Psaltic Musings

Lazarus and the Rich Man

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:54:00 +0000

The sixth week of the great Fast is dedicated to the commemoration of our Lord's parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16. 19-31).

I always like to ponder how Jesus' parables often make use of people without a name. As in this case, they are often the people we should ponder as being examples of own sinful life.

I also love St Romanos' kontakion on the same parable.

Lord, have mercy on us and grant all a blessed week of the Passion full of divine compunction and an all-blessed passage to the great and holy Pascha!

Konstantinos Byzantios publication

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:23:00 +0000

Konstantinos Byzantios
Originally uploaded by FRCJT.

I'm happy to announce that a publication I've been working on over the past few years has finally seen the light of day!

To view the Table of Contents or order a copy click here: Konstantinos Byzantios . Enjoy and "Thanks!"

the prayer of saint ephraim the syrian

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:53:00 +0000

The Dormition of St Ephraim the Syrian
Originally uploaded by FRCJT.

There is a special, little known characteristic in the basic diataxis for the prayer of Saint Ephraim which appeals to me. The prayer is already quite unique in its simple, direct textual beauty:

O Lord and Master of my life, give me not a spirit of sloth, vain curiosity, lust for power, and idle talk (great metanoia).

But give to me Thy servant a spirit of soberness, humility, patience, and love (great metanoia).

O Lord and King, grant me to see my own faults and not to condemn my brother (metanoia).

O Lord, be gracious to me, the sinner (twelve times, with a small metanoia after each).

O Lord and King, grant me to see my own faults and not to condemn my brother: for blessed art Thou to the ages of ages. Amen (metanoia).

Rivaled only by the Jesus prayer and Kyrie eleison in its conciseness, the prayer of Saint Ephraim the Syrian, an ascetic fourth-century church father, is unique in its combining of great and small metanoiai, or prostrations, with the text. But that's not the aspect of diataxis that is on my mind today with regards to the prayer.

Texts reflecting on the prayer's beauty and power, as well as its place in the lenten services abound. There are, however, two specific aspects of its historical place in the liturgical life of the Eastern Orthodox Church which I would like to underline.

First, common knowledge has it that it is used only during the great Paschal fast. The preciseness of sinaitic typika, however, also call for the prayer and its metanoiai to be used at two other times: Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays of the Nativity fast and fast of the Apostles'. Why Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays? As you probably know, these are the fast days in monasteries. Therefore, the services on these days during the Nativity and Apostles fasts actually follow the lenten order of services! This is expressed via the use of Alleluia in the Orthros instead of the Apolytikion of the day. The Great Apodeipnon, or Compline, and Mid-Hour Services are also used on these days. But even this somewhat obscure detail is not the main point of what I share today.

This second aspect of the prayer's diataxis is, I think, the most potent. The strange thing is that you don't even need an ancient Typikon to find it; it's right there in the Horologion and Triodion books. While the above rubric of using the prayer in the Nativity and Apostles' fasts has mostly fallen out of use today, even in the Athonite monasteries, this second aspect has not. It is how the prayer is used both throughout Mount Athos and monasteries elsewhere, still closely following the ancient taxis.

This most powerful aspect of the use of the Prayer of Ephraim is indicated by the use of two words, either "mystikos" or "kath' heauton." In English these words can be translated as "mystically," or "to oneself." Simply put, the prayer and its metanoiai are called to be performed in silence.

The picture is quite powerful, if you can imagine a church full of monks all doing their prostrations and crosses in silence. All that is heard is the swoosh of their robes as they fall down and rise up again.

I think this is a most uniquely private moment in the mystical liturgical worship of the Eastern Church.

It's no wonder that varying opinions exist today as to how to actually deal with the prayer in parish worship. One priest will read the prayer and make all the prostrations with each verse, another will simply read the three verses without making the prostrations and a bishop elsewhere will even just skip the prayer altogether! How could such diversity of practice be explained? Easily. The actual rubric has been suppressed. This is often the case with discrepancies in practice, but that's another story.

Can the practice be implemented in parish life? My experience is that there are times when it can be slipped in. The first compunctual vespers may not be the ideal moment, though. At some point during the first week of the great fast, however, it could be addressed and introduced. Often, the weekday services of the great Fast are attended by a smaller number of worshipers, offering a beautifully intimate worship atmosphere. Also, they are many times congregants that have a developed liturgical sense and who often also attend adult educational, catechetical and faith enrichment gatherings. Their hearts are often warmed with the experience of such liturgical practices. But the liturgical worship services of the Church is not the only environment where this powerful rubric can bring forth spiritual fruit.

The prayer of Saint Ephraim the Syrian can be used as a centerpiece for the believer's personal prayer life during the fasts. Today's hectic life, zealous for our every waking moment is all too often the excuse for a weak or even non-existent prayer life from Sunday to Sunday for many. This is also a primary spiritual argument why many find it so hard to fast today. Without at least an attempt at living prayer true fasting is virtually impossible. The beloved saint of the twentieth century, Saint Nektarios the wonderworker and bishop of Pentapolis also connected fasting with the preparation for the mystery of holy Repentance, Confession. Isn't this the preparation for the great Pascha?

Therefore, whether one learns to make the prayer of Saint Ephraim out loud or in silence, the prayer of Saint Ephraim the Syrian, I have seen, can be a positive element in a parish's or individual's spiritual life. It warms hearts, enlivens prayer and brings us into Christ's presence in a profound, time-tested way.

I've said enough; I've said too much.

Logos and Melos

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:25:00 +0000

What we say, hear and sing in worship shapes our faith. In the case of words, rhythm and rhyme create poetry, clothing the words so they might penetrate deeper into the mind and soul, giving strength to the logos hidden behind the words. In the case of poems, melos (melody) blends with the logos so as to bring us more easily before the Lord, in turn, affecting our whole being through the direct, intimate one-on-one contact with God and persuading us to good works. In short, as St John Chrysostom would write in the fourth century, the poetry (logos) and melody (melos) make the process of prayer and the catechetical word less a chore.

“When God saw that many men were rather indolent, that they came unwillingly to Scriptural readings and did not endure the labor this involves, wishing to make the labor more grateful and to take away the sensation of it, He blended melody with prophecy in order that, delighted by the modulation of the chant, all might with great eagerness give forth sacred hymns to Him. For nothing so uplifts the mind, giving it wings and freeing it from the earth, releasing it from the chains of the body, affecting it with love of wisdom, and causing it to scorn all things pertaining to this life, as modulated melody and the divine chant composed of number” (PG LV, 155-159, from St John Chrysostom’s homily on Psalm XLI).

The strength of the metered word and modulated melody appear at both the most joyous and most difficult, even tragic, points of human existence. When the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, “then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the Lord, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously…” (Ex. 15. 1). On the other end of the spectrum of human existence, in the late 1940s, shortly before his death in a Siberian prison camp, a Russian Archpriest by the name of Gregory Petrov composed his own song to the Lord, an Akathist of Thanksgiving, in which, amidst all his personal suffering, his spirit welling up with gratitude, confessed:

“Immortal King of the ages,
Holding within your right hand
all the paths of human life
Through the power of your saving providence,
We thank you for all your acts of goodness,
Manifest and hidden, for the life on earth,
And the heavenly joys
of your kingdom to come.
Extend your mercy also into the future
for us who sing:
Refrain. Glory to you, O God, unto the ages.”

So it is clear that at the point of origin of any divine hymn or sacred musical composition is the relationship of prayer, a dialogue with God, either man reaching out to God or God touching man. The hymn or music is either the believer’s vocal response to contact with the divine or the believer’s attempt to reach out to the divine in thanksgiving, doxology or supplication. Apart from being a means of worship, it is also clear that the root of the rhythm (poetry) and sound (melody) of sacred music is also an inspired expression of faith. A confession of what one believes about God, the Saints, neighbor and the world he or she lives in. As such an expression it is worthy of examination. In time, over the centuries, changes in hymn forms will be related to changes in liturgical development and liturgical worship (practice), evolving especially during times of dynamic social change in the life of the Church, times where the theology (thought)—the perception of how one’s faith is to be lived—is challenged, be it from within or without. Theological and sociological developments interact, leaving some mark on liturgy, whether it be the hymns or their music. This form of looking at liturgical music from the vantage point of its place in the history of liturgy and an expression of social change is a widening of the fields of musicology and theology.

Nativity Vigil

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Tue, 28 Dec 2004 06:44:00 +0000

This year I celebrated the feast of our Lord's Nativity with a vigil at a women's monastery on Hymitos mountain, must be Koropi. The monastery's katholikon is dedicated to the Nativity and is known as "Bethlehem." We started at about 10:30PM and finished around 6:30AM. I was on the road back to Piraeus by 7AM and caught the 8AM boat back to Aegina.

There's always alot of talk about how "beautiful" Christmas is in the West (i.e. US, UK, Germany, etc.), but I think there's no match to the spiritual stregnth that should and could be.

In recent years, apparently influenced by powers not known to me, there is a push to begin services later and later. The idea is that people can't wake up early for Church. When I came to Greece for studies the first time, back in 1988, I remember entering a Church on Christmas morning at 5:15AM and not finding a seat! The announced time for the start of the service was 5AM. If you check the old "Farlekas," you see that ten, twenty and thirty years ago the services began even earlier—3:15AM, 4AM. We would call this a "Sunrise" service in American Protestant circles. It's basically an abbreviated vigil service for the parishes.

The monastic diataxis begins with the Great Apodeipnon up to the doxology and then finishes the vespers that was not completed in the morning by going directly into the Lity, Aposticha, Blessing of the loaves and then continues as would any other vigil, with the reading, hexapsalmos and the rest of the orthros followed by the hours, metalipsis, typika and divine Liturgy.

The parish diataxis (Konstantinos/Biolakes typika) begins with a kind of mesonyktikon, followed by the orthros and divine Liturgy.

In America most Orthodox Churches are mostly empty on Christmas morning. The parishes with more than one priest, with the blessings of the bishops, have moved the services to early afternoon. This means all the larger cathedrals. People wanna come to Church early in the evening, take communion and then go home, open presents and feast. Christmas morning becomes a sleep-in day.

How is this a "beautiful" Christmas?

Christmas is not lights, decorated trees, presents and richly laden tables…

"O Lord my God, I know that I am not worthy, nor sufficient, that Thou shouldest come under the roof of the house of my soul, for all is desolate and fallen, and Thou hast not in me a place worthy to lay Thy head. But even as from on high Thou didst humble Thyself for our sake, so now conform Thyself to my lowliness. And even as Thou didst deign to lie in a cave and in a manger of irrational beasts, so also deign to lie in the manger of mine irrational soul and to enter my defiled body."

This is the attitude the Church fathers brought to Christmas prayer.

Somehow, it seems to me that the situation in America is more than assimilation. Something else is operative. Something un-American. To what extent do allow a weak, Anglo-Protestant worship life to infiltrate into our rich Orthodox Christian heritage? God forbid anyone take the tyropittes, spanakopittes, pastitsia and feta cheese off our Christmas dinner menu. Then we'd get upset!

Have we maybe taken something much more worthy off our "table"?

15th c Nativity icon; Athens: Byzantine Museum

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Sat, 25 Dec 2004 11:03:00 +0000

AthensNativity
Originally uploaded by FRCJT.

Oikos.

Bethlehem opened Eden, come let us behold;
We have found joy in this hidden place,
comelet us seize
The pleasures of paradise within the cave;
There appeared an unwatered root
which sprouted forgiveness;
There was found an undug well
From which David once yearned to drink;
And there the Virgin brought forth an infant
Who at once quenched their thirst,
that of Adam and of David.
Come, then, let us hasten to this place
where there has been born
A newborn babwe, the pre-eternal God.
St Romasnos Melodos

Prayers for a blessed Christmas and New Year full of His grace!

Tradition and Change: American Assimilation vs Acculturation

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Tue, 21 Dec 2004 06:48:00 +0000

It's really everywhere if you stop and think, even the Iraqi war. Age-old traditions with a history, cultural life and outlook all their own coming face to face with modernity in the post-modern world. When either side seems threatened, tradition or change, the meeting point can contain a degree of tension. It is a challenge to both sides.

Relating to the sacred sound, the traditional psaltic art of the Orthodox Christian Church, especially Hellenic in origin, but subsequently affecting the other linguistic Orthodox traditions, it is no secret that this age-old sacred chant form, more commonly known as Byzantine Chant, has been challenged in the context of North American Orthodox Christianity. And I think it's fair to say, not just the chant, but that would get us onto other topics.

The basic question is how to acculturate this aspect of Orthodox Christian practice without assimilation into modern, secularized American "entertainment" worship. There's much to explain and much to explore, but there is also much to be gained.

What was most surprising to me, when I was finally face to face with the reality, is the fact that the challenge was not unique to the American cultural scene. The sacred music problem in the North American Orthodox Christian jurisdictions coming out of this liturgical chant tradition is actually a carry-over from the old country. It's the same challenge modernity gave to sacred Orthodox Iconography, another age-old liturgical art form, and even monasticism. The difference is that while both traditional liturgical art forms—iconography and chant—eventually prevailed in Greece and other traditionally Orthodox homelands, the same has not occured in North America for the chant.

Amidst the backdrop of all the talk on Orthodox leadership, clergy-laity relations, autocephaly, archdiocesesan and parish by-laws, parish councils, uniform codes and the rest, the tiny corner of our traditional liturgical chant will, no doubt, be viewed as quite an esoteric exercise by many, maybe even most.

Sleeping in

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 20:59:00 +0000

What time does Liturgy begin there in Greece? Why should we start early vs later?

Papouli,

The schedule of services throughout the year for the archdiocese of Athens are published in the dypticha each year; you can get an idea from there.

From St John Chrysostom's eighth baptismal catechesis:

16. I exhort you, therefore: let us seek the things which abide forever and never change. It was fitting, therefore, that I brought up this matter and that I exhorted all of you together, both those who have been initiated in the past and those who have just deserved the gift of baptism. On the days when we were continuously present at the tombs of the holy martyrs, we received an abundant blessing from those holy ones and enjoyed the rich benefit of their instruction. From now on, the continuity of our meetings will be broken off; hence, I must remind your loving assembly to keep ever ringing in your ears the memory of the important instruction those holy martyrs gave, and to hold spiritual things of greater importance than all the goods of this life.
17. And I urge you to show great zeal by gathering here in the church at dawn [orthron] to make your prayers and confessions to the God of all things, and to thank Him for the gifts He had already given. Beseech Him to deign to lend you from now on His powerful aid in guarding this treasure; strengthened with this aid, let each one leave the church to take up his daily tasks, one hastening to work with his hands, another hurrying to his military post, and still another to his post in the government. However, let each one approach his daily task with fear and anguish, and spend his working hours in the knowledge that at evening he should return here to the church, render an account to the Master of his whole day, and beg forgiveness for his falls. For even if we are on our guard ten thousand times a day, we cannot avoid making ourselves accountable for many and different faults. Either we say something at the wrong time, or we listen to idle talk, or we think indecent thoughts, or we fail to control our eyes, or we spend time in vain and idle things that have no connection with what we should be doing.
18. This is the reason why each evening we must beg pardon from the Master for all these faults. This is why we must flee to the loving-kindness of God and make our appeal to Him. Then we must spend the hours of the night soberly, and in this way meet the confessions of the dawn. If each of us manages his own life in this way, he will be able to cross the sea of this life without danger and to deserve the loving-kindness of the Master. And when the hour for gathering in church summons him, let him hold this gathering and all spiritual things in higher regard than anything else. In this way we shall manage the goods we have in our hands and keep them secure.

In the above we see St John's late fourth-century Constantinopolitan daily prayer programme for his flock. Notice, these are not monastics, but lay believers with all sorts of jobs. It is evident that he speaks of going to church very early in the morning, before going out to each ones' job.

Another, even earlier witness is from Egeria's early fourth-century Jerusalem pilgrimage account (24. 8-12):

But on the seventh day, the Lord's Day, there gather in the courtyard before cock-crow all the people, as many as can get in, as if it was Pascha. The courtyard is the "basilica" beside the Anastasis, that is to say, out of doors, and lamps have been hung there for them. Those who are afraid they may not arrive in time for cock-crow come early,and sit waiting there singing hymns and antiphons, and they have prayers between, since there are always presbyters and deacons there ready for the vigil, because so many people collect there, and it is not usual to open the holy places before cock-crow.
Soon the first cock crows, and at that the bishop enters, and goes into the cave in the Anastasis. The doors are all opened, and all the people come into the Anastasis, which is already ablaze with lamps. When they are inside, a psalm is said by one of the presbyters, with everyone responding, and it is followed by a prayer; then a psalm is said by one of the deacons, and another prayer; then a third psalm is said by one of the clergy, and a third prayer, and the Commemoration of All. After these three psalms and prayers they take censers into the cave of the Anastasis, so that the whole Anastasis basilica is filled with the smell. Then the bishop, standing inside the screen, takes the Gospel book and goes to the door, where he himself reads the account of the Lord's resurrection. At the beginning of the reading the whole assembly groans and laments at all that the Lord underwent for us, and the way they weep would move even the hardest heart to tears. When the Gospel is finished, the bishop comes out, and is taken with singing to the Cross, and they all go with him. They have one psalm there an a prayer, then he blesses the people, and that is the dismissal. As the bishop goes out, everyone comes to kiss his hand.
Then straight away the bishop retires to his house, and all the monazontes go back into the Anastasis to sing psalms and antiphons until daybreak. There are prayers between all these psalms and antiphons, and presbyters and deacons take their turn every day at the Anastasis to keep vigil with the people. Some lay men and women like to stay on there till daybreak, but others prefer to go home again to bed for some sleep.

From the above you can see that the first cock-crow is well before daybreak. Also, at the Anastasis we have to participation of the "spoudaioi", those monazontes referred to who were from the Sabas Lavra and were there in Jerusalem to serve the holy places, those who today are called the "phylakes tou taphou."

We can also clearly see the use of three antiphons, as is still retained in the use of the Typikon service for days without a feast, as well as the three antiphons prescribed for all great feasts. The number three, of course, is always in honor of the Holy Trinity.

Evident, also is the tradition of holding vigil on Saturday night, in honor of the resurrection, just as is still indicated in the sabaitic typika to this day. Additionally, this is why the mesonyktikon for Sunday morning, in the absence of a vigil, is in the order of the Studite/Constantinopolitan panychis (i.e., vigil).

Finally, we also see the practice of the reading of the Sunday heothinon Gospel from within the tomb by the Patriarch himself. This is why (i) we still read it today inside the bema, (ii) why, when a bishop is present, he should be present at its reading (hence, the reason why its reading is delayed till after the eighth ode of the orthros kanon) and (iii) why the reading of the orthros Gospel belongs to the clergy with the highest rank, as opposed to the Gospel of the Liturgy, which belongs to the deacons.

In any event, both examples clearly show how the early christians, even if they were not making vigil, came to church at first cock-crow. Anyone who has lived in the country knows that this is at the very first breaking of the darkness, say around 3-4AM.

Levy and Velimirovic honorary doctorates

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:26:00 +0000

Two honorary doctorates were awarded by the National and Capodistrian University of Athens, Greece this past Monday, 18 October 2004.

The well-known professors, Milos Velimirovic and Kenneth Levy were the recipients.

Prof. Gregorios Stathis, a third generation Byzantine musicologist, also well known for his research in the field, professor of the Department of Music Studies introduced the recipients at the old university building just under the Acropolis in the Plaka area of historic Athens.

After the reading of the citations by the appropriate university professors and the presentation of the degrees and garbing, both professors offered papers:

M Velimirovic, "On the Byzantine influence in early slavonic chant"
K Levy, "Byzantine chant: some western perspectives"

The ceremony was concluded with the chanting of three hymns by the Maistores of the Psaltic Art, directed by Prof. A Chaldaiakis. After entering and chanting the megalynarion _Axion estin os alethos thn hypertheon_, the eighth and ninth odes of the kanon for Great and Holy Tuesday written by the monk Kosmas were chanted with the mele of Petros Lambadarios and Petros Byzantios in honor of K. Levy's work on certain Great Week troparia. The music programme was concluded with a verse of the Great Anoixantaria (Ps 103 [104]. 21b) according to the melos of the Byzantine composer Ioannes Kladas in honor of M. Velimirovic's work on the great vespers.

Present in the audience were a wealth of now fourth generation Byzantine musicologists, students of the University of Athens, as well as a number of well known researchers and choir directors, such as Michael Adamis, Kaite Romanou, Markos Dragoumis, Lykourgos Angelopoulos and others.

A truly memorable, but also historic meeting of three generations of Byzantine musicologists.

Congratulations to both recipients, sterling representatives of a second generations of Byzantine Musicologists and also members of the AMS!

Adam's Family chant

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:18:00 +0000

I recall this particular point with fondness for the following reason. When I was teaching Byzantine Music 101 at Holy Cross in Brookline MA back in 1990-2 I had devised a kind of Mode Table for use by the beginning students as a help to learning the modes. It had space for the various modes in their respective genera (i.e. iv had three rows: heirmologic, sticheraric and papadic, etc.). One column would show the basis, another the dominant notes, another would recall a well know melos in that particular mode that could be easily recalled by these neophites; an example would be Phos hilaron for mode II or Christos aneste for mode I plagal, and so on. The last column, however, was blank for each student to fill in him or herself; in that last space they would enter any tune or song that helped then 'get into the mode'. The one that I got the biggest kick out of was when one student wrote in 'the Adam's family tune' for mode III: you know, where it goes "da da da dum; da da da dum; da da da dum [snap snap]"! I'll never forget it; it was his na na.

;-)

Liturgical, ahistorical fad

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Mon, 01 Mar 2004 20:20:00 +0000

[In response to a letter circulated by an Orthodox bishop in the US.] It's too bad that people without a historical base try to use history without respect to the received tradition in order to support liturgical practices they personally would like to see applied, downgrading and ragging on flocks not under their pastorate.

First, I find the entire tone of the letter offensive. There is talk of 'the standard tradition which we have received from time immemorial' in reference to how 'our priests' celebrate the divine Liturgy in various parishes. It would be nice to know what 'standard tradition' the said respected writer has in mind; references don't hurt, in fact, a real reference to some monument of the Church's liturgical diataxis would go a long way in helping someone judge whether or not we're not really just dealing with _one_ writer's personal preferences in liturgical practice, but then that would be logical.

One point, no. 7, actually deals with practice and it is good to see that a distinction is made between concelebrated liturgies and liturgies served by a single priest. However, again, some actual reason or at least reference to sources would go a long way in dispelling the air of simple liturgical 'dictation'. _Why_ does a priest celebrating along not chant the entrance hymns, the phos hilaron, the apolytikia, kontakion, hagios ho theos, etc.? Is this where we are? Just tell us what we should do and 'we follow orders, sir!'? I think not.

Point 10 deals with the dialogue preceding the recitation of the Epistle reading in the divine Liturgy. Again, simple dictation is being applied here. If there is some 'standard tradition' regarding this dialogue it surely was not alluded by the writer. Do this; do this; do this and then do this. That's all it is. Not only that, but two prekeimenon verses are alluded to! What could they be? Any epistle I've ever opened have a prokeimenon with one verse before the epistle reading. Who knows? Maybe they've published another epistle book in that jurisdiction? If we're really talking about the received liturgical tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church there is an established form of dialogue for the epistle reading from 'time immemorial'. Unfortunately, it's definitely not described in this document.

The real clincher, however, is point 19. Unfortunately, not only is the received liturgical tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church ignored in this point, but even the canons of the church are set aside in favor of a 'policy of the Archdiocese [of the Greek Orthodox Church of America] from 1950! Not quite 'time immemorial', as suggested at the introduction. Most interesting is the use of the example of the kneeling service on Pentecost Sunday. The writer does not mention that the kneeling takes place _after_ the full dismissal of the divine Liturgy celebrating the great feast of holy Pentecost and even then only _after_ the entrance in the vespers of the next day, the Monday of the Holy Spirit, or first day after the feast of Pentecost.

Also not mentioned are the ancient canons of the church (which, by the way, have not been rescinded). Not only are we not talking about some local council canon, but we speak specifically of canon 20 of the first oecumenical council which states: '…it has seemed best to the holy Council for prayers to be offered to God while standing'. Hmm. My less than perfect reading of canon 90 of the sixth oecumenical council seems to find this issue clearly reinforced: 'We have received it canonically from our God-bearing Fathers not to bend the knee on Sundays when honoring the Resurrection of Christ, since this observation may not be clear to some of us, we are making it plain to the faithful, so that after the entrance of those in holy orders into the sacrificial altar on the evening of the Saturday in question, let none of them bend a knee until the evening of the following Sunday, when, after the entrance during the Lychnikon, again bending knees, we thus begin offering our prayers to the Lord…'. Sounds pretty clear to me. Here we even have mention of the specific point in the service after which we can again kneel: after the entrance in the vespers. Hmm. Interesting how our liturgical texts have preserved this very point in the vespers for the Holy Spirit. Imagine that?! The writer's comments betray a faulty reading of the most basic kind. I won't get into the fact that this very issue was the excuse used to 'rid' Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology of the famous 20th c Orthodox theologian, Fr G Florovsky; need I say more?

Maybe these canons aren't old enough, though? St Peter the Martyr of Alexandria who lived in the 3rd century also makes mention of the venerable ancient practice and true liturgical taxis 'from time immemorial' in his 15th canon saying, 'as for Sunday, on the other hand, we celebrate it as a joyous holiday because of His having risen from the dead, on which day we have not even received instruction to bend a knee'. A-hah: there's our 'time immemorial'.

So, according to this writer, if we choose to heed to the holy and god-bearing fathers of the oecumencal councils *and* ancient tradition as witnessed to from time even before the first oecumenical council we should be as those who see themselves as 'more orthodox than you are, people who see externals, outer trappings, as more essential than the fervent heart'. As if this is not enough, he also goes on to refer to what he calls 'a sad reality that the Orthodox people in Greece', who do not kneel at the epiklesis. He claims that they do not kneel because they 'do not find that special moment any different than the rest of the divine Liturgy'. Tell me. Where in any manuscript or printed edition of the eucholgion is the diataxis to kneel at the the time of the epiklesis offered?

Well, it doesn't stop there. Injury is followed by insult. The writer then goes on to condemn 'most Orthodox in Greece' for not receiving holy Communion, 'even monthly, and if they do, it is often after the divine Liturgy at the Deacon's doors, as sort of an afterthought'. Then he goes on to mock a priest serving the divine Liturgy in Greece who was 'simultaneously carrying on a conversation with another priest in the altar, while chanting the divine Liturgy'. This what why, 'of course, he did not kneel at the Epiklesis; it would have interrupted his conversation with the other priest'. How the one follows from the other I shall probably never know. I can, however, attest for the laxity of American piety with regards the preparation for the reception of the holy Mystery of Communion. Yes, dear writer, they do not feel comfortable in Greece approaching the holy Cup after spending the night out at a restaurant or movie theatre. Yes, most Orthodox in Greece will also not approach if they have not received a rule of communion from their spiritual father, either. I also do know how many times I was reprimanded while serving in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America when I even mentioned the word confession. How often did I hear the retort, from clergy and lay alike, 'this isn't Greece! We don't do that here!' Or, another 'faithful' of the American church who told me, 'Father, we have a family tradition. We have breakfast together on Sunday mornings and then attend Church as a family'. What would our writer say if he knew the faithful here in Greece don't even eat antidoron if they've put anything in their mouth before coming to church?!

I remember attending a diocesan clergy meeting with an American bishop that has since fallen asleep in the Lord. He chose a church somewhat central to most clergy and scheduled a celebration of the divine Liturgy with his clergy and then meetings throughout the day. I was there early enough to get to the church before the bishop. When I did, the 'highly respected' proistamenos of the cathedral church was in pants and a shirt having a smoke just outside the altar. Inside was the holy proskomide he had prepared for the arrival of the bishop--paten and chalice with the gifts already cut, placed and poured. Of course, he had not taken kairo before starting the service of proskomide, neither was he vested, but I guess I shouldn't go by externals.

Somehow, I'm not convinced.

Organic(?) native sacred music

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Fri, 27 Jun 2003 16:06:00 +0000

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.

Abstract(?) Typikon?

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Sun, 22 Jun 2003 16:05:00 +0000

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.

Heothinon Gospel and Kanons

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Sat, 21 Jun 2003 16:04:00 +0000

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.

Tillyard

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Tue, 20 Aug 2002 10:16:00 +0000

Dear Dejan,

I believe I have the article somewhere, but I'm not sure if I'll be able to fish it out for you any time soon. If I recall (it's been quite a long time since I've read it) there are four or five weak 'proofs' put forward, trying to argue for the use of chromatic and enharmonic intervals as being later (I believe he uses the term) 'oriental' borrowings or influences on post-Byzantine modes.

This is something Tillyard expresses in many of his articles; take this quote as an example:

Chromatic Passages
Anyone who has listened to Modern Greek Church music must have been struck by the frequency of its chromatic passages; but in Middle Byzantine music we never find a whole hymn in the chromatic species, but only a short passage here and there. Further, the introduction of the chromatic sign seems usually, if not always, to be due to a later hand than the thirteenth century and may be regarded, in the main (1), as a fifteenth century development. Until the reform of Chrysanthus in 1821, Greek Church Music had only one properly chromatic sign, called Nenano (nenano [in Greek]) [sign], which might be used (so far as can be seen) in any mode and on any part of the scale, where the augmented tone was desired. This sign has survived in the modern system

The effect of the sign only lasted to the end of the versicle.

In the Late Byzantine system we often find, not only Mode I Plagal, but also II Plagal using the Chromatic species

Furthermore it is possible that the Late Byzantine notation where it used the Chromatic modulation-sign, may have recorded an older, though unwritten, practice of some singers, who had come under Oriental influence.(H. J. W. Tillyard, HANDBOOK OF THE MIDDLE BYZANTINE MUSICAL NOTATION (Copenhague: Levin & Munksgaard, 1935), pp. 35-6.)

Dejan, this is something you can find in Wellesz articles and many others. There was a clear 'line' held by all MMB people that Byzantine Music was a purely diatonic music. If I recall correctly, Tillyard begins his article that you mention above with the premise that both the enharmonic and chromatic genera witnessed to in ancient Greek music theory had long ceased to exist before Byzantine music makes its appearance. Chrysanthos is usually blamed (along with the other two Teachers of the New Method, Gregorios Protopsaltes and Chourmuzios Chartophylax) for introducing such intervals into Greek Church music, always, through 'oriental' influence; the line usually goes: they were forced to by their Ottoman lords.

The big weakness (other than the fact that the premise is not founded on any pure data, but simply speculation) is that if the introduction of chromatic (and enharmonic) intervals was such a late development, how is it that (1) there are no records of any protest and (2) when we have Konstantinos Byzantios chanting from the right analogion with the old notation and his lambadarios Stephanos chanting from the new notation on the left analogion, how is it that there is no difference in performance expressed, in fact, specific witnesses exist explicitly stating that "no difference in performance was detected"!?

As far as the most Greek Byzantine musicologists are concerned, there's no issue. Chromaticism and enharmonic intervals were always on the scene and did not 'disappear'. The only person I know of in the 'western camp' (if such a thing exists) who dared stand up for chromaticism in Byzantine music from the beginning was J. Raasted:

"Chromaticism in Medieval Byzantine Chant" CIMAGL 15 (1986) 15-36

Prof. Stathis has often told us of his joy when he heard Raasted speak on this topic in Wien at the Egon Wellesz Symposium (1985). The consequences of accepting such a premise (that chromaticism existed in Medieval Byzantine chant), however, are quite far-reaching for those 'scholars' who do transcriptions from Byzantine music manuscripts using the guidelines established by the MMB founders.

That's about all I have time for just now. If I can be of any other assistance, don't hesitate to contact me privately, too.

20 August 2002

Tillyard's article

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Tue, 20 Aug 2002 10:16:00 +0000

Deacon's vespers

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Sat, 17 Aug 2002 10:15:00 +0000

A summary of Georgios Regas' Typikon (1908) and his Chapter X.1. 'On when the deacon should vest'.

(1) the deacon vests for feasts with an entrance in the vespers and a great doxology in the orthros, as well as the feast of the annunciation, presanctified liturgies and the holy Passion. he may also vest for any divine liturgy throughout the year.

(2) at the vespers of a vigil he vests during the stichologia of the 'Blessed is the man', if it is not said, then during the Introductory psalm or the stichologia of the psalter; he remains vested till the dismissal.

(3) if there is no vigil he vests before the initial blessing of the vespers, during the reading of the introductory psalm or during the reading of the kathisma; he remains vested till the dismissal.

(4) at the orthros, whether there is a vigil or not, if there is a gospel he vests during the anabathmoi chanted before it and remains vested till the beginning of the first hour; if there is no gospel then he vests during the 8th ode and remains vested till the 1st hour. the same is done for the holy Passion.

(5) for each liturgy or presanctified he vests before the beginning in order to perform the proskomide with the priest and remains vested until the dismissal.

(6) at the vespers without an entrance and orthros without a great doxology (except for the holy Passion, Annunciation and celebrated saints in the Great Fast) as well as the complines and hours only the priest vests.

(7) by exception the deacon vests at the orthros of Great Saturday during the chanting of the Theos Kyrios.

(8) in orthros and vespers of the week of new creation the deacon vests before the enarxis of necessity.

In Chapter I.15: without a priest [translation]

When the daily services are performed in parecclesion, or hermitages, or monastic cells, or personally in a home and there is no priest, then none of the priest's parts are said, neither litany, nor gospel, nor exclamation, nor blessing or dismissal. But in the beginning of the service, instead of the Blessed is our God, the Through the prayers of our holy fathers is said; the same as for the May God be gracious unto us, and at the end of the service instead of the dismissal we say, Glory, Both now, Lord have mercy (thrice) and the Through the prayers of our holy fathers. And nothing more, for all excess is from the evil one.

Very, very short history of typikon

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:14:00 +0000

For a good little introduction to the history of the development of the Byzantine Typikon with clear sources, there is a small title that can probably be easily accessed in the US (I believe the publisher is online):

Taft, Robert F.
The Byzantine Rite: A Short History
American Essays In Liturgy
Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1992

I can't speak for the Slavic development, but the Typikon that has come down to the Greek Church is a Palestinian-Studite synthesis. The key period, of course, is immediately after the Iconoclastic controversy (9th c). This is a key period as far as the establishment and appearance of the Oktoechos and the popularity of the canon genre as far as hymnography is concerned. All around a developmental period of recuperation and growth for the worship life of the Church. After the Studite adaptation of monastic (St Sabas monastery—Palestinian) and cathedral (Great Church—Constantinopolitan) practice, the Palestinian monks again make changes that appear by the 11th century (very important source is the typikon of Nikon of the Black Mountain). It would be this final, what Taft calls, "Neo-Sabaitic" synthesis that would find its way back North to Constantinople and, eventually, Mount Athos and the other Greek speaking monasteries.

To summarize, for Greek practice we have a back and forth influence between Palestinian and Constantinopolitan, and monastic and cathedral practices, not to mention the musical influences rising out of these new hymnological forms and their performance (cf. Edward V Williams, John Koukouzeles' Reforms of the Byzantine Chanting for Great Vespers in the Fourteenth Century, PhD diss., Yale, 1968).

Another interesting site to consider is .

*

Many local 'official' and 'unofficial' developments have contributed to minor differences of practice between the Slav and Greek usages witnessed today, but the major difference comes in 1838 with the publication of the first edition of the Typikon Ekklesiastikon of Konstantinos Byzantios, the Protopsaltes at the Great Church at that time. For the first time since Byzantium the Greek Church institutes a separate Typikon for the city churches just as it comes out from under the Turkish yoke. A second (1851) and third (never published) edition will be prepared by Konstantinos, but in 1888 another patriarchal committee headed by Georgios Violakes, also a Protopsaltes of the Great Church, will revise Konstantinos' Typikon and is basically the order used to by the Greeks, Bulgarians, Romanians and Serbs, as far as parish order is concerned. While the Konstantinos typikon did have influences on monastic practice, theoretically, each monastery retains its own typikon.

This, to answer your question, is the basic difference between contemporary practice for the Slav (Russian) and Greek Typika as observed in parishes today.

Pascha Apodosis

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:13:00 +0000

XPICTOC ANECTH!

I've already been asked three times today regarding the apodosis tomorrow, specifically, regarding the taking up of the icon, cross, epitaphion and gospel, so I thought I'd go ahead and post it here before the frantic inquiries tomorrow! This, of course is the practice for the Greek tradition.

If you look at the Diataxeis from Kalamos Publications and the Diptycha from Apostolike Diakonia this year (the later copies the former now) there is a note in the order for Thursday of Ascension at the point of the Ninth Hour. Before I tell you that, though, the older monastic Typika speak of the 'aspasmos' (veneration) of the icon of the Resurrection (in the middle of the Church during the entire Pentekostarion period) during the final chanting of the Christos Aneste, normally mode II, argon (some places I've seen use Chrysaphes the New's 'Anastaseos hemera' in the old sticheraric melos). Once everyone venerates, the priest takes the icon into the hieron and the typikarios places the icon of the Ascension.

Then the priest comes out, preceded by the censer. Censing the Cross that has been outside the holy bema since the Great Friday 'apokathilosis', he venerates it and procedes into the holy bema and places the icon of the King of Glory upon it, once again venerating. Then, moving to the holy table, he censes and venerates the epitaphion, which has been on the holy table since the Orthros of Great and Holy Saturday, folds it and places it where it is normally stored. Finally, venerating it, the priest then takes the Gospel, turning it so that the icon of the Crucifixion faces upward and begins the vespers of the Ascension.

Except for the order of the aspasmos of the Gospel, the rest I don't believe is found in any older typika, but represents contemporary practice.

Canon 90 of Penthekti

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Tue, 04 Jun 2002 10:10:00 +0000

It's even more specific stating that we should not kneel from the point of the entrance of the clergy during the lychnikon on Saturday evening until the entrance of the clergy during the lychnikon on Sunday evening.

This has to do with the penitential character of evening worship and its appropriateness on the day of the Resurrection or, as is now the case, during the period of the Joyful Triodion or Pentekostarion. The canon is not primarily concerned with the D. Liturgy.

The first point of patristic phronema to research is the connection of the beginning of the liturgical day as a time when the Lord sends forgiveness to those who repent for the days works (i.e. Apostolic Constitutions VIII, 34-5; Basil the Great, Great Rule 37—PG 31, 1016; Theodore the Studite, Interpretation of Presanctified—PG 99, 1688c). Also, read closely the evening prayers of the Church, whether they be from the Vespers or even the simple pocket daily prayer books.

Now, it is important not to get too scholastic about the issue. Typikon, first and foremost, is imitation. The earliest 'rules' for liturgical life even before the appearance of Typika—foundational or liturgical—are the imitation of the prayer of the holy fathers and saints (i.e. Basil, Pachomius) and the monastic practices joined with the Antiochian, Jerusalemite and, later, Constantinopolitan practices.

The fact that repentance in the American Church—especially the Greek—is a relatively new phenomenon (a greatly few of the faithful are familiar with the mystery of confession and repentance) most do not comprehend the penitential character of the vespers, hence, it is impossible to understand the Resurrectional character of the Pentekostarion period or even a 'simple' Sunday! In this way, all kinds of 'reasons' for it's ok to kneel on Sunday can be devised. The simple fact is that a specific liturgical practice has come down to us.

Another story. When I was in the Atlanta Diocese (GOA) I would normally chant in the Diocesan Church of the Archangel Michael when there were clergy meetings. It happened to be a Saturday morning and like most, the orthros called for Ainoi, Small Doxology, Aposticha, etc. Once we began reading the small doxology a priest stuck his head out the North Door to angrily shout: "We're going to have liturgy; that means we chant the Great Doxology. This is America!" He was a visiting priest and not even the celebrant. Needless to say, no one payed any attention, neither the bishop nor the other priests, but it does illustrate how the dynamics and variety of celebration from the daily to the Resurrectional services are in danger of being forgotten in the US, anyway. Most clergy, lower or higher, only go to Church and pray/serve on feast days. Hence, they've never seen a 'normal' weekday service. The dynamic of a celebrated saint or feast is fuzzy (enough of this).

Back to your topic. As for the group of questions at the end of your snip, the question of continuity is not threatened with the kneeling in conjunction with ordination on a Sunday or during Pentekostarion. If one goes to confess during Pentekostarion he or she will kneel for the prayer of forgiveness. The opportunity with your research is to rediscover the penitential character of the 'Evening Sacrifice' and you have all the troparia of the Great Parakletike, the writings of the fathers and the mystical prayers of the priest for the vespers. Add the instances of penitence in the Scriptures and you've got alot at your fingertips I think. A final and most beautiful source would also be the actual 'kneeling prayers' for the Vespers of the Holy Spirit!

Rhythm in Byzantine Chant

noreply@blogger.com (FRCJT) — Mon, 20 May 2002 10:07:00 +0000

Chanting could be written without time markings—as in most Byzantine notation—but that does not mean it has no rhythm or, furthermore, that within a singular chant tradition some things may be done in a freer rhythm than others (i.e. verses—stichoi—can begin in a free, logathes, rhythm only to end up with the rhythm of the sticheron they precede, also take the Doxa and Kai nyn of the first stasis of the anabathmoi for mode IV as used in festal Orthros services).

There is a great confusion as to rhythm in Byzantine chant and the interpretation of the great hypostaseis signs as interpreted by some western musicologists. Even with the New Method, there are good number of very good chanters who would not necessarily be able to correctly divide the pieces they chant into correct measures. As a by the way, there is an 1815 ms in the New Method of Petros Peloponesse's Anastasematarion in the Nat. Lib. of Greece (Metochion Panagiou Taphou 716) that has red 'measure' lines incorrectly dividing the music into four-beat measures. Anyway, rhythm is closely connected with each thesis as it relates to the particular genre it is being used with.

There are a large number of transcriptions of Byzantine Music into the western staff notation that use no time signatures or measures. These are usually done by people who do not know that there is rhythm in Byzantine chant or do not choose to believe so.