When we speak of organic development for our Hellenic Psaltic Art here in Greece we speak of a purely vocal system of chant using the eight-mode system and unique notational alphabet up to the New Method as a few of the most basic characteristic elements, so as not to deal with the slippery 'aesthetic' terminology, i.e. 'I like this', 'The "people" like this', 'This is pretty', 'This is not'.
It is quite clear that the music that the GOA hierarchy and 'official' federations are promoting is based an overriding appreciation of the western European musical heritage and a devaluation of its own eastern, Hellenic Psaltic Art. There is evident even a kind of embarrassment attitude which looks upon the Hellenic chant heritage as 'uncultured' or 'unsophisticated'. The fact that this attitude was operative in Greece with Sakellarides and his students does not make it organic. We have discussed the historical roots in other posts in the past on this list. Similar attitudes existed on Orthodox iconography, also, but were overcome. America, GOA America that is, has simply remained in a kind of a time warp for some reason. The 'destruction' of its musical heritage will one day be looked upon with awe. Here are a couple reasons I can think of.
The reasons for this are not so much musical as they are social, possibly. If I am not mistaken, this is what Basil refers to when he comments on the prevailing 'political organization', lack of monasticism, blandness, and institutionalization.
On the other hand, to hint that the use of our Hellenic psaltic heritage would digress into a 'disastrous sectarianism', in my opinion, is a bit far-fetched and completely un-American, if America is indeed the 'land of the free'.
The powers that be there in America have systematically decided to succumb to the reformed Protestant musical culture they are surrounded by (just as the Roman Catholic and Jews have in various ways). Mind you, not everyone wants this. It's just that enough people in high places do. They happen to not value the musical heritage as an integral part of the spiritual heritage. Most people have no clue and, hence, as it goes with the uninformed, no choice. The choice is made by others.
I remember when I first went to teach Byzantine Music at Holy Cross in 1990. A hierarch took me aside and played a cassette tape of Papapostolou (not the one who chanted in Washington, DC, but his brother), a composer of secular music in Greece. The tape was of a performance of the composer's 'Div. Liturgy'. It was not a piece he wrote for use in worship, but for extra-ecclesial performance, very much in the tradition of Theodorakes' liturgy, it was instrumental and vocal. The hierarch played a piece of the doxology and told me, 'this is the future of ecclesiastical music in America'.
After the strictly musical and social points, there is also the theological, or more precise, liturgical side of things. In the desire to 'Americanize' liturgical and ecclesiastical life music is one of the elements that take the blame and, hence, becomes a victim of the aggressive spirit of liturgical populism. 'People cannot relate to the music!' Or, as was stated earlier in this thread, 'people really don't like Byzantine music'. Rather than realizing that communal prayer is something truly foreign to most of our population, a scapegoat is needed to blame low attendance on. The 'new music' will bring 'em in! This is the liturgical problem, both separate and related at the same time.
Music, society and liturgics. The conversation is quite interesting.
Friday, June 27, 2003
Sunday, June 22, 2003
Abstract(?) Typikon?
I understood very well that your question was rhetorical. I also understand quite well the general attitude toward typikon in many parts of the GOA. My point is that it's not all so simple, it's just not as simple as 'the typikon follows the the practice of the church', because there are all too many clergy and laity who use that excuse to justify whatever it is they 'want' to do in divine service. My stance is that the typikon is also a witness to genuine Orthodox Christian spirituality, codifying and bearing witness to us the way the saints who came before us prayed and worshiped.
I also don't think this is very far out either. The present interest in foundational and liturgical typikon in universities around the world bears this out. Scholars, liturgists, historian and theologians are literally climbing over each other to get access and translations to historic typika exactly because they are such clear witnesses to spiritual life through the centuries.
The typika we Orthodox use in our churches today are in direct line with these 'ancient' diataxes, typika, synaxaria, etc. To ignore them, not know their basic history and not know the correct order of worship in our churches as described in these important texts leaves our worship open to every passing liturgical 'fad' and whim. It is a sad commentary that this often is quite characteristic of our American reality. That's all I mean.
thanks for the opportunity to get that out.
I also don't think this is very far out either. The present interest in foundational and liturgical typikon in universities around the world bears this out. Scholars, liturgists, historian and theologians are literally climbing over each other to get access and translations to historic typika exactly because they are such clear witnesses to spiritual life through the centuries.
The typika we Orthodox use in our churches today are in direct line with these 'ancient' diataxes, typika, synaxaria, etc. To ignore them, not know their basic history and not know the correct order of worship in our churches as described in these important texts leaves our worship open to every passing liturgical 'fad' and whim. It is a sad commentary that this often is quite characteristic of our American reality. That's all I mean.
thanks for the opportunity to get that out.
Saturday, June 21, 2003
Heothinon Gospel and Kanons
It's not that odes 1-8 of the orthros kanons are moved, I would prefer to say that the heothinon gospel is held back until the end of the 8th ode of the orthros kanon. That said, let's remember where the St Sabas Typikon places the heothinon gospel when it's called for in *any* orthros: after the anabathmoi and prokeimenon, which are *always* before the 50th Ps and the kanons. Right? Well, this is still the case in any church that follows the St Saba typikon (i.e. Mount Athos, I use them only because they're (mostly) Greek).
A short historical note. The place of the gospel reading in the orthros is not so standard down through history; bring to mind Gr Saturday Orthros. In the cathedral or asmatic rite of the Great Church it's place was at the end of the orthros, as well as it was in the early monastic daily offices. There are also a number of Byzantine mss with kanons that find the morning gospel placed after the 3rd, 6th and 8th odes. In fact, I just described a 15th c mss menaion that has the gospel for the feast of the Annunciation (25 March)check this outafter the 6th ode. The oder is as follows: the kanon of the annunciation, the same one we use today with the alphabetic acrostic, the kontakion and *all 24 oikoi of the Akathist*, after which the synaxarion is recited, the 50th psalm, gospel and then odes 7-9 of the kanon! It seems that this is the second placing of the Akathist, the first being on 26 Decemberthis explains why the acathist does not progress beyond the veneration of the magi.
Back to the subject. Second, how is it that the Biolakes Typikon places *only* Sunday heothina gospels after the 8th ode? The answer is that it's not really Biolakes. This seems to have become the practice in the patriarchal church of Constantinople by the end of the 18th century and, by extension, in all the parish churches that were under its spiritual care at that time. This we know because the first edition of Konstantinos Byzantios the Protopsaltes' Typikon (Constantinople 1838) places it in this very position. If you read the title page of the so-called Biolakes Typikon you'll see that it is actually the Typikon of Konstantinos that has been 'corrected' and embellished, filled out by a Patriarchal committee headed by Biolakes. In essence, it is a reworked, though not 'reformed', Konstantinos typikon. The point is, in the patriarchal church, even though the patriarch himself did not serve each Sunday, some patriarchal metropolitan did. The educated guess (there's really no bibliography here) is that since the metropolitan was not in attendance until a later time in the service, the order of the heothinon gospel was held back to its later position.
Conclusion. 'On what basis do the Antiochians fail to observe this separation?' The practical answer is that even if they are following a translation of the Biolakes edition of the Konstantinos typikon (I don't know this to be the fact, other than the earlier post by Stephan), it is quite possible the editors have (a) opted to move the heothinon gospel to its normal position in the Sunday orthros (as has the Church of Cyprus: cf. their Hemerologion) or (b) either at the time of translation or some subsequent edition the editorial committee for some reason felt it should retain the older practice. I can think of two reasons for the latter, (i) that was what they were doing anyway, or (ii) they're actually not following the Konstantinos-Biolakes typika, but the St Saba.
In any event, there is an historical precedence that is not in any way, shape or form arbitrary, but an authentic element of the same monastic, St Saba/Studite Typikon used by all Orthrodox Christians throughout the world.
Postscript. By the way, the reading of the heothinon gospel is done immediately after the anabathmoi and prokeimenon in all male and female monasteries throughout Greece, as the Konstantinos/Biolakes typikon was never meant to affect monastic practice. This can also be extended to monastery Metochia in large cities, like Athens and Thessalonike.
A short historical note. The place of the gospel reading in the orthros is not so standard down through history; bring to mind Gr Saturday Orthros. In the cathedral or asmatic rite of the Great Church it's place was at the end of the orthros, as well as it was in the early monastic daily offices. There are also a number of Byzantine mss with kanons that find the morning gospel placed after the 3rd, 6th and 8th odes. In fact, I just described a 15th c mss menaion that has the gospel for the feast of the Annunciation (25 March)check this outafter the 6th ode. The oder is as follows: the kanon of the annunciation, the same one we use today with the alphabetic acrostic, the kontakion and *all 24 oikoi of the Akathist*, after which the synaxarion is recited, the 50th psalm, gospel and then odes 7-9 of the kanon! It seems that this is the second placing of the Akathist, the first being on 26 Decemberthis explains why the acathist does not progress beyond the veneration of the magi.
Back to the subject. Second, how is it that the Biolakes Typikon places *only* Sunday heothina gospels after the 8th ode? The answer is that it's not really Biolakes. This seems to have become the practice in the patriarchal church of Constantinople by the end of the 18th century and, by extension, in all the parish churches that were under its spiritual care at that time. This we know because the first edition of Konstantinos Byzantios the Protopsaltes' Typikon (Constantinople 1838) places it in this very position. If you read the title page of the so-called Biolakes Typikon you'll see that it is actually the Typikon of Konstantinos that has been 'corrected' and embellished, filled out by a Patriarchal committee headed by Biolakes. In essence, it is a reworked, though not 'reformed', Konstantinos typikon. The point is, in the patriarchal church, even though the patriarch himself did not serve each Sunday, some patriarchal metropolitan did. The educated guess (there's really no bibliography here) is that since the metropolitan was not in attendance until a later time in the service, the order of the heothinon gospel was held back to its later position.
Conclusion. 'On what basis do the Antiochians fail to observe this separation?' The practical answer is that even if they are following a translation of the Biolakes edition of the Konstantinos typikon (I don't know this to be the fact, other than the earlier post by Stephan), it is quite possible the editors have (a) opted to move the heothinon gospel to its normal position in the Sunday orthros (as has the Church of Cyprus: cf. their Hemerologion) or (b) either at the time of translation or some subsequent edition the editorial committee for some reason felt it should retain the older practice. I can think of two reasons for the latter, (i) that was what they were doing anyway, or (ii) they're actually not following the Konstantinos-Biolakes typika, but the St Saba.
In any event, there is an historical precedence that is not in any way, shape or form arbitrary, but an authentic element of the same monastic, St Saba/Studite Typikon used by all Orthrodox Christians throughout the world.
Postscript. By the way, the reading of the heothinon gospel is done immediately after the anabathmoi and prokeimenon in all male and female monasteries throughout Greece, as the Konstantinos/Biolakes typikon was never meant to affect monastic practice. This can also be extended to monastery Metochia in large cities, like Athens and Thessalonike.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
