Presentation of the Reformed Takhsa
Introduction on the History of the Reformed Text
The Patriarchal Liturgical Committee, Its Formation
and Mandate:
The Chaldean Patriarchal Synod, held in Baghdad on
the days between the 14th and 18th
of January 1992, and presided by his Beatitude Mar
Raphael I Bidawid of blessed memory, in accordance
with Canon 124 of the Eastern Code, decreed the
formation of a Patriarchal Liturgical Committee, to
be composed of three hierarchs: Mar Andrews Sana,
Mar Estephan Babika, and Mar Yohannan ‘Ysayi, and
three expert priests, the Reverends: Jacques Isaac,
Peter Yousif, and Sarhad Jammo. Their mandate was
to present to the Holy Synod a historical study and
a draft of reform for the Divine Raze and the
other sacraments of the Church. For practical
reasons, of the three hierarchs only one could join
the three experts in their endeavor, Mar Andrews
Sana, who acted as President of the Committee until
his retirement in 2003.
Acts of the Committee:
The Committee held six meetings between June 1994
and March 1997, five in Rome and one in Paris, and
presented its first draft of the Divine Raze
to the Holy Synod on April 15, 1997, with the
related explanation. The Fathers of the Synod,
during their meeting in Lebanon in May 1997,
reviewed the Draft as presented by the members of
the Committee, and requested, later, the opinion and
comments of their dioceses. The Committee received
the comments and suggestions from the Chaldean
clergy during the following months, and held two
meetings in Rome to give them due consideration:
from May 25 to June 2, 1999, then from May 8 to 13,
2000, and presented an updated draft of the
Takhsa d-Raze to the Holy Synod in Rome on the
following day, May 14, 2000.
Acts of the Holy Synod:
The Fathers of Holy Chaldean Synod, during the
period of their meeting in Baghdad, from the 16th
to the 24th of October 2002, after
listening to the presentation of the members of the
Liturgical Committee, gave their approval to the
proposed Reformed Takhsa, and decided on the
practical measures and directives of implementation
to be adopted following the Recognitio of the
Holy See.
Recognitio
of the Holy See:
On April 12, 2003, the Reformed Takhsa, with
a complete English translation, was presented to the
Holy See for the canonical Recognitio. The
Congregation for the Eastern Churches responded on
July 20, 2004, with appropriate observations and
directives. In fulfillment with the instruction of
the Holy See, the Liturgical Committee held a
two-week meeting, on July 12-26, 2005, in San Diego,
California, and updated the text of the Takhsa
accordingly. In a Special Synod held in Rome on
November 8-12 2005, the Chaldean Hierarchs gave the
Chaldean Ordo of the Divine Raze their
final retouches, as well as their final
approval. On November 15, 2005, His Beatitude Mar
Emmanuel III Delly presented the final version to
the Holy See for the final Recognitio,
which was communicated to His Beatitude by a letter
of the Oriental Congregation dated February 18,
2006.
The History of the Chaldean Divine Liturgy
I. Review of the Instructional Section
General Remarks:
The Chaldean rite is very close to the Scriptures.
The Eucharistic celebration, in particular, is
based, for its Instructional segment, on the
encounter of the Risen Lord with the two disciples
in their journey to Emmaus, as described in Luke
24:13-35. Therefore, in a solemn celebration (for
Sundays or Feasts), two readings are provided “from
Moses and the Prophets,” respectively, followed by
two readings from the New Testament: one of these
being the exposition and interpretation of God’s
word as found in the writings of the Apostles,
especially Paul, then the other one the exposition
of Christ’s words and actions as reported in the
Gospels.
After the homily on Sundays and Feasts, the
Petitions (Ba’utha) are presented, in
accordance with the request of Paul in the First
Letter to Timothy: “First of all, then, I ask that
supplications, prayers, petitions, and
thanksgivings, be offered for everyone, for kings
and for all in authority, that we may lead a quiet
and tranquil life in all devotion and dignity. This
is good and pleasing to God our Savior.” (1 Tim
2:1-3).
Around this Scripturally guided structure,
pertaining liturgical elements were developed
through the centuries, including glorifications and
Psalmody, hymns and responsories (‘Onyatha),
deaconal salutations and priestly prayers. The
passage from the informal ambiance of a house
celebration to a church building ceremonial required
the composition and arrangement of many of the
processional elements, such as the Responsory of the
Mysteries (‘Onytha d’Raze), etc.
The
above-mentioned passage occurred in two major
historic periods: the first one happened in the
early centuries of Christianity, i.e. before the era
of major persecutions (A.D. 340-380), the second one
occurred with the official recognition of
Christianity and of Church status before 410 by the
Persian King of Kings Yezdegerd. The first period,
in its early stage, could hardly suffice to compose
and organize prayers and hymns, lectionaries and
Psalmodies, and provide the means to diffuse them
uniformly throughout the dioceses east of the
Euphrates. But, with the growing of Ecclesiastic
organization, the needed compositions were gradually
provided for in a fairly systematic way.
Accordingly, we can table the different phases of
development of the Instructional Section of the Mass
as follows:
1st
& 2nd Century
(in-house
Eucharist or in a primitive church building)
- Deacon:
“Peace be with us. Be seated and silent”
- O.T. Readings
(Moses & Prophets)
- N.T.: (early)
Apostolic Sermon, (later) Epistle & Gospel
3rd
& 4th Century
(in-church
celebration)
- Deacon:
“Peace be with us”
- People:
Lakhu Mara (processional hymn with incense
and candles)
- Priest:
Improvised priestly prayer
- Deacon:
“Be seated and silent”
- O. T. Readings
(Moses & Prophets)
- N. T. Readings
(Epistle, Gospel & Sermon)
Between the 5th and 7th
Century
The Synod of Mar
Isaac (A.D. 410) was an opportunity for the
hierarchy of the Church of the East to commonly
adopt and approve liturgical structures and texts,
as is explicitly mentioned in its 13th
Canon:
“Concerning
the ordinances and canons which are appropriate to
the liturgy, and to the Holy Mysteries, and to the
glorious feasts of the Savior, (it has been
ordered):
The western liturgy which Isaac and Marutha the
bishops taught us, and all of us saw them
celebrating here in the church of Seleucia,
henceforth shall we celebrate ourselves in like
manner. The deacons in every city shall proclaim the
proclamation like this, and the Scriptures shall be
read thus, and the pure and holy Oblation shall be
offered upon one altar in all churches, and the
argument of that ancient memory shall no longer
exist among us. The Oblation shall no longer be
offered from house to house.”
This is how the
Instructional Section would have looked at the time
of Mar Isaac in the Cathedral of Seleucia:
Entrance Ceremony
- Priest:
Priestly prayer “Before the Throne…”
- Choir:
Responsory of the Sanctuary (‘Onytha d-Qanke)
Procession to the Bema
- Deacon:
“Peace be with us”
- People:
Lakhu Mara (processional hymn with incense
and candles)
At
the Bema
- Deacon:
“Be seated and silent”
- Readers:
2 Readings of the O.T. (Moses & Prophets)
- Choir:
Interval Psalmody
- Deacon:
Epistle Reading
- Choir:
Halleluiah with Psalmody
- Priest:
Gospel Reading & Sermon
- Deacon:
Supplication
With
Mar Abba the Great (A. D. 540-552), the Trisagion (Qaddysha
Alaha) found its place before the Readings.
Then, before 600 A.D., the monastic Psalmody
gradually established itself as a practical way to
fill the waiting time immediately before the
beginning of the ceremony, making its two last
verses (Aqqapta) as the official Invitational
Acclamation to start the Solemn Mass (Awde lakh
b’edta rabtha…). With Isho’yahb III (650-659) a
standard structure and texts were organized and
adopted, not only for the common or fixed
elements of the Mass but also for the
variable or proper pieces. With Timothy
(780-823), the Lord’s Prayer with its responsorial
Qaddysh was introduced at the beginning and
at the end of all services, and soon after it found
its place at the very opening of the Eucharistic
celebration, preceded by the Angelic chant Gloria
in Excelsis.
However, the structure and ceremonial of the
Eucharistic celebrations were not uniform,
especially in regard to the opening ceremony of the
Instructional Section: Feasts of the Lord would
open with the Acclamation: “I will give you thanks
in your great assembly;” Sundays would begin with
“Glory to God in the highest;” Lenten Eucharist
would continue Vespers with the prayer preceding
Lakhu Mara. Some priestly prayers, as well, were
assigned to different solemnities. Nevertheless, by
the end of the first Christian millennium, a general
structure could be outlined for the instructional
section of the Eucharistic celebration as follows:
Fully Developed Structure (10th century)
Entrance Ceremony
(The clergy
standing in front of the altar)
- Priest:
“Glory to God in the Highest…”
- People:
Lord’s Prayer with “Qaddysh” refrain
- Priest:
First priestly prayer pro clero (“Envigor,
Our Lord…”)
- Deacons:
Psalmody
- Priest:
Second priestly prayer pro populo (“Before
the Throne…”)
- Choir:
Responsory of the Sanctuary (‘Onytha d-Qanke)
- Deacon:
“Peace be with us” (with the opening of the curtain)
- People:
Lakhu Mara (processional hymn with the cross,
the book of the Gospels, incense and candles)
- Priest:
Priestly prayer following Lakhu Mara (“Lord,
you are…”)
At
the Bema
- People:
Trisagion (Qaddysha Alaha)
- Priest:
Priestly prayer following Trisagion (“O Holy,
Glorious…”)
- Deacon:
“Be seated and silent”
- Readers:
2 O. T. Readings (Moses & Prophets)
- Choir:
Interval Psalmody
- Priest:
Priestly prayer before the Epistle. (“Enlighten, O
Lord…”)
- Deacon:
Epistle Reading
- Choir:
Halleluia with Psalmody for the Gospel Procession
- Priest:
Gospel Reading & Sermon
- Deacon:
Supplication
Theological and Liturgical Dynamics of the Section
The design of
the church building, reflecting, from one side, the
Scriptural temple and synagogues, and the
Mesopotamian architecture, from the other, were
carefully Christianized to fit the liturgical
performance of the Mystery of Salvation. The
celebration would begin in front of the altar,
inside of the veiled sanctuary, with the heavenly
and divine words of glorification, i.e. the angelic
glorification announcing the coming of the Son of
God to our earth, followed by the first words of
praise of the Lord’s Prayer. The celebrant then
presents to the Trinity, in the name of the people,
the opening prayer, followed immediately by the
‘Onytha d-Qanke formulating the seasonal theme
of celebration.
Now the gate of
heaven opens; the Deacon announces with his
salutation the beginning of the divine drama of the
descent of the Son of God to our earth. The
procession towards the bema will parade the
basic visible signs and means of Christian salvation
and faith: the cross and the book of the Gospel. The
archaic hymn Lakhu Mara summarizes it
eloquently. The tri-Qaddysha will enhance the
theme of glorification, preparing us to be submitted
and committed to the plan of God that will guide us
in our earthly journey. At the bema the
clergy will sit, among the people, to listen to the
Word of God in the obedient attitude of the
disciples. At the proper time, a procession will
take the Gospel to the designated stand to be
proclaimed to all nations; another procession will
take the gifts to the altar for the Presentation,
leading in Spirit the whole congregation to the
heavenly sanctuary.
Problematic of the Old Missal and Situation
A.
Accumulation of Elements
Since ‘Ysho’yahb
III (in the mid-Seventh century) until recent times,
no competent and comprehensive study was ever made
of the Chaldean Liturgy. At the present time,
however, as a result of the last century’s
scholarship, we are made aware that through
generations of liturgical life, the original meaning
and the correct use of some elements of the Mass may
have been lost or misunderstood, resulting today in
a ritual that contains some confused or unjustified
arrangements of liturgical structure, or
entanglement of ceremonial elements. The following
are a few instances with their solution:
1.
Reciting the Lord’s Prayer three times during the
same Mass is obviously redundant. The proper place
of the Our Father is before Communion, as it is in
all Rites of the Church. Nonetheless, the opening
glorification of the Lord’s Prayer is very fit for
the opening of the liturgy and was retained by the
Reformed Text.
2.
The
prayer “Envigor, our Lord and God …” is a prayer for
clergy and was thus allocated for that function.
3.
The
monastic Psalmody (Marmytha) is out of
context, and was therefore eliminated.
4.
The
“Gloria” of the Responsory of the Sanctuary (‘Onytha
d-Qanke) is often in reference to the cross,
even when the liturgical season has a different
theological focus. An adjustment was therefore
needed.
5.
The
prayer introducing Lakhu Mara was mutilated,
and was thus reconstructed to express the fullness
of its meaning.
6.
The
Petitions (Ba’utha w-Karozutha), in the
practice of last century, were either eliminated or
reserved to the Lenten season. They have been
therefore restored to their place, though in their
shorter form.
7.
Several prayers relating to the Readings and to the
Incensing are duplicates that needed better
distribution and arrangement.
B.
The Elimination of Bema and Veil
The Mongolian
attacks on Christianity during the 14th
and 15th Centuries caused a devastating
and lasting destruction of church structures all
over the territory of the Church of the East,
including church buildings and monastery chapels,
and affected also the liturgical ceremonials and
rituals. Having very little leftover from that
spiritual glory of the ancient Mesopotamian
cathedrals, we will miss forever their archaic
sanctuaries, altars and bemas. According to
the latest research, the most ancient remnant of the
original Mesopotamian altar with its canopy is in
the chapel of Rabban Hormizd Monastery, behind the
actual wooden altar. The most ancient bema to
be found today, in clear archaic shape, is within
the archeological remains of a church-monastery
complex south of Sulaimanya in Northern Iraq.
By the
elimination of the bema in all Chaldean
churches, the Entrance ceremony became quite static.
Also, by eliminating the veil in the past decades,
by explicit or implicit approval of the Chaldean
hierarchy:
a) The
sanctuary has been made an open field for the
public;
b) The awakening
and dramatic sign that indicated the beginning and
termination of the liturgical act, that is, the
opening and closing of the veil, disappeared;
c) The
atmosphere of holiness to be reserved for the
sanctuary is diminished;
d) The Chaldean
Church has been deprived of her particularity and
her genuine characteristics that are deeply
Scriptural.
Doubtless, a
serious Reform could not but restore the Bema and
the Veil to their original state and function.
C.
Prayer with the Back to the Cross
Furthermore, a
most drastic change has happened, again during these
last decades, in many Chaldean dioceses and
churches, wherein the Chaldean celebrant, imitating
the Latin Rite celebrant, reversed the direction of
prayer and, without concern, mingled both sections
of the Mass.
In fact, in the
historic design of the Chaldean Mass there is a
clear distinction between the first Instructional
Section, perceived as a journey of the Church – like
the disciples of Emmaus – and the Eucharistic
section, which begins with the Presentation. The
first part proceeds in a movement between the
qanke and the bema and has for its focal
point the stands of the readings. The second section
occurs in the sanctuary and has for its focal point
the altar, which is directed toward the cross. As
the Prefect of the Congregation for Doctrine of
Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger (now Holy Father Benedict
XVI) said in his book The Spirit of the Liturgy:
“For the Liturgy of the Word is about speaking and
responding, and so a face-to-face exchange between
proclaimer and hearer does make sense…On the other
hand, a common turning to the East during the
Eucharistic Prayer remains essential. This is not a
case of something accidental, but of what is
essential. Looking at the priest has no importance.
What matters is looking together at the Lord.” (p.
81)
As far as the
direction of prayer is concerned, sadly enough, this
is what happens in many Chaldean churches today: the
celebrant goes, immediately after the prayer
preceding Lakhu Mara, to stand behind the
altar, with his back to the cross; he leaves that
location for the reading of the Gospel and the
sermon; then he returns to the same position to
perform the Presentation; he then descends toward
the people for the Creed, and returns again with his
back to the cross to recite the Eucharistic Prayer,
the Our Father and what follows until Communion, and
doing the same for the final prayers after
Communion. This unjustified recent use, or abuse to
be more accurate, contradicts the whole tradition of
the Chaldean Church in celebrating the Eucharist, as
well as the historic comprehensive design of the
Chaldean Mass and the harmony of its texts, and
disregards gravely the Instruction of the
Holy See for the Application of the Liturgical
Prescriptions of the Code of Canons for the Eastern
Churches: “This practice (i.e. praying towards
the east), threatened in many Eastern Catholic
Churches because of a new and recent Latin
influence, has thus a profound value and must be
safeguarded, it being strongly coherent with the
Eastern spirituality.”
(Vatican: 1996, No. 107).
The Liturgy therefore becomes disoriented in the
manner described by the same above-quoted eminent
author in the same book:
Now the priest - the "presider", as they now prefer
to call him - becomes the real point of reference
for the whole liturgy. Everything depends on him. We
have to see him, to respond to him, to be involved
in what he is doing. His creativity sustains the
whole thing...Less and less is God in the picture.
More and more important is what is done by the human
beings who meet here and do not like to subject
themselves to a "pre-determined pattern". The
turning of the priest toward the people has turned
the community into a self-enclosed circle. In its
outward form, it no longer opens out on what lies
ahead and above, but is closed in on itself. The
common turning toward the east was not a
"celebration toward the wall;” it did not mean that
the priest "had his back to the people:” the priest
himself was not regarded as so important. For, just
as the congregation in the synagogue looked together
toward Jerusalem, so in the Christian liturgy, the
congregation looked together "toward the Lord.” (p.
80)
Thus, the new
Reform preserves duly and fully the Celebrant’s
attitude of standing in front of the Cross at the
moment of the Divine Offering, as alike at Golgotha
did Mary the Blessed Mother, John the Beloved
Disciple, and the holy women
(John 19: 25).
II. Review of the Eucharistic Section
General Remarks:
The Eucharist of the Church is an implementation of
the command of the Lord in the Last Supper: “Do this
in memory of me.” The basic outline of the founding
Eucharist of the Lord’s Supper, as narrated in
Paul’s Letter
(1 Cor, 11:23-26 ),
in the Synoptic gospels
(Luke 22:14-20, Mt 26:26-29, Mk 14:22-25),
as well as in Luke’s description of the acts of
Jesus at the banquet in Emmaus, is summarized by
Luke as follows: “When he was at table with them, he
took the bread and blessed, and broke it, and gave
it to them.”(Lk
24:30).
Thus the four sections of the Eucharistic Rite of
the Church follow the four actions of the Lord as
described in this narrative: He took,
blessed, broke and gave.
The Church of
the East has developed its Eucharistic ritual in
fulfillment of that command of the Lord and
according to that very pattern as delivered by the
Apostolic tradition of Addai and Mari. Like the
other Apostolic Churches, the Mesopotamian Church
formulated a liturgical context fitting the
celebration, both in its totality as well as in its
individual sections, by way of introduction or
conclusion, accompaniments or insertions,
considering these compositions and formulas as an
organic development of the basic Apostolic
structure.
The following
are tables that illustrate the principal phases of
development of the Eucharistic celebration in the
Church of the East:
1st
& 2nd Century
(in-house
Eucharist or in a primitive church building)
Presentation:
- Deacon:
“Peace be with us”
- Immediately
the Gifts are brought to the Celebrant
Anaphora:
- Deacon:
Invitational: “Lift up your minds”
- People:
“Towards you God of Abraham…etc.”
- Deacon:
“The Oblation is being offered to God the Lord of
all”
- Priest:
the Quddasha of Addai & Mari in its primitive
form
Breaking and Signing:
- The Qsaya
& Rushma, in a basic and simple form
Communion:
- The Lord’s
Prayer with improvised priestly introduction and
conclusion
- Communion with
improvised prayers
As
we discover from the documentation of early
Christianity, the Eucharist of Apostolic times was
celebrated in houses of the faithful with simplicity
and minimal ceremony. Established hymns or fixed
prayers were not yet composed or commonly approved.
Evidently, the Lord’s Prayer made an exception as
well as the Psalter for the Judeo-Christians. For
the Mesopotamian Church, the Eucharistic tradition
of Addai & Mari was the point of reference in
liturgical practice. Indeed, we know that the
people’s response: ‘Towards you…’ belongs to the
earliest Christian era because it reflects the
Judeo-Christian character of the congregation, as
were the first communities of converts in
Mesopotamia.
From
the mid-second century, at the time of Tatian and
Bardaisan, we begin to have an organized
Christianity in Mesopotamia and farther East. Pagan
converts were joining the new Faith, and churches
were built to formalize the Christian worship and
allow the shaping of its ceremonial. Liturgical
compositions started to be redacted by the spiritual
Fathers to fit the needs of liturgy. In regard to
the formulation of Eucharistic Prayer, the Epiclesis
made its appearance inside the Anaphora, west and
east of Euphrates, as did the Isaian Qaddysh,
which was added to the first Gehanta of Addai
& Mari.
3rd
& 4th Century
(in-church
celebration)
- Deacons:
Dismissal of the Catechumens – “Whoever has not
received baptism…”
Presentation:
- Deacon:
“Peace be with us”
- The Gifts are
brought to the altar
- Choir:
Responsory of the Mysteries (‘Onytha d-Raze)
Anaphora:
- Deacon:
Invitational “Peace be with us. Lift up your minds”
- People:
“Towards you God of Abraham…etc.”
- Deacon:
“The Oblation is being offered to God the Lord of
all”
- Priest:
The Quddasha of Addai & Mari with the
insertion of Qaddysh & the Epiclesis
Breaking and Signing:
- Qsaya &
Rushma, with their ceremonial approach, i.e.,
encirclement of the altar
Communion:
- People:
“O Lord, forgive the sins…” (Marya Hassa
Hta-he…)
- Priest:
priestly prayer for forgiveness and introduction to
the Lord’s Prayer
- People:
The Lord’s Prayer
- Priest:
priestly prayer concluding the Lord’s Prayer
- Communion with
its prayers
- Final Blessing
With
Mar Issac
(Synod 410 A. D. and after)
Since A.D. 313, when Constantine won his battle
under the banners of the cross and Christianity
enjoyed its freedom in the West, Christians of the
East became the scapegoats of the military
misfortunes of the Persian Empire, and had to
curtail all contacts with their brothers in the
West. A century later, the atmosphere was much more
relaxed and Mar Marutha, as delegate of the “Western
Fathers,” came to the East to restore relations and
update ecclesial communion.
By the year 410,
when the Synod of Mar Isaac decreed its canons, the
anaphora of the Apostolic Tradition had long
been formulated, the Apostolic Constitutions
with their ideal-anaphora were edited, and the
Liturgy of St. James was composed and became the
model Eucharistic Prayer for Jerusalem and Antioch.
Consequently, the updating effected also the
Eucharistic liturgy in Mesopotamia, as stated in the
text quoted above: “Also, the western liturgy
which Isaac and Marutha the bishops taught us, and
all of us saw them celebrating here in the church of
Seleucia, henceforth we shall celebrate ourselves in
like manner.”
Prelude:
- Deacons:
Dismissal of the Catechumens – “Whoever has not
received baptism…”
- Priestly
benediction for Catechumens
Presentation:
- Procession
with the Gifts to the altar for the Presentation,
during the Responsory of the Mysteries (‘Onytha
d-Raze)
- The
congregation exchanges the Sign of Peace
Anaphora:
- Deacon:
“In calm and awe remain standing and praying”
- Deacon:
Invitational “Peace be with us. Lift up your minds”
- People:
“Towards you God of Abraham…etc.”
- Deacon:
“The Oblation is being offered to God the Lord of
all”
- Priest:
the Quddasha of Addai & Mari, basically in
its text as presented in the Hudhra of Mar ’Ysha’ya
Breaking and Signing:
- The Qsaya
& Rushma, with their ceremonial approach
Communion:
- People:
“O Lord, forgive the sins…” (Marya Hassa
Hta-he…)
- Priest:
priestly prayer for forgiveness and introduction to
the Lord’s Prayer
- People:
The Lord’s Prayer
- Priest:
priestly prayer concluding the Lord’s Prayer
- Communion
- Choir:
The hymn Maran ‘Ysho’ of St. Ephrem
- Priest:
Prayers of Thanksgiving and Final Blessing
Development of the Eucharistic Section between the 5th
and 7th Centuries
With
Mar Abba the Great:
The
political honeymoon between East and West was of
short duration, and soon after, that is, during the
time of Mar Dadysho’ and his Synod of A.D. 428,
relations were severed with the West. The situation
worsened with the Christological controversy, and
official contacts were not resumed until the
patriarchate of ‘Ysho’yahb I (A.D. 586). In the
intervening years, the Church of the East had sent
privately, around A.D. 530, two highly educated
scholars, Mar Abba and Mar Toma, to become
acquainted with the liturgical, theological, and
ecclesiastic life of the Western Church. The latter
died in Constantinople, and the former became
Patriarch. All the manuscript rituals attribute the
2nd and 3rd Anaphoras to Mar
Abba. To him is attributed also the arrangement of
the Psalter, the prayers between the Psalms and the
Giyyore. He is also recognized as the author
of the Chaldean text of the Trisagion Qaddysha
Alaha and its insertion in the liturgy. The
addition of the Creed to the structure of the
Eucharist belongs to the same period, and probably
as well other elements of Greek characteristics like
the Book of the Living and the Dead, and the
acclamation “The Holy is fit to the holy ones.”
With
Mar ‘Ysho’yahb I: The Breaking and Signing
Mar
‘Ysho’yahb I,
whose letter to Bishop Jacob of Darai is attached to
the Acts of his Synod (A.D. 587), gives us precious
and interesting information about the Breaking &
Signing rubric. He states:
“(The
Celebrant) at the end of each of the consecutive
sections (Yubal Pasoqe), duly glorifying with
his tongue, draws with his hand over the Divine
Mysteries--according to the norm—the sign of the
holy cross.
When he finishes the three sections (Tlatheyhon
Pasoqe), he draws near to sign—not as you wrote,
but as we write—lifting
up upon his hand the upper Host, kissing (it) and
placing (it) upon his eyes. And fixing his mind and
his eyes upon heaven, he says: ‘Glory to you, O
living and life-giving bread, who descended from
heaven that those who eat shall not die.’
And he begins to break, and while breaking says: ‘I
thank you, O Lord God, Lord of heaven and Earth,
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,
that though I am wretched and unworthy, you have
accounted me worthy in your grace to offer the
fearful, holy, and divine Mysteries of the Body and
Blood of your Christ, that I may
minister to your people and the flock of your
pasture absolution, the forgiveness of their sins,
the salvation of their souls, the reconciliation of
all people, and the tranquility and peace of all
creatures, in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit for ever. Amen.’
He signs the Body with a broken piece, saying: ‘The
holy Body is signed with the absolving Blood in the
name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, for ever
Amen.’
And when he places the broken pieces in the type of
the cross, he says: ‘These divine Mysteries are
signed, sanctified, united, and fulfilled, in the
name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, for ever
Amen.’ Here he makes the sign of the cross, not over
the Mysteries, but upon his forehead.
These things suffice concerning the signing of the
Mysteries, for you also only asked us, in the matter
of the canon of the Mysteries, concerning the
signing of the Mysteries.”
Let
us make few observations about this text:
a) Jacob the
Bishop of Darai described to the Patriarch how he
usually performs the ceremony of Breaking and
Signing. The Patriarch answers back: No, he should
not do it that way, but the way the Patriarch will
tell him. Now, if a bishop does not know how to
Break and Sign the Eucharist, it is presumably
because of a new norm that has been introduced.
b) Oddly
enough, the Patriarch, with the new norm, eliminates
all the liturgical texts containing the reference to
the movement of “approaching,” which is quoted four
times in all known Missals: three times as the
celebrant implores: “Let your graceful mercy make
us approach toward these …. Mysteries, though
unworthy we are,” and a fourth time when the
celebrant, at the point of Breaking, says: “We
approach, Lord, … and we sign…in the
name…” Furthermore, the Patriarch assigns to the
Breaking act a kushapa that obviously relates
to the devotional attitude of the celebrant at this
moment, but not to a theological and liturgical
act. Indeed, the Kushapa speaks in a generic manner
of the “Offering” not of the “Breaking” of the
Mysteries.
c) At any rate,
not even one manuscript, nor any printed Missal,
ascribes the “Breaking” ceremony as described by
‘Ysho’yahb.
Therefore, we must pose the question: What motivated
‘Ysho’yahb I to ascribe a new liturgical arrangement
for the Breaking? And why did no one ascribe to it?
As
to the first question: taking into consideration the
fact that the Patriarch eliminated all reference to
the act of “approaching” allows us to assume that he
was concerned with altars where “approaching” was a
problem or no longer applicable. That would be the
case certainly if “approaching” would mean turning
around the altar to face west, and if, in many
churches, the altar were attached or were too close
to the eastern wall of the sanctuary.
Other
indications point to the same original practice of
“Breaking and Signing” facing west, i.e. facing the
clergy and people, otherwise the traditional text,
found basically as it is in all manuscripts, would
not make sense. The indications are:
a) The threefold
repetition of Bless me sir at every approach,
being directed to the clergy that are around the
altar, supposes a continuous movement in their
vicinity.
b) If the
celebrant is in front of the altar and the Breaking
were to take place at the same spot, there would be
no meaning to making a ceremonial approach.
c) The breaking
of the consecrated Host and the fashion of its
placing in the paten in the old Missal is quite
awkward and hardly genuine, because the celebrant
must twist his left hand to place it facing the
chalice.
d) The literary
style of the formulas of Breaking and Signing is not
invocative in the fashion of prayer, but carefully
composed to be descriptive, being meant to be
performed before the congregation. That is, it is
not a prayer addressed to God, and so it is
appropriately said facing the people.
e) The Psalmic
verse “I have washed my hands in purity, and
encircled your altar, O Lord,” which the old Missal
prescribes for this moment of the liturgy, is an
indication of the ceremonial movement around the
altar at this moment of the Celebration.
f) A ceremony
with a similar structural pattern, namely the Rite
of the Consecration of an Altar, gives us a rubric
that prescribes the celebrant facing West when he
presents the consecrated altar to the people, using
the same formula used at the end of the Breaking and
Signing Rite (“This altar has been set apart,
sanctified…”).
g) Indeed, the
Body “is to be broken for you and for
many for the forgiveness of sins.”
As
to the second question, I respond that the directive
of ‘Ysho’yahb I to use a private devotional priestly
Kushapa as a formula for the Breaking and
Signing implies the elimination of a traditional
formula, liturgically genuine and quite fitting for
Breaking and Signing; the circumstantial difficulty
of “approaching” was a secondary matter, to be
considered as a contingent element that could be
dealt with according to the situation of the altar,
without altering the formula of breaking.
Consequently, the directive of ‘Ysho’yahb I, being
an ill-conceived attempt of a solution, was not
implemented factually, and is, indeed, never found
in manuscripts.
The
Insertion of “Let us all approach” (Kollan
b-dihiltha)
With
the rejection of the Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451)
by many Syrians, and the campaign that Bishop Jacob
Boradai conducted to establish a Monophysite Church
west and east of Euphrates, the Mesopotamian
Hierarchy felt it appropriate to formulate an
expression of orthodox faith before Communion, in
addition to the penitential act. The Karozutha “Let
us all approach” was therefore added as a doctrinal
and penitential preparation to Communion. Two synods
confirmed its permanent status in the Mass: the
Synod of Mar Sabrysho’ (A.D. 596) and of Mar Gregory
(A.D. 605) and it was somehow blended with the
following penitential formula that predated it,
i.e., “O Lord, forgive the sins…” (Marya hassa
htahe...).
From Mar Abba to ‘Yshoyahb III
Prelude:
- Deacons:
Dismissal of the Catechumens – “Whoever has not
received baptism…”
- Priestly
benediction for Catechumens
Presentation:
- Washing of the
hands and access to the altar
- Procession
with the Gifts to the altar for the Presentation,
during the Responsory of the Mysteries (‘Onytha
d-Raze)
- The Creed was
added, cutting the Presentation prayers in two
- Clergy and
Congregation exchange the Sign of Peace taken from
the altar
- The reading of
the Book of Living and Dead
Anaphora:
(Mar Abba
introduces the 2nd and the 3rd
Anaphors)
- Deacon:
Invitational “In calm and awe remain… Peace be with
us.”
- Priest:
“May the grace…etc.”
- People:
“Amen”
- Priest:
“Lift up your minds”
- People:
“Towards you God of Abraham…etc.”
- Priest:
“The Oblation is being offered to God the Lord of
all”
- People:
“It is fit and right.”
- Priest:
Recites the Quddasha of Addai & Mari as
presented in Mar Ysha’ya Hudhra
- Priest:
Kushapa for universal peace “O Christ, the Peace
of the exalted…”
Breaking and Signing:
- Priest:
Devotional Kushapa “I give thanks to you…”
- The ceremonial
approach to the altar
- Qsaya &
Rushma
Communion:
- Priest:
“May the grace…etc.”
- Deacon:
“Let us all approach…etc.”
- Priest:
priestly prayer of absolution and introduction to
the Lord’s Prayer
- People:
The Lord’s Prayer
- Priest:
Conclusion to the Lord’s Prayer
- Priest:
“The Holy is fit for the holy ones…”
- People:
“One Holy Father …”
- Communion
- Choir:
Maran ‘Ysho’
- Deacon:
the Karozutha “As we were made worthy…”
- Priest:
2 Prayers of Thanksgiving
- Priest:
Final Blessing
Later Additions and Modifications:
Though
‘Ysho’yahb III is recognized as the Patriarch who
organized the Chaldean liturgy in a comprehensive
and stable way, by the passing of time several
additions and modifications were introduced in the
Eucharistic ritual that was developed through the
first millennium. I will mention first the additions
that remain until the present time:
First:
The four fixed verses that were added to the
variable ‘Onytha d-Raze in our extant missals
are not mentioned at all by the commentators, but
they appear first in the ms. of Diarbekir (A.D.
1240), then in other manuscripts even with
additional verses. They were probably composed as a
summary of the Book of Living and Dead and as a
replacement to it. They still maintain the same
function in our Missal with a stronger theological
connection to the Presentation.
Second:
Regarding the Anaphora, the addition of the 2nd
and 3rd Quddasha to the primordial
Quddasha of the Apostles is to be noted.
Using the three anaphoras, definitely since the time
of ‘Ysho’yahb III, has affected a gradual tendency
to align them in matter of structure and content.
The kushape found in Addai & Mari after the
10th century are clearly the result of
this alignment. The addition of “it is fit and
right” before the first Gehanta of the anaphoral
text is also to be attributed to the same tendency.
Third:
The insertion of the penitential Psalm 50 before the
Breaking and Signing is denied by all commentators
until the 14th Century. Indeed, they all
state that no hymn of the Old Testament is to be
used after the chanting of the Mazmora before
the Gospel. This late and redundant addition has
been eliminated in the current Reform.
As far as
modifications are concerned, I mention here only
two of the kind, because they are still relevant to
our actual liturgical condition.
First:
The borrowing of some parts from of the ancient text
of the Pre-Sanctified D-Razana’yth Liturgy –
I would rather call it the Rite of Communion – in
order to arrange a ritual for the daily Eucharistic
celebration. This arrangement became needed as a
devotional and pastoral alignment with Catholic
piety. The initial prayer and the introductory Psalm
of the ferial ritual, in fact, were borrowed from
the Liturgy of D-Razana’yth, as well as the ‘Onytha
D-Raze “Paghreh daMshyha,” that
was allocated also for the Presentation
(unfittingly, because this ‘onytha speaks of
the gifts as already consecrated). The current
Reform maintained the prayer and the Psalm for the
ferial Mass but replaced the ‘Onytha.
Second:
Catholic theology requested, furthermore, the
insertion of the Last Supper Narrative into the
Anaphora. In addition, three imitations of the Latin
Ritual were also inserted in the Chaldean Ritual:
a) Mysterium
Fidei interrupting the text of the Narrative;
b) Agnus Dei
before the Communion;
c) The
repetition by the celebrant of a Communion formula
in imitation of Domine non sum dignus.
The Reform has
maintained only the Narrative within the text of the
Anaphora, though not in the first section but in the
third of the Quddasha.
Dynamics of the Eucharistic Section
The Chaldean
liturgy has formulated an impressive theological and
ceremonial design for its Eucharist, faithful to the
Scriptures, cohesive and balanced in its structure,
dynamic and rich in its expression. Since the 4th
century, 1500 years before Gregory Dick exposed it
to western liturgists in his classic The Shape of
the Liturgy, Mesopotamians made clear the
division of the Eucharistic Section into four
segments: He took, He blessed, He broke, and He
gave.
Moreover, Mesopotamian liturgy expressed clearly the
difference between the first instructional section
of the Mass and the second Eucharistic one in their
comprehensiveness. A procession would carry the
Gifts and the clergy from the bema to the
altar, with the celebrant making his solemn access
inside the Holy of Holies. Some details of each
segment are warranted:
Jesus Took:
The Presentation
The celebrant
stands at his chair during the Ba’utha,
washes his hands immediately after, then proceeds to
make his solemn access to the altar while
pronouncing the accompanying prayer.
The gifts are
brought up in procession from the bema to the
upper steps of the altar, the bread on the right (as
one faces the altar) and the cup on the left. The
priest takes them from the deacon and turns facing
the cross behind the altar, and crosses his arms,
keeping the positioning of the elements the same,
that is, the cup being always underneath the
representation of Christ’s right side, out of which
blood and water spilled. Christ is the first-born of
many brothers and sisters; his offering is the
offering of the Head of the Church that she renews
in fulfillment of his command. Once the gifts are
placed on the altar, therefore, we commemorate, as
an offering, our brethren in the Church as well:
first of all Mary, the Mother of the Lord, then the
Apostles, then the Patron Saint, and finally all the
faithful deceased.
-
Requirements to continue
the Offering:
After the Presentation, the priest leaves the
Sanctuary and, facing the people, begins the
Nicean-Constantinopolitan Creed. This Profession of
Faith is followed immediately by the Kiss of Peace.
This is in precise accord with the Lord’s command in
Matthew 5:23-24: “Therefore, if you bring your gift
to the altar, and there recall that your brother has
anything against you, leave your gift there at the
altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother,
and then come and offer your gift.” We become
reconciled with all of our brethren, first in our
mind by expressing the same Creed, then in our
hearts by the kiss of peace, that is, in faith and
in love, as it is written in 2 Corinthians 13:11:
“Be of the same mind; live in peace.”
Jesus Blessed
: The Quddasha
After the gifts
have been placed on the altar and the reconciliation
made among the community, in faith and love, the
gifts of bread and wine are sanctified. The Anaphora
Proper begins with the 1st Gehanta that
includes the usual Sanctus-Benedictus.
The basic
structure of the Anaphora in Mesopotamian tradition
is as follows: 1) Praise and Glorification of God
for the creation of the world and of men; 2)
Thanksgiving to God for the redemption through
Christ; 3) Memorial of Christ by the Church in
response to the Memorial by Christ of his Church.
Since the early
centuries up to modern times, the Apostolic Quddasha
of Addai & Mari has been adapted to the theological
and liturgical developments following the practice
of the Universal Church. Consequently, the Narrative
of the Last Supper and the Epiclesis were
incorporated into the structure of the Anaphora, and
the Kushape were attached to it as well, one
Kushapa before each Gehanta.
Jesus Broke
: The Breaking and Signing Rite
While the
Presentation and the Anaphora are performed with the
face of the celebrant to the cross, the text of the
ancient ritual allows us to perform the Breaking and
Signing Rite facing the congregation, for while the
Rite of Consecration is the act whereby the
Sacrifice of Christ is offered to the Father through
Christ, who is liturgically represented by the
cross, the Breaking Rite does not take the form of a
prayer, but is a sacramental representation of the
breaking of Christ’s Body that was done for the sake
of the Church – “this is my Body, which will be
broken for you.” In fact, the words that
accompany the breaking and signing are not in the
style of an invocation but in the form of an
explanation of the act. Therefore, in full harmony
with the ancient text, the celebrant should do a
ceremonial approach to the eastern side of the altar
and perform the Breaking and Signing in front of the
congregation, representing symbolically the death
and the resurrection of the Lord.
Jesus Gave:
The Communion Rite
After the
Sanctification and the Breaking and Signing, the
Mysteries are ready for Communion, but a
purification of the heart and mind is required.
Consequently, the deacon will address an admonition
expressing first of all the basic creed of our
Faith, then inviting the congregation to a genuine
repentance and reconciliation. A priestly prayer for
forgiveness follows immediately, in order to prepare
all the participants to receive “the Holy.” The
community then together prays the Lord’s Prayer
asking particularly for the “Daily Bread,” and
receives Holy Communion.
Problematic of the Old Missal and its Implementation
1)
The
Preparation of the Gifts--imitating the Latin
Rite--is arranged wrongly, in direct disagreement
with the original Chaldean Rite. Oddly enough, the
celebrant first goes to the side to pour and mix the
wine and water in the chalice, then washes his hands
afterwards, and returns to the center of the altar
to perform the Presentation. Evidently, the holding
of the chalice and the washing of hands are in
reversed order. All ancient rituals have the
ceremony of Preparation of the Gifts completed
immediately before the Mass, in which the gifts of
bread and wine are prepared in a short, separate
rite, called “Preparation,” in accord with the
command of Christ in Lk 22:8: “Jesus sent Peter and
John, saying, ‘Go and prepare the Passover for us,
that we may eat it.’ ” Indeed, at the Passover
Supper, the Scriptural narrative says that the Lord
“took the cup,” not that he “prepared the mixture of
wine in the cup.”
2)
‘Ysho’yahb I, in his letter to the Bishop of Daran,
ordered that the designation of the celebrant of a
specific Eucharist be done by the Archdeacon at the
bema, when the clergy begin their procession
toward the qanke to recite the creed. That
arrangement had as a consequence the performance of
the Presentation by a priest different than the
celebrant. In our times, having only one celebrant
for the whole service, the solemn access to the
altar is confused, and had to be rearranged with the
respective texts.
3)
The
Creed was inserted into the Eucharistic Rite before
the middle of 6th Century, cutting the
formulary of the Presentation into two segments. In
fact, the memory of Saints is made before the Creed,
and again after the Creed with a concluding Ending.
Obviously, this was not a good arrangement, and had
to be addressed.
4)
The
Salutation of Peace is given with a short Invitation
of the Deacon without sufficient explanation of
meaning. It was preferable to add some exhortation
to clarify and enhance the meaning of the gesture,
i.e. fraternal reconciliation.
5)
The
text of Addai & Mari, through many additions and
adjustments, was made confused and distant from its
Mesopotamian pattern. The main needs of the formerly
used text are two: a) to clarify the address of the
3rd Gehanta to the specific divine
Person to whom it is directed; b) to place the
Narrative at the place that fits it into the
Mesopotamian pattern of the Anaphora.
6)
The
devotional pieces expressing penance before the
fraction are noticeably redundant: a kushapa,
Psalm 50, a prayer of purification with incense. The
Psalm is the latest comer to this section. According
to the Chaldean commentators, the Eucharist of the
New Testament should not include hymns of the Old
Testament.
7)
The
approach of the celebrant to the consecrated
elements, in order to Break and Sign, expressed
emphatically and ceremonially three times, is done,
in former implementation, without approaching. This
should be rectified whenever the design of the
sanctuary allows it.
8)
The
inclusion of many Kushape to be recited by
the celebrant as private prayers while the deacon or
the congregation are reciting their own segment is
not a good liturgical practice. These redundant
prayers had to be relocated to preserve their
belonging to the Eucharist.
9)
A few
imitations of the Tridentine Latin Missal still
persist in the Chaldean Missal, outliving
paradoxically their original source. The main
section concerned here is the rite and prayers of
Communion. The present Reform restores the Chaldean
text to its original purity.
General Observations Regarding the Reform
Since the
liturgical Reform of ‘Ysho’yahb III, 1350 years ago,
a fresh comprehensive Reform of the Chaldean Liturgy
is an imperative; though this endeavor would prove
to be an exhausting marathon, it is nevertheless
absolutely needed. As far as the present phase of
the Reform is concerned, the endeavor, though
defined to the Commune of the Takhsa
d-Raze, effected the formulation of a fresh
outline that encompasses both structural features
and textual and ceremonial elements. I may group the
elements of novelty into two kinds of categories:
Reform and Renewal; the first refers to the elements
that were restored to their genuine origin and
meaning, the latter to an organic growth of the
liturgical expressions accomplished in vital
harmonic connection with the traditional patrimony
of the Church.
What was Restored to its Origin in the Present
Reform
Over the centuries, the liturgical
patrimony of the Church had accumulated elements
that were either redundant or interruptive of the
harmonic structure of the Mass, which often occurred
through misunderstandings of original texts. The
present Reform attempted to redistribute these
prayers and adjust their position, without losing
any of the richness of the tradition it inherited.
Regarding the Structure:
* The Reform
restores the ceremony of the Preparation of the
Gifts to its original place, i.e. at the
threshold of the Mass. The gifts should be placed on
a particular table in the bema, which is
either a platform in the middle of the Nave, or a
side table in the qanke area, and be brought
to the altar with the chanting of the ‘Onytha
d-Raze for the Presentation.
*
The Reform restores also the ceremonial distinction
and movement between the two major sections of the
Mass: the Rite of the Word of God, and the Rite of
the Eucharist. Therefore, it allows the
performance, in the solemn celebration, of a
ceremonial expression of the dynamic relationship
between the two services, by the means of a
processions between the qanke and the bema,
for the first part, and vice versa for the second
part, as well as to solemnize the veneration of the
Gospel by a procession between the bema and
the Pulpit.
* The solemn
entrance into the sanctuary, which had previously
occurred twice, once at the Presentation and again
after the Creed, is unified, allowing also the
Presentation prayers to be said together, without
the previous interruption of the Creed.
Regarding Specifics:
* The Reform
allows for a more practical use of processions to
and from the functional bema which is nearer
the sanctuary.
* The prayer
before Lakhu Mara, which had been mutilated,
is given fuller expression and meaning.
* The ‘onytha
“Paghreh da-Mshyha,” which had been in
a totally inappropriate place, since it assumes the
elements to be already sanctified, is moved, during
Ordinary Days, to before Communion.
* Certain
Latinizations, such as the Mysterium Fidei
and the practice of hand-washing after having
touched the sacred vessels, were removed.
* The Reform
makes a more balanced distribution and use of
“doubles” or redundant pieces (i.e. more than one
text for the same function) accumulated through
centuries of liturgical life, as in the case of
prayers before the Readings and the Gospel, and the
acclamation Brykh Paghrakh.
* The use of
Psalm 50 as a prayer for purification during the
Eucharistic section of the Liturgy is removed, since
the patrimony of the Church of the East considers it
inappropriate to use texts of the Old Testament
during the Sacrifice of the New.
Organic Growth and Renewal
The Liturgical
Reform is not restricted to simply fixing
inconsistencies and disconnections in the structure
and text of the previous Missal, but is also an
organic growth of the same harmonic patrimony,
pushing the ceremonial to a further enrichment.
Regarding the Structure:
* The Renewal
provides the clergy and the faithful of distinct
rituals for different solemnities: 1) a simple
weekday ceremonial, 2) one for Commemorations and
Funerals, 3) a more solemn ritual for Sundays and
Feasts, and 4) a solemn Ritual for the Feasts of the
Lord; making it quite practical to follow for both
the celebrant and the participants.
- The difference
among them is clear, particularly in regard to the
opening of the Liturgy, the solemnity of the
entrance procession, the number of the readings, the
inclusion or not of the Petitions, the solemnity of
the celebrant’s approach to the altar, the
procession for the presentation of Gifts, the
Introduction to the Anaphora, the invitation to the
Lord’s Prayer, the prayers after Communion, and the
Final Blessing.
- Moreover,
forming four categories of formularies will allow,
as well, the adoption of an improved system for the
collection of variable pieces to be used in the
Eucharistic celebration. It will become feasible,
indeed, to assign variant groups of prayers or
‘Onyatha for different commemorations or
liturgical seasons, and organize them
accordingly.
* It makes
clearer the Biblical divisions within the Mass, from
the division between Instruction and Eucharist, to
that between each of the four sections of the
Eucharist itself.
* Following this
division, it assigns to the congregation an
‘Onytha for each of the main sections of the
Eucharist (Presentation, Blessing, Breaking, and
Communion), enhancing the participation of people in
the celebration, and assigns as well a more
appropriate text or hymn to replace a current one,
whenever this substitution is required and
justified, as in the selection of the ‘Onytha
D-Raze for Ordinary Days, since the previous one
was taken from the Liturgy of the Presanctified,
treating the gifts as already consecrated.
* The
participation of the people in the Mysteries is
furthermore enhanced through the elevation of the
celebrant’s voice during several of the prayers
restricted in the old Missal to himself.
Regarding Specifics:
