A (Not Quite) Lost Liturgy: The Liturgy of St. Gregory the Theologian

Fr. Nicholas Newman

Mysterious Origins

On Feast-days of Christ, the Coptic Church celebrates the Divine Liturgy with an Anaphora attributed to St. Gregory the Theologian. This is one of three main Anaphoras in use in the Coptic Church, the other two being attributed to St. Mark the Evangelist and St. Basil the Great. Manuscripts of the Liturgy of St. Gregory the Theologian exist in Sahidic Coptic, the earliest dating from around the sixth century, later manuscripts, in Bohairic Coptic, exist as well. There exists, however, alongside the Coptic recension of the text, a Greek version of the text. The Greek text is particularly interesting, because the two main manuscripts that exist for the Greek text: Paris Manuscript Greque 325 and the Kacmarcik Codex, were in use in very different contexts. The Kacmarcik Codex, held in the library of St. John’s College in Minnesota, is in Greek, but spelled out phonetically. This text, which contains only the Anaphora, was presumably in use, then, by Coptic priests who may not have been familiar with Geek, but would still have celebrated in Greek on occasion. The Paris Manuscript, at the Bibliotheque Nationale, however, contains the entirety of the Liturgy, and seems to have been in use in the “Melkite” that is, Orthodox, community in Egypt.

We are faced, then, with a bit of a conundrum of a Divine Liturgy. One that is in use in both the Coptic and Greek communities in Egypt. Where did this text arise? Did it arise in the Coptic community, and was then translated into Greek and, at one point, adopted by the Greeks living in Egypt? Is this a Greek-Alexandrian Liturgy, eventually translated and adopted by the Copts? Is this Liturgy imported from elsewhere, and then makes its way into both the Greek and Coptic communities?

In the literature discussing this text, the most common theory is that the Liturgy was brought to Egypt from Syria. Hugh Evely White, in his edition of some fragments of this Liturgy found in the Wadi n’ Natrun. He suggests that the Liturgy was brought to the Wadi n’ Natrun, an important monastic centre in Egypt, by Syrian monks (the monastery of St. Mary Deipara, also known as St. Mary El-Sourian, in Wadi n’ Natrun was inhabited by Syrian monks, for example). There are many things that speak in favor of this theory. Albert Gerhards and Ernst Hammerschmidt show that the Liturgy belongs to the family of Syrian Anaphoras, not to the Alexandrian. In particular the prayer of following the Thrice Holy Hymn, leading up to the words of Christ at the Last Supper, which focuses on the historical from Creation to the Last Supper, shows the origin of the text to be in the Syrian family of Liturgies.

The Syrian family of Liturgies is extensive, and even though the Liturgy of St. Gregory the Theologian shows evidence of belonging to this family, that does not mean that it was in use in the Syriac speaking community of the Wadi n’ Natrun. There exists, in addition to the Greek Liturgy of St. Gregory, a Syrian Liturgy of St. Gregory, and the two are entirely distinct texts. It seems unlikely, given the existence of a completely separate Syrian Liturgy of St. Gregory, that the Syrian monks of the Wadi n’ Natrun would have introduced the Greek text into Egypt.

To complicate the matter of discerning the origin of this liturgy is the paucity of manuscripts of the Greek text, the two manuscripts we mentioned above from the fourteenth century and two later manuscripts (Manuscript 172 from the late sixteenth century and Manuscript 175 from the nineteenth century) along with the Wadi n’ Natrun fragments are the only currently accessible manuscripts of the text. The manuscript tradition, then, is late and only to be found in Egypt. The structure of the Liturgy, particularly the form of the prayers of the Anaphora, however, tells us that its origin is not in the Alexandrian family of Liturgies, and must, rather, belong to the Syrian family of Liturgies. One possible solution to this dilemma may be found in some of the prayers of the Liturgy of St. Basil (and St. John Chrysostom). Throughout the Liturgy of St. Basil, the prayers address God the Father. This is the case in all but three of the prayers. The Prayer of the Gospel: “Sine in our hearts, O Master Who loves mankind...For You, Christ our God, are the illumination of our souls and bodies, and to You we offer up glory...” (Holy Cross Orthodox Press translation); the Prayer of the Cherubic Hymn: “No one bound by carnal desires and pleasures is worthy to approach, draw near, or minister to You, the King of Glory...For You are the One Who both offers and is offered, the One Who is received and is distributed, O Christ our God, and to You we offer up glory...” (Ibid); and finally in the Prayer that immediately preceeds the exclamation “Let us be attentive ... The Holy Gifts for the holy people of God” (Ibid): “Hearken O Lord Jesus Christ from Your holy dwelling place...” (Ibid).

“Christusanrede”

That there are prayers in the Liturgy of St. Basil that are directed to Christ, rather than the Father, is not itself unusual, as there is a tradition of such prayers in liturgical worship (Albert Gerhards Die Griechische Gregoriosanaphora: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Eucharistischen Hochgebets pg. 238-242). He discusses “Christusanrede” and how it was in use in such liturgical contexts as the Didache, the East Syrian Anaphora of Addai and Mari, and the Greek Baptismal prayers (Ibid). While this liturgical style does exist and could perhaps explain the origin of these anomalous prayers, an interesting alternate possibility presents itself when we consider that two of these prayers are shared with the Liturgy of St. Gregory. One of the unique things about the Liturgy of St. Gregory is that it is, in its entirety, written with Christ as the addressee, rather than God the Father, so it seems likely that these prayers are borrowed into the Liturgy of St. Basil from the Liturgy of St. Gregory. That this occurred in Egypt seems unlikely, since this would mean that the change would have to occur in the Greek population of Egypt and then spread from there to Constantinople, which goes against the normal direction of liturgical influence. A more likely possibility would be that these prayers were adopted into the Liturgy of St. Basil in Constantinople. The Liturgy of St. Gregory, then, would fall into that subcategory of the Syrian family of liturgies in use in Constantinople, before being brought to Egypt, and falling out of use in its original context. Certainly, there are issues with this interpretation, the most obvious being that there is no evidence that the Liturgy of St. Gregory was in use in Constantinople, no extant manuscripts, no mentions, etc... The same is true, of course, for this Liturgy in Syria, and, at least for the Greek version of the text, before the fourteenth century in Egypt. Given this interliturgical exchange, however, Constantinople seems the most likely place for its origin.

While rare in our own liturgical tradition, prayers addressed to Christ in the Divine Liturgy are by no means unheard of. Gerhards discusses this “Christusanrede” as a possible reason why the Liturgy of St. Gregory is written in this style. While there are certainly examples of this style of prayer, it is by no means a universal or even particularly common style. Jungmann expresses his surprise that this is not a more popular style within Christian liturgical worship. He suggests that liturgical conservatism preserved Jewish Second Temple forms of address within the Christian community, making prayers addressed to the Father the norm. Although we see isolated examples of “Christusanrede” in other liturgical texts, the extent of it within the Liturgy of St. Gregory places it well outside of the norm, it is, in fact, unique, the only Liturgy directed completely to Christ. Rather than explaining this unique aspect of the Liturgy through the lens of the tradition of “Christusanrede,” it seems more likely that the author of the Liturgy is using the address of Christ in a programmatic way, to make a theological point.

There is one particular theological context in which using a direct address of Christ makes the most sense, the Arian controversy. In the early fourth century, a presbyter in Alexandria named Arius broke with the Christology of the Church, believing that Christ is not God, but a first created being. While giving a full history and background of the Arian controversy is beyond the scope of this article, the absolute divine simplicity essential to Neoplatonist philosophy, as well as misunderstanding what it means that the Son is begotten of the Father seems to have been the driving issues behind Arius’ Christology. The Arian controversy raged throughout the eastern part of the empire, forcing the intervention of the emperor Constantine. In 325, the emperor called a council of all the hierarchs of the empire, who convened in the city of Nicea, and condemned Arianism and wrote the first part of the Nicene Creed. Condemned does not mean defeated, however, and Arianism continued, in various different forms (usually termed semi-Arianims) and even applying Arian theology to other members of the Trinity, this we see in Pneumatomachianism. It was not until the second Ecumenical Council held at Constantinople in 381, that these semi-Arian groups were finally defeated.

The heart of every Divine Liturgy is the participation in the Eucharist. The sharing in the Eucharist defines the Christian community, so that those who do not participate, whether because they are not permitted to approach the chalice or because they stay away themselves, are outside of the community. By directing its prayers to Christ, the author of the Liturgy of St. Gregory not only offers a theological defense of Nicene Christology but effectively cuts off anyone who disagrees with this Christology from participation in the Eucharist. The Arians did not develop their own liturgical tradition of their own but used the same Divine Liturgy as the Orthodox. While participation in a liturgy in which the prayers are directed to God the Father may be a possibility for Arians. While Christ is worshipped in the liturgy, this can be glossed over, so to speak. A liturgical text directed only to Christ does not allow for such ambiguity and precludes the participation of Arians. This serves, then, not as much as a polemical text, but as one that defines the limit of the Christian community and places the Arians squarely outside of that community. We see similar purposeful exclusion in the Birkat haMinim, the twelfth of the eighteen daily benedictions in the daily prayers of Judaism. This prayer invokes a curse on, for example, the Nazarim, the Nazarenes, which is often understood as referencing the Christians. This prayer effectively cuts the Christians, originally one of several Jewish sects, off from being part of the Jewish community.

In several places in the Liturgy of St. Gregory the Theologian, we see an interesting theological assertion. The author of the Liturgy uses the term ὁμοούσιος to describe the relationship of the Holy Spirit with the other persons of the Holy Trinity. This is not entirely an unusual formula in liturgical texts, but we see it mostly in liturgical texts in Syrian and Coptic language liturgies and there in specific contexts, normally the ekphonesis of prayers (this is an oversimplification, a more detailed discussion is beyond the scope of this article). In Greek language liturgies we see this same usage, but this seems to have been added secondarily. The Liturgy of St. Gregory the Theologian seems to be the only Greek language text in which this theological statement occurs organically, and in a context outside the ekphonesis, in the Prayer of the Greeting and in the Prayer of Inclination.

Conclusion

The theological context of the liturgy seems to be the Arian controversy of the fourth century, particularly within the second half of the controversy, with the semi-Arian groups like the Pneumatomachians, who arose after the First Ecumenical Council. This gives us an approximate dating for the text. The text seems to belong to the fourth century, particularly the later part of the fourth century leading up to the Second Ecumenical Council in 381. The time period, and the theological context of the Liturgy makes it a very real possibility, particularly since the interaction of the Liturgy of St. Gregory and the Liturgy of St. Basil suggests Cappadocia/Constantinople as the geographic context for the origin of this Liturgy, that this text could be associated with St. Gregory the Theologian himself. St. Gregory the Theologian was appointed as Archbishop of Constantinople by the Emperor Theodosius in particular to combat the semi-Arian groups who dominated the religious landscape of the capital. In Constantinople, St. Gregory received a villa from his cousin Theodosia, which he turned into a chapel, the Anastasia church. It is from this church that St. Gregory launched his retaking of the capital, offering from there, for example, the five theological orations. While there is no direct evidence, it seems possible that it was at this chapel that St. Gregory composed a Divine Liturgy directed to Christ, shoring up the identity of the Nicene Christians within the city.