The Eucharistic Prayer A Comparison of Lutheran and Armenian Orthodox Traditions

The Heart amd Soul of the Divine Liturgy

by Rev. Shnork Kahana Souin

Because the church is identified by those within and without her in what she does and what she says both corporately and publicly, her actions must be clear and rooted in truth according to her confessional heritage. The liturgies of the church, which have their clearest expression in the Divine Liturgy or Divine Service, are those actions which define what she is, what she believes and what she confesses by those who, as totus christus membra cum capite, gather in unity of faith as members of the Crucified and Risen God, the Lord Jesus Christ her head. The Divine Liturgy, therefore, based on the ancient canon of lex credendi, lex orandi, expresses the clearest confession of the apostolic faith not only by definition, but in truth.

This affirmation requires that we look into the "heart" and "soul" of the Divine Liturgy, the Eucharist, which is the celebration of the very representation of the Lord's Supper in which our Lord, the "Bread of life"¹ who inaugurated the eternal covenant in His Blood which He shed on the Cross, promised, until His glorious Second Coming, to be present as we "Do this in remembrance"² of Him.

For the Orthodox generally and for the Armenians³ specifically, the sacramental reality of Christ's presence in the Eucharist has its confessional formalization and proclamation within the context of the Eucharistic Prayer. The Eucharistic Prayer of St. Athanasius⁴ therefore, by which it is known in the Armenian Church's Tradition, is the "heart and soul" of the Divine Liturgy. This paper will compare the Eucharistic Prayer of St. Athanasius, with a Lutheran understanding of the appropriate use of the Eucharistic prayer and its place in the Gottesdienst, insofar as it has a place. This study of this topic, with the impending advent of the New Lutheran Hymnal due out in 2007, is important because the new Liturgy may or may not contain that core which an ancient sister church sees as fundamental and the "heart and soul" of the Liturgy⁵. While the Armenian Rite and more particularly the Canon of the Eucharistic Prayer will in almost complete likelihood not be considered specifically, I submit this paper with the humble intention that at least in some small way the tradition of the universal church will be better understood not only for its antiquity but for its theological purity and orthodoxy as expressed in how she prays the Eucharist.

To start with, one might ask, "if the Apology of the Augsburg Confession states, 'We do not abolish the Mass...(and) keep traditional liturgical forms...,'⁶ should it not be clear without argument that the Eucharistic prayer, which has a clear and well documented pedigree in the historical and liturgical tradition of the church catholic, be preserved by the Lutherans?" It is however a more complex question than one would assume at first blush. Its history and understanding, which impact the very theological foundations for the Lutheran Reformation itself and the reforming fathers understanding of the Mass, prevent a superficial dismissal of it nor does it lend itself to the implementation of a universal Eucharistic Prayer for Lutherans only for the sake of historicity.

As with the Roman Church, so too with the Orthodox Church, the Lutheran objection is not about whether or not the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present in the Mass. On this basis, there is concord⁷ by all. It is a question of what the Mass is and more specifically in terms of the Eucharistic prayer, it is a question of what it does or does not do, functionally as much as liturgically. Liturgically, some Lutherans feel that the Institution narrative spoken together with the Verba without a clear break, can impede the Gospel thereby making murky God's work in the Sacrament presumably turning it into a work of man. Not so! Functionally, also, the epiclesis is not seen by the Lutherans to be both consecratory and sanctificatory like in the Orthodox Rite. These two objections however should not call for the omission of the prayer.

These concerns can be considered on the basis of the Maxwell-Weedon principles on what constitutes a "confessional Lutheran" Eucharistic Prayer. Before this however allow me to comment on the Armenian Canon itself in regard to the preceding two Lutheran concerns. Firstly, the Armenian Orthodox Church's Eucharistic Prayer is remarkable as it is unique in all Christendom in that it is most profoundly Christological in its outpouring of praise and thanksgiving. In no way does it look to our worthiness but contrarily "remembers" and proclaims in a solemn declaration to the Father all the magnificent work of Creation and Redemption to ensure for us the Coming Kingdom which is inaugurated in the Eucharist which is the Bridal Feast. All this is said and framed in a context whereby we confess also, in the anamnesis, that God has;

overlooked our unworthiness, and (has) made us ministers of this awesome and ineffable mystery. This not by reason of our good works, because we are altogether lacking of them. Rather, counting on your overflowing forbearance

This inclusion shows the dual confession of who "we believe" "Christ God" to be and what "I believe" myself to be before Him, and the ensuing relation that we desire to have with Him because He is :

both debtor and debt, victim of the sacrifice and anointed one, lamb and bread from heaven, high priest and sacrifice; for he offers and is himself always offered amongst us without ever being consumed.⁸

While this demonstrates the sacramental reality of what is received in the Eucharist, it also points to the question of the epiclesis and why it may be rightly understood as not only sanctificatory but also consecratory. The church, is the Body of Christ! As the Body, it has Christ Himself as her head⁹. The "nuptial" symbolism is not merely allegorical nor is it accidental. It is a profound sacramental reality. As the Liturgy is the intersection of where Heaven and earth are enraptured, the Eucharist is the festal consummation of the eschaton where Christ takes up His Bride to Himself, filling her with himself. As such, the church, through the celebrant of the mystery, can boldly call upon God to "send down upon us and upon these gifts (your) co-eternal and con substantial Holy Spirit," to sanctify not only those gathered but to consecrate them as well as the oblation of bread and wine. By His Word, Christ, washed and sanctified His Bride, not with mere water but by the Holy Spirit who descended upon the waters. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is invoked again because, the Orthodox believe, it is the Holy Spirit that brings the spoken Words of the Gospel to our anamnesis or remembrance. If these Words of our Lord then consecrate, as I have suggested because of the relationship between Christ's Word and the work of the Holy Spirit, then it is through the recollection, the presence and the sanctification of the descent of the Holy Spirit, who established us as the Body of Christ, by which the change¹⁰ in us and the elements takes place--the Word and the Holy Spirit are intimately associated!¹¹

Following the Intercessions, which is the close of the Eucharistic Prayer of St. Athanasius,

The Maxwell-Weedon principles and the Orthodox responses are as follows:

Confessional Lutheran Eucharistic Prayers must not;

1/ Have the notion of sacrifice, but

may give thanks to God for what He gives in the sacrament.

2/ Focus on "our" actions but on God's

3/Have an anamnesis with cultic "analogy", but

may have one that points to our salvation in Christ.

4/ Have an epiclesis suggesting a transformation of the elements.

5 Have a verbosity obscuring the chief thing of the Sacrament but

may include and locate the Verba in a central position both textually and theologically.

The objection by some Lutherans, against the use of a Eucharistic Prayer, is seen in the statement, "The Eucharist is not a Sacrifice!" This statement is made by the Lutherans in the historic context of the denial of the medieval Roman understanding of the "Sacrifice of the Mass."¹² What they mean by that statement is that the Eucharist is not the work of man, but the work of God. While there may be the continued hesitation then to say that the Eucharist is not sacrificial, there is the historic fact that the Fathers of the church "call the Mass a sacrifice." What the fathers did not mean by that however was that the "Mass confers grace ex opere operato¹³ or that it merits the remission of sins..."¹⁴ To understand the Mass as sacrifice, one needs to first understand it "sacramentally," viz. that the Eucharist is none other than the sacrament of sacraments. The Armenian name for the Divine Liturgy is Sovrp Badarac (surb patarag¹⁵) which literally means Holy Sacrifice¹⁶. How it is a sacrifice is understood very differently than the sacrifice of the Old Testament. Another feature of the word sacrifice, must be seen in how the church is properly understood. The church is clearly the Body of Christ, which itself will have bearing on what we can say in defence of the epiclesis.

While, in the ecclesial gathering, it is man (albeit as the Body of Christ) who offers a "sacrifice", he is motivated and empowered by faith to offer up a new type of "sacrifice", one of thanksgiving and praise for the now and the not yet. An Armenian church father, St. Khosrov of Andsew, speaking about the eschatalogical character of the Divine Liturgy, mysteriousely made present, calls the Eucharist "a Sacrifice of thanksgiving for gifts received, of expiation of sins, a redemption for those present and an intercession for the living and the dead in the time to come,"¹⁷ in responce to God¹⁸ for having been dead, and being made alive in Christ¹⁹. This reality however sacrificial, cannot be identified or confused in any way with the "old testamental" sacrifice offered to God for the forgiveness of sins and the accrual of merit to be stored up in the so-called treasury of the church. This is further observed in the greatly Christological anamnesis which fulfills the requirments of Maxwell.

Again, to be clear, the Eucharist is God's work and a re-presentation of Christ's saving mystery that is manifest to us. This can be understood most gloriously in the words following the Verba as a summation to the anamnesis, "Thine of Thine own, unto Thee we offer on behalf of all and for all." This most profound and perfect statement is rooted in the text from 1 Chronicles 29:14, which says;

But who am I and who are my people, that we should be able to give as generousely as this? Everything comes from You, and we have only given You that which comes from Your hand.

On the final caveat, in regards to the prominence of the Verba, one must talk of context since positioning is the criteria. For the Orthodox, the Eucharistic Prayer can really only be understood as a context and not the content for how the Body and Blood of Christ are present for the distribution of the faithful. It remains a vital and I should add, the fundamental aspect of the Divine Liturgy because it is the "vessel" in which is kept the spoken Verba, the promise of Christ's very presence which has been given in the Eucharist itself. This does not mean that the Orthodox dismiss as secondary or less important, the rest of the entirety of the prayer, that Lutherans should pare away the prayer argueing as some have, that the prayer confuses the Eucharist as something man does rather than what God is doing. Both can however agree that the Verba²⁰, as His last will and testament, are the very Words of Christ ensuring that He is where He promises to be. This then is the evangelical expression and "high point" of the Eucharitic Prayer and thus the entire Liturgy.

In the Divine Liturgy of the Armenian Church the rubrics are almost as important as the text itself since it is the form of the eucharistic celebration which "catechizes" and demonstrates sensually, by sight and sound, the sense and the content of the faith which is being confessed and proclaimed. While many Lutheran hymnals have avoided placing the Verba within the prayer, seeing it as a confusion of Law and the Gospel, the practice of the Armenian Church while it maintains the Verba within the Institution account, at the end of it, prescribes the priest to chant audibly the Verba while raising the paten and then the cup singing with great solemnity "Take eat....Take drink..." This action, liturgically gives the Verba eminence over and above the prayer as the very solemn words of Christ by which He established the Sacrament of His Body and Blood.

The early church found the centre of its piety and gave expression to her life in the devotion to the teaching of the apostles and the breaking of bread. This eucharistic fellowship was therefore contextualized in the apostolic kerygma through which a knowledge of God in Jesus Christ and consequently true prayer was made possible. This proclamation of the Good News, on which the apostolic teaching was founded, was the occasion for true prayer. Why this is important, is to understand how the content of the Christian ecclesia, the eucharistic breaking of bread, may have set the context for this proclamation. There is no doubt that the confessions and the creeds of the church, the Te Deum, the Nicene, Apostolic and Athanasian Creeds etc. are chiefly proclamitory, because "what is believed in the heart is confessed with the lips."²⁰ Therefore, while they are proclamations, they are at the very self same time devotional declarations offered up to God about what we believe based on what He revealed in Jesus Christ. In the same way, the reverse is also true. That which is prayer can also be proclamitory. The anamnesis within the Eucharistic Prayer is one such proclamation and avoids completely any reference to cultic "analogy" rather focusing entirely on the divine economy of salvation in the life, death and resurrection of Christ, thus fulfilling principal 3 of Maxwell-Weedon both positively and prohibitively.

Finally, we can look at the proposed structures that are in consideration by the Lutherans for the new hymnal. Let us look at it in comparison to the structure of the historical and universal model as well as to the Eucharistic Prayer of St. Athanasius.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE

EUCHARISTIC PRAYER

OF ST. ATHANASIUS

A COMPARISON

POSSIBLE COMPONENT PARTS OF THE EUCHARISTIC PRAYER ACCORDING TO NEW WESTMINISTER DICTIONARY Introductory dialogue Preface Sanctus Post-Sanctus Prelim. Epiclesis Institution Account Anamnesis Epiclesis Intercessions Doxology

PROPOSED EUCHARISTIC PRAYER OF MAWELL-WEEDON       Introductory dialogue Common Preface Anamnesis Verba Epiclesis Sanctus

ARMENIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH'S EUCHARISTIC PRAYER OF ST. ATHANASIUS     Invitatory (Introductory dialogue) Preface Sanctus Post Sanctus Institution Account (Inaudible) Verba (Audible) Anamnesis Epiclesis Intercessions Doxology

As one can see, not surprisingly, the structure of the Armenian Church's eucharistic prayer follows the ancient pattern almost exactly according to the general description from the New Westminister Dictionary. However, the proposed Lutheran eucharistic prayers not only generally lack some of the component parts, but have changed the traditional place of the like. It is here that one can draw interesting conclusions as to why the difference. Clearly, at least according to the Lutheran liturgical tradition, it is easy to notice that the Verba "stands alone." A criticism that I would suggest based on my above observations is that there is no real need to flip flop that which was received in the ancient tradition. The Verba is no more prominent in the proposed model as it is in the existing paradigm. What can be said however, is that the aching desire to "perfect" and evangelize that which exists has even seen the development and the occasion for anomaly in the "ordo" whose occurrences are to numerous to mention. My final suggestion would be that we should look for ways to secure unity in that which is possible so that we might have a ground on which to discuss that which seems irreconcilable. If we "form" a new liturgy incongruent with that which has been received in all places, and in all times then we may risk the possibility to attain by the grace of God consensus on that in which we have convergence. If in fact the time has come, by God's will and command, to introduce a Eucharistic Prayer for the good edification of God's people in the LCMS, in her desire for renewal and refreshment of God's praise in the fellowship of Holy Communion, then may His Church's prayer be to receive from His hand according to His will--His gift to the Church the "heart and the soul" of the Eucharist.

1 John 6:48.

2I Cor. 11:24.

3 The Divine Liturgy as used in the Armenian Church is called the Anaphora of St. Basil not only for its early dependence on Cappadocea, but because St. Basil himself visited the bishop in Armenia from May to June of 373AD. Radical variations in the early liturgy found in Armenia, especially in the re-ordering of the Intercessions means that a prominent church figure would have been the influence, maybe Basil himself during his visits. While there are profound similarities with other liturgies of the same name, it is a unique Anaphora which has been developed in an independent evolution since the 6^th century.

4The Armenians call their Eucharistic Prayer the Eucharistic Prayer of St. Athanasius, not because he is the author of it, but for 2 reasons, the first being that Athanasius is considered a hero of the faith as a great father and confessor of the Church and secondly, for its uniquely Christological character. St. Athanasius was the champion and theologian behind the acts and confessions of the first Ecumenical council of Nicea in 325ad.

5"According to Justin Martyr, the Eucharistic prayer effects the transformation of the bread and wine into the Flesh and Blood of Jesus. It is interesting to note that he does not say the Verba, but includes that which contextualizes it, presumably including the "epiclesis" as a consecratory and thus essential aspect. (Justin 1 Apol., 66)

6Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Art. XXIV,para.1.

7It is the Reformed tradition, whose understanding of the Lord's Supper is Zwinglian, with whom the Roman Catholics, the Orthodox and the Lutherans all disagree.

8Post-sanctus preceding the Institution account.

9See Ephesians 5, which is read at the Rite of Crowning according to the Euchalogion of the Armenian Orthodox Church.

10The word in Armenian to describe the "change" of the elements into Body and Blood is poxarkel or transposition, which is parallel to the Greek word metabollo to show "that material elements as such remain the same in every respect except that they receive a new function and a new power. They are thereby raised to a new level or role in the order of things, by virtue of their having been consecrated to be a vehicle of the (Holy) Spirit." See: Nersoyan TIRAN, Divine Liturgy of the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Church, 6^th ed, St. Sarkis Armenian Church:London, 1985, 273.

11See; John 17:17, "Sanctify them by you truth, your word is truth" and "Jn. 16:13, "When the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears He will speak."

12The Council of Trent states that the Eucharist is more than a sacrifice of prayer and thanksgiving, and that anyone who denies that it is propitiatory is anathema.

13Through the performance of the work.

14Apology, para.66.

15Hubschmann-Meillet-Benveniste System.

16The Eucharistic Prayer is called Anaphora in the 4^th century Apostolic Constitutions. While Eucharist means thanksgiving, anaphora means sacrifice. Since these words are used synonimousely in reference to the Lord’s Supper, the best translation and theological understanding for what is implied is a "sacrifice of thanksgiving."

17Khosrov of Andsew, Commentary on the Divine Liturgy, Peter Cowe trans., St. Vartan Press: New york, 1995.

18This difficult sentence is intentional in that I intend to say that it is God’s death and resurrection through which we too, who were spiritually dead, rise to new life and are incorporated into the Body of Christ in the rebirth of Baptism.

19Apology, para.72.20By Verba, one should understand the very Word of Christ that He spoke which promised His presence in the life-giving mystery of Holy Communion found in Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19 and I Corinthians 11:24.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andsewaji Khosrov, Commentary on the Divine Liturgy, Peter Cowe trans., St. Vartan Press: New york, 1995.

Dix Dom Gregory, The Shape of the Liturgy, Harper and Row Publishers: San Francisco, 1982.

Grime Paul, D. Stuckwisch, J. Vieker, eds, Through the Church the Song Goes On, Commission on Worship-LCMS: St. Louis, 1999.

Jasper R. C. D., G. J. Cuming, Prayers of the Eucharist, The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, 1992.

Jones Cheslyn, Geoffrey Wainwright & E. Yarnold, ed., The Study of Liturgy, 6th ed, SPCK: London, 1983.

Lane Ronald E., The Origins of the Eucharistic Prayer, The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, 1995.

Nersoyan Tiran, Divine Liturgy of the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Church 5th ed., St. Sarkis Church: London, 1984.

Quill C. J. Timothy, The Impact of the Liturgical Movement on American Lutheranism, The Scarecrow Press: London, 1997.

Schmemann Alexander, Introduction to Liturgical Theology, St. Vladimir's Seminary Press: Crestwood, 1986.

Tappert Theodore, ed., The Book of Concord, Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959.