You, O Lord, in your unspeakable mercies make a gracious remembrance for all the upright and just fathers who have been pleasing before you in the commemoration of the body and blood of your Christ which we offer to you upon the pure and holy altar as you have taught us. And grant us your tranquility and your peace all the days of the world

The Anaphora of Addai and Mari is considered the oldest known Eucharistic anaphora still in use today, particularly amongst Nestorians and Eastern Catholic Chaldean and Syro-Malabar Rites. A form of it also exists in the Maronite Sharar.

The following posts will look at some aspects of this ancient Liturgical prayer in the following sequence :

1)Manuscript Traditions

2)Missing Institution Narrative?

3)Institution Narrative Missing

4)Institution Narrative Reconsidered

5)Problem of methodology

Manuscripts
Today, all manuscripts containing the Anaphora of Addai and Mari(AM) can be divided into Nestorian, Chaldean and Syro-Malabar traditions. Currently there are around 86 known manuscripts, collated by William F Macomber (1966) and Douglas Webb (1967-68). Amongst these the oldest date to the 10th cent.

These manuscripts are currently divided into these streams

Hudra : Nestorian Liturgical text

Alqosh : Nestorian Liturgical texts that show no Roman influence

Webb B : Texts collated by Webb that are classified as preserving older Syrian ritual and are archaic.

Chaldean : Texts belonging to the faction of the Nestorians that come into Communion with Rome in 1552

Malabar : Texts belonging to the Malabar Church in India, today in Union with Rome.

Missing Institution Narrative?
A feature of AM that is controversial is the fact that it lacks an Institution Narrative. In July 2001, the Vatican issued a statement that recognises the validity of AM, as used by the Nestorian Church. This was meant to deal with Pastoral issues in Iraq, where Chaldean and Nestorian Christians suffer persecution. A key part of this agreement is to allow these two groups to receive Communion in each other's churches during cases of necessity.

Shortly after the publication of this agreement, there were opposition raised in print.

Monsignor Brunero Gherardini, director of Divinitas, a theological journal published by the Vatican press, comments :

Whosoever presumes to celebrate the Eucharist by silencing or altering the words used by Him [i.e., Christ] at the moment of the institution, does not perform an act of homage to Christ, but rather the opposite. Without the dominical words the sacrament does not exist.The celebrant consecrates the bread and the wine only with the words used by Christ and in no other way.

The eminent Liturgical historian, Fr Robert Taft recounts the reaction of a high ranking Catholic prelate to this, stating :

"But how can there be Mass without the consecration?” The answer, of course, is that there cannot be. But that does not solve the problem; it just shifts the question to “What, then, is the consecration, if not the traditional institution narrative which all three Synoptic Gospels and 1 Cor 11:23-26 attribute to Jesus?

This sort of theological objection will find its way into scholarship surrounding the issue of whether AM contains a Eucharistic Institution Narrative or not. On the outset it must be stated that most scholars consider the Narrative to be excluded from AM.

I will lay out the main arguments for the mainstream view, drawing from Fr Robert Taft and Bryan D Spinks(one of the main scholars who researched AM) and some points of reconsideration, drawing from Fr Uwe Michael Lang. Agree or disagree, the threads of these arguments is a journey through the background of AM and a not well known aspect of the history of the Nestorian Church and Nasrani Christians of India.

Institution Narrative Missing
As stated, most scholars today consider AM to lack an Institution Narrative. Such a thing would not be implausible in light of documents like the Didache and Strasbourg Papyrus Gr.254, both being key witnesses to Pre Nicene Eucharistic prayers. Both lack an institution narrative. The Prayer of St Polycarp, recorded in his martyrdom, commonly taken as being patterned after Eucharistic prayer also lacks anything of this sort.

Patristic testimonies of the Eucharistic liturgy also does not lend to any indication that an Institution Narrative is present. Taking St Justin Martyr's 1st Apology as an example, 66.3 might seem to indicate that there would be an Institution Narrative present as he refers to the Gospels and command Jesus gave at the Last Supper, "Do this in memory of me". However there is an uncertainty given the indication of extempore prayer in 67.5 where the Bishop(President) is to offer prayer and thanksgiving, "to the best of his ability".

Turning to the Manuscripts themselves, the oldest text known to contain AM, the Mar Esh'aya codex and 12th cent Hudra lack the Institution Narrative. Vat. syr. 66, belonging to the Chaldean tradition has it present, but it is clearly an insertion as it was written on a separate leaf. Most likely, this was added by Mar Joseph Sulaqua in 1566. This testifies to a significant moment in Nestorian history.

During the mid 16th cent., there was growing discontent that the Patriarchate was kept to a single family line. This position was handed down from uncle to nephew. In protest to this, Mar John Simon Sulaqua was elected. In order to secure his election as Patriarch, a move was made that would see the Nestorian church restored to communion with Rome. In 1553, he was consecrated Patriarch by Pope Julius iii, a move that will cause a permanent rift in the Nestorian church.

The faction loyal to Rome would become the Chaldean Catholics today. The faction that rebelled against this would become the Nestorian church today, or the Assyrian Church of the East. During this time, changes in the Liturgy would occur, with Chaldeans simplifying it and Nestorians using a more complex form of it.

In India, following the Synod of Diamper in 1599 under the Portuguese Aleixo de Menezes, Latinazation in the Malabar rite began, with the first Latin Rite bishop for the Nasranis in India, Francisco Roz SJ inserting the Institution Narrative into the Liturgy.

With these in mind, liturgists generally conclude, there is no Institution Narrative in AM.

Institution Narrative Reconsidered
If currently most scholars view AM as bearing no Institution Narrative, early in the 20th cent, most Scholars took an opposite stance. Here I will draw from Fr Uwe Michael Lang, who represents IMO, the best current objector to the mainstream view.

While the Synod of Diamper Latinized the Malabar rite, Canons 109-110 appear to indicate that an Institution Narrative was present in AM. Aleixo de Menezes noted how Chaldean prelates have added to or removed the words of the Institution Narrative out of ignorance. Although uncertain, the prelates may be identified as two bishops sent by Patriarch Simeon to Southern India in 1490, in response to requests by the Nasranis who were deprived of bishops due to Islamic persecution.

This raises the possibility that before any Roman Catholic influences, the institution narrative is present in AM. Also noteworthy is that in 1890, Anglican missionaries in Urmia, Iran actually reported that although AM lacked an Institution Narrative, Nestorian priests would actually recite them orally.

Another thing to consider is comparisons with the Maronite Sharar, which shares similar patterns to AM, which gives a possible common older Anaphoral tradition that lie behind them both.

The Sharar includes the Institution Narrative where AM prays for peace for the Church, and for the world to know God and the Gospel. In it, there is an observable distinction in the verbs used in the blessing of the bread and chalice. This finds correspondence in Jewish prayer. The short berakah over the bread and the Birkat ha-Aretz over the chalice, essentially pointing to antiquity of the Sharar's Institution Narrative.

If this is assumed, a question arises about why the AM removed the Institution Narrative. Looking at East Syrian Liturgical commentaries, we might get some answers. Starting with Theodore of Mopsuestia's commentary on Baptism and the Eucharist.

Theodore is clear that the Last Supper is the Scriptural warrant and Institution of the Eucharist. In contrast to the majority view to dissociate Propriatory elements from AM's concept of Eucharistic Sacrifice, Theodore states,

As to us it behoves us to perform symbolically the remembrance of His death by our participation in the Sacrament, from which we derive the possession of the future benefits and the abolition of sins

Theodore also makes clear that there is a silent prayer recited by the priest during the Liturgy. Fortunately he discloses its contents, saying

And the priest brings his prayer to a close after having offered thanksgivings to our Lord for the great things which He has provided for the salvation and the deliverance of men, and for His having given us the knowledge of these wonderful mysteries which are a remembrance of that ineffable gift which He bestowed upon us through His Passion, in that He promised to raise us all from the dead and take us up to heaven.

With this in mind, it becomes possible that in the 4th cent., the Institution Narrative is actually present in AM, but it was recited silently. One argument against this that Nicholas Russo raised is, Theodore's liturgy is not East Syrian but represents only what is customary in Antioch and Mopsuestia at the time. Persian expansion also meant that East Syria is isolated from the Græco-Roman world. However, given Theodore's strong influence in the East Syrian tradition, this seems rather odd. One may also see this as something more to do with the assumptions and methodologies used widely in contemporary critical scholarship, one which Fr Uwe Michael Lang have pointed out, causes issues.

One may also look back earlier at Syrian poets for some insights into this. Of particular interest here is Cyrillona, a lesser known contemporary of St Ephrem the Syrian. Fortunately we have memras(Poetry) left by him that describes the Eucharist. There may be an instance that allude to the Institution Narrative.

He describes Judas' act of dipping the bread into the chalice as follows :

And why did he dip the bread in the water and then give it to him?
Its power departed from it,
and its delightful taste,
because the bread had been blessed and glorious,
since he had blessed it and it was set before them.
He dipped that bread and took his blessing from it.
He stripped it of his power and emptied it of his word;
(he stripped) the bread of the blessing and Judas of the throne. (221–34)

Power and Word here is taken by Carl Griffin to denote Christ's word of Blessing and Eucharistic consecration, which was revoked when Judas partook. This could very well indicate that in the 4th cent. Syriac liturgy, the Institution Narrative is present. Griffin is cautious on the idea that Cyrillona's liturgy is AM. Regardless this possibility does complement the idea that perhaps there is an Institution Narrative embedded within it given how it is present in its Syrian context way earlier than the oldest 10th cent. Manuscript.

This still raises the question, why is it missing? One possibility may be due to the Liturgical Reforms undertaken by Patriarch Isho‘yabh III in the 7th century. Part of this reform is revising the Eucharistic anaphoras used by the Nestorians. Fr Uwe Michael Lang raises the possibility that due to Theodore's view that the Eucharistic elements are consecrated not by the Words of Institution but by the Holy Spirit, it is possible that the Institution Narrative was removed from AM as a way to convey this, given it becomes more dispensible.

Another possible suggestion, owing to Theodore's description of the prayer containing the Institution Narrative being silent ties to the idea of mystagogical secrecy that is widespread in Liturgical Rites at his time. In Cyril of Jerusalem for instance even the Creed was given a mere three days before Baptism. Cathecumens were often instructed not to reveal what is taught to outsiders.

In the 7th cent. Gabriel of Qatar makes an interesting comment on why the Words of Oblation are recited silently, stating :

The fact that he recites the entire section quietly, but at the end raises his voice so that the people can hear: first, because it is a Mystery that is being performed, and it is not appropriate that all the people should know of it; and secondly, so that the words, on being heard, should not be learnt by laymen, women and children, with the result that the divine words are held to be ordinary and (so) despised.

This could very well indicate the Institution Narrative was simply not written down because it was deemed as secretive and too Holy to be profaned by anyone. Adding to this, AM also states of the Eucharistic service, that it is "received by tradition the example which is from thee". "Receive" in this context is taken as being an allusion to 1 Corinthians 11:23, which is understood to mean teachings being handed down from from teacher to student. The Tradition here is also understood to be oral Tradition, that is to say, recited by mouth.

If this is correct, this means AM may very well have an Institution Narrative in place, it's simply not written down for reasons of the sanctity of this Tradition given that it is directly from Christ Himself.

Problem of Methodology
To understand the methodological issues in current scholarship, one needs to go back to early 20th cent. Liturgical Studies. Gregory Dix and Josef Andreas Jungmann are two main pioneers in this field and developed a theory for how the main Liturgical Rites come about. Their methodology involves the idea that all these liturgies must have a common primitive source. An original shape if you will.

However, later studies, which employ the methods of critical scholarship with the hermeneutics of suspicion and emphasis on redaction led to this idea being challenged. A key contemporary scholar that led the way to this is Paul Bradshaw. Sharing and utilising the approach of Bart Ehrman and Walter Bauer, the assumption of Early Christianity as diverse and talk of Orthodoxy and Heresy being a misnomer led to a rejection of the old monolinear model.

Indeed while this approach(or perhaps aspects of it) have yielded results, there is increasing recognition of its flaws. Eminent scholar of Liturgical Studies, Fr Robert Taft states that there is some truth to the old monolinear narrative. There is an original kerygma that expressed itself differently in different places, leading to the diverse nature of Liturgical Rites analogous to how dialects of languages develop.

Larry Hutardo who specialises in Christian Origins also question the skepticism of Ehrman on variety in Early Christianity. He has also attacked the critical assumption that there is no unified group and even within the same city, each and every Christian congregation functioned autonomous from each other. But this is flawed as the early New Testament and Patrisric texts before Nicaea speak of heretical movements and these 'proto-orthodox' groups saw themselves as guarding the Apostolic deposit. These would naturally have an impact on Liturgical Practice.

Conclusion
Initially I intended to add in sections detailing Jewish influences in AM, which is a major factor in scholars being near unanimous that it must date back to at least the 3rd century and possibly even earlier. There is also another section concerning the remembrance of departed Fathers mentioned as it is weirdly commonly used as a way to say that the invocation of saints are absent from the earliest liturgies. A closer look would of course also show some very uncanny similarities with how some Anglican theologians dealt with Patristic texts that look like there are prayers to saints involved.

However interesting these areas are, to look at just the question of the Missing Institution Narrative made these series of posts longer than I anticipated. These aspects of AM are perhaps best left for another time.

One thing I hope can be shown here is, the question of the missing Institution Narrative is far from a settled one. One may plausibly argue that it is actually there and that one's methodology can affect how one will read and assess primary sources.

Ultimately I hope this to be informative and edifying to you all. God bless

Further Reading :
1) Studies on the Liturgy of Addai and Mari
The Eucharistic Prayer of Addai and Mari, A. Gelson

Eucharist without Institution Narrative? The Anaphora of Addai and Mari Revisited, Fr Uwe Michael Lang

Issues in Eucharistic Praying in East and West : Essays in Liturgical and Theological Analysis (See Nicholas Russo's contribution at Chapter 2)

Addai and Mari - The Anaphora of the Apostles: A Text for Students, Bryan D Spinks

2) Liturgical Studies
The Roman Mass : From Early Christian Origins to Tridentine Reform, Fr Uwe Michael Lang (For methodological issues in Scholarship, see chapter 2, pg.47; For the Liturgy of Addai and Mari, see Chapter 3)

Do this in Rememberance of Me : The Eucharist from the Early Church to the Present Day, Bryan D Spinks (See Chapter 2 on Paleoanaphoras for the Liturgy of Addai and Mari)

Mass without the Consecration? The historic agreement on the Eucharist between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East, Fr Robert Taft*

*While the focus of Taft's essay is on the validity of the Liturgy of Addai and Mari without the Institution Narrative, I put this under Liturgical Studies in general since he will refer to Byzantine liturgical theology to suggest that in the Patristic period, there is no single set of formula to consecrate the Eucharistic elements.

An interesting idea he raises is the already-not yet dimension of the liturgy that can refer to the bread and wine before consecration as the Body and Blood of Christ, alongside the idea that in the Eucharistic prayers, it is kind of like Christ's words at the Last Supper reverberating from past to the present moments whenever the Eucharist is celebrated.

3) Patristic Studies
Cyrillona : A Critical Study and Commentary, Carl Griffin

4) Primary Sources
Commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Lord's Prayer and on the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist

How far short shall we fall of the faith of her who was "blessed among women," if we can turn easily to ordinary objects from these first scenes of the Gospel; scenes in which the kingdom of God, and of his Christ was first manifested upon earth, and have been since fulfilled, and will one day be finally accomplished, in the ruin of the common foe to God and man, and in the triumph of faith, humility, and resignation, which have never failed to shine in Christian patterns, and which shall endure for ever...

Consider that whole dispensation which has been confirmed in every age by the graces of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of men, of the faithful, humble, unshaken, and devoted servants of an Heavenly Lord and Leader. Look well to the fruits of holiness and zeal, of hope and charity, of constancy and patience, and of well-founded and entire dependence on the Will of God, which meet together in the pattern this day set before us. - Joseph Holden Pott

#Annunciation #Anglican #Soteriology