The Catalog of Good Deeds

The classic image of the Christian as an athlete of Christ is a little overplayed nowadays, in a culture obsessed with sports. I personally like very much this metaphor, but if we push it too much, we may end up with a very simplistic view, as the priests become coaches, the church an arena, the church community a team and so on. We can get lost in sports metaphors and loose the genuine significance of our Christian life.

What we do in Christ is beyond a sport, beyond a mere entertaining game. It’s about real life. For me, a true athlete is someone closer to the soldier that ran the first marathon, who did not complete an eight-week program of gradual endurance build-up, nor run it to overcome a midlife crisis. But he ran with a purpose, as he was asked to, and gave up all he had to give to fulfill the mission for his country.

I am not saying that there are no similarities between sports and our life in Christ. There are many, and I have used such metaphors in sermons and catechism before. We need, however, to make a distinction between the two. Let me be blunt: our life in Christ is not a sport. The Greeks have a great word to describe our life in Christ: askesis. Askesis could be translated as exercise, but not for fun, not to stay fit, not to pass time, but as a purposeful exercise that builds us out of this world and prepares us for the Kingdom. Askesis is also not only for the monastics, for the hermit living in the lost caves of the earth, but askesis is for everyone that is serious about being saved.

The Work of the Faith

To me however, probably the most appropriate translation of askesis, would be “struggle”. The first marathoner, in his supra-human effort of self-denial, gave up his life to fulfill his mission. In the same way, askesis is an exercise of renunciation to the world for a greater purpose: we give up a Sunday morning sleep-in for a Divine Liturgy, a burger for a day of fasting, a party on a Saturday night for a Vesper service, our favorite song in the car for a few minutes of the Jesus prayer. And we can go on. Struggle means to give up the “fluff” and concentrate on the things that matter. Anyone can do that. You don’t need monastic vows to show up in time for services or resist a meat craving.

But the struggle does not stop here. The above are the “easy” things. The struggle also involves fighting against our inner sinful urges as each one of us deals with internal turmoil. Some struggle with alcohol, other with drugs, others with sexual temptations, others with envy, or pride, or gossip or depression. On a smaller or a larger scale, we all have to face these tendencies. Their nature is different in each one of us, but the struggle is common to all.

The current trends in the culture tell us to let go of the struggle, that we are defined by our inner predispositions, and we should accept them as part of who we are. Christianity, and particularly Orthodoxy, says the opposite. We are not defined by our sinful desires, but we are defined by the purpose of our creation, which is union with Christ. Our true nature is fully revealed in Christ, the new Adam, and our struggle is to grow more into what He is. This is not an easy task and probably you know it already.

The sinful desires are to be rejected, are to be chased away from our lives and replaced with what is beneficial for our ultimate purpose. Therefore, the life of the Christian is against the world, not to condemn it, but to transform it into a better place, starting with one’s self. The transformation of man into Christ should transform and lift the fallen world. The fallen world should not pressure down man to its fallen level.

The Treasure of Finishing the Race

Keeping up this fight is hard and many times requires a great deal of sacrifice. Not all choices made for Christ are easy, but neither is the easy way out a good choice. Along the path of struggle we fall many times, but in Christ we rise and we continue to run, walk or even crawl. We bite our lips, and we keep moving ahead, never stopping. It is not our sinful tendencies that define us, but our ability to transform them in opportunities of growth and our perseverance to rise after every fall.

Struggle may also mean learning to accept the things in our lives that are not in our control: pain, suffering, loss. These are all part of the fallen world in which we operate. There is no way to avoid them, and the Christian struggle helps us be better prepared when they strike. By living a purposeful life towards the kingdom, we understand that any earthly suffering is temporary in nature. And the healing of the soul will eventually lead to a complete refashioning of man: body and soul. Living in the Communion of the Church, of the living and of the departed together, we learn that any separation is transitory, and the Reunion we wait for will bring great joy to those who have gone through the pains of separation. The Christian self-denial shows that every material loss is a gain, as we learn more and more to give up what is earthly and gather what is heavenly.

What is in our control however is to keep up the struggle no matter what. A life without struggle is a life not worth living, as it would be nothing else but a capitulation to slothfulness, sinfulness and decay. Life is a struggle, and the struggle is life. There is no way around it. We should accept it, embrace it and use it for our final benefit. It will be with us all our lives, only ending with our entrance in the Kingdom. So let’s get to “work-out” our salvation through struggle, not with sadness, but with joy and complete trust in the Lord, Who struggled Himself for our salvation, showing us first the way to conquer the Kingdom! Amen!

Source: http://myocn.net/christian-athletics-struggle-for-the-kingdom/

In the very beginning of the article about the event, which the Church celebrates today, we need to define its name, stated in the calendar as the uncovering of the relics of St. Stephen. The thing is that in September the uncovering of the relics did not occur, but instead it was their translation from Jerusalem to Constantinople in the year 428. As for the uncovering of the relics, occurred several years earlier and now it is celebrated on December 27.

In fact, this last date is the most ancient of all the feast days devoted to St. Stephen. In the sources, which have been preserved to this day, the earliest references to the liturgical honoring are the word of Gregory of Nyssa to St. Basil the Great and two homilies devoted to the first martyr himself, which were announced on his feast day, December 26, and the next day in the year 386. The existence of liturgical speeches devoted to St. Stephen proves that he was widely honored in the 4^th century almost in all parishes on the territory of the Roman Empire.

An additional proof is that the name of St. Stephen was mentioned in an ancient Syrian menology of the 4^th century. December 26 is marked with the following note in it: “Stephen the Apostol, the first martyr in Jerusalem, the leader of martyrs.” Following the example of the Eastern Christian parishes, the tradition of which was described in this menology, Western Christians also began to celebrate the memory of St. Stephen. First of all, his liturgical veneration was mentioned in the martyrology of Pseudo-Jerome (its main part was written in 5^th – 7^th centuries), where it was stated that on that day “the memory of St. Stephen, a martyr and deacon, who was beaten with stones by the Jews, is celebrated in Jerusalem”. In later redactions this note said the following: “…the sufferings of St. Stephen, a deacon, martyr and apostle, who was beaten to death with stones by the Jews in the village Kafargamala in the city of Jerusalem”. Except from additional titles of the saint, there also appeared new details about the place where he had been buried. What is more, it is important to point out that the first reference to the village of Kafargamala dates back to the 5^th century. Lucian, a presbyter of the Jerusalem Church, describes this village as the place of his service and the burial site of St. Stephen in his “Message to all Churches about the uncovering of the relics of St. Stephen”.

In the Lucian’s story the uncovering of the relics in connected with the name of Gamaliel. According to the message, Gamaliel came to the mentioned presbyter in a dream and ordered to dig out the remains of St. Stephen. As far as there is neither earlier information about Kafargamala, nor information about honoring Gamaliel and his connection with the village, it may be concluded that the link between Kafargamala and Gamaliel was the work of the author of the “message”. Perhaps, he made such a decision because of the consonance of the name of a famous Pharisee and the name of the village. However, it is possible that in the 4^th century there was a certain story about Gamaliel, which was used by the author.

On the other hand, we have already found out that St. Stephen was honored even before the uncovering of his relics. It is possible that the reverence of the first martyr was connected with the village Kafargamala, where in the 4^th century people could venerate the alleged grave of Stephen. In December, 415, the relics of St. Stephen were found. It is very likely that the legend about Gamaliel, who had buried St. Stephen, was created for that very event or even retroactively.

It seems that in 415 the relics of Nicodemus and Aviv were brought to the church on mount Sion together with the relics of St. Stephen; the remains of a Christian buried near the grave of St. Stephen could be taken as the relics of Gamaliel. They could be considered his relics on the ground that the village was identified as belonging to Gamaliel.

However, we can only assume about this. Nevertheless, the uncovering of the relics occurred not in September, but in December 415. According to the Byzantine historians and chroniclers, September 428, relates to the translation of the relics to Constantinople under the rule of Empress Pulcheria.

Most likely, only a part of the holy relics was brought there. Under Emperor Anastasis I (years of rule 491 – 518) the whole relics were transferred in August, which is why people began to honor the feast of the Translation of the relics in August more than the feast day in September. Particularly, in the Russian Orthodox Church the translation is commemorated on August 2. As for today’s “uncovering”, in some eastern menologies and calendars the day of September 15 was marked with the word “uncovering” instead of the word “translation” by mistake or just because of the mixture of various events. In this form the description and the name of the feast moved to the menologies and calendars of the Slavs.

Source: http://www.bogoslov.ru/text/1122197.html

Readers of the New Testament are familiar with St. Paul’s description of Christ as the “Second Adam.” It is an example of the frequent Apostolic use of an allegoric reading of the Old Testament (I am using “allegory” in its broadest sense – including typology and other forms). Christ Himself had stated that He was the meaning of the Old Testament (John 5:39). Within the Gospels Christ identifies His own death and resurrection with the Prophet Jonah’s journey in the belly of the fish. He likens His crucifixion to the serpent raised on a staff by which Moses healed the people of Israel. Without the allegorical use of the Old Testament – much of the material in the gospels and the rest of the New Testament would be unintelligible.

Orthodox Christians are very accustomed to this manner of handling Scripture – the hymnography (largely written during the Patristic period) of the Church’s liturgical life is utterly permeated by such a use of allegory. The connections between New Testament and Old – between dogma and the allegory of Scriptural imagery is found in almost every verse offered within a service. Those who are not familiar with the Eastern liturgical life are unaware of this rich Christian heritage and of its deep doctrinal piety and significance.

In the Feast of the Holy Cross, the hymnography at one point makes the statement, “The Tree heals the Tree.” It is one of the marvelous commentaries on the life of grace and its relationship to the human predicament. It refers to the relationship between the Cross of Christ and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The latter was the source of the fruit that Adam and Eve consumed that was the source of their fall from grace. The “Tree that heals” is none other than the Cross of Christ.

I am struck particularly by this treatment of Biblical imagery. The meditation does not say that the Cross destroys the tree whose fruit, along with our disobedience, brought the human tragedy. The Tree heals the Tree. In the same manner, the Kingdom of God does not destroy creation – it makes it whole.

There is a tendency within our lives to view failure and disasters (whether self-inflicted or otherwise) as deep tragedies that derail our lives and the world around us. Our heart becomes confused when the thought of “if only” takes up residence. But the Tree heals the Tree. In God, nothing is wasted.

It is the spiritual habit of the Church’s liturgical life to see the story of Christ in everything. Every story involving wood or a tree seems to find its way into the hymnography of the Cross. The same is true for many other images. I believe this way of reading Scripture is also a key to the Christian life. Our hearts are such that they generally do not see the Kingdom of God – we see only the tree and our disobedience. But Christ Himself became sin that we might become the righteousness of God (2 Cor. 5:21). He took our life upon Himself that He might bestow His own life upon us. Thus Christ has entered all things that He might make all things new. Nothing is wasted.

An article by Fr. Stephen Freeman

Source: https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/2017/09/14/tree-heals-tree/

It is a known practice in the Orthodox Church that every person, child or adult, should have a godparent (sponsor) at the time that they enter into the faith through Holy Baptism and Chrismation. To be a godparent is at the same time a great honor and a tremendous responsibility. God asks each godparent to assist in leading souls along the narrow path which leads to the Kingdom of Heaven. For this reason the role of the godparent is not to be minimized or trivialized. It is in fact a role that is holy and needs to be taken seriously.

The task of steering a child along the narrow path, and bringing them up according to the law of God is perhaps the greatest of all things in life. St. Theophan the Recluse says that there is no holier act. What better thing can we offer our children than to lead them to our Lord and teach them to imitate Him in their life.

The challenge of raising up a child in the teachings of God is perhaps far greater today than ever before. We are contending against many negative influences that carry with them great appeal. Due to the fallen state that we are in, and the unhealed passions that remain within us, the things that are most harmful are the things that are most enticing. With the many obstacles and temptations, the parents along with the godparents, must help the precious souls entrusted to them through the course of life.

While it is an honor to be asked to be a godparent, one should make sure that the potential sponsor will be committed to the responsibility. The role must be honored and not taken lightly. Every godparent will be accountable to God as to whether or not he or she has fulfilled their duties. Prospective godparents must know their faith, or at least be in the process of learning their faith and be committed to a life in Christ. One problem today is that people who are called upon to be godparents do not know their faith and are not regular participants in the life of the Church. This is also true for some parents. Consequently a child who is baptized may never know anything about Jesus Christ and the Church.

In the early Church heavy emphasis was placed on the educating of the faithful and those who desired to come into the Christian faith. As Christianity spread in a pagan world, the need to teach individuals before their baptisms became crucial. The systematic instruction, which was a preparatory stage for baptism was and is called "catechism."

During catechism one learned the basic elements of the Christian faith and moral life. We see the importance of these teachings and the teachings themselves in the 4th Prebaptismal Catechesis of St. Cyril of Jerusalem. The candidate had to be introduced by one of the faithful, called anadochos, (the godparent to be) and be examined by the "doctors" (the Bishops) who were in charge of the catechumens, to ensure that clear spiritual motives led him to enter the Church. Other than in cases of urgency, baptism was not something that was rushed. Not only did the candidate need to understand the teachings of Christ and the Church, but he also had to be living by them.

The anadochos which means one who receives (the person out of the font), was responsible for the candidate and played a very important role during the process of his Catechesis and even after the candidate had been baptized. This obviously took place primarily with adult candidates or young people. However, as the faith spread and as entire families were coming into the Body of Christ, infant baptism became more the norm rather than the exception. With the emergence and common practice of infant baptism, the anadochos was called upon to be the spokesperson for the infant at their baptism.

The godparent, therefore, is the representative of the infant who is being admitted into the Church of Christ. He speaks for the infant and vows that he will do all he can to assure that the child will be a true soldier of Christ and a devoted member of His Church. He accepts the sacred responsibility of guiding the child into the understanding and practice of the teachings of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. The godparent makes a public profession of the Nicene Creed during the Baptism. Likewise, his renunciation of the devil is made on behalf of the candidate for Baptism. The godparent implicitly pledges himself to aid his godchild in whatever necessities that may arise, but most especially in the giving of a good Orthodox Christian example to the Godchild.

How should one go about choosing a Godparent?

1. Parents must exercise the greatest care in the selection of godparents for their children. Certainly they will never select atheists or agnostics, or persons who are lukewarm toward the Church. This would obviously defeat the purpose of having a godparent in terms of their role.

2. The Godparent must bring godliness and holiness to the child. Godparents are parents representing God or parents on God's behalf.

3. Parents should not choose godparents because they feel obligated, or because they think that if they don't ask a certain person or couple that they will be offended. Many, if not most situations, where people who have chosen someone to be a godparent out of guilt or obligation, end up being disastrous.

4. The faith of the godparent and their involvement within the sacramental life of the Church is crucial. The person who confesses Jesus Christ as His Lord cannot ignore and violate in word and deed this faith. How can he promise God that he will make certain that the child will grow to be a true follower of Christ, when he himself lives a life of unbelief and disobedience?

5. It goes without saying that the godparent must be an Orthodox person. How could someone who is not Orthodox provide the proper religious education, example and inspiration to his godchild? It should also be noted that an Orthodox Christian who has not had his or her marriage blessed in the Orthodox Church is excluded from exercising the privilege of serving as a godparent, because they are not considered to be in good standing with the Church.

6. The Church also cautions us to select a person who has reached the age of reason and moral responsibility (at least 12 years of age). It is also good to look for godparents outside of the family. In this way, the family grows and special bonds are created.

What are some other things that are expected of the Godparent?

1. It is a gross misunderstanding to think that the only duty of the godparent is to buy a new outfit and a cross for the infant. Certainly this is a beautiful tradition, but the emphasis must not be on the material but rather the spiritual. Many times people are so concerned with the clothing, the cross, the martyrika, (witness pins) and the luncheon afterwards, that they forget the magnitude and the awesomeness of the great mystery and the great gift of Holy Baptism. Both the parents and the godparents should be careful not to fall into this trap, but instead to keep their minds focused on the most important aspect and that is the baptism itself.

2. The godparent should make a faithful commitment to join the struggle with the parents, guided by the Church, to bring the infant carefully and prayerfully along the difficult road to Heaven.

3. After the baptismal service is finished, the godparent delivers the child into the arms of the mother in front of the congregation. As she receives the child, now baptized, sealed and illuminated, she kisses the hand of the godparent as a token of the spiritual relationship that is established between the godparent and the family. This is a Christian expression of gratitude and respect.

4. If the godparent lives in the same city, it is customary for the godparent to bring the infant (or accompany the newly illumined adult) to Holy Communion with the lit baptismal candle for the next three Sundays. After three Sunday's the candle is no longer used, but it is good for the godparent to take the child to communion each week.

5. A faithful godparent will make the effort to maintain close contact with their godchild, building up their relationship. The main focus, however, is the progress of the child in the knowledge and practice of the Christian life. He should at all times model a Christ-like example. For this reason it is important that the godparent stay on top of their own spiritual life. The godparent should pray, fast, read from Holy Scripture, and participate in the sacramental life of the Church. As they grow and mature in the faith, they will in turn be able to offer more and more to their godchild who has been entrusted to them. To neglect their own spiritual life is ultimately to neglect the spiritual life of their godchild.

6. Godparents are encouraged to call to remembrance the sacred and joyous moment of Baptism, which may be done by participating in "Godparents' Sunday", a National Observance by the Greek Orthodox Church in America.

7. Appropriate gift-giving honoring the occasion of the godchild's nameday, birthday or baptism day, could include such things as icons, a Bible, and religious books that will be helpful in building up the spiritual life of the child. These are the most important, but it is not wrong to give other things as well that the child would enjoy and make use of.

8. Most of all, the greatest duty of the godparent is to pray fervently for their godchild that God will always watch over them and guide them throughout his/her life. The Akathist to the Mother of God the Nurturer of Children could be read by the godparent and they could simply replace the word "child" with "godchild".

The role and responsibility of the Godparent can be summed up in the Divine Commandment that is read from the Holy Gospel at the service of Baptism. "Teach them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age." It is truly an honor to be called upon to be a godparent. May we all live a life close to the Church, seeking help from Christ, that we may fulfill our sacred duty as godparents in a way pleasing to God.

Source: http://orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/godparenting101.aspx

An article by Mikhail Skaballanovich, Ph.D. (Church History)

Although St Andrew of Crete calls the Nativity (nativitas) of the Most Holy Theotokos the “Beginning of All Feasts,” it was likely the last of the twelve major Christian holidays to appear in the calendar.

As a rule, holidays dedicated to the Mother of God appear later than the ones dedicated to the Lord. Although the first report of the holiday of the Nativity of the Mother of God dates back to the 5^th century, viz., the homilies of Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople (439-446) in the East and Sacramentarium of Pope Gelasius (492-496) in the West, these accounts are not fully reliable: the authenticity of Proclus’s words is contested, while the earliest copies of the Sacramentarium of Pope Gelasius date to a much later time (8^th century). A recently discovered Syrian menologion (AD 412) does not mention the Nativity of Theotokos and, for that matter, neither does it mention any of the other Marian holidays; it mentions only two of the holidays dedicated to Jesus Christ, i.e. the Nativity of Christ and Theophany. This menologion commemorates “Presbyter Faustus and Ammonius and 20 martyrs with them” on September 8 (O.S.).

This holiday apparently originated in the Greek Church and soon spread to Rome and its affiliated churches. It is noteworthy that this holiday is celebrated by Nestorians (the Nativity of Our Lady Mary) as well as by Jacobites, on September 8 (with the exception of several ancient Coptic menologions, where this holiday is celebrated on April 26). It may mean that this holiday appeared in the Eastern Church before these heretics parted ways with the Church, i.e. in the 5^th century.

St Andrew of Crete († ca. 712) wrote two homilies and a canon for this holiday.

He already considered this holiday as a solemnity. He insists in his canon that all creation must rejoice (Ode 1); the heaven must be glad and the earth must be joyful (Ode 4); barren women and mothers must join the chorus (Ode 6). St Andrew probably wanted to put this holiday on par with other Marian feasts. If you read his canon, full of deep emotion and admiration, you will surely see that a 7^th-century Christian like St Andrew, who died in the early 8^th century, perceived the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos as a day when his heart trembled in awe and his soul was overflowing with exalted feelings.

Only a person who had been reared in veneration of this day and maybe heard enthusiastic hymns composed by earlier authors could have the inspiration to write such masterpieces as the 2^nd Canon for the Nativity of Theotokos. This holiday is highlighted in a 7^th-century Jerusalem Book of Canons, and a Georgian version refers to it as significantly different from other days. This feast is also referred to by name in the Festive Gospel, which Emperor Theodosius III (715 – 717) gave as a present to St Catherine Monastery on Mt Sinai. This Gospel was written with golden letters and apparently contained readings only for the most important holidays of the ecclesiastical year (it contains readings only for 21 days of the year: aside from the current twelve major feasts – with the exception of Palm Sunday, which might have been omitted by mistake – there are readings for September 1, December 24, January 5, February 7, March 9, April 23, May 8 and 10, June 29).

In the West, this holiday is first mentioned in the Roman Pseudo-Hieronymus Martyrology (7^th century), in the statutes of Bishop Sonnatius of Rheims (614 – 631) as one of the 13 days of the year when public affairs are forbidden, and in the Martyrology of St Bede the Venerable (†735). Holy Pope Sergius (687-701) is said by Anastasius the Librarian (9^th century) to have appointed a litany (a procession) from St Mary Church to St Adrian Church on this day. The rules of St Boniface (8^th century) name this feast as one of the holidays that merit special honor (sabbatizandae a populis cum singulari devotione). King Charles the Bald mentions this holiday in one of his charters (on distribution of monastery lands). An 8^th-century Anglo-Saxon Pontifical contains a bishop’s blessings for this feast.

However, this holiday was not common in the West even in the 7^th – 9^th centuries. There is no such holiday in the Gothic-Gallican Calendar (7^th – 8^th centuries), Calendarium Luxoviensis (7^th century), the list of holidays found in the Acts of the Council of Mainz (813), in the 10^th-century Toledo Calendar and ancient Mozarabic calendars, all of which mention the Assumption. 17^th-century liturgics scholars even asserted that it was Fulbert of Chartres (†1028) who first popularized it; instead, he might have been instrumental in the expansion of this holiday to Northern France. The earliest Latin sermons on this feast belong to him, and the feast is characterized as a new one.

Although it took a long time to become commonly known and celebrated in the West, this holiday took even longer to become as solemnly celebrated as it is nowadays. The most ancient calendar of Corbie Abbey (8^th– 9^th centuries) contains the following note on September 8: “Memory (natale) of St Adrian and of the Nativity of Blessed Virgin Mary.” Later records assign one Mass to the Nativity of the Mother of God and another Mass to the commemoration of St Adrian; then two Masses to the Nativity and one to St Adrian; then St Adrian is left with only the early Mass; and then finally St Adrian has only a commemoration (commemoratio). Bruno von Hildesheim is characterized in a chronicle dated 1155 as “this most venerable prelate (praesul) was God-loving: he shone with ardent reverence towards His Most Glorious Mother Virgin Mary and diligently did whatever he could to venerate her. Among other things, he was the only bishop who ordered an eight days long octave (apodosis) of Her Nativity to be observed in his diocese, which was later adopted by the entire Holy Mother Church.” Bishop Guido Autissiodensis (†1270) also made this feast a solemn annual celebration in his diocese. Pope Innocent IV made the eight days long octave of this holiday mandatory for the entire Western Church during the Council of Lyon in 1245. Pope Gregory XI (1370-1378) determined a vigil and a fast for this feast, as well as a special rite of mass.

It was in the West and around that time that an explanation for the date of this holiday (September 8) was found. Durandus (†1296) writes that a pious man heard joyful singing of Angels every year on that day and he wondered why they were singing. It was revealed to him that the Angels rejoiced because Virgin Mary had been born on this day; as soon as the Pope learned about it, he ordered a celebration of the Nativity of the Holy Virgin on earth like in the heaven.

* * *

Church chants dedicated to the holiday of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos must have appeared from its very beginning. Unfortunately, our current service hardly retains any of the 5^thor 7^th century hymns dedicated to this feast. Liturgical manuscripts that date back to 7^th and 8^th century (e.g., some Georgian manuscripts) contain chants that are totally different from our current ones.

We do not have a kontakion for the Nativity of Theotokos composed by St Roman the Melodist who lived in the 6^th century and wrote many of our current kontakia for the twelve major feasts. It is only the troparion Thy Nativity, O Theotokos Virgin that belongs to these ancient times — the 5^th– 7^th centuries, given that the same chant is a part of both the Roman Catholic mass and the Eastern Orthodox liturgy, and that this is practically the sole case where worship hymns in the Orthodox Church and the Roman Church coincide.

On the contrary, the 8^th and the 9^th centuries were the time when a number of church hymns dedicated to the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos appeared. Less than half of them made it into our current rite of celebration of this feast and its eve. The majority of these chants were introduced into the rite of worship by ancient rubrics but later faded out of use. Currently, there are chants by the following authors used during church services of the Nativity of the Mother of God: St Andrew of Crete († ca. 712) — the Second Canon of the feast; St John of Damascus († ca. 780) — the First Canon of the feast; Patriarch Herman of Constantinople († 740) — the aposticha; Anatoly, bp. of Thessalonica (?) — several stichera chanted during the litiya; Stephen and Sergius of the Holy City, i.e. monks of St Sabbas Monastery in the Holy City (Jerusalem), fl. 9^th century — the Canon of the Eve of the feast. The following authors once had their chants used in old times, e.g. according to the Hypotyposis of the Monastery of the Theotokos Evergetis, Constantinople, but were later rejected by our current Typikon: Emperor Leo VI († 916) — Canon, tone 4 I Shall Open My Mouth (according to the Evergetis Hypotyposis, it was chanted during “pannikhida” of the feast) and another canon with the same initial irmos (according to the same document, it was chanted during “pannikhida” on September 11); George, bishop of Nicomedia (?), fl. 9^th century — Canon, tone 4 I Shall Open My Mouth (the same Hypotyposis assigns this canon for the Matins on the Eve of the feast) and Canon, tone 4, The Powerful Generals during the “pannikhida” on September 10. The same Evergetis Hypotyposis requires (during the “pannikhida” on September 9) another canon, tone 4, I Shall Sing To Thee, O Lord My God, by John (of Damascus?). It is worth noting that St Cosmas of Maiuma did not leave us a canon for this feast: nor did he leave canons for Easter, Ascension, Annunciation, and Entrance of the Mother of God into the Temple.

The extant sources do not allow us to say anything definitive about the kind of service and the hymns and readings that the holiday of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos had before the 7^th century. Luckily, we have a 7^th-century source that sheds light on the rite of this service: a translation into the Georgian language of the so called Jerusalem Canonarium, that is, a collection of liturgical instructions, or rather an index of readings during worship in the Church of Jerusalem. We read, “The Nativity of Theotokos. Troparion, tone 1: Thy Nativity, O Theotokos Virgin. Prokeimenon, tone 1: Thou Hast Sanctified Thy Dwelling; verse: God Is Our Refuge and Strength.” This note is followed by a list of readings, viz., 1. The Wisdom of Solomon 8:2-4 (mistakenly cited as Proverbs); 2. Isaiah 11:1 ff.; and an unnumbered reading of Hebrews 8:7-9,10. Hallelujah, tone 8: Hear O Daughter. Gospel Luke 11:27-32. Washing of hands, tone 1, “Thy Nativity, O Most Pure Virgin.” Apparently, these are the instructions for the Liturgy only; more important feasts have rubrics for the Vespers and the Matins, too. Perhaps, the Vespers and the Matins of this feast did not differ too much from everyday services. We see Old Testament readings during the Liturgy and a special troparion “on washing of hands”, which might have been a substitute of the Cherubic Song. Remarkably, the Gospel reading in this source begins with “And it came to pass, as he spake these things…”, i.e. with the last words of the current Gospel reading. The second earliest source that contains liturgical instructions for this feast is the so called Canonarium of Mt Sinai, i.e. a similar book, which was meant to be used in a certain Church (maybe the Church of Constantinople), found alongside a Gospel book in St Catherine Monastery on Mt Sinai and attributed to the 9^th century. The Vespers prokeimenon in this book is “Glorious things are spoken of thee, O city of God” and the verse is God loves the Gates of Zion. The OT readings, the troparion, the Epistle and Gospel readings, and the Koinonikon are already the same as today.

The information about the order of the services on the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos is available to us since the 11^th century, when this service was already very close to the current one. We will mention only the few differences between the known ancient manuscripts and the current Typikon.

Thus, the manuscript of a Georgian translation of the Typikon (the 11^th -century Synaxarion of Iveron Monastery on Mt Athos) requires a special prokeimenon on the Vespers of this feast: “The holy place of the tabernacles of the most High, God is in the midst of her” and the verse was God Is Our Refuge. There was no litiya during the Vespers according to this book; it stipulated current stichera for Lord I Cried during the Aposticha (this book does not determine stichera for Lord I Cried; the same is true for all other great feasts); the troparion is the current one but in the first tone; the usual Matins kathisma is replaced with Psalms 43, 44, and 132; the Antiphons during the Liturgy are It Is Good — apparently the usual weekday ones — with the following refrains: 1). By the Prayers of Theotokos, 2). and 3). Save Us, O Son of God Born of a Virgin, For We Sing Thee: Hallelujah.

The 11^th-century practice of celebration of the feast of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos in the Evergetis Monastery in Constantinople as recorded in a 12^th-century manuscript has the following differences from the current practice. Only three initial stichera are chanted during the Lord I Cried at Vespers: the first and the second ones are repeated three times, and the third sticheron is repeated twice. There was no litiya during Vespers according to this Typikon. The Aposticha had the following verses: 1) Lord, remember David, and all his afflictions: how he sware unto the Lord, and vowed unto the mighty God of Jacob; 2) The Lord hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it;

Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. Only two first stichera of the Aposticha coincide with the current ones, while the third one, Thy Most Honorable Nativity, is now the last during the Vespers; the fourth, Today the Barren Gate, is currently the fourth sung at Lord I Cried. The troparion is in tone 1. The first kathisma at the Matins was the usual one, and the second was a special one, appropriate for the feast, i.e. the sixth kathisma, O Lord, rebuke me not in thy wrath. The sessional hymn after the first kathisma is the one which is now read after the second kathisma; the sessional hymn after the second kathisma is the one that is read after the third ode of the canon today; the sessional hymn after the polieley is the one that is now read after the first kathisma. Canons: First Canon has irmoses repeated twice, troparia by 4, the 2^nd by six (no mention of irmoses here); consequently, the canon itself is read by 12 (today by 16). The current 1^st sessional hymn after the polieley is read after Ode 3 of the canon; the exapostilarion Holy is the Lord our God is read after Ode 9, like on other, mainly medium-importance feasts and, “optionally, another exapostilarion, sung to the tune of Hearken O Women: The ends of earth rejoice.” The Lauds included six stichera but the book names only two of them (probably the first two of the current ones), Glory: Now: the sixth one currently at Lord I Cried, Today the Barren Anna. The Beatitudes during the Liturgy are unique to this feast, in tone 8 “Remember us” — a troparion, a troichen and a theotokion. The following readings from the “Book of Praises to the Theotokos” were incorporated into the service according to this book of rubrics: the First Homily of St John of Damascus, beginning with Come All Nations, during the panikhida; the Second and the Third Homilies of St John of Damascus during the Matins after the First and the Second Kathisma, beginning with the following words, “If the Earth is measured by cubits” and “Various other subjects of feasts”; a homily by St Andrew of Crete “This feast is the beginning of all feasts” after the polieley; a “historical account by St James in his Metaphrastos” after Ode 3 of the Canon (currently, there remain the following readings: the Second Homily by St John of Damascus, referred to as the Homily by St Andrew of Crete; the First Homily by St John of Damascus after the 2^nd Kathisma; a homily by Gregory the Hieromonk; and an unspecified “reading of the feast” after the 1^st Kathisma).

We see that the service according to that Typikon is different from our current one in just a few ways, such as lack of several stichera (e.g. stichera during the litiya), another order of stichera and sessional hymns, and an abridged canon. The Hypotyposis of Evergetis Monastery is an important document in the history of liturgy because it recorded the practice of worship, which was the middle ground between the so call Studite and Jerusalemite Typika. The Hypotyposis of Evergetis is closer to the Studite Typikon in its earliest form, which we cannot find in the full copies that exist today, due to the fact that these remaining copies date back to the 12^th-13^thcenturies and are very close to the Jerusalem (the present) Typikon; they are much closer to it than the Hypotyposis of Evergetis.

According to these copies of the Studite Typikon, which are a Slavonic-Russian edition of this Typikon made in 12^th or 13^th centuries, the worship on this feast has the following differences from the current one. There are six verses for the stichera on Lord I Cried, and the stichera are the current first three ones; there is no litiya during Vespers according to this Typikon; the Aposticha stichera go in the following order: the 1^st Sticheron is the same as today; the 2^nd Sticheron is the same as the 3^rd Sticheron now; the 4^th Sticheron is the same as the 4^th Sticheron on Lord I Cried today. Glory: Now: tone 2, to the tune of House of Ephratha, unspecified text — possibly the current aposticha sticheron from the Small Vespers; troparion, tone 1. The prokeimenon Lift up your hands in the sanctuary, which was sung after the Gospel at Matins during other feasts, was likewise sung after the Gospel at Matins of this day. The canons were chanted as follows: the First Canon had irmoses read once and verses repeated twice in Odes 1, 3, 4 and 6; both irmoses and verses were repeated twice in Odes 5, 7, 8, and 9 (because the first odes contained three verses, while the last odes contained just two verses each); the Second Canon had irmoses and verses recited once: all verses were by 12; there was the exclamation Holy Is The Lord Our God after Ode 9. The current three stichera at the Lauds were chanted twice each, then Glory: Now, followed by the first one of them. This Typikon always required Aposticha, too: Matins aposticha in tone 2, to the tune of House of Ephratha (unspecified), Glory: Now: One of those. Liturgy had “designated Psalms and they sing canons in tone 2, odes 3 and 5 with irmoses, during the Beatitudes.”

According to the earliest copies of the current Jerusalem Typikon, the service of the Nativity of Theotokos is only slightly different from the current (printed) Typikon. The two first stichera are repeated at Lord I Cried. Some manuscripts require singing the Second Canon by 6 with just the troparia without irmoses; other (Slavonic) manuscripts note that “we say its irmoses and troparia once, for they are plentiful.” The exapostilarion of the feast is chanted twice. It is either not specified or the one that Greeks use today. (Sessional hymns aren’t specified either, so we cannot be certain if they are meant to be the same as today or not). The odes of the Liturgy are taken only from the First Canon.

Finally, there are minor inconsistencies between our current rubrics of that feast and the modern Greek or Old Rite rubrics. The Greek rubrics have more differences, albeit insignificant. Thus, according to the Greek Menaia, the first two stichera at Lord I Cried are read twice. The First Sessional Hymn after the Polieley and the Sessional Hymn after Ode 3 of the Canon are chanted one in the place of the other, and there is no second sessional hymn after the polieley. The First Canon has irmoses by 8, the Second Canon has troparia by 6. There is a kontakion and an ikos after the Sixth Ode, together with a brief synaxarion (description) of the feast with preceding verses. The Ninth Ode does not have any refrains. The exapostilaria we use nowadays aren’t there; instead, they use one exapostilarion, mentioned in ancient books, and sing it three times to the tune of Hearken O Women: “The ends of earth today rejoice of Thy Nativity, O Virgin Theotokos Mary and the Unwedded Bride; it is through it that thy parents’ woeful malediction of infecundity was untied, as well as the curse of birth of Foremother Eve.”

According to the liturgical instructions used in the Patriarchate of Constantinople for parish churches, this service has the following differences from ours. They sing stichera by 6 at Lord I Cried; they do not have a litiya during Vespers; the litiya accompanied with singing of a troparion goes before Matins, which is served separately from the Vespers, similarly to other great feasts. The Matins contains Psalter (kathismas) and a polieley to Theotokos My heart is inditing; then hypakoe (in fact, it is a sessional hymn) after the Third Ode of the Canon. During the Liturgy, they sing antiphons consisting of the verses of what is known to us as the select Psalm for the Exaltation, viz., verses 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 (see below), with insertions of Ps. 132:17 between verses 7 and 8, and Psalm 132:14 between verses 9 and 11. The chorus of the First Antiphon is By the Prayers of Theotokos; and of the Second Antiphon, Save Us O Son of God, Wondrous Art Thou In Thy Saints…; of the Third Antiphon, a troparion. They sing Come Let Us Worship… Wondrous Art Thou in Thy Saints during the Entrance.

According to the liturgical instructions used by Old Rite believers, the second and the third stichera at Lord I Cried are sung twice; they sing Today The Barren Gate sticheron in tone 6 after the Gospel reading; they have no refrains after Ode 9; instead they have a katavasia Mysterious Is The Paradise. Instead of It Is Truly Meet they sing Virginity Is Alien to Mothers and repeat the Photogogikon (Svetilen) three times. Apparently, the photogogikon is the same as in the Greek Menaia.

Our account of the history of the service in honor of this feast makes it clear how slowly and gradually this service was developed. Its authors were holy monks and confessors of the 8^th and 9^th centuries and this fact, coupled with high artistic qualities of their works, was the reason why their chants replaced earlier and doubtlessly simpler and less sophisticated hymns used in the 5^th-7^th centuries. Later, quite a few famous hymnographers brought the fruit of their inspiration to this feast, which came to be more and more venerated and honored by the Christian oikumena; however, the Church was so demanding that their works were not adopted for use during worship because they were found to be less brilliant than the former ones. It is also worth noting the care with which the liturgical instructions replaced certain hymns with others in the course of their centuries-long formation and development: texts formerly used at the Aposticha were then moved to Lord I Cried; texts originally chanted between odes of the canons were later moved to kathismas and the polieley. The rubrics were hesitant even in the seemingly unimportant issues, such as where to repeat a sticheron and which one to repeat; which number to sing canons by; whether to sing irmoses of the second canon or not. All this guarantees that the current rite of church service on this day is a harmoniously balanced single whole.

An article by Mikhail Skaballanovich, Ph.D. (Church History)

Translated from: https://www.sedmitza.ru/lib/text/440413/