Preface for 22nd Sunday after Trinity Sunday [23rd Sunday after Pentecost]

 

The following is the Preface that was sung at Mass this past 22nd Sunday after Trinity [i.e. 23rd Sunday after Pentecost]: 

V.  It is very meet and just, right and available for our salvation, that we should at all times and in all places give thanks unto Thee, O Lord, Holy Father, Almighty and Everlasting God.  Thou Who dost therefore punish them that wander away from Thy Law, and dost mildly refresh them that have been chastized:  that Thou mayest drag us away from all evil works, and make us turn unto doing good works; for Thou wantest not to come upon that which Thou dost condemn, but rather that which Thou dost approve; for when we ought jointly to be afflicted as we deserve, Thou nevertheless dost temper justice in order to correct us; nor dost Thou administer unending correction for punishment; for Thou dost rightly correct us, and gently forgive us; in one case there is truthfulness, in another case mercy; Thou That dost set us in order by the law, that by drawing close Thou mayest not set us down to perish for ever, and by sparing Thou dost grant us the time needed for correction; for Thou so afflictest us with the evils of the present, that Thou mayest lead us to the good things of the future; Thou dost so comfort us with good things that are temporary, that Thou informest us about those things which are eternal; for which we do ever praise Thee with loving acknowledgment both in times of prosperity and in times of adversity.  Through Christ Our Lord.  Through Whom Angels praise Thy Majesty, Dominions adore, Powers tremble.  The Heavens, and the Heavenly Virtues, and the Blessed Seraphim unite in one glad voice in extolling Thee.  Together with whom, pray Thee, that Thou wouldest command that our voices should have entrance, humbly confessing Thee, and saying: 

[Holy, Holy....]

Our ancient Western Orthodox Fathers remind us that as Christians that we must go through suffering in this life, and that the correction of punishment that we endure as children of the Lord is to bring us to a purified state in this life, to prepare for the Paradise after death; as the Preface says, God does not "administer unending correction for punishment" for the Christian in this life; however, this is to preserve us from the unending punishments of Hell in the next life, where the punishment is not for correction, but is the desert of man's sin, unrepentant, having, sadly, turned away from the Lord's correctives in this life, and finding himself, therefore, sorrwofully, in hell.  May the Lord preserve from such, and may we cooperate with the Grace of God that lead us to salvation eternal! 

All Holy Monks and Nuns

 

A Blessed Feast of All Holy Monks and Nuns!

Below is the Introit with Tropes for today's Mass:

Today over all the Earth there hath dawned forth the Feast Day of the Holy Monastics; come ye, come ye, and sing: Rejoice we all, and praise the Lord, celebrating an Holy Day in honour of the Holy Monastics!  Today the Hosts of Martyred Monks and Nuns are surpassingly joyful in Heaven; and as for us upon the Earth, come ye, come and sing: In whose Solemnity the Angels are joyful, wherefore on this day we render honour and offer truly meet praises unto the Holy Monastics, and Glorify the Son of God. 

Ps.  Rejoice in the Lord, O Ye Righteous; for it becometh well the Just to be thankful! 

The Error of the Missiological Argument for Western Orthodoxy

 

One of the problems with trying to gauge, judge, and conform the Western Orthodox rite and practice by even Pre-Vatican II standards would be the immense issues then present liturgically in the Pre-Vatican II Latin liturgical usages called commonly the "Tridentine Rite".  Of course, these weren't as absolutely insane as what came in the 1960s and then was solidified after 1969 by the Vatican. 

In short, the argument that brings forth the Pre-Vatican II Latin liturgical rite as a standard in conjunction with missiological arguments for Western Orthodoxy falls into the trap of making the Vatican the determiner of what is and what is not allowed; Western Orthodoxy simply is not allowed to live and make its own judgments by its own Fathers and Saints in concord with the general Consensus Patrum of the Ecumenical Councils and Canons and how they were historically understood.  

9th Century Poem "Muspilli" and the Soul after Death

 

The Christian epic poem known as the "Muspilli" survives in fragmentary form in a 9th century Bavarian manuscript; the Old German text describes what happens to the soul after death, the events of the end times, the battle between the Prophet St. Elias and the Antichrist, Second Coming of Christ with the Resurrection, and the Last Judgment.  It is possible the text was meant to be sung by bards and others, in a similar fashion to the work of Caedmon in England. 

What I find important, however, is the witness it gives to the popular and ancient Christian belief that, after death, the souls of men are disputed over by angels and demons; this belief was so deeply ingrained among Christians not only in the Middle East, or in England, but also among the Old Germans, that it found consistent expression in Latin and vernacular poems, homilies, etc.  Here is the relevant text, as well as some of the important sections:

Vigilius, Bishop of Thapsus [+500] on the Council of Chalcedon and St. Cyril of Alexandria

 

"But now let us consider the last article in the Decree of the Synod of Chalcedon: “We confess that Christ Our Lord, the Only Begotten Son, is to be understood to be One and the Self-Same in [His] Two Natures, neither confounded, nor changed, nor divided, nor separated, not making void the difference of the Two Natures because of the Unity, but keeping sound the Property of Both Natures coming together into One Person and Substance, not as being divided or separated, but (as being) One and the Same Only-Begotten Son, God, the Word, (Our) Lord Jesus Christ.”

"In this In this article this displeaseth them, because they said, “The Property of Both Natures remaining sound;” or, “The difference of the Natures not being made void.” And that they may persuade us that those things (which they mislike) are assuredly so, they, using their accustomed largeness of words and vain assertions, do bring in many testimonies out of the articles of Cyril, wherein he denied not the Two Natures in Christ, but teacheth that there is but One Person. To the intent therefore that we may not confute them with our disputation alone, let us set down also the words of Cyril, that even as they lean to the testimony of Cyril, so by the testimony of Cyril they may be overcome. In the Synodal Epistles of Cyril to Nestorius thus it is written: “For we do not affirm,” saith he, “that the Divine Nature is turned or changed into Flesh, nor yet that it is transformed into the whole man, which consisteth of the Body and Soul; but we say rather, that the Reasonable Soul hath coupled to Itself the substance of Living Flesh, that it is Unspeakably and Unconceivably made Man, and is also called the Son of Man, not of bare will alone, nor by the only taking on of the Person, but because the Two Natures do after a certain manner come together in One, so that there is One Christ, and One Son of Both (the Natures) by Joining Them in One, not in making void or taking away the difference of the Natures, but because they, that is, the Godhead and the Manhood Together, by that Hidden and Unspeakable Knitting to the Unity, have made to us One Lord, and (One) Christ, and (One) Son.” What could be spoken more plainly than this? What could be shewed more clearly out of the Epistles of Cyril to agree with the determination of the Council of Chalcedon? For see, neither are words to words, nor sentence to sentence any thing contrary: but even as they had one meaning of Faith, so use they in a manner the self-same words.

 "The Holy Synod [Chalcedon] said, “The difference of the Two Natures being no where made void;” St. Cyril said, “The difference of the Natures not being made void, or taken away, by Joining Them Together.” The Holy Synod said, “Both the Natures Meeting Together in One Person;” St. Cyril said, “Not of a bare will only, nor yet by the only taking on of a Person, but because the Two Natures after a sort do Meet Together in One.” The Holy Synod said, “Not being divided into two persons, but being One and the Same Christ;” St. Cyril said, “So that of Two, that is to say (of Two) Natures in One Christ the Son;” and again, “Because they, that is, the Godhead and the Manhood together, have made to us One Lord, (One) Christ, and (One) Son."

[Vigilius, Bishop of Thapsus (+500), "Against the Eutychians", Book 5, Chapter 25]

English translation taken from here; Latin can be found in the Patrologia here. 

 

10th Century Anglo-Saxon Reliquary Cross

 A Cross with Saints Relics originally contained it; made in the 10th Century in England.   Additional photos can be found in the above link.  Notice that the older form of depicting the Crucifixion was with both Feet of Our Lord nailed separately, and not together. 

Abbot Walafrid Strabo (+840) on Veneration of Icons

 Every now and again one encounters claims that Abbot Walafrid Strabo (+840), the Abbot of Reichenau Abbey on Lake Constance, did not accept the veneration of icons, but, rather simply thought they were nice decorations and nothing else.  Many of us have seen this repeated over and over again, often without any actual primary source references.  Thankfully, a translation exists of Abbot Walafrid's "Libellus de Exordiis", in which he takes the position that sacred Christian images are given "sincere and moderate veneration."  In other words he opposes destruction of images, since any damage done to the icon redounds to an act of dishonour to the one it represents, but he also opposes ignoring icons, as well as giving "immoderate culturs" or "spiritual cultus" to icons; spiritual cultus being his phrase for what in the East was termed "latria".   The admission of icons deserving "honesti et moderati imaginum honores" [i.e. "honest and moderate honors of images"] accepts the teachings of St. Adrian of Rome, and the Seventh Ecumenical Council.  Abbot Walafrid only opposes "excesses" in venerating icons as well as 'spiritual cultus' [latria], not the veneration itself.