A few admissions on the leavened Eucharist:

There is great debate about which bread was used at the Last Supper. Many scholars believe that the question will never be answered.

But there is no doubt that the Church of Rome used leavened bread, and not unleavened bread, for the first 1000 years while she was in communion with the Churches of the East. The change to the present use of unleavened bread was taking place at the same time as the Great Schism between us.

The requirement of unleavened bread in the Latin Church today is for liceity. In the early centuries, both Eastern and Western Churches used leavened bread for the Eucharist, but in the eighth and ninth centuries the use of unleavened bread became the general custom in the West. Starting in the north of the continent among recently converted germanic tribes and gradually spreading south to Italy by the 1100’s. In keeping with the scope of the Code, the canon properly addresses only the practice of the Latin Rite… (“The Code of Canon Law, Text and Commentary,” page 659).
http://www.dioceseofgfb.org/Diocesan…stic_bread.htm

Fr. Joseph Jungman — in his book The Mass of the Roman Rite — states that:

“In the West, various ordinances appeared from the ninth century on, all demanding the exclusive use of unleavened bread for the Eucharist. A growing solicitude for the Blessed Sacrament and a desire to employ only the best and whitest bread, along with various scriptural considerations — all favored this development.

“Still, the new custom did not come into exclusive vogue until the middle of the eleventh century. Particularly in Rome it was not universally accepted till after the general infiltration of various usages from the North” [Joseph Jungman, The Mass of the Roman Rite, volume II, pages 33-34]

Fr. Jungman goes on to say that, “. . . the opinion put forward by J. Mabillon, Dissertatio de pane eucharistia, in his answer to the Jesuit J. Sirmond, Disquisitio de azymo, namely, that in the West it was always the practice to use only unleavened bread, is no longer tenable” [Jungman, The Mass of the Roman Rite, volume II, page 33]

“Now, the fact that the West changed its practice and began using unleavened bread in the 8th and 9th century — instead of the traditional leavened bread — is confirmed by the research of Fr. William O’Shea, who noted that along with various other innovative practices from Northern Europe, the use of unleavened bread began to infiltrate into the Roman liturgy at the end of the first millennium, because as he put it, “Another change introduced into the Roman Rite in France and Germany at the time [i.e., 8th - 9th century] was the use of unleavened bread and of thin white wafers or hosts instead of the loaves of leavened bread used hitherto” [Fr. William O'Shea, The Worship of the Church, page 128].

“Moreover, this change in Western liturgical practice was also noted by Dr. Johannes H. Emminghaus in his book, The Eucharist: Essence, Form, Celebration, because as he said: “The Eucharistic bread has been unleavened in the Latin rite since the 8th century — that is, it is prepared simply from flour and water, without the addition of leaven or yeast. . . . in the first millennium of the Church’s history, both in East and West, the bread normally used for the Eucharist was ordinary ‘daily bread,’ that is, leavened bread, and the Eastern Church uses it still today; for the most part, they strictly forbid the use of unleavened bread. The Latin Church, by contrast, has not considered this question very important.” [Dr. Johannes H. Emminghaus, The Eucharist: Essence, Form, Celebration, page 162]

“Thus, with the foregoing information in mind, it is clear that the use of leavened bread by the Eastern Churches represents the ancient practice of the undivided Church, while the use of unleavened bread by the Western Church was an innovation introduced near the end of the first millennium.”

The difference between leavened and unleavened is the difference between home made versus walmart. Pictured below is an industrial grade host baking machine made by Kissing GmbH in Germany typically used by the Latin Churches of today.

http://www.kissing-menden.com/english/hostbaking-machine/

In the past the preference was for the Orthodox unindustrial grade prosphera baking machine.

Now you tell me which is the True Church!

The more (modern) western in outlook (theologically speaking) an Eastern Orthodox Catholic Christian becomes, the more vulnerable they are to Protestant ideas. This was a serious concern in those areas where Orthodox lived under (Latin) Roman Catholic governments. It’s not a good place to be. (Elements of 2nd millenium Latin) Roman Catholic theology is at the root of Protestant theology. – Michael (Hesychios) on Karl Keating’s Catholic.com message board.

While reading a long post on papal infallibility on the catholic.com message board I read this statement. I was struck me at how particularly truthful it was.

The Eastern people retained as their part in the liturgy listening to the lections (which the orthodox populations have always done with assiduity) and participation in some of the chants (though the admirable melodies of most of these were too difficult for the people and had to be left to the choir) — and the litany! It was natural this should be popular; it was the only devotion in the whole rite in which the laity as such now had any active part. From being used only at the intercessions which closed the synaxis it began to be repeated at other points in the rite, as an act of corporate prayer accompanying the liturgical action proceeding in mystery beyond the veil. It is now repeated no less than nine times in various forms, in whole or in part, during the Byzantine eucharist. With so many of the liturgical prayers said in silence, the litany forms the main substance of the people’s prayer.

There may be a certain evidence of liturgical decadence in this acceptance of the need to occupy the attention of the congregation with irrelevant devotions while the liturgical action — the eucharist proper — proceeds apart from them behind the screen. But even so, Westerns are hardly in a position to remark upon it. The Eastern litany is at least a corporate devotion provided by the church for the faithful, magnificently phrased and noble in its all-embracing charity. The Western ‘low mass,’ dialogued in an undertone between priest and server, is in a different way just as degenerate a representative of the old corporate worship of the eucharist. The faithful, it is true, can see the action and associate themselves continually with it in mind in a way that the Eastern layman cannot quite do. But the Western laity, unprovided with any corporate devotions whatever, are left with no active part in the rite at all. They listen and pray as individuals, adoring in their own hearts the Host elevated in silence, and then passively receive communion. All this throws the whole emphasis in Western lay devotion upon seeing, and on individual silent prayer. This question of ‘seeing’ is really at the basis not only of the difference of Eastern from Western eucharistic devotion, but of Western catholic and Western Protestant doctrinal disputes. Is what one sees elevated or ‘exposed’ — a significant word! — to be adored as such? Posed thus, apart from its context in the corporate offering, the question is distorted. But what caused it to be posed in this way in the sixteenth century, and made the reality of the Body and Blood of Christ a center of controversy in the West as it never had been in the East, was precisely the growth of low mass as the normal presentation of the eucharist to the laity during the mediaeval period.

Symeon, Archbishop of Thessalonica during the early fifteenth century (1416/17 – 1429), produced a typikon prescribing the conduct of Orthodox ritual in the Thessalonian cathedral of Hagia Sophia, including highly detailed instructions for performance of the Office.14 The work including Symeon’s commentary on the Office of the Three Children – the Dialogue in Christ – is primarily a catalog of heresies throughout Christianity’s history, with a special emphasis on the more recent impieties of the Latins.15 Chapter 23 of the Dialogue, “That it is Necessary to Portray Divine Matters
Piously and Righteously, and In Accordance With Tradition,” devotes itself primarily to the Catholic habit of “innovation,” kainotomia, in representational practice.16 Catholic innovation, in Symeon’s scenario, manifests itself in three distinct ways: in permitting non-iconic representations of divinity, especially plays; in creating and portraying the realm of Purgatory; and in adding the word filioque to the confession of the faith (which portrays the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father “and the
Son”). Here, as in the earlier Medieval period addressed by Kobialka’s study, the dispute centers on how one visualized divinity and (more importantly) produced its visible aspects. In Symeon’s view, it wasn’t just that the Catholics misrepresented the nature of the Trinity or the afterlife; it was that they had also sanctioned new technologies through which their flawed dogma was made visible to the laity.

Symeon begins Chapter 23 with a brief reminder of what Orthodoxy considered to be the traditional technology for realizing the visibility of the sacred, i.e., through the painted image or icon. His repeated use of the word ‘icon’ (eikon) and its correlatives, particularly the verb for making icons, ‘to iconize,’ (eikonizein), reflect Symeon’s understanding that the only non-written means to provide visual access to divinity is through images that have been valorized through traditional practice. In an echo of the iconodules of an earlier age, he notes that images communicate ‘as if by other [kinds of] writing’ (hōs grammasin allois), a reminder that in the Orthodox tradition the written word and the painted figure are equivalent.17
And because both media serve to make the divine visible, Symeon stresses the need
for clergy to control their production. The equivalence between word and image, in
turn, enables Symeon to group three seemingly unrelated topics — religious theatre,
Purgatory, and the confession of faith — into one Chapter.
Symeon’s first objection has to do with the vernacular practice, sanctioned by
the Catholic Church, of embellishing icons with what he regards as spurious
materials:
… they often portray holy images contrary to tradition in another way; and
they dress them up with human hair and clothes, instead of using the clothing
and hairstyles in icons, they dress them up with human hair and garments –
not the image of hair and garments, but they are the hair and garments of some
person, and not the icon and model (typos) of their prototypes.18
One of the reasons Symeon objects to hair and clothing is that such artificial touches
are “contrary to tradition,” neither practiced nor approved by the Church Fathers. But
what concerns him even more is the use of a specific person’s hair and clothing,
because they are things, objects from the natural world, as opposed to images of
things. Symeon believes such objects, because of their physicality, cannot function as
proper models (typoi) of divine prototypes.
Symeon’s chief concern is that physical objects might block or otherwise
obscure the laity’s access to divinity – an access that icons, through their careful
construction, makes possible. Icons do not provide access to divinity through their
realistic depiction but through their invocation of divine prototypes – an enterprise
that, in the Orthodox tradition, is incompatible with pictorial realism. Hence Symeon’s belief that the use of spurious visual/tactile stimuli distracts the laity from
the kinds of prayer and communion with the divine that Symeon regards as proper.
The unspoken message here is that accommodating the wishes of uneducated
laypersons, through permitting them to decorate an already worthy icon, constitutes
idolatry and may betray the very people the practice is intended to serve.19
Once this heretical habit has been delineated, Symeon describes the even more
abhorrent practice of representing divine matters using human beings “as if in a
drama” (hōs en dramati):
For contrary to the canons, they put men at crossroads and on platforms [lit.,
“plataion”], as if they were representing iconically things pertaining to the
Annuciation of the Virgin and Mother of God, and the crucifixion of the
Savior, etc. And one represents the Virgin, and they call that man Mary;
another is called the angel, …20
Introduced as it is after his discussion of hairy, dressed-up icons, Symeon regards
dramatic depictions of divinity as even worse. As for having men play women,
Symeon’s implicit attitude can be discerned in his explanation of why Latins have to
glue a fake beard onto the man playing the Almighty:
. . . since the Latins don’t hold shaving them to be effeminate and contrary to
natural law they put on fake ones, hence showing they contrive things as they
see fit. For if the prophets saw that God has a beard, iconically speaking, we
too have beards in honor of nature and according to what God intended.21
In an amusing reversal of the usual trope of ‘orientalization’ Symeon depicts Latin
males as effeminate, intensifying the insult to Western dignity by implying that the
man playing the Heavenly Father, being beardless, probably wasn’t a real man to begin with. Greek culture had distinguished men since antiquity by the growth of
their beards, a marker that (as Symeon indicates) had acquired Christian connotations
as well. For Symeon clean chins were markers of only two kinds of adults: women
and eunuchs. The Latin male’s habit of looking like a woman or castrato was
especially perverse for Catholic monks and clergy, who also performed in these plays
(see below), because they had supposedly renounced the care of their bodies to
become men of the cloth.22
The heretical use of human hair on sacred icons, now complemented by the
decadent use of human hair on androgynous, clean-shaven men masquerading as
sacred figures, lays bare the perversity of Latin sacred representational practice. But
Symeon’s critique addresses the dogmatic as well as the cultural level: as a preamble
to his critique of the filioque heresy, he critiques the Latin’s manner of representing
the Holy Spirit in performance:
. . . they portray the Ancient of Days holding onto a winged dove in place of
the Holy Spirit, thereby showing that they follow their own devices. For if
they believe the Spirit proceeds also from the Son, why don’t they portray the
Son sitting together with the Ancient of Days, so that both dispatch the
dove?23
Symeon points out that the Latins don’t even know how to portray their own heresy
properly on-stage. To create a false creed is one thing; failing to reinforce that fallacy
through other false practices like plays speaks to a fundamental incoherence in
Catholicism’s approach to sacred matters. Symeon is aware of the didactic and
propagandistic function of these sacre rappresentazioni, and shows how they have
backfired against their own practitioners.

Representing divinity through human beings on a public stage is foreign to
Symeon’s thinking; equally foreign is the use of special effects, intended to heighten
the ‘realism’ of the action. Symeon describes how Latins make use of the crude
apparatus of animals’ blood and guts in their Passion Plays, to create the illusion of
the crucified Christ.24 Taking Symeon at his word, these plays consist of using one
beast’s blood, stuck into another beast’s bladder, to provide fake blood for a fake
(and, of course, androgynous) Christ. All Symeon needed to do was compare this
debased human form of representation with the implicitly superior form of the sacred
icon:
What, then, is that man being crucified? And what is the blood? Real, or an
icon? And if it’s an icon, how on earth could it be a man and blood?25 For an
icon is not a man. But if they are really man and blood, then it’s not an icon.
So then, what is that man? And what is that blood? And whose is it supposed
to be, the Savior’s? Or is it shared? Bless me, how bizarre!26
The repetition of the term ‘icon’ here drives home the absurdity of the Latin
enterprise; no human being, and certainly no animal’s blood, can serve the icon’s
function, by virtue of their physicality. As an Italian translator of Symeon’s Dialogue
points out, this kind of representation places such a heavy emphasis on Jesus’
physical form that it effectively wipes out the consensus painstakingly established
through numerous church councils, stressing Jesus’ dual nature as both man and
God.27 It is in this context of lambasting Catholics for the use of public stages,
androgynous actors and crude props instead of sacred icons that Symeon discusses his
conduct of the Office of the Three Children; for it is only with the Office that Symeon
appears to be on shaky theological ground:
And if they should censure us for the furnace of the three children, yet shall
they not rejoice completely. For we do not light up a furnace, but candles for
lights, and we offer incense to God as is customary, and we portray an image
of [lit., “iconize”] an angel, we do not send down a man. And we offer only
singing children, as pure as those Three Children, to sing the verses from their
canticle according to tradition.28
The initial focus on how a physical site called a “furnace” is represented in the nave
of an Orthodox church indicates that Symeon is particularly concerned about the
perception that he has created a stage area for the Office. So he makes a point of
listing the more mundane details of traditional Orthodox ritual – the use of liturgical
lamps and the purification of the area with incense, signifying the presence of the
Holy Spirit – to emphasize what he regards as its proper liturgical setting. Symeon
argues that if the furnace were intended as a set for a play, he would have created a
realistic kiln complete with flames rising up to the skies as the biblical story calls for.
Symeon’s refusal to adopt western scenic conventions extends to his use of an
icon instead of a human being to depict the angel. The presentation of the “furnace”
as a sacred, liturgically-constructed performance area instead of a stage, the use of an
icon instead of an actor, along with the use of choirboys to sing odes from the canons
in the usual, liturgical fashion – they do not, Symeon implies, deliver lines like actors in a play – are cited to support Symeon’s contention that the Office is a liturgical
performance.
In accordance with the Byzantine tradition of liturgical exegesis, Symeon goes
on to describe the ways in which each class of performer in the Office symbolizes its
divine prototype:
And all these children sealed [in Christ] and holy, typify those Children. And
since all are consecrated, each typifies the one of his own rank. And while the
first hierarch typifies the Lord, the bishops typify the first of the apostles,
since they also possess their grace, and the priests the seventy; and the
deacons the Levites; and the other sub-deacons the rank of the prophets.29
Symeon insists that the performers in the Office are sanctioned liturgical performers
who, through their training and careful mode of self-presentation, model on behalf of
the divine participants in the eternal, heavenly liturgy. By identifying what he
regards as the iconic aspects of the Office’s performance, and by delineating the
divine figures the Office’s celebrants typify, Symeon lays out both the specific modes
through which divinity is made visible and audible to his congregation, as well as
how he intends this liturgical performance to be interpreted.
Perhaps because he dwells on the significance, or rather the signification of
liturgical celebrants, Symeon ends his treatment of Latin sacred plays by addressing
the issue of clerical actors. Although the presence of clergy as actors may justify
representations of biblical episodes in Catholic eyes, to Symeon their participation
only makes things worse. Given the condemnations of clerical acting from the
earliest ecumenical councils onward, Symeon needs only note that when it comes to
modeling on behalf of divinity, the clergy already know their lines, cues and
blocking: They model what is needed in these: in baptizing, in conducting services, in
washing each other’s feet, as well as the rest that the Savior told us, that is
given to priests and hierarchs to do. And the singers too, who are given
authority to read, do so in reading and singing.30
Symeon reminds Catholic celebrants that they already model through carefully
prescribed modes of ritual conduct, as established by Christ himself; theatrical modes
of representation were specifically banned.
In contrast to the practice of Latin plays, Symeon offers a familiar model for
Christian mimesis, albeit one that does not involve acting:
Nobody is capable of playing the Virgin birth-giver of God (Theotokos)
whether with respect to her chastity, or the reception of the Holy Spirit into
her flesh and the bearing of the Lord, as she alone did this, and by herself; but
he who imitates her example, living chastely and seeking to live as a celibate,
is also worthy of the reception of grace, as much as can be given. Moreover,
it ought to be desired by everyone to play her in these agreed ways.31
Here, Symeon openly embraces verbs associated with imitation — mimesthai, ‘to
imitate,’ and ekmimesthai, ‘to play’ – but with the twist that imitation now
encompasses a psychological practice, i.e., a life of chastity and spiritual purity.
Symeon agreed with his Latin counterparts on the virtues of imitation, but only when
it involved adopting the spiritual examples of Jesus and Mary.

Excerpt from the Dialogue in Christ, by Archbishop Symeon of Thessalonica

CHAPTER 23:
That it is necessary to portray divine matters piously and righteously, and in accordance with tradition.

But what else have they introduced, contrary to Church tradition? The holy and august images have been offered piously in honor of divine prototypes, and indicate iconically both veneration

in representing these holy images by the faithful, and the truth. For they represent the Word Made Flesh for our sake, and all of His divine works and sufferings and miracles and mysteries on our behalf, and moreover the sacrosanct image of His holy ever virgin mother, and His saints, and the very things of which the Gospel and the rest of Divine Scripture speak, as in other writings, they teach iconically, through coloring and the rest of the materials [i.e., of painting]. These men are always innovating, as is said, and they often portray holy images contrary to tradition in another way; and instead of using the clothing and hairstyles in icons, they dress them up with human hair and garments – not the image of hair and garments, but they are the hair and garments of some person, and not the icon and model (typos) of their prototypes. And they depict these things and dress them up contrary to piety, which is opposed to holy icons, as the canon from the sixth ecclesiastical council
establishes. For it prohibits depicting things that do not benefit simpler folk. And that which is contrary to canon law is not pure. And the Fathers do not practice this. But moreover, they
produce some things as if in a drama, contrary to divine law. For contrary to the canons, they put men at crossroads and on platforms, as if they were representing iconically things pertaining to the Annunciation of the Virgin and Mother of God, and the crucifixion of the Savior, etc. And one
models on behalf of the Virgin, and they call that man Mary; another is called the angel, and another the Ancient of Days, on whom they put white hair for a beard. For since the Latins don’t hold shaving them to be effeminate and contrary to natural law they put on fake ones, hence showing they contrive things as they see fit. For if the prophets saw that God has a beard, iconically speaking, we too
have beards in honor of nature and according to what God intended. So they act contrary to what God intended, shaving to the disgrace of nature, especially priests and monks, who defend this bodily vanity.2 Moreover, they portray the Ancient of Days holding onto a winged dove in place of the Holy Spirit, thereby showing that they follow their own devices.3 For if they believe the Spirit proceeds
also from the Son, why don’t they portray the Son sitting together with the Ancient of Days, so that both dispatch the dove?4 But instead, they should also send the Son to the one they call Mary. For the Spirit was not incarnated, even though it hoveredover the Virgin. Yet all these things are contrary to reason, alien to Church tradition, and designed to insult the mysteries and Christian piety. And
what things are modeled for the sake of Christ’s crucifixion? Putting blood from brute animals into animals’ guts, they substitute it for the Lord’s blood, to man’s hands and feet and chest, as
he pretends to be crucified. What, then, is that man being crucified? And what is the blood? Real, or an icon? And if it’s an icon, how on earth could it be a man and blood? For an icon is
not a man. But if they are really man and blood, then it’s not an icon. So then, what is that man? And what is that blood? And whose is it supposed to be, the Savior’s, οr is it shared? Bless me, how bizarre! These things are contrary to the holy icons and the Gospels and, moreover, the awesome mysteries of Christ. But why did they undertake these things? Which saint taught such things? Verily, these men
have made innovations in everything. And they do these things at crossroads and on platforms, setting out men contrary to canon law; and exhibiting dramas about matters beyond reason,
and about miracles which it is not right [to dramatize] and calling a dove, a bird, the Holy Spirit. And such men chant and respond these things on feast days.5 And the pretend Mary receives a stupid dove instead of the Spirit. And again, as we said, someone is crucified, called Christ by these men, the crucifixion is not real, and the shedding of blood from some animal is an insult to the flowing blood
of God. And yet the Lord commands that we commemorate the mysteries not in this way but rather as He Himself taught, through which He acts again and ministers himself; and the body and blood being sanctified are his. So then, aren’t things of this sort perilous, and extremely perilous? My man, if you wish to present these things and to teach men, minister as he handed it down to you; teach using
words, write using treatises, and make icons with colors, as is traditional. Wherefore also the truth is formed in a perfect image, like the writing in a book, and divine grace is in them, also, since the things imprinted are holy. But these men, turning away once and for all, rush headlong to forbidden
things. And if they should censure us for the furnace of the three children, yet shall they not rejoice completely.6 For we do not light up a furnace, but candles for lights, and we offer incense to God as is customary, and we portray an image of an angel, we do not lower a man. And we offer only singing children, as pure as those Three Children, to sing the verses from their canticle according to tradition. And all these children sealed [in Christ] and holy, typify those Children. And since all are consecrated, each typifies the one of his own rank. And while the first hierarch typifies the Lord, the bishops typify the first of the apostles, since they also possess their grace, and the priests the seventy; and the deacons the Levites; and the other sub-deacons the rank of the Prophets. And from another perspective the ranking heirarch typifies the Divine Word made flesh, the priests the higher-placed ranks, the deacons the lower liturgical powers; and the rest of the clergy, along with the Orthodox
laity, the lowest ranks. And all of them have rank according to their station, and a corresponding grace. Wherefore it is not unfitting for the children to portray those three Children, for it is possible to possess their grace. But to portray the Lord in a crucifixion, and to pretend he is killed, and pours forth blood, is neither truthful nor according to divine tradition. And for the Mother of God to be portrayed through a man or a weak woman, and to receive a dove instead of the Holy Spirit, is entirely
out of place. And to decorate the saints using someone else’s hair and garments, and dressing them up contrary to piety, is not handed down by the Fathers; simply put, to reveal divine things as if on-stage in a drama is not pious, not handed down, nor worthy of Christians. And if they should say that practicing priests perform these things, and therefore it is possible for them to model the Lord and his virgin mother – it makes no sense to perform in them. For they model what is needed in
these: in baptizing, in conducting services, in washing each other’s feet, as well as the rest that the Savior told us, that is given to priests and hierarchs to do. And the singers too, who are given authority to read, do so in reading and singing. Surely not in being crucified and shedding blood falsely or, worse, blood from an animal; unless someone is asked to shed his own blood as a true martyr, so that he is afflicted in the flesh as in the crucifixion with suffering and passions, (as Paul said), so that “The world is crucified to me, and I to the world,”7 and everyone ought to hasten to do this. And nobody is capable of playing the Virgin birth-giver of God (Theotokos) whether with respect to her chastity, or the reception of the Holy Spirit into her flesh and the bearing of the Lord, as she alone did this, and by herself; but he who imitates her example, living chastely and seeking to live as a celibate, is also worthy of the reception of grace, as much as can be given. Moreover, it ought to be desired by everyone to imitate her in these agreed ways. But if they say these things are like divine painted icons, their reasoning is unreasonable, since what is in images is truly an icon — the painted icon of Christ, the iconized blood, and the mother of God in an icon, and an angel, and an apostle, and a bishop and a martyr, and the Holy Spirit in the shape of a dove, and every icon, since icons and scripture are from divinity, is honorable and worthy of veneration: but the imitation of these things by
men is not pious.

“the defense and survival of Mozarabism depends basically on us”

Video Trailer de la Misa Mozarabe de Santa Eulalia de Merida

Taken from the book: Mozarabs, Hispanics,
and the Cross (<- click link to order) by Raúl Gómez-Ruiz, S.D.S.

(Orbis Books, Maryknoll, New York, 2007)

“Some people in Toledo don’t even know anything about us or that we even exist. Some think we are the Moors. We are not the Moors, we are the Old Christians,” asserted Doña Justa Córdoba Sánchez-Bretaño. It takes an extraordinarily interesting bit of sleuthing to uncover the story of how so many inhabitants of one and the same Spanish city can have become completely unaware of the existence, never mind history and faith practices, of a once dominant part of their population. But such is the story of the Mozarabs of Toledo.

Present-day Mozarabs claim to form a community comprised of the descendants of those Hispano-Roman and Visigothic Christians who held onto their Catholic faith despite the vicissitudes of Islamic invasion and the need to adapt culturally to the dominant culture. Through the centuries they mingled and intermarried with subsequent conquerors and inhabitants of Toledo including the Arabs, Berbers, Syrians, Castilians, Galicians, and French who made their home among them. During the more than 370 years of Islamic domination they spoke Arabic and acquired the cultural characteristics of the dominant Arabic culture: their building styles and techniques, agricultural methods and products, clothing styles and materials, stress on learning, and religious outlook. Thomas Burman notes that in the course of becoming Arabicized, Mozarabs became partially Islamicized through their familiarity with Islamic books, religious language, and patterns of thought; this is especially evident in their religious-apologetic literary output. Since the reconquest of Toledo in 1085, Mozarabs have blended with the general Spanish populace due to the social pressures that occur when a subaltern population enters into the realm of a more dominant one. This process can be traced partially through the change from Arabic to Romance names during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Over the course of time, many Mozarab families were subsumed into the dominant culture and disappeared as part of a distinct cultural group or forgot their origins, as Doña Justa asserted in the opening quotation. For long periods of time those who despite everything maintained their sense of identity have suffered marginalization and domination, as I will recount.

Since 1996 I have come to know personally various Mozarabs through interviews, and I have been present at some of their community events. Who, then, are these people? Mozarabs speak modern-day Castilian, though they at one time spoke a particular Romance dialect. Both adult males and females work as shopkeepers, professors, government officials, lawyers, and in other professions. Economically they appear to fall within various economic levels, but those I have met range from the middle income to wealthy. Some own estates or farms, while others work as craftsmen or are in various ranks of the Spanish military. In terms of social class they rank in the upper-middle to the titled classes. I think of a widow I met at a ceremony in June 2000, a marquesa, whose husband had been a high-ranking military officer under Generalissimo Francisco Franco. Nonetheless, in language, appearance, dress, lifestyle, occupation, education, religious practice, and so forth they otherwise appear to differ little from the general population of Toledo, and in fact, as Doña Justa reminds us, many of them feel that most of their compatriots do not even know they exist.

So what makes them different from their compatriots? The key difference is their liturgy and the social status they have received. Both of these derive from their self-identification as the original Old Christians of Spain. Ildefonso, Juan, and Salvador, the sons of a couple who are prominent lawyers, when asked what it meant to be Mozarab, answered, “We feel proud because it means to be descended from Old Christians; to be heirs to (and carry) a tradition that is so ancient (and has been passed on for so many generations).” Because of their ancestors’ cooperation in the Christian reconquest of Toledo, King Alfonso VI of León-Castile (1065–1109) entered into an agreement or fuero with the Mozarabs of Toledo. Alfonso’s fuero granted them notable exemptions and immunities and also raised their social status to that of nobleza e hidalguía. In order to identify Mozarabs and to ensure their support of the parishes, a system of tazmías (registers) and diezmos (tithes) was established under Alfonso VI and developed by subsequent rulers and church officials. The members of the community were taxed yearly and their support subscribed to the parish to which they were assigned. In this way a system of identification was kept in place until it was eliminated by the desamortización (divestment) of 1834. Doing away with it then necessitated significant reconstructive work later on, as we shall see.

Over the course of time the original six parishes have come to be housed at two sites, Santa Eulalia y San Marcos and Santas Justa y Rufina. Nonetheless, all Mozarabs are still identified with one or another of the six parishes. Those ascribed to the parishes of San Marcos, Santa Eulalia, and San Lucas are assigned to the parish Church of Santa Eulalia y San Marcos. Those ascribed to the parishes of San Sebastián, San Torcuato, and Santas Justa y Rufina meet at the latter’s church.

Despite a long history of conquest, despite cultural, social, religious, and ecclesial conflict, and despite suffering caused by alienation and limited resources, Mozarabs have persisted. Mozarabs of Toledo tend to be conservative politically and religiously. This was a trait upheld by various of my older informants, although some of my younger ones gave evidence of this in terms of a desire to pass on their heritage intact. Mozarabs call their conservatism conservadurismo. They have worked at conserving a sense of self by appealing to the past as well as rallying around Mozarabic Catholicism. Mozarabs call this sense of self mozarabía (mozarabicity).
But how does a minority culture maintain this sense of self amid all the forces of change and even repression? The people passed on their mozarabía from generation to generation by means of the tazmías, the system of registers first established by Alfonso VI. Once these were eliminated, their family histories helped them remember. This was especially the case between the period from the end of the tazmías in 1834 until the 1950s; during this time grandparents told the stories of their ancestors to their grandchildren. Various informants told me their grandmothers and great-aunts especially spoke to them of their mozarabía.

Through my interactions with them and by examining their literature I have discovered that the shape, purposes, and meanings of the contemporary Mozarabs of Toledo are particularly expressed in the following institutions, arts, and learning: the Hermandad Mozárabe (Mozarab Brotherhood); the Hispano-Mozarabic rite; the Mozarabic rite parishes of Toledo; the charting of genealogies; the recourse to Spanish and Mozarab history; Good Friday processions; the emblem they have created for themselves named the Cross of Alfonso VI; the Lignum Crucis reliquary; Mozarabic architecture and artwork in churches; the images of saints they have installed in the Mozarabic rite parishes; Mozarabic chant; the annual gathering of the members of the Hermandad (called a capítulo, chapter); and periodic congresses at which both Mozarab and other scholars make presentations about Mozarab culture, some of which have been published and which I cite in this book. This short list gives an idea of the depth and range of the institutions, arts, and learning that are being generated by Mozarabs. Together these institutions and rituals have helped Mozarabs form a social group or community that shares common characteristics and interests as well as perceiving itself as distinct from larger Spanish society.

The construction of contemporary Mozarab culture is, of course, the result of the power exercised, and the choices and responses made, by the members of the community in relation to the larger Spanish society and church. And, of course, certain members of the community and of the larger society and church wield greater power in this realm. Among them is the archbishop of Toledo, who functions as the ecclesiastical superior of the Hispano-Mozarabic rite as well as of the Hermandad Mozárabe. This puts him in a position to check the exercise of power by those who rank below him in regard to Mozarabs, both clerical and lay.

And yet, for all of the archbishop’s power, a certain negotiation of power nevertheless takes place between the archbishop and those subject to him. For the male and female officers of the Hermandad are able to influence decisions made about who is identified as a Mozarab and what is considered as mozarabía. Don Mario Arellano García in particular has great power as the one who keeps the register of members; he also frequently publishes scholarly and popular articles, and edits the community’s official chronicle, the Crónica Mozárabe. The original Crónica Mozárabe was written in 754 by an anonymous author who probably lived in Córdoba; it was written in Latin and intended as a continuation of Isidore of Seville’s chronicle. The Toledan community began the contemporary Crónica Mozárabe in 1968 in order to maintain contact among the Mozarab parishioners in “diaspora” as well as in Toledo.

Others who wield extensive power in the construction of Mozarab culture include the Mozarabic rite chaplains, particularly those assigned as pastors to the parishes. Chief among these is Don Enrique Carrillo Morales, pastor of the parish of Santa Eulalia y San Marcos, who also functions as the co-prior of the Hermandad Mozárabe. But even regular members of the community and certain outsiders engaged in the study, promotion, and publication of works on Mozarab culture contribute to the construction of the culture. Likewise, in the civic realm, Mozarabs have acquired prominence through their interactions with city and provincial governmental authorities. Some of this is the result of asserting their status through the Hermandad as well as through their granting of Hermandad membership to high government officials by reason of their office.

The gradual loss of Mozarab self-identity was to result in tremendous reconstructive detective work later on. In the early 1950s Mozarabic rite chaplains Don Anastasio Granados and Don Luis Casañas encouraged Mozarab parishioners to reaffirm their mozarabía and their canonical rights to the rite. They began to gather names of Mozarab families and to visit them. In 1957, led by newly named pastors of the Mozarabic rite parishes Don Jaime Colomina Torner and Don Balbino Gómez-Chacón, members of the community continued this initiative by means of a census. They went from house to house to remind people of their Mozarab heritage and to encourage their registration in one of the parishes. They identified at that time five hundred parishioners of Santa Eulalia y San Marcos and fifty of Santas Justa y Rufina. Most Mozarabs still lived in Toledo then.

The census takers drew upon the network of relatives as well as on the surviving parish registers and records of marriages. Their work was made considerably easier by Colomina Torner, who discovered the tazmías of Santa Eulalia dating to 1830.18 This facilitated the construction of family genealogies and the revival of interest in Mozarab history among the parishioners. By studying marriage registers and phone books, the register of Mozarab families with canonical rights to the ancient personal parishes of Toledo slowly came to be reconstituted. Yet of almost ten thousand families recorded in the first one-third of the nineteenth century, only five hundred families were counted in a census taken in 1958. This was because, first, people had lost interest in their old parishes when they were no longer required to pay tithes; second, their old noble status had been degraded under the Bourbons; and third, the Roman church had decided to count only the eldest daughter as Mozarab.

So in 1966 the community reorganized itself as part of the effort to identify Mozarabs and began to revitalize its old brotherhood as a way to help them recover their cultural and liturgical heritage. Don José Antonio Dávila García-Miranda (Dávila) reconstituted the register on behalf of the revival of the old Hermandad; he describes how he studied the marriage register of San Marcos from the end of the 1800s until 1966, thereby creating a genealogical record.19 The original brotherhood was founded in 1513 as a confraternity at the parish of San Lucas. It was formed to foster devotion among Mozarabs to the Virgin by means of the Rosary and the Salve on Saturday evenings. In 1867 the city of Toledo became the official civil protector of the Mozarab confraternity, then called La Ilustre y Antiquísima Cofradía-Esclavitud de Nuestra Señora de la Esperanza de San Lucas (The Illustrious and Ancient Servitude of Our Lady of Hope of San Lucas). It ceased to exist shortly thereafter.

The community renamed the brotherhood La Ilustre y Antiquísima Hermandad de Caballeros Mozárabes de Nuestra Señora de la Esperanza, de la Imperial Ciudad de Toledo and its feminine branch, the Damas Mozárabes. The name was revised in 1999 to include the Damas Mozárabes in the title. The new name of the confraternity translated into English is The Illustrious and Ancient Brotherhood of Mozarab Gentlemen and Ladies of Our Lady of Hope of the Imperial City of Toledo. The Constitutions of the Hermandad Mozárabe state that its purpose is “to perpetuate the piety and the ancient traditions of the Mozarabs.” The brotherhood also aims to gather Mozarabs in Toledo and elsewhere for the purpose of repairing the harm done materially and morally by the Spanish Civil War (1936–39); maintaining, dignifying, and actualizing the ancestral liturgy, including the use of Spanish in its celebration; and recognizing the nobility of its members. Upon its reestablishment in 1966, the archbishop of Toledo resumed his role as titular head of the brotherhood and the mayor of Toledo resumed the role of its civil protector.

Another aspect in the reorganization of the community has been to record again the names of families and individuals who are members of the community “by birth” or lineage. The leaders of the community have taken periodic censuses based on the census of 1957 as well as the work done on behalf of the Hermandad. The names gathered through this process were recorded in provisional Padrones (census registers) in 1971 and 1973. A definitive Padrón de las Nobles Familias de Caballeros Mozárabes de Toledo (Census Register of the Noble Families of Mozarab Gentlemen of Toledo) was published in 1982 with the approval of Cardinal González Martín.24 Since then, three appendices have been published as part of the Crónica Mozárabe.

Mozarabs wishing to claim membership must prove descent from families listed in the official register of the Mozarab families. To describe categories of membership they use the terms nato (born or natural), de estirpe (by stock), linaje (lineage), ascendencia (descent), ius familiæ (by family right) and ius sanguinis (by blood right). If their forebears are not listed in the official register and subsequent appendices, they are to solicit “rehabilitation” (rehabilitación) through the pastor of one of the Mozarabic parishes by submitting appropriate birth or baptismal records and a detailed genealogy that show direct Mozarab descent either through the father’s or mother’s line.

The keeping of the Padrón has become the means to record the names of those who have rights to the rite by descent. It is updated periodically by Arellano García who, together with his wife, Doña Justa Córdoba Sánchez-Bretaño, engages in genealogical research in order to verify calidad mozárabe (Mozarab authenticity). This has resulted in the identification of over thirteen hundred Mozarab families so far in the world. The majority of the families live in Spain, and most of them, approximately one thousand, have been identified as members of Santa Eulalia y San Marcos. Arellano García estimates five hundred Mozarab families actually live in Toledo, another three hundred to four hundred families live in Madrid, and the rest are scattered throughout Spain.

Initially Mozarab nobility and personal membership in the parishes were transmitted in Toledo and elsewhere to all of the descendants of the first generation acknowledged by King Alfonso VI’s fuero, whether male or female. This was confirmed by the Sacred Roman Rota in 1551. However, Pope Julius III in 1553 restricted this to Mozarabs living in Toledo. As a consequence, only descendants in the male line could claim the right. This was done to resolve conflicts between Latin and Mozarabic pastors in Toledo regarding tithes due the parishes. In another reversed decision, Archbishop Luis María de Borbón of Toledo in 1815 restored calidad mozárabe once again to those living outside of Toledo.

Today, adult male and female Mozarabs who wish to affirm their calidad mozárabe are invited to become members of the Hermandad Mozárabe. They are required to present genealogical proof of descent from any of the parishioners of the six Mozarabic parishes. Their children may also become members of the Hermandad when they come of age. Calidad mozárabe is transmitted according to regulations set out by canon law. Namely, Mozarabs must be direct descendants through the male line either of a Mozarab father or the eldest married daughter of a Mozarab family. All sons of a Mozarab family are considered to be Mozarabs. Daughters are also Mozarabs, but they retain their calidad mozárabe only if they marry a Mozarab or if their non-Mozarab spouse opts for membership in the Mozarabic rite at the time of marriage. He can acquire parroquialidad mozárabe (membership in a Mozarabic rite parish) at the time of marriage. The children are then considered Mozarabs as well. If the spouse decides not to join a Mozarabic parish, the children of the Mozarab daughter are not considered Mozarabs. However, if the wife is widowed, she may recover her calidad mozárabe.
Calidad mozárabe is dependent on descent and membership in one of the six parishes. Thus, recovery of status as a Mozarab requires enrollment in a Mozarabic rite parish, even if one lives outside of Toledo. The Mozarab is expected to support the parish and its assistance programs for needy members. Mozarab men and women who are members of the Hermandad may participate in the Good Friday processions and other public religious acts that are of importance to the community, especially if they are celebrated in the Hispano-Mozarabic rite. Non-Mozarab men and women who contribute to the welfare of the community or promote knowledge of it and its rite can also join the Hermandad as honorary members after application and acceptance by the Cabildo (governing body) of the Hermandad. They do not, however, acquire calidad mozárabe nor parroquialidad mozárabe.

THE LITURGY AS A SOURCE OF IDENTITY
The requirement that those wishing to recover their calidad mozárabe must enroll in one of the Mozarabic parishes raises the issue of the rite’s role in the community’s identity. Through speaking with various Mozarabs of Toledo I learned that they very much link self-identity to what they claim as their liturgical heritage. For example, Alicia Arellano, a Mozarab, wrote an open letter to the community calling upon it to
take responsibility for passing on mozarabía by participating in the liturgy and by getting involved in its promotion. Or as Doña Justa put it: “There is no difference in religiosity and culture; the difference is the liturgy and the fact that the Mozarabic parishes are personal and not territorial like the Latin ones.” This was affirmed by Don Felipe Jurado Puñal, who declared to me that being Mozarab “means to be the descendant of people who maintained their rite; the link is the rite.” The Crónica Mozárabe affirms this notion as well noting that the community is “conscious of the historico-liturgical treasure that encompasses the symbolism of Mozarabism.” Another member of the community, Don Antonio Muñoz Perea, declares in an article in the Crónica Mozárabe that “the defense and survival of Mozarabism depends basically on us; as long as there are faithful there will be worship and parishes; if one day there are no faithful it will be the end of the Hispano-Mozarabic rite.” He goes on to declare that if “our churches are filled we will be able to ask for the approval of our sacramentals so that we can celebrate the Sacraments in our proper rite, to which we have a right especially to Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, and Anointing of the Sick.” So that the community is aware that the rite is for its use and forms part of its religious and cultural heritage, the 1984 Constitutions of the Hermandad explicitly attest to the importance of the liturgy to its identity, with Article 1 declaring that one of the main purposes of the Hermandad is “the conservation of the traditions of the historico-liturgical Mozarab community.” The pastors of the community have encouraged it to hold on to this liturgical heritage as well as to participate in the rite’s updating. In 1987 Cardinal González Martín affirmed the community’s efforts by authorizing the Mozarabic rite parishes to celebrate the Mozarabic Mass on a regular basis. Since the approval of the new ordo missæ in 1991, Santa Eulalia y San Marcos does so every Sunday at noon as its only eucharistic celebration. By contrast, Santas Justa y Rufina only celebrates the Hispano-Mozarabic rite Mass on the first Saturday of the month.

Mozarabs attribute the link between liturgy and their culture to the Islamic conquest. The Mozarabic liturgy became the “all-encompassing literary expression of Mozarab culture, the best dispensed to all the social classes, and the fount and source of collective life, the living center of the community’s resistance to the diverse centrifugal forces of assimilation.” Although they succeeded in living with the Muslims, their own culture, particularly in the ninth century, was centered upon and unified by the church, “which was not only the custodian and purveyor of learning and tradition from the past but also the educator and trainer for immediate tasks confronting the Christians.” Don Cleofé Sánchez, also a Mozarab, writes that “in mozarabía there is a line that has threaded its way through the melody of life’s ups and downs and those difficulties inherent in a culture and that is the liturgy.” It appears that Mozarab genealogy, law, history, and art have revolved around and been subordinated to the Mozarabic liturgy. This link between the community, the church, and the liturgy has been strengthened over the centuries. What were the cultural forces that occasioned this link, and what efforts were made to preserve the liturgy?
PRESERVING THE CULTURE THROUGH THE LITURGY
Over the centuries the Hispano-Mozarabic rite has remained the distinctive liturgical celebration of Mozarabs. Even after Cardinal Francisco Ximénez de Cisneros (1436–1517) installed a corps of Mozarabic chaplains in the Corpus Christi chapel of the cathedral in 1502 for the express purpose of celebrating the rite, Mozarabs continued to celebrate it in their parishes. Cardinal Marcelo González Martín had the celebration by Mozarab parishioners in mind when he authorized its actualization in the 1980s. The rite is primarily destined for them. A commission established by González Martín is making efforts as far as possible to bring up to date the sacramental and other liturgical celebrations that compose the rite. The eucharistic celebration has been the starting point. In addition, the marriage rite has been updated and has become an optional rite for all Spanish Catholics. Currently the other sacraments are celebrated according to the Roman rite usage. Mozarabs themselves are keenly aware they are the canonical subjects of the rite and have made their thoughts and desires known in the efforts to update the rite. It is precisely the self-consciousness of Mozarabs of Toledo that is a key factor both in the actualization of the rite and its potential for continued survival.

Courtesy of and Copyright © 2007 by Raúl Gómez-Ruiz

Rito Hispano-Mozárabe, lectura del evangelio (San Pascual)

Canción Popular A La Virgen De Regla

Often called the Maghreb, North-West Africa is today divided from west to east into three countries, Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. Two thousand years ago the area was inhabited by a people called the Berbers, but when the region was conquered by the Roman Empire, it was also colonized by Roman settlers.
Following settlement by the Jewish Diaspora and then the preaching of the Gospel, by the second century the area had started to become a centre of Latin-speaking Orthodoxy. Gradually, both Roman settlers and Romanized Berbers became Christian. In this way the region was to produce figures such as the Church writer Tertullian (c 155 – c 202), the martyr St Cyprian of Carthage (+ 258), the Righteous Monica, her son the philosopher Blessed Augustine, Bishop of Hippo I (+ 430) (1), the martyr St Julia of Carthage (5th century) and many other saints of God.

In the early centuries the Church here was also to be much shaken and divided by various heresies and schisms. There was fanatical Donatism from the fourth century onwards, Manicheanism which so tempted the pagan Augustine, and then Arianism brought by the invading Germanic Vandals in the fifth century. This dissidence and the ensuing schisms were much coloured by ethnic tensions between the wealthier Roman settlers and the poorer native Berbers, some of whom for ethnic and social reasons wished to differentiate themselves from the colonists.

Thus, the heresies and schisms of the region were much conditioned by politically-motivated nationalism. The process here was therefore similar to the rise of the ethnic heresies of Monophysitism and Nestorianism of the Copts in North-East Africa and the Semites in the Middle East. Nevertheless, in those areas Orthodoxy survived, whereas in North-West Africa, where there were once hundreds of Orthodox dioceses and bishops, today there are none. What happened? Let us look and see what we can learn from this tragedy for today.

The beginning of the end of Orthodoxy in North-West Africa came in the year 647 with the arrival from the east of the first Arab invaders, bringing Islam with them. The capture of St Cyprian’s great Christian Metropolia of Carthage in 698 and the gradual Islamization of dissident native Berbers followed. For the Orthodox, Islam was (as it still is) a Christian heresy, or rather a heresy of a heresy. Therefore, for political and ethnic Berber dissidents, Islam was just another opportunity to be independent of Roman colonial administration. However, this still does not explain why here in North-West Africa, Orthodoxy did not survive, unlike in Egypt and the Middle East, where native Orthodox Christianity has survived to this day. When and why then did Orthodoxy disappear in North-West Africa?

Undoubtedly, the main cause was the progressive emigration of Christians of colonial origin, who sought refuge from Islamic taxes elsewhere. Many of them had interests, property and family in other countries of the Western Mediterranean. In a word, they had somewhere else to go. Thus, on the capture of Carthage in 698, there was a huge exodus to Sicily, Spain and elsewhere in the Mediterranean. This exodus especially affected the educated elite, including churchmen, many of whom were not of native Berber origin, but were descendants of the Latin-speaking settlers of Roman times. This emigration continued in the eighth century. Some were even to settle as far north as Germany, as is mentioned in a letter of Pope Gregory II (715-731) to St Boniface.

Nevertheless, many Christians stayed on in North-West Africa throughout the eighth century and relations between Muslims and the remaining Christians, who by now often belonged to the same Berber race, were mainly cordial. Letters from the Christian Maghreb to Rome from the ninth century prove that Christianity was still a living faith at that time too. Although in the tenth century a reference to forty episcopal towns must be more historic rather than real, nevertheless Orthodoxy continued and several bishops and dioceses were active (2). Relations continued with the Patriarchal See in Rome and towards the end of the century, under Pope Benedict VII (974-983), a certain priest called James was sent to Rome to be consecrated Archbishop of Carthage. However, it is from this end of the tenth century that we hear that Christians are abandoning even the local form of Latin, and as in the Middle East, are using Arabic to communicate.

Unlike in North-East Africa and the Middle East, it is in the eleventh century that Orthodoxy finally begins to disappear in the Maghreb. Communities become isolated and ever smaller. For example, the church in Kairouan in Tunisia disappears from history in 1046 with the victory of militant Muslims. A second exodus occurs now, further weakening the Christian presence. In a letter from the Pope of Rome dated 17 December 1053, we hear that there are only five bishops left in all the Maghreb and that they are to recognize Thomas, Archbishop of Carthage as their Metropolitan. Two other bishops, Peter and John, perhaps of Tlemcen in Algeria or Gafsa in Tunisia, are mentioned, but we do not even know the names of the other two bishops at this time. By 1073 the Archbishop of Carthage is called Cyriacus, and there are now only two bishops left in all of North-West Africa. By 1076 he was alone and another bishop, Servandus, for Tunis, had to be consecrated in Rome.

These are the last communications that we have between the Christian Maghreb and Rome, which was by now in any case undergoing its own Gregorian Revolution. From this time on it is clear that surviving Christian communities are ever smaller and fewer, as emigration continues. With the capture of the Christian centre of Tunis in 1159 by the militant Muslim leader Abd al-Mu’min, who in 1160 also chased the Normans from what is now Tunisia, there was a further weakening. Without the protection of the Normans, a third exodus of Christians, following that of the end of the seventh century and the mid-eleventh century, now occurred.

Without monastic centres and writers, the Christians of the Maghreb faced assimilation. Unlike in the Middle East, where there were great figures like St John Damascene, there was no-one to argue the Orthodox cause with understanding of Islam, its culture and its language. There are no literary monuments, no Patristic figures, writing in either Latin or Arabic, from this period. The old Orthodox culture of North-West Africa was disappearing. True, even after the eleventh century, isolated survivals continued. Thus a Christian community is recorded in 1114 in Qal’a in central Algeria. In the mid-twelfth century an Africanized Latin was still being spoken by Orthodox in Gafsa in the south of Tunisia – at a time when Latin was nowhere spoken in Western Europe. And in 1194 a church and community dedicated to the Mother of God is recorded in Nefta, in the south of Tunisia (3).

In the thirteenth century, the apogee of Papal power, Spanish and Italians tried to conquer North-West Africa for Catholicism, as the Spanish had done in the Iberian Peninsula, and convert the Arab-speaking Muslims. However, importing Dominicans and other Catholics and setting up tiny chapels on the coastal fringes of the Maghreb led them nowhere. Not only did they fail to convert Muslims, but some of these imported Catholics within a few years themselves became Muslim (4). Moreover, these new religious imports had no contact whatsoever with the few remaining native Christians of the far older Orthodox Tradition. The latter were faithful, not to the new medieval Catholicism, but to the ancient Orthodox life of North-West Africa.

Thirteenth and fourteenth century Catholicism came from a different planet from that of historic Maghreban Orthodoxy. Thus, even though Berber Christians continued to live in Tunis and Nefzaoua in the south of Tunisia up until the early fifteenth century, they did not recognize the new Catholicism. In the first quarter of the fifteenth century, we even read that the native Christians of Tunis, though much assimilated, extended their church, perhaps because the last Christians from all over the Maghreb had gathered there (5). Moreover, this is the last reference to native Christianity in North-West Africa. Tunis seems to have been the last citadel from over twelve hundred years of Orthodoxy in North-West Africa. With assimilation in the sea of Islam, native Christianity now died out all over the Maghreb.

Enfeebled by ethnic and social division, weakened by the emigration of their elite and deprived of monastic life, not persecuted as such but nevertheless reduced by Islam to second-class citizens, isolated from the outside world, the Orthodox of the Maghreb were over seven centuries assimilated into the Muslim universe. In about 1400, after 700 years of faithfulness, the lamp of Orthodoxy in North-West Africa went out through lack of oil. It left vestiges only in folklore and language. For example, to this day the Touareg word for ’sacrifice’ is ‘tafaske’, derived from the Latin word for Easter ‘Pascha’.

From their tragic history, we can learn various lessons for today:

Firstly, we can learn of the need for Christians of different nationalities to work together in justice, without treating each other as second-class citizens. Whether they are Roman or Berber, Greek or African, Ukrainian or Romanian, Russian or English, they must treat one another as Orthodox Christians, avoiding divisions, putting their Faith, and not their ethnicity, first.

Secondly, we can learn of the vital importance of monastic life and the spiritual and intellectual training given there for clergy, thus ensuring the future survival of the Faith. A local Church can survive even with emigration, providing that it has a monastic basis. Whether, it is in North-West Africa or modern Western Europe, the United States or Australia, a Church without monastic life is a Church destined to close.

Thirdly, we can learn that to oppose the heterodox counter-culture surrounding us, we must first understand it and explain our views in terms and language which it can understand. Whether it is in Arabic or English, French or German, Spanish or Portuguese, a Church which does not speak the local language and understand the local culture, is a Church whose young are doomed to assimilation.

Finally, we can learn that it is vital for Orthodox not to become isolated from one another. If Orthodox have contact with other Orthodox, especially in other countries, they are more likely to remain Orthodox, remaining faithful to the Tradition, resisting local assimilation through uniatization and other forms of secularism.

May the Saints of North-West Africa, led by St Cyprian, protect us!

Notes:
1 Now called Annaba. In 1963 Matushka was the last Christian to be baptized in St Anne’s church in Blessed Augustine’s City of Annaba, before it was destroyed the very next day by Muslim bulldozers.
2 See P. 332 of Le Christianisme maghrébin (LCM) by Mohamed Talbi in Indigenous Christian Communities in Islamic Lands, M. Gervers and R. Bikhazi, Toronto, 1990. I am indebted to this valuable article, which is largely based on Arabic sources, for much of this article.
3 LCM, Pp. 338-9
4 LCM, Pp. 342 and 346
5 LCM, Pp. 344-45

courtesy of: http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/maghreb.htm

PRIME ROMAN ORDER

THE CHURCH, ITS MINISTERS, AND THE ORNAMENTS THEREOF

THE document from whence this journal’s title has been taken is commonly known as Ordo Romanus Primus and is a directory of the ceremonies of solemn or public mass, celebrated in Rome by the pope himself (or his deputy) in the year 700 A.D. , at which all the clergy and people of the Church of Rome were present or at least represented, and in which they all fulfilled their several functions in the exercise of that royal priesthood which St. Peter tells us is the common property of the body of baptized Christians.

CHRISTOPHORVS, humilis discipulus, servum servorum Dei, indignus nomine et professione monachi, omnibus mentis desidiam animique vagationem utili manuum occupatione, et delectabili novitatum meditatione declinare et calcare volentibus, retributionem coelestis praemii!
Legimus in exordio mundanae creationis, hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem Dei conditum et inspiratione divini spiraculi animatum, tantaeque dignitatis excellentia caeteris animantibus praerogatum, ut rationis capax divinae prudentiae, consilii ingeniique mereretur participium, arbitriique libertate donatus solius conditoris sui suspiceret voluntatem et revereretur imperium. qui astu diabolico misere deceptus, licet propter inobedientiae culpam privilegrium inmortalitatis amiserit, tamen scientiae et intelligentiae dignitatem adeo in posteritatis propaginem transtulit, ut quicunque curam sollicitudinemque addiderit, totius artis ingeniique capacitatem quasi haereditario iure adipisci possit.
Huiusmodi intentionem humana suscipiens sollertia, et in diversis actibus suis insistens lucris et voluptatibus, per temporum incrementa, tandem ad praedestinata christianae religionis perduxit tempora, factumque est, ut quod ad laudem et gloriam nominis sui condidit dispositio divina, in eius obsequium converteret plebs Deo devota.
Qua propter quod ad nostram usque aetatem sollers praedecessorum transtulit provisio, pia fidelium non neglegat devotio; quodque haereditarium Deus contulit homini, hoc homo omni aviditate amplectatur et laboret adipisci. quo adepto nemo apud se, quasi ex se et non aliunde accepto glorietur; sed in Domino, a quo et per quem omnia, et sine quo nihil, humiliter gratuletur, nec concessa invidiae sacculo recondat, aut tenacis armariolo cordis occultet, sed omni iactantia repulsa, hilari mente simpliciter quaerentibus eroget, metuatque evangelicam illius negotiatoris sententiam, qui domino suo reconsignare dissimulans mammonam foeneratam, omni beneficio privatus oris sui iudicio nequam servi promeruit notam.
Quam sententiam incurrere formidans ego indignus et pene nullius nominis homuncio, quod mihi gratis concessit, quae dat omnibus affluenter et non improperat, divina dignatio, cunctis humiliter discere desiderantibus gratis offero, et ut in me benignitatem dei recognoscant largitatemque mirentur, admoneo et ut idem, si opera addiderint, sibi praesto esse, procul dubio credant, insinuo. sicut enim homini quodcunque vetitumaut indebitum cuiuscunque modi ambitione attemptare, sive rapina usurpare, iniquum est et detestabile: sic iure debitum, et ex patre Deo haereditarium intemptatum negligere aut contemptui ducere, ignaviae adscribitur ac stultitiae.
Tu ergo quicunque es, fili carissime, cui Deus misit in cor, campum latissimum diversarum artium perscrutari, et ut exinde, quod libuerit colligas, intellectum curamque apponere, non vilipendas preciosa et utilia quaeque, quasi ea tibi sponte aut insperato domestica terra produxerit; quia stultus negotiator est, qui thesaurum subito fossa humo repererit, si illum colligere et servare neglexerit. quod si tibi arbusta vilia myrrham, thus et balsama producerent, seu fontes domestici oleum, lac et mella profunderent, sive pro urtica ot carduo ceterisque horti graminibus nardus et fistula diversorumque generum aromata crescerent, numquid his contemptis tanquam vilibus et domesticis ad extranea, nec meliora, sed fortassis viliora comparanda circuires terras et maria? et hoc te iudice grandis foret stultitia. quamvis enim soleant homines quaeque preciosa multo sudore quaesita, sumptuumque numerositate comparata, primo locoo reponere, summaque tueri cautela: tamen si forte interdum gratis occurrerint aut inveniantur paria seu meliora, non dissimili, imo maiori servantur custodia.
Qua propter, fili dulcissime, quem Deus omnino beatum fecit in hac parte, qua tibi gratis offeruntur, quae multi marinos secantes fluctus cum summo periculo vitae, famis ac frigoris artati necessitate, aut diuturna doctorum fessi servitute, nec defatigati discendi desiderio, intolerabili tamen acquirunt labore; hanc diversarum artium schedulam avidis obtutibus concupisce, tenaci memoria perlege, ardenti amore complectere.
Quam si diligentius perscruteris, illic invenies quicquid in diversorum colorum generibus et mixturis habet Graecia; quicquid in electrorum operositate, seu nigelli varietate novit Rusca; quicquid ductili vel fusili, seu interrasili opere distinguit Arabia; quicquid in vasorum diversitate, seu gemmarum ossiumve sculptura auro decorat Italia; quicquid in fenestrarum preciosa varietate diligit Francia; quicquid in auri, argenti, cupri et ferri, lignorum lapidumque subtilitate sollers laudat Germania.
Quae cum saepe relegeris et tenaci memoriae compessabis, ut, quoties labore meo bene usus fueris, ores pro me apud misericordiam Dei omnipotentis, qui scit, me nec humanae laudis amore, nec temporalis praemii cupiditate, quae digesta sunt, conscripsisse, aut invidiae livore preciosum quid aut rarum subtraxisse, seu mihi peculiariter reservatum conticuisse, sed in augmentum honoris et gloriae nominie eius multorum necessitatibus succurrisse et profectibus consuluisse.

TRANSLATION :

Christophorus, humble student, servant of the servants of God, unworthy of the name and profession of monk – wishes to all, who are willing to avoid and spurn idleness and the shiftlessness of the mind by the useful occupation of their hands and the agreeable contemplation of new things, the recompense of a heavenly reward! In the account of the creation of the world, we read that man was created in the image and likeness of God and was animated by the Divine breath, breathed into him. By the eminence of such distinction, he was placed above the other living creatures, so that, capable of reason, he acquired participation in the wisdom and skill of the Divine Intelligence, and, endowed with free will, was subject onlv to the will of his Creator, and revered His sovereignty.

Wretchedly deceived bv the guile of the Devil, through the sin of disobedience we lost the privilege of immortality, but, however, so far transmitted to later posterity the distinction of wisdom and intelligence, that whoever will contribute both care and concern is able to attain a capacity for all arts and skills, as if by hereditary right.

Human skill sustained this purpose and, in its various activities, pursued profit and pleasure and, finally, with the passage of time transmitted it to the predestined age of Christian religion. So, it has come about that, what God intended to create for the praise and glory of His name, a people devoted to God has restored to His worship.

Therefore, let not the pious devotion of the faithful neglect what the wise foresight of our predecessors has transmitted to our age; what God has given man as an inheritance, let man strive and work with all eagerness to attain. When this has been attained, let no one glorify himself, as if it were received of himself and not Another, but let him humbly render thanks to God, from Whom and through Whom all things are, and without Whom nothing is. Nor let him conceal what has been given in the cloak of envy, or hide it in the closet of a grasping heart. But, repelling all vain-glory, let him with a joyful heart and with simplicity dispense to all who seek, in fear of the Gospel judgment on that merchant who failed to restore to his master his talent with added interest, and, deprived of all regard, merited the censure from his master’s lips of being a wicked servant.

Fearful of incurring this judgment, I, an unworthy and frail mortal of little consequence, freely offer to all, who wish to learn with humility, what has freely been given me by the Divine condescension, which gives to all in abundance and holds it against no man. I exhort them to recognize God’s favour towards me and to appreciate His generosity, and I would have them know that they can be quite sure that the same things are at hand for themselves if they will add their own labour. For, as it is wicked and detestable for man in any man to strive after, or take by theft, what is forbidden or not intended for him, so, to fail to strive after what is rightfully his and an inheritance from God the Father, or to hold it in contempt, must be put down to laziness and foolishness.

Therefore, dearest son,- wherever you may be, whose heart is inspired by God to investigate the vast field of the various arts and apply your mind and care in order to gather from it what pleases you-do not despise useful and precious things, simply because your native earth has produced them for you of its own accord or unexpectedly. For, foolish is the merchant who suddenly finds a treasure in a hole in the ground and fails to pick it up and keep it. if the common vines were to produce myrrh, frankincense and balsam for you: if your native springs were to pour forth oil, milk and honey: if, instead of nettles and thistles and other weeds of the garden, nard, calamus and various spices grew, surely you would not still despise them as mean and homely, and voyage over lands and seas to procure foreign things, not better but probably more mean. This, you would consider to be great folly. For, however much men are accustomed to place in the first rank precious things that are sought with much toil and acquired at great expense, and to look after them with great solicitude, yet, if meanwhile they happen to find or come across things for nothing that are comparable or better, then they keep these with a similar, even greater care.

Wherefore, dearest son,-whom God has made wholly happy in this regard, in so far as those things are offered freely, for which many at the greatest peril of life plough the sea waves compelled to endure hunger and cold, or which others, wearied with long servitude in the schools and not exhausted by the . desire of learning, only acquire with intolerable labour-be eager and anxious to look at this little work on the various arts, read it through with a retentive memory, and cherish it with a warm affection. If you will diligently examine it, you will find in it whatever kinds and blends of various colours Greece possesses: whatever Russia knows of workmanship in enamels or variety of niello: whatever Arabia adorns with repouss6 or cast work, or engravings in relief: whatever gold embellishments Italy applies to various vessels or to the carving of gems and ivories: whatever France esteems in her precious variety of windows: whatever skilled Germany praises in subtle work in gold, silver, copper, iron, wood and stone.

When you have read through these things several times and commended them to a retentive memory, you will recompense me for the labour of instruction if every time you make good use of my work you pray to Almighty God to have mercy on me. He knows that I have ‘Written’ the things collected here out of no love for human approbation nor greed for temporal gain, and that I have not appropriated anything precious or rare nor kept silent about something reserved especially for myself from malice or envy, but that, to increase the honour and glory of His name, I have ministered to the necessities of the many and bad regard to their advantage.