I have added a link to the little chant (The Small Paraklesis to the Theotokos) to the Holy Theotokos for your prayerful and listening pleasure. Enjoy!

I have put a link on the blog on the right where you can listen to "Let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silence" a Cherubic hymn at the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great on the Holy Saturday. I put it in this format so that you, the reader, can choose to listen or not to listen while you surf about. I hope you enjoy it! Do click on it while you surf about my site and leave a comment to let me know what you think.

4. For the priestly office is indeed discharged on earth, but it ranks amongst heavenly ordinances; and very naturally so: for neither man, nor angel, nor archangel, nor any other created power, but the Paraclete Himself, instituted this vocation, and persuaded men while still abiding in the flesh to represent the ministry of angels. Wherefore the consecrated priest ought to be as pure as if he were standing in the heavens themselves in the midst of those powers. Fearful, indeed, and of most awful import, were the things which were used before the dispensation of grace, as the bells, the pomegranates, the stones on the breastplate and on the ephod, the girdle, the mitre, the long robe, the plate of gold, the holy of holies, the deep silence within.86 Exod. xxviii. 4 sq.

But if any one should examine the things which belong to the dispensation of grace, he will find that, small as they are, yet are they fearful and full of awe, and that what was spoken concerning the law is true in this case also, that “what has been made glorious hath no glory in this respect by reason of the glory which excelleth.â€87 2 Cor. iii. 10.

For when thou seest the Lord sacrificed, and laid upon the altar,88 “What then? do we not make an offering every day? We do, certainly, but by making a memorial of His death; and this memorial is one, not many. How one, not many? Because the sacrifice was offered once for all, as that great sacrifice was in the Holy of Holies. This is a figure of that great sacrifice, as that was of this: for we do not offer one victim to-day and another to-morrow, but always the same: wherefore the sacrifice is one. Well, then, as He is offered in many places, are there many Christs? No, by no means, but everywhere one Christ, complete both in this world and in the other, one body. As then, though offered in many places, He is but one body, so is there but one sacrifice. Our High Priest is He who offers the sacrifice which cleanses us. We offer that now which was offered then: which is indeed inconsumable. This takes place now, for a memorial of what took place then. ‘Do this,’ said He, ‘for my memorial.’ We do not then offer a different sacrifice, as the high priest formerly did, but always the same; or rather we celebrate a memorial of a sacrifice.â€and the priest standing and praying over the victim, and all the worshippers empurpled with that precious blood,89 This may be only a rhetorical expression, but perhaps there is an allusion to a custom which prevailed in some churches, that the worshippers after receiving the cup applied the finger to the moistened lip, and then touched their breast, eyes and ears, canst thou then think that thou art still amongst men, and standing upon the earth? Art thou not, on the contrary, straightway translated to Heaven, and casting out every carnal thought from the soul, dost thou not with disembodied spirit and pure reason contemplate the things which are in Heaven?

Oh! what a marvel! what love of God to man! He who sitteth on high with the Father is at that hour held in the hands of all. “Just as the bread before consecration is called bread, but when the Divine Grace sanctifies it through the agency of the priest it is released from the appellation of bread, and is deemed worthy of the appellation of the ‘Lord’s Body,’ although the nature of bread remains in it, and we speak not of two bodies, but one body of the Son: so here the Divine nature being seated in the human body, the two together make up but one Son—one Person.â€and gives Himself to those who are willing to embrace and grasp Him. And this all do through 47the eyes of faith!91 Some mss. omit the word πίστεως “of faith,†having in its place τότε “at that time.â€

Do these things seem to you fit to be despised, or such as to make it possible for any one to be uplifted against them?

2. Will you, then, still contend that you were not rightly deceived, when you are about to superintend the things which belong to God, and are doing that which when Peter did the Lord said he should be able to surpass the rest of the apostles, for His words were, “Peter, lovest thou me more than these?â€70 In some editions the words “tend my sheep†are added here.

Yet He might have said to him, “If thou lovest me practise fasting, sleeping on the ground, and prolonged vigils, defend the wronged, be as a father to orphans, and supply the place of a husband to their mother.†But as a matter of fact, setting aside all these things, what does He say? “Tend my sheep.†For those things which I have already mentioned might easily be performed by many even of those who are under authority, women as well as men; but when one is required to preside over the Church, and to be entrusted with the care of so many souls, the whole female sex must retire before the magnitude of the task, and the majority of men also; and we must bring forward those who to a large extent surpass all others, and soar as much above them in excellence of spirit as Saul overtopped the whole Hebrew nation in bodily stature: or rather far more.71 1 Sam. x. 23.

For in this case let me not take the height of shoulders as the standard of inquiry; but let the distinction between the pastor and his charge be as great as that between rational man and irrational creatures, not to say even greater, inasmuch as the risk is concerned with things of far greater importance. He indeed who has lost sheep, either through the ravages of wolves, or the attacks of robbers, or through murrain, or any other disaster befalling them, might perhaps obtain some indulgence from the owner of the flock; and even if the latter should demand satisfaction the penalty would be only a matter of money: but he who has human beings entrusted to him, the rational flock of Christ, incurs a penalty in the first place for the loss of the sheep, which goes beyond material things and touches his own life: and in the second place he has to carry on a far greater and more difficult contest. For he has not to contend with wolves, nor to dread robbers, nor to consider how he may avert pestilence from the flock. With whom then has he to fight? with whom has he to wrestle? Listen to the words of St. Paul. “We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.â€72 Ephes. vi. 12.

Do you see the terrible multitude of enemies, and their fierce squadrons, not steel clad, but endued with a nature which is of itself an equivalent for a complete suit of armor. Would you see yet another host, stern and cruel, beleaguering this flock? This also you shall behold from the same post of observation. For he who has discoursed to us concerning the others, points out these enemies also to us, speaking in a certain place on this wise: “The works of the flesh are manifest, which are these, fornication, adultery, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulation, wrath, strife,73 Gal. v. 19, 20, 21 backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults,â€74 2 Cor. xii. 20 and many more besides; for he did not make a complete list, but left us to understand the rest from these. Moreover, in the case of the shepherd of irrational creatures, those who wish to destroy the flock, when they see the guardian take to flight, cease making war upon him, and are contented with the seizure of the cattle: but in this case, even should they capture the whole flock, they do not leave the shepherd unmolested, but attack him all the more, and wax bolder, ceasing not until they have either overthrown him, or have themselves been vanquished.

Again, the afflictions of sheep are manifest, whether it be famine, or pestilence, or wounds, or whatsoever else it may be which distresses them, and this might help not a little towards the relief of those who are oppressed in these ways. And there is yet another fact greater than this which facilitates release from this kind of infirmity. And what is that? The shepherds with great authority compel the sheep to receive the remedy when they do not willingly submit to it. For it is easy to bind them when cautery or cutting is required, and to keep them inside the fold for a long time, whenever it is expedient, and to bring them one kind of food instead of another, and to cut them off from their supplies of water, and all other things which the shepherds may decide to be conducive to their health they perform with great ease.

I have been tied up with my new title parish in the C of E by trying to get my mind and body into the rhythm of Church life and out of full-time academia. Thankfully, I am now back to serious writing and thinking in order that I finish my PhD as well. I have done some re-reading of Andrewes' sermons on the incarnation and find his explanation of Eucharistic presence described within the categories of the incarnation to be fascinating and quite in line with the Orthodox in many ways. Yet, Andrewes maintains the emphasis of the Western Church that communicates the realness of that objective presence with the elements themselves. A particular emphasis of this is seen in his sermon on Isaiah 7:14 and his description of God's name Immanuel. Below are some thoughts that I typed up after reading this particular sermon. I would love to hear what the readers here think about it! So, leave a comment or two!

Presence for Andrewes is much like his understanding of the nature of the incarnation. For instance, what Andrewes says about the incarnation is that it is ‘nisi credideritis non intelligetis’ that is, ‘to be believed, is otherwise not understood.’[1] Reason is not able to comprehend the mystery of the Eucharist but faith in what God can do embraces the mystery. God is able to do that which our reason is not able to reach. As the working of the mystery of the incarnation was ex Spiritu Sancto, so the presence of Christ in the creaturely elements of bread and wine is also from the Holy Spirit. Therefore, it was Andrewes’ theology that taught a view of God who was above and not bound by nature that makes the reality of Christ’s presence in the actual elements to be a real presence. Therefore faith rests in ‘tota ratio facti est in potential facientis’ which is ‘the power of the doer is the reason of the thing done.’[2] Hence we have Andrewes stating once again his absolute surrender to the power of the supernatural in the nature of God.

Yet it was God’s condescending love towards us when he took on flesh and was conceived in the Virgin’s womb and brought forth in our nature that makes his presence in the Eucharist effectual for our salvation. In the incarnation we are brought forth in love, honour, and due regard since it is where God’s love condescended to by going to the very root of our defilement to cleanse us and set us right again.[3] The incarnation is the healing of our nature and this honour was bestowed upon us by his dishonour in taking on sinful human flesh. As the incarnation and the pariet (bringing forth) makes his love appear in bodily form, so his condescending to us in the holy sacrament reveals his ongoing love and presence with us. As Jesus was thesaurus absconditus as the incarnation of God’s love so that hidden treasure is pariet in the Eucharistic elements.

When Andrewes speaks of the Eucharistic presence it is in the language of the name of God with us Immanuel. The incarnation is where God comes amongst us and is made one with us and in the Eucharistic rite history past, present and future is recapitulated and summed up as one in Christ. It is the 'knitting together' of the two natures where the human and divine becomes one thing, univoce again. Andrewes describes this union that has taken place between us and God as a new ‘kind of Trinity—God, we and Christ.’[4] Since it is Christ who makes the Trinity one with us it is Christ who makes God to be with us in the flesh. This union with us is knit together so closely with Christ that Andrewes describes the union with the imagery of clothing. As Christ wears the name Immanuel so he wears us. This wearing is a comfort and a glory to us.[5] The result is that when Christ is named we are also named with him.

What is seen in baptism by Andrewes is our being brought forth from the womb of the Church and our baptisms moving us in a God-ward direction. By baptism we are brought forth as children of God. In this rite we come to participate in the divine nature of Christ who was brought forth from the Virgin’s womb to participate in our nature. And in this sense of being knit together with Christ, God shall be with us.[6] As a result of Andrewes’ description of the name Immanuel and all that this name means for us as creatures that are fitted to the oneness of God—a oneness only now experienced in the presence of the flesh of Christ in the Eucharist—it is evermore realised in the Christian feast. Andrewes describes this oneness in relationship with the incarnation saying,
For us to be ‘with God’ now is for us to discover his ‘with us’ in the sacrament of his Body—the Body in the sacrament is the Body that was conceived and brought forth from the Virgin’s womb and Andrews emphasises that the Eucharist is especially for God’s being with us. The doctrine of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist is communicated in the shadows of the incarnation that describe what it means for God to be with us in this rite.
What we have in the Eucharist is the preparative to that Day when Christ will come to be with us again in the flesh. Andrewes stated that immediately after Jesus gave them the Eucharist, ‘He prayed straight that they that had so been with Him in the blessed Sacrament—‘Father, My will is,’ My prayer, My last prayer, ‘that where I am they may be also.’[10] Therefore, for Andrewes the Eucharist carries with it not only the recapitulation of time in the incarnation, death, burial, resurrection and ascension, but also the eschatological hope of what it means for God to be with us in the flesh again. For Andrewes, just as Jesus is with us ‘in the flesh’ by way of his real presence in the Eucharist so also will we be with him when he comes in the fullness of his kingdom. For Andrewes, this is the hope set forth in the Most Blessed Sacrament.

[1] Andrewes, Works, i. 138.
[2] Andrewes, Works, i. 139.
[3] Andrewes, Works, i. 141.
[4] Andrewes, Works, i. 146.
[5] Andrewes, Works, i. 147.
[6] Andrewes, Works, 150-151.
[7] Is. 8.8
[8] Andrewes, Works, 151.
[9] Andrewes, Works, 151-152
[10] Andrewes, Works, 152.

I love what Flannery O'Connor says in this piece! It is so outstanding and this is one lady that I would have loved to see in the world of blogging!