The Purpose of the Liturgy

“This gets more to the heart of things,” said Father. “What does each of us do? Only we can answer that for ourselves. Doesn’t Christ say, ‘Where your treasure is, there also is your heart’? If you remain passive or a spectator, you never experience the inspiration and challenge of liturgy. You remain locked within yourself. You rate the liturgy like a TV show and grade it on the basis of how it entertains–without it ever entering your mind that the purpose of liturgy is not entertainment.”

Father’s voice grew passionate. “Liturgy truly is ‘work’ in the sense that it requires us to move outside ourselves, to prepare, study, attend, sing, and listen together in faith and love. When liturgy is celebrated correctly and with care by everyone involved, its beauty and majesty does nourish and inspire us. These become the very vehicles that enable us to meet the mystery of God, giving us the strength to live life well and deal creatively with its problems. Only then does this ‘work’ bring us to Christ. Let’s face it: Liturgy is also about energy and belief, life and death. It’s not about comfort, amusement, entertainment, and distraction. Christian liturgy is about dying, leaving behind the old self and becoming a new person, so that we may life more fully, more abundantly.”

(The Monks of New Skete, In the Spirit of Happiness, pp. 227-228)


The Liturgy of Theology

Archimandrite Aimilianos said in a talk:

“In speaking of the Holy Apostles and the Fathers of the Church, we return to the story of creation, for the Holy Fathers are true images of God.  All that they said and did was according to the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26).

And they celebrate the liturgy of theology in the company of all creation, for together with them

the heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 18:1);

Hubble Telescope Photo
Hubble Telescope Photo

the rivers lift up their voices (Ps 92:4);

Ohio River at Cincinnati

the mountains rejoice (Ps 97:8) and skip like lambs at the presence of the Lord (Ps 113:6).

Deeps calls unto deep (Ps 42:7) and

night proclaims knowledge to night (Ps 18:3);

San Francisco

the morning stars sing together and shout for joy (Job 38:7),

indeed there are no tongues or voices in which the praise of God is not heard (Ps 18:4),

so that even the very stones cry out: Blessed is He Who comes in the name of the Lord! (cf Lk 19:38-40).”


Transformed by the Liturgy

“We must always remember that the Liturgy is an infinite creation. Every Liturgy is unique and is performed by Christ Himself. It is an act of revelation surpassing description, embracing the whole creation: heaven and earth, Angels and men, the living and the departed. Christ offered Himself once for all in the eternal power of the Holy Spirit and His Holy Sacrifice remains unto eternity to sanctify all who partake of it, for it is sealed in His divine blood which He shed for the life of the world. The Divine Liturgy is an eternal expression of Christ’s ‘greater love’. It is a workshop of love, a heart of love, man’s union and communion with the Savior and the other members of the Body. Man thus becomes an active member of the communion of Divine love, hearing the word of God, invoking His holy Name and partaking of the Body and Blood of the Lord.” (Archimandrite Zacharias, Remember Thy First Love, pp 213-214)


Worship and Relationship

Hear the word of the LORD,
You children of Israel,
For the LORD brings a charge against the inhabitants of the land:
“There is no truth or mercy
Or knowledge of God in the land.   (Hosea 4:1)

For I desire mercy and not sacrifice,
And the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.   (Hosea 6:6)

Commenting on Hosea 6:6,  biblical scholar Fr. Eugen J. Pentiuc writes:

This eternal will of Yahweh is revealed in v. 6.

‘For I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’

Note that ‘mercy’ is followed by ‘knowledge of God’ as in 4:1. Both virtues reflect the will or the delight of God in promoting a profound relationship with Israel. Yahweh is the Lord, and in this quality, he sets the moral standards and principles pertaining to the covenantal relationship with Israel. Yahweh does not reject worship as a whole but he criticizes the way Israel perceives it. Instead of a means to enter the relationship with God and to foster community ties, the worship becomes gradually a goal in itself (cf. Am 5:21ff.; Mic 6:6ff.).

A similar explanation may be found in Theodoret of Cyrus:

‘For I do not require sacrifices, I accept these sacrifices, condescending to the weakness of your mind. But I demand these two things: good will toward me, and love for your neighbor.’

Instead of cultivating the ‘knowledge of God’ and ‘mercy,’ Israel is more interested in bringing sacrifices (or sacrificial meals) and burnt offerings.” (Long-Suffering Love: A Commentary on Hosea with Patristic Annotations, p 99)

Every generation of Orthodox Christians has to also consider the words of the Lord.  We place emphasis on exacting and proper liturgy and rules of fasting, yet they are never to become ends in themselves.  Right worship and exacting piety, which we believe are important to the spiritual life, can never displace or preempt mercy and the knowledge of God in our spiritual lives.  Piety, asceticism and liturgy are to form our hearts so that we can have a proper relationship with God and neighbor.   If we come to see them as the goal of the spiritual life, we can lose the right relationship we are to have in loving God and loving neighbor.


Commemorations: The Reality of Faith

“Biblical scholarship has long taught us that the essential meaning of biblical remembrance (anamnesis) has to do with making present the reality of the saving events in the context of communal prayer and worship. In antiquity the ritual acts among Jews and Christians were not taken as merely figurative, a modern notion, but rather they were seen as bearing divine powers and having decisive consequences according to the words of Saint Paul.

Just as the preaching of the word of God carries intrinsic power and transformative impact on receptive hearers, so also, and indeed more so, the ritual acts of Baptism and the Eucharist, in the context of the Church’s living faith and the power of the Holy Spirit, make present the saving reality and blessings of the death and resurrection of the Lord.

Surely the Apostle Paul did not view the Lord’s Supper as merely metaphorical in 1 Cor. 11, any more than he viewed Baptism as figurative in Rom. 6. The Gospel of John which declares that true worship is ‘in spirit and truth’ (Jn. 4:24) also contains references to Baptism and the Eucharist as determining one’s entry into the kingdom (Jn. 3:5) and one’s sharing in the divine life of the Incarnate Lord (Jn. 6:52-58). Seen from this perspective, the Orthodox Eucharist is not only a proclamation but also an actualization of the good news of Christ and his saving work.” (Theodore G. Stylianopoulos, The Way of Christ: Gospel, Spiritual Life and Renewal in Orthodoxy, pps. 36-37)

“Unto Ages of Ages”

TempleThe final exclamation which concludes many Orthodox liturgical prayers is “…unto ages of ages. Amen.”  We get so used to hearing that phrase that we probably don’t even consider where it comes from and why it is in our prayers.  David Instone-Brewer in his book TRADITIONS OF THE RABBIS FROM THE ERA OF THE NEW TESTAMENT examines many aspects of Jewish practice from the time of Christ and he points out that a feud had emerged between Sadducees and Pharisees about how properly to conclude a blessing in the Temple.  There apparently were different practices for ending a Temple prayer:  “Amen” was one traditional ending but also at one time the response was “Blessed be the name of his glorious kingdom forever.”  The Sadducees did not believe in an afterlife and so interpreted “forever” to mean until this age ended, since there is only this age but nothing beyond this age.  The Pharisees then changed the ending of the prayer to “for ever and ever” (= “unto ages of ages”) because then it referred to both this age and the age to come (which the Sadducees didn’t believe  in).  It was an effort to force the Sadducees to have to pray for the age to come.

Christianity which follows the beliefs of the Pharisees regarding the afterlife, the resurrection and the world to come kept the phrase “unto ages of ages. Amen” as part of their prayer to affirm belief in the afterlife and the Kingdom which is to come.   The split between the Pharisees and the Sadducees is mentioned in Acts 23:6-9 where St. Paul, himself a Pharisee, takes advantage of the disagreement to turn the two Jewish sects against each other (see also Matthew 22:23-33).  The phrase “unto ages of ages” occurs in the New Testament in Matthew 6:13 (in some ancient Greek manuscripts), Romans 1:25 and Galatians 1:5, Ephesians 3:21, 1 Timothy 1:17, Hebrews 13:21, 1 Peter 4:11 and frequently in the book of Revelation just to name some occurrences.

Worshiping in Beauty and Symbol

“Thus in our prayer we use words not just literally but beautifully; through poetic imagery – even if the texts are in rhythmic prose rather than rhymed stanzas – we endow the words with a new dimension of meaning.

We worship, moreover, not through words only but in a wide variety of other ways: through music, through the splendor of the priestly vestments,

through the color and lines of the holy icons, through the articulation of sacred space in the design of the church building,

through symbolic gestures such as the sign of the cross, the offering of incense, or the lighting of a candle,

and through the employment of all great ‘archetypes,’ of all the basic constituents of human life, such as water, wine and bread, fire and oil.”    (Bishop Kallistos Ware, The Inner Kingdom, pg. 63)

You will find links to my other photoblogs at My Photoblogs.

September 1 as the Church’s New Year

September 1 became the beginning of the civil New Year in the Byzantine Empire and eventually prayers were done in the Orthodox Church to mark this event as well.  On the Byzantine Calendar our year 2013AD is counted as the year 7522 as they dated years not from the time of Christ, but from what they calculated to be the beginning of the world.    Archimadrite Job Getcha comments on the calendar practice of the Church in Constantinople which ended up governing the calendar of the Orthodox Church throughout the Byzantine Empire:

“The Typikon of the Great Church maintains the practice dating to the first half of the fifth century, in which September 1 marks the beginning of the indiction (beginning of the civil year), while September 23 remains the beginning of the ecclesiastical year. It is estimated that this change took place during the second half of the fifth century, probably beginning on September 1, 462.” (The Typikon Decoded, pg. 61)

Fr. Theodore Stylianopoulos comments on the Church’s liturgical year:

“Thus the liturgical year, by bringing unceasingly before us God’s mighty deeds of salvation and the reality of God’s kingdom in our midst, is the sanctification 0f time and thereby the true fulfillment of both personal and corporate aspects of our lives as Christians.  Far from being simply a calendar, the liturgical year is the life of the Church – the life of Christians living in community as brothers and sisters – in awareness of God’s kingdom, remembering the entire communion of Prophets, Apostles, Saints and all of God’s people on earth and in heaven, being renewed by God’s saving love, helping one another, witnessing to Christ’s good news, and waiting for the fullness of the coming kingdom according to God’s timing.  ‘If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord (Rom 14:8.’

Orthodox worship proclaims the centrality of Christ.  The liturgical year celebrates the presence of the mystery of Christ in the life of the Church and seeks to make the living Christ a renewing life-source for every Orthodox Christian.”  (A YEAR OF  THE LORD: LITURGICAL BIBLE STUDIES, Vol 1, p X)

Christ is in our midst!

Other Church New Year Blogs:  There is One God Maker of All and The Good News: Blessing and Truth

The Liturgy: Making US the Body of Christ

“… leitourgia. It meant an action by which a group of people become something corporately which they had not been as a mere collection of individuals – a whole greater than the sum of its parts. It meant also a function or ‘ministry’ of a man or of a group on behalf of and in the interest of the whole community. Thus the leitourgia of ancient Israel was the corporate work of a chosen few to prepare the world for the coming of the Messiah. And in this very act of preparation they became what they were called to be, the Israel of God, the chosen instrument of His purpose. Thus the Church itself is a leitourgia, a ministry, a calling to act in this world after the fashion of Christ, to bear testimony to Him and His kingdom.”     (Alexander Schmemann, For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy, p 25)

Typikon: E Pluribus Unum

Growing up Orthodox in a small city that had a number of different ethnic Orthodox parishes, it was easy to be aware that though there was a common belief in the unchanging nature of Orthodoxy there was a great deal of variation in liturgical and pious practice among the different Orthodox communities.  Local custom was not always distinguished from what was more properly called the Tradition of the Orthodox.  Russian Orthodox did things differently than Carpatho-Russians, or Serbs, or Romanians or Greeks or Arabs.   What I never heard about early on in my life in Orthodoxy was the Typikon, the book of liturgical rules that officially guides how services are to be done.

When I went to seminary the variety of liturgical experience and pious practice was even more pronounced – more traditions and variations within different ethnic traditions.  At seminary typikonchiks were those few folks fascinated by all of the minutiae of the Typikon’s rules and sometimes they became rabidly fanatical about following the rules – but disagreements among them indicated there were more than one Typikon to which one could appeal as authoritative.  One could for example see that for the most part the books governing a baptism in Greek and Russian tradition reflected a similarity in services, but the actual parish practices varied greatly.

After seminary I came to appreciate that whatever the Typikon might prescribe for liturgical practice, the reality was parishes followed practices which they had inherited, or based on texts available, or what the choir could do or the ethnic tradition typically did. Different traditions and pastors followed different ideas as to how to ‘edit’ the services when the parish was not able to follow the complete monastic Typikon.   Small mission parishes offered challenges for what to do liturgically when one doesn’t even have a regular church building.   The Typikon was not designed for mission situation, nor for how to be evangelical or introduce new peoples to salvation through Orthodox teaching.  The Typikon was designed for monks who are committed to living as full an Orthodox liturgical life as possible, not for thinking how to proclaim the Gospel in an Orthodox manner to those not acquainted with Orthodoxy.

Typikon DecodedArchimandrite Job Getcha’s new book THE TYPIKON DECODED offers some historical insight into the development of the Typikon but also contains the basic descriptions for the liturgical services as they are prescribed in current Orthodox practice.   I personally have never been that attracted to the mechanics of liturgical practice (what at seminary long ago was referred to as liturgics), but was far more inspired by liturgical theology especially as taught by Fr. Alexander Schmemann.   So, no doubt, I read the book through that same lens.   I was more intrigued by his historical comments than the formulae for doing liturgical services.  There is in Orthodoxy often a strong push for a monolithic interpretation of everything, but that effort to homogenize all things liturgical does not completely correspond to the reality of a variety of liturgical practices and typikons which have been Orthodoxy’s history.

In the rest of this blog, I will point out some of the aspects of the book which attracted my attention.  First is an understanding of the liturgical books of Orthodox Tradition.

“These ancient books contained in generally rough fashion liturgical material that could be sung, rather than what had to be sung.”  (p 35)

While today some want the liturgical tradition to be without variation or change, historically this wasn’t always true.   The liturgical tradition offered hymns and practices that could be done but were not perceived of as laws that must be obeyed.  A more rigidly fixed and monolithic idea of tradition is oddly enough the innovation.

“As we know, before the invention of the printing press each monastery or church had its own Typikon (ordo) and resolved liturgical issues in its own way.  While differences between the various typika were not that numerous, liturgical scholars have discerned three large families of typika: Constantinople (of the Great Church), Studite, and Sabaite (or Hagiopolite).”  (p 40)

“… there were in Constantinople and throughout the empire, and even among the Slavs, two different types of daily offices: one used in secular churches and following the Typikon of the Great Church, the other used by the monks, which followed either the Studite or Sabaite ordo.” (p 54)

So we learn from history that the liturgical books of the church underwent many changes through the centuries, and the liturgical practices were varied throughout the Orthodox world – even though on a grand scale there appears to have been commonality between the typikons.  Monasteries and parish churches used different typikons up until about the 14th Century when the monastic practices became predominant throughout the churches of the Orthodox world.

And the Typikon itself as a book is the most recent development of all in Orthodox liturgical books.

“… the Typikon is the most recent among the liturgical books , because it implies the existence of all the other books it seek to regulate.” (p 40)

So the Typikon is part of that evolving tradition of the Church.

Next:  Typikon: A History of Change