January 8, 2010

PDF of Pastoral Letter

Shalma 'Amkhon

New Temple, New Offering, New Priesthood
The coming of the Lord into our world and his self-insertion into the history of our humanity is not just a “happening” among other relevant or less relevant events, but it is the radical and uniquely pivotal and central act of divine intervention. A defining moment of that intervention, and a major lordly sign of the establishment of a new covenant between God and his people, was the cleansing of the temple of Jerusalem by Lord Jesus, in the wake of the Jewish Passover celebrations:

“… The Jews … said to him: ‘What sign can you show us for doing this?’ Jesus answered and said to them: ‘Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up’…But he was speaking about the temple of his body.  Therefore, when he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they came to believe the scripture and the word Jesus had spoken.” (John 2: 18-22.)

The offering of gifts and sacrifices to Divinity was a worshiping act that was practiced by many cultures of antiquity, most of all by the people of Israel; the main purpose was tripartite: a) Atonement for men’s sins; b) Praise and thanksgiving to God; c) Memorial celebration of redemptive events. Furthermore, the proper offering of sacrifices entailed two requirements: the provision of a sacred altar in a temple, and a consecrated class of priests. Thus, for Jesus to envisage the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem, with its sacrifices and priesthood, is to entail likewise the provision for the new People of God not only a new temple, but also of a new sacrifice, and a new priesthood.

I- The New Temple
Two locations identify and embody the features of the New Temple: Golgotha, where a cross carried a slain tortured body with the pierced side of Jesus, the Son of God, and a tomb that became empty when the dead body of Jesus the Lord was raised to divine glory. The altar in the Temple is the table where the sacrifice is slain and offered to God. As it happened in historical factuality, Jesus, the Lamb of God, was slain on the cross. Thus, that cross became the altar upon which the new sacrifice was offered. The fate of that sacrifice is much brighter. Indeed, that tortured body was carried to a tomb, from whence he was raised to eternal glory on the third day. Moreover, putting an end to the Old Testament, in a ritual and official manner, ushering in the New Testament, on the cross “Jesus gave a loud cry and breathed his last." Then, “The veil of the sanctuary was torn in two from top to bottom.” (Mk 15:38). Thus, the Cross, hanging at the center of the sanctuary of a Christian church is certainly not mere artistic decoration, but rather an icon that represents the instrument of our salvation. The crucifix attached to the Cross is certainly not a mere informative reminder of a tragic historic event, but rather a holy representation of how our Lord endured the suffering and death for our redemption. Mary, the Virgin Mother, was there, with John the beloved disciple, looking at the crucified Son, inviting all of us, including the celebrant, to stand with her and offer to the Heavenly Father the satisfactory sacrifice, vicarious for the entire human race.

Therefore, a cross with the icon of the Crucified and glorified Lord in the vicinity of the altar, signifying the empty tomb, are the visible features of every church building, worthy to be a new temple and to properly host the Offering of the sacrificed Lamb of God. Indeed, in the Mesopotamian tradition, this Holy Ground is set aside from the rest of the church, with a Veil that opens from its midst, signifying the open access of the redeemed human race to the divine throne, fountain of all graces.

At the Last Supper, before he died, the Lord established the Divine Eucharist, the Sacrament of his Body and Blood; this he did on the prospect of his death on the cross and his resurrection from the tomb. Therefore, whereas the Last Supper gives us the structure and fundamentals of the Eucharistic liturgical celebration, the cross in Golgotha and the empty tomb are the historic references for the features and modalities of the New Temple. Moreover, the Body that was slain on the cross and rose to glory is the New Temple itself.      

II- The New Offering
The Lord Jesus, the night before he died, taught his disciples how to celebrate his redemptive memorial in the pattern of bread and wine, ordering them to reiterate his own sacrificial Eucharist until his second coming. Indeed, the crucified Lord himself is the vicarious sacrifice for our disobedience, and his blood is offered for the forgiveness of our sins: “For if the blood of goats and bulls…can sanctify those who are defiled…, how much more will the blood of Christ… cleanse our consciences.” (Heb. 9: 13-14).  Whereas the historic sacrifice of the divine Lamb occurred on the evening of Passion Friday, completed with the Resurrection early Sunday, the sacramental offering of the same divine Lamb is celebrated in our Eucharist as the Lord himself taught us and ordered us to do.

In the celebration of the Eucharist in both the Upper Room in Jerusalem and on the table in Emmaus, the basic features of the celebration are as performed by the Lord:  He took the bread then the chalice, he offered prayers of blessing and of thanksgiving, he broke the bread, then he gave for communion what he asserts to be his Body and his Blood, ordering us to reiterate what he did in memory of himself and in unity with him and his Church. This is the founding act of the Christian Eucharist, the Paschal Lamb of the New Testament, the Manna of immortality, the new central act of worship for the faithful of the New Testament.      

III- The New Priesthood
Jesus ordered his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor. 11:24 & 25), providing his faithful, everywhere under the sun, with those who are qualified to become his ministers, granted to be participants in his Priesthood, and mandated to celebrate his eternal sacrifice for his people. For all that happened in human history, nothing is greater in meaning, value, and impact than the sacrifice of Jesus the Lord; thus, of all human endeavors, nothing is greater in relevance and implications than the priestly celebration of the divine Qurbana.

The Priesthood as Mediation: The Letter to the Hebrews gives us the classic formulation of the essence of priesthood: "Every High Priest is taken from among men and made their representative before God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sin. ..." (Heb. 5:1) "But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that have come to be, passing through the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made by hands, that is not belonging to this creation, he entered once for all into the sanctuary, not with the blood of goats and calves but with his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption..." (Heb. 9:11-12), "For this reason he is mediator of a new covenant...” (Heb 9:15). Therefore, the Christian priest, fulfilling the command of Jesus the High Priest of the new covenant, celebrates the Eucharist as mediator between the people and the heavenly throne. Consequently, the liturgical function of mediation is expressed also in the ceremonial positions and movements of the celebrant, when offering the divine Eucharistic sacrifice, and the building of the sanctuary is made suitable accordingly.

Furthermore, the priesthood in the Catholic Church is an order intrinsically connected with the ecclesial communion as established by the Lord, both in regard to being a legitimate member in the priestly order, and in regard to being a receiver, from the canonical authority, of the liturgical ritual. Indeed, the performance by the celebrant of the Eucharistic celebration is an act performed as handed on according to the tradition of the Church, as ordered by the Lord. Paul said it emphatically: "For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you..."(1 Cor. 11:23), thus the celebrant must always be aware that he performs an official act of the Church, according to a ceremonial canonically recognized by the competent authority.
 

 The Eucharistic Liturgy
Of The Mesopotamian Church:
The Need For A Reform 

I. The Instructional Section

Review: 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 the solemn celebration, two readings are provided “from Moses and the Prophets,” respectively, followed by two readings from the New Testament: one being the exposition and interpretation of God’s word as found in the writings of the Apostles, especially Paul, the other the exposition of Christ’s words and actions as reported in the Gospels. For the daily celebration, only the two readings of the New Testament are presented to the faithful.

Problematic of some current practices warranting a Reform

The Elimination of Bema and Veil
The Mongolian attacks on Christianity during the 14^th and 15^th 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, that effected also the liturgical ceremonials and rituals. Having very little left over 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. The most ancient Bema to be found today, in a 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 few 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 disappeared; c) The atmosphere of holiness to be reserved and preserved for the Sanctuary is diminished; d) The Chaldean Church has been deprived of her particularity and genuine characteristics that are deeply scriptural. 

Prayer with the Back to the Cross
Furthermore, a most drastic change has happened in many Chaldean dioceses and churches, again during the last decades, wherein the Chaldean celebrant, imitating the Latin celebrant, reversed the direction of prayer and 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 Offertory. The first part has for its focal point the Stands of the Readings. The second section has the altar for its focal point. 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; he then returns to the same position to perform the Offertory, descends toward the people for the Creed, and returns again with his back to the Cross while reciting the Eucharistic Prayer, the Our Father and what follows until Communion, and doing the same for the final prayers after Communion.

What are the directives of the Holy See to the Eastern Churches in that regard? 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 (to face to the East, i.e. the Cross), 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, N. 107). Disregarding this explicit directive, the Liturgy becomes degraded 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. Not surprisingly, people try to reduce this newly created role by assigning all kinds of liturgical functions to different individuals and entrusting the "creative" planning of the liturgy to groups of people who like to, and are supposed to, "make their own contribution." 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)

II. The Eucharistic Section

Review: 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 Last Supper, as narrated in Paul’s Letter (1 Cor, 11:23-26), in the Synoptic gospels (Lk 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 acts 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.  

A. Jesus Took: The Presentation of Gifts
Problematic of the Missal before the Reform
In direct disagreement with the original Chaldean Rite, the Preparation of the Gifts is arranged wrongly, due to imitating the Latin Rite. Oddly enough, after the Gospel, the celebrant ascends the altar without any text for ceremonial access - because the text has been misplaced - says a first prayer of Presentation, and goes immediately to one side of the altar to prepare the chalice of wine and water, then washes his hands, and afterwards completes the Presentation of the Gifts. Evidently, the access to the altar, followed by the preparation of the chalice, then followed by the washing of hands are in reversed order.

a) In accord with the command of Christ, as  referred in Lk 22:8: “Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, ‘Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat it,'” all ancient Chaldean rituals have the ceremony of Preparation of the Gifts completed before the Mass, in which the gifts of bread and wine are prepared in a short separate rite called Subatha ("Preparation”).

b) The washing of the hands, indicating the cleansing of the heart, should obviously be performed before ascending the altar; even the faithful know how to bless themselves with the holy water at the entrance of the church.

c) The 'Onytha d-Raze being frequently used as the Hymn of Mysteries (Paghreh DaMshyha), speaking of the Offerings as being already consecrated, is clearly at the wrong spot, and cannot, in good conscience, be allowed to be chanted at this phase of the liturgy.  

Presentation of Gifts in the Reformed Missal
Immediately after the Gospel and the sermon, the choir chants the 'Onytha of the Mysteries "Ha Mzamnyton," announcing the invitation to the Eucharistic banquet; while the celebrant washes his hands before ascending the altar, he then proceeds to make his solemn access to the altar while pronouncing the accompanying prayer composed originally for that function.

The elements are brought up in procession from the Tablytha 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. Thus, once the gifts are placed on the altar, 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. The 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.” The Salutation of Peace, in the pre-Reformed rite, is given with a short Invitation of the Deacon without sufficient explanation of meaning.

Organic Growth: It is quite fitting to add some exhortation to clarify and enhance the meaning of the sign of peace, i.e. fraternal reconciliation, as was done in the Reformed Missal.

B. 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 to be consecrated. The Anaphora, i.e. the Prayer of Consecration, begins with the First Section 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 and for their redemption; 2) Thanksgiving to God for redemption through Christ; 3) Remembrance of Christ by the Church in response to the Remembrance by Christ of his Church.

From the early centuries until modern times, the Apostolic Quddasha of Addai & Mari was 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, as well as some invocations for the several categories of the hierarchy and the needy of the congregation, which were inserted before the Third Section. 

Problematic of the Missal before the Reform
The text of Addai & Mari, through many additions and adjustments, was confused and made distant from its Mesopotamian pattern. The main needs of the text used before the Reform were three:

a) The Anaphora of Addai & Mari having no integral narrative of the Eucharistic Institution within its original text, the latest Chaldean Missal before the Reform forced several paragraphs from other Anaphoras, patching them between the first and second sections with the Narrative. By doing this, the original structure of Addai & Mari was deeply distorted and rendered confused and evidently not Mesopotamian. 

b) The Third Section needed to be made consistent in addressing the prayer to the specific divine Person to whom it is directed; the text before the Reform is quite confusing, moving the direction of the prayer, within the same paragraph, from Father to Son, then back to the Father.

c) To worsen the abnormality, a practice has developed in the past decades, becoming practically universal at the present time, to chant, by choir or congregation, a devotional hymn of any content, so that the celebrant recites all the sections of the Anaphora silently up to the Epiclesis, or even up to the Fraction. This practice is in full contradiction with the basic character of the consecutive sections of the Last Supper, where Blessing and Thanksgiving are uttered by the Lord as public, central, and constitutive Eucharistic prayers; even in direct opposition to the invitation of the Herald: “Pray in your minds...In Silence and awe remain standing and praying!”       

The Anaphora in the Reformed Missal
Correcting the untenable, the Reformed Missal: a) Respects fully the original text of Addai & Mari, without any alteration, inserting the Narrative at the exact spot where its mention is made in the Third Section; b) The addressee of the Anaphora is clarified; c) The full tenure of the Prayer of Consecration, i.e. the three Sections in their entirety, are executed with a loud voice, in full solemnity, along with the diaconal invocations to animate the congregation's awareness and prayerful participation.

 

C. Jesus Broke: The Breaking and Signing Rite
While the Offertory and the Anaphora are to be performed with the face of the celebrant to the cross, 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 people – “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 is directed in the reformed missal to make a ceremonial approach to the eastern side of the altar and perform the Breaking and Signing in front of the congregation, representing liturgically the death and the resurrection of the Lord.

D. Jesus Gave: The Communion Rite
After the Consecration 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 of absolution, said audibly, 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, after which a diaconal invocation, a hymn, two prayers and final blessing seal the Service of the Divine Mysteries.

The Voice of Your Shepherd

Priesthood and the Celebration of the Eucharist in our Diocese
On December 27, 2006 I wrote to all the pastors of my Diocese asking them to implement the Liturgical Reform,  as ordered by the Chaldean Synod and approved by the Holy See, starting January 6, 2007 and for three years as for trial period. At the present time, the overwhelming majority of our diocesan churches and missions abide by that directive. The period of the three-year trial is approaching its end, and the results are visible to all competent observers, most of all to the celebrants, but also to all the ordained ministers and to the whole congregation.

Indeed, the new Missal is a true liturgical jewel, one that is a fount of spiritual graces for the people of God in the Chaldean Church wherever it is celebrated: it is true to its Scriptural Apostolic Tradition, the beauty and depth of the Mesopotamian ecclesial patrimony, harmonizing and unifying structure and choreography, text and chant, movement and orientation, the elements of church architecture and liturgical space, ceremonial features and furniture. Truly, it is the medicine, the soothing balm, for the wounds of liturgical confusion and disorder that we have seen in the past decades.

Thus, carrying on my responsibility of Shepherd, I am hereby asking all the ordained ministers in my diocese, without exception, to implement faithfully the Liturgical Reform regarding the celebration of the Eucharist, no later than January 6, 2010, using accurately the Missal approved by the Holy Chaldean Synod and recognized by the Holy See, as announced in the Patriarchal Review (Najim Al-Mashriq, 2006, N.46, pp. 161-162) and promulgated by His Beatitude the Patriarch Mar Emmanuel III Delly, in his Introduction to the Reformed Missal printed by the Chaldean Patriarchate.

I must declare to all ordained ministers and to the people of God in my Diocese, with clarity and candor, that the celebration of the Divine Mysteries, including text and rubrics, and every segment within, must be celebrated implementing a Missal that is: a) approved according to canonical procedure by the Holy Chaldean Synod, and b) recognized officially by the Holy See. This is the Ritual that I am requesting you in this Pastoral Letter to implement and celebrate. Any text or practice that lacks these conditions cannot claim to be legitimate or canonical, and therefore is not permitted in our Diocese.

Finally, I would like to inform you that I have written to His Eminence, Patriarch Emmanuel III Delly, with a copy of the letter sent to the Oriental Congregation, that our Diocese has been privileged to have implemented the Reform on time, and is settled to enjoy its benefits permanently. Furthermore, I have informed His Eminence that, as result of the three year period Ad Experimentum, I am ready, as Chairman of the Patriarchal Liturgical Committee, to receive with due consideration any observation relevant to the liturgical reform from any Chaldean diocese.

As far as our Diocese is concerned, it is my request from the priests to share their individual comments, observations, and suggestions with me and all the diocesan clergy, so that we may commonly evaluate our liturgical experience of the past three years and finalize any warranted adjustment. Noting that, the Eucharistic celebration being an act of the Church handed down to her from the Lord, any observation or suggestion, in order to be relevant, must follow basic theological criteria, including: a) Scriptural foundation, b) cohesiveness with the structure, text, and ceremonial of the Apostolic liturgical tradition of our Mesopotamian Church, c) compliance with the directives of the Holy See in regard to the matter. I give a one-month period for your response, ending February 6th 2010, to be sent to our Chancery in San Diego, having also the option to send your remarks to the Patriarchate as well. 
 

Final Blessing

Wishing a happy New Year to everyone in our Diocese, most of all to our priests, in this year dedicated to their vocation and ministry, I recommend myself, my clergy and all the faithful into the hands of the eternal High Priest, who is for all of us, as well as for the entire human race, the satisfactory Offering to the Heavenly Father and the Mediator of all divine mercies.

Your brother in Christ,

+ Sarhad Yawsip Jammo
Eparch
Catholic Diocese of St. Peter the Apostle
for Chaldeans & Assyrians, USA