Structure and Theology of the Anaphora of St. James

Structure and Theology

of the Anaphora of St. James

Fr. David Vadakkummuriyil

david.vadakkummuriyil@gmail.com

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Eucharistic celebration is the sublime expression of the Christian faith. The Second Vatican council’s constitution on the sacred liturgy elaborates further “the liturgy… the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, is the outstanding means where by the faithful can express in their lives and manifest to others, the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true church”(SC 2). “The liturgy is the summit towards which the activity of he church is directed, it is also the fount from which all her power flows”(SC10). At the center of all Christian belief is the Pascal Mystery of Christ, and every liturgical celebration is the anamnesis of the paschal mystery which accomplished in Christ.

The Second Vatican council in its decree on ecumenism says: “every one knows with what love the eastern Christians celebrate the sacred liturgy, especially the Eucharistic mystery, source of church’s life and pledge of future glory (UR 15). For oriental churches, there existed an intimate relationship between, the liturgical experience of faithful (Practice), and the theological reflection. For us, Christian life is nothing other than ecclesial life and faith expression of the church. Hence the famous dictum, lex orandi lex credendi. So liturgy is said to be the blue print of the life of the church.  and the experience of heaven on earth.

Scope and Method

The purpose of this study is to make a synthesis of the liturgical theology of the Holy Qurbono, in the light of the patristic commentaries and writings, and it is an attempt of finding and defining the liturgical concepts and categories related to the life of the faithful.

Our study is an attempt of find out the structure and theological meaning of the Holy Qurbono, especially of the anaphora of St. James, the  model of all other Anaphoras of the West Syrian tradition.

Sources

The present Tekso of Holy Qurbono in the Syro Malankra Church, the Syriac version of the old manuscript of St. James version, the mystagogical catechesis and teaching of the fathers and the liturgical commentaries are the main sources of our study. We make use of the mystagogical catechesis of Cyril of Jerusalem (+386), John Chrysostom (+407) and Theodore of Mopsuestia (+428). Among the fathers of the church we make reference to Ephrem of Nisibis (+373) and Severus of Antioch (+538). The liturgical commentaries of Jacob of Edessa (+708), George Bishop of the Arab’s (+724), John of Dara (+825), Moses Bar Kepha (+908) and Dionysius Bar Salibi (+1171) are included in the study.

Limitation

We may limit our study to the pre-anaphora and the Anaphora in the strict sense;We may not make a study of the entire Anaphora.

Procedure

The present study consists of two chapters. The first chapter is dedicated to the historical part of the Anaphora. Second chapter is the analysis of the structure and the theology of the anaphora based on other anaphoras of both West Syrian and the other liturgical traditions.


CHAPTER ONE

JAMES’S ANAPHORA

A BRIEF HISTORY OF ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT

Introduction

            Celebration of the Divine Liturgy is the most sacred act of the Church, and it is the best expression of the life of the church. Liturgy of St. James is the proto-type of the Eucharistic liturgy of the Antiochene as well as of the entire universal church. One of the oldest anaphoras, which got wide acceptance in the Christian mileu as the Jerusalem liturgy, since it was the liturgy of the mother church of all churches. In this chapter we discuss with the historical part like author, date of composition, Jerusalem origins: Aramaic and Greek developments, the Anaphora in Antioch, Pre-chalcedonian development of Syriac and Greek form, post-chalecedonian development, Syriac and related versions, and introduction of Antiochene rite in the Malankara church of St. Thomas.

1.1. Ancient Witness to the Liturgy of St. James

            The oldest manuscript of Greek as well as Syriac versions of St. James anaphora belongs to the 8th or 9th Century AD. However P.E. Brightman gives a list of quotations and references from the 4th century church fathers to the St. James liturgy[1]

            All the Syrian churches acknowledge that the anaphora took its birth from St. James, the brother of our Lord and the first bishop of Jerusalem. This is strongly expressed by Barsalibi (+1173)  “ on Wednesday, James the brother of the Lord, celebrated the Qurobo (liturgy), which has his name the beginning of which being  “ God and Lord of all”. And being asked where from he had taken it, he replied, “God is living, and I neither added nor left out anything of what I heard from the Lord. This is why this is the primitive and first liturgy.”[2]

             The most ancient father in the history, who gives witness to anaphora of St. James, is Prochus, the patriarch of Constantinople.[3]But authenticity of this work is questioned. St. Jerome of 5th century articulates the liturgical evidences of St. James’ authorship of the anaphora in his name. [4]And Jerome (+420) in his treaties against Pelagius quotes from the memento of the departed in the great intercession of the James liturgy[5].

The 6th and 7th ecumenical councils (Constantinople III (680-81) and Nicea II (787) make an authentic reference to the liturgy of St. James and testify that he is the author of the liturgy bearing his name.[6] The Quinisextine council (692) in Trullo makes mention of St. James, during the controversy regarding the mixing of water with wine in the Armenian Church. The canon 32 of the council speaks that “when James, brother of Jesus who was the head of the Jerusalem Church and Baselious the metropolitan of Kesariya handed over the written sacramental form, water and wine in the holy chalice.”[7]

During the same period, Jacob of Edessa (633-708) in his letter to the presbyter named Thomas, gives an outline of the St. James liturgy.[8] Cyril (John) of Jerusalem quotes from St. James liturgy in his 5th mystagogical catechesis in 348 AD.[9]

1.2. Who was the Author?

            Fathers of the Church firmly affirm that the brother of Christ and head of Jerusalem church, James is the author of anaphora that is known in his name. Dionysius Bar Salibi writes: “again we say that on the Sunday of the Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descended on the apostles. On Monday, they consecrated Myrun, on Tuesday they consecrated Tablito, that is altar, on Wednesday James the brother of our lord celebrated the liturgy (qurobo).[10] So the Malankara church celebrates the anniversary of the Eucharistic memorial celebration by St. James on the first Wednesday after Pentecost.

            James was a pillar of the Jerusalem Church (Gal.2:9) and was the presiding bishop at the eucharistic assembly and had both the formative and definitive role in giving shape to the first model of Christian worship.[11]Final word at Jerusalem council was of St. James (Acts. 15). James’ relation with Jerusalem as first bishop strongly affirms the origin of Jerusalem liturgy in his name [12]

             There are a good number of scholars, who believe that the liturgy of St. James originated from the very cenacle where Jesus celebrated his Last Supper with disciples. So the ancient manuscripts bear the following tittle “ the anaphora of St. James, the brother of our lord and the apostle, who learned from our lord in the upper room of the mysteries”[13]

            The shorter version, which is published from Pampakuda (in India), gives the emphasis that James learned from the mouth of our lord. “Anaphora of St. James, brother of our lord’s Apostle, martyr and the first Archbishop of Jerusalem, learned from the mouth of our lord”[14] This tittle is abridged by Bar Hebraeus in 1286.[15]

            In 16th century some authors have questioned the authenticity and authorship of St. James so in the institution narrative the expression “(the bread) was given to the disciples was modified as ‘the bread was given to us the disciples”.[16] This gives an expression that one was present in the upper room during the Last Supper. According to Thomas Elavanal “the anaphora of St. James or anaphora of St. Mark does not necessarily mean written by themselves but one used from the very beginning of the early churches which is founded by the apostles, and so remotely coming from them.” [17]

            Though the liturgical prayers bearing the name of the apostles were not composed by them, they can be considered as the legitimate development of their unwritten tradition. But the faithful considered themselves following the venerable traditions coming from the apostles. It is in this sense that the Didache is called ‘ the teaching of the Apostles’ or the anaphora of Hipplytus is called ‘ the Apostolic Tradition’.[18] So the title “Anaphora of St. James” expresses the belief of the community that this prayer in its original form comes from St. James.

1.3. Date of Composition

            Opinions differ among scholars as to the time of origin of this anaphora. We can not say that it originated in the first century itself. Because there are objections about the period. These are based on the Greek anaphora.

v Only after the second century the dismissal of the catechumens was introduced in the Eucharistic celebration. Justin the Martyr (165-190) is silent about this practice. [19]

v In the Greek version, prayers are said for the pilgrims coming to Jerusalem and also for the royal city Constantinople. Jerusalem became a pilgrim center in the forth century and Constantinople was founded only in 330 AD. This suggests that this anaphora was developed only after 4th century.[20]

v References to the divinity of the Holy Spirit in the anaphora reflect the influence of council of Constantinople in 381. According to Baby Varghese “the qualification Homoousion attributed to the holy spirit, entered the theological vocabulary only after the council of Nicea , in fact even the creed of Nicea- Cpmstantinople does not say that the holy Spirit is Homoousion with father and the Son. It uses another expression Homotion (=none who is worthy of the same worship) which could imply the con-substantiality of the holy Spirit with the Father and the Son. [21]

v The theological vocabularies used in the epiclesis as the qualification of the holy Spirit are kurion , sopion, sumbasileion, homoousion and sunaidion. All these are later 4th century developments.[22]

v Greek version shows that the author is in acquaintance with the style of Greek rhetoric. [23]

v The New Testament is cited and used as the source as the developing prayers. For example the author is quoting  from the epistle to the Hebrews (12:22-23)[24]

            Opinion differs among the scholars, as to the origin of this anaphora. A. Raes dated this anaphora in the middle of the third or middle of the fourth century.[25]Those who propose the 4th century, admits that the anaphora got its final shape before the 5th mystagogical catechesis of Cyril of Jerusalem.[26] C.H. Mercier dates this anaphora in the fourth or fifth century.[27] But according to O. Heiming, The Syriac text originated in between 520 and 630.[28] Baby Varghese says that the original form of the anaphora took shape before the council of Chalcedon (451) because this anaphora was acceptable for both Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians.[29]

            Whatever be the earliest dating of the anaphora or whatever be the age of the old known text of St. James, it does not amount to say that the anaphora was not in existence in an oral tradition before it. Probably it was written down later. “There is no sufficient evidence to prove the existence of any written liturgical book before 325 AD, but it does not disprove the existence before it.”[30] All that we can say about the anaphora of St. James is that it is the one of the most ancient anaphoras known in the Christian melieu.

1.4. Jerusalem Origins: Aramaic and Greek Development

            Modern liturgists generally agree, that the origin of St. James liturgy might have originated in Jerusalem.[31] The New Testament history of the pioneer Christian community of Jerusalem, throw much light on that the first church of Jerusalem gave birth to Syriac and Greek versions of St. James liturgy. [32]The Jerusalem community was formed immediately after the Pentecost experience and it gave much emphasis to a worship (Acts. 2:42). This congregation was composed of Jerusalem Jewish Christians who spoke Aramaic and the Hellenistic Christians who spoke Greek (Acts. 6:1-7).[33] By AD 31/32 these groups started to separate worship due to the linguistic distinction.[34]This caused the development of Aramaic and Greek liturgy of St. James.

1.5. The Anaphora in Antioch

            After the martyrdom of St. Stephen (c 32/33) the Greek Christian community of Jerusalem was persecuted and scattered (Acts 8:1-4 ). The Christians went out preaching the Gospel (acts 8:4) first in Samaria and then in the coastal region of Palestine and Phoenicia and thereafter in the Syrian cities of Damascus and Antioch(Acts 11-19-20). [35] The Antiochine Church was universal in character due to Jewish and gentile believers and the Church was strengthened by Paul, the chief of apostle Peter, and Bernabas.(Gal 2:11).[36] It was here that the followers of Jesus were called as Christianoi (Acts 11:26).[37] This sheds light on the character of the worship of Antiochene church.

            The Antiochene Church is the extension of the Jerusalem Church. The believers from the mother Church laid foundation stone of the Antiochene Church. [38]The earliest written document about the Eucharist is that of Paul (1 Cor 11:22-23) is Antiochene and Luke also is familiar with this.[39] “As in Jerusalem, in Antioch also, the liturgy was celebrated on the Lord’s day (Sunday) in the sanctuary under the leadership of bishop and with the co- operation of priests’ congregation and with the assistance of deacons.” [40]The Antiochene liturgy of St. James took another name Antiochene order and now it means the liturgy of the monophysites (anti-chalcedonians) [41]St. James anaphora, born in Jerusalem, brought up and shaped in Antioch is called the Jerusalem –Antiochene liturgy of St. James.[42]

1.6. Pre-Chalcedonian Development of Syriac and Greek Form

            The pre-Chalcedonian development of Antiochene- order has a long history. It was first celebeated in Jerusalem immediately after Pentecost. There existed two forms of liturgy in Jerusalem and the Greek form was shifted to Antioch during the persecution. And Aramaic form continued to exist in Jerusalem. After the fall of Jerusalem, this shifted to Antioch. Before the council of Chalcedon the anaphora goes through five stages of developments:

1)     The original Jerusalem Aramaic forms 2) the original Jerusalem Greek version 3) the original Antiochene Greek form in Antioch. 4) The Jerusalem version of the Antiochene Greek form. 5) Jerusalem Syriac version.[43]

The Jerusalem liturgy helped other Churches in two ways for the formation of their liturgy:

1) some adopted the Jerusalem liturgy as their own liturgy. 2) Others took it as model for their liturgy. [44]After the fall of Jerusalem, Antioch took the place of Jerusalem and became center of all missionary work..

1.7. Post Chalcedonian Development

            The council of Chalcedon (451) divided the Antiochene Church into two: the Melkites and Aeephaloi (non- Chalcedonians).[45] The Melkites continued to use the Greek version of anaphora of St. James, but in course of time they adopted two Byzantines anaphoras of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom. [46]

            The non-Chalcedonians were gathered under the leadership of Jacob Baradai (c578) and later known as Jacobites and received the title the Syrian Church of Antioch.[47] In the 6th century Jacob Baradai made the first complete translation of Greek text into Syriac.[48] Jacob of Edessa (640-708) revised the Syriac version with the help of original Greek text.[49]Later liturgical theologians like Moses Bar Kepha (813-903) and Dionysius Barsalabi (1173) enlarged the text.[50] Bar Hebraeus (1286) of Persian Maphrianate again released the syriac text and abridged some prayers. [51]This is known as the shorter version of St. James. The Syrian Orthodox Church in Antioch and in India also followed this version.[52]However, enlarged version of the anaphora in the missal known as Ktobo-d- Takso d- Qurobo was printed and published by the patriarch Rahmani in 1922.[53] Malankara Catholic Church’s first metropolitan, archbishop Mar. Ivanios printed this longer version for the use of Malankara Church.[54]

1.8. Syriac and Related Versions

            The anaphora of St. James carries all the characteristics of the West Syriac anaphoras.[55] The Churches in Palestine, Syria , Georgia, Armenia, Greece and Egypt use James’ liturgy. Constantinople and Greek Church of Jerusalem used the liturgy till the 4th and 12th centuries respectively.[56] Even today the Greek Catholic Melkite Church in Jerusalem, Cyprus and Santé uses the liturgy of St. James minor on October 23.[57] In 6th century Greek anaphora of St. James translated into Ethiopian and in the 7th century, into Slavonic  (Russian) and Armenian. At present these translations are not used in respective Churches. At present the anaphora is used only in the post Chalcedonian Syrian Churches.

1.8.1. Shorter Version of St. James

            Bar Hebraeus  (1286) the Persian maphrianite abridged the Syriac text and made a short version.[58]This text is printed at Pampakuda and is used by Orthodox Malankara Church.

1.8.2. Armenian Version

            A Rucker considers the text of Armenian version of St. James’ anaphora has been followed in some points the Greek, and in some other Syriac version. [59] But Baumstark suggests that Armenian version has more similarities with the Syriac translation. [60] Because the Syriac translation was made in 6th century and was used by the Julianists,  the followers of Julian of Halicurnasius who was opposed to Severus of Antioch in the christological contraversy. [61]

1.8.3. Ethiopian Version

            O.Heining who consider that the Ethiopian version is the direct literal translation from the syriac text which is older than the revised text of Jacob of Edessa.[62]The long anamnesis which is one of the important characteristics of old Syriac version, is also found in Ethiopian version. So it is considered that Ethiopian version was formed in 6th or 7th AD, during the time of Syrian missionaries in Ethiopia.

1.8.4. Coptic Version

            History of the Coptic version is still unknown but C.H. Mercier claimed that Professor Goussen of Bonn had a manuscript of the Coptic version, but after his death the manuscript seems to have been lost.[63]

1.9. Greek and Related Versions

            Influence and popularity of St. James’ anaphora was much less among the Chalcedonian Churches than non-Chalcedonians. Only Georgian and Russian Churches translated it.

1.9.1. Georgian

            This text seems to have been in existence in the 7th century. The scholars say that this version has reserved the original form of the Greek version so it is very important in the study of St. James anaphora. [64]

1.9.2. Slavonic

            This version is based on the revised Greek text, which has its origin in Thessalonica.[65]

1.10. Introduction of Antiochene Rite in Malankara

            The very origin of Antiochene tradition in Kerala is recent and accidental, but epoch-making. Before the second half of the 17th century, there existed no relation with the Jacobite Patriarch of Antioch. The Coonan- Cross oath in 1653 at Mattanchery against the latinisation in the Malankara Church was a remote cause of the relation.[66] After the separation the archdeacon had no valid ordination and he wrote to different patriarchiates for getting valid ordination. In 1665 the Jacobite see of Antioch granted the request of archdeacon by sending Mar Gregorios, metropolitan of Jerusalem. There was not much in common between him and Archdeacon Thomas in matter of doctrine. Subsequently Jacobite Church was rooted in the soil of Kerala. [67]

            The independent Malankara community started to entertain an ecclesiastical relationship with the Syrian orthodox Church of Antioch from the middle of the 17th century, which paved the way for the introduction of the West Syrian liturgy in the Malankara Church. This process was more or less completed by the declaration of the Jacobite patriarch Peter IV in the synod of Mulanthurutrhy in Kerala in 1834.[68]

Conclusion

            The most circulated tradition is among the Syrian Church is that on the Wednesday after Pentecost, Mar James’ brother of our Lord, and first Bishop of Jerusalem celebrated the Eucharist on the Wednesday. This may be seen as the ultimate origin of the liturgy of St. James. We can notice obvious strength of legends in the history of religion, and attribution of religious literature to religious leaders to gain acceptability. Though the liturgical prayer bears the name of the apostle, it was not composed by him. However the liturgy may be considered as the legitimate development of unwritten traditions, whose origin goes to St. James. The Christian community had always the consciousness that, in the liturgical celebration, they are following a venerable tradition coming from the apostle. So the ‘anaphora of St. James’ in its original form has relation to St. James the Apostle, with regard to the source as oral traditions.

CHAPTER TWO

THE ANAPHORA

Introduction

            The title anaphora for the central and consecratory part of the Qurbono, also is one alluding to the worshipping character of the celebration. The meaning of anaphora varies according to churches. Some of the churches understand anaphora as the whole liturgical prayer that is from the arrival of priests before the altar till leaving the sanctuary. G. Paniker defines it as “that part of the Eucharistic liturgy which begins with the prayer of peace and ends with the prayer of the third imposition of the hands, inclusively after the communion”.[69] Others are of the opinion that the anaphora is the Eucharistic part of the liturgy that begins with “Let us lift up our heart” and ending with the dismissal of the faithful. West-Syrian tradition gives both the meaning to the anaphora. But in this chapter for our study we make use of the prayers from the prayer of peace to the second blessing (Christological) as anaphora.

2.1 Etymology

            The Syriac word ‘anaphora’ is coming from the Greek verb ‘anapherein[70] which means “to bring up”, “to offer in sacrifice”, “to make expiation”, “to raise up”, “to bring back”, “to call to mind”, “to recall a likeness”, “to pray over” etc.[71] while its noun form anaphora meant often offering, ascend of a sign, a coming up, raising up etc.[72] The term in its Syriac usage would contain meanings such as: offering sacrifice a Qurbono, prayer of Holy Qurbono.[73]

2.2 Popular Meanings

            In the Syriac tradition anaphora has three different meanings such as,

v The whole Eucharistic prayer.

v Suseppo, that is the veil referred to here is a large piece of cloth which covers the mysteries at the beginning

v The Mystery of the bread and wine.[74]

The equivalent Syriac term for anaphora is Qurobo or Takso.[75] The anaphoras of the West-Syrian liturgy is composed of 66 prayers, out of which 33 are variable which shows the 33 years of the earthly life of Jesus Christ.[76]

2.3 St. James and The Early Eucharistic Prayers

            In ancient times the term anaphora is used to show that part of celebration from the opening dialogue to Epiclesis. In ancient time, this part was common to all traditions, when the liturgies developed many things were added to that. If we analyze the ancient liturgical development we can see it. Since primitive form of eucharistic celebration was much same in East and the West, these prayers can be of great help to our understanding of the structure of anaphora of St. James.

2.3.1 Didache

            Didache or the Teaching of the Apostles probably of the first century, chapter 9, 10 and 14 gives us some information about the early Christian liturgies. From this we get the information that Christian faithful gathered together and made the prayer upon the bread and the wine and participated in it. The general structure of the prayer in Didache is

v Thanksgiving for the new economy of salvation in Christ.

v Thanksgiving for the spiritual food-Eucharist

v Intercession for the gathering, for the Church

v Maranatha, a prayer of eschatological hope.[77]

Didache represents an age when Eucharistic prayer had not yet fixed from and was not fully developed.

2.3.2 Apology of St. Justin

            St. Justin who wrote his first apology in 150 CE in Rome gives clearer picture of the second century Eucharistic celebration. According to him the Qurbono after baptism started with the kiss of peace and Sunday celebration started with the reading from the scripture. The structure of the Eucharistic celebration after baptism is this:

v Communal prayer

v Kiss of peace

v Presentation of bread and wine

v Prayer over the bread and wine

v Distribution of communion.[78]

But the Sunday celebration had two elements namely,

  1. Celebration of the word, which involves 1. Reading from the scriptures 2. Instruction or homily 3. Prayer and 4. Kiss of peace.
  2. Celebration of the Eucharist contains 1. Presentation of bread water and wine. 2. Prayer of thanksgiving over the bread and wine and 3. Distribution.[79]

2.3.3 The Apostolic Tradition

            After Justin, Hippolitus of Rome gives ancient authentic witnesses to the celebration of the Eucharist through the apostolic tradition C 215 CE. The following structural pattern can be distinguished in this account.

  1. Kiss of peace 2. Preparation of bread and wine 3. Introductory dialogue 4. Thanksgiving prayer 5. Institution narrative 6. Anamnesis 7. Epiclesis 8. Sanctus 9. Two prayers for receiving communion 10. Bowing down prayer 11. The Holies to the holy and pure alone ought to be given 12. Communion 13. Prayer after communion 14. Prayer of imposition of hand 15. Final blessing and 16. Dismissal.[80]

Many modern structures of Qurbono we can see in the apostolic tradition.

2.3.4 The Apostolic Constitution

            For more perfect Eucharistic prayer, we should take into account the apostolic constitution in the fourth century than the apostolic tradition.[81]

2.3.5 Present forms of Anaphoras

            We can draw the common elements in modern forms of anaphoras such as:

  1. Pre-anaphora, that is kiss of peace 2. Introductory dialogue 3. Sanctus 4. History of salvation 5. Institution narrative 6. Anamnesis 7. Epiclesis 8. The great intercession 9. The great doxology 10. Breaking of bread 11. Preparation for reception of the Eucharist 12. Communion and 13. Final blessing.[82] But in the anaphora of East-Syrian tradition only after the intercession Epiclesis comes.[83] And at the same time Coptic anaphora contains two Epiclesis one before the sanctus and the other after the sanctus.[84]

2.4. Pre-Anaphora

            Before the Trinitarian blessing three prayers were added to the anaphora which are 1. Prayer of peace, 2. Prayer of blessing and 3. Prayer on the veil. These prayers are the introduction to the anaphora. We get first hand information on these prayers from the canon 19 of synod of Laodicea. Council says, “after penitence received the imposition of hands, three prayers are to be said over the faithful. The first prayer is said in low voice, while the second and third aloud. Then these follow the kiss of peace”.[85]

            But from the letter of Jacob of Edessa addressed to Presbyter Thomas, we get the idea that in the council of Nicea, 318 Fathers of the church introduced this prayer.

“After the composition of the creed of 318 (Fathers), it was judged that it also should be added to the ordo of the qurobo (so that) the souls, hearts and bodies, and the voices might be sanctified by it. After this, when the doors are closed there should be the three prayers of the faithful. Later, when different practices and customs established in the church, the first of these three prayers of the faithful was prescribed for the sacramental request for peace and another for the imposition of hands, and the third of them the lifting up of the anaphora (Litt: for the revelation of the table), by which they symbolise, that the doors of the heaven are opened.”[86]

            But the decrees of the council of Nicea do not carry any evidence to it. These prayers in the letter of Jacob of Edessa may be the attribution of the Dionysious Bar Salibi because the other two commentaries known in the name of Jacob of Edessa do not mention about it.[87]

            In connection to that Moses Bar Kepha says that the prayer “glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit” before the kiss of peace is not proper because it is not the part of the anaphora.[88]

            Prayer on veil was common during the time of Severus of Antioch in Palestine and Jerusalem.[89] From seventh century onwards these three prayers were common in Greek anaphora.[90]

            According to Moses Bar Kepha there were other prayers during these prayers. Two of them are mentioned by himself as “pardon, my Lord, our debts, and Thou art good, whom art not angered”.[91] But he disagreed with regard to the position of these prayers. This shows that the influence of Moses Bar Kepha to fix these three prayers before introduction to proper anaphora.

2.4.1 Prayer of Peace

            This is the prayer to become worthy to give peace in the sermon on the mount, Jesus emphatically requires that reconciliation with one brother or sister must take place before worship (Mt. 5: 23), for this reason that the rite of peace in the eastern liturgies put forward after the service of word.

            For the service of the rite of peace has three parts:

  1. The prayer for peace by priest b. The priest’s wish of peace for the congregation c. deacon’s announcements d. Sign of peace and e. People’s responses.

Priestly prayer starts with “God of all and the Lord, account these our unworthy selves to be worthy of this salvation so that without guile and united by the bond of love….”[92] Moses Bar Kepha explains it with the words of the Anaphora itself. “This first prayer is a supplication to God the Father that He would grant us that with cleanness of heart and with divine love, we may give the peace one to another”.[93] Dionysious Bar Salibi says “by this (prayer) of peace, he orders us to be freed from all ill will, division and evil, so that by fulfilling the giving of the peace, we may made worthy to be gathered before God and to communicate with Him in peaceful unity which drives away from us every carnal (desires).[94]

Anaphora of St. James is considered as originally addressed to Father except for the last prayer, where the second person of the Trinity, the Son Our  Lord  Jesus Christ is mentioned.[95] The body of the prayer of peace on paschal Thursday and Saturday is addressed to the Son. During the prayer of kiss of peace the celebrant, with crossed hand, stand up on the darga says loudly the prayer, shows the entrance of Jesus the High priest, in the house of Mark for the paschal meal. Here priest is raising above the material realm and now thinking of Jesus where he sits on the right side of the Father (Col. 3:1-2)[96]. It also could mean the paschal mystery of Jesus in the sacramental form.

2.4.1.1 Peace Be unto You

            The greeting and the kiss of peace serve as an introduction to the Eucharist. It is common to all eastern liturgies. The wish of peace for the congregation comes after the prayer of peace. The rite of kiss of peace may  be apostolic origin because St. Peter and Paul exhorts the Christians to greet one another with of holy kiss (1 Pet. 5:14, Rom. 16:16) Moses Bar Kepha says concerning the priest’s salutation as “priest urges them to give the peace one to another in peacefulness and love, the clergy and the people alike: the clergy, according to that which our  Lord  said to His disciples: “ By this shall every man know that ye are my disciples, when ye shall love one another”; but the people, (according to that): “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”.[97]

Moses Bar Kepha puts forward five reasons for exchanging peace.

Ø  We are making ready to communicate with God through His body, and this cannot be so long as we are divided in ourselves and in regard to each other; accordingly we give the peace, that we may shew that, as we embrace outwardly, so inwardly we have love and concord.

Ø  By being made at peace with one another we are made at peace with God.

Ø  The peace, which we give one to another, quenches and does away mutual enmity.

Ø  By the peace which we give we signify that Christ has made an end of the enmity which was between (God) and men, and between the people and peoples, (and between the soul and) the body, and has caused peace and love to reign among us.

Ø  By the peace, which we give at this time we fulfil the word of the Lord, who said: “if thou offer thine offering upon the altar”, etc., “leave thine offering, and go, be reconciled with thy brother”.[98]

At present time, mainly five times in the Qurbono, priest whishes peace to the congregation, which are, 1. In the beginning of the anaphora, that is before the proclamation of deacon for giving peace one another. 2. Before the fraction of the bread 3. Before the second prayer of the imposition of the hand that is after Lord ’s prayer. 4. Before third blessing. 5. Before third imposition of hand.

            In the Roman liturgy, prayer and gestures of rite of peace are direct preparation for receiving communion. But Eastern Churches put it in the beginning of the anaphora

2.4.1.2. And with Your Sprit

            Here we should remember that the word ‘peace’ as mentioned by Our Lord Jesus Christ means more than the absence of war or conflict. He used the Hebrew- Aramaic term Shalom, which was used by the prophet as term comprehending messianic salvation. It includes well being of both body and Saul and it includes harmony between God, and among the people. The great gift of God is the fruit of the paschal mystery, the fullness of salvation of new covenant.

According to Baby Varghese the translation of the term valruho dilok is not correct as with your Spirit. We can not translate ruho meaning spirit only but it has a meaning of whole Person so it has the meaning that also with you.[99]In Chaldian liturgy we can see the expression with you and with your Spirit.[100]

Thedore of Mopsuestia considers the expression and with your Spirit as the Holy Spirit dealt in the priest because he says that:

In saying “and unto thy Spirit” they do not refer to his Soul, but to the grace of the Holy Spirit by which those who are under him believe that he drew nigh unto priesthood, as the blessed Paul said: “I serve Him with the Spirit in the Gospel of His Son” (Rom. 1:9) (….) All of them pray that through peace the grace of the Holy Spirit may be vouchsafed unto him, so that he may strive to perform his service to the public suitably and rightly.[101]

Moses Bar Kepha explains it as:

Even that which Thou didst bestow upon us in baptism, may we have that peace and Concord of Thine which Thou gavest us when Thou saidst: “ My peace I give to you, my peace I leave to you” Again, they answer the priest: With thee also be peace; as saint Gregory Theologus said: “That peace which thou givest and receivest.[102]

The same word of Bar Kepha is repeated by Bar Salibi with an addition of Theodore of Mopsuestia. Bar Salibi says that “as if to Christ, they answer to the priest with your Spirit, that you have given us in baptism.[103]

2.4.1.3. The Kiss of Peace

             There are numerous references in the scripture especially in the New Testament to the practice of kiss of peace. (Rom. 16:16, 1 Cor. 16:20, 1 Pet. 5:14, Mt. 5:23, Lk. 7:45,).

 Cyril of Jerusalem and Apostolic Constitution witness that after began to bringing bread and wine in procession to the altar the kiss of peace has given.[104] But St. John Chrysostom says that when the bread and wine taken into the altar people gave kiss of peace.[105]

             People respond to the priestly prayer as   “Make as worthy o Lord and God of this peace, all the days of our lives”. Moses Bar Kepha is salient about the deacons acclamation and people’s response. Bar Salibi mentions only of deacon’s cannon, which shows that during the time of Jacob of Eddessa (7th century) it was not in the text. At the time of giving peace people chant either manito of peace and tranquility of service (Slomon Ushanio, Elen Dal Teshmeshto).[106]

Deacon’s acclamation until the 16th century was in simple form. Both Greek and Coptic versions follow the simple statement that “Before the Lord we can bow down our heads.”[107] In the East Syrian liturgy, we can see the proclamation of deacons before the prayer of imposition of hands as “blessed O Lord bow down your head for the imposition of hand and receiving the blessing”.[108] But in the Maronite Anaphora of St. James nothing is mentioned of the deacon’s proclamation.

2.4.2. Prayer of Imposition of Hands

            The prayer of peace is known as the ‘prayer of imposition of hand’ and in all the ancient scripts. At the same time it also known as ‘prayer up on people’. In the present text we can see there are three impositions of hands upon people which are, 1. After the prayer of peace. 2. Before the ‘holy things to holy’ and 3. At the end of the Qurbono.

In the Apostolic Constitution, we can see the indirect saying of the imposition of hand,[109] which mentions that Bishop asked the priest to bless people like Moses (Num. 6:24-26).

In the West Syrian liturgy we can not see the priest holding the right hand over the people for imposition of hand but keeps his hand cross-wise over his breast. This shows that, according to tradition, this blessing is given directly given by God and hence everybody in the community, including the celebrant, has to stand in such disposition but in the East Syrian liturgy only during the Husaya prayer after the Epiclesis, priest holding his right hand over the people. But his prayer of imposition of hand after Koruzuto does not carry the imposition of hands over the people.[110]

Bowing down the heads before God is the sign of the total surrendering of human being. (Gen. 48: 12, Jh. 19: 30). The Syriac word for prayer is Sloso and toot verb root Sali could also means bowing down[111]. This prayer expresses praise, thank giving, reverence and adoration to God.

2.4.3. Lifting up of the Veil

The third prayer is that ‘of veil’ or ‘above the veil’, during which the celebrant put the veil, covering the offering and thus preparing himself for the recital of the Eucharistic prayer. At the end of the prayer, the priest raises the Veil and reveals the mysteries, which are covered. This also known as the Anaphora or the linen cloth Keltho, and Bar Salibi calls it as prayer over the Veil.[112]

The biblical understanding of the priestly prayer is that “O God the Father (Mt.6:9) who by your great love toward mankind did send your Son into the world (Jn. 3:16) to bring back the sheep that had gone astray (Is. 55:5; Ps. 119:17; Mt. 18:12; Lk. 15:4; II Pet. 2:25) Reject not, O my  Lord , the service of this bloodless sacrifice for we rely not on our righteousness, but of your mercy (Ps. 52:8)….”[113] During this prayer, priests calling the Father to accept the Qurbono from him and from the people who stand behind him. Because we are offering the sacrifice not referring on our righteousness, but we trust in your mercy alone, that you shall receive the scarifies from us. The priestly prayer proclaims the personality of Jesus Christ, his relation to the Father and so on.

The susepo used in the Qurbono is the representation of the covering stone of the sepulchre of the Lord. In the west Syrian rite there is a solemn rite of waving and removing the susepo from above the gifts. Then pray as following “You are the fiery rock, which sent forth twelve streams of water for the twelve tribes of Israel. You are the hard rock which was set against the tomb of our redeemer.”[114] This prayer brings out the symbolism of susepo in the Antiochean tradition. Fathers of church consider the rock sent forth twelve streams of water for the twelve tribes of Israel as the archetype of Jesus. And the rock, which covered the tomb of our Lord, is opened during his resurrection to give living water of eternal life.

Syrian Fathers consider the altar as the tomb of our Lord. John Chrysostom says that the altar took the place of Christ’s tomb and the susepo, which covers the chalice shows, the rock, which was set against the tomb of our saviour.

Writings of Theodore would help to understand the beginning of susepo. He considers the procession of the mysteries to the altar as the burial of Christ’s body.

He says, When they (the deacons) bring out (the Eucharistic bread) they place it on the Holy altar for the complete representation of the passion, so that we may think of Him on the altar, as if he were placed in the sepulchre, after having received His passion. This is the reason why those deacons who spread linens on the altar represent the figure of the linen clothes of the burial (of our Lord). Sometimes after these have been spread, they sand up on both sides, and agitate all the air above the holy body with fans, thus keeping it from any defiling object. They make manifest by this ritual the greatness of the body which is lying there, as it is the habit, when the dead body of the high personage of this world is carried on a bier, that some men should fan the air above it.[115]

Severius of Antioch wrote to Caseraea the Hyptatissa about the meaning of lifting up of veil. He says, “The susepo that covers the mysteries indicates the hidden divine mysteries of Old Testament sacrifices. But through the spiritual uncovering of the veil indicates that Christ the Lord becomes revealed to the believers.

In Palestine and Jerusalem when priests were praying, deacons were continuing the lifting up and let down of susepo during the prayer. It continues till the end of the priest prayer and then the priest continues the Eucharistic prayer.

This action also indicates the vessel come down from heaven before Peter which contained all types of clean and unclean creatures. This was an indication to Peter that gift of the Holy Spirit is not limited to the Jews with the Torah but also to the gentiles.”[116]

Bar Kepha points out the reasons for putting veil on mysteries:

Ø  It signifies the secretness and invisibleness of the Godhead, which is hidden in the mysteries.

Ø  It is a symbol of the stone, which was placed over the tomb of our Redeemer.

Ø  It makes known that Emmanuel Himself was covered over and hidden in the sacrifices of the Law and in that figurative service.[117]

Again Bar Kepha interprets the lifting up and let down of susepo as the vision of St. peter. He says,

And God signified to him by this, that it was not only to the people of the Jews, whom the Law used to cleanse, that this grace of holy baptism was given, but to the peoples also, who aforetime were defiled. Wherefore the anaphora also they lift up and let down, that they may signify that this grace of the holy mysteries has been given for pardon to all those who have believed in Christ, whether they be of the people or of the peoples.[118]

Bar Kepha is silent about who is lifting up the veil. But John of Dara says that the veil is raised above the mysteries, and raised three times by three priest and he continues that the anaphora  (veil) should not be raised from the east, because it is the side of the type of the holy angels, who don’t have the veil of ignorance. The priest one who stands at the south represents the Michael and the another in north Gabriel.[119]

In the Antiochene tradition the susepos are changing according to the liturgical seasons. During the season of yeldo used the veil with picture of star, Denaho and Pentacost with dove and Sleebo and other seasons with cross.[120]

2.4.3.1. Announcement of Deacon

During the time of Kushapa prayer over veil the deacon makes the announcement, which brings as follows “Barekhmor; Let us stand well, let us stand with fear, let us stand with modesty, purity and holiness and let us all stand, my brethren, in love and faith. Let us intelligently behold, with the fear of God, this…”[121]

The faithful are instructed to stand with due reverence and look with their mind on what is being done. The time of the Qurbono is when the salvific and awe inspiring mysteries accomplished by our Lord, who is in fact the  Lord  and king of kings, high priest and the only begotten Son of God, and the one who judges the whole world are religion-enacted on our altar through signs and symbols.

The heavenly choirs stand attentively and vigilantly around these mysteries. The altar is the place where they are re-enacted in the place of encounter between God and man. Man must look at God who is his creator surely with fear and this fear comes out of his deep love and reverence for him. It is the outcome of deep faith. This fear is not one detaching him form his God but attaches him more intimately to God. True fear of God comes through basic repentance and conversion. This is why we stand in fear.

Fathers of the church consider the lifting up and letting down of veil as the opening of heavenly door. Here we visualize the meeting point of heaven and earth so tit is considered as the ladder of Jacob (Gen. 28:12; Heb. 12:22). To see this mysteries we need the real faith and love toward mysteries.[122]

2.4.3.2. This Qurbono is mercy (blessing), peace and sacrifice of thanks giving.

The real meaning of Qurbono is expressed through the response of people as mercy, peace and sacrifice of thanks giving. The Syriac word rahmey has the meaning like love mercy grace and compassion. Even though we turn away from God through our sins, through the redemptive activities of the Son we are saved. This deep God experience of Jesus and the love of God the Father towards humanity is reenacted in the Qurbono. So this Qurbono is considered as mercy and blessing.

Christ himself is peace (Eph. 2:14), the king of peace (Rom. 16:20). Peace is the gift of God towards those who have love of God. Through this sacrifice Christ destroyed the enmity of Jews and gentile, heavenly and earthly bodies and souls and body.

The aim of     Qurbano is Eucharistia, i.e. thanks giving to God. Obedience, suffering, blood-shed etc were considered as external expressions of believing in God. Jesus gave thanks to the Father during Last Supper (Lk  22:17-19). So St. Paul calls the Qurbono as the cup of blessing and sharing in the body of Christ.[123]

Bar Kepha explains it as “The mercies of God which have been poured out upon us, they are this sacrifice which has been offered for our race, and it has been pardoned. But (they say) peace, because it (the sacrifice) made peace between the heavenly and earthly beings, and between the people and the peoples, and between the soul and the body. Again, confession: for when Christ confessed (or gave thanks) and gave it to His disciples in the upper room, He confessed to His Father on our behalf, as Paul has said: “The bread of blessing which we receive, and the cup of confession etc”.[124]

2.5 The Anaphora

This is the center part of the Eucharistic prayer. This part begins with the apostolic Trinitarian blessing. The Anaphora of St.James begins with Pauline salutation at the end of second epistle of St. Paul to Corinthians. “The love of God the Father +, the Grace of the only begotten Son +, and fellow ship and descent of the Holy Spirit be with you all my brethren forever”[125]. Where as in Pauline salutation first place is given to Lord Jesus Christ.

2.5.1 The First Blessing

This blessing had a long history. In Jewish tradition before the meal they gave praise to Yahweh as sacrament. This dialogue is known as Berakah. There were thus aveilabe two Greek words to translate the Hebrew word Berakah, which are Eulogia = a blessing, or Eucharastia = giving thanks [126]. Some of the Jewish domestic rites and prayers like Quddus and Birkat Ha- Mazon, were benedictions to Yahweh before and after meals[127].

The early church also followed this tradition before the Lord’s Supper, which we can see in the Apostolic Tradition of Hypolitus where use the salutation ‘ Lord is with you’. The same word is still using in Roman, Coptic and Ethiopean liturgies. But other Eastern Churches use the salutation of Paul[128].

According to scholars the anaphora took its form from the Jewish Chaburot that is supper held in the eve of Sabbath or holy day[129]. Berakah had three elements: Prayer, thanksgiving and intercession (Prayer of mercy). In Christian tradition these three elements put in to three Persons of Trinity.

Praise: God the Father created the whole world due to his eternal love towards the human beings. But though sin we fall in to the death of sin. God the Father saved the world through his Son (Jn. 3:16). Proclamation of this love is praise.

Thanksgiving:  Function of Anaphora is to give thanks and praise which was an anemnesis of the Mireabilia Dei  that is great deeds of the Father through His Son.

Intercession:  Through the fellowship of the Holy Spirit we become holy. And the descent of the Holy Spirit towards us is the sign of acceptance of our prayers before God. So the duty of the church is to pray for the action of Holy Spirit.[130]

Bar Kepha says: “By saying the love of Holy God the Father, he shews that in His love God gave His Son to death for us, as the apostle has said. By saying and the grace of the only Begotten Son, he signifies that it was by His grace that the Son tasted death for all, and not as through they were worthy of this. Again, by saying and the lighting down and communion of the Holy Spirit, he declares that by the lighting down of the Holy Spirit, the sacrifices are accomplished and accepted[131].

Antiochene Qurbono is Trinitarian and at the same time most of the prayers are addressed to the Father. This may be the reason that changes the Pauline salutation. Louis Bouyer consider that this change is made in order to establish the Trinitarian theology of the 4th C. by placing the Father first then the Son second and the Holy Spirit third[132]. Theodore is considered as the first one who mentions this formula of blessing[133]. Jacob of Edessa and Moses Bar Kepha consider it as a shorter formula. ‘Peace be to you all’ and people respond ‘and with thy Spirit’. But they say, later Fathers add more explanations to it[134]. Both East Syrian and Bysantine Anaphoras use the same salutation of St. Paul. The Anaphora of Addai and Mari, which quotes it as: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of the Father and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all, now and always for ever and ever”[135].

The Eucharistic prayer starting with the apostolic blessing of the celebrant who makes the sign of the cross three times. The sign of the cross made with the thumb and the first two fingers joins together signify the Holy Trinity.  The people also hold their fingers in the same way, touching the forehead first, then the breast, then the left shoulder and then the right, reminding themselves that Christ came down from heaven above and made us who were children of darkness (left) in to the children of light (right)[136].

2.5.2 The Opening Dialogue

The dialogue prayer of the Qurbono of St. James runs as following. “Upward, where Christ sits on the right hand of God the Father, let our thoughts, minds, and hearts be at this hour”. “They are with the Lord God”. “Let us give thanks to the Lord in awe”. “It is meet and right”.

The opening dialogue between the priest and the people in the beginning of the Eucharistic prayer is common to all liturgies. Where as the distinctive feature of the Anaphora of St. James is the expression of “Upward, where Christ sits on the right hand of God the Father, let our thoughts, minds, and hearts be at this hour”. According to Theodore, the priest prepares the people through this opening dialogue. He says: that “Lift up your mind, in order to show that although we are supposed to perform this awe – inspiring and ineffable service on earth, we, nevertheless, ought to look upwards towards heaven and to extend the sight of our soul to God…”[137]

For Cyril of Jerusalem it is a priestly duty to give admonition to concentrate our mind on God:  “So the priest is virtually commanding you all at that moment to lay aside the cares of this life, your domestic worries, and to keep your heart in Heaven on God who loves men”[138]. Moses Bar Kepha and Bar Salibi, explain why we need to lift up our mind. “Now the holy mysteries have been revealed, and the doors of heaven have been opened, and the holy hosts and the Spirits of the righteous have come down for the honoring of the mysteries, on high be our mind and our thoughts, and not below in earthly things”[139].

In the Apostolic Constitutions, the word ‘Mind’ is used instead of ‘heart’. But the Greek and Syriac text of St. James mention of both notions ‘heart and mind’ which is more authentic. Some of the old manuscripts follow the word ‘meditation and thought’. Bar Kepha and Bar Salibi mention it as our ‘mind’ thought and heart unto the Lord our God.[140] The Anaphora of Addai and Mari, St. Mark, and Apostolic Constitution of Hippolitus follow the same words of Bar Kepha. This prayer which shows that this prayer come into Christian Liturgy before 4th century.[141] The anaphora of Addai and Mari follows the simplest form “Let your mind be on high”.[142]

The people respond to priestly dialogue as “they are (our minds, thoughts and hearts) unto the Lord our God”. Cyril of Jerusalem considers through these words faithful are declaring that they are at one with God.[143] Moses Bar Kepha explains its meaning as following: “we have with” the Father, our God, His mercies which are upon us. Secondly: again, “we have with” Him the incarnation of the Son, whereby He redeemed us. Thirdly: “we have with” Him the writing of the Holy Spirit, whereby we have been written in the adoption of Sons through baptism, according to that “Rejoice that your name are written in Heaven”.[144]  Here Fathers of the Church say that Qurbono is the union of our mind, heart and thought with Holy Trinity, which is acquired through the mercy of the Father, the incarnation of the Son and the gift of the Holy Spirit in baptism. Bar Salibi quotes Jacob of Edessa and says “they are with the Lord, (because) He saved us by the inhomination of the Son”.[145] It is through the Son our heart becomes in communion with the Father and we are made “worthy of the brotherhood with Him”.[146]

            Then the priest says, “In fear let us give thanks to the Lord”. Moses Bar Kepha says three explanations for people confess to Lord in fear. They are i) The mysteries, which were hidden, have been revealed. ii) The angels have come down and stand around the mysteries. iii) On account of these great gift which He has given us.[147]

            For Cyril the reason for thanks to God is that “Because He has called our unworthy Persons to this great gift, because he has reconciled us though we were enemies, and because he has counted us worthy of the ‘Spirit of Sonship’ (Rom. 5:10, 8:15)”.[148] According to Theodore, we give thanks to God is an expression of our gratitude to God, who is the cause of all benefits.

            The people respond to celebrant: “it is meet and right”. It is a duty of the people to give thanks for the redemptive works of God towards mankind.  Here the priest sees that he and all people are become one body and in the name of the people offer sacrifice to God. During this time the priest confesses to the Lord secretly saying: “Truly meet and right and is it that Thee we should glorify, Thee we should bless, etc.”[149] When the priest and people become one body, the priest begins the mystical services of the Qurbono.[150]

2.5.3 The Preface

            In this prayer priest invokes all powers of heaven and earth and nine angelic choirs to praise and thank God. So it is considered as introduction to sanctus. Content of this prayer is praise and thanksgiving to God. This prayer divided the creatures into two groups, the cosmic creatures, namely the visible creation, and the angelic creatures, namely the invisible creation.  “We offer glorification and adoration to that external nature, which brought (both) visible and invisible things into existence.”[151]

            The Apostolic Constitutions gives witness to very lengthy and ancient form of this prayer. From the Catechetical Homily of Cyril we can conclude that the preface to Sanctus during his time was similar to that of the Apostolic Constitution and Anaphora of St. James.

 After that we make mention of sky and earth and sea, sun and moon, stars and all creation- Whether endowed with reason or not, whether seen or unseen. We recall Angels, Archangels, Virtues, Dominations, Principalities, Powers, Thrones, and the Cherubim of many faces. In effect we bid them, in the words of David: ‘Magnify the Lord with me’. We recall also the Seraphim, whom Isaiah by the power of the Holy Spirit saw encircling God’s throne. With two wings they covered the face, with two more the feet, and with two more they flew, saying: Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord  of Hosts.[152]

According to Isaiah 6:1-4 Seraphim cover their own faces and leg with their own wings. But Cyril of Jerusalem considers the Seraphim cover God’s faces with their wings Alexandrine Father Origen also holds this view. Later in order to avoid confusion the Anaphora of St. James added that “ the six winged seraphim who, covering their faces and their feet, fly to one another…”[153] According to Louis Moolaveettil, this prayer the Jerusalem church itself borrowed from the Alexandrian church.[154]

            Moses Bar Kepha comments on the action of Seraphim as:

By covering their faces they signify that God is eternal and without beginning. By hiding their feet they show they shew that God is without end and without limit. By flying with two wings and praising, they signify that to Him who is without beginning and without end praise is due from all. By singing three times Holy, Holy, Holy they signify that this God, who had no beginning and has no end, is three Persons.  By saying Lord, thy shew that these three persons are one nature and one Lord. By saying Almighty, they signify that His exalted power brought the universe into being, and that He holds and preserves it by His care. By saying Sabaoth, they signify that He is the Lord of hosts.[155]

This is the nutshell of theology of trinity. God is eternal, without beginning, end and limit. And He is three Persons with one nature and Lord. It is through His power that the universe come into existence and preserve by His grace. This prayer is the combination of the vision of Isaiah (6:1-3) and Ezekiel (3:12). Bar Kepha gives Christological explanation also to this prayer.

            Theodore does not speak of the prayer in Ezekiel in his commentary. Later in fourth century the prayer in Ezekiel is added. According to tradition, the subject to whom it was praising is changed. In Jewish liturgy it was intruded to God the Father (Yahweh), during the time of early Christianity this view was strong. When the heresies originated this prayer was considered as introduced to trinity. In the Anaphora of Addai and Mari and Maronite anaphora of Peter Sarrar consider this prayer was addressed to the Son. Bar Kepha gives these three possibles meaning in his commentary.[156] In short Qurbono is the foretasting of the heavenly liturgy because through calling living and non-living creature to praise God we part take in heavenly liturgy.

2.5.4. Sanctus

As a continuation to preface people saying “Holy, holy, holy, Lord God almighty, heaven and earth are fully of your glory. Hossana in the highest.  Blessed is he that has come and is to come in the name of the Lord.  Hosanna in the highest”.[157]  This prayer is the combination of Is. 6:3 and Mt. 21:9. In Isaiah it is the utterance of the Seraphim at a call of prophet. And in Mathew it is in the background of Jesus’ entry in to Jerusalem with reference to Ps. 118:25-26.[158] In the prayer of the Angel we can see only the heaven is fully of God’s glory. Where as in Anaphora, it is changed in to heaven and earth are full of your glory. And in the Gospel we can see the attribution give to God as “one who come in the name of the Lord,” but in Anaphora, Christ is, one who has come and is to come. Through this extention the period of the Church is made to cover the whole eschatological period established by Jesus, extending up to Parousia.  The Church takes from the past and lives in the present casting it’s eyes to the future.[159]

The term ‘Son of David’ is not mentioned in the Anaphora, which may be due to the monophysitic theology in the Antiochene Church. In the Egyptian Anaphoras (Coptic, Alexandrine and Ethiopian) give up the prayer from Mt. 21:9. Due to the absence of Sanctus in the Anaphora of Justine and Hypolitus, we can conclude that this prayer had later origin after 4th CE.[160] But Cyril of Jerusalem and the Apostolic Constitution give witness to origin of Sanctus to Christian liturgy before 4th C.E.

There are three elements of Isaiah. Firstly he acknowledges his unworthiness, that is man of unclean Spirit.(Is. 6:5) Secondly one of the seraphim touches his lips with a burning coal and said “ your guilt is taken away, your sin is forgiven” (Is.6:7). Finally comes the mission of Isaiah, Whom shall I send? Send me… here we can see a movement from wonder and awe to confession of unworthiness followed by sanctification and forgiveness leading to mission. Therefore the prayer of sanctus is considered as an invitation to us to be holy as the heavenly Father is holy.[161]

Cyril gives reason why we utter the praise of God with the Seraphim, it shows that we may join in hymns with the hosts of the world above. And he continues “once we have sanctified ourselves with these spiritual hymns, we call upon the merciful God to send the Holy Spirit on our offering”.[162] This shows that through the recitation of the Sanctus the congregation is sanctified.

Moses bar Kepha gives the following reasons for the Sanctus and why God is almighty:

¨      He brought the universe in to being.

¨      He preserves the universe that it may not perish by his care for it

¨      He became incarnate without being changed from being God

¨      He conquered sin, death, and Satan and redeemed us from them

¨      Even though he became incarnate with the flesh of our weakness he is almighty in his God-head .[163]

Moses Bar Kepha and Bar Salibi explain the prayer “The heaven and the earth are full of your glory”. This is because all the heavenly and earthly beings glorify Him the word Hosanna, is a Hebrew expression and the Greek and Syrians took it from the Hebrew. It is pronounced as the Hosh’ana in Hebrew, Hosanna` in Greek and `Osha`na in Syriac. In Hebrew it is interpreted as ‘save now’ and in Greek as ‘glory’. It means that Jesus is the redeemer and he is the Lord  of glory.[164] “Blessed is He that came and cometh in the name of the Lord :” May that in His first coming He redeemed us and in his Second Coming He will judge and reward us. He came in the name of the Lord  His Father and He will come in the name of the Father, not as being less, or foreign in nature, but as full and equal in essence to the Father.[165]

2.5.5. Post Sanctus

While the congregation sings the Sanctus the priest waves (ruhopo) his hand over the holy mysteries and prays the post Sanctus in silence. This prayer has two parts. First part contains the Trinitarian praise as in Sanctus repeated in another way like ‘king of the ages’, ‘the only begotten Son’ and ‘the Holy Spirit, whose searches out all things’. The second half of this prayer is usually a thanks giving prayer where remember the whole salvation history fulfilled in Christ. The priest waves the hand over the mysteries indicates the ineffable brooding of the Holy Spirit.[166]

2.5.6. The Institution Narrative

The words of institution are the logical continuation of the recall of the salvific event of the redemptive act of God fulfilled in Christ, which is mentioned in the post Sanctus. Bar Salibi explains the importance of institution narrative as “the mystical story and makes commemoration of the priestly sacrifice that our Lord  accomplished in the upper room, in the evening in which he was about to surrender himself for us. After having celebrated the Old Testament Passover, He fulfilled the High priestly order, and entrusted this sacrifice to His disciples”.[167] This is the reason behind the origin of the celebration of divine Eucharist and it’s continuation.

Through the commandment of Christ ‘do this in memory of me’ we follow up the celebration. So each Qurbono is the re-enactment of Christ’s words.  Latin and eastern understanding of institution narrative is different. Latin tradition considers the institution narrative as the occasion of the change of mysteries, and gives emphasis to the words of ‘this is my body and this is my blood’.  But in the Antiochene liturgy the importance is given to the actions rather than the words, without loosing the importance of Epiclesis like other eastern churches. It has more scriptural basis because  the gospels put forward the actions of Jesus “he took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to them and said:” (Mt. 26:26-29, Mk 14:22-25, Lk 22: 19-20).  When Jesus appeared to the disciples who were going to Emmaus, Jesus repeated the same action. Here not the words but the action caused to realization. Most of the Antiochene Anaphoras like Mar Peter, Mar Crysostoms, Thomas of Harkala, etc do not contain the institution words.[168]

“Njagalkkuvendi maranam anubhavikkuvanum, sandhya samayathulla pesaha aacharikkuvanum, thanikku thiruvishttam thonniyappol, thante kayil appameduthu vazhthi, shudhikarichu, murichu, shishya samoohathinu nalkikkondu arulicheythu: Papamochanathinum, nithya jeevanum vendi ithu vangi bahkshikkuvin.  Veenjum vellavum kalartia kasayum iprakaram thanee vazhthi shudhikarich vishutha sleehanmarkku nalkikondu arulicheith: Papa mochanathinum nithya jeevanum vendi ningal ellavarum ithu vangi panam cheyyuvin”.[169]

“Rakshakaramaya kashtanubhavathinu than thayarayappol, than aashirvdichu murich thanthe parishutha sleehanmarkku vibhajichu koduthu.  Appam vazhiyayi papapariharapradamaya thantye shariram nithya jeevanuvendi njangalkku nalki.  Apprakaram thanne than rushmachythu shudhikarichu parishutha sleehanmarkku nalkiya kazha vazhiyayi, papapariharapradamaya thantte rektham nithyajeevanuvendi njangalkku nalki[170]

The above statement is strongly affirmed by the actions of the priest in the holy Qurbono. While the celebrant reciting the following words like ‘he took the bread, had given thanks, blessed and sanctified and broke’, respectively following the actions like celebrant takes the host from the paten with his right hand and puts it on the palm of his left hand, raising his hands upward, makes three signs of the cross on the host and breaks the bread without separation.

He makes prayer on the chalice with both hands, then he holds it with his left hand and makes over it the sign of the cross three times. Then he puts the second finger of his right hand on its edge and tiles it cross ways.[171]

Moses Bar Kepha takes each phrase and giving the meanings in the following way.

¨      He took bread: He declares to us that He had taken flesh from the Virgin Mary.

¨      He looked to Heaven: Means, he manifested the will of God.

¨      He showed to the Father: Declares that He was speaking with his cause and Father, and that He is not an opponent with the Father as the Jews accused Him.

¨      He gave thanks: To the Father on behalf of us for the dispensation of His Son and He ascents to the will of the Father.

¨      He blessed signifies that He had removed the cause of the transgression from our race and blessed it.

¨      He hallowed: Shows that He has sanctified us from sin as it says: “Behold the Lamp of God, who takes away the sins of the world” (Jn. 1:29) and He sanctified himself for us, and he said; “for their sake I sanctify myself” (Jn 17:19).

¨      He broke: Reminds us of His passion, cross and death. It also symbolises that He sanctified and divided Himself for the remission of sins.[172]

Mose Bar Kepha explains why the celebrant takes the Eucharist bread (perista) and breaks it a little without separating the halves into two. “Although Christ Himself was broken upon the cross and died, and His soul was separated from His body, yet His Godhead did not depart or withdraw either from His soul or from His body, but remained in a natural and hypostatic union with His soul and His body”.[173]

He gave to the disciples and said, eat of it: Moses Bar Kepha and Dionysius Bar Salibi suggest that Jesus Himself ate of His Body and drank of His blood because our Lord Himself said ‘I will not drink of this offspring of the wine until I drink it with you new in the kingdom of Heaven (Mt. 26:29, Mk. 14:25).[174] John Chrisostom points out that “When he had tasted He gave to His disciples”.[175] Patriarch Cyriacos’ accounts makes that “He ate and drank of His body and His blood”.[176] St. Ehprem points out in his writings: “He eateth His body, and causeth them to eat: and He drinketh His blood, giveth them of drink”.[177]

Which for you and many is broken: which means not only for the apostles but also for the many who believe in Christ. The reason for giving the body for the faithful is due to two reasons 1) for the remission of sins 2) for the eternal life in heaven (Jn.6:52-59).[178]

Having mingled wine and water and said to them take, ‘drink of it’, all of you this is my blood of new covenant: Bar Kepha explains why Lord says to his apostles when he broke his body “take, eat of it and did not say all you? He says that ‘all the disciples used to take food for the sustenance of the body; but wine not all of them were drinking; for there were certain among that them that were nazirites; and He said, Take, drink, even you nazirites”.[179]

Moses Bar Kepha and Bar Salibi explain it as covenant through the pouring out of blood of His only Son the covenant is established. Through this 1) He made us Sons of His Father from baptism 2) He pardoned our debts and sins by His body and by His blood 3) He called us to the kingdom of heaven 4) He has arranged the holy and unspeakable enjoyment for us.[180]

Special features of the Anaphora of St. James are: 1) The expression ‘that night’ where in he was delivered up for the life. It shows that the eastern understanding of the day from sun set to sun set, but in the Latin missal points out the expression, “The day before he suffer”. 2) Having taken upon ‘His holy and spotless and undefiled hand: this expression has no biblical background but it may be received from the tradition. 3) He showed it to thee God the Father: this may be coming from the early Christian understanding of the multiplication of the bead (Matt. 14:13-21) as a prefigure of Eucharistic celebration. Here we point out that Jesus looked upon heaven. St. James changed this expression into showed it to thee God the Father. In the Syro Malabar Qurbana we can see the expression like “lifted His eyes to heaven towards you, His glorious Father”.[181]

Both Cyril of Jerusalem and Theodore do not mention about the words of institution and they go immediately from the sanctus to the explanation of the Epiclesis. But both of them speak of institution in other parts their sermons.

“As Paul proclaimed, (in passage just read:):

Our Lord Jesus Christ, on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and handed it to his disciples saying: “Take and eat; this is my body”. And taking the cup, and giving thanks he said; ‘Take and drink; this is my blood’. Since, then, Christ Himself clearly described the bread to us in the words “This is my body”, who will dare hence forward to dispute it? And since he has emphatically said, ‘This is my blood’, who will waver in the slightest and say it is not his body?[182]

It is with justice, therefore, that when He gave the bread, He did not say: “This is the symbol of my body”, but: ‘This is my body’, likewise when He gave the cup He did not say ;‘This is the symbol of my blood’ but: ‘This is my blood’ because He wished us to look upon these (elements) after their reception of grace and coming of the spirit, not according to their nature, but to receive them as if they were the body and the blood of the Lord ”.[183]

In the institution of the sacrament Theodore said: ‘Take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you for the remission of the sins’, and: ‘Take, drink, this is my blood which is shed for you for the remission of sins’.[184]

Cyril and Theodore do not consider the words of institution as the form of consecration but Severus of Antioch, in his letter to Caesaria the Patrician writes that “For it is Christ Himself and His mysterious words which are pronounced over the bread and the cup of blessing that complete the rational and the bloodless sacrifice, not the priest who stands before the altar”.[185]

“It is not the offerer himself who, as by his own power and virtue, changes the bread into Christ’s body, and the cup of blessing into Christ’s blood, but God-befitting and the efficacious power of the words which Christ who instituted the mystery commanded to be pronounced over the things that are offered”.[186]

Even though Severus mentions of the institutive words we cannot compare the words of him to the Latin understanding of the magical power of institution words because Severus writes it as an answer to those who give over emphasis to the holy Qurbono had been celebrated by the religious heads and the bishops.

But John Chrysostom explicitly states that the words of institution effect the consecration. He writes that “ the priest is set to represent Him (Christ) in uttering these sayings but the power and grace is of God, Christ says “ This is my body”: and this saying transforms the offerings”.[187] At the same time he attributes the change to the work of the Holy Spirit. “The grace of the Holy Spirit being present flying to all things effects this mystical sacrifice”.[188]  The common bread becomes heavenly bread by the coming of the Holy Spirit.

Josef Jungmann has reached the conclusion that liturgical version of the institution narrative is older than the New Testament texts. He says that institution narrative in the liturgies is based on the tradition and close to the original:

Here we face an outgrowth of the fact that the Eucharist was celebrated long before the evangelists and St. Paul set out to record the gospel story. Even the glaring discrepancies in the biblical texts themselves regarding this very point are explained by this fact. For in them we evidently find segments from the liturgical life of the first generation of Christians.[189]

All this makes clear that the Christians of the first century were not so much concerned with an unchangeable sentence structure and vocabulary as with arrangement on the content. This is why the Eastern Churches were never concerned about the differing formulations used in individual liturgies and never doubted its validity.

            Because of the Latin understanding of the consecrated power of institutional words Rome proposed in 1843 that the institution narrative in the Anaphora of St. James should be recited in all other Anaphors. Now Syrian Catholic and Malankara Catholic follow this instruction, but it is against the real understanding of the Eastern churches, especially Anthiochene Theology.

2.5.7. Anamnesis

 The institution narrative of Luke (22:19) and Paul (I Cor: 11:24) report the Lord’s instruction that, this meal of His body and blood is to be held in the future. The Greek word Anamnesis means remembrance or memorial.[190]  In the ordinary sense, it means only mentally recall, but in the biblical context it is used in the sense of ‘recalling or representing’, before God of an event of the past; it does not mean a mere retrospective reflection but a contemporary experience of His presence as well as prospective anticipation in its fullness at the Parousia as in the eschatological banquet in heaven.[191]

            Priest says after institution narrative that “do this in remembrance of me as often as you participate in this sacrament, commemorating my death and my resurrection until I come”.[192] Moses Bar Kepha and Bar Salibi elaborate that when we are celebrating this mystery three things need to be remembered. “That is in addition to the fact that it pardons your sins, when ye perform this mystery ye do two things; first, ye commemorate my death; secondly, ye confess my resurrection.”[193]

            Until I come: Bar Kepha elucidates that “ it is right to know that from Egypt and until the upper room this mystery was performed in figures, with the body and blood of a lamb, but from the upper room and until the end of the world, with the body of Christ Our Lord, is it performed”.[194] As a response people answers “your death, Lord we commemorate, your resurrection we confess, and your second coming we look for, may your blessing be upon us all”.[195] This response is known as the anamnetical acclamation, which is common to all oriental Anaphoras.[196]

If we analyze just of the priest we can realize the richness of the anmnesis. The celebrant take the gromouro from the northern side with his left hand; then he take the spoon from the southern side with his right hand (and while reciting my death touches the chalice and pilas ) and puts on the gromuro .He now raises with his hand to remind the faithful of the  Lord ’s second coming, which will be like a flash of lightning ,and put them on them southern side . Then he places sponge on the northern side .In order to show the Second Coming, the golden spoon is used. (Mt. 24:27). The change of the place symbolizes the change of Jesus from the seat of mercy to the throne of the final judgment. Here priest took the role of Christ as intercessor (Heb .7:25-27).[197]

At the conclusion of the priestly prayer, the faithful find themselves before the throne of last judgment and join the celebrant in the cry for mercy “Have mercy up on us O God the Father almighty”. The anamnetical acclamation is addressing to the Son because the paschal mystery, Christ is remembered here and as mediator we through Him, pray to God the Father. People say “The death, our Lord we, commemorate, and they resurrection we confess, and they coming we expect”.[198] Bar Kepha explain this prayer as “that is: according to Thy death we commemorate, because that by it Thou didst cause our death to die; and Thy resurrection we confess, because it was made for us a pledge of our resurrection, and a firstfruit of new life; and again, Thy coming we expect, that we may drink with Thee the spiritual offering of the spiritual vine in the Kingdom of Thy Father.”[199]

 “Remembering, Lord, thy death”: Here the priest recites a commemoration of the dispensation, and adding the supplication to the Son that your mysteries intercede, to you and to your Father for our sins. According to your banquet mercies, blot out the sins of your servants in the final judgment.[200]

For these things yet more: “That is, for all the dispensation. Thy church and Thine inheritance: your people. People pray: Have mercy up on us, God the Father almighty. That is what we pray for to God the Father through his Son and our mediator, Jesus Christ for the remission of our sins and the mercies may be poured out up on us in the second coming of Thine only begotten Son”.[201]

     The celebrant says “And we also, Lord thanking Thee are confessing to Thee for all thing”. That is why we thank for all things from the beginning and even to the incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ. In another words, we thanks because you made us in your image, bestowing of reason, careful of us, and all things, through incarnation like forgiveness of sins, the adoption of Sons, kingdom of heaven, heavenly joy etc.[202]

People answer “Thee we praise, thee we bless, thee we confess, we beg of thee, O Lord our God”. Bar Salibi says, “we glorify you. That is, for every thing that the priest said before or later, we glorify you. We bless you like Cherubim, for you have blessed our race from the cause of the transgression of the commandment .We confess you, for you are our God and Lord, our Benefactor .We beseech you to answer our good requests. Again we glorify you for you have made us intelligent, we bless you, with mouth tongue, for you have made us worthy to be your worshippers: We confess you, for you have gathered us together from the error of sins’’[203]

 The deacon says ‘in silence and in fear’ is stating that, is the deacon summons the people for the lighting down of the Holy Spirit.

¨      In silence: because the light of the Holy Spirit is given in silence.

¨      In fear :lest any out cry be made by them, and that happened to them which happened to the Israelites in mount Sinai , who said Moses :”speak with us thou , and let not God speak with us ,lest we die”.(Ex. 20:19)[204]

 In short specialty of anamnesis in the anaphora of St. James is that it is not the anamnesis only of the death and resurrection of our Lord but is extended to include the ascension and the Christ’s sitting at the right hand of Father and His glorious return for the judgment.

2.5.8. Epiclesis

            After remembering the paschal mystery of Christ the Spirit is invoked for the fruitful participation in the Eucharistic mystery and for the economical fulfillment of the economy of salvation, because Holy Spirit is the conscience of the church (Jh.14:20). Epiclesis was derived from the Greek word epikalew which means to invoke. In general it means that we invoke God to sanctify a person or a thing.[205] In this understanding, the entire Eucharistic prayer is an invocation of God’s name over the gifts and over the congregation.

In the present text of the holy Qurbono, this part consists of an announcement of deacon. “Barekhmor, how aweful is this hour and how dreadful is this moment, my beloved, wherein the Holy Spirit from the topmost heights takes wings and descents and hovers and rests upon this Eucharist here present and sanctifies it. We in calm and awe, while standing and pray”.[206] During the announcement of deacon, the celebrant waves his hands over the mysteries, and bowing down his head, says silently “Have mercy upon us, O God the Father, and send upon these offerings your Holy Spirit, the Lord who is equal to you and to the Son in dominion, reign and eternal substance, who spoken through your Old and New Testaments, and descended in the likeness of a dove on Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Jordan river, in the likeness of tongue of fire on the apostles in the upper room”.[207]  This is the prayer addressed to the Father then equality of the Holy Spirit to the Father, the work of Holy Spirit in the salvation history is mentioned here. Different adjectives to the Holy Spirit are the speciality of St. James’Anaphora.

According to Bar Kepha the term like His Holy Spirit is used to distinct Spirit of God from other spirit and the term the Lord the life giver is used to distinct other Holy Spirits (angels) because this spirit is Lord and moreover He bestows life on both angels and all that live.  The other identification of the Holy Spirit as the equal in essence that is “He is equal in essence and in Godhead to the Father and to the Son, and is complete also as they are”.[208]

 Then the celebrant stretches out his hand and says aloud. “Answer me, O Lord; answer me, O Lord; answer me, O Lord; O God one, have compassion and mercy upon me”. Then the people cry “Kyrie elision, Kyrie elision, Kyrie elision”. Which means Lord have mercy on us. The reason for the cry Kyrie elision is that “they have perceived by faith that the Holy Spirit has come down and perfected and completed the mysteries”.[209] This prayer originated in the 12th century because Bar Salibi states that this is a new prayer, which is existing today. “In the west, according to the new custom, which is exiting today, as we have, said above, the priest says in Syriac “Lord, answer me have mercy upon me”.[210]

Then the celebrant stretches out his left hands and waves his right over the mysteries and says aloud so that by his indwelling. “He (the Holy Spirit) may make this bread the life giving body +, the redeeming body + and the body + of Christ our God and may He (the Holy Spirit), perfect this cup into the blood + of the new covenant, the redeeming blood + and the blood + of Christ our God”.[211] Priest signs three crosses over the bread and three over the chalice indicating that “by the will of the Father, God the word listens and over shadows the mysteries and perfects by the Holy Spirit the bread so that it may become the body and that he may make the mixture in the chalice the blood”.[212]

 Again the cross on the body and the blood indicates the words: the Holy Spirit will come (upon you) and the power of the most high will overshadow upon you (Lk.1:35). As by the will of His Father, by His Holy Spirit, the word was incarnated from the virgin without change, so by the will of His Father by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, He perfects the bread as his body and the wine as His blood”. Like institution narrative the Epiclesis prayer is different in each anaphora. We can see the expressions like come upon us, and send upon us. The first one is addressing directly to Holy Spirit and the second expression is asking to God the Father to send His Holy Spirit. The expression come is more ancient because the Acts of Judas Thomas, the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, the Maronite Anaphora of St. Peter (Sharaar) and Egyptian anaphora of Seraphion hold this term. In the anaphora of Addai and Mari contains the prayer “May your Holy Spirit come and rest on this offering of your servant and bless and sanctify it”. The Anaphora of St. Peter (sharer) mentions that “Let your living Holy Spirit, Lord come and descend upon this offering”. Egyptian anaphora of Seraphion expresses that ‘Let your word come on this bread”.[213]

It recalls the cry of the prophet Elijah which brought fire from heaven on the sacrifice he had prepared (I Kng. 18:37).[214] John Chrysostom writes, “— the fire coming from heaven at he prophets prayer, so the priest stands here, bearing not fire but the Holy Spirit, and makes the great supplication, … that thereby the grace descending upon the sacrifice may kindle the souls of all, and exhibit them brighter than refined silver”.[215] The celebrant prays to the Father to send your Holy Spirit “upon us and upon the offerings”. The older version and some Syriac version of Anaphora of St. James points out the need of coming of Holy Spirit upon offering and upon faithful through which the believers becomes the temple of God.[216] But the shorter version of St. James neglects the aspect of communion Epiclesis. The priest hovering the right hand over the mysteries originated after 12th century, because Jacob of Edessa, Bar Kepha and Bar Salibi mentioned only of three rushmas, not of any other gestures mention of it. In order to show the activity of the Holy Sprit used the term ruhofo, which means incubating first used by St.Ephrem.[217]

Deacon’s announcement in the present text is not much ancient because the Greek and Syriac manuscript does not contain this prayer. At the time of Bar Kepha the prayer was just “In silence and in fear be ye standing”. During the time of Bar Salibi it developed as how aweful is this hour and how fearful is this time”.

2.5.9. The Intercession (Tubden)

The Syriac word Tubden literally means and/but again.[218] This section contains altogether eighteen prayers, which are six prayers of deacon, six Kusappa prayer of priest during deacons’ prayer and six Gahanta prayers of priest.

The name Tubden is given this session is due to deacon’s prayer, which starts with Tubden. These six intercessions may be divided into two groups of prayers. Three for living like Roman Pontiff, Patriarch, Bishop and pastors, faithful Christian people and rulers of the country, and three for the departed like the saints, the fathers of the church and the faithful departed.

Instead of (Tubden), commemoration, canon and diptychses are more accurate for intercession.[219]  Jacob of Edessa uses the term commemoration for intercession. Cyril of Jerusalem considers Qurbono as commemoration. He says “then after the spiritual sacrifice of Propitioation, for the common peace of all churches, for emperors……… sick, oppressed and praying for all who need, a help, we all offers this sacrifice”.[220] Again he says why we are praying Lord remember me in each prayer. “It will be a great help of whom, a supplication is put up, while that holy and most awefull sacrifice is set forth”.

While deacon proclaims the intercession priest is saying the same in silence.  Then the congregation responds ‘Kyrie elesion’ which means Lord have mercy upon us. The Greek word Diptychon means  “two leafed tablet”. On one leaf the name of the living and on the other name of the dead were inscribed.[221] Therefore in the early liturgy we could see only two intercessions, but in the seventh century Mar Jacob of Edessa rearranged them as they are today.[222] In the present liturgy there is a shorter and longer versions of the six intercessions. M. Moosa puts forward that the longer versions come form the eastern side of the Syrian Church that is from the Maphrianate of Tagrit.[223]  The Malankara Churches used these longer versions for important feasts.

The specialty of the intercession of Anaphora of St James is linked by their common verb of petition ‘Remember’. Here remember means not only mere psychological remembrance but it includes the existential remembrance. God remembers means that we have ‘eternal life’.[224] In the Qurbono we not only remember God’s greater deeds but also remember church that is both living and dead.[225] So Theodore, after speaking of the Epiclesis, says that the priest proceeds to pray for all whom believes that intercession be made, first for the living and then for the dead.[226] John Chrysotom also holds the same view that “a public Sacrifice….. (Is) about to be offered for all, not only for those present but also for those who are absent”. Cyril of Jerusalem gives testimonies for the present practice of intercession. “Then, when the spiritual sacrifice – this worship,  without blood- has been completed, we beg God over the sacrifice of propitiation for general peace among the churches, for the right order of the world, for the kings, for soldiers and allies, for the sick and afflicted, and in short we all make entreaty and offer this sacrifice for all who need help. Next we recall those who have gone to their rest before us, and first of all patriarchs, apostles and martyrs, so that God may listen to our appeal through their prayers and representations”.[227] Chrysostom also realized the importance of intercession in this way “therefore with confidence we then entreat for the whole world and name them (the departed) with martyrs, confessors and priests. For we all are one body…. And it is possible from every part to gather pardon for them by prayers, by gifts offered for them, by those who are name with them”.[228]

Intercession is differed according to Ecclesiology of different churches in the Antiochene tradition. The Mar Thoma Syrian Church with Anglican influence rejects intercession of saints and prayer for the dead.[229]  The orthodox churches put the name of their patriarchs or Catholicos as the supreme head of their churches. But Catholics include the name of the Roman Pontiff as the head of the church and patriarch or Catholicos as the head and Father of the church. Name of the doctors of the church non-chalcidonians like Dioscoros, severus of Antioch, Philoxenus of Mubbug and Jacob Baradeus, Mar Antimus, Mar Timothious, Mar Balai, and Bar Saumma were not mentioned in the Catholic Church, because catholic church considers they are non- Caledonian fathers.

The Anaphora ends with the praise called Doxology. “May your all glorious and blessed name be praised and glorified with that of our Lord Jesus Christ and of the Holy Spirit, by us and because of us, now and forever”.[230] The faithful respond and says, “Amen as it was and is and shall remain from generation to generations to all ages, for ever and ever amen”.[231]  Moses Bar Kepha explains it as “Thy name, O Father, and that of Thy only begotten Son and of Thy Holy Spirit was glorified and praised in the time that is past, so it is also in the present time, and so also does it continue in the future time. And not only in these three times is Thy name be glorified and praised, and that of thy Son and of Thy Holy Spirit, but also in both worlds, in this, and is that which is to come”.[232]  Doxology of St James understands the wonderful and magnificent happenings the sanctification and mercy of God’s infinite goodness. We are unworthy to render thanks to magnificent providence of God. Still we try our best to offer glory to the divine name. This doxology is the conclusion of the Anaphora.

Then the priest blesses the people a second time with the sign of the cross and says “may the mercy of the greet God our savior Jesus Christ be with you all my brethren for ever.”[233]  This blessing is known as the Christological blessing.

Conclusion

In Short, the Anaphora comprises of Christ events, the mysteries which are necessary for our salvation through the passion, death and resurrection and the gift of the Holy Spirit.  We remember Christ, together with the Holy Spirit and God the Father.  So, the Anaphora is the Anamnesis of great deeds of God as well as human mysteries.  At the same time we pray for both communion epiclesis and consecratory epiclesis.


GENERAL CONCLUSION

Christian worship is a celebration of our salvation achieved in Christ. It is first and foremost an activity of God in Christ. A prayer that the celebrant says at the time of the Eucharistic offertory goes like this: “Lord, you are the Holy Qurbono and qurbono is offered to you”. Secondly it is more than an individual act, it is the activity of the church, and he calls us to conversion to him and union with him and to reconciliation with one another in him.

Along with the catholic teaching, the West Syrian churches give importance to the sacrificial and sacramental aspect of the Eucharist. In the holy Qurbono the aspect of praise and thanks giving are emphasized so much that every prayer ends with the doxology. The response of the faithful to the diaconal announcement at the time of the celebration of the Susepo is “this Qurbono is blessing, peace, sacrifice and thanksgiving”.

In the following pages an attempt is made to deduce certain conclusions, summarizing and recapitalizing the main features of anaphora of St. James. Compared to many other Eucharistic prayers the anaphora of St. James contains many characteristic elements of early Christian Eucharistic theology, which call for our attention. This anaphora is considered by many as one of the earliest documents of Eucharistic prayer, which in its original form probably goes back to the fourth century. Its Semitic characteristics are specially remarkable. This shows the Jewish influence in its origin and early developments.

The Anaphora of St. James has the following qualities:

¨                  Trinitarian and Christocentric: an important feature of this anaphora is the Trinitarian emphasis, which gives ample importance to the role of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The very action of creation and salvation are the work of Trinity. During the liturgy , the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are frequently remembered and praised by the church. Every prayer of the anaphora ends with the form “we will offer praise and thanks giving to you, and your Son and your Holy Spirit now and always and forever Amen”. 1. At the end of the preparatory service by incensing and kissing the three side of the Susepo the celebrant prays “Worship to the compassionate Father”, “worship to the merciful Son who died on the cross”, and “ worship to the loving giving spirit”. 2. At the time of the blessing of the censers the celebrant prays “holy is the holy Father, Holy is the Holy Son and Holy is the Holy Spirit”. 3. At the time of the elevation of the celebrant prays “The one Holy Father be with us, who fashioned the world in his mercy”, “The one Holy Son be with us, who redeemed by the precious passion”, and “The one living Holy Spirit be with us, the perfector and fulfiller of all that has been and will be”. 4. The first blessing of the Qurbono is Trinitarian “The love of the God the Father, the grace of the only Son and the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit be with you all”. 5. the third blessing  brings out the dogmatic position of the church “may the grace + and the mercy of the holy and glorious Trinity + uncreated, self existent, external, worshipful and consubstantial + be with you all my brethren”.

¨                  Christological: Among the person of the Trinity, Christ has a central position. Therefore we find Christ centered Trinity in the liturgy of St.  James. The trisagion is a profession of faith in Christ’s’ divinity, addressed to Christ. The prayer “Who were crucified for us” shows that trisagion is Christological in nature. This refers to Christ’s unchanging holiness, his might in enduring suffering and death and his immortality by resurrection. In the West Syrian Qurbono some of the prayers like, Manisa, Trisagion, Prayers of priest before the gospel reading, Christological blessing before the fraction of the bread, all the prayers during the procession of the mysteries and hutomo prayer, are addressed to Son. The Christology in the anaphora of St. James includes soteriology and insists a living one. In each celebration the faithful are re-experiencing the Christ events by which the liturgical Christology become a living Christology.

¨                  Biblical and Traditional: the biblical background of the Syrian liturgy is tremendous that it appears as a continuation of the Old and New Testaments. Father Bede Griffiths writes,” West syrian liturgy is a perfect example of that living theology, a theology based throughout on the biblical revelation and conceived not as an abstract system of thought but as an imaginative representation of an ever present reality which the church  seeks today”. Here both the scripture as well as the tradition of the church are well integrated. It comprehends and compares the image of Christ in the bible, the dogmas of the great councils and the teaching of the Fathers of the church.

¨                  Ecumenical: Since the orthodox and Catholics of the Antiochene churches share the same liturgy and its tradition the orthodox and catholic faithful encounter the same Christ and his salvific event during the Qurbono, even though it is celebrated in different churches. It is an ecumenical liturgy for both churches, helping people to grow more and more to the same faith and real unity.

¨                  Experiential and Existential: The faithful encounter the person of Christ and communion with him during the liturgical celebration. They realize the salvation brought by Christ in each liturgical participation experience and communion with God. No other medium of the church is so experiential as the liturgy. During the liturgical celebration especially in the homily human problems are discussed in the light of the word of God. Faithful find solution for there day today problems during the liturgical participation.

¨                  Mystical Nature: Qurbono is a mystery because it is concerned with reality, which is beyond human comprehension. Here one should not look for information but transformation through purification and experience. At the very outset it has to be said that the west Syrian liturgy is dominated by a sense of awe and wonder before the divine mysteries. This aspect is highlighted at the time of the elevation of the mysteries in the diaconal announcement “Let us look with fear and trembling”. This is similar to the experience of Moses to whom God appeared in the burning bush (Ex. 3:1-6) and Isaiah (6:1). Just as these holy men who saw the glory of God and became awe of their sins and need for purification. The people participating in the divine mysteries celebrated in the church also admit their sinful nature and pray for divine help.

¨                  Repetition: Repetition is the another specialty of west Syrian Qurbono. Example for the repetition of prayers Kauma, creed, doxology, Kurieleison etc.

¨                  Participation of the Congregation: two third of the Holy Qurbono is recited by the congregation either by the prose or in hymns.

¨                  Communitarian: Ecclesial and personal: Liturgical celebration is always communitarian because the very nature of the liturgy is communitarian. The liturgy takes place in the church. Since liturgy is the supreme faith expression of the church the community of faithful express and celebrate their faith. Though it is communitarian in nature each person encounter Christ personally.

In short we can say that characteristics of anaphora of St. James are Trinitarian, Christological, Biblical and traditional, ecumenical, experiential and existential, mystical, repetition, Participation of the Congregation, communitarian, ecclesial and personal.  All these call for our personal transformation by encountering Christ, in and through this rich liturgical traditions.


————————————–

[1]. P E.Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, I, Oxford, 1986, iv.

[2] Bar Salibi, Commentary on the Eucharist, (tran ), B. Varghese , Moran ’Eth’o, 10, SEERI, Kottayam, 1998, 6-7.

[3] B.Varghese,  “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, The Harp, III, SEERI, Kottayam, December 1989, 142.

[4] G.Panikar,  “West Syrian Anaphora, The Harp, VI,SEERI,Kottayam, April 1993, 34.

[5]. E.C.Ratclift, The Eucharistic Office and The Liturgy of St. James, Lendon, 1920, 49.

[6] G. Panikar,West Syrian Anaphora”, 34-35.

[7] B.Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora West Suriyani Sabhayil,(Mal.), Madrosho, 4, SEERI, Kottayam, Januvary 2002, 27.

[8] P. E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, 490-94.

[9] G. Panikar, “West Syrian Anaphora”, 35., B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy:A Brief History of the Test”, 142.

[10]. Bar Salibi, Commentary on the Eucharist, 6-7.

[11] G. Panikar, “West Syrian Anaphora, 34.

[12].G.Panikar, “West Syrian Anaphora, 34.

[13]B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 143.

[14] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 143.

[15] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 143.

[16] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 143.

[17]S.A. A. Salaville, An Introduction to the Study of Eastern Liturgies, London, 1938, 58-59.

[18] T. Elavanal, The Memorial Celebration, OIRS, Kottayam, 1989, 28. 

[19]  B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 144.

[20] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 144.

[21] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 144.

[22] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 144.

[23] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 144.

[24] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 30.

[25] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 31.

[26] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 30.

[27] A. Raes, Introdutio in liturgium Orientalium, PIO, Rome, 1947, 20.

[28] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 31.

[29] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, 144.

[30] T. Elavanal, The Memorial Celebration, 27.

[31] E .J. Mounayer, The Eucharistic liturgy of the Syrian church of Antioch, SEERI, Kottayam, 1984, 73-74.

[32] K. Valuparampi, “St. James Anaphora: An Ecumenical Locus; a Survey of the Origin and Development of St. James’ Anaphora”, C O 8, Kottayam, 1987, 178-79.

[33] M. Hengel ,  Between Jesus and Paul, London, 1983, 1-17.

[34]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 179.

[35]T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, PIO, Rome, 2000, 10.

[36]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James  Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 179.

[37]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James  Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 180.

[38]  M Hengel, Between Jesus and Paul, 34.

[39]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 181.

[40]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 181.

[41]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 182.

[42]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 182.

[43]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 182.

[44]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 182.

[45] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 11.

[46] Witvliet, “The Anaphora of St. James”, in P.F Bradshaw ed., Essays on Early Eastern Eucharistic Prayer,  Liturgical Press, Minnesota, 1997, 154.

[47] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 11.

[48] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 11.

[49] Witvliet, “The Anaphora of St. James”, 154.

[50] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of .the West Syrian Holy Qurbono , 11.

[51] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of .the West Syrian Holy Qurbono , 11.

[52] G. Panikar, “West Syrian Anaphora, 36.

[53] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of .the West Syrian Holy Qurbono , 12.

[54] J. Moolaveetil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 268.

[55] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 12.

[56]  K. Valuparampil, “ St. James  Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 182.

[57]  K. Valuparampil, “St. James Anaphora; An Ecumenical Locus”, 182.

[58] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Text”, 148.

[59] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Text”, 148.

[60] B.Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 35-36.

[61] B.Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 36.

[62] B.Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 27.

[63] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Text, 148.

[64] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Text, 149.

[65] B. Varghese, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Text”, 149.

[66]K. Paniker Karichal, The Holy Qurbono in the Syro Malankara Church, SEERI,Kottayam,1991, 1-2.,  I. Thottunkal , Emerging Trends in Malankara Catholic Theology , Rome, 2000, 156.

[67]I. Thottunkal , Emerging Trends in Malankara Catholic Theology , 156..

[68] G. Thumpanirappel , Christ in the East Syriac Tradition, Ephrem’s Publication, Satna, 2003, 32-33.

[69] G. Panikar, “West Syrian Anaphora”, 47. 

[70] K.G. Panikar, Malankara Kurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, SEERI, Kottayam, 1996, 195.

[71] H. G. Liddel & R; Scott, A Greek – English Lexicon, Oxford,  1968, 125.

[72] H. G. Liddel & R; Scott, A Greek – English Lexicon, 125

[73] A. Kalapurakal, Syriac – Malayalam Dictionary, SH Leage, Alwaye, 1940, 26.

[74] B.Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 83.

[75] B.Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 83., G. Chediath, Kurbanayude Vyakyanangal, OIRSI, Kottayam, 2000, 88.

[76] K.G. Panikar, Malankara Kurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 196., L. Moolaveetil, Jacobinte Anaphora,1976, 121.

[77] R.J. Deferrari, The Fathers of the Church, The Catholic University of America Press,Washington D.C., 1969, 178-80.

[78] R. Alexander & D. James, The Anti-Nicene Fathers, I, W.M.B. Eerdmans, Michigan, 185-186.

[79] T. Elevanal, Memorial Celebration, 62.

[80] G. Dix Dom, The Shape of the Liturgy, Dacre Press, London, 1970, 156-62.

[81] W. J. Grusbrook, The Liturgical Portion of the Apostolic Constitution, Grow Liturgical Studies, Cambridge, 1990, 13-14., L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 120.

[82] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 121.

[83] T. Elevanal, Memorial Celebration, 68.

[84] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 121.

[85] B.Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 84.

[86] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 47.

[87] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 84.

[88] G. Chediath, Kurbanakyude Vyahyanaml, 35.

[89] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 85.

[90] Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 124.

[91] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy by George Bishop of the Arab Tribes and Moses Bar Kepha: Together with the Syriac Anaphora of St. James and a Documen Entitled the Book of Life, Gregg International Publishers Limited, Oxford, 1913, 39.

[92] The Order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Church, St. Mary’s Press,  Thiruvananthapuram, 2001, 41.

[93]  R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two  Commentaries on  the Jacobite Liturgy, 40.

[94]  Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 49.

[95] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 87.

[96] K. G. Panikar, Malankara Qurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 197.

[97]  R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 40.

[98] R.H. Connolly & H.W. Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 40-41.

[99] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 81.

[100] The Syro-Malabar Qurbana, Order of Raza, San Jose, Trivandrum, 1989, 35.

[101] A. Mingana , “With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Lord’s Prayer, and on the Sacrament of Baptism and Eucharist”, Woodbrook Studies, VI, Cambridge, 1933, 91-92.  

[102] R.H. Connolly & H.W. Codrington, Two Commentaries on  the Jacobite Liturgy, 40

[103] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 51.

[104] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 36.

[105] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 36.

[106] G. Chediath, Kurbanayude Vyakhyanangal, 127.

[107] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 93.

[108] The Syro-Malabar Qurbana, Order of Raza, 25.

[109] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 94.

[110] The Syro-Malabar Qurbana, Order of Raza, 38, 63- 64.

[111] K.G. Panikar, Malankara Kurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 202., Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 53.

[112] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 53-54.

[113] The Order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Church, 42-43.

[114] The Order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Church, 43.

[115] A. Mingana, With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia, 86.

[116] Severus of Antioch, “Letter, 105, To Caesarea the Hypatissa”, Po, XIV, 256-58., in B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 97.

[117]R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 44.

[118] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 45.

[119] John of Dara, Commentary on the Eucharist, B.Varghese, tran., Moran Etho, 12, Kottayam, April 1999, 41-43.

[120]K. G. Panikar, Malankara Kurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 203.

[121] The Order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Church, 43.

[122] K. G.  Panikar, Malankara Kurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 204.

[123] K. G.  Panikar, Malankara Kurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 204.

[124] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 45-46.

[125] The Order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Church, 43.

[126] T. Elavanal, The Memorial Celbration, 77-78.

[127] G. Dix Dom, The Shape of the Liturgy, 79.

[128] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 136.

[129] G. Dix Dom, The Shape of the Liturgy, 50-51.

[130] K. G. Panikar, Malankara Kurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 207.

[131] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 46.

[132] L. Bouyer, Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic Prayer, University Press, Notre Dame, 1968, 253, 269-70.

[133] A. Mingana , With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia, 98.

[134] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 57.

[135] The Syro-Malabar Qurbana, Order of Raza, 37.

[136] C. A. Abraham, “The Syrian Malankara Liturgy”, Word and Worship, II, Bangalore, 1969, 214.

[137] A. Mingana , With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia, 99.

[138] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, in E. Yarnold, The Awe-Inspiring Rite of Iniciation, Edin urh, 1994, 91.

[139] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 46., Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 58.

[140] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 46., Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist,58.

[141] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 101-102.

[142] The Syro-Malabar Qurbana, Order of Raza, 37.

[143] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, 91.

[144] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 48.

[145]  Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 58.

[146] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 58.

[147] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 48.

[148] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, 91.

[149] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy.43.

[150] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 59.

[151] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 60.

[152] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, 92.

[153] The Order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Church, 44.

[154] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 144.

[155] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 49.

[156] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy , 48-50.

[157] The Order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Church, 43.

[158] T.Kanjiramukalil,The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 46-47., L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora,145., B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 109.

[159] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 145-146., B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 109.

[160] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 146. B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 109-110.

[161] Broke, “The Thrice-Holy Hymn in the Liturgy”, Eastern Churches Review, London, 1985, 24-34.

[162] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, 94.

[163] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 50.,   Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 62.

[164] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 51.

[165] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 51.

[166] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 148.

[167] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 64.

[168] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 157-158.

[169] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 153.

[170] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 153-154.

[171] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 43.

[172]R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 52-53.

[173] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 53.

[174]R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 53.

[175] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 53.

[176] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 53.

[177] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 53.

[178] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 55.

[179] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 57.

[180] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 57.

[181] L. Moolaveettil, Jacobinte Anaphora, 151-152.

[182] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, 95.

[183] A. Mingana, With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia,75.

[184] A. Mingana, With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia,74.

[185] E.W.Brooks, The Sixth Book of the Letter of Severus of Antioch, II, Oxford, 1904, 245.

[186] E.W.Brooks,The Sixth Book of the Letter of Severus of Antioch,234-235.

[187] John Chrysostom,Proditionem Judae,380.in , T.Kanjiramukalil,The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono,64.

[188] John Chrysostom , Des,Pentacoste,459, in T.Kanjiramukalil,The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono,64.

[189] Adolf Adam, The Eucharistic Celebration, The Source and Submit of Faith, Minnesota, 1919, 78.

[190] John Peter Sandanam, Do this in Memory of Me, St. Peter’s Publication, Bangalore, 2002, 65.

[191] John Peter Sandanam, Do this in Memory of Me, 65-67.

[192] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 48.

[193] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 57.

[194] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 57.

[195] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 49.

[196] T.Kanjiramukalil,The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 57.

[197] K.G. Panikar, Malankara Qurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 224-225.

[198] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch , 57.

[199] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 58.

[200] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 58.

[201] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 59.

[202] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 59.

[203] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 59., Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 75.

[204] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 59.

[205] Jozef Lamberts, “May Your Holy Spirit, Lord Come… Some Reflection on the Epiclesis”, Ephrem’s Theological Journal, II, October 1998, 100.

[206] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 151.

[207] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 151.

[208] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 61.

[209] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 61.

[210] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 77.

[211] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 51.

[212] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist, 78.

[213] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 129.

[214] C. A. Abraham, “Syro – Malankara Liturgy”, Word and Worship, II, Bangalore, 1969, 214.

[215] John Chrysostom, De Sacrrdiotion, 642, in T.Kanjiramukalil,The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 61.

[216] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 129.

[217] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 131.

[218] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 65.

[219] B. Varghese, Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil, 139.

[220] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, 93.

[221] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, 93.

[222] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist,80., Kanichal Panikar, Malankara Qurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, 223.

[223] Dionysius Bar Salibi, Commentary on Eucharist,80.

[224] P. Tovey, Essays in West Syrian Liturgy, OIRSI, Kottayam, 1997, 45.

[225] A. Mingana , With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia, 105.

[226] A. Mingana, With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia, 95.

[227] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis, 93.

[228] T. Kanjiramukalil, The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 67.

[229] T. Kanjiramukalil,The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbono, 67.

[230] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 58-59.

[231] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 58-59.

[232] R.H. Connolly & H.W.Codrington, Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy, 63.

[233] The order of the Holy Qurbono of the Malankara Chiurch, 59.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABRAHAM, C. A., “The Syrian Malankara Liturgy”, in Word and Worship, II, Bangalore, 1969, 210-216.
ADAM, A., The Eucharistic Celebration, The Source and Submit of Faith Liturgical press, Minnesota, 1919.
ALEXANDER. R., & JAMES, D., The Anti-Nicene Fathers, I,W.M.B. Eerdmans, Michigan, 1964.
BAR SALIBI, DIONYSIUS, “Commentary on the Eucharist”, (tran.), B. Varghese, Moran ’Eth’o, 10, SEERI, Kottayam, 1998.
BOUYER, L., Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic Prayer, University Press, Notre Dame, 1968.
BRIGHTMAN, P. E., Liturgies Eastern and Western, I, Oxford, 1986.
BROCK, S., “The Thrice-Holy Hymn in the Liturgy”, ECR, Oxford, 1985.
BROOKS, E.W., The Sixth Book of the Letter of Severus of Antioch, II, P.O., Paris, 1904.
CHEDIATH, G., Kurbanayude Vyakyanangal, OIRSI, Kottayam, 2000.
CONNOLLY, R.H., & CODRINGTON, H.W., Two Commentaries on the Jacobite Liturgy by George Bishop of the Arab Tribes and Moses Bar Kepha: Together with the Syriac Anaphora of St. James and a Document Entitled the Book of Life, Gregg International Publishers Limited, Oxford, 191.
CYRIL OF JERUSALEM, “Mystagogical Catechesis”, in E. Yarnold, The Awe-Inspiring Rite of Initiation, Edinburh, 1994.
DEFERRARI, R. J., The Fathers of the Church, The Catholic University of America, Washington D.C., 1969.
DIX DOM,G., The Shape of the Liturgy, Dacre Press, London, 1970.
ELAVANAL, T., The Memorial Celebration, OIRSI, Kottayam, 1989.
GRISBROOKS, W. J., The Liturgical Portion of the Apostolic Constitution, Grow Liturgical Studies, Cambridge, 1990.
HENGEL, M., Between Jesus and Paul, James Clarke and Co. Ltd., London, 1983.
JOHN OF DARA, “ Commentary on the Eucharist”, (tran.), Varghese, B., Moran Etho, 12, SEERI, Kottayam, April 1999.
KALAPURAKAL, A, Syriac – Malayalam Dictionary, S H League, Alwaye, 1940.
KANJIRAMUKALIL, T., The Liturgical Theology of the West Syrian Holy Qurbonocus, P I O, Rome, 2000.
LAMBERTS, J., “May Your Holy Spirit, Lord Come…” Some Reflection on the Eplicesis”, Ephrem’s Theological Journal, II, Satna, October 1998, 99-105.
LIDDEL, H. G., & SCOTT, R., A Greek – English Lexicon, Oxford. 1968.
MINGANA, A, “ With a Critical Apparatus, Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Lord’s Prayer, and on the Sacrament of Baptism and Eucharist”, Woodbrook Studies,Camebridge, 1933.
MOOLAVEETIL, L., Jacobinte Anaphora, (Mal.), Bethany Publication, Kottayam, 1999.
MOUNAYER, E.J., The Eucharistic liturgy of the Syrian Church of Antioch, SEERI, Kottayam, 1984.
PANIKAR, G., “West Syrian Anaphora”, The Harp, VI, SEERI, Kottayam, April 1993, 29-40..
PANIKAR, K. G., Malankara Kurbana Theerthadakasabhayil, (Mal.), SEERI, Kottayam, 1996.
PANIKER, K. G., The Holy Qurbono in the Syro Malankara Church, SEERI, Kottayam, 1991.
RAES, A, Introdutio in Liturgium Orientalium, P I O, Rome, 1947.
RATCLIFF, E.C., The Eucharistic Office and The Liturgy of St. James, James Clarke & Co. Ltd., London, 1920.
SALAVILLE, S.A. A., An Introduction to the Study of Eastern Liturgies, Sands & Co., London, 1938.
SANDANAM, J.P., Do this in Memory of Me, St. Peters Pontifical Institute, Bangalore, 2002.
The Order of the Holy Qurbono of the Syro-Malankara Church, St. Mary’s Press, Thiruvanthapuram, 2001.
The Syro-Malabar Qurbana, Order of Raza, San Jose, Trivandrum, 1999.
THOTTUNKAL, I., Emerging Trends in Malankara Catholic Theology, Mar Thoma Yogam, Rome, 2000.
THUMPANIRAPPEL, G., Christ in the East Syriac Tradition, Epherm’s Publications, Satna, 2003.
TOVEY, P., Essays in West Syrian Liturgy, OIRSI, Kottayam, 1997.
VALUPARAMPIL, K., “St. James Anaphora: An Ecumenical Locus; a Survey of the Origin and Development of St. James’ Anaphora”, C.O., 8, OIRSI, Kottayam, 1987, 177-184.
VARGHESE, B, “St. James’ Liturgy: A Brief History of the Test”, The Harp, III, SEERI, Kottayam, Dec.1989, 142-149.
VARGHESE, B, “Yakobinte Anafora Suriyani Sabhayil”, (Mal.), Madrosho, 4, SEERI , Kottayam, Januvary 2002.
WITVLIET, “The Anaphora of St. James”, in Bradshaw, P.F. Ed., Essays on Early Eastern Eucharistic Prayer, Liturgical Press, Minnesota, 1997.

ABBREVIATIONS
CO : Christian Orient
ECR : Eastern Churches Review
Mal. : Malayalam
OIRSI : Oriental Institute of Religious Studies
P.I.O : Pontificium Institutum Orientale
P.O. : Patrologia Orientalis
PIOS : Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum
SC : Sacrosanctum Concilium
SEERI : St. Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute
UR : Unitatis Redintegratio

Pin It

Comments are closed.