WHEN Lord Jesus Christ, having gathered his disciples round him to supper on the night before he suffered death, solemnly broke bread before them and blessed a cup of wine and gave them to his disciples, he enjoined them to continue this thenceforward as a continual memorial of his death and passion undergone for the redemption of the world. This command was obeyed from the time that the Holy Spirit descended upon the Church shortly after our Lord's ascension into heaven. We are told, of those who were converted by the preaching of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost, that 'they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in the breaking of bread, and in the prayers'. [Acts ii. 42.]

The first liturgy of the type that later became universal does not appear, in the records that have come down to us, until two centuries after this. We have a certain number of notices in the literature of those centuries, from which it is possible to learn something of the nature of the prayers and ceremonies that accompanied the 'breaking of the bread'; and these we must examine. The evidence is, however, at almost every point confused by the absence at that period of any clear definitions of religious ideas, and of the technical language in which they would at a later date be expressed. It is with the utmost caution that we should form conclusions based on words and phrases which have a very definite meaning to us, but which were probably used more loosely in a primitive age. The sentence quoted in the last paragraph is an example. We shall see later on that a great deal of uncertainty in the interpretation of evidence arises from doubt as to whether words like 'prex', 'orationes', &c., have in any particular case a specialized meaning such as they often acquired, or are used quite generally. In the Acts of the Apostles ' the prayers' may mean, as it would later, the prayers that were used on the occasion of the breaking of the bread; on the other hand, with more probability, the writer may be referring to some other occasion on which the congregation met for prayer. This ambiguity will pursue us for some centuries.

The evidence about the Eucharist is also confused by the fact that at first it was sometimes, if not always, celebrated in connection with, and following, a social meal known as the Agape or Love-feast, so that any description of the prayers used at the breaking of the bread may be taken to refer either to the Agape or material feast, or to the Eucharist or spiritual feast. This would not have much significance if it were not for the fact that before long the date is difficult to determine the two functions were separated, and we may suppose that any prayers belonging to the Agape, such, for instance, as the thanksgiving for the food consumed, would normally disappear, but might in some cases continue, probably with modifications adapting them to the liturgy. And indeed there are scholars, as we shall see, who hold that two of the prayers of the Didache are such, and that they do make sporadic appearances in the ancient liturgies.

The Agape

Two passages, one at the beginning of this primitive period and one near the end, when the Agape must have been near its extinction, will suffice to show its nature.

St. Paul, writing to the Church of Corinth [l Cor.11.17 ff.], rebukes the brethren there for disorders which have happened at their religious gatherings. There are dissensions among them on these occasions. First he speaks at some length on improper customs among the women attending worship. Then he censures their differences, without indicating their cause, though they seem to be connected with the supper itself.

When ye come together in the congregation (ἐκκλησία - ekklesia)
I hear that dissensions (σχίσματα - schismata) prevail among you,
and I partly believe it.
Indeed there must be parties (αἱρέσεις - haireseias) among you,
that the trustworthy may be manifest.
When therefore ye assemble yourselves together, it is not the Lord's Supper that ye eat,
(οὐκ ἔστι κυριακὸν δεῖπνον φαγεῖν - ouk esti kyriakon deipnon phagein)for in your eating each one taketh before other his own supper, and one is hungry and another drunken.
Have ye no houses in which to eat and drink Or do ye despise the congregation of God,
and humiliate the poor What am I to say to you Am I to praise you I cannot praise you in this;for I myself received from the Lord that which I delivered to you, &c.

Here follows the account of the Institution of the Eucharist. Then there are warnings against unworthy partaking of the bread and the cup, 'not discerning the body', and a final exhortation:

Wherefore my brethren, when ye come together to eat, wait one for another.
If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home;so that your coming together may not bring judgment upon you.

In this passage the meeting of the faithful was for the purpose of celebrating the Eucharist. The language leaves no doubt about that. On the other hand, it is equally certain that it was also a social feast, held in close connection with the Eucharist. The mention of the dissensions at this point must mean that they were caused by the inconsiderate and self-indulgent behaviour described. The most natural explanation is that resentment was caused by the fact that some had too much to eat and drink, while others went hungry and thirsty. There is an explicit reference to the poor (τοὺς μὴ ἔχοντας - tous me echontas). St. Paul does not discourage the holding of these meals, but suggests that those who have their own means should satisfy their hunger at home, in order, no doubt, that they should still participate, but as an expression of social fellowship, rather than for their bodily requirements. He does not indicate whether the feast or the sacrament came first, but the nature of the improper behaviour suggests that the Eucharist followed.

From this passage of St. Paul it will be as well to pass to the best account we have of the Agape, written by Tertullian in Africa at the end of the second century. It is in his Apology, where he is defending the Church to the heathen. After describing the charity and love that Christians show to one another, he proceeds:

Why wonder then if such love takes a social form (convivatur)
For even our little suppers (cenulae) you revile as extravagant,
as well as scandalous from vice.

He then reminds them of the orgies which accompany heathen festivities, and continues:

It is only with the dining room of the Christians that men find fault. Our feast shows its nature by its name; it is called by the Greek word for 'love' ('dilectio', not 'amor'). Whatever it may cost, what is spent in the name of piety is well spent;
if by this refreshment we help a number of poor people, it is not, as with your parasites, for the satisfaction of enslaving their liberty through corrupting a belly by stuffing it to the accompaniment of insults, but by what is better in the eyes of God, consideration of the lowly. ...Our people do not sit down to meat until prayer to God has been tasted.
That is eaten which hungry men need; that drunk which is sufficient for the sober.
They are so filled, as men who remember that God is to be praised by them during the night; they speak, as those who know that God is listening. After water for the hands and lights have been brought, each is called upon to sing in the company,
as well as he can, to God, either out of the Holy Scriptures, or that which is of his own composition.
This shows to what extent he is drunk! In the same way the company dismisses with prayer[Apol.i.39.].

There is no reference to the Eucharist in Tertullian's account of the Agape; they had perhaps been separated by this time, though the reserve Christians were bound to maintain concerning the mysteries would naturally account for his silence. But his description enables us to understand the conditions under which the Eucharist was celebrated at an earlier time.

There are reasons for supposing that there was not at first any other public Office than the Eucharist [Swete, J.T.S.iii (1902), 162. Others, however, hold that there was a meeting, corresponding to the Synagogue service, which later became the Mass of the Catechumens.]. The Didache prescribes the use of the Lord's Prayer three times a day in private devotions [c.8.]. The ' Stations' mentioned by Tertullian [De oratione, 19.] were not meetings, but half-day fasts.

The Eucharist in the first century

The New Testament gives us incidental information about the worship of the Church, but scarcely ever is it definitely related to any particular type of gathering. It is therefore only by analogy with the liturgy as later developed that we can conjecture whether any particular acts of worship mentioned were made in connection with the Eucharist or on some other occasion. Such conjectural associations will be noted in the Commentary. It will be sufficient here to mention that the Scriptures were read, and also, on certain occasions, the letters of the Apostles; psalms and hymns were sung, sermons delivered, prayers offered for all sorts of men, sins publicly confessed, and open professions of faith made. There were also prophesying, sometimes quite unintelligible, and acts of healing, and of course baptisms and confirmations. We read as well of some ceremonies. They prayed standing, with hands uplifted, and heads bared; except the women, who were veiled. The kiss of peace was exchanged.

In chapter 7 of this work directions are given for baptism; then there is a short passage about prayer and fasting, after which comes the following:

Concerning the thanksgiving (εὐχαριστία - eucharistia), but it probably does not mean ' Eucharist') thus shall ye give thanks: First, concerning the cup:

We give thee thanks, our Father, for the holy Vine of David thy servant (παιδός),which thou didst make known to us through Jesus thy servant. Thine is the glory for ever. And concerning that which is broken:
We give thee thanks, our Father, for the life and knowledge,
which thou didst make known to us through Jesus thy servant. Thine is the glory for ever. For as this broken bread (τὸ κλάσμα - to klasma),
scattered over the mountains and gathered together, is one,
so may thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into thy Kingdom; for thine is the glory and the power, through Jesus Christ for ever.

Let no one eat or drink of your thanksgiving (or Eucharist) but those who have been baptized into the name of the Lord.For the Lord also has said about this:
'Give not that which is holy to the dogs'.
And after ye are satisfied give thanks thus: We give thee thanks, Holy Father, for thy holy Name, which thou hast made to dwell in our hearts,
and for the knowledge and faith and immortality, which thou hast made known unto us through Jesus thy servant: thine is the glory for ever.
Thou, Almighty Master, 'didst create all things' 'for thy Name's sake',
and didst give food and drink unto men for enjoyment, that they might give thanks to thee; but didst bestow upon us spiritual food and drink and eternal life through thy servant. Before all things we give thee thanks that thou art mighty; thine is the glory forever. Remember, Lord, thy Church, to deliver it from all evil, and to perfect it in thy love, and gather it together 'from the four winds' even thy Church which has been sanctified into thy Kingdom, which thou hast prepared for it; for thine is the power and the glory for ever.

May grace come and may this world pass away. 'Hosanna to the God of David.' If any man is holy let him come; if any man is not, let him repent.
'Maran-Atha.'
Amen.

But permit the prophets to offer thanksgiving as much as they desire.

Chapters 11 to 13 are about apostles and prophets. Chapter 14 reads thus:

And on the Lord's own day gather yourselves together and break bread and give thanks, first confessing your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. And if any man have a dispute with his fellow, let him not join your assembly until they have been reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be defiled; for this sacrifice it is that was spoken of by the Lord: 'In every place and in every time offer me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great king, saith the Lord, and my Name is wonderful among the nations.'

At first sight these passages all seem to refer to the Eucharist, and so most scholars have taken them.

This was still the age of the composition of the New Testament, which was hardly completed. In the books of the New Testament the word εὐχαριστία always means 'thanksgiving' in its general sense. In the Didache the thanksgiving is made, not for the life and death of our Lord, but for certain benefits made known to us through him. The 'Vine of David' seems to mean the Church throughout the ages. The ' spiritual food' does not seem to be the body and blood of our Lord, but, as the parallel of the preceding sentence shows, 'knowledge and faith and immortality'; the thanksgiving is quite general for bodily sustenance and spiritual food. When Apostolic Constitutions, which incorporates the whole of the Didache, applies this language to the Eucharist it has to supplement it with suitable terms. A hearty meal is also implied by the word ἐμπλησθῆναι - emplesthenai 'after ye are satisfied (filled)', for this is a plain direction, not a phrase of devotional rapture. More over, these prayers are found in much the same form (given below) in a tract De Virginitate of the fourth century, often attributed to St. Athanasius, where they are prayers of 'Grace' at ordinary meals.

They are distinctly Jewish in type. The following blessings of the Jewish prayers before the Sabbath meal may be noted:

Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe,
who createst the fruit of the vine. Blessed art thou, O Lord our God,
King eternal, who bringest forth bread from the earth.

The prayers of the Didache are therefore, if its date is early, probably not Eucharistic; from Chapter 14, moreover, we should expect some reference to the sacrifice.

These thanksgivings, however, have their own interest, and some of the language will be found in the later forms. The prayers in De Virginitate mentioned above are as follows:

We thank thee, our Father, for thy holy resurrection. For through Jesus thy servant thou hast made it known to us. And as this bread, having been scattered, is that which is upon this table, and, having been gathered together, has become one, so may thy Church be gathered together, from the ends of the earth, into thy kingdom, for thine is the power and the glory for ever. Amen.
(After the meal)O God, the almighty, and our Lord Jesus Christ, the Name that is above every name, we thank thee and praise thee, because thou hast considered us worthy to share thy good things, the material food. We pray and beseech thee, O Lord, that thou wilt give us also the heavenly food. [Ath. De Virg. 13, 14.]

The Didache is mentioned in this work, and these prayers may therefore have been adapted from it.

The question of the extent to which Jewish worship has influenced or moulded the Christian Liturgy is one to which much attention has been directed. Unfortunately most of the available information about the Jewish forms of worship comes from dates that are too late to give a safe indication of the prayers used in the time of the Apostles. That there was any conscious adoption or imitation of Jewish services can hardly be supposed, in view of the antipathy of the early Church to 'Judaising'. On the other hand, the adherents of Christianity in the earliest days must have unconsciously formed their devotions according to the methods to which they were accustomed. The Eucharist may at first have been moulded somewhat on the lines of the Kiddush, a ceremonial meal held on the eve of the Sabbath and of festivals; if so, it is of little significance, for the Christian sacrament had an inspiration and ideal of its own. More certain is the relationship of the early part of the liturgy with the Sabbath morning Synagogue worship. The purposes and the materials at hand for these services of praise, instruction, and prayer were so similar that it was but natural that the Christian system should follow in the accustomed paths, as we shall see it did.

The second century

The writings of Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch give much interesting information about the Eucharist, but throw no light on the development of the rite. There is a long passage in St. Clement's Epistle to the Romans (cc. 96-8) which has a general resemblance to the Great Thanksgiving of the liturgy, but there is no reason to suppose that it is anything more than a fervent prayer which the author composed for the purpose of the epistle, and it has no close affinity to any specifically liturgical formula [cc. 59-61.] (see Appendix A).

PLINY.

There is, however, a much quoted and important letter, written to the Emperor Trajan, about AD 112 by the Roman orator, Pliny the younger, governor at that time of Bithynia. In the course of this letter, in which he consults the Emperor on how he ought to treat the Christians, he describes their worship, as it has been reported to him by the Christians themselves.

But they declared that this was the extent of their crime or error, that they were accustomed on a regular day to meet before dawn to sing the praise (carmen dicere) of Christ as a god, and mutually to bind themselves by an oath (sacramentum), not to any crime, but to commit no theft or robbery or adultery, nor to break faith, and, 'if challenged, not to deny that a trust has been committed to them'. After this they were accustomed to separate, and meet again later to take food, which however is of an ordinary and harmless kind (promiscuum et innoxium). Even this, however, they gave up after I published my edict, by which in accordance with your orders associations (hetaeriae) had been forbidden.
[Ep. x.96.]

Here there were two gatherings of the Christians, one in the early morning and another later in the day. Of the first we are only told that a hymn was sung and an oath made. The second meeting was for the purpose of a meal. It is impossible from the data to come to any definite conclusion as to what these meetings respectively were. The second certainly looks like the Agape rather than the Eucharist, though it may well be the Agape-Eucharist. The hymn of the morning is probably a psalm accompanied by Scripture reading, or a series of acts of worship. The interesting item is the ' sacramentum'; one is tempted to see here already the technical term 'sacrament', and to suppose that this is therefore the Eucharist already transferred to the morning. It is indeed quite possible that this morning service is the Eucharist, but the word is probably a coincidence, and we cannot say what was the feature that has thus impressed itself on Pliny's mind. The fact that the Christians gave up the evening feast points to its being an Agape only. The Agape might well be described to a heathen as an ordinary meal; it is more than likely that the witnesses would have said nothing about the essential character of the Eucharist.

JUSTIN MARTYR.

In the next piece of evidence, however, we find a writer, in defending the Church against the crimes attributed to it, revealing to the heathen something of the nature of the Eucharist, and here we find in Rome for the first time an outline of the liturgy in its main line of descent. St. Justin the Martyr, writing in Rome about AD 145, says:

But, after having washed (i.e. baptized) him who has believed and has been joined to us, we lead him to the place where those we call brethren are assembled, earnestly to offer common prayers for ourselves and for him who has been enlightened, and for all others everywhere, that having learned the truth, we may be accounted as men who practise good lives and keep the commandments, and thus may obtain everlasting salvation. Then breaking off the prayers we salute one another with a kiss. After that, bread is brought to him who presides over the brethren, and a cup of water mixed with wine (ὕδατος καὶ κράματος), And he, when he has received them, sends up praise and glory to the Father of all, through the name of the Son and the Holy Spirit, and makes a thanksgiving (εὐχαριστίαν ποιεῖται) at some length, because God has deigned to give us these things. And when he has finished the prayers and the thanksgivings, all those present assent to what he has said by repeating 'Amen', a Hebrew word signifying: ' So be it'. When the president has given thanks, and all the people have assented, those who with us are called deacons give to each of those present a portion of the bread and wine and water, over which the thanksgiving has been made, to partake of them, and they carry away some for those who are not present.
And this food is called among us 'Eucharist'. It is not lawful for any one to partake of it unless he believes that the things that are taught by us are true, and he has been washed in the washing that is for the forgiveness of sins and the new birth, and thus is living as Christ commanded. For we do not receive these things as ordinary bread and ordinary drink, but, as through the word of God Jesus Christ our Saviour became incarnate, and took on flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food over which the thanksgiving has been made by a word of prayer which comes from him.
(τὴν διεὐχῆς λόγου τοῦ παραὐτοῦ εὐχαριστηθεῖσαν τροφήν),
[The absence of articles makes the rendering of this phrase doubtful. J
It may mean 'by a prayer of the word'.]
The very food, that is, by which our blood and flesh are nourished by transformation, are the body and blood of the same incarnate Jesus. For the apostles, in the memoirs which have been made by them, and which are called 'Gospels', have thus handed down that Jesus gave them commandment: having taken bread he gave thanks and said: 'This do in remembrance of me; this is my body'. Likewise also taking the cup and having given thanks he said: 'This is my blood', and he gave of it to them alone.
And from that time we always recall these things to memory among ourselves, and those of us that have take care of those that lack, and we always help one another. And in all the offerings we make we praise the Creator of all things through his Son, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. And on the day which is called Sunday, there is an assembly (συνέλευσις) of all who live in the city and the country into one place, and the Memoirs of the Apostles and the Writings of the Prophets are read as long as there is time. Then, when the reader stops, the president admonishes and exhorts those present to the imitation of these good things. Then we all stand up together and send up prayers, and, as we have said before, when our prayers have ceased, bread is offered, and wine and water, and the president likewise sends up prayers and thanksgivings as much as he is able, and the people assent, saying 'Amen'. And the distribution and reception is made for each from the things over which thanksgiving has been made, and some is sent by the deacons to those who are not present.
[Apol. i. 67.]

There is no doubt whatever that these two accounts are descriptions of the same rite, the former being for the communion of the newly baptized. If the prayers in the Didache are prayers for the baptismal love-feast, it is a striking fact that in Justin also we have first the neophytes' Eucharist, and later that of the ordinary Sunday, but Justin makes no mention of the Agape, and the reception of the newly baptized might well have become attached to the eucharistic portion of the double feast instead of to the Agape.

There is now a distinct order of service:

Lections (only mentioned for Sunday).
Sermon ,, ,,
Prayers.
Kiss of Peace (only mentioned in the Baptismal Eucharist).
The Offering of bread and wine mixed with water.
The Prayers and Thanksgivings with Amen.
Communion.

The Lections mentioned are 'the Memoirs of the Apostles or the Writings of the Prophets'; but the ἤ can hardly be pressed, especially in view of μέχρις ἐγχωπεῖ. The 'Memoirs' are certainly the Gospels, as Justin explains this in chapter 66. It is a little unusual that the Prophet should follow the Gospel, but there is no reason for supposing that the phrase refers to Christian prophets, as we find the prophetic lection holding a place in the earliest liturgies. The expression probably indicates the Old Testament in general.

The Sermon is an explanation of the Lection and its application to the life of the congregation.

Prayers are mentioned twice; in the Baptismal Eucharist we are told that the first prayers (this account does not mention prayer with the thanksgiving) were for all Christian people, that they may live good lives. Indeed, the prayer is apparently not restricted to Christians, for elsewhere Justin says that the Church prayed for the Jews and for all men.

Next comes the Kiss of Peace; though only mentioned in the baptismal form, it was probably used in the general Eucharist also.

Here then we have in broad outline the substance of the later liturgy. Apparently the catechumens have as yet no part in the sacred mysteries, not even in the preparatory portions, so that we can only divide the rite into two parts; the first, down to the Kiss of Peace, is the Pre-Anaphora. containing the Lections, Prayers, Offertory, and Kiss of Peace; the Anaphora, as it will be called later, i.e. the central formula of Consecration, is represented by the ' Thanksgiving'. What was the form of the Thanksgiving there is no indication. If the words, ' by a word of prayer which comes from him', are to be pressed, it will mean the Lord's Prayer, rather than the narrative of the Institution, for the latter interpretation is inconsistent with the next sentence, where our Lord's words are a commandment and not a prayer. This is not to say that the account of the Institution was not included in the prayer, but it is unlikely that it was 'the word of prayer'.

We may notice the early date of the mixed chalice, and the reservation for the absent. In the rite also the mention of the Holy Spirit in connexion with the offerings should be noted.

OTHER WRITERS.

St. Irenaeus also mentions the Lections, Sermon, Hymns, Offertory, Prayers, and Amen. Two important passages dealing with the consecration will be considered in connection with the Epiclesis. He gives us none of the forms used in the liturgy, except short formulae like 'for ever and ever'.

St. Clement of Alexandria has the same features, and in addition he may refer to the Sanctus: 'We always give thanks to God, as do the creatures (ζῶα - Zoa) who sing to him hymns of praise', referring to the Seraphim [strom, vii. 12.].

There are some apocryphal works, which must also be quoted, for they contain Eucharistic prayers. The first of these is the Acts of John, the authorship of which was attributed by Eusebius, Epiphanius, and others to Leucius Charinus. It belongs to late in the second century, and seems to come from Encratite circles [Woolley dates it AD160.]. This has several eucharistic prayers, of which this is an example:

And having asked for bread he gave thanks thus:

What praise, or what offering (προσφορά)or what thanksgiving shall we mention in breaking this bread, but thee alone, Lord Jesus We glorify thy Name which was spoken by the Father. We glorify thy Name, which was spoken by the Son. We glorify thy opening of 'the door'. We glorify the Resurrection which has been manifested to us by thee. We glorify thy 'way'. We glorify thy 'sowing thy Word', thy grace, thy faith, thy 'salt', thy 'pearl of great price', thy 'treasure', thy 'plough', thy 'net', thy greatness, thy crown, thy being called for us the 'Son of Man', thy gift of truth, thy peace, thy knowledge, thy power, thy commandment, thy confidence, thy hope, thy love, thy freedom, the refuge that there is in thee. For thou, Lord, only art the root of immortality, and the fountain of incorruption, and the throne of eternity. And thou hast been called all this for us now, in order that we, calling thee by these names, may know thy greatness un-perceived by us until now, and recognized by the pure only, and reflected in thy manhood alone. [Acta Johannis, c. 109.]

This prayer, and the others given in the Acts of John[Ibid., cc. 85, 110.] have little relation to the later liturgy, except a faint resemblance to the Anamnesis; but its method has some likeness to similar prayers to be found in the Acts of Thomas, a Syriac Gnostic work, also used by the Encratites and other heretics. Its date is late second or early third century. Here the Eucharistic conception is more developed.
He brought bread and wine and placed it on the table, and began to bless it and said:

'Living bread', the eaters of which die not, bread that fillest hungry souls with thy blessing, thou that art worthy to receive the gift, and to be for the remission of sins, that those who eat thee may not die, we name the Name of the Father over thee. We name the Name of the Son over thee. We name the Name of the Spirit over thee,
the exalted Name that is hidden from all. And he said: In thy Name, Jesus,
may the power of the blessing and the thanksgiving come upon this bread, that all the souls which take of it may be renewed, and their sins forgiven them.
[Wright, Apoc. Acts of App. ii. 268.]

And he brake and gave to Sifur and to his wife and his daughter.

A further example from this book is interesting as providing an example of an Invocation.

And he began to say:

Come, gift of the exalted; come, perfect mercy; come, Holy Spirit;
come, revealer of the mysteries of the chosen among the prophets; come, proclaimer by his Apostles of the combats of our victorious athlete; come, treasure of majesty;
come, beloved of the mercy of the Most High; come, thou silent one, revealer of the mysteries of the exalted; come, utterer of hidden things and shewer of the works of our God; come, giver of life in secret, and manifold in thy deeds; come, giver of joy and rest to all who cleave unto thee; come, power of the Father, and wisdom of the Son,
for ye are one in all; come and communicate with us in this Eucharist which we celebrate, and in this offering which we offer, and in this commemoration which we make.

There are several forms of words of Administration:

Let it be unto thee for a remission of transgressions and sins, and for the everlasting resurrection. Let this Eucharist be unto you for life and rest, and not for judgment and vengeance. Let this Eucharist be unto you for grace and mercy,
and not for judgment and vengeance. Let this Eucharist be to you for life and rest and joy and health and for the healing of your souls and your bodies.
[These and other illustrative texts will be found in Woolley, Liturgy of the Primitive Church.]

It is evident that these forms, which differ considerably among themselves, are not in the regular line of development, for the Acts of Thomas was probably written in the early years of the third century, when the normal type of liturgy, still very flexible and adaptable, had already attained a general outline and substance which is recognizably the same as it has in its varying forms to-day. But, with the data at present available, it is impossible to say to what extent at this time those who celebrated the Eucharist in the orthodox Churches were at liberty to depart from the more usual type, and improvise their own prayers; nor can we say whether the type of rite which was ultimately to become universal was always predominant, or whether it was only one of several, and eventually ousted the others.

Woolley suggests that there were three or perhaps four forms current in the second century; one of the ordinary type, one based on Grace before meals, one based on the baptismal formula, blessing the bread and wine in the name of the Holy Trinity, and perhaps one based on the Lord's Prayer. [Op. cit. 45.]

The third century

At the end of the second century and in the earlier part of the third century the information about the liturgy becomes more abundant, and we can gather from Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, and other writers many details about the contents of the service. But in none of these are the texts of the rite given. The details derived from them will best be noticed when we consider the liturgy in its separate parts. It is early in the third century that we first come upon a text of at least the central portion of the liturgy, which is reinforced within a few years by other texts and commentaries, which make it clear that at the beginning of the century a certain uniformity of plan had established itself in various parts of the world, and that that plan was a development of what we have already seen in Justin Martyr.

THE 'APOSTOLIC TRADITION' OF HIPPOLYTUS

The account referred to is that contained in what was till recently known as the Egyptian Church Order, but is now more suitably called the Apostolic Tradition. This is one of a number of manuals which existed in the early Church, of which the Didache may be considered the earliest; most of them were later than the 'Apostolic Tradition'. They contain directions for carrying out the social and religious work of the Church, and some of them give the text of the rites to be used. The Apostolic Tradition is known in several forms.

(a) In the great Ethiopian law book called the Sinodos. This is usually known as the Ethiopic Church Ordinances or Statutes of the Apostles,
(b) In the Coptic Ecclesiastical Canons [Sahidic Ecc. Canons, and Bohairic Apost. Const. and Canons of App.] there is a section generally known as the Egyptian Church Ordinances, which corresponds to (a),
(c) A Latin translation, probably of the fourth century, of the same document, commonly referred to as the 'Verona Latin Fragments', is also known from a palimpsest of the late fifth century,
(d) There is an Arabic version of the Coptic edition. Closely connected with these are two other works, one
(e) which has only survived in Arabic, known as the Canons of Hippolytus, and
(f) Testamentum Domini, of which a Syriac and an Ethiopian version are known. [Dom Gregory Dix, The Apostolic Tradition, is now the most convenient edition for English readers. He gives the Latin text as well as the English translation with variants of other versions.]There are other Orders of the same nature as these, and related to them, but only one, the Apostolic Constitutions, to be considered later, is of liturgical interest.

That these works were in some way dependent upon one another has long been known. It was at first thought that the Canons of Hippolytus was the earliest, and that the others derived from it. But of recent years, mainly as a result of the careful work of Dom R. H. Connolly [Camb. Texts and Studies, vol. viii: The so-called Eg. Ch. Order. Connolly was anticipated by Prof. E. Schwartz, but to him is due the conviction now general. R. Lorenz, De Eg. Kerkord. en Hipp. van Rome, challenges his conclusions.], it has become fairly well established that the original is the Apostolic Tradition mentioned above, and that this is the work of Hippolytus, a scholar of great renown in Rome early in the third century, who contributed many important theological works, and whose own life is somewhat a mystery. Eusebius, who wrote about AD325, says that he was 'bishop of another Church (than Jerusalem) somewhere '; but there is evidence that he himself claimed to be Bishop of Rome, though he is not mentioned in any of the lists of the Bishops of Rome. He was certainly in strong opposition to Popes Zephyrinus and Callistus, but he was exiled with Pope Pontianus, and apparently their bodies were brought back together to Rome. It is generally assumed that he was the first Roman Antipope, but it is hard to reconcile that with the fact that he was canonized by the Roman Church. In 1551 there was found in the cemetery of St. Hippolytus in Rome a marble statue of a man seated on a chair which, from the inscription on the chair, was learned to be that of Hippolytus. On the side of the chair is engraved a list of his works and the kalendar that he is known to have constructed. Among the works is included ἁποστολικὴ παράδοσις - apostilike paradosis, which is evidently the work we are now considering. The book must be dated not far from AD217.

In view of the importance of the liturgy set out in this document it is given here in full. The Coptic and Arabic versions and Canons of Hippolytus do not preserve the liturgy, though the last refers to it. The following is from the Latin version. It immediately follows after the form for the Consecration of a bishop; but although it is the liturgy used in connexion with that function, it seems also to be the one used on ordinary occasions.

And when he has been made bishop all offer him the Kiss of Peace (os pacis), saluting him because of the dignity he has been given. Then the deacons offer the oblation to him, and he, laying his hands on it with the whole presbytery, giving thanks, says:

The Lord be with you. And all say: And with thy spirit. Lift up your hearts. We lift them up unto the Lord. Let us give thanks unto the Lord. It is meet and right. And so now he goes on:

We give thanks to thee, O God, through thy beloved Servant,
[I have used the word 'servant' to translate 'puer' as also παῖς pais to preserve the connexion with the many passages where ' servant' is required; but here 'son' would be better.]
Jesus Christ, whom in the last times thou didst send to us as Saviour and Redeemer and Messenger (angelus) of thy will; who is thine inseparable Word, through whom thou hast made all things, and in whom thou wast well pleased;
Whom thou didst send from heaven into the womb of the Virgin, and who having been contained in the womb was incarnate, and was manifested to be thy Son,
being born of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin, who fulfilling thy will and purchasing for thee a holy people, stretched out his arms when he was to suffer,
that by his passion he might free those who believed in thee;
And when he was betrayed to a voluntary passion, that he might end death, and break the chains of the devil, and tread down hell, and illuminate the righteous, and determine the end, and manifest the resurrection; Taking bread and giving thanks to thee, he said: Take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you;
likewise also the cup saying: this is my blood, which is shed for you;
as often as ye do this do it in remembrance of me: Remembering therefore his death and resurrection, we offer to thee the bread and the cup, giving thanks to thee,
because thou hast made us worthy to stand before thee and minister to thee;
And we pray that thou wilt send thy Holy Spirit upon the oblation of thy holy Church,
that uniting them into one (in unum congregans) thou wouldst grant to all thy saints that receive it the fulness of the Holy Spirit for the confirmation of faith in truth,
that we may praise and glorify thee; Through thy servant Jesus Christ, through whom be glory and honour to thee, Father and Son with the Holy Spirit,
in thy holy Church, now and ever, Amen. [Dix, p.6, for Latin original.]

In the Latin version there is then a blessing of oil, cheese, and olives, and in the Ethiopian version a series of communion prayers follow, which are not part of the original, though probably early. These will be noticed in their proper place.

Connolly's argument for assigning the authorship to Hippolytus chiefly depends on the frequent coincidences in language and thought between this and his other writings. This means that the wording is his own, but it may not be so in the Eucharistic prayer. The following passage, however, shows that the great importance Hippolytus attaches to the apostolic tradition concerns the general structure and contents of the rite, and not the mode of expression:

It is not altogether necessary for him to recite the same words as we gave before in his thanksgiving to God, as though he had learned to say them by heart; but let each one pray according to his ability. If indeed he is able to pray suitably a prayer of elevated style, that is well; but if he is only able to pray according to a fixed form (so Dix, lit. ' in measure'; cf.' canonical') no one may prevent him, so long as his prayer is doctrinally sound.
[Eth. vers. Stat. 25. See Dix, 19.]

We shall see this modified liberty of improvisation echoed at a later date.

Baumstark thinks that Hippolytus was so reactionary as to turn back from current practice to a state of things prior to the fusion of the Jewish morning prayers (the Mass of the Catechumens) with the thanksgiving after a feast (the Anaphora), and that this was due to his opposition to the Pope [Irenikon, xi (May-June 1934), 146.]. The book does speak of a morning 'instruction' (catechizatio) which the faithful are to attend, when it is held, before going to work; but they are also told to partake of the Eucharist before eating anything else. There is no reason to suppose that there was no ' Mass of the Catechumens ' preceding Hippolytus's Anaphora; it is naturally not mentioned in the Mass described, as that follows the bishop's consecration. There are indeed slight indications of the'Mass of the Catechumens'.

There can be no doubt that this work of Hippolytus was widely known, at any rate in the fourth century. Its influence has, however, often been exaggerated; for, while it does probably represent fairly well the liturgy in use in both East and West at the end of the second century, and has formed the core of the chief Ethiopian Anaphora, it does not appear to have directly affected the other Eastern liturgies. It is a witness for them rather than a source.

An examination of the Consecration Prayer of the Apostolic Tradition shows a considerable advance on that of Justin. We have now:

1. The Prayers (mentioned in xxii. 6, 'after the prayers let them give the Kiss of Peace').

2. Kiss of Peace.

3. Offertory.

4. Sursum Corda.

5. Thanksgiving.

6. An account of the Incarnation.

7. The Institution of the Sacrament.

8. A Memorial of our Lord's death and resurrection (Anamnesis).

9. The Oblation of the bread and cup.

10. The Invocation of the Holy Spirit.

It will be seen that 5-10 make only one compound sentence with the Oblation and the Invocation as the principal verbs (we offer . . . and we pray).

THE CHRISTIAN LITURGY

WHILE the liturgy was developing during the first two centuries of the Christian era there must have been not only individual variations but also local customs and traditions. The tendency in forms of worship is always in the direction of stereotyping certain modes of expression that have pleased the mind or the ear of those who have heard them. Those religious bodies which have rejected set liturgies nevertheless fall into the almost unconscious habit of forming collections of stock phrases, which often frame themselves into quite long prayers, in which the variation is more by way of differing selections and permutations than by original composition. It is but natural therefore that the presence in any particular local Church of a bishop with talent in the happy expression of the spiritual needs of the Church would set a fashion, which would be followed by those who heard him. In fact, in spite of the meagreness of our early evidence, we can see the operation of this tendency, though, because we know So little that is certain of the provenance or history of the documents, we cannot readily relate it to its proper locality. But it will be useful to illustrate this point.

We have seen in the Didache the following passage:

For as this broken bread scattered over the mountains and gathered together is one, &c.

This is a curious and striking phrase, expressing rather mystically the union in Christ of an infinite variety of different people. It has no place in the normal liturgy, but we find the phrase with variations cropping up here and there. We have already seen it in the 'Grace at meals' of the De Virginitate; but it is also used by Bishop Sarapion of Egypt in the middle of the fourth century at the Oblation:

And as this bread has been scattered on the top of the mountains and when gathered together came to be one, so also gather thy holy Church out of every nation
and every country and every city and village and house and make one living Catholic Church.

No doubt Sarapion has simply borrowed this from the Didache, which has by some been associated, though without much to go on, with Egypt. But this figure is also found in some of the Ethiopian Anaphoras. That of St. John has, at the Anamnesis, after mentioning the resurrection :

As the bread was gathered when it was scattered over mountains and hills and in the desert and valleys,and being gathered was made one perfect loaf,
even so gather us from every evil thought of sin into thy perfect faith,
and as the mingling of this wine with water cannot be separated into two parts,
even so may thy Godhead be joined with our manhood.

The Anaphora of St. James of Serug, after the Fraction, has:

As thou didst gather this bread while it was scattered amidst the mountains and hills and in the valleys and the field, and as it being gathered became one prosphora (oblation) ...(here this sentence seems to break off abruptly).

Other examples of these local peculiarities will be found in this interesting group of Anaphoras that have been preserved in the Ethiopian liturgy. Some of them are, in their present state, evidently late in date, but most of them show signs of an ancient and complicated ancestry. An interesting example is given in the opening of the Epiclesis (or Invocation of the Holy Ghost) of three of these Anaphoras, those of St. John, St. James of Serug, and the 318 Fathers (of Nicaea). The differences are no less striking than the resemblances.
The last two only will be given here.

James of Serug:

Flung wide be the gates of light, and opened the doors of glory,
and drawn back the veil that is before the Father's face,and let him descend;
behold the Lamb of God, &c.The 318:

Flung wide be the doors of light,and opened the gates of glory,
and thy living and holy Spirit shall be sent from the place of his secret essence.

This tendency towards local peculiarities, which might well have ended in a multiplicity of entirely different forms of worship instead of the universal 'Christian Liturgy', which exhibits under manifold modes of expression the same organic structure, was counteracted by two impulses in the opposite direction. The first was due to the authority and influence of the great metropolitan and patriarchal sees; the second to the prestige that certain liturgies obtained through their association with the names of great figures in Church history. These influences led to the establishment of national liturgical characteristics, and along with them, and to a certain extent cutting across them, of rites which, while not altogether ousting others, obtained an ascendancy which placed them in the position of being looked on as the national or regional rite. It will be necessary to study these movements in detail.

The conversion of Constantine to Christianity, and the consequent peace of the Church, was an event of the highest importance for the liturgy. For the future the mysteries would be celebrated openly, and with all and more than the splendour which characterized civil celebrations. Moreover, as the world flocked into the doors of the Church, the character of the Church, and of its liturgy, changed. Hitherto the Church was a messenger from another world; now it was to be, or hoped to be, the soul of the world, guiding it to righteousness. Previously, as we are frequently told, it prayed for the Emperors and rulers as possible enemies who were to be softened, and guided in spite of themselves; henceforward it prayed for them as the first of her sons. And as the world became more conspicuously and generally Christian, the reserve of the 'Mysteries' and the discipline of those who sought admission to the Faith, or departed from it, became less real, and gradually disappeared, with considerable effect on the liturgy itself. From this time too we should probably date the beginning of national rites and regional customs, the sentiment towards common Christian tradition being replaced by local unity and patriotism. The distinction that first arose between East and West was due to the weakening of the sense of unity of the whole body of Christians, and a closer association of the Church with the Eastern and Western Empires.

The early Christian world was entirely dominated by the Roman Empire; but this Empire was unable for long to maintain unity. It was too unwieldy. Thus at the end of the third century a plan, which had already been tentatively used by Marcus Aurelius in 161 'that of dividing the Empire amongst two or more rulers in an independent partnership' was permanently established; and the Eastern and Western Empires came into existence. This division of the ancient world into East and West, with its capitals in Constantinople and Rome, or more frequently a Gallic or north Italian city, corresponded roughly to a real distinction in the character of the peoples who comprised them. There had been, during the last years of the Republic, and still more during the Empire, a flood pouring into the northern shores of the Mediterranean of peoples from the East, bringing with them the pomp and luxury and barbaric splendour of Egypt, Persia, and the Far East. While Rome itself was infected with this new civilization, it specially established itself in the new capital city of Constantinople and throughout Asia, giving the East and consequently Eastern Christianity a character quite distinct from that exhibited by the West. Nowhere has this shown itself more clearly than in the theological literature and the liturgy of the Church. The Eastern liturgies are marked by a great profusion of rhetorical and exuberant language and ideas, often heaping up strange and rare compound adjectives, and never tiring in expressions of self-abasement. The Western liturgies, although in Spain and Gaul they were not uninfluenced by similar tendencies, [The exuberance of these rites is of a different character, pedantic rather than majestic; in spite of their extravagance, they cultivated an excessive conciseness in individual phrases. Retained the austerity and conciseness that was so great a beauty in the classical languages.

There were also three well-marked divisions of Eastern Christianity: Syria, which may be subdivided into Western and Eastern Syria; Egypt, of which region Abyssinia forms a subdivision; and the Byzantine world, which comprised the eastern portion of Europe and so much of Asia as was directly under the influence of Constantinople.

SYRIA

(a) Jerusalem.

The Holy City of Jerusalem was at first the centre of the Church, and throughout the ages has always had a special claim on the affections and loyalty of Christians. But its fortunes deprived it of that supreme position which it might have held in Christian organization. In the year 70 Titus destroyed it, and in 132 Julius Severus destroyed it again. Shortly after this the Emperor Hadrian rebuilt the city under the name of Aelia Capitolina, forbidding Jews to occupy it, but allowing Christians to live there. Little is known about the Church there up to the end of the third century, but it was already the object of pilgrimages. We read that Justin and Melito, Bishop of Sardis, visited it in the second century, and Clement of Alexandria, Julius Africanus, Firmilian, and Gregory of Neocaesarea in the third. But with the conversion of Constantine a new era dawned for the Holy City. By his orders the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Church of the Cross (now disappeared) were erected, and the Church at Jerusalem from this time exercised an influence out of proportion to the importance of the city. In 349 and again in 399 General Councils were held there, as well as many in later centuries. In 325 the Council of Nicaea gave to the Bishop of Jerusalem (still called Aelia), according to ancient tradition, the second place of honour {next to Rome), but preserving as a matter of jurisdiction the authority over him of his Metropolitan the Bishop of Caesarea. Macarius, the bishop at this time, was a man of great influence. The position of the Church became in the time of Cyril, bishop in 351, a cause of strife. Cyril claimed priority by virtue of the apostolic nature of his see, and refused to obey a summons of his Metropolitan, Acacius, to Caesarea. He was therefore deposed, and only after a long and stormy career was he at last confirmed in his possession of the see, though not of his independence of Caesarea. Juvenal, however, bishop from 420 to 458, did succeed at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 in settling the matter, and Jerusalem was created a Patriarchate over the 'three Palestines' (Caesarea, Scythopolis, and Petra); Arabia was added later. The Bishop of Jerusalem is now one of the four ancient Patriarchs who preside over the Eastern Churches.

The Cyril mentioned above has preserved to us valuable information of the liturgy in Jerusalem in his time in a series of catechetical lectures given by him in which he explains the sacred mysteries to the catechumens. During his episcopate also a lady from Spain, named Etheria, a relation of the Emperor Theodosius, paid a visit to Jerusalem and wrote an account of the services she attended there during the Holy Week of 380. Frequent pilgrimages at this time gained Jerusalem a special influence. From St. Cyril we learn much of the rite in use, and from Etheria a great deal about the ceremonies.Page^

(b) Antioch.

The city of Antioch on the river Orontes, founded in 300 BC, had been the capital of the Syrian Empire. It was a great and magnificent city, with a population estimated by St. Chrysostom in the fourth century at 200,000, not including slaves. There was a tradition, on which the Church still founds its patriarchal claim, that St. Peter first preached there and became its bishop, and the converts there were the first to be called Christians. St. Paul made Antioch the centre of his missionary activities. Later it became the chief centre of Christianity in Asia, until its importance was somewhat eclipsed by the growth of Constantinople. It included in its sphere the regions of Pontus, Asia, and Thrace. With the rise of Constantinople, Thrace became independent, while the Council of Chalcedon definitely transferred these three provinces to Constantinople by requiring that their metropolitans should be consecrated by the Patriarch of Constantinople.
[Canon 28.]

Antioch was distinguished by a brilliant succession of great Churchmen, Ignatius the martyr, Theophilus the Apologist, Serapion, an eminent theologian, Babylas, saint and martyr, the heretic Paul of Samosata (260-8), and the group of teachers known as the School of Antioch, followers of Origen, who taught there for some time, Diodorus of Tarsus, and Theodore of Mopsuestia, and, for a part of his life, John Chrysostom. The school mentioned stood, in opposition to the mystical and allegorical School of Alexandria, for the literal interpretation of Scripture, and for the humanity and historical character of our Lord.

The Church of Antioch was unfortunately divided during the last half of the fourth century by one of the most serious of the ancient schisms, owing to the appointment as bishop in 361 of Meletius, an orthodox bishop, who had, however, been consecrated by Arians. The strict Catholics of Antioch would not accept him, and Paulinus was consecrated in his place. This schism was not healed 1 ill about AD 415. Before this, however, a new subject of division had broken out, due chiefly to the unwise emphasis which the School of Antioch were giving to their humanistic tendencies in theology, which seemed to the theologians of Alexandria to divide Christ into two separate beings. Their teaching, not itself heretical, was exaggerated by Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople, in order to counteract the excessive honour given to the Blessed Virgin by the Egyptian party, of which he disapproved. The controversy became embittered, and ended in the condemnation of Nestorius at the Council of Ephesus in 431. John, Patriarch of Antioch, was also excommunicated, but reconciled two years later. In 435 stern laws were enacted against Nestorians, and they were forced out of the Empire. Bar-sumas. Bishop of Nisibis, became its apostle in the Far East, and Nestorianism became and has continued to be the teaching of the Church of Persia.

The opponents of Nestorius had gone too far; their revulsion from that heresy led them into the opposite extreme, which received from an archimandrite in Constantinople the name of Eutychianism. Another but shorter, though even more disastrous, wrangle began. It ended by the condemnation of the Eutychians at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, was exiled, and the Emperor Marcian issued harsh edicts against the Eutychians, or as their successors came to be known, Monophysites.

This proscription of the Monophysites had not the same success as that of their opponents. A monk, Theodosius, hurried from the Council to Jerusalem and stirred up the people there against their Patriarch Juvenal, who only just escaped assassination on his return, and had to flee. Theodosius usurped the episcopate at Jerusalem, organized a reign of terror, and, when threatened by the Emperor, repaired to Mount Sinai, and spread disaffection there. In Egypt the bishop who was chosen to succeed Dioscorus was killed, and, in spite of the efforts of the Court, the dispute continued, and involved a breach between Constantinople and Rome, though without any difference in doctrine. Gradually the Monophysites prevailed in Syria, excepting Jerusalem, and in Egypt; while the Catholics were predominant in Constantinople and the West. Eventually, between the years 565 and 622, separate Monophysite national Churches were established in Syria, Armenia, and Egypt. They were called in derision 'Jacobites' after Jacob Baradaeus, who was consecrated a bishop in Syria in 541; but they have themselves proudly retained that name, deriving it from the Apostle James.

There are therefore in the Syrian Church three ancient divisions,
(a) The Orthodox, once called Melchites, a term now usually applied to Syrian and Egyptian Uniats of the Byzantine rite. They still use the Greek liturgy, but an Arabic version is also used. (b) The Jacobites, using a Syrian liturgy, (c) The East Syrian or Persian Nestorian Church.

(1) THE SYRIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH.

This is in communion with, and subject to the primacy of, the 'Great Church' of Constantinople. There are still the two Patriarchs of Antioch and Jerusalem. The former lives at Damascus and presides over Syria, Cilicia, Mesopotamia, and portions of Asia Minor. Till recently he was always a Greek. The Patriarch of Jerusalem has authority from the Lebanon to Sinai. He also is a Greek. In both these Churches the people and most of the clergy are Arabs.

The earliest Syrian liturgy preserved is that of the Apostolic Constitutions, Book VIII. This work dates from the end of the fourth century or the beginning of the fifth, and was compiled in Syria. The eighth book is based on theApostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, but in sections 5-14, which give the liturgy, though here and there the phraseology of Hippolytus is apparent, a different source is drawn upon, and it is mainly independent. The text is given in Brightman, pp. 1-27. The prayers are largely the composition of the compiler, but the framework and much of the language probably go back to the third century. The writer, who seems to be the interpolator of the Ignatian epistles, makes special use of Clement's epistle to the Corinthians, whence it is often known as the Clementine liturgy, though the Mass of the Catechumens is attributed to St. Andrew, and the Anaphora to St. James of Zebedee. [Brightm. 3, L. 10; 13, L. 24.] This liturgy also contains parallels with other writers, Justin Martyr, and especially Novatian (c. 250). This can be explained by its being compiled by a learned writer familiar with the Christian literature, but to some it seems more natural to suppose that it is based on a widespread primitive rite used by all its apparent sources. [Leclercq, D.A.C.L. xi. 617.] The last theory, however, is improbable.

The ancient liturgy of the Church of Syria bears the name of St. James. It was of Palestinian origin, and seems to have replaced the native rite in Antioch at an early date. The earliest manuscripts extant are a roll of the tenth century (Vat. gr. 2282), which represents an eighth-century text of Damascus, and a manuscript in Messina University (Graec. 177), of the tenth or early eleventh century. The latter is printed in Swainson, pp. 224-328. Brightman's text, pp. 31-68, is from a fourteenth-century manuscript (Paris Bib. Nat. graec. 2509).

This liturgy is mentioned as the composition of St. James, brother of our Lord, in Canon 32 of the Council of Constantinople (in Trullο), AD 692, but it must be much older than that, for the Jacobites, who separated from the Orthodox c. 550, used it and must have looked on it as ancient. It seems to have been known by Jerome, who says 'The mouths of the priests daily proclaim "ὁ μόνος ἀναμάρτητος that is to say in our tongue, "who alone is without sin" ', [contra Pelagium, ii. 23.] a phrase which occurs in the Greek James. [Brightm. Lit. E. & W. 57, L. 31.] In the eighth and ninth centuries it was much drawn on in the West, and must have had a fairly wide range, but by the twelfth century it was becoming very restricted, and about the thirteenth century the Byzantine rite took its place. It is, however, still used at Jerusalem on the Sunday after Christmas and St. James's Day, and in Cyprus and Zante.

(2) THE SYRIAN JACOBITE CHURCH.

The first Patriarch of the Monophysite Church, Sergius of Tella, was consecrated by James Baradaeus in 543, which may be taken as the date of the definite schism with the Orthodox Church. The Arab conquest of Syria in 638 prevented the Jacobites from increasing, but at times they have flourished. They are under a Patriarch of Antioch, who lives in Mardin. The liturgy is a Syriac form of the Greek St. James, with a good deal of adaptation. There are also a large number of anaphoras in existence, which have been used for special occasions, but are little used now. One of these is of special interest as it is believed to contain an ancient tradition before the influence of Jerusalem. It is named after St. Athanasius. [Baumstark, Oriens Christ, ii. 90-129.] Many other manuscripts date from the eighth century onwards. Brightman constructs his text from a number of sources (pp. 69-109). There is also in existence a letter from James of Edessa (late 7th cent.) to Thomas the Presbyter which gives an account of the Jacobite rite of that time. [Brightm. L.c. 490.]

A branch of the Jacobite Church is that of the SYRIANS OF MALABAR, who have a curious history. The Church was founded as a result of Nestorian evangelization in the sixth century. In the fifteenth century it suffered much persecution from the Moslems, and in 1490 being without clergy applied for help to the Catholicos of the Nestorians. [J. A. Assemani, Bibl. or. iii. i, 590.] Two bishops were consecrated, and the Church renewed. During the Portuguese rule in southern India in the sixteenth century the Church was compelled to submit to Rome; all their books were burned, and the ancient liturgy revised, though not extensively. When the Dutch seized the Malabar coast in the seventeenth century the non-Uniat remnant led the way to gaining independence again, but instead of securing consecration for their bishop from the Nestorians, they arranged for a Syrian bishop from Jerusalem to go to India and consecrate him. Thus the Malabar Church became Jacobite instead of Nestorian, and has remained so since. They use the Syrian Jacobite liturgy with six variable anaphoras. But the term 'Malabar Liturgy' refers to the ancient liturgy. No copy of the unrevised rite exists and it has to be reconstructed by comparison with that of Addai and Mari . The Nestorian liturgy is also used by a small remnant of the old Malabar Church.

There is also a SYRIAN UNIAT Church (subject to the Roman obedience) with a Patriarch of Antioch living at Beirut, and a Syrian liturgy in Arabic. This body dates from 1781 as a result of a schism. There is a Uniat Church of Malabar with a much romanized Nestorian rite in Syriac.

(3) THE NESTORIAN CHURCH.

Before the separation of the Nestorians from the Orthodox bodies as related above, the small Persian Church was under the Patriarch of Antioch. In 410 the Bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon took the title of Catholicos and became Patriarch of the East, and a few years later the Church declared its independence. There are three ancient liturgies used by Nestorians.

(i) The Liturgy of the Apostles Addai and Mari, which is supposed to have been finally edited by the Patriarch Jesuyab III (645-7). It has been suggested that this is a primitive type of Eucharist, and addressed to the Son; it is unique in not containing the Words of Institution. [E. C. Ratcliff, J.T.S. (Oct. 1928), 23-32.] (ii) Theodore the Interpreter (of Mopsuestia), which is probably Cilician in origin, of the fourth century.²(iii) Nestorius, which is Byzantine much expanded, with theological tendencies. Baumstark thinks it may be the work of the heresiarch. [Both in Renaudot, Lit. Orient. Coll. ii; Baumst. Irenikon, xi (July-Aug. 1934), 296. For evidence of Theodore's authorship, see Brightm. J.T.S. xxxi (Jan. 1930), 160.] The last two were revised on the lines of the Jerusalem rite in the sixth century.

There is also a fragment of an anaphora of the sixth century. [Brightm. Lit. E. & W. 511.] Light is thrown on the history of the rite by the Homilies ofNarsai (d. 502), of which No. 17 is an exposition of the 'Mysteries'. [Connolly,Camb. Texts & Studies, viii. No. i.]

In the Middle Ages the Nestorian missionaries founded Churches far and wide through eastern Asia, as far as China and Tibet, but in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries the Mohammedan conquests almost extinguished Christianity in these regions. Since the Great War the small Christian community that remained has again been almost exterminated by the Arabs. The hereditary Patriarch of the East had his seat in a remote village, Qudshanis.

There is a UNIAT 'CHALDAEAN' Church that seceded in the sixteenth century, with a Patriarch of Babylon. They use a slightly revised Syriac Nestorian liturgy with three anaphoras.

Another Uniat body, the MARIONITES, originally a Monothelite sect connected with the monasteries of the Lebanon, and founded by John Maro in the fifth century, became united to the Roman See in the twelfth century. Their head is called 'Patriarch of Antioch and all the East'. Their liturgy is a form of St. James in Syriac, much romanized, and with eight anaphoras. It has some points of resemblance to Nestorian rites.

EGYPT

The Patriarch of Alexandria in the earliest times held an authority unequalled in the Eastern Church. The city of Alexandria was, after Rome, the first city in the world, and in scholarship and philosophy was the recognized centre of learning. Throughout the early centuries of the Church it produced a series of scholars, theologians, and ecclesiastics who were always in the front rank. And it had its own character. It was the home of the mystical and allegorical school, which was the Christian representative of the philosophic thought that had made its heathen schools famous. The Patriarch of Alexandria was, at the Council of Nicaea, recognized as second only to the Bishop of Rome; but the growth of Constantinople as the imperial city caused the Council of Chalcedon in 451 to place Constantinople second.

The Eutychian controversy, which has been referred to, was the occasion of schism in Egypt as in Syria. When the Patriarch Dioscorus was banished as a Eutychian, an Orthodox succeeded him; but the people of Egypt were predominantly inclined towards Monophysitism, and racial differences added force to the theological divisions, the Orthodox being mainly Greek. As in Syria, the difference first showed itself in a fight for control, now the Orthodox and now the Monophysites gaining possession of the patriarchal throne; in most cases there were two rivals. These conflicts lasted till 642, when Egypt was conquered by the Islamites, and the native Copts who refused to accept that religion were now at least free from ecclesiastical aggression, and their Church attained independence. It is historically interesting to notice that the Trisagion in the Coptic liturgy is in a Greek text but in a Monophysite form, showing that the translation to the vernacular was made after the schism.

There are therefore in Egypt, as in Syria, an Orthodox and a Jacobite Church, the former mainly Greek and the latter Coptic.

(1) THE ORTHODOX CHURCH OF ALEXANDRIA.

This is a small body. The Patriarch, whose jurisdiction extends over Egypt, Libya, Arabia, Ethiopia, and Nubia, lives in Alexandria with his seven Metropolitans, and most of his flock are in the large Egyptian cities.

The liturgy used is called after the patron Saint Mark, but is, according to Coptic tradition, due to St. Cyril. It is of very ancient date, perhaps fifth century, of Alexandrian origin, but it has been much affected by Byzantine influences. The first mention of this liturgy is not till the twelth century, when it was about to be superseded. Isaac, the Catholicos of Armenia, then said that the Rites of James and Mark both had the Commixture. Theodore Balsamon of Antioch tells that the Patriarch Mark (c. 1190) on a visit to Constantinople inquired why they did not use the Liturgies of St. James or St. Mark there, and was told that the Catholic Church of the Ecumenical throne did not know them, and that all Churches were by imperial legislation bound to use the rites of New Rome. Being impressed by this, he followed from that time the Byzantine custom.

The earliest manuscript is that of Messina, also containing James, of the twelfth century. Swainson gives this with two other manuscripts, Rossanensis and Vaticanus, [Greek Lit. 349-95.] and Brightman uses his text with additions (pp. 113-43). There are two other manuscripts at Mount Sinai and Cairo.

There are also two other anaphoras: (a) St. Basil; (b) St. Gregory (of Mopsuestia), which is addressed to the Son. Both are printed in Renaudot from a fourteenth-century manuscript.

Another interesting anaphora has recently been discovered on some fragments of papyri from Deir Balyzeh in Upper Egypt of the seventh or eighth century. There are portions of the prayers of the Faithful, a Creed (not Nicene), the Sanctus with its Preface, and the Words of Institution preceded by an Invocation. [Text in D.A.C.L. xi. 624.]

An early liturgy from Egypt is preserved with the name of Bishop Sarapion of Thmuis. [G. Wobbermin, Texts und Untersuch. n.F. ii. 36. English version by John Wordsworth (S.P.C.K.).] It has peculiar features which will be noticed later.

(2) THE COPTIC (JACOBITE) CHURCH.

There is a Patriarch of Alexandria with a flock of somewhat under a million, mostly peasants. The clergy are very uneducated, and the deacons are usually boys. The liturgies are:

(i) St. Cyril (also called St. Mark), representing the Greek St. Mark. Brightman (pp. 144-8) gives a translation from a thirteenth-century manuscript. This is the most ancient rite; it is used In Advent and Lent. (ii) St. Basil. Translated in Bute, Coptic Liturgy. It is adapted from the Byz. Basil. This is the most commonly used.
(iii) St. Gregory, from the Greek Gregory, and, like it, addressed to the Son. [Lat. trans. in Renaudot, i. 9-51.] It is used at Festivals.

The Uniat Copts are under a Patriarch of Alexandria who lives in Cairo; they use a modified form of the Coptic Rite. The Greek Uniats (Melchites) are under the Patriarch of Antioch.

(3) THE ABYSSINIAN CHURCH.

Abyssinia was converted in the fourth century by the efforts of Frumentius, who was consecrated bishop c. AD 340. It was early infected with Monophysitism. With the conquest of the north of Africa by Islam, it became isolated, and we know little of its history, except that its metropolitan was dependent on the Coptic Patriarch of Alexandria, and consecrated by him. During the time of Portuguese colonial activity (16th cent.) the Jesuits made their way into the country, and in 1626 the Negus accepted a Jesuit Patriarch, but ten years later the Church returned to its Monophysite character and Coptic allegiance.

The oldest form of the liturgy is that printed in Rome in an edition of the New Testament, edited by Petrus Ethiops (Tasfa Sion), but it has some Latin alterations. This contains the Anaphora of the Apostles, which is based on theApostolic Tradition. Besides this there is a number of manuscripts, none of them earlier than the seventeenth century. Brightman's translation is from five manuscripts in the British Museum with additions (pp. 194-244).

There are no less than sixteen anaphoras extant, but only one pre-anaphora, and the Anaphora of the Apostles is used except on rare occasions. [Harden, The Anaphoras of the Ethiopia Liturgy.] The present use of the Ethiopian Church is given in Mercer. [Ethiopic Liturgy.]

THE BYZANTINE CHURCH

The founding of New Rome, the Imperial Capital of Constantinople, in the year 328 almost immediately placed it in a position of supremacy over the Eastern world, and the interest taken by the Christian Emperors in Church affairs, and their readiness to interfere in the disputes which marked the centuries following the reign of Constantine, gave exceptional authority to the Patriarchs of the great city. In 451 the Council of Chalcedon decreed 'the same things respecting the privileges of the most holy city of Constantinople, the new Rome', as had been given by the Fathers of Nicaea to old Rome, 'so that she should be magnified like her in ecclesiastical matters, and be second after her'. [Canon 28.]

The same Council also deprived the Patriarch of Antioch of much of his importance and influence, by transferring from his authority to that of Constantinople the dioceses of Asia, Pontus, and Thrace. As Christianity spread northwards so did the influence of the Ecumenical Patriarch, as the Patriarch of Constantinople came to be known, increase; and today he is recognized as the Primate of the whole of the Orthodox Churches, which are for the most part autonomous.

In addition to the Syrian and Egyptian Churches there are the following well-established autonomous Churches:

THE CHURCH OF RUSSIA.

The Patriarch of Moscow is the fifth Patriarch, but the Soviet Government has prevented the Office from being filled since 1926. The liturgical language is Old Slavonic.

THE CHURCH OF CYPRUS,

which was originally included in the Patriarchate of Antioch, but was made independent on the ground of ancient usage at the Council of Ephesus in 431. Its head is the Archbishop of Nova Justiniana and all Cyprus, who has his seat at Nicosia.

THE MONASTERY OF ST CATHERINE

on Mount Sinai. The Hegumen is a bishop with the title of Archbishop of Mount Sinai. He was subject to the Patriarch of Jerusalem till 1782, since which time he has been independent. He lives in the daughter monastery at Cairo.

THE CHURCH OF GREECE,

Which was proclaimed to be independent when the nation attained its freedom in 1833, though its autonomy was only recognized by Constantinople in 1850. It is presided over by the Metropolitan of Athens.

THE CHURCH OF BULGARIA.

After its conversion it was attached to Constantinople, but with the establishment of the Bulgarian Empire in the tenth century it attained independence, which, however, it lost again at the conquest by the Turks in 1398, and not till 1870 was it made into an Exarchate, independent of Constantinople. The conflict which led to this was so heated that the Church of Bulgaria is not in communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch, though it is with the rest of the Orthodox Church. The language is Old Slavonic.

THE CHURCH OF SERVIA

was in the thirteenth century under the Servian Empire a Patriarchate (of Ypek). In 1804 the country revolted against the Turks, and in 1879 the Church became autonomous. After the Great War, in 1920 the Patriarchate of Karlovcy, the dioceses of Bosnia and Herzegovina, parts of Dalmatia and Macedonia, and the ancient Church of Montenegro, were included in the Patriarchate of Belgrade.

THE CHURCH OF RUMANIA,

which became autonomous in 1885, with two Metropolitans, those of Bucharest and Jassy; but the Great War increased the country and a Patriarchate was constituted in 1925 at Bucharest. The vernacular is used.

Since the War the constitution of some of these Churches has been very unsettled and it is likely to remain so for some time. The persecution of the Russian Church by the Soviet Government has led to schism. There are now several bodies not in communion with one another, often covering the same ground and working against one another.

The following are the chief:(a) Within Russia:

(i) THE PATRIARCHAL CHURCH under the locum tenens.

(ii) THE SYNODAL CHURCH, Established under the aegis of the Government,

(b) Outside Russia amongst the exiles:

(i) THE SYNOD OF KARLOVCY in Yugoslavia,

(ii) THE WESTERN EXARCHATE Under a Metropolitan at Paris.

A number of smaller independent Churches have also been formed, which will only be mentioned, with the liturgical language: Finland (Finnish and Slavonic), Estonia (Estonian and Slavonic), Poland (vernacular), Latvia (vernacular), Lithuania (vernacular), Albania (Greek), and Georgia (vernacular).

There are also Russian missionary Churches in Siberia and the Far East and in other countries, and in several of the countries already mentioned there are Uniat Churches.

The following are the Byzantine liturgies:

(i) ST. BASIL.

The first mention of this liturgy seems to be in the history of the Armenian nation by Faustus of Byzantium (early 5th cent.), who quotes the passage ἀλλὰ παραλούσαντα ... τῆς εικονος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ of the Great Thanksgiving. [Brightm. 324 I. 22-326 I. 7. So De Meester, D.A.C.L. vi. 1599.] Peter the Deacon (c. 520) in a letter written for the monks of Scythia to the African bishops in exile in Sardinia says: 'Hence the blessed Basil, bishop of Caesarea, in a prayer at the sacred altar, which almost the whole East uses, says: "... Make, we beseech thee, the evil good, and keep the good in their goodness".' [Ep, xvi. (De incarn. et gratia, 8).] Leontius of Byzantium (c. 531) [Adv. Nest. et Eutych, iii. 19.] and the 32nd Canon in Trullo also speak of the liturgy as Basil's. There seems no reason to doubt that its nucleus comes from St. Basil, and therefore from Caesarea. It was in great vogue in the early centuries, and was translated and adapted into Armenian, Syriac, Coptic, and Arabic. Not till after the ninth century did the rite of St. Chrysostom oust it from its place in the normal Greek liturgy. It has the most prominent position in the Barberini manuscript (c. 800), and is referred to in the time of Charles the Bald (823-77) as the 'Constantinopolitan liturgy'.

The most important manuscript is the Barberini. [Rome Bibl. Barb. MS. iii. 55.]This is printed in Brightman, pp. 309-44. As it is a living rite there are numerous printed books of the present form. The prayers are given in Brightman, pp. 400-11.
It is now used only on the first five Sundays in Lent, Maundy Thursday, the Eves of Christmas, Epiphany, and Easter, and the Feast of St. Basil.

(ii) ST. CHRYSOSTOM.

It is not probable that St. Chrysostom had any important part in the formation of this liturgy, but it may well go back to his time or not long after. It has now superseded St. Basil as the ordinary liturgy. It is contained in the Barberini manuscript mentioned above, though only three of the prayers are there attributed to Chrysostom, [Brightman thinks this is an oversight and that the writer intended to illuminate a title, but omitted to do so (op. cit. xcii).] and the modern form is given in Brightman, pp. 353-99.

(iii) ST. GREGORY DIALOGOS

(i.e. Gregory the Great of Rome). This is also in Barberini.
It is the Liturgy of the Presanctified, used at Vespers to communicate with the reserved Sacrament. It is first mentioned in Chronicon Paschale (ann. AD 645). The text is in Brightman, pp. 345-52.

There is another Greek liturgy, that of ST. PETER, compiled for the use of the Greek residents in Latin areas. Baumstark suggested Illyricum as its source. Codrington shows that it is translated from a Latin text used by the Lombards of south or south-central Italy, for the use of Greek-speaking priests who celebrated in Latin [J.T.S. xxxviii (July 1937), 280-1.]. It is a mixture of Byzantine and Roman rites; the Roman Canon is substituted for the Eastern Anaphora. It is contained in a ninth-century manuscript of Grottaferrata.

ARMENIA

The conversion of Armenia was due to St. Gregory the Illuminator, an Armenian who himself was converted in Caesarea of Cappadocia, and returned to be the Apostle of his native land in 302. In 491 the Church refused to accept the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon, and became Monophysite. The country has had a disastrous history, and in successive tyrannies the Armenians have been wellnigh exterminated. The Catholicos has his seat at Etchmiadzin. Under him are four other ecclesiasts bearing the name of Patriarch, one at Sis in Armenia and one each at Constantinople and Jerusalem, and a titular Patriarch of Agthamar.

The liturgy seems to have been established in Armenia not later than the fourth century. It was, however, worked over again in the fifth century, when the Armenian alphabet had been perfected, and about the ninth century it became more distinctly Byzantine. As the result of Dominican activities in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries it has been infected with Roman elements. It is apart from this one of the most beautiful liturgies in Christendom. The oldest manuscripts are of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Brightman's text, pp. 412-57, is translated from modern books.

Our Liturgy

1. Transfiguration of the whole being

Human mind is provided with conscious, sub conscious and unconscious layers. Worship is not only the transfiguration of the conscious mind. It transforms the whole being . St. Paul expresses this process as follows: And we all, with unveiled face beholding the glory of the Lord as in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory , just as by the spirit of the Lord . ( 2 Cor.3:18). The three representatives of the Apostles could experience this glory of the Lord in their Taboric Transfiguration. Christian witness is not only to see the glory of God, but also to become glorified. Human beings , created in the image of God are transfigured from glory to glory through incessant prayer and worship. This process is not intellectual but experiential. The whole being is involved in this process. In other words, worship is infinite growth in goodness. It is theosis or Defecation.

2. Communication with the five senses.

The five sense help us in human communications. The same is applicable to our communication with God. In real worship we see, hear, smell, taste and experience the divine communion. Preaching the word of God and listening to it are not the exclusive factors of worship. Take the example of the three fold colors by which the Holy Altar is decorated. The red covering at the altar indicates the universe and the solar system. The green coloring denotes the earth with the greenish variety of biological species. The white covering indicates the Church made sanctified and pure through the blood of the unblemished lamb of God , Jesus Christ. The blood and body of Christ were given to the Church and the whole creation is sanctified through the Church. In worship we listen to the word of God , smell the odor of incense ,touch the hands of our brethren in Kiss of Peace and taste from the divine chalice perceiving the mysteries of the liturgical scenario.

3. Rituals, offerings and incense

God became man. He took flesh, matter was used in the redeeming process of incarnation. . Rituals offerings and material objects were given sufficient role in the ministry of Jesus. St. Luke chapter 5 verse 14 states , And he charged him to tell no one : but go and show yourself to the priest and make an offering for your cleansing as Moses commanded for a proof to the people . Thus Jesus commanded to give offering and rites of thanks giving. Jesus is serious towards those who disobeyed the commandments. Jesus taught that offerings and rituals must help to be firm in faith and for the glorification of God. Jesus was respectful towards priesthood , offerings of thanks giving and vows . Even St.Paul cut his hair at Cenchreae, for he had a vow ( Acts 18:18) .Bread , wine , water, oil and soil are all seen used in the redemptive process according to the Bible. You do this in remembrance of me, this is my body and this is my blood commanded Jesus. The offering of the incense is practiced in Christian worship ( See Rev. 8 : 3,4 Rev. 5:8, Heb 9:4, Mt.2: 11). Offering of the incense is to get rid of the plagues to remove the foul smell of sin, to please the Lord with complete dedication and to keep the Biblical commandments ( See Num. 16:46- 50 ) . Ex. 35: 8, 2 Chron 2: 4, 1 kg 9: 25, Malachi 1:11 etc.) With the offering of incense we are mingling with the prayers of all the saints. ( Rev, 8:4)

4.Symbolic Represntations

We have to acknowledge our linguistic limitations. Words and language alone fail to reflect our gratitude to God Almighty. Symbols speak volumes and help us for meaningful communication with God. The early Church developed symbolic art in the Catacombs.Symbols used by early Christians include , lamb, dove ,fish, shepherd, vine , bread, cross and the like. The dove represents holy Spirit, Christ si the Good Shepherd,and the Lamb of God. The Greek word ikhthus which means fish denotes Jesus Christ, son of god, Savior when alphabetically expanded. This was the creed and declaration of faith used by ancient Christians. The symbolism of salt, lamp, etc. are inspirative and educative for a Christian. They are parts of the Christian devotion. The cross speaks out the sacrificial acts of Jesus. Signing of the cross is also silent , but meaningful worship. The icons first came into existence in Syria and Egypt. The Byzantine Church developed icons and iconostasis with a sound theology of symbols called iconography.

5.Fasting, Feasting and Festivals

In worship there are factors beyond human reasoning and intellect. Through the particular cycle of prayers, rites of purification and courses of meditation together with lent, fasting and deeds of charity we find amalgamation with such factors beyond our reason and intellect. In our worship we bow our heads, kneel down and pray to the Lord. ( See Gen 24:26, Gen 24:48, Ex 4:31, Dan 6:10, 1 king 8:54,Mt. 2:11, Rev.7:11, ps,95:6. Etc.) Fasting is pleasing to God Is 58:6-8) , God asked his people to observe fast . Joel 1:12-15. The evil one can be overcome by fasting. Luke 2:37, Mt. 17:21, Esther 4:16 , . Moses observed fasting Ex: 34:28, Mk 9:29, Acts 14:23, , fasting is mentioned in 1 king 19:18. Also we see 21 days fasting of Daniel ( Dan 10:2,3) 14 days fasting in Acts 27: 33,35 . 7 days fasting of David in 2 Sam 12:16, 1 Sam 31:13, 3 days fasting of Esther 3:13, 4:16, Acts 9:9, Dan 9:3-21 , Ezra 8:3, people of Nineveh Jona 3:6 etc. Jesus is the best example Mt. 4:2, Feasts are observed as days of special honor and reverence. Jn.7:2 , acts 20:16, 1 Cor 16:8. The Jews observed feast of Passover. ( Ex. 12: 14-17) ,Pentecost ( Ex. 19:20), tabernacle ( Lev 23:24 ), Purim ( Esther 9:26) , Trumpet ( Lev 23:24) , Feasts and Festivals of Christianity commemorate events related to Christ , saints, and martyrs sharing the experiences in and with so great a cloud of witness ( Heb 12:10)

6. Conformity with the mind of the Church

We are bound to hold fast the traditions transferred to us through the Church by our Lord, the Apostles and the church Fathers. The Greek word paradosisused in the Bible means that which is transferred or traditions ( see 2 thess 2 : 15, 3:16, 1 Cor 11:2 etc.) The continuity and apostolic authority together with the rich spiritual fragrance behind these traditions are to be counted. Tradition is the mind of the Church . It is difficult to write down everything that we see , know and experience . The canons, faith declaration and textual formations of the liturgical practices form the spiritual code of conduct made by the Holy Spirit through the Apostles , gospel- writers and Church Fathers. These traditions (oral and written ) act as catalytic agents for our spiritual upbringing . These tradition are not be ridiculed , misused , and misunderstood. See 1 Cor, 11:34, Phil 4:9, 2 Tim 2:2, 2 Tim 1:13, Heb 2: 1, 3 Jn. 1 :13 , 2 Pet 3:16.

7.Communion with the departed ones

The Church is the communion of all believers in the past , present, and future. Both the living and the departed are members of the church. A believer never dies.Jn.11:26. The departed ones stand around us like clouds today. Heb 12:1. They live 1 Pet 4:6. They speak Luke 9:30,31. They please God 2 Cor 5:8,9. They pray for the world. Rev 6:9,10. Death is not capable of separating us from the love of God. Rom 8:38. The departed Moses and Elijah are seen talking with Jesus Mt. 17:3. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effect. James 5:16. See also Prov 10:7, 1 Cor 6:2, Rev 2:26, Luke 16:27,28. The departed ones are alive in paradise. Luke. 23:43. St. Paul prayed for the departed Onesiphorous. 2 Tim 1:16-18 . We commemorate and unite in prayer with the departed ones who form the larger part of the Church.

8.Intercession for the whole creation

Intercession for the living and the departed was practiced in the Church from the very beginning. If it is alright to ask a living person to pray for us without violating the principle of one unique Mediator , it cannot be wrong to ask a departed saint to pray for us. We also pray for them. Even the relics of the departed saints can do miracles. See 2 kings 13:20, 21. The rich man in hades prays for his five brothers who are living Luke 16:27,28. The Orthodox Church believes that the range of Christ s saving activity is the whole creation at large. The creation is based on the will, wisdom and power of God. Purpose of the creation is to glorify God. With our prayers and intercession we transfigure the world for the glorification of God.

9.Liturgical hymns with diversity of tunes

The highest form of worship is to use hymns with diversity of tunes as in the Psalms. Through liturgical hymns we are getting into the horizon of the fact of incarnation. We are exploring the divine mysteries through our hymns. Music is the human response to divine love. Music transforms human mind. It is the highest form of devotion and the strongest mental shock absorber. With the heavenly angels who stand in rows and repeat the chanting of melodious prayers, the earthly beings participate in the worship with melodious songs. In the book of psalms there are directions to lift up the voice of the choir. The word sela means lift up . In the communal worship and singing , the choir members are reminded here to raise and lower down the voices and tunes. Worship is our state of being immersed into the ocean of God. We feel relaxed when our burdens, problems, afflictions and aspirations are submitted before God. Worship is the state of our relaxation before God.

10. Strong Biblical basis

The apostles and the early disciples described the mystery of early Incarnation based on the law of Moses, prophets and other writings. See Acts 28:23. The worship and liturgical practice of the early Church were developed with the contents of Synagogue worship and Temple worship. The worship in the Jerusalem Temple followed morning and evening sacrifice , offering of the incense and Hanukah processions with lighted candles. The synagogue worship followed readings from the Old Testament, verses of blessings, singing of Psalms, exegetical sermons by religious scholars and Aaronic benediction. Assimilating these ancient practices of worship , the Church developed and regularized readings from the Old Testament, New Testament, songs, offering of incense and the holy Eucharist which is the liturgy of the sacrifice (Jn 6:53 ,1 Cor. 11:23-32, Heb 9: 15-22,). The worship of the Orthodox Church is saturated with verses from the Holy Bible.

"To err is human and to forgive is divine" "Please forgive...!!!

May Almighty God Bless You all

Fr. Johnson Punchakonam