Gabriel of Qatar's Commentary on the Liturgy
Sebastian P.
Brock
University of Oxford
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
George A. Kiraz
James E. Walters
TEI XML encoding by
html2TEI.xsl
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
2003
Vol. 6, No. 2
For this publication, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
license has been granted by the author(s), who retain full
copyright.
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/article/hv6n2brock
Sebastian P. BROCK
Gabriel of Qatar's Commentary on the Liturgy
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/pdf/vol6/HV6N2Brock.pdf
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute, 2003
vol 6
issue 2
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies is an electronic journal dedicated to the study
of the Syriac tradition, published semi-annually (in January and July) by Beth
Mardutho: The Syriac Institute. Published since 1998, Hugoye seeks to offer the
best scholarship available in the field of Syriac studies.
Syriac Studies
Gabriel of Beth Qatraye
Commentary
File created by XSLT transformation of original HTML encoded article.
The Commentary on the Liturgy by Gabriel of
Beth Qatraye (early seventh century) is preserved in a single
thirteenth-century manuscript. A short introduction draws
attention to the interest of the manuscript itself (as well as
its contents), and to previous studies of the Commentary. In
order to give a fuller indication of its contents, an English
translation of the chapter headings is given, and this is
followed by a translation of the chapter on the Eucharistic
Liturgy (Memra V, chapter 2). At the end, the Syriac text of
chapter 2 of Memra V is also given.
The Unique Manuscript
[1] The
unique witness to the important Commentary on the Liturgy by
the early seventh-century author, Gabriel bar Lipeh of Qatar,
is a thirteenth-century manuscript in the British Library, Or.
3336. The opening of the text is lost, and a few folios are
missing later on. Although this manuscript received a short
description in Margoliouth's Descriptive List of Syriac and
Karshuni MSS. in the British Museum acquired since
1873,
(London, 1899), 15.
it was not until 1966 that it received any
serious attention. In that year S.H. Jammo published a
useful—though still brief—description of its
contents.
"Gabriel Qatraya et son commentaire sur la liturgie
chaldéenne"Orientalia Christiana Periodica 32
(1966), 39-52.
In the course of his article Jammo made two
important observations: the date accorded to Gabriel of Qatar
by A. Scher and A. Baumstark (late seventh century) cannot be
correct, since Gabriel makes mention (f.109a) of Shubhalmaran,
metropolitan of Karka d-Beth Slokh as still alive; this means
that Gabriel must belong to the early decades of the seventh
century. Jammo went on to identify the author with the scribe
of British Library Add.14471, written at Nisibis by a Gabriel
of Qatar and dated 615; this, however, seems unlikely, for
reasons I have given elsewhere.
"Syriac writers from Beth Qatraye," Aram
11-12 (1999-2000), 85-96, esp. 89-92.
This earlier date is
particularly important, since it means that Gabriel was writing
before the liturgical reforms of the Patriarch
Ishoʿyahb III (649-659). Jammo's second
observation concerned the date of the manuscript: this had been
given as AG 1579 = AD 1268 by Margoliouth, but as Jammo
observes, the manuscript is damaged at this point and most of
the third digit is missing. Jammo rightly points out that the
date could equally be AG 1549 = AD 1238. Although this is
correct, there is in fact a further possibility: all that
remains of the third digit is [-]ʿ
yn,
which means that the number might have been
teshcin (90), as well as
shabcin (70) or arbcin
(40); in other words, the later date of AG 1599 = AD 1288. (The
month is given as July, and the day as the last Friday of that
month).
[2]
Margoliouth gives no indication of where the manuscript was
written, and Jammo simply states that the manuscript was
written at the Monastery of Deba at the foot of Mount Kola.
This turns out to be a little misleading, for what the (rather
damaged) colophon in fact states is: "This book ... was
completed and finished in the holy monastery, the place of rest
for humility, Tabor's abode, Sion's Upper Room, the fragrant
shrine [of] the holy Mar Hnanya, Mar
Hnanishoʿ, Mar Bassima, and Mar Habbib, known
as the (monastery) of the Bear (debba), situated ... on
the edge of the resting place of Noah and his children when
[they] came out of the Ark (qibuta), it being on the
slopes of the mountain of the Ark (KWL' = kewila)". This
happens to be very interesting information, supplementing some
exiguous other sources on the monastery. The ninth-century
Ktaba d-nakputa (Liber Castitatis) by
Ishoʿdnah
Ed. J.B. Chabot, Le Livre de la Chasteté
composé par Jesusdenah (Rome 1896).
mentions (in section 52) the
monastic foundation of the otherwise little known Mar Habbib in
the vicinity of a village called Kfar Tuta in the region of
mount Qardu (where, according to the Peshitta, Noah's Ark came
to rest, rather than on Ararat). In his next section
Ishoʿdnah goes on to tell of Mar Bassima, who
while in secular life in royal service
By ‘king’ either Sasanid shah or Muslim
Caliph could be intended.
was told by a
Zoroastrian magian that he would become a monk. This indeed
took place, and after spending time in various different
monasteries, he ended up in that built by Habbib, and in due
course he enlarged it. In the eighth century the monastery had,
for a while, as its abbot the famous monastic author Joseph the
Seer (Hazzaya).
Liber Castitatis, section 125.
After that date, as Fiey puts it, "on n'entend
plus parler du couvent. On ignore sa position exacte en
Qardu".
J-M.Fiey, Nisibe, metropole syriaque
orientale (CSCO Subsidia 54; 1977), 219.
Our manuscript thus provides clear evidence, not
only that two further names (both otherwise unknown) were
associated with the monastery, but also that it was still
flourishing in the thirteenth century.
The Contents
[3] The work
consists of five Memre of uneven length, and each is divided up
into chapters. In his article Jammo listed the topics covered
by the five Memre, and for the fifth he mentioned the topics
dealt with in each chapter. Subsequently, in the course of his
useful monograph La structure de la messe
chaldéenne
Orientalia Christiana Analecta 207, 1979,
29-48.
he provided a Latin translation of the
chapter in Memra 5 which constitutes a commentary on the
Eucharistic liturgy. An English translation of the same
section, made by Father Placid Podipara, was first published in
India in 1974, and then reprinted by Father G. Vavanikunnel,
Homilies & Interpretation on the Holy
Qurbana, in 1977. Since a full listing of the chapter
headings of each of the five Memre has not yet been made
available, an English translation of these is given below.
Similarly, since Podipara's English translation is not easily
accessible, I have also provided a new English translation
(deliberately rather literal and without annotation) of this
important section, as well as the text of its Syriac original.
For convenience of future reference, I have broken the text up
into short sections.
[4] In his
article of 1966 Jammo already pointed to certain aspects of
particular interest in this part of the Commentary, and he
makes some comparisons with some of the other East Syriac
liturgical commentaries; in particular he rightly observes that
the published Commentary by Abraham bar Lipeh
R.H. Connolly, Anonymi auctoris Expositio
Officiorum Ecclesiae Georgio Arbelensi vulgo ascripta. Accedit
Abrahae Bar Lipeh Interpretation Officiorum, II (CSCO
Scr.Syri 29, 1913), 171-80.
is nothing but an
abbreviation of Gabriel's work (what the relationship between
these two men was, both bar Lipeh, remains a puzzle). In order
to highlight the passages found in Abraham, I have italicized
these in the translation. A full-scale investigation of the
relationship of Gabriel's chapter on the Eucharistic liturgy
with the other commentaries would be of considerable interest,
but this is a task which must wait for the future. Here it must
suffice simply to note that Gabriel makes use (in sections
43-44) of the early anonymous Commentary which has proved
influential in all three Syriac ecclesial traditions,
Reedited, with English translation, in my
"An early Syriac Commentary on the Liturgy", Journal of
Theological Studies NS 37 (1986), 387-403.
and
that, while Ps.George of Arbela shows little contact with
Gabriel, Abdishoʿ, in his Tukkas
Dine,
Latin translation in J-M.Vosté,
Ordo iudiciorum ecclesiasticorum ... a Mar
Abdisoʿ metropolita Nisibis et Armeniae
latine interpretatus (Fonti, II.xv; Rome, 1940), 93-103. I
hope to publish an English translation of this section in the
near future.
does draw on him.
As does Iohannan bar
Zoʿbi, according to Jammo, "Gabriel Qatraya
et son commentaire," 45.
[5] There
is, however, one other significant matter which should be
mentioned. In the discussion of the attitude of the Church of
the East towards figurative images and icons, attention has
already been drawn by scholars to the important evidence of
Abraham bar Lipeh's commentary, where the presence of an icon
of Christ on the altar is considered essential at the time of
the consecration.
J. Dauvillier, "Quelques témoignages
littéraires et archéologiques sur la
présence et sur le culte des Images dans
l’Ancienne Eglise Chaldéenne," L’Orient
Syrien 1 (1956), 297-304, esp. 297; K. Parry, ‘Images
in the Church of the East’, in J.F. Coakley and K. Parry
(eds.), The Church of the East: (= Bulletin of the
John Rylands Library 78:3 (1996)), 143-62.
Abraham's source is (as one would expect)
Gabriel's commentary, where the relevant passage will be found
in sections 45 and 46. In this connection it is worth drawing
attention to another reference to the liturgical importance of
icons, to be found in an unpublished set of 23 liturgical
questions put to Ishoʿbarnun, in Vatican
Borg. Syr. 81. Question 10 (f.371b), concerns the case of a
priest who, in an emergency, has to baptize his own child when
there is no one else apart from the mother—his
wife—available to "receive" the child (that is, act as
godparent). Ishoʿbarnun's solution to this
dilemma is to say that the child should be placed on an icon
instead, the person portrayed thus acting as godparent.
Specific reference is made here to an "icon of our Lord"
(yuqneh d-Maran) if the infant is a boy, and an "icon of
the Blessed" (Mary), if it is a girl. Later on in the questions
there is a passing reference to "icons of the saints" (Question
21, f.373b).
[6] The
remainder of Gabriel's Commentary remains largely unexploited,
though Jammo has provided a description of his comments on
Ramsha,
"L’Office du soir chaldéen au
temps de Gabriel Qatraya," L’Orient Syrien 12
(1967), 187-210.
and I have given a translation of his section
on the Trisagion (Qaddisha; ff.23a-26b) as a
contribution to a (forthcoming) Festschrift in honour of Fr.
Emmanuel Thelly, the compiler of the recently-published
Syriac-English-Malayalam Dictionary that is based on Audo's
Simta d-leshana suryaya. I hope to return to some other
aspects of particular interest on a later occasion. In the
meantime, mention might be made of the presence of several
patristic quotations; thus Gabriel quotes from Basil's Letter
to Gregory (f.95a),
An edition of the Syriac translation of this
letter is in preparation.
Gregory of Nazianzus' Invective against
Julian (f.96a), Evagrius (ff.96b-97a, 218a),
This is from Kephalaia Gnostica
IV.25.
Narsai (f.59b)
and (not surprisingly) the "Interpreter", that is, Theodore of
Mopsuestia (ff.123b, 160b, 170b etc.). Much more surprising,
however, is the presence of a long and unattributed extract
(ff.107b-108b) from Sergius of Reshʿaina's
Discourse on the spiritual life, which prefaces the first
Syriac translation (probably by Sergius) of the Dionysian
Corpus.
Ed. P. Sherwood, ‘Mimro de
Serge de Reshaina sur la vie spirituelle’,
L’Orient Syrien 5 (1960), 433-59; 6 (1961),
95-115, 121-56; sections 35-39 are quoted (= L’Orient
Syrien 5, (1060), 456, and 6 (1961), 96). There is also a
quotation attributed to Dionysius on f.49ab.
There are also references to Aristotle's
Categories and to Pythagoras (ff.88b, 144a-b).
Translations
For the liturgical technical terms, see the
glossary in J. Mateos, Lelya-Sapra: Essai
d’interprétation des matines
chaldéennes (Orientalia Christiana Analecta 156,
1979), 485-502.
Chapter Headings
[7]
Memra 1: On the ordering of the Office of
Ramsha on weekdays.
<Opening lost>
Why do we begin from the Old [Testament] in our services
and crown them with the new teshbhata? [f.3b]
Why do we change the qala before the
marmyatha come to an end, and then we say the Glory
and have the suyyaka? [f.5b]
<Opening lost>
Why do we bring out a light at this point, and kindle
from it the lamps on the menorah that is placed in front of
the sanctuary? [f.7a]
What is the reason why we draw the curtain along with the
utterance of "Peace be with us"? [f.9a]
Why do we burn incense at the Lak(h)u Mara?
f.10b]
Why do we say the Lak(h)u Mara at this point, and
what its words mean? [f.11a]
Why do we say two separate shurraye at every
Ramsha, and why we say "O Lord, I have called on you" in the
middle? [f.15a]
What the ordering of the petition and the
proclamation/litany that follow it mean for us, and why we
say them? [f.19a]
How, and what is the reason for this qanona
"Holy", and why we say it continually? [f.22b]
Why, when the service of Ramsha is completed with the
qanona "Holy", we add an
ʿ
onitha and a section from the
Beatitudes? [f.26b]
<Opening lost>
Why, on Friday which is a weekday, do its shurraye
go round not twice, but three times? [f.29b]
What is the reason for the sevenfold cycle (?) of the
shurraye on Sundays? [f.32a]
[8]
Memra 2: On the ordering of the Office of
Sapra on weekdays. List of chapters. [f.35a]
What is the common purpose of the rites for the Office of
Sapra? [f.36a]
What benefits do we have from knowledge of these
orderings? [f.40b]
Why are we instructed to pray and to praise God at the
time of Sapra? [f.44a]
With what aim is the psalm(ody) of Sapra arranged?
[f.46b]
What is the ordering of the second psalm? [f.49a]
What does the ordering of the third psalm instruct us?
[f.51a]
What does the ordering of the fourth psalm indicate to
us? [f.53a]
Why do we serve these shurraye from the Old
(Testament) at Sapra before the Lak(h)u Mara?
[f.58b]
Why do we complete the first two psalms, but not the
third; and why do we attach five others to the fourth?
[f.60b]
Why do we say the Lak(h)u Mara after these psalms?
[f.63a]
What is the reason why we say the psalm "Have mercy on
me, O God" (Ps 51) after the Lak(h)u Mara?
[f.65b]
What does the ordering here of the petition, and
proclamation (litany) after it, indicate to us? [70a]
What is the reason that prevents the Solitaries from
saying the petition and following proclamation at Sapra?
[f.73a]
What purpose does the ordering of "To You be praise"
have, and why do we say it at the crowning/climax of our
Office? [f.77b]
Why do we say the qanona "Holy" after this
teshbohta? [f.82b]
What is the reason why the Fathers arranged that we
should give thanks and praise to God seven times, by night
and day? [f.83b]
Why do we serve three shubbahe during the Hours of
daytime, but at Compline four, and at Lilya nine? [f.89b]
Admonition concerning this topic [f.100a]
[9]
Memra 3: On the ordering of the Office of
Ramsha and of the three Sessions that are served at Lilya of
Sunday. List of chapters. [102a]
On the special honour of the day of holy Sunday.
[f.102b]
Why the orderings of the Office of Ramsha are not changed
in the way that the orderings of the Office of Sapra on the
same day are changed? [f.105b]
What is the reason for the ordering of the first Session
which we serve at Lilya of Sunday? [f.111a]
Why do we sound the great naqosha (semantron) in
the middle of Lilya, and begin once again to sing praise?
[f.114a]
Why do we sound the naqosha again at the last
Session, and open the door of the sanctuary; and why do we
say the Qale d-Shahra? [f.115b]
[10]
Memra 4: On the ordering of the Office of
Sapra on Sunday. List of chapters. [f.120b]
The protheoria of the memra. [f.121a]
What does the ordering of the naqosha at Sapra on
Sunday instruct us? [f.122b]
For what reason, at Sapra on Sunday, do we first serve
four separate psalms, but we do not attach other psalms to
the fourth one, as we do on weekdays? [f.124a]
What do we understand about the sequence of the four
psalms of the fifth shuraya; and why do we not say
"Praise the Lord with a new song" (Ps. 149)? [f.128a]
Why, at Sapra on Sunday, do we say an
ʿ
onitha instead of Lak(h)u
Mara; and why do we not say the Petition and
Proclamation? [f.132b]
What does the ordering of the two new
teshbhata joined to one another
instruct us; and why do we then attach to them a third, that
of Hnanya (Ananias) and companions? [f.136a]
What opinion do we have of the ordering of "Glory to God
in the heights"? [f.162b]
Why, after this teshbohta,
do we say the qanona "Holy" in a raised and distinct
voice/melody? [f.173a]
Why do we say ʿ
onyatha of the
Martyrs, and not of the Apostles, in particular on Sunday;
and why do the Solitaries say them every day? [f.176b]
[11]
Memra 5: On the ordering of the Office of the
Mysteries. List of chapters. [f.182b]
Why do we constantly perform the Office of the Mysteries?
[f.183b]
What does each one of the orderings of the Office of the
Mysteries instruct us? [f.186b]
Why do the Solitaries not draw the curtain at the time of
the epiclesis in the way that the clergy in the world do?
[f.211b]
Why do we light lamps during the daylight at the time of
our Office, while we take care that the (lamp) of the
sanctuary does not go out? [f.215a]
What does the ordering of the Solitaries instruct us, who
reside in their cells during the whole week, but on Sunday
they gather together and take part in the Office and in the
Mysteries, and in the Table? [f.218b]
From when did the tonsure begin, and what is the reason
for it? [f.223b]
Why do the Solitaries shave their head but allow their
beards to grow; and what advantages do they gain from this?
[f.225a]
An admonition concerning virtuous conduct, in accordance
with the common aim of the whole book. [f.227b]
Memra 5, Chapter 2 (On the Eucharistic
Liturgy)
(Italics indicate passages taken up by Abraham bar
Lipeh)
[12]
[186b] What each of the components in the service of the
Mysteries signifies to us.
In this service of the Holy Mysteries, too, our blessed
Fathers have had as their aim briefly and cursorily to
provide [187a] a reminder of God's entire dispensation that
was fulfilled in the world through Christ, beginning from his
fleshly birth and travelling on, step by step, to his death,
resurrection and ascension. They depicted for us, as it were
as an image, each one of the things that were performed, for
the confirmation of our faith, the growth of our hope, and
the increase of our love towards him.
We begin, therefore, with the commencement of this
service.
The fact that we serve one marmitha from the
Psalms of the blessed David signifies this:
that the Lord Jesus Christ Son of God is one; he was born
of the holy Virgin who was descended from the seed
of David. In his divinity he was born of the Father, beyond
all times, without limit and without beginning; [187b] and at
the end of times, in his humanity, Christ was born in the
flesh, while the Old Testament still held
sway.
The fact that this marmitha is arranged out
of three psalms is because the name Christ [mshiha]
makes known the Father who anointed him, the Son
who was anointed, and the Holy Spirit who fulfilled the role
of the oil [meshha].
Or, another explanation: just as three psalms constitute one
marmitha, so too the Man [barnasheh] of our
Lord is perfect in body, perfect in soul, and perfect in
mind, just like all human beings who share his nature. He was
not body without soul, according to the opinion of Arius and
Eunomius, nor was he body and soul without mind, according to
the precept [188a] of Apollinarius.
Or, the triple psalms indicate the threefold decade of years
during which Christ fulfilled all the observances of the
threefold laws in the Old Testament, that is, the natural
law, the law that was commanded, and the written law.
The fact that we attach a hullala to every
verse (pethgama) is an indication of the
utterances of praise of the heavenly powers who, at the
birth of Christ, appeared to the shepherds, giving praise
and saying "Glory to God in the heights" (Luke 2:14)
The fact that, before the marmitha ends, we
change the chant with the two verses (signifies) the change
that John the Baptist introduced to the Law through
baptism of forgiveness of sins.
The fact that after these things we glorify
Father, Son and Holy Spirit is a demonstration of [188b]
the revealing of the Trinity of holy Persons
(qnome) who were made known to rational beings at
the baptism of our Lord; for when our Lord was baptized
the Spirit in the bodily form of a dove tabernacled
(aggen) over his head, and the Father called out from
on high "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased"
(Matt. 3:17 and par.)
The ʿ
onitha of the chancel
(qenke) is a symbol (raz) of the praises of
the heavenly hosts who, on seeing these things, raised up new
songs of praise to the Lord of all.
Or, it is a symbol of the (utterance of) praise of
John, who cried out saying, "This is the Lamb of God; he
takes away the sin of the world". (John 1:29)
The coming out of the cross from the sanctuary is
a symbol of Jesus' going out to the wilderness and his
fight with Satan.
The ascent of the cross to the Bema
accompanied by the deacons and priests is a symbol of
Jesus' frequent ascents to Jerusalem accompanied
[189a] by his twelve disciples and the seventy.
The qanona "To you, Lord (Lak(h)u Mara)"
is a symbol of the confession of the Apostles
concerning him, spoken by Simon, representing them all, "You
are the Christ, the Son of God" (Matt. 16:17).
The two lights accompanying the cross are a symbol of
the light of the two Testaments from which Christ
supported the words of his teaching, as when he said "Such
and such was said to those of old, but I tell you such and
such". (cp Matt. 5:21, 27, 33).
The fragrant (d-besme) incense is a symbol of
the delight (bussama) that is to come, which our
Lord promised to those who believe in him and keep his
commandments.
The qanona "Holy..." is a symbol of the
sanctification (of Christ) by the angels who
accompanied him during his entire dispensation, just as the
blessed Matthew said, "The angels approached and were
ministering to him". (Matt. 4:11)
The Law and the Prophets that are read are a symbol of
the demonstrations that our Lord adduced for the
confirmation of his teaching, taken from Moses and all
the Prophets, such as when he was seen saying to the
Jews, "Examine the Scriptures in which you hope that you have
eternal life: they will testify concerning me". (John
5:39)
And again, "Do you imagine that I am accusing you before the
Father? There is one who accuses you, Moses, whom you hold to
be true. If you had believed in Moses, you would have been
believing in me; for Moses wrote concerning me. And if you do
not believe his writings, how will you believe in my words?"
(John 5:45-47)
And again, increasing his rebuke, he was saying to them,
"None of you keeps the Law". Thus, when he was given the Book
of Isaiah [190a] the Prophet to read, he read the section
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me; for this reason the Lord
has anointed me" etc. (Luke 4:18) After the reading he said
to them, "Today this Scripture which you have heard has been
fulfilled". (Luke 4:21) And when they further argued against
him, he said to them, "Well did the prophet Isaiah prophesy
and say 'This people honours me with their lips, but their
heart is greatly distant from me, and in vain do they fear
me, teaching doctrines that belong to the ordinances of human
beings'". (Matt. 15:7)
And again, when they asked him to show them a sign from
heaven, he said, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for
a sign, but no sign will be given to it, apart from the sign
of Jonah the prophet: for just as Jonah was in the fish's
belly for three days and three nights, so the Son of Man will
be in the heart [190b] of the earth for three days and three
nights". (Matt. 12:39-40)
In the same manner, when he was prophesying concerning the
devastation of Jerusalem, his disciples asked him, "When will
these things happen?" (Matt.24:3) He said in answer, "When
you see that unclean sign spoken of by Daniel the prophet".
(Matt. 24:15)
Our Lord used to adduce many demonstrations to establish his
teaching. It is for this reason that the Law and the Prophets
are read first.
The Acts of the Apostles are read along with
the Old Testament: firstly, as a demonstration of
the harmony of the two Testaments. And secondly, as an
indication of what was done by our Lord before he suffered,
for the Old Testament still held sway, [191a] and the
apostles were living as Jews. Our Lord sent them to all the
towns of Israel, saying to them, "Do not go to the region of
the gentiles, and do not enter the town of the Samaritans. Go
rather to the sheep who have been lost from the House of
Israel, and tell them, Repent, the Kingdom of Heaven has come
close to you". (Matt. 10:5-7)
The sitting down of the priests on the Bema at the
time of the Readings is for a demonstration of what our
Lord said to his Apostles, "You who have left everything
and followed me, when the Son of Man comes in his glory,
you too shall sit on twelve thrones and judge the twelve
tribes of Israel". (Matt. 19:28)
Their rising up from sitting: (this) points to
the assurance of the Apostles' minds at our Lord's
words. [192a]
The estatyona before the Apostle: a
symbol of the praises of the people concerning John who,
after he appeared, was preaching repentance and the
forgiveness of sins; and he was prophesying concerning
the closeness of the Kingdom of Heaven.
The reading from the Apostle: a symbol of
John's exalted words when he spoke to the crowds
concerning our Saviour, such as "He who has come from above,
is above all" (John 3:31), along with the rest of such
passages; and "I am not the Christ, but the one sent
before him". (John 3:28)
That a deacon reads the Apostle and not a priest is
because John was in the role of a deacon/minister before
our Saviour, and not in the role of a presbyter, a priest
of the New Testament.
The psalmody (zummara) before the Gospel: a
symbol of the songs of praise of the disciples
and children who were crying out saying, "Hosanna
[192a] to the son of David" etc. (Matt. 21:9).
The silk vestment that the priest carrying the
Gospel is wrapped in: (this is) because he stands
in the role of our Lord who was wrapped in a robe of
glory.
The coming forth of the Gospel, and the Cross with it:
a symbol of the humanity of our Lord which existed in body
and soul. The Cross is a symbol of the body which was
crucified, and the Gospel a symbol of the soul in which there
is rationality.
That the Gospel goes forth with a procession of the
deacons is a symbol of the procession with which our Lord
entered Jerusalem, riding on a colt.
The reading of the Gospel: a demonstration of our
Lord's reply to the Scribes and Pharisees who were
smitten with envy, and they said to him, "Do you not hear
what these people are saying? Rebuke them, so that they do
not praise you as God". Whereas our Lord answered and said to
them, "If these keep quiet, the stones will cry out" etc. And
this is the end of the matter. (Matt. 21:16, Luke
19:39-40)
[192b] The reading of the Gospel is a symbol of all the
words which our Lord spoke to the Jews before he
suffered.
The Cross which is fixed above the staff is a
symbol of what our Lord said as he indicated by what
death the Son of Man would be raised up, and (how)
everyone who believes in him will not be ashamed, but have
eternal life.
The Lights at that moment are a symbol of what our
Lord told his Apostles, "You are the light of the
world" (Matt. 5:14); and again, "Let your light thus
shine out before people so that they may see your good
works and praise your Father who is in heaven". (Matt.
5:16)
The fact that there are two Lights, not one, is
because he did not say this just to the Apostles, all of
whom were from the single people of Israel, but also (he
said it) concerning those who from the gentiles were
converted at their hands, as the words he spoke when he
prayed testify, [193a] "Not only for these do I ask, but also
for those who believe through their words". (John 17:20)
The (sweet) incense at this moment
is a symbol of the sweetness of our Lord's words; what
he said indicates: "Come unto me, all you who are weary and
carrying loads, and I will give you rest (Matt. 11:28); for
my yoke is kind (bassim) and my load is light". (Matt.
11:30) And again, "Learn from me that I am restful and humble
in my heart, and you will find rest for yourselves". (Matt.
11:29)
The turgama after the Gospel is a symbol of the
teaching uttered by Jesus before he suffered.
The supplication and proclamation: as a
demonstration of his saying "Be wakeful and pray so
that you do not enter into temptation" (Matt. 26:41)
The prayer of the syamida which the person who
fills the role of Christ prays is a symbol of the prayer that
he prayed [193b] over his disciples before he suffered:
"Holy Father, keep them by your name that you
have given me, so that they may be one, just as we are one"
(John 17:11), and the remainder of the words that he uttered
in prayer before he was arrested by the Jews.
The Cross and the Gospel on the Throne that is
on the Bema: a symbol of the sitting of Jesus among
his disciples as he taught the crowds in Jerusalem.
The taking up of the Cross along with the Gospel from
the Throne, and the descent from the Bema: a symbol of
the arrest of Jesus by the crucifiers, and his departure from
Jerusalem to the place where he was crucified.
The fact that a priest carries the Gospel: a symbol of
the attachment of John the Evangelist who accompanied Jesus
up to the crucifixion.
The carrying of the Cross by a deacon:[194a] a symbol
of the carrying of the Cross by Simon of Cyrene who was
coming from the field. (Matt. 27:32 and par.)
The fact that the Cross and the Gospel come down from
the Bema without any procession and unaccompanied by
priests and deacons: because when Jesus was arrested and
led off to be crucified, all his disciples abandoned him and
fled.
The raising of the Cross at the entrance of the
sanctuary door: a symbol of the crucifixion of Jesus on the
wood (of the Cross).
The separation of the Gospel from the Cross, and
its being placed on the other side: a symbol of the
separation of his soul from his body and its going to
Paradise.
The fact that, when the Cross and Gospel are
placed by the sanctuary door, the deacons say
"Let whoever has not received baptism [194b]
depart": a symbol which (the Church) depicts
(indicating) that when the soul of Jesus separated
from his body and entered Paradise, the soul of
the (Good) Thief accompanying it (cp Luke 23:43),
all the souls of the righteous from Adam up till that
moment, entered after them into Paradise, which is a
staging post for the Kingdom of Heaven; whereas all
the souls of sinners are held back and prohibited from
entering.
At this moment the Church depicts a type by which
she portrays the crucifixion of Jesus on the Wood and
the separation <of his soul> (from his body)
and its entry into Paradise; by dividing off and
expelling those who are not worthy to participate in
his living and saving body, (the Church) hints
that in the same way the souls of sinners have
been held back and prohibited from entering that holy
place of Paradise along with [195a] the souls
of the righteous. It is as if the divine intimation
was saying to them, "Let everyone depart who does not
repent of his sins like the Thief, and for whom his
repentance has not filled the place of baptism, and let
him not enter Paradise. And everyone who from this
moment onwards is not going to receive the mark
(rushma) of Salvation in the baptism that Jesus
has handed down to his Church, let him go back and not
enter that holy place; just as Jesus said
beforehand: 'Whoever is not born of water and the
Spirit shall not enter the Kingdom of heaven'". (John
3:5) Thus in the case of everyone who does not
sanctify his body and soul and receive the gift of
the Mysteries in purity, his soul will go (and join) the
sinners, and not enter Paradise.
"Depart, catechumens
(shamoʿe)", etc. [195b](This is) like
the divine intimation bidding the angels there to preserve
those (souls) mentioned (earlier).
From this point onwards the Church depicts a type
of the burial of Christ by the setting out of the bread
and wine that are placed on the altar, for the altar
is considered as (taking) the place of the tomb, and the veil
over the bread and wine as (taking) the place of the stone
which was placed above the entrance of the tomb. (cp
Matt. 28:2 and par.)
The deacons who stand on either side: a symbol of the
angels who were seen in the tomb, one by his pillow, the
other at his feet. (cp John 20:12)
The Cross and the Gospel that are placed on the altar,
and above them the icon of our Lord, amidst which the
awesome Mysteries are consecrated: these fulfil the place
of the person of our Lord who, [196a] when he handed down
these Holy Mysteries to his disciples did not cut some of his
own body to give them to eat, nor did he put some of his own
blood in a cup to give them to drink—this could not
possibly happen!; rather, he blessed bread and wine, broke
and gave to them saying, "This is my body and this is my
blood; take, eat and drink of it, all of you. And thus should
you be doing whenever you are gathered in remembrance of me".
(cp Matt. 26:26-7 and par.; 1 Cor. 11:23-6)
The fact that he said "This is my body", and "This is my
blood", and did not say "a type of my body and my blood", was
so that the matter of the Holy Mysteries should not be
thought of as ordinary. [196b] For this reason, in the
consecration of the Mysteries the holy Church depicts the
type of that moment when our Lord handed down this Mystery to
his disciples: instead of the person of our Lord, she places
the Cross and the Gospel on the altar, and instead of the
bread and wine which he gave, she sets out bread and wine.
Accordingly it is not at all permitted for the Holy
Mysteries to be consecrated without the proximity of the
Cross, the Gospel and the icon of our Lord.
The ʿ
Onitha of the
Raze: a symbol of the ineffable songs of praise which the
holy angels and the souls of the righteous raised up at the
time when the souls entered Paradise along with the soul of
our Lord.
Alternatively: a symbol of the songs of praise of the
angels and saints at the time of the Passion of our
Lord, when they saw that the earth quaked, the rocks
were rent apart, the sun [197a] was darkened, and the
curtain of the Temple was torn, and the dead who had arisen.
(Matt. 27:45, 51-2)
The fact that at this time the priests are seated on
the Bema is because, at the death of Jesus, all the
Apostles were sitting in Jerusalem, in hiding for fear of the
Jews, with their minds dazed as they pondered on the
death of their Master.
Their washing their hands at this time: a symbol of
the washing away from their hearts of resentment
(Abraham: against the Jews) and doubt over the love of their
Lord.
Alternatively: a symbol of the washing of the Jews.
Again, because they are on the point of entering the
sanctuary in order to complete and perfect the service of the
awesome Mysteries, they do well to indicate, by the washing
of their hands, the washing away from their hearts of
resentment and enmity; just as our Lord himself [197b] said,
"When you get up to pray, leave behind anything you have
against anyone". (Mark 11:25) And in another place he said,
"Do you wash the interior—that is, the heart—from
which issue forth evil thoughts which make a person unclean".
(cp Matt. 15:19-20) Just as the blessed David said, "I have
washed my hands in purity and have gone around your altar".
(Ps. 26:5(6))
The fact that when the priests go down from the Bema
the deacons come out of the sanctuary and do obeisance to
them, and give way for them to enter (the sanctuary) in front
of them: this instructs that when the Jews crucified Christ,
the priesthood (Abraham: and kingdom) was taken from them;
and the Levites left the sanctuary while there entered the
company of Simon, who did not carry out their ministry with
the sacrifice of animals, [198a] but with the living
sacrifice of the Son of God, concerning whom the blessed
Melkizedek, in the distant past and many generations ago, had
indicated beforehand. (cp Gen. 14:20; Heb. 5:6,
7:10-11).
The fact that the deacons meet the priests and
enter the sanctuary after them is a demonstration
of what has happened: that those of the priests
and Levites who believed in Christ and were converted
used to hold the Apostles in great honour, like disciples
their teachers, showing reverence to them and showing respect
to their words; just like (other) people who were
converted through them and received baptism from them, they
also received ordination of priesthood from them. Rightly are
they numbered after the apostles, in accordance with the will
of the Spirit who (thus) assigned them.
The fact that,[198b] when the priests enter the
sanctuary, before everything else they say the Creed laid
down by our Fathers. This indicates that everyone who does
not correctly believe in the Holy Trinity and the
Dispensation effected in Christ, is alien to the truth, and
deprived of delight with our Lord Christ who was
sacrificed for the salvation of the world.
The fact that when the Creed has finished the
herald (= deacon) says, "Pray for the memory of
our Fathers the bishops" is a demonstration of the
spiritual love which bids us to honour and pray for
our Fathers who have laboured, toiled and struggled for
the true faith, and for its sake have accepted all kinds of
tortures and deaths.
The (words) "Let us also pray for the priests and
deacons": because they too have toiled [199a] and been
diligent in the divine ministry, and they have instructed and
baptized. And "Let us remember, along with these, the
celibate young men and women", for they too, by their
virtuous way of life, have benefited the entire community.
Thus we also pray for the remainder of the faithful, who
are to the Church like sons and daughters, in order to show
that the fullness of spiritual love is preserved in the
Church.
The fact that we remember the prophets, apostles, martyrs
and confessors is because we take refuge in their prayers so
that we may be held worthy to carry out fittingly this
awesome divine service.
Up to here the Church depicts, through her types, the
Mystery/symbol of the death and burial of Christ. From now on
the priest approaches to depict the type of the
Resurrection through the recital [199b] of the holy words
from his mouth, and by the sign (rushma) of the cross
which is in his hand. For just as our Lord Jesus
Christ, when he transmitted these Mysteries, blessed, gave
thanks as said (these words), so the Church, in
accordance with his bidding, separates out a single priest to
be the one who blesses and gives thanks, in the likeness of
Christ our Lord. Through the recital, he indicates that he is
uttering the words of our Lord, (saying) "This is my body
which is broken for you for the forgiveness of sins". (1 Cor.
11:24) After the priest's recital, blessing the bread and
the wine, through the grace of the Holy Spirit which
overshadows, they become henceforth the Body and Blood of
Christ—not by nature, but by faith and effectiveness.
It is not that Christ has two bodies, one in heaven and one
on earth; rather, [200a] just as a king and his statue/image
do not constitute two kings. Nor does the humanity which has
been taken from us constitute two sons, but a single Son of
God who has been united to the humanity that (comes) from us.
Thus this Body along with that one in heaven constitute the
single Body of Christ. Accordingly, it is necessary for
the priest to complete this awesome service in fear and with
great attention, realizing that he is standing there at that
moment instead of Christ, as he blesses and gives
thanks.
Now at this time the priest prays the first prayer. In it
is confession and supplication for himself; he prays and
supplicates that he may be held worthy to carry out his
priestly action fittingly.
The first Peace which the priest gives [200b] to the
people is a prayer of the priesthood where he prays
for the people that there may remain with him, and beside
him, that peace which Christ left behind before he
died, saying "My peace I leave to you". (John
14:27)
After the people respond to the priest "May you have
peace with the spirit of priesthood which you have received",
then the herald bids the people "Give the peace to one
another in the love of Christ"; that is to say, "Show in
action your peace with one another, and root out from your
hearts resentment and enmity, so that you may become
worthy to receive the life-giving Mysteries, and be
forgiven your sins". (cp Matt. 6:14) For with this peace
we fulfil the words of our Lord, "Forgive, so that you
may be forgiven", and again, "When you offer up your
offering on the altar [201a] and there remember that your
brother holds some resentment against you, leave your
offering there on the altar", and the rest. (Matt.
5:23-4)
The fact that at this point they read the Book of the
Living and the Dead is for a demonstration that the Mysteries
of our salvation have been performed on behalf of the living
and the dead, and together, the living and the dead are in
need of what is carried out by us in a mystical
fashion.
That a single priest offers the sacrifice: as a
symbol of the one High Priest who was sacrificed for the
salvation of our race.
The priests and deacons who stand in the sanctuary
(are) a demonstration that the holy angels are close by when
the Mystery of our salvation is performed.
That the herald cries out and says "Stand well
and be attentive to what is being done: (this) is an
instruction of the priesthood who prepare the entire
[201b] people so that everyone stands with great
attention before God at that awesome and dread
time.
The incense at this point: a symbol of the aromatic
spices with which the body of our Saviour was
embalmed.
That the priest inclines himself three times and
recites the holy words of the offering of the oblation:
a symbol of the three days during which the humanity of
our Lord was under the authority of death.
The fact that he recites the entire section quietly,
but at the end raises his voice so that the people can
hear: first, because it is a Mystery that is being
performed, and it is not appropriate that all the people
should know of it; and secondly, so that the words, on being
heard, should not be learnt by laymen, women and children,
with the result that the divine worlds are held to be
ordinary and (so) despised.
The fact that [202a] he raises his voice at the end
(is) so that, along with the priest, the people should
participate with the response "Amen".
The fact that, at the moment of the epiclesis [lit.
hovering] the herald cries out and says "In your
minds pray; in stillness and fear be standing":
in order to teach us that at this moment full of awe it is
not appropriate that we should utter our prayers in an
audible voice, but rather, in stillness, within the
heart.
The fact that the entire people prostrate, along with
the priest, at the time of the epiclesis [lit. hovering]
corresponds to our supplicating, together with the priest,
that the grace of the Holy Spirit should come and perfect and
complete the Holy Mysteries. Again, in honour of the coming
of Grace we supplicate and prostrate in stillness
and awe.
The fact [202b] that when the priest invokes the
Spirit and she hovers he joins the Body to the Blood, and the
Blood to the Body: a symbol of the returning of the soul
of our Lord within his body, and his resurrection from
the dead. For the priest resurrects the Body symbolically
through the agency of the Spirit.
The fact that, after the tabernacling of Grace, the
priest does not make the sign of the cross again over the
Mysteries (is) because the Mysteries have been completed
by the dissolution of death.
The fact that at this point we remove the incense from
the altar (is) because corruptibility, which was the reason
for the embalming, is dissolved.
After these things the herald cries out and says
"Let us all with fear and honour approach the
Mystery of the honoured Body and Blood of our Saviour"
etc. Through this proclamation the priesthood teaches
us concerning the exalted character and the greatness of
the Mystery; and that we should not [203a] henceforth
look on the bread and wine in accordance with their
natural disposition, but as the Body and Blood of
Christ, who in his human qnoma is body and
soul, like everyone, because of the conjunction with God
the Word who shared everything with him apart from his
(divine) nature; (God) granted that he should have life
in his qnoma, just as our Lord said "Just as the
Father has life in his qnoma, so likewise did he
grant to the Son to have life in his qnoma". (John
5:26). For it is clear that what he said here about the
Father was said because of the weakness of the listeners,
for it was not the case that the Father gave to his
eternal Son to have life in his qnoma, as is the
supposition of the heretics, but (he did so) to the Man
who (derives) from us, who, because of his union with God
the Word, has inherited a name that is more honourable
than [203b] all names, etc., (cp Heb.1:4) that is, the
Son of God, as the angel said to his Bearer, "He shall be
called Son of the Most High", (Luke 1:32) that is, the
Man who possesses body and blood, whose type he
transmitted to the Church; just as, again, our Lord said,
"The Spirit gives life, the body profits nothing".(John
6:63) For the body of our Lord Christ does not possess of
its own (human) nature New Life, and was going to give
(this) to others too; rather, through the grace of the
Holy Spirit which was given to him (sc. the Man) as a
result of his resurrection from the dead, and by the
perfect conjunction with the divine Nature, he was raised
up, and became the gatherer of immortality to others,
just as he said "Just as I am alive because of my Father,
so whoever eats me will also live because of me". (John
6:54) Accordingly, with awe [204a] and great attention we
ought to approach this Mystery, and not in an ordinary
fashion.
For just as (in the case of) the blessing with which
God blessed Adam and Eve, saying "Be fruitful and
multiply, and fill the earth", (Gen. 1:28) it travels
through all generations up till eternity, without being
held back, so too with that blessing with which our Lord
blessed the bread and the wine, calling them his Body and
Blood, it travels through all generations up to eternity,
without being held back.
Again, just as it is an act of great wickedness that
someone should say that Adam is not the image of God when
God (himself) called him his image (Gen. 1:26), so (too)
it is an act of great wickedness that someone should say
of the Mysteries that they are not the Body and Blood of
Christ, after (Christ) himself has said [204b] "This is
my Body, and this is my Blood".
For even though by their nature they are bread and
wine, but we, by faith, ought to look upon them as the
Body and Blood of Christ, just as we were instructed by
Christ. And whenever we take them in our hands we ought
thus to think that we are embracing and kissing our
Saviour himself, as we mingle his Body in our body, and
mix his Blood in our blood. Consequently it is
appropriate that we approach them with awe and honour,
seeing that they convey two types, of things past and
things to come: for they teach us about the closeness we
shall have to Christ in the world to come; for he, again,
arms us against suffering and death, since through these
our salvation has been accomplished. For the blessed Paul
said, [205a] "Whenever you eat this Bread and drink this
Cup, you recall the death of our Lord, until his coming
(again)". (1 Cor. 11:26) For if, by participating in the
Mysteries we make a commemoration of the suffering and
death, according to the words of the Apostle, (Christ)
did well to transmit to us, along with the Body, also the
Blood, so that by the Body we might learn about the
suffering, in that suffering affects the body, and
through the Blood, (we might learn) the strength of the
suffering, in that the suffering causes blood to be shed.
And from this we learn that, through the suffering and
death (of Christ) we have been held worthy of this entire
gift, in order that we might have expectation of
resurrection and delight with Christ in eternal
life.
Besides teaching us how we should approach the Holy
Mysteries in awe [205b] and with honour, at the same time
the sense of the words of this proclamation also puts to
shame the dogmas of the heretics who proclaim that this
(sc. the karozutha) is concerning (?) the
reception (of Communion)—about which they say that
we are saved by the death of God—with the result
that they have removed this proclamation from their
churches, since they cannot (bear to) hear what is said
in it, (namely) that for our sakes the Only Begotten God
the Word took from human beings a mortal body and a
rational soul endowed with intelligence, and immortal;
and after the entire dispensation on our behalf the
Firstfruits of our nature was tested on the cross, arose
from the dead, and was raised to heaven.
At the end of this proclamation we say "Lord, forgive
the sins and wrongdoings of your servants",
seeing that we are in this world of mortality,[206a] and
it is not possible that we should not do wrong, as we
learn from what has been said "There is no one who does
not sin". (cp Eccl. 7:20)
After these things we say the prayer of "Our Father
who is in heaven". It is right we should say this prayer
at this point: for, because we are depicting the Mystery
of the death and the resurrection by which we become children
of God, it is good that we now call God "Our Father". Just as
our Lord said, "You shall not call (anyone) father on
earth", (Matt. 23:9) and as the blessed Paul said, "Just
as Jesus Christ has risen from the dead in the glory of his
Father, so too we shall walk in New Life", (Rom. 6:4) in that
henceforth we become, in faith, children of God, just as he
again said, "We call God 'Father, our Father'". (Rom.
8:15)
The Peace which the priest gives at this [206b] moment
is a symbol of that peace which our Lord gave to the women
and to his disciples after he had arisen from the
dead.
After these things the priest says "What
is holy is fitting for the holy, in harmony": we do not
presume to speak about this matter which the Interpreter
expounded.
We crown this service by means of thanksgiving, and we
say "One holy Father", indicating through this that the Holy
Trinity is not a numerical Trinity where one precedes two,
and two (precedes) three, but (a case of) one, one,
one.
We provide a seal with "Praise to the Father and to
the Son and to the Holy Spirit, for eternal ages, amen". By
this we indicate that the cause of all our benefits is that
worshipful and glorious Nature which is confessed (as)
Father, Son and Holy Spirit, [207a] to whom is due glory
and honour, thanksgiving and worship, not only now but to
eternal ages, amen.
We say these things at this point in remembrance of
what our Lord said to his Apostles after he arose from
the dead, that "everything has been transmitted to me" etc.,
(Matt. 11:27) "Go out, therefore, make disciples of all
the nations; baptise them in the name of the Father, Son and
Holy Spirit". (Matt. 28:19)
The fact that we say "Fearful are You", and the
Response (ʿ
onaya) is a symbol of the
praises and ineffable hullale with which all the
heavenly hosts give praise for the dispensation that has been
effected in Christ.
That the consecrator is the first to receive the
Sacrament (qudsha) is a symbol of what (occurred with)
Jesus, the High Priest, for the priest stands in his role;
for (Christ), through the sacrifice of himself first, through
the Holy Spirit, [207b] received the nourishment of
immortality; and then he was capable of giving it to
others. For this reason, it was not in an ordinary way,
without the Spirit, the divine Nature in him, that he took
and gave to himself, just as it is said that he also raised
himself, in that he was also God; and it was not because he
was Man that he raised himself, as he intimated by what he
said, "This commandment I have received from my Father".
(John 10:18) Therefore (the priest who celebrates)
should, without restraint, be bold to receive the
Sacrament without anyone else, for he stands in the role of
the life-giving Spirit. Now the consecrator gives to others
as a demonstration of what will happen as a result of our
Lord at the (final) resurrection, for he will give us all
that future immortality.
Our partaking of the Holy Mysteries is a symbol of our
participation that we shall have with him in the Kingdom
[208a] of Heaven.
The teshbohta beginning
"Our Lord Jesus, revered Sovereign", which we say at the
end of the service of the Mysteries, is a symbol of (the
praise) that will occur in the world to come from all
rational beings, for we praise and exalt as heavenly King the
one in whom the entire fullness of divinity willed to dwell,
and through his mediation we worship the Trinity.
The "Seal of Prayer" and the signing of the cross
by the priest over the people (is) in remembrance of that
blessing with which our Lord blessed his Apostles at the
time he was raised up to heaven, just as the blessed
Luke said, "It happened that while he was blessing them
that he was separated from them and he ascended to
heaven". (Luke 24:51)
Again, the blessings with which the priest
blesses the people as he stands on the threshold of the
sanctuary door is [208b] a symbol of the tabernacling of
the grace of the Holy Spirit over the apostles after our
Lord had ascended to heaven, just as he himself said,
"I tell you the truth, that it is better for you that I
should go; for if I do not go, the Paraclete will not
come to you. Whereas, if I go, I will send him to you".
(John 16:7) This was fulfilled with the apostles on the
day of Pentecost, as Luke wrote in Acts, "There appeared
to them tongues divided like fire, and they settled on
each one of them and they were all filled with the Holy
Spirit". (Acts 2:3)
Also the Peace that we give one another after
receiving the Mysteries is a symbol of the holy union by
which we are united there to one another, as limbs, and we
are all joined to the Head of the Church [209a] and the
Firstborn from the dead, (Col. 1:18) our Lord Jesus
Christ.
Understand, O discerning reader, and see how, from the
reading of the Gospel until the end of this service, nothing
of the ancient psalmody is said, and realize that it is not
right that there should be said on feasts those two Psalms
which are said in the monasteries of solitaries when the
brethren finish in the sanctuary, since these do not belong
to the former (liturgical) arrangements, but they have come
in recently; and testimony to their recent character are the
churches where they are not said. But if there should be a
church with this custom, having learnt it from solitaries who
are ancient(?) or close by, they [ ] accepting it without
investigation [ ] and all sorts of teshbhatha and
qanone [209b] and (liturgical) arrangements. On what
understanding the solitaries make use of these two psalms I
have no idea. But one should realize this, that formerly the
psalms from the Old Testament were arranged so as to be used
as a demonstration of the prior character of the Old
Testament, preceding in time the New Testament; accordingly
as a result we culminate all our services with new poetic
texts, so as to demonstrate that the New Testament has
fulfilled and set the seal on the Old Testament, following
the declaration of the blessed Paul, who says, "Christ is the
end of the Law", (Rom 10:4) and as our Saviour said, "The Law
and the Prophets have prophesied up to the time of John; from
then on the Kingdom of Heaven is necessarily [210a] in
force". (Luke 16:16) Both these things we depict in the
arrangements for the church services; if that were not so,
why is it that in all the services, after the
ʿ
onitha, the qanona,
teshbohta and karozutha,
or "Holy...", we do not utter anything further from the Old
Testament. And if we observe this in all the other services,
how much more ought we to observe this in the service of the
Mysteries, which is the seal of all the other services. For
it is in this service that we depict the type of the Passion
and death and resurrection and ascension, and the gift of the
Spirit of our Lord Jesus Christ who fulfilled the Old
Testament and gave the New. Manifestly in this service we
ought to observe the (rule) that after we have finished
[210b] the service, we do not say anything from the Old
Testament. Otherwise, after receiving the Mysteries, the
participation in which points to the participation we shall
have with Christ in the world to come, then, at the very
moment when we depict the type of that holy union, we are
returning to say a psalm from the Old Testament—which
depicts the type of this world: by doing so we indicate that
we concur with the infantile mentality of the Jews, and that
of the heretic Apollinarius who transmitted that, after the
resurrection we would again be eating and drinking, and once
again living in the way of life of the Old Testament. This is
something that is absurd [211a] for us to accept, seeing that
it is the opposite to the words which our Lord spoke: "Human
beings will be like angels, because they have become children
of the Resurrection". (Luke 20:36)
Along with these things, I urge those who are going to
encounter this book not to attach blame to me if they find
anything I have said which does not agree with the view of
others, for it is the sequence of the arrangements that
forces me to act thus; otherwise, the sequential order of the
wording and meaning would be confused and muddled. For every
explanation that does not have a sequential ordering that
fits the order and sequence (akolouthia) of the words,
then the commentator misses the aim of the meaning and he
will not be accepted by discerning readers, as the blessed
[211b] Interpreter declared when he spoke on this matter on
many occasions. I have not thought it necessary to set these
out here, so as not to burden the discourse by reason of the
expansive and drawn-out nature of the universal Teacher's
words.
Text
[13]
Since the Syriac text of this important section of Gabriel's
Commentary has not yet been published, I give it here.
I take the opportunity to thank Fr. Robert
Matheus for kindly lending me a photographic copy of the
manuscript.
In
copying Gabriel's work the scribe of Or. 3336 has made a number
of small errors, and these have been corrected in the text
printed below, though in every case the manuscript's reading is
given in the apparatus.
_______
Notes
_______
Bibliography
Brock, S.P. "An early Syriac
Commentary on the Liturgy," Journal of Theological
Studies NS 37 (1986), 387-403.
— "Syriac writers from Beth
Qatraye," Aram 11-12 (1999-2000), 85-96.
Chabot, J.B. Le Livre de la
Chasteté composé par Jesusdenah (Rome,
1896).
Dauvillier, J. "Quelques
témoignages littéraires et archéologiques
sur la présence et sur le culte des Images dans
l'Ancienne Eglise Chaldéenne," L'Orient Syrien 1
(1956), 297-304.
Fiey, J-M. Nisibe, metropole
syriaque orientale (CSCO Subsidia 54, 1977).
Jammo, S.H. "Gabriel Qatraya et son
commentaire sur la liturgie chaldéenne," Orientalia
Christiana Periodica 32 (1966), 39-52.
— La structure de la messe
chaldéenne, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 207,
1979.
— "L'Office du soir
chaldéen au temps de Gabriel Qatraya," L'Orient
Syrien 12 (1967), 187-210.
Parry, K. "Images in the Church of
the East," in J.F. Coakley and K. Parry (eds.), The Church
of the East: (= Bulletin of the John Rylands Library
78:3 (1996)), 143-62.
Margoliouth, G. Descriptive List
of Syriac and Karshuni MSS. in the British Museum Acquired
Since 1873, (London: Longmans & Co., 1899).
Mateos, J. Lelya-Sapra: Essai
d'interprétation des matines chaldéennes
(Orientalia Christiana Analecta 156, 1979).
Sherwood, P. (ed.) "Mimro de Serge
de Reshaina sur la vie spirituelle," L'Orient Syrien 5
(1960), 433-59; 6 (1961), 95-115, 121-56.
Vosté, J-M. Ordo
iudiciorum ecclesiasticorum ... a Mar Abdisoc
metropolita Nisibis et Armeniae latine interpretatus
(Fonti, II.xv; Rome, 1940).