www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy The Antiphons of the Liturgy

A new thread for a new topic.

"Incidentally, I've been thinking of writing up a defense of the antiphons (the enarxis, is it called?) based on Schmemann's thinking--one must look at their function in the whole of the liturgy, not just on their historical meaning. They represent the "gathering" which is constitutive of the Body of Christ, the Church (the ecclesing of the ecclesia, if that makes any sense).

It seems to me that one way to answer revisionists would be to point out the reason for the various parts of the liturgy. Otherwise, when a historicist says "that's old, and the original purpose is gone; therefore, it's unnecessary," we are at a loss. The antiphons may have their origin in the processions in Constantinople, but that's not why they remain.

We need to ask why we have three antiphons and what they express. What is the essence of the matter? We had three full antiphons before in our history, why don't we have them now?

Indeed. The fact that things have been retained for a thousand years past their usefulness shows that they have another meaning than their use."

Well the first thing I would point out is that the 1964 Liturgicon that most here want promulgated states that what is in brakets may be used or omitted at the discretion of the ordinary. What is in brackets? The Antiphons. So from the get go the authority to reduce antiphons to one verse or omit the third is inherent in the Liturgicon.

Another question would be is it consistent with tradition? I would say yes, given that the Greeks usually use no verses at all and the Russians will often reduce the typical psalms to 4 verses of each psalm. One verse antiphons have become our particular usage.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Dear Fr. Deacon Lance,

Thanks for setting up this thread.

I would respond that current practice is perhaps not the place to look. Rather, let's look at the liturgy as a whole and see the place that the antiphons have in that whole. Why have they been retained long after the processions ceased in which they have their origin?

To look at what the Greeks or Russians do is to assume as our conclusion exactly what I want to argue against, namely that abbreviating the psalms and antiphons is acceptable practice.

I want to look at it differently. I was hoping to write something more extensive, but am swamped with course prep. I'll just give a sample:

Let me begin my arguments: first, it seems to me obvious that if we no longer make our way to church singing psalms and troparia, but simply come to directly to the building, that we need to prepare ourselves in some other way. In the old days in Constantinople, the faithful would gather progressively as they journeyed, and would arrive at the church ready for the liturgy. We drive in separate cars, listening to secular radio, and arrive at the church unready for the liturgy. With the passing of the fasting requirement and the general disuse that Vespers has fallen into, it is likely that we arrive completely unready. It seams to me that our current situation requires and makes very wise some part of the liturgy where we "gather", where we come into the church.

Schmemann makes the point that the word for church, ecclesia, comes from the word meaning to gather together. The Church, the mystical body of Christ, consists of those called together. The action that makes us into a Church is when we gather. This is what the processions did in ancient times, as people joined the parade to the church building. We don't have those processions anymore, and haven't had them for a millenium, but the antiphons remained. Why? It seems obvious to me that they are there because of the corporate nature of worship, of the need for us to _come together_. We just do it in the church building now instead of on the way.

Given our disparate and fragmented state, it seems to me that we need the antiphons more than ever. Rather than abbreviating them, we should be expanding them. Really, if one is only going to do one verse, why do it at all?

Dear Father Deacon,
Do look again. The business about what's in brackets being discretionary refers to those things which are in brackets in the original Church-Slavonic, not in the English translation - specifically to the Filioque, the sponge and the hot water.

The actual texts of the three antiphons are not given in the Church-Slavonic Liturgicon at all - one finds them in the Church-Slavonic Epistle Book.

Fr. Serge

Fr Dcn Lance,

I don't recall anyone requesting a promulgation of the 1964 Liturgicon "as is". Most admit that a few things need to be corrected.

Let a 'new' Liturgicon contain the entire Typical Psalms/Beatitudes as well as the 'Resurrectional' Antiphons and let things progress organically. If one publishes liturgical books with materials cut out, how will people know what has been skipped? Of course, that's what some want...

In many Ukrainian Greco-Catholic parishes in the Diaspora the Second Antiphon is not taken, and usually not even printed. A few years ago I saw a text of the Divine Liturgy printed by the Basilians (in Brazil?) where the Third Antiphon was renamed the Second. Why? My guess is: if you give a First and Third but no Second, some 'trouble makers' may start asking what happened to the Second Antiphon. Thankfully I've seen this only once.

I'm all for singing the Beatitudes. Why not include them?

Could someone please post the complete antiphons?

Deacon Lance,

By following your logic and words, why pray at the Divine Liturgy at all? Isn't it at least 1500 past its usefulness if you use your logic and words? Any old form of worship can be used, which is exactly what Protestant use and teach. Is that how they are forming deacons and priests now?

The Insider

Dear Insider,

Please note that Father Deacon is quoting someone ELSE (in this case, Pseudo-Athanasius), and took the occasion to start a new thread, as had been requested.

The "use" in this case is that of psalm singing as the faithful went in procession from one church to another in Constantinople, singing the entire psalms (with refrains) which have been abbreviated to just a few verses each. Very few parishes have the processions which these hymns accompanied, so the question of what purpose they serve NOW is certainly a legitimate one - and I for one would like to see P-A and others discuss it. Why not sing the ENTIRE psalms, instead of abbreviated ones, for example? Would that serve the purposes better than one verse or three? Why or why not?

These days, it seems that sometimes people are waiting for an opportunity to comment negatively on our clergy - but in this case you are aiming at the wrong target in your above post.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

Dear Jeff,

Maybe if you looked at my profile, you might see that I am one of your clergy. I did not think my comment was directed to you unless you have suddenly been elevated to the diaconate with a name change.

I generally expect that when a comment is directed to someone in particular, that person responds for themselves. Or is that how your clique sticks up for itself?

The Insider

Dear Insider,

My apologies; I don't generally peruse profiles, as it feels _to me_ like snooping; I would prefer to read what people post and how they sign themselves. (And it is difficult to ask an anonymous individual for a blessing!)

In this case, I felt it was a courtesy to point out that your statement attributing to Father Deacon Lance a view on "usefulness", based on P-A's words, was a bit off-target, since Father Deacon expressed no opinion on the "usefulness" of the antiphons, but merely opened a thread, as someone else had suggested. My mention of negative comments on the clergy came from a sensitivity to such comments in the broader world, and I'd rather avoid such automatic suspicion here; I was not intending to discern your motives, but point out your apparent mistake. I apologize if I offended.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

First Antiphon for Sunday:

Shout joyfully to the Lord, all the earth, sing praise to His name; give to Him glorious praise. (refrain) Through the prayers of the Mother of God, O Savior, save us.

[Say to God: How awesome are Your deeds! So great is Your power that Your enemies cringe before You. (refrain) Through the prayers...

Let all the earth worship You, and sing praises to You; let it sing praises to Your name, O Most high. (refrain) Through the prayers...]

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and forever. Amen.(refrain) Through the prayers...


Second Antiphon for Sunday:

Be gracious to us, O God, and bless us; let Your face shine upon us, and have mercy on us. (refrain) O Son of God, risen from the dead, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.

[That Your way may be known upon earth, among all nations Your salvation. (refrain) O Son of God, risen from the dead, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.

Let the peoples praise You, O God, let all the peoples praise You. (refrain) O Son of God, risen from the dead, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.]


Third Antiphon for Sunday:

Come, let us sing joyfully to the Lord; let us shout with joy to God our Savior. (refrain) O Son of God, risen from the dead, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.

[Let us come into His presence with thanksgiving, and let us joyfully sing psalms to Him. (refrain) O Son of God, risen from the dead, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.

For God is a great Lord, and a great king over all the earth. (refrain) O Son of God, risen from the dead, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.]


First Antiphon for weekdays:

It is good to give thanks to the Lord; and to sing praises to Your name, O most High. (refrain) Through the prayers of the Mother of God, O Savior, save us.

[To proclaim Your mercy in the morning, and your faithfulness throughout the night. (refrain) Through the prayers...

For the Lord our God is upright, and there is no wrong in Him. (refrain) Through the prayers...]

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and forever. Amen. (refrain) Through the prayers...


Second Antiphon for weekdays:

The Lord reigns, He is clothed in majesty; robed is the Lord and girt about with strength. (refrain) Through the prayers of Your saints, O Savior, save us.

[For He has made the world firm, which shall not be moved. (refrain) Through the prayers of Your saints...

Your decrees are worthy of trust indeed; holiness befits Your house, O Lord, for length of days. (refrain) Through the prayers of Your saints...]


Third Antiphon for weekdays:

Come, let us sing joyfully to the Lord; let us shout with joy to God our Savior. (refrain) O Son of God, wondrous in Your saints, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.

[Let us come into His presence with thanksgiving, and let us joyfully sing psalms to Him. (refrain) O Son of God, wondrous in Your saints, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.

For God is a great Lord, and a great king over all the earth. (refrain) O Son of God, wondrous in Your saints, save us who sing to You. Alleluia.]


Square brackets mark the verses that are not included in the proposed Divine Liturgies book, although the Cantor Institute has offered to provide the omitted verses and litany petitions in booklet form for use by the priests and cantors in those parishes that take them. Also note that some feasts have proper antiphons. When a feast has its own third antiphon, the traditional refrain is the troparion of the feast.


As was previously noted, these antiphons are not in the typical (Church Slavonic) edition of the Liturgikon for the Recensio Ruthena; instead, they are in the Apostol (roughly, the Epistle book, which also provides the other changeable hymns of the Divine Liturgy - troparia, kontakia, prokeimena, alleluia verses, Communion hymns, and so on).

The Apostol also provides the first and second Typical Psalms (Psalms 102 and 145) and the Beatitudes, which can be used in place of the three antiphons; all three seem to have been omitted from the official English Liturgikon of 1965. The Apostol provides the entire text of Psalms 102 and 145, but the abbreviation of each to three verses seems to go back to at least end of the 19th century.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

Do I understand correctly that the antiphons are each reduced from three lines to one line and any parish wishing to take the three lines must use a supplementary text?

Yes - though many parishes (all but one of the parishes I have served in) have for many years omitted the second and third verses, which were omitted entirely in the 1965 Liturgy book for the people, and printed in reduced-size type in the 1978 Levkulic book and the Book of Byzantine Prayer. The reduction to the first verse of each antiphon has been standard throughout the Diocese of Passaic for eight or ten years.

If the six Sunday verses (which do not change from week to week) are used consistenty, I doubt it would take long for all those who attend regularly to commit them to memory, even without an sort of supplementary text. The real problem is the hierarch's decision to leave them out of the Liturgikon, which has usually been a more "complete text" than that used by the faithful. (In this case, of course, the antiphons aren't IN the priest's Liturgikon in Slavonic, since they are sung by the cantor, choir and people rather than by the clergy. But they HAVE been added to the English Liturgikon since one was promulgated.)

Essentially, it standardizes the common practice in this particular part of the Liturgy, rather than either leaving in optional verses, or requiring parishes to sing more than they have in the past.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

In 1969 the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Synod under the presidency of Patriarch Joseph passed a resolution permitting (not requiring) the omission of the Second Antiphon (while retaining the Monogenes, the "Only-Begotten Son").

The immediate result was a carnival of destruction: service-books were printed without these texts, paramonsatic communities were required to excise the Second Antiphon from their existing books - anyone would have thought that the use of the Second Antiphon had been forbidden.

In Ukraine, meanwhile, liturgical life continued as normally as it could in an underground situation; in many parishes and monastic communities in Ukraine the use of the Second Antiphon remains standard practice. In the diaspora, the prayer-books and service-books published by Patriarch Joseph continued to provide all three antiphons and so forth.

Father Bohdan Lipsky wrote at the time that the direct result of this ill-considered decision would be the establishment of two different forms of the Ukrainian Liturgy: that used in Ukraine and that used in the emigration. Time has proved him correct.

Fr. Serge