OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 25, 2014, 02:46:39 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: "Ho On" in Icons of Christ  (Read 3625 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #45 on: December 10, 2012, 11:29:17 PM »

I know you never said that, but I don't know if you realize that in that day, among the Jews, the marriage was sex and it wasn't a formalized civil and religious ceremony like it is today. Either they had sex and were married, or they didn't have sex and weren't married.

Wrong.  There was a ceremony that occured at the betrothal that legally began the marriage.  This had already occured when the Annunciation took place and Joseph found out Mary was pregnant which is why he considered divorcing her.  After betrothal the groom went and prepared a home, when he was finished he came and got his bride and there was a procession to the home and a feast.  Of course aftewards it would be assumed that the marriage was consumated that night.  It matters not that Joseph and Mary did not have sex because they cohabitated and had a child.  Jesus was Joseph's legal heir.  The Evangelists were not shy about calling Joseph Jesus' father or Mary's husband.    

"And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him" (Luke 2:33 RSV).

"And when they saw him they were astonished; and his mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, your father and I have been looking for you anxiously" (Luke 2:48 RSV).

"and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ" (Matthew 1:16 RSV)

Deacon Lance, do you believe Mary is Ever-Virgin and Christ had no blood-brothers?

Also, Deacon Lance, no offence, but you're from the Roman Catholic tradition, therefore you don't have the early traditions about Joseph & Mary that we have. You cannot question Orthodox Christian tradition.

Also, what is the reading of those texts in the Greek versions? In the Orthodox texts? Not the Roman Catholic or Protestant translations.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2012, 11:31:57 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Auntie Oak
Posts: 4,040



« Reply #46 on: December 10, 2012, 11:37:02 PM »

Wrong.  There was a ceremony that occured at the betrothal that legally began the marriage.  This had already occured when the Annunciation took place and Joseph found out Mary was pregnant which is why he considered divorcing her.  After betrothal the groom went and prepared a home, when he was finished he came and got his bride and there was a procession to the home and a feast.  Of course aftewards it would be assumed that the marriage was consumated that night.  It matters not that Joseph and Mary did not have sex because they cohabitated and had a child.  Jesus was Joseph's legal heir.  The Evangelists were not shy about calling Joseph Jesus' father or Mary's husband.    

"And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him" (Luke 2:33 RSV).

"And when they saw him they were astonished; and his mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, your father and I have been looking for you anxiously" (Luke 2:48 RSV).

"and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ" (Matthew 1:16 RSV)

This also explains why the blind man that was healed by Christ said "Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me." Since the Davidian lineage was through Joseph.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2012, 11:37:46 PM by Nephi » Logged

Liberalochian: Unionist-Ecumenism Lite™
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #47 on: December 10, 2012, 11:37:51 PM »

Wrong.  There was a ceremony that occured at the betrothal that legally began the marriage.  This had already occured when the Annunciation took place and Joseph found out Mary was pregnant which is why he considered divorcing her.  After betrothal the groom went and prepared a home, when he was finished he came and got his bride and there was a procession to the home and a feast.  Of course aftewards it would be assumed that the marriage was consumated that night.  It matters not that Joseph and Mary did not have sex because they cohabitated and had a child.  Jesus was Joseph's legal heir.  The Evangelists were not shy about calling Joseph Jesus' father or Mary's husband.    

"And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him" (Luke 2:33 RSV).

"And when they saw him they were astonished; and his mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, your father and I have been looking for you anxiously" (Luke 2:48 RSV).

"and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ" (Matthew 1:16 RSV)

This also explains why the blind man that was healing by Christ said "Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me."

And explains when James is referred to as the "brother of our Lord".
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #48 on: December 10, 2012, 11:47:37 PM »

Deacon Lance, do you believe Mary is Ever-Virgin and Christ had no blood-brothers?
Yes and yes.  And neither have anything to do with Jesus status under Jewish law.

Also, Deacon Lance, no offence, but you're from the Roman Catholic tradition, therefore you don't have the early traditions about Joseph & Mary that we have. You cannot question Orthodox Christian tradition.
 I am from the Greek Catholic tradition and I have the same early traditions about Joseph and Mary. I was not questioning the tradition.  The Latin Catholic tradition also makes use of the Protoevangelion of James by the way.  I also have a knowledge of Jewish custom and law which you appear not to have because the nonsense you wrote is neither correct or Orthodox tradition, no offence.

Also, what is the reading of those texts in the Greek versions? In the Orthodox texts? Not the Roman Catholic or Protestant translations.
The OSB agrees with Luke 2:48 and Matthew 1:16.  It has Joseph for father in Luke 2:33.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #49 on: December 10, 2012, 11:50:52 PM »

Deacon Lance, do you believe Mary is Ever-Virgin and Christ had no blood-brothers?
Yes and yes.  And neither have anything to do with Jesus status under Jewish law.

Also, Deacon Lance, no offence, but you're from the Roman Catholic tradition, therefore you don't have the early traditions about Joseph & Mary that we have. You cannot question Orthodox Christian tradition.
 I am from the Greek Catholic tradition and I have the same early traditions about Joseph and Mary. I was not questioning the tradition.  The Latin Catholic tradition also makes use of the Protoevangelion of James by the way.  I also have a knowledge of Jewish custom and law which you appear not to have because the nonsense you wrote is neither correct or Orthodox tradition, no offence.

Also, what is the reading of those texts in the Greek versions? In the Orthodox texts? Not the Roman Catholic or Protestant translations.
The OSB agrees with Luke 2:48 and Matthew 1:16.  It has Joseph for father in Luke 2:33.

We don't get our tradition from the Protoevangelion. The traditions existed before its authorship, the Protoevangelion simply made use of already existing traditions.

Your issue isn't with me, if you want to hear someone who is more reputable than me and knows more than I do,, and who speaks on this issue, listen to Dr. Jeannie Constantinou.

It doesn't matter, Greek Catholic, Roman Catholic, it's still all the same. Either one is Orthodox, or one isn't. It doesn't matter if one is playing Orthodoxy under the Pope, or playing Orthodoxy under Canterbury or playing Orthodox under Protestantism. It is still not Orthodoxy, and I"m not going to listen to someone trying to talk to me about Orthodox tradition who isn't Orthodox. What I"m saying is what I've heard in the Orthodox Church, and I'm not going to change what I say just because a non-Orthodox tells me we're wrong.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2012, 11:52:06 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,584



WWW
« Reply #50 on: December 10, 2012, 11:51:49 PM »

I know you never said that, but I don't know if you realize that in that day, among the Jews, the marriage was sex and it wasn't a formalized civil and religious ceremony like it is today. Either they had sex and were married, or they didn't have sex and weren't married.

Wrong.  There was a ceremony that occured at the betrothal that legally began the marriage.  This had already occured when the Annunciation took place and Joseph found out Mary was pregnant which is why he considered divorcing her.  After betrothal the groom went and prepared a home, when he was finished he came and got his bride and there was a procession to the home and a feast.  Of course aftewards it would be assumed that the marriage was consumated that night.  It matters not that Joseph and Mary did not have sex because they cohabitated and had a child.  Jesus was Joseph's legal heir.  The Evangelists were not shy about calling Joseph Jesus' father or Mary's husband.    

"And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him" (Luke 2:33 RSV).

"And when they saw him they were astonished; and his mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, your father and I have been looking for you anxiously" (Luke 2:48 RSV).

"and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ" (Matthew 1:16 RSV)

....and if you keep reading...

49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?

Whom does Christ call his "Father"?  (..mind you, Joseph is standing right there.)
« Last Edit: December 10, 2012, 11:52:45 PM by LizaSymonenko » Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #51 on: December 11, 2012, 12:24:00 AM »

Liza,

Of course the Son knew the Father.  You misunderstand the point.  Joseph was Jesus' father under Jewish law.  That being true does not negate the virgin birth.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2012, 12:25:18 AM by Deacon Lance » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #52 on: December 11, 2012, 12:54:47 AM »



We don't get our tradition from the Protoevangelion. The traditions existed before its authorship, the Protoevangelion simply made use of already existing traditions.

Your issue isn't with me, if you want to hear someone who is more reputable than me and knows more than I do,, and who speaks on this issue, listen to Dr. Jeannie Constantinou.

It doesn't matter, Greek Catholic, Roman Catholic, it's still all the same. Either one is Orthodox, or one isn't. It doesn't matter if one is playing Orthodoxy under the Pope, or playing Orthodoxy under Canterbury or playing Orthodox under Protestantism. It is still not Orthodoxy, and I"m not going to listen to someone trying to talk to me about Orthodox tradition who isn't Orthodox. What I"m saying is what I've heard in the Orthodox Church, and I'm not going to change what I say just because a non-Orthodox tells me we're wrong.

Hmmm.  Protoevangelion circa 2nd century.  First documentation of the Feast of the Presentation of Mary, 11th century. 

Either something is the truth or it isn't, no matter who is speaking it.  You have alot to learn young man.  One doesn't have to pretend Joseph and Mary weren't married to protect her ever-virginity or that Joseph wasn't Jesus' father according to Jewish law to protect his virgin birth.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #53 on: December 11, 2012, 01:11:59 AM »



We don't get our tradition from the Protoevangelion. The traditions existed before its authorship, the Protoevangelion simply made use of already existing traditions.

Your issue isn't with me, if you want to hear someone who is more reputable than me and knows more than I do,, and who speaks on this issue, listen to Dr. Jeannie Constantinou.

It doesn't matter, Greek Catholic, Roman Catholic, it's still all the same. Either one is Orthodox, or one isn't. It doesn't matter if one is playing Orthodoxy under the Pope, or playing Orthodoxy under Canterbury or playing Orthodox under Protestantism. It is still not Orthodoxy, and I"m not going to listen to someone trying to talk to me about Orthodox tradition who isn't Orthodox. What I"m saying is what I've heard in the Orthodox Church, and I'm not going to change what I say just because a non-Orthodox tells me we're wrong.

Hmmm.  Protoevangelion circa 2nd century.  First documentation of the Feast of the Presentation of Mary, 11th century. 

Either something is the truth or it isn't, no matter who is speaking it.  You have alot to learn young man.  One doesn't have to pretend Joseph and Mary weren't married to protect her ever-virginity kor that Joseph wasn't Jesus' father according to Jewish law to protect his virgin birth.

Protoevangelion as I said, recorded preexisting traditions.

Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Truth is truth, but clearly being a Papal pretend-Orthodox clouds a persons judgement about what the truth really is.

Take up your issue with the EOC, not me. But that's probably why your under the Pope's so-called "church" instead of the real church.
Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,159


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #54 on: December 11, 2012, 01:44:34 AM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,500



« Reply #55 on: December 11, 2012, 02:02:15 AM »

Liza,

Of course the Son knew the Father.  You misunderstand the point.  Joseph was Jesus' father under Jewish law.  That being true does not negate the virgin birth.

Deacon Lance, we would prefer that you just became Orthodox  Smiley
No one denies St. Joseph's supreme importance in salvific history.

However, we know that "holy family" type representations came about in the context of emphasizing celibacy (within marriage) over marital chastity (i.e. having unadulterated intercourse). 

On the Sunday after Nativity St. Joseph has a primary position.  No one denies it.  The difference is that we know in Hebrew tradition the difference between a betrothed spouse and a married spouse, and distinction still made in Orthodox services. 

Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,500



« Reply #56 on: December 11, 2012, 02:03:17 AM »

Liza,

Of course the Son knew the Father.  You misunderstand the point.  Joseph was Jesus' father under Jewish law.  That being true does not negate the virgin birth.

Very true, no one here denies it. 
Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,984



« Reply #57 on: December 11, 2012, 02:24:52 AM »

Liza,

Of course the Son knew the Father.  You misunderstand the point.  Joseph was Jesus' father under Jewish law.  That being true does not negate the virgin birth.

The church refers to Joseph as "St. Joseph the Betrothed."  Church Fathers refer to him as the guardian of the Theotokos.  End of discussion.   It is not for us to be cleaver and reinterpret the traditional teaching of the Orthodox Church.  This fact is properly described in Reply Nos. 27 and 36.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2012, 02:31:28 AM by Basil 320 » Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #58 on: December 11, 2012, 02:44:03 AM »


Of course one must understand what being betrothed meant for a Jew of the time.

"The term "betrothal" in Jewish law must not be understood in its modern sense; that is, the agreement of a man and a woman to marry, by which the parties are not, however, definitely bound, but which may be broken or dissolved without formal divorce. Betrothal or engagement such as this is not known either to the Bible or to the Talmud, and only crept in among the medieval and modern Jews through the influence of the example of the Occidental nations among whom they dwelt, without securing a definite status in rabbinical law.

In the Bible.
Several Biblical passages refer to the negotiations requisite for the arranging of a marriage (Gen. xxiv.; Song of Songs viii. 8; Judges xiv. 2-7), which were conducted by members of the two families involved, or their deputies, and required usually the consent of the prospective bride (if of age); but when the agreement had been entered into, it was definite and binding upon both groom and bride, who were considered as man and wife in all legal and religious aspects, except that of actual cohabitation.

The root ("to betroth"), from which the Talmudic abstract ("betrothal") is derived, must be taken in this sense; i.e., to contract an actual though incomplete marriage. In two of thepassages in which it occurs the betrothed woman is directly designated as "wife" (II Sam. iii. 14, "my wife whom I have betrothed" ("erasti"), and Deut. xxii. 24, where the betrothed is designated as "the wife of his neighbor"). In strict accordance with this sense the rabbinical law declares that the betrothal is equivalent to an actual marriage and only to be dissolved by a formal divorce.

After the betrothal a period of twelve months was allowed to pass before the marriage was completed by the formal home-taking ("nissu'in," "liḳḳuḥin"). In case the bride was a widow or the groom a widower, this interval was reduced to thirty days (Ket. v. 2; Shulḥan 'Aruk, Eben ha-'Ezer, 56)."

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3229-betrothal
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,984



« Reply #59 on: December 11, 2012, 02:45:42 AM »

Quote
just as there is no specific canon which says that St Joseph the Betrothed should not be shown holding the Christ-child.

Why is St. Joseph not to hold Jesus in icons?

Because Holy Tradition in Iconography did not pass down such a depiction.  Recall the admonition and teaching of Archbishop Chrysostomos of Etna, "Imitate, don't innovate."

It is the Theotokos who is typically protrayed in iconography holding the Christ Child because of her role in the Incarnation of Christ.  She is referred to as the "Playtitera ton Ouranon," "She Who is Wider than the Heavens," because she contained "the Uncontainable One," depicted iconographically typically on the apse of the eastern wall of the church, the wall of the Sanctuary or Altar, also symbolizing her role in connecting Heaven and Earth.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2012, 02:50:32 AM by Basil 320 » Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #60 on: December 11, 2012, 03:31:31 AM »


Of course one must understand what being betrothed meant for a Jew of the time.

"The term "betrothal" in Jewish law must not be understood in its modern sense; that is, the agreement of a man and a woman to marry, by which the parties are not, however, definitely bound, but which may be broken or dissolved without formal divorce. Betrothal or engagement such as this is not known either to the Bible or to the Talmud, and only crept in among the medieval and modern Jews through the influence of the example of the Occidental nations among whom they dwelt, without securing a definite status in rabbinical law.

In the Bible.
Several Biblical passages refer to the negotiations requisite for the arranging of a marriage (Gen. xxiv.; Song of Songs viii. 8; Judges xiv. 2-7), which were conducted by members of the two families involved, or their deputies, and required usually the consent of the prospective bride (if of age); but when the agreement had been entered into, it was definite and binding upon both groom and bride, who were considered as man and wife in all legal and religious aspects, except that of actual cohabitation.

The root ("to betroth"), from which the Talmudic abstract ("betrothal") is derived, must be taken in this sense; i.e., to contract an actual though incomplete marriage. In two of thepassages in which it occurs the betrothed woman is directly designated as "wife" (II Sam. iii. 14, "my wife whom I have betrothed" ("erasti"), and Deut. xxii. 24, where the betrothed is designated as "the wife of his neighbor"). In strict accordance with this sense the rabbinical law declares that the betrothal is equivalent to an actual marriage and only to be dissolved by a formal divorce.

After the betrothal a period of twelve months was allowed to pass before the marriage was completed by the formal home-taking ("nissu'in," "liḳḳuḥin"). In case the bride was a widow or the groom a widower, this interval was reduced to thirty days (Ket. v. 2; Shulḥan 'Aruk, Eben ha-'Ezer, 56)."

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3229-betrothal


You're also making a common, false and typical western assumption that it was a typical Jewish situation, it wasn't.

Also, I'm going to trust Orthodoxy before I'm going to trust Jews. The West holds Jews in too high of a regard when it comes to the Bible.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #61 on: December 11, 2012, 04:58:47 AM »

I never said they had sex.

I know you never said that, but I don't know if you realize that in that day, among the Jews, the marriage was sex and it wasn't a formalized civil and religious ceremony like it is today. Either they had sex and were married, or they didn't have sex and weren't married.

How many times do you have to say it? Do you think I don't read?

I'm pretty tired of hearing someone considerably younger than me repeat himself so much it's like he's talking to a doorpost.

All right, Devin, you win. No one is going to show you any more scary pictures of poor St. Joseph holding a baby. You are the Cereberus of Orthodoxy. You have certainly proven that you are the most rightest person ever.

Party hats for all!
I have to concede to some of biro's points.

I don't know the date, but it seems to predate the Western Captivity of the Church. It's not the only one, nor the oldest, that I have seen.

The youth pulling the donkey is St. James, there being a reference to this on this feast day:"You were shown to be the Lord’s brother in the flesh by His own desire, O wise one, His disciple and an eye-witness to Divine mysteries, having fled with Him to Egypt, with Joseph and the Mother of Jesus. Pray with them, that we be saved."

Mystogagy has a nice little blurb on St. Joseph's day, celebrated on the Sunday after the Nativity.
http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2010/12/sunday-after-christmas-jospeh-betrothed.html
the Kondak is interesting:
Quote
Today godly David is filled with joy; Joseph and James offer praise. The glorious crown of their kinship with Christ fills them with great joy. They sing praises to the One ineffably born on earth, and they cry out: "O Compassionate One, save those who honor You!"

There is a lot of traditions about Christ's relations according to the Flesh, the Desposynoi, through St. Joseph (as St. Matthew records).  One reason for the lack of emphasis on St. Joseph, comes from the fact that he fell asleep long before Christ was revealed.  But even then he is connected-the Tomb of the Theotokos is at the end of a cave.  The Tomb of St. Joseph is in the passage to it.

There are few icons of St. Joseph holding the Christ child because there is no theology point to them in the main, as there is important theological points with the Holy Theotokos with child (one reason why he is on the side in the Nativity Icon, while the Holy Theotokos is towards the center with Christ).  They do, as the above example shows, show a posture of St. Joseph protecting and/or supporting the child.  DEFINITELY not like the "Holy Family" picture that Liza showed, for the reasons she indicated (although I don't have a problem in the main with the concept of the "Holy Family," but definitely with an older St. Joseph).

St. Jospeh is commemorated on the Sunday of the Forefathers: it is through him, under the Law, that Christ fulfills the Law and the Prophets as heir to the throne of his father David.  That is how He is born of the Virgin in Bethlehem, as promised.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #62 on: December 11, 2012, 10:22:29 PM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #63 on: December 11, 2012, 10:35:14 PM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.

You're telling an Orthodox Christian that he is confusing it? You're the one who is mistaken. Quit kissing the Popes foot and maybe you could actually see the truth.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #64 on: December 11, 2012, 10:46:58 PM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.

You're telling an Orthodox Christian that he is confusing it? You're the one who is mistaken. Quit kissing the Popes foot and maybe you could actually see the truth.

Dude, LBK said she wasn't sure herself. Try looking something up for yourself before bashing someone else who's at least done some research on the subject. A little Christian charity can go a long way as well.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #65 on: December 11, 2012, 11:06:23 PM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.

You're telling an Orthodox Christian that he is confusing it? You're the one who is mistaken. Quit kissing the Popes foot and maybe you could actually see the truth.

Dude, LBK said she wasn't sure herself. Try looking something up for yourself before bashing someone else who's at least done some research on the subject. A little Christian charity can go a long way as well.

Doesn't really matter, I'm not going to listen to a pretend Orthodox (I would use the proper "U word" but it's banned here).
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #66 on: December 11, 2012, 11:36:21 PM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.

You're telling an Orthodox Christian that he is confusing it? You're the one who is mistaken. Quit kissing the Popes foot and maybe you could actually see the truth.

Dude, LBK said she wasn't sure herself. Try looking something up for yourself before bashing someone else who's at least done some research on the subject. A little Christian charity can go a long way as well.

Doesn't really matter, I'm not going to listen to a pretend Orthodox (I would use the proper "U word" but it's banned here).

At least try to prove him wrong, show some evidence of the Feast prior to the 11th century. I'm fairly sure the Entrance of the Theotokos feast is at least Post-Chalcedon since the tradition does not exist in any OO Church that I'm aware of.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #67 on: December 11, 2012, 11:48:15 PM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.
The Entrance into the Temple was never a feast of the Holy Theotokos Mary, until the West later adopted it.  The Presentation of the Holy Theotokos was celebrated in Syria in the seventh century, when a canon was composed for it.  It was, however, celebrated in connection with the dedication of the New Church in Jerusalem in 543 in Jerusalem:
Quote
In the middle of the sixth century, a third basilica was built in honor of Mary (November 20, 543). Archaeologists have recently identified the site as near the square in front of the temple, close to the mosque of Al- Aqsa. This church, the Nea or New St. Mary's, made it possible to celebrate in situ, as it were, the Presentation of Mary in the Temple, as described in the Protoevangelium of James. There is every reason to believe that the feast of November 21 developed here.
The Church at Prayer: The Liturgy and Time
 By Irénée Henri Dalmais, Aimé Georges Martimort, Pierre Jounel
http://books.google.com/books?id=DWdk0AZlzZIC&pg=PA131&dq=%22In+the+Middle+of+the+sixth+century,+a+third+basilica%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Gf7HUJNwp8DaBbSqgMAJ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22In%20the%20Middle%20of%20the%20sixth%20century%2C%20a%20third%20basilica%22&f=false
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Auntie Oak
Posts: 4,040



« Reply #68 on: December 12, 2012, 12:02:35 AM »

Doesn't really matter, I'm not going to listen to a pretend Orthodox (I would use the proper "U word" but it's banned here).

Ultimately none of your personal attacks are relevant in the slightest to whether he is correct or not, and are quite unnecessarily rude.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 12:02:56 AM by Nephi » Logged

Liberalochian: Unionist-Ecumenism Lite™
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #69 on: December 12, 2012, 12:09:54 AM »

The Entrance into the Temple was never a feast of the Holy Theotokos Mary, until the West later adopted it.

From an Antiochian Orthodox online typicon:

7 The Nativity of the Theotokos (Sept. 8th), her Entrance into the Temple (Nov. 21st) and her Dormition
(Aug. 15th). The Meeting of the Lord (Feb. 2nd) and the Annunciation (March 25th) are also considered
Feasts of the Mother of God
but, unlike the other three 2nd Class Feasts, these two also share certain
characteristics proper to Feasts of the Master as well as having ones unique unto themselves.

http://www.dowama.org/sites/docs/Descriptions%20of%20Ranks.pdf

Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #70 on: December 12, 2012, 12:23:45 AM »

The Entrance into the Temple was never a feast of the Holy Theotokos Mary, until the West later adopted it.

From an Antiochian Orthodox online typicon:

7 The Nativity of the Theotokos (Sept. 8th), her Entrance into the Temple (Nov. 21st) and her Dormition
(Aug. 15th). The Meeting of the Lord (Feb. 2nd) and the Annunciation (March 25th) are also considered
Feasts of the Mother of God
but, unlike the other three 2nd Class Feasts, these two also share certain
characteristics proper to Feasts of the Master as well as having ones unique unto themselves.

http://www.dowama.org/sites/docs/Descriptions%20of%20Ranks.pdf
It is wrong.  Every Antiochian liturgical book in Arabic I've seen classes it as "sayyidii" i.e. "of the Master," hence "The Meeting of the Lord," which matches every Greek, Slavonic and Romanian work I've seen on the matter.  It is the closing of the cycle of Feasts (and the Fast) centered on the Nativity, i.e. Christmastide.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #71 on: December 12, 2012, 12:27:30 AM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.

You're telling an Orthodox Christian that he is confusing it? You're the one who is mistaken. Quit kissing the Popes foot and maybe you could actually see the truth.

Dude, LBK said she wasn't sure herself. Try looking something up for yourself before bashing someone else who's at least done some research on the subject. A little Christian charity can go a long way as well.

Doesn't really matter, I'm not going to listen to a pretend Orthodox (I would use the proper "U word" but it's banned here).

At least try to prove him wrong, show some evidence of the Feast prior to the 11th century. I'm fairly sure the Entrance of the Theotokos feast is at least Post-Chalcedon since the tradition does not exist in any OO Church that I'm aware of.
The Copts celebrate it on 3 Kiyahk/November 29/December 12
http://ccdl.libraries.claremont.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/cce/id/1846/rec/10
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #72 on: December 12, 2012, 12:31:37 AM »

http://www.dowama.org/sites/docs/Descriptions%20of%20Ranks.pdf
Quote
In the middle of the sixth century, a third basilica was built in honor of Mary (November 20, 543). Archaeologists have recently identified the site as near the square in front of the temple, close to the mosque of Al- Aqsa. This church, the Nea or New St. Mary's, made it possible to celebrate in situ, as it were, the Presentation of Mary in the Temple, as described in the Protoevangelium of James. There is every reason to believe that the feast of November 21 developed here.
The Church at Prayer: The Liturgy and Time
 By Irénée Henri Dalmais, Aimé Georges Martimort, Pierre Jounel
http://books.google.com/books?id=DWdk0AZlzZIC&pg=PA131&dq=%22In+the+Middle+of+the+sixth+century,+a+third+basilica%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Gf7HUJNwp8DaBbSqgMAJ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22In%20the%20Middle%20of%20the%20sixth%20century%2C%20a%20third%20basilica%22&f=false

No doubt the date for the Feast comes from the dedication of the New Church, as many Feasts of Our Lord and Lady do, but the author is conjecturing not offering proof.  There is no mention of the Feast in the Menologion until the 11th century.  Also worth notng is the Syriac Orthodox Church does not have this feast.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,159


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #73 on: December 12, 2012, 12:37:32 AM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.

You're telling an Orthodox Christian that he is confusing it? You're the one who is mistaken. Quit kissing the Popes foot and maybe you could actually see the truth.

Dude, LBK said she wasn't sure herself. Try looking something up for yourself before bashing someone else who's at least done some research on the subject. A little Christian charity can go a long way as well.

Doesn't really matter, I'm not going to listen to a pretend Orthodox (I would use the proper "U word" but it's banned here).

At least try to prove him wrong, show some evidence of the Feast prior to the 11th century. I'm fairly sure the Entrance of the Theotokos feast is at least Post-Chalcedon since the tradition does not exist in any OO Church that I'm aware of.

Here you are:

The hymnographers who are documented by name in the Menaion hymnody are: George of Nicomedia (eighth century), Leo the Maistor (886-912), Sergius of the Holy City (second half of 9thC - first half of 10thC), Kyr George (8th C), and Joseph of Maiuma (816-886).

A second Matins canon was composed in the tenth century by Basil, Bishop of Caesarea, and added to the feast.

« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 12:39:50 AM by LBK » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #74 on: December 12, 2012, 01:11:33 AM »

http://www.dowama.org/sites/docs/Descriptions%20of%20Ranks.pdf
Quote
In the middle of the sixth century, a third basilica was built in honor of Mary (November 20, 543). Archaeologists have recently identified the site as near the square in front of the temple, close to the mosque of Al- Aqsa. This church, the Nea or New St. Mary's, made it possible to celebrate in situ, as it were, the Presentation of Mary in the Temple, as described in the Protoevangelium of James. There is every reason to believe that the feast of November 21 developed here.
The Church at Prayer: The Liturgy and Time
 By Irénée Henri Dalmais, Aimé Georges Martimort, Pierre Jounel
http://books.google.com/books?id=DWdk0AZlzZIC&pg=PA131&dq=%22In+the+Middle+of+the+sixth+century,+a+third+basilica%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Gf7HUJNwp8DaBbSqgMAJ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22In%20the%20Middle%20of%20the%20sixth%20century%2C%20a%20third%20basilica%22&f=false

No doubt the date for the Feast comes from the dedication of the New Church, as many Feasts of Our Lord and Lady do, but the author is conjecturing not offering proof.  There is no mention of the Feast in the Menologion until the 11th century.  Also worth notng is the Syriac Orthodox Church does not have this feast.
Perhaps it has dropped it:
Quote
The Syrian Orthodox Church usually celebrates the nativity of the Virgin Mary on Sept.8. It used to celebrate the Feast of the Virgin Mary’s presentation in the temple, in addition to three others; the Feast of the Virgin Mary for the blessing of the crops, the Feast of the Virgin Mary of the sowing and the Feast of the Virgin Mary for blessing of the vineyards.
http://syrianorthodoxchurch.org/library/essays/the-holy-virgin-mary-in-the-syrian-orthodox-church
The Scattered Pearls: A History Of Syriac Literature And Sciences  By Ighnāṭyūs Afrām I (Patriarch of Antioch), Matti Moosa
http://books.google.com/books?id=0f-eB_KK7fAC&pg=PA75&dq=%22Included+also+are+the+seven+feasts+of+the+Virgin%22+%22her+Entrance+into+the+Temple%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WRHIUOymDcaY2wXHm4GYBQ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Included%20also%20are%20the%20seven%20feasts%20of%20the%20Virgin%22%20%22her%20Entrance%20into%20the%20Temple%22&f=false
on "The Service Book of the Principle Feasts" which includes it.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #75 on: December 12, 2012, 02:16:41 AM »

On the Presentation dating from the sixth century, and the Nea Church of Holy Sion being built near the site where it happened:
The feast of the presentation of the Virgin Mary in the temple: an historical and literary study
http://books.google.com/books?id=6e8WAAAAIAAJ&q=%22sixth+century.%22+%22He+refers+to+the+erection+in+Jerusalem+of+the+new+church%22&dq=%22sixth+century.%22+%22He+refers+to+the+erection+in+Jerusalem+of+the+new+church%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Eh_IUMO7G5H22QXLyIDACg&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Opus118
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,419



« Reply #76 on: December 12, 2012, 02:29:01 AM »

This thread is disturbing.

I am certainly misinterpreting things in this thread, but this is what I see as take home messages:

The Sacrament of Marriage is meaningless unless one copulates immediately afterwards, otherwise you are living together in sin if you caress each other and the Sacrament itself is without substance.

How often must copulation occur in order to keep the marriage active and not live in sin?

If you are incapable of copulating you can't be married.

Sex trumps love in regard to marriage.

Orthodoxy is necessarily hedonistic because be people here say so.

These are just some initial thoughts that necessarily lacks clarity.

.
Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,984



« Reply #77 on: December 12, 2012, 05:18:14 AM »

You are excessively interpreting, exaggerating, statements made on this thread.

I would suggest you re-read Reply Nos. 24 and 27, which concisely explain St. Joseph's responsibilities to the Theotokos and her Son, our God.  Nothing more needs to be read into these statements; they simply stand on their own.
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #78 on: December 12, 2012, 09:22:01 AM »

You are excessively interpreting, exaggerating, statements made on this thread.

I would suggest you re-read Reply Nos. 24 and 27, which concisely explain St. Joseph's responsibilities to the Theotokos and her Son, our God.  Nothing more needs to be read into these statements; they simply stand on their own.
I always chuckle a bit when Relevant Radio and other Vatican media suggest to boys that they should take St. Joseph as their role model when they marry. You'll never have children that way.  And yes, the suggestion is on that aspect of marriage.

But then, it has a long history in the West: St. Jerome promoted the idea of the Holy Family as the ideal family where no sex was involved (he invented the perpetual virginity of St. Joseph), and the idea that to have passion towards one's wife was to treat her as a mistress.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #79 on: December 12, 2012, 09:26:29 AM »


At least try to prove him wrong, show some evidence of the Feast prior to the 11th century. I'm fairly sure the Entrance of the Theotokos feast is at least Post-Chalcedon since the tradition does not exist in any OO Church that I'm aware of.
The Copts celebrate it on 3 Kiyahk/November 29/December 12
http://ccdl.libraries.claremont.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/cce/id/1846/rec/10

I stand corrected.


No doubt the date for the Feast comes from the dedication of the New Church, as many Feasts of Our Lord and Lady do, but the author is conjecturing not offering proof.  There is no mention of the Feast in the Menologion until the 11th century.  Also worth notng is the Syriac Orthodox Church does not have this feast.
Perhaps it has dropped it:
Quote
The Syrian Orthodox Church usually celebrates the nativity of the Virgin Mary on Sept.8. It used to celebrate the Feast of the Virgin Mary’s presentation in the temple, in addition to three others; the Feast of the Virgin Mary for the blessing of the crops, the Feast of the Virgin Mary of the sowing and the Feast of the Virgin Mary for blessing of the vineyards.
http://syrianorthodoxchurch.org/library/essays/the-holy-virgin-mary-in-the-syrian-orthodox-church
The Scattered Pearls: A History Of Syriac Literature And Sciences  By Ighnāṭyūs Afrām I (Patriarch of Antioch), Matti Moosa
http://books.google.com/books?id=0f-eB_KK7fAC&pg=PA75&dq=%22Included+also+are+the+seven+feasts+of+the+Virgin%22+%22her+Entrance+into+the+Temple%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WRHIUOymDcaY2wXHm4GYBQ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Included%20also%20are%20the%20seven%20feasts%20of%20the%20Virgin%22%20%22her%20Entrance%20into%20the%20Temple%22&f=false
on "The Service Book of the Principle Feasts" which includes it.

I went and double checked this, the feast is not mentioned in the lectionary, but it is there on our calendar. I guess we're supposed to use the general Marian Festal readings for that day.

Edit for sources:
Indian Orthodox
Syriac Orthodox (Warning: PDF, scroll down to November to see the Feast)
« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 09:29:34 AM by sheenj » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #80 on: December 12, 2012, 10:27:05 AM »


At least try to prove him wrong, show some evidence of the Feast prior to the 11th century. I'm fairly sure the Entrance of the Theotokos feast is at least Post-Chalcedon since the tradition does not exist in any OO Church that I'm aware of.
The Copts celebrate it on 3 Kiyahk/November 29/December 12
http://ccdl.libraries.claremont.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/cce/id/1846/rec/10

I stand corrected.


No doubt the date for the Feast comes from the dedication of the New Church, as many Feasts of Our Lord and Lady do, but the author is conjecturing not offering proof.  There is no mention of the Feast in the Menologion until the 11th century.  Also worth notng is the Syriac Orthodox Church does not have this feast.
Perhaps it has dropped it:
Quote
The Syrian Orthodox Church usually celebrates the nativity of the Virgin Mary on Sept.8. It used to celebrate the Feast of the Virgin Mary’s presentation in the temple, in addition to three others; the Feast of the Virgin Mary for the blessing of the crops, the Feast of the Virgin Mary of the sowing and the Feast of the Virgin Mary for blessing of the vineyards.
http://syrianorthodoxchurch.org/library/essays/the-holy-virgin-mary-in-the-syrian-orthodox-church
The Scattered Pearls: A History Of Syriac Literature And Sciences  By Ighnāṭyūs Afrām I (Patriarch of Antioch), Matti Moosa
http://books.google.com/books?id=0f-eB_KK7fAC&pg=PA75&dq=%22Included+also+are+the+seven+feasts+of+the+Virgin%22+%22her+Entrance+into+the+Temple%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WRHIUOymDcaY2wXHm4GYBQ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Included%20also%20are%20the%20seven%20feasts%20of%20the%20Virgin%22%20%22her%20Entrance%20into%20the%20Temple%22&f=false
on "The Service Book of the Principle Feasts" which includes it.

I went and double checked this, the feast is not mentioned in the lectionary, but it is there on our calendar. I guess we're supposed to use the general Marian Festal readings for that day.
That's what we (Constantinopolitan rite) do.  In fact, I think that the Annunciation is the only Marian/Theotokian feast that has a different set of readings.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #81 on: December 12, 2012, 10:52:41 AM »


That's what we (Constantinopolitan rite) do.  In fact, I think that the Annunciation is the only Marian/Theotokian feast that has a different set of readings.

I think we (West Syrian rite) have different readings for the Dormition as well. Although the Annunciation is the only feast we celebrate twice, once during on March 25th and again during the Nativity season.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #82 on: December 12, 2012, 11:24:44 AM »

Quote
Also the belief of Mary's presentation is much older than 11th Century.

Indeed it is. IIRC, St Gregory of Nyssa mentions it as a feast, which would date it to the mid-fourth century. Even if my recollection is incorrect, the celebration of the Feast of the Entry into the temple dates to from at least ca. 543, at the dedication of the Church of St Mary the New in Jerusalem. This itself must mean that the feast was being celebrated for quite some time before that.


You are confusing it with the Feast of the Presentation of Christ/Purification of Mary, mentioned by St Gregory and legislated by St Justinian in 542, which is one of the most ancient feasts of Mary.  The Presentation of Mary is not in the Menologion in the eight century but does turn up in the eleventh century.

You're telling an Orthodox Christian that he is confusing it? You're the one who is mistaken. Quit kissing the Popes foot and maybe you could actually see the truth.

Dude, LBK said she wasn't sure herself. Try looking something up for yourself before bashing someone else who's at least done some research on the subject. A little Christian charity can go a long way as well.

Doesn't really matter, I'm not going to listen to a pretend Orthodox (I would use the proper "U word" but it's banned here).
Devin, Deacon Lance's affiliation with a non-Orthodox faith tradition does not invalidate his statements from the historical record, and to argue that it does by stating that you won't listen to him because he's not Orthodox matches the definition of formal ad hominem. Again, Deacon Lance has made arguments from history and from a knowledge of ancient Jewish culture that need to be addressed on their own merit, not summarily dismissed because of the faith tradition of the person presenting them. Your rude dismissal of Deacon Lance's arguments on this thread is threatening to turn this discussion into another cesspool of your anger and needs to stop. If you don't stop this, then the moderators may need to use formal warnings and post moderation to force you to stop. Therefore, I ask formally that you either offer a point-by-point correction of his historical assertions (from the same historical record) or keep silent.
Logged
Opus118
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,419



« Reply #83 on: December 12, 2012, 12:15:03 PM »

You are excessively interpreting, exaggerating, statements made on this thread.

I would suggest you re-read Reply Nos. 24 and 27, which concisely explain St. Joseph's responsibilities to the Theotokos and her Son, our God.  Nothing more needs to be read into these statements; they simply stand on their own.

I did this morning, since I was exhausted when I read it last night. Maybe you are suggesting that I put blinders on when I read threads and ignore the arguments.

Posts 24 and 27 are counterproductive legalisms. Counterproductive because they incite misinterpretation and abuse. This is something that is not worth arguing over in my opinion.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #84 on: December 12, 2012, 05:24:45 PM »

On the likelyhood of the introduction of the Feast by Patriarch Germanos in the 8th centruy:
http://books.google.com/books?id=lq56Qp5FbTkC&pg=PA63&dq=The+Feast+of+the+her+Entrance+of+the+Theotokos&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kPTIUK_2IIPU0gGv24HADg&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=The%20Feast%20of%20the%20her%20Entrance%20of%20the%20Theotokos&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=mimRtU4vtDwC&pg=PA241&dq=The+Feast+of+the+Entrance+of+the+Theotokos&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pPbIULyZNK6M0QH77YHYAg&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=The%20Feast%20of%20the%20Entrance%20of%20the%20Theotokos&f=false
« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 05:29:28 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #85 on: December 12, 2012, 06:46:42 PM »

Deacon, you are so absolutely wrong, quit questioning the Orthodox faith.

Dr. Jeannie Constantinou, in her commentary on Isaiah, shows how wrong you are about the life of the Theotokos & the Protoevangelion:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/isaiah_7_continued
Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,159


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #86 on: December 12, 2012, 06:58:28 PM »

Deacon, you are so absolutely wrong, quit questioning the Orthodox faith.

Dr. Jeannie Constantinou, in her commentary on Isaiah, shows how wrong you are about the life of the Theotokos & the Protoevangelion:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/isaiah_7_continued

A word of warning: Many pronouncements of Jeannie Constantinou are not in keeping with established and accepted Orthodox thought, doctrine and praxis. The (former) SVS mentality and ethos has MUCH to answer for.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #87 on: December 12, 2012, 07:12:49 PM »

Deacon, you are so absolutely wrong, quit questioning the Orthodox faith.

Dr. Jeannie Constantinou, in her commentary on Isaiah, shows how wrong you are about the life of the Theotokos & the Protoevangelion:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/isaiah_7_continued
Devin, Deacon Lance is NOT challenging the apostolicity of our stories regarding the Theotokos. The only thing I see him challenging is how ancient we believe the feast of her entry into the Temple (celebrated on November 21) to be. I've not seen him say anything I haven't already heard from Orthodox sources, that the feast of the Entry of the Theotokos dates back to no earlier than the 8th century.

Now to put on my moderator hat here: Since you and I are already discussing this situation via PMs, I must warn you that if you continue to use this thread to press your case that Deacon Lance is violating the purpose of the Faith Issues section by challenging our Orthodox faith, I will hold you in contempt of my warning to you earlier on this thread. Not only that, but I will also have grounds to discipline you for vigilante moderation. You've already taken up your case with me. Please allow me and the rest of the moderator team to address your concerns properly. If you do not like how we're handling this thread, feel free to plead your case to this section's global moderator, LizaSymonenko. DO NOT take moderation of this thread into your own hands.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 07:47:14 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #88 on: December 12, 2012, 07:53:40 PM »

Deacon, you are so absolutely wrong, quit questioning the Orthodox faith.

Dr. Jeannie Constantinou, in her commentary on Isaiah, shows how wrong you are about the life of the Theotokos & the Protoevangelion:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/isaiah_7_continued
Devin, Deacon Lance is NOT challenging the apostolicity of our stories regarding the Theotokos. The only thing I see him challenging is how ancient we believe the feast of her entry into the Temple (celebrated on November 21) to be. I've not seen him say anything I haven't already heard from Orthodox sources, that the feast of the Entry of the Theotokos dates back to no earlier than the 8th century.

Now to put on my moderator hat here: Since you and I are already discussing this situation via PMs, I must warn you that if you continue to use this thread to press your case that Deacon Lance is violating the purpose of the Faith Issues section by challenging our Orthodox faith, I will hold you in contempt of my warning to you earlier on this thread. Not only that, but I will also have grounds to discipline you for vigilante moderation. You've already taken up your case with me. Please allow me and the rest of the moderator team to address your concerns properly. If you do not like how we're handling this thread, feel free to plead your case to this section's global moderator, LizaSymonenko. DO NOT take moderation of this thread into your own hands.

Can't you see that he is doubting its apostolicity? If it isn't earlier than the 8th Century, then it is not apostolic!
 
Devin, you know better than to argue with a moderatorial directive in public. Again, if you don't like what I'm instructing you to do, please take it up with me in private. This warning is set to last for 30 days. If you continue to argue with me on this thread you will be placed on post moderation.

Again, if you wish to appeal this warning, please take it up with me via private message.

- PeterTheAleut
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #89 on: December 12, 2012, 07:54:59 PM »

Deacon, you are so absolutely wrong, quit questioning the Orthodox faith.

Dr. Jeannie Constantinou, in her commentary on Isaiah, shows how wrong you are about the life of the Theotokos & the Protoevangelion:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/isaiah_7_continued

A word of warning: Many pronouncements of Jeannie Constantinou are not in keeping with established and accepted Orthodox thought, doctrine and praxis. The (former) SVS mentality and ethos has MUCH to answer for.

I'd like you to support that idiotic viewpoint. AFR would not entertain her podcast and her views if they weren't in keeping with Orthodox thought.
Logged
Tags: icons 
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.196 seconds with 72 queries.