks at a Liturgikon for St. basil's Liturgy. The Liturgy of St. James is amongst Eastern Orthodox serves annually on the island of Zakynthos and in Jerusalem. In one place on Oct. 23rd in the other the Sunday after Christmas, (when St. James, St. Joseph and the Prophet King David are commemorated together), though I can't remember which is which. Since the 20th C the Liturgy of St James has had a revival and is now served annually in a few other places. The only other Cherubikon is "Now the Powers of heaven with us do invisibly serve..." sung at Presanctified Liturgy and recited by the clergy as above (except there is no Apologia, no "new sacrifice" being offered, and the censing is abbreviated.)
I have long become some what alarmed at the differences in emphasis between East and West being used by Westerners eager to escape their own dogmas without either engaging or taking seriously the Fathers; a prime example of which would be the Presiding "Bishop" of the TEC on "individual salvation" as a "heresy" at TEC's general con. From your description here I would be wary of ARCIC's use of the Patristic tradition.
I do hope that Joshua and Kiran will take advantage of Hilda Graef's lovely book on the history of Doctrine and Devotion of the all Holy Theotokos, which is just coming back into print.
Joshua, if you are correct, why did not we Orthodox deny the Assumption just because Pius XII dogmatized it?
Kiran, I actually don't hear the "H word" a whole lot in regard to the Immaculate Conception. However, there is a certain logic in now considered a heresy precisely because it is no longer a pious Western opinion but a Dogma of the Roman Church. I don't know why we Eastern Orthodox are the ones "making a big deal"about it ... Pius IX making it a Dogma makes a big deal about it.
My best wishes to all for the remaining "days of Christmas"
Fr. Yousuf Rassam
Orthodox Priest,
St. Innocent Church,
Tarzana, CA
"Sounds like you should write for the Talumd. You could justify Gentile killing with that skill."
I wonder what would inspire this irrational comment.
Does its author think that the Blood of the "new" testament, or the "new" bottles, the "new" garment with the "new" cup, along with the "new" man or the "new" creature, not to mention the "new" covenant, and lastly making of "all things new" somehow should lose their lustre? Does the "new" eventually become old in the Christian religion? Alas, only for the legalist.
It is Admin that practices the alchemy of the Talmud by transforming Christ's NEW things into old, banal, dead things. Get a living religion Admin for God is a God of the living - the ever new (read Matt. xxii.32). As Father said, "the sacrifice of the Mass is ever one and unchanging and yet for ever new."
Fr. Youssuf, I didn't use the word "making a big deal," and however much you want to call the immaculate conception a pious western opinion, I suspect such a statement can be made only from a western point of view. Or to put it better, more importantly perhaps than the Immaculate conception, Original Sin is dogma. So, God's preparation of the Blessed Virgin was the Immaculate Conception. And as far as "Dogmatization" is concerned, the Immaculate Conception, like the Assumption, was celebrated liturgically for a long time. All of this said, so far as I can see, denial of this, however problematic, is not offensive. It is a difference (or a supposed difference) between us.
Actually, I might say that one of the best books I have read on the BVM is by the Orthodox Fr. Andrew Louth, and at the moment, I have just started reading John Zizoulas' Eucharist, Bishop, Church, which thus far is fascinating. Much about Orthodoxy fascinates me, but when I hear certain elements of Orthodox polemic (not so much the h word, for instance, as denial that catholic Baptisms are valid).
And a happy Christmas to you too, Fr. Yousuf, and a happy Epiphany soon!
I thought it was on Zante, not Zakynthos that the use of the Liturgy of St. James survived (and survives) on October 23rd. In Jerusalem, I was given to understand, its use on both October 23rd and on the Sunday after the Nativity (but only in the chapel of the patriarcheion) its use was revived in 1905, its use having fallen into desuetude there in the 14th or early 15th Century.
Its use, in a Syriac version, has continued among the non-Chalcedonian Syriac Orthodox, of course.
Ugh, a rather awkward piece of writing I just produced; see what comes of staggering to the computer before my morning cup of tea.
Fr Yousouf: Of course I defer to an Orthodox with regard to Orthodox Liturgy. I was not, however, looking at a translation of anything but at the Greek text of James as printed by Neale. It has the rubric "Kai archontai hoi anagnostai tou Cheroubikou" and the text of "Hoi ta cheroubim mustikos ... taxesin, allelouia". Then follows the rubric "ho hiereus", followed by the Sigesato. And the other sung parts are printed in full (e.g. Eita hoi psaltai ton trisagion psallousin humnon: "Hagios ho theo .... eleison hemas") but there is no suggestion that the choir sing the Sigesato.
Dr Tighe: Zante is simply the Italian name (and commonly used in English) for the island the Greeks call Zakynthos.
I'm stumped finding the Sarum offertory prayer that says "hoc sacrifium novum." Please, help me!
Rev'd up: This is the sole offertory prayer in Sarum, recited by the celebrant holding the chalice with the paten and host resting on it, and offering both together. You will see the relevant phrase at the end.
Súscipe, sancta Trínitas, hanc oblatiónem, quam ego indígnus peccátor óffero in honóre tuo : beátæ Maríæ, pro peccátis et offensiónibus meis, pro salúte vivórum et réquiæ ómnium fidélium defunctórum. In nómine Patris, et Fílii, et Spíritus Sancti accéptum sit omnipoténti Deo hoc sacrifícium novum.
Thank you, Pastor!
Sorry: Sacrifium a misprint for sacrificium. haplography.
Father, your mis-spelling (and my subsequent one) was not my problem - my dullness was. All better now.
Kiran, I am afraid that you are trying to mix apples and oranges. Simply because the Orthodox believe that the BVM is Immaculate, does not mean the same thing as Immaculately conceived. I would suggest a reading of Lossky's "Mystical Theology of the eastern Church" for a fuller understanding of the Orthodox position...which is very similar to that taken by St. Thomas Aquinas. I might also suggest finding a pre-1854 Missale Romanum or Breviary to read the original texts of the Feast of the Conception of the BVM.
Dale, I recently acquired another book by Lossky (In the Image and Likeness of God) and shall certainly look for this one, though it might have to wait till my thesis is complete. Happy feast of the Holy Name!
That said though, it remains a problem today, now that we know longer think ensoulment happens at some later stage in the child's development, as to what could possibly be meant by all-holy or immaculate, and how one could be immaculate if not immaculately conceived.
Kiran, besides reading Lossky, his son, Nicholas, was my dissertation adviser, it would not hurt to read Aquinas on this subject as well. Although many modern Romans have attempted to state that what Aquinas wrote is not what he believed, I find such sentiments more along the lines of wishful thinking!
I read the feast in a 1959 Ukrainian Greek Catholic missal (by no means a pro-Orthodox publication put out by the Redemptorists), and although the feast is entitled "The Immaculate Conception" no place in the text of the tropars or Kondakions does the term appear, but only "Ann's conception." The more recent Greek Catholic prayer books do not even use "Immaculate Conception" at all, but simply "The Maternity of Ann." And once again the usage of "Immaculate Conception" does not appear in the text. One will find this also true in older, pre-1854, editions of the Roman rite, and the Dominicans were the last hold-outs in changing the texts to reflect this new dogma.
I can accept that the Immaculate Conception follows along the lines of Newman's development of doctrine theory, but to attempt to state that it was always believed by the Church, when there is no liturgical evidence for this statement, seems weak at best. Of course my reliance on liturgical texts might easily be considered as more of an Orthodox concept than a western Catholic understanding.
One should also mention that the Immaculate(ness) of the BVM is tied not to the conception, but to the Incarnation in Orthodox understanding of the term.
Post a Comment