The Bema: Syriac Church Architecture from Old

[MorEphrem]

So recently I spent a semester in Florence, and while there I went to the Great Synagogue and it sparked my interest in reading up on original Syriac architecture. I read the book The Architecture and Liturgy of the Bema in Fourth to Sixth Century Syrian Churches by Emma Loosley. The bema is essentially a platform for the liturgy of the word derived from the Jewish tradition and not considered part of the sanctuary.

From the book, I gathered this is a normative set up of the bema:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

As a general discussion, does anyone disagree with my normative diagram? What are the implications of implementing seemingly archaic church architecture? Does the termination of its liturgical use testify to it not being worth the use or does its re-implimentation seem promising?

 

[malphono]

What are the implications of implementing seemingly archaic church architecture? Does the termination of its liturgical use testify to it not being worth the use or does its re-implimentation seem promising?

I could probably say a lot about this, but I will confine myself for the time being to saying that the whole idea is interesting from a historical perspective but, to me at least, not at all interesting from a liturgical one. The fact that the bema was, in the first place, never ubiquitous and, in the second place that, even in those churches where it existed, it passed into disuse by the 7th century, says to me that the disappearance of the bema (and it is notable that NONE of the Syriac Churches, whether Eastern or Western nor, for that matter, even the Armenians, seem to have retained it) was truly the result of organic development. That, of course, means that any attempt to revive its use at this point in space and time, would be but an exercise in antiquarianism.

Well, so much for my :twocents:

 

[yawsep1569]

I could probably say a lot about this, but I will confine myself for the time being to saying that the whole idea is interesting from a historical perspective but, to me at least, not at all interesting from a liturgical one. The fact that the bema was, in the first place, never ubiquitous and, in the second place that, even in those churches where it existed, it passed into disuse by the 7th century, says to me that the disappearance of the bema (and it is notable that NONE of the Syriac Churches, whether Eastern or Western nor, for that matter, even the Armenians, seem to have retained it) was truly the result of organic development. That, of course, means that any attempt to revive its use at this point in space and time, would be but an exercise in antiquarianism.

Well, so much for my :twocents:

I’m not sure this captures the reality of the “Eastern Syriac” churches or the Mesopotamian traditions (i.e. Assyro-Chaldean, Syro-malabar). As far as I know, the bema fell into disuse in Mesopotamia with the decline of the Church of the East beginning with the onslaught of Timur. However, I believe that the bema is an integral part of both the Chaldean and Syro-malabar liturgies today. In the Syro-malabar Church, it has been greatly reduced in scope and the elevated platform has been completely done away with.

I would be greatly interested in hearing much more of your thoughts on this, Malpan Malphono

 

[chaldobyzantine]

Out of curiosity, were you exposed to any information concerning a bema in the center of the nave? My local Chaldean parish once had a central bema, but was soon replaced by pews, and uses the convenient bema near the altar instead. My interest is to see if any other parishes still functionally use it to this day.

~God Bless

 

[malphono]

Out of curiosity, were you exposed to any information concerning a bema in the center of the nave? My local Chaldean parish once had a central bema, but was soon replaced by pews, and uses the convenient bema near the altar instead. My interest is to see if any other parishes still functionally use it to this day.

Do you know when that was? In any case, I’d be interested to see a photo of it (either posted or by PM) if you can find one.

 

[chaldobyzantine]

Do you know when that was? In any case, I’d be interested to see a photo of it (either posted or by PM) if you can find one.

It was Saint Joseph’s in Troy, MI. I believe Father Sarhad Jammo was in charge of the architecture and overall vision of the new church building that was completed around the mid 1990s. As I recall that bema was used until he became Bishop Sarhad and went to California.

He seems to be very fond of Byzantine iconography, as most of the parish is covered in icon murals, and St. Peter’s Cathedral in El Cajon has a new icon mural of the Last Supper behind the altar. Personally, I’m very thankful that he chose icons instead of statues.

I was able to find a couple photos of the bema on the iconographer’s website of what it used to look like, and a separate one of how it looks now.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
cristianstudio.com/Rel_Murals_St_Joseph/Rel_Murals_St_Joseph08.html

hqphotovision.com/ImagesofMichigan/Historic-Churches-of-Detroit/St-Joseph-Chaldean-Parish/21089653_RLTz6L#!i=1677329882&k=L5gd8Fr&lb=1&s=X2

 

[malphono]

One thing you need to know about Mar George Metran is that he is Pro-Syriac. After his enthronement to Major Archbishop many Syriac customs were restored to the Syro Malabar Church.

Thank you for the follow-up. This is good news, and I’m pleased to learn that Mar George has had some success in pushing the restoration of at least some traditional Syriac customs.

To answer your question, don’t quote me on this but I think in the current status, most Syro Malabar Churches use a mix of Ad Orientem and Versus Populum. The liturgy of the word is celebrated at the small table in (versus populum) than the priest turns and heads up the stairs to the Madbaha. The rest of the Holy Qurbana (ad orientem) until the final blessing is celebrated in the Madbaha. Then to celebrate the final blessing (versus populum) the priest turns, heads back down the stairs, to the small table.

That small table is the only part outside of the Madbaha. I cant confirm but yes I believe it is the current Syro Malabar version of the Bema.

From what I’ve read and from what I’ve been told, the standard in the US (as well as Ernakulum and Thrissur) for the SMC has been versus populum, period, which doesn’t thrill me at all. Hopefully Mar George’s example will turn a few heads (and turn a few altars to the proper ad orientem use).

One thing that I’m not thrilled with, though, is that pseudo-bema versus populum table. It seems to be ubiquitous, and I think the idea of the bema has to be taken in its historical context. Be that as it may, (as I said earlier in this thread, I really don’t wish to get into a detailed discussion of the matter), it just strikes me that the pseudo-bema arrangement that the SMC seems to be using has some practical problems. The main thing is that it sits front-and-center and obstructs the view of the altar. The only thing that should do that is the sanctuary veil, and of course that is opened and closed at specific times. That table is just there, and it drives me crazy. In a word, it’s incredibly distracting, which is certainly not what a bema is supposed to be.

 

[malphono]

It was Saint Joseph’s in Troy, MI. I believe Father Sarhad Jammo was in charge of the architecture and overall vision of the new church building that was completed around the mid 1990s. As I recall that bema was used until he became Bishop Sarhad and went to California.

He seems to be very fond of Byzantine iconography, as most of the parish is covered in icon murals, and St. Peter’s Cathedral in El Cajon has a new icon mural of the Last Supper behind the altar. Personally, I’m very thankful that he chose icons instead of statues.

I was able to find a couple photos of the bema on the iconographer’s website of what it used to look like, and a separate one of how it looks now.

Thanks for the links. Now tell me, where is the bema? Maybe it’s just me, but I really don’t see it. What I **do **see are the dual podia (which is the same arrangement that Mar Sarhad uses in St Peter’s in San Diego). I’m not crazy about fixed podia, but OTOH, they are better than the front-and-center table that the SMC seems to have adopted. At least they’re off to the side and don’t obstruct the view of the altar. In any case, I find it interesting that Mar Sarhad went with the fixed podia idea in San Diego.

Oh, BTW, I agree about the murals, at least esthetically. Of course, the authentic East Syriac tradition seems to spurn all images, but I will grant that since, in the past 400+ years, images have been incorporated into the Chaldean tradition, it’s preferable to use an iconographic style rather than stone and clay.

 

[Thomas48]

Thank you for the follow-up. This is good news, and I’m pleased to learn that Mar George has had some success in pushing the restoration of at least some traditional Syriac customs.

From what I’ve read and from what I’ve been told, the standard in the US (as well as Ernakulum and Thrissur) for the SMC has been versus populum, period, which doesn’t thrill me at all. Hopefully Mar George’s example will turn a few heads (and turn a few altars to the proper ad orientem use).

One thing that I’m not thrilled with, though, is that pseudo-bema versus populum table. It seems to be ubiquitous, and I think the idea of the bema has to be taken in its historical context. Be that as it may, (as I said earlier in this thread, I really don’t wish to get into a detailed discussion of the matter), it just strikes me that the pseudo-bema arrangement that the SMC seems to be using has some practical problems. The main thing is that it sits front-and-center and obstructs the view of the altar. The only thing that should do that is the sanctuary veil, and of course that is opened and closed at specific times. That table is just there, and it drives me crazy. In a word, it’s incredibly distracting, which is certainly not what a bema is supposed to be.

You welcome, I’m actually from Houston Texas and I attend St.Mary’s Knanaya Catholic Church (The Church I’ve pictured) . I’m not sure about Ernakulam and Thrissur but in the U.S the norm is the mixed Ad Orientem and Versus Populum. The only Versus Populum parts being at the Bema like small table. Yes you are correct at times the small table does obstruct the view of the altar and the rest of the Madbaha. But most of the time the altar is placed high above the Bema, making it in view when the priest goes to it. Like the OP’s explanation of the Bema, the Syro Malabar Bema is not apart of the Madbaha (Syriac for Sanctuary) , and even after the veil is closed the Bema is used for announcements. I’m not sure the Syro Malabar Church ever used a historical Bema like you explained malphono. From what I have seen, even our most ancient churches have something more like the small table.

 

[andrewstx]

I have only been to an Assyrian Church of the East. It was a small church but their was a heavy curtian drawn accoss the sanctuary and in front of that there were two small pulpits at floor level.

Being EO I was surprised to see no iconography at all, instead they had elaborate plain crosses.

 

[chaldobyzantine]

Thanks for the links. Now tell me, where is the bema? Maybe it’s just me, but I really don’t see it. What I **do **see are the dual podia (which is the same arrangement that Mar Sarhad uses in St Peter’s in San Diego). I’m not crazy about fixed podia, but OTOH, they are better than the front-and-center table that the SMC seems to have adopted. At least they’re off to the side and don’t obstruct the view of the altar. In any case, I find it interesting that Mar Sarhad went with the fixed podia idea in San Diego.

Oh, BTW, I agree about the murals, at least esthetically. Of course, the authentic East Syriac tradition seems to spurn all images, but I will grant that since, in the past 400+ years, images have been incorporated into the Chaldean tradition, it’s preferable to use an iconographic style rather than stone and clay.

I thought that two fixed lecterns (pulpit/podia) on a bema were important in Church of the East usage, as one is for reading the New Testament and another for the Old Testament. See the Presentation of the Reformed Chaldean Missal, under the Church Building and Practical Matters.

Back to the Bema issue, I’m sorry about the image and the angle. In the lower half of image I posted, you can see a semi-circular large pew on a raised platform in the center of the nave, with two lecterns. In the link below it from hqphotovision, you can see that semicircle and the platform has been removed and replaced with pews. Haven’t seen a bema like that since.