OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 17, 2014, 05:52:14 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  
Poll
Question: Which is more important in terms of importance to our faith?
The Nativity
Pascha
Neither
Both are equal
Other (enter below)

Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Pascha or the Incarnation  (Read 2928 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
admiralnick
Cardinal, Editor for Photogalleries
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,880


« on: November 10, 2009, 05:47:01 PM »

So I wanted to get everyone's take on this since I saw on another thread that there was a comment relating that the Incarnation was greater than the resurrection in terms of importance to our faith. I totally cannot believe this nor can I agree that this is the case. Pascha is the Feast of Feasts and the Triumph of Triumphs. How can there be a legitament thought that this is not the greatest feast in importance to our faith.

-Nick
Logged

The ORIGINAL: "NULL"
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2009, 05:49:29 PM »

I voted Pascha, even though Nativity (Incarnation) is also very important.
Logged

Love never fails.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,469


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2009, 05:52:55 PM »

Both are equal.  One cannot exist without the other.  The Resurrection is nothing if Christ is not the Incarnate God-Man.  The Incarnation is nothing if the God-Man did not rise from the dead.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2009, 05:53:29 PM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
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: 12,996



WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2009, 05:54:53 PM »

Hands down, Pascha is the most important event in human/Church history.

Without Pascha....the incarnation would merely be a miraculous birth.  We would not have a chance at salvation through the Nativity alone.

It's true that Christ needed to be born in order for all the other events to transpire.  However, His birth alone, is not the most important feature of His life on earth.

We have a chance at salvation through His resurrection, not His birth.

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
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 29,802



« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2009, 06:04:02 PM »

Quote
We have a chance at salvation through His resurrection, not His birth.

What then of the famous orthodox principle "that which is not assumed is not saved"? Doesn't it have a place as well?
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,469


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2009, 06:05:30 PM »

But, as I said, without the Incarnation, the Resurrection would simply be God raising Himself from the dead and not the God-MAN's resurrection.  The former means nothing to the reality that humanity needed to be saved while the latter is essential to that salvation.

Honestly, this question has a near zen-koan quality to it.  It's unanswerable.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,167


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2009, 06:14:39 PM »

I think, though, that the poll and many posts on this thread mistakenly identify Christ's Incarnation solely with His Nativity.  Whereas the Feast of the Nativity is indeed a celebration of Christ's Incarnation, it is most certainly not the only such feast, for the Word's life as a man began with Gabriel's Annunciation to the Theotokos and continues on into eternity.  In a way, even though not one feast of our Lord has any significance apart from the Resurrection, every feast of our Lord, even Pascha itself, is also a celebration of His Incarnation.  I just don't think we can separate the two and say that one is much more important than the other.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2009, 06:16:25 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,469


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2009, 06:16:50 PM »

Excellent point, PtA.  One can even say, I suppose, that the Resurrection is the culmination of the Incarnation. 

It's like Obi-wan Kenobi said to Luke in Return of the Jedi that everything depends on one's point of view at any given moment. Smiley

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2009, 06:28:51 PM »

It was my comment to which the OP refers, so let me clarify, lest I should cause some to stumble. The argument on the other thread was that Nativity was not worth celebrating, because Pascha was much more important. My rebuttal actually was not of the nature of Nativity and Pascha, but actually with the Incarnation. I have done much study in this area and have come to the conclusion, from a number of Orthodox sources, including my priest, that the Incarnation was always intended to happen, and did not depend on man's sin. We were always to be joined to God, regardless of what choices we made. The Resurrection is a part of His joining us to Him; it is the method by which we are made clean, so that we can be joined. So one cannot look at Nativity as the event of the Incarnation and Pascha as the event of the Resurrection--because they are not events. We are being joined to the risen Lord. The Incarnation is not simply God becoming man, but is how we become like God; that is, it is the very method by which we are saved.

So my conclusion was that no, we cannot skip Nativity and simply celebrate Pascha, because we miss an important component of our salvation. We do not believe, as others do, that Nativity was simply the method by which Jesus was delivered to earth to he could be crucified and resurrected. We believe that Nativity itself is an invaluable part of our salvation.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Liz
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Church of England
Posts: 989



« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2009, 07:24:32 PM »

Disclaimer: Not Orthodox. Possibly shouldn't be commenting but it's a discussion I've been having about how my Orthodox partner and I should bring up the (putative) children, so:

For me, the birth of Christ is more uncomplicated; more simply 'happy'. It is a wonderful family occasion, and it is good for reassuring those who feel as if they have no family, that they belong with Christ. It is also a beautiful 'human' expression of Christ's love, since we are all more likely to understand the miracle of motherly love for a baby, than we are to understand the more austere, more amazing miracle of Christ's sacrifice for people whom the atheists among us would say were not members of His family.

Easter is the more important time, but it is very private. It is a time to be sorrowful for our sins. We must recongize how wrong we are. And recongize how undeservedly lucky we are that Christ came to redeem us. But this is a festival we should not glory in too much, because Christ suffered pain and died for us. It is more important than any other festival, but it must be solemn.

Well ... that's my understanding so far. I know it may change as I learn more, and I am aware that this is my take, not an Orthodox opinion - although I hope that it is not entirely divorced from Orthodox principles.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 29,802



« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2009, 08:19:05 PM »

Liz,

Just put your two cents in, the worst they can do is tell you to butt out!  Grin  Fwiw, though a fellow non-Orthodox, I didn't see anything unorthodox about what you wrote. I would only say that the Orthodox tend to see more in the incarnation than you are saying in your post. In fighting the Apollinarian heresy, St. Gregory the Theologian said in his 101st Epistle: "For that which He has not assumed He has not healed; but that which is united to His Godhead is also saved." Many theologians took this concept as being very important, both before and after St. Gregory, for it means (as someone else said) that the incarnation was more than just the method for how the God-man came. It was (as Mr. Y said) part of what makes the phrase "God became man that man might become God" possible. Perhaps I am exaggerating the importance of it in comparison to the crucifixion, death, and resurrection, but if I am it is only to emphasise a point.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2009, 08:19:41 PM by Asteriktos » Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,191


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2009, 08:20:08 PM »

Excellent point, PtA.  One can even say, I suppose, that the Resurrection is the culmination of the Incarnation. 

It's like Obi-wan Kenobi said to Luke in Return of the Jedi that everything depends on one's point of view at any given moment. Smiley


awwww. I haven't seen that in years.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Jonathan Gress
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,087


« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2009, 08:37:41 PM »

I think, though, that the poll and many posts on this thread mistakenly identify Christ's Incarnation solely with His Nativity.  Whereas the Feast of the Nativity is indeed a celebration of Christ's Incarnation, it is most certainly not the only such feast, for the Word's life as a man began with Gabriel's Annunciation to the Theotokos and continues on into eternity.  In a way, even though not one feast of our Lord has any significance apart from the Resurrection, every feast of our Lord, even Pascha itself, is also a celebration of His Incarnation.  I just don't think we can separate the two and say that one is much more important than the other.

What he said ^^!

Some of the discussion here I find very strange as a traditionalist. I feel that what the Church practices by tradition should be our starting point; we shouldn't presume to evaluate it and consider which bits we can leave out and which bits we can keep. Who has the authority to do that? So I think the answer is: the Resurrection is clearly the center of our faith, and the evidence for this is the FACT that Pascha/Easter is the most highly regarded Feast in the calendar, and the one upon which all the other feasts depend. If the Nativity were more important, then we would base our calendar around that, not Pascha.

That being said, the other Great Feasts are obviously next in importance by tradition. And as far as I know there is no clear tradition of ranking one Great Feast over another. I suppose there is some evidence that Feasts of our Lord are greater than Feasts of our Lady. My bishop is of the opinion that Theophany is the next greatest feast after Easter, but St John Chrysostom said something that sounded like Christmas was the next most important feast. Yet, as PtA points out, since all the feasts revolve around the same thing, the Divine Economy of salvation, it's really hard to be more definite. Better not to ask frivolous questions and accept what has been handed down to us! Smiley
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2009, 11:52:06 PM »

The Incarnation as a whole is more significant than the just the Resurrection.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Jonathan Gress
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,087


« Reply #14 on: November 11, 2009, 12:30:20 AM »

The Incarnation as a whole is more significant than the just the Resurrection.

Well that begs the question of what you mean by 'the Incarnation as a whole'. You could say that since the POINT of the Incarnation was the Resurrection, that's why the Resurrection is the most significant event that we commemorate. The thing is, it is a FACT that the Resurrection is the most significant event we celebrate. The only question we should be asking is WHY it's the most important event we celebrate. If we start questioning whether the Resurrection is even the most significant event, that only shows we doubt the Church and what the Church believes.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,469


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 11, 2009, 12:45:45 AM »

The Incarnation as a whole is more significant than the just the Resurrection.

Well that begs the question of what you mean by 'the Incarnation as a whole'. You could say that since the POINT of the Incarnation was the Resurrection, that's why the Resurrection is the most significant event that we commemorate. The thing is, it is a FACT that the Resurrection is the most significant event we celebrate. The only question we should be asking is WHY it's the most important event we celebrate. If we start questioning whether the Resurrection is even the most significant event, that only shows we doubt the Church and what the Church believes.

I think that the bolded statement is the reason why the original poll, as it is stated, is unanswerable.  As the Cappadocians and St. Athanasius pointed out (especially the latter), the only way the Resurrection has any real effect on humanity is because of the Incarnation ("as a whole" and not necessarily as just the Feast of the Nativity).  But, as you have pointed out, the Incarnation itself is nothing without Pascha (which is obviously the most significant feast), for it is only by His death and resurrection that Death is despoiled and we are saved from its clutches. 

The question as stated only leads to a circular syllogism.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #16 on: November 11, 2009, 12:51:31 AM »

For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. ~1 Cor. 2:2
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,167


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #17 on: November 11, 2009, 02:14:23 AM »

Easter is the more important time, but it is very private. It is a time to be sorrowful for our sins. We must recongize how wrong we are. And recongize how undeservedly lucky we are that Christ came to redeem us. But this is a festival we should not glory in too much, because Christ suffered pain and died for us. It is more important than any other festival, but it must be solemn.
To us Orthodox, though, Great Lent, Holy Week, and especially Holy Friday are the solemn, sorrowful times for the introspection you describe.  Pascha, OTOH, is a time for great rejoicing, since our crucified and buried Lord has risen from the dead to grant us new life.  How can one be sorrowful at a time like this?

Well ... that's my understanding so far. I know it may change as I learn more, and I am aware that this is my take, not an Orthodox opinion - although I hope that it is not entirely divorced from Orthodox principles.
As I just stated above, I think this pov is somewhat at odds with the Orthodox understanding of the glory of Pascha.  Our Pascha services are very joyous and very communal.
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #18 on: November 11, 2009, 02:19:05 AM »

Quote
We have a chance at salvation through His resurrection, not His birth.

What then of the famous orthodox principle "that which is not assumed is not saved"? Doesn't it have a place as well?

touché.
Logged
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #19 on: November 11, 2009, 02:24:12 AM »

Easter is the more important time, but it is very private. It is a time to be sorrowful for our sins. We must recongize how wrong we are. And recongize how undeservedly lucky we are that Christ came to redeem us. But this is a festival we should not glory in too much, because Christ suffered pain and died for us. It is more important than any other festival, but it must be solemn.

As Peter points out, that is a fairly good description of Lent, culiminating in the services of Holy Week. But Pascha itself, the Feast of Feasts, is the one of the purest moments of joy I've ever experienced--and the Church offers it up every year.

Until you've actually attended an Orthodox Paschal service it's almost impossible to describe.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 11, 2009, 05:01:12 AM »

While you can't have one without the other, I don't think that automatically means that Pascha and the Nativity are of equal importance.
If Christ had only been Incarnated, spent some time here, then left again, that would have been a nice part of human history, but that is all it would be. But Pascha has done what no other event in human history has done by rectifying the most fundamental and troubling aspect of the human condition which has plagued humanity since the dawn of time. Pascha has destroyed death.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2009, 09:42:57 AM »

The Incarnation as a whole is more significant than the just the Resurrection.

Well that begs the question of what you mean by 'the Incarnation as a whole'. You could say that since the POINT of the Incarnation was the Resurrection, that's why the Resurrection is the most significant event that we commemorate. The thing is, it is a FACT that the Resurrection is the most significant event we celebrate. The only question we should be asking is WHY it's the most important event we celebrate. If we start questioning whether the Resurrection is even the most significant event, that only shows we doubt the Church and what the Church believes.
Agreed. So are we talking about events, or are we talking about our relationship to God? Pascha and Nativity were events, and without the theology, they would have been nice stories. But in the Incarnation, God is made man, and we are made like God. It's a two-way process. As we become more like God, God dwells ever more in us (not that He is ever partially with us). Then in the Resurrection, death is crushed, and we are made alive in Christ, able to receive Him fully. So I see the Incarnation as the point of the Christian life, and all of the events we celebrate point to it. I could be wrong, of course, but it seems to me that the Resurrection made up for our failures, whereas God always intended to dwell with man.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2009, 10:15:40 AM by ytterbiumanalyst » Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #22 on: November 11, 2009, 10:02:27 AM »

Just as a matter liturgical history, Pascha is a much older Christian festival than the Nativity.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 11, 2009, 07:39:16 PM »


Well that begs the question of what you mean by 'the Incarnation as a whole'.

Every aspect of the Logos becoming human and living as a human.


You could say that since the POINT of the Incarnation was the Resurrection, that's why the Resurrection is the most significant event that we commemorate.

I don't agree that the Resurrection was the singular point of the Incarnation.


The thing is, it is a FACT that the Resurrection is the most significant event we celebrate.

The Incarnation is no one event with no one commemoration, so you can't compare the Resurrection and its commemoration in Pascha to it.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 11, 2009, 07:40:30 PM »


For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. ~1 Cor. 2:2

Is this option #3?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 11, 2009, 07:43:31 PM »


We have a chance at salvation through His resurrection, not His birth.

Redemption began at the Annunciation (the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary and purifying her from ancestral sin), so no. The Resurrection is required for the completion of our redemption, but it is not the point at which our redemption begins.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #26 on: November 11, 2009, 11:33:34 PM »

As was pointed out, Nativity does not equal Incarnation.   The point that the poster on the other thread was that Pascha has its meaning in the totality of the mystery of the Incarnation, from the Conception (Annunciation) to the great Coming Again of our Lord.   

The ranks of the Feasts are clear:
1.  Pascha is the Feast of feasts and is superior to the 12 Great Feasts
2.  Nativity ranks 3rd among the 12 Great Feasts.  After Pascha, the rank is as follows:   2.  Pentecost   3.  Theophany   4. Nativity.   

However, we cannot "separate" Pascha from the rest.   They all are interconnected and give meaning to one another.   We see this in the fact that Theophany originally was the feast of all of the Manifestations:  Nativity, Baptism, 1st Miracle at Cana...  It is one whole and one cannot be separated from the others.
Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,035



« Reply #27 on: November 12, 2009, 02:18:30 AM »

Father HLL's Post #26 is the Church's Teaching.  Pascha being the "Feast of Feasts,"  a "singular event," is not really a matter for debate.
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,167


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #28 on: November 12, 2009, 02:24:38 AM »

Father HLL's Post #26 is the Church's Teaching.  Pascha being the "Feast of Feasts,"  a "singular event," is not really a matter for debate.
What evidence can you provide for such dogmatic statements as "[This] is the Church's teaching," and "[It] is not really a matter for debate"?
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,286


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 12, 2009, 03:00:46 AM »

Both are equal.  One cannot exist without the other.  The Resurrection is nothing if Christ is not the Incarnate God-Man.  The Incarnation is nothing if the God-Man did not rise from the dead.

My thoughts exactly.

Selam
Logged

"If we are unwilling to accept any truth that we have not first discovered and declared ourselves, we demonstrate that we are interested not in the truth so much as in being right." ~ Thomas Merton ~
LBK
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,700


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #30 on: November 12, 2009, 03:02:00 AM »

Father HLL's Post #26 is the Church's Teaching.  Pascha being the "Feast of Feasts,"  a "singular event," is not really a matter for debate.
What evidence can you provide for such dogmatic statements as "[This] is the Church's teaching," and "[It] is not really a matter for debate"?

PtA, a considered look at the liturgical texts (Vespers, Matins, etc) for these feasts will be most instructive for you. The Resurrection texts are unequivocal in their clarity in proclaiming the primacy of the feast of Pascha. Lex orandi, lex credendi, my friend.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,167


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #31 on: November 12, 2009, 05:03:28 AM »

Father HLL's Post #26 is the Church's Teaching.  Pascha being the "Feast of Feasts,"  a "singular event," is not really a matter for debate.
What evidence can you provide for such dogmatic statements as "[This] is the Church's teaching," and "[It] is not really a matter for debate"?

PtA, a considered look at the liturgical texts (Vespers, Matins, etc) for these feasts will be most instructive for you. The Resurrection texts are unequivocal in their clarity in proclaiming the primacy of the feast of Pascha. Lex orandi, lex credendi, my friend.
I didn't ask you for the evidence.  I asked Basil 320 for the evidence. Wink  I don't need to be convinced that Pascha is the Feast of Feasts.  I just wanted to voice my objection to anyone making a dogmatic statement such as Basil 320 made and putting it beyond the reach of debate without also giving us evidence to support such a statement.  Seeing that you didn't make any such statement, I didn't need you to post any evidence.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2009, 05:04:55 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,700


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #32 on: November 12, 2009, 05:57:11 PM »

Pta, allow me to ask you two questions:

1. Does it matter who on this forum provides the evidence for the Pascha as the premier feast? Others have already quoted from the Resurrection services confirming this on this thread, without any comment (favourable or unfavourable) from you. Yet you have chosen, for reasons only known to yourself, to react to my post.

2. If you don't need to be convinced of the primacy of Pascha, then why write "I just wanted to voice my objection to anyone making a dogmatic statement such as Basil 320 made and putting it beyond the reach of debate without also giving us evidence to support such a statement"?
« Last Edit: November 12, 2009, 05:59:07 PM by LBK » Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 12, 2009, 05:59:59 PM »

If you don't need to be convinced of the primacy of Pascha, then why write "I just wanted to voice my objection to anyone making a dogmatic statement such as Basil 320 made and putting it beyond the reach of debate without also giving us evidence to support such a statement"?
Because what he is asking for is Basil320's evidence.
There. I answered for him. Now you know how it feels.  Tongue
« Last Edit: November 12, 2009, 06:04:33 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
LBK
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,700


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #34 on: November 12, 2009, 06:09:19 PM »

If you don't need to be convinced of the primacy of Pascha, then why write "I just wanted to voice my objection to anyone making a dogmatic statement such as Basil 320 made and putting it beyond the reach of debate without also giving us evidence to support such a statement"?
Because what he is asking for is Basil320's evidence.
There. I answered for him. Now you know how it feels.  Tongue

I am not offended by your post, ozgeorge. I am only puzzled that people other than Basil320 have given evidence supporting the primacy of Pascha, yet it is what I had to say which seems to have miffed PtA.

As for answering on his behalf, would it not be proper courtesy to allow him to answer for himself?  Wink

« Last Edit: November 12, 2009, 06:09:36 PM by LBK » Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 12, 2009, 06:12:59 PM »

I am not offended by your post, ozgeorge.
I'm glad. I was just kidding.

I am only puzzled that people other than Basil320 have given evidence supporting the primacy of Pascha, yet it is what I had to say which seems to have miffed PtA.
I don't know. This time I'll leave PetertheAleut to answer for himself.

As for answering on his behalf, would it not be proper courtesy to allow him to answer for himself?  Wink
Absolutely! Cheesy
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,167


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #36 on: November 12, 2009, 06:32:27 PM »

If you don't need to be convinced of the primacy of Pascha, then why write "I just wanted to voice my objection to anyone making a dogmatic statement such as Basil 320 made and putting it beyond the reach of debate without also giving us evidence to support such a statement"?
Because what he is asking for is Basil320's evidence.
There. I answered for him. Now you know how it feels.  Tongue

I am not offended by your post, ozgeorge. I am only puzzled that people other than Basil320 have given evidence supporting the primacy of Pascha, yet it is what I had to say which seems to have miffed PtA.
That's because I did not ask for evidence to support the primacy of Pascha.  I asked Basil 320 to offer evidence to support his dogmatic statement, the content of which really doesn't matter to this side discussion with you.  I honestly don't care about the dogmatic claim per se; rather, I'm focused on Basil 320 and his attempt to make a dogmatic statement without evidence.  As such, your smug attempt to speak on behalf of Basil 320 shows no understanding of what I really want, and I still await his reply.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2009, 06:35:03 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
katherine 2001
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 888


Eastern Orthodox Church--Established in 33 A.D.


« Reply #37 on: November 12, 2009, 08:19:57 PM »

I voted for Pascha, as that is the "feast of feasts", "holy day of holy days" as one of the Paschal hymns says.  The Nativity is an extremely important feast day and event, but Pascha is the most important.  I was taught that Pascha is the most important feast day in the Church.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2009, 08:22:00 PM by katherine 2001 » Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,700


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #38 on: November 13, 2009, 12:02:01 AM »

If you don't need to be convinced of the primacy of Pascha, then why write "I just wanted to voice my objection to anyone making a dogmatic statement such as Basil 320 made and putting it beyond the reach of debate without also giving us evidence to support such a statement"?
Because what he is asking for is Basil320's evidence.
There. I answered for him. Now you know how it feels.  Tongue

I am not offended by your post, ozgeorge. I am only puzzled that people other than Basil320 have given evidence supporting the primacy of Pascha, yet it is what I had to say which seems to have miffed PtA.
That's because I did not ask for evidence to support the primacy of Pascha.  I asked Basil 320 to offer evidence to support his dogmatic statement, the content of which really doesn't matter to this side discussion with you.  I honestly don't care about the dogmatic claim per se; rather, I'm focused on Basil 320 and his attempt to make a dogmatic statement without evidence.  As such, your smug attempt to speak on behalf of Basil 320 shows no understanding of what I really want, and I still await his reply.

To make it clear, I was not at all speaking for Basil320 when I made my post. This being an online FORUM (please note the meaning of the word), I had always understood that when a general question was asked, that any forum member was entitled to voice his opinion. Did you call out FatherHLL on his post, when he made a clear, dogmatic statement on the primacy of Pascha, which Basil320 simply affirmed as being correct? Are you making a distinction of authority between a clergyman (Father HLL) and a layman (Basil320, myself, and others who have affirmed the primacy of Pascha)? Or are you simply splitting semantic hairs, and selectively calling out particular posters?  police
« Last Edit: November 13, 2009, 12:08:47 AM by LBK » Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,035



« Reply #39 on: November 13, 2009, 12:53:57 AM »

To all who have replied on my behalf, a very sincere thank you,very much.

To PeterTheAleut's inquiry, you have made me realize I failed to couch my message as my opinion, even though I believed my comment to be fact.  I don't think Pascha being the "Feast of Feasts" is dogma.  I was definitive in my statement because it's something I've always known about our faith.  I recall as a youth being taught that Roman Catholics believe the Nativity of Christ to hold more significance, while, later, a Jesuit educated friend of mine told me Pascha is the most significant of Feasts in the Roman Catholic Church, though their "diocesan" priests don't always promote it as such, as they should, in his opinion.

Further, while Pascha being the "Feast of Feasts," may not be dogmatic, it is so much enmeshed into the conscious, the Tradition of the church, that it may as well be dogmatic, in my opinion.  (Note my use of "in my opinion," this time.)  I didn't feel we had to cite sources in commenting on the forum as if we were writing college papers, yet, I can appreciate the need to assist those who don't hold this view, at this time, about Pascha, to provide sources for them.  I really don't recall the source of where I learned this, through sermons, bible classes, catechism, I think Timothy Ware's (Metropolitan Kallistos of Diokleia) "The Orthodox Church" states it somewhere. 

I'll try in the future to note when something is my opinion of something that I may believe to be absolute, when I don't have a source in hand.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2009, 01:01:22 AM by Basil 320 » Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,167


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #40 on: November 13, 2009, 01:02:09 AM »

If you don't need to be convinced of the primacy of Pascha, then why write "I just wanted to voice my objection to anyone making a dogmatic statement such as Basil 320 made and putting it beyond the reach of debate without also giving us evidence to support such a statement"?
Because what he is asking for is Basil320's evidence.
There. I answered for him. Now you know how it feels.  Tongue

I am not offended by your post, ozgeorge. I am only puzzled that people other than Basil320 have given evidence supporting the primacy of Pascha, yet it is what I had to say which seems to have miffed PtA.
That's because I did not ask for evidence to support the primacy of Pascha.  I asked Basil 320 to offer evidence to support his dogmatic statement, the content of which really doesn't matter to this side discussion with you.  I honestly don't care about the dogmatic claim per se; rather, I'm focused on Basil 320 and his attempt to make a dogmatic statement without evidence.  As such, your smug attempt to speak on behalf of Basil 320 shows no understanding of what I really want, and I still await his reply.

To make it clear, I was not at all speaking for Basil320 when I made my post. This being an online FORUM (please note the meaning of the word), I had always understood that when a general question was asked, that any forum member was entitled to voice his opinion.
But it wasn't a general question.  It was a question directed to a specific poster within the context of the thread.  I'm also aware that an online forum--you don't need to tell me the meaning of the word--allows me to question specific posters in specific ways, so that when someone else pipes up to speak for a questioned poster, she does so on that poster's behalf.

Did you call out FatherHLL on his post, when he made a clear, dogmatic statement on the primacy of Pascha, which Basil320 simply affirmed as being correct?
Why does that matter to you?

Are you making a distinction of authority between a clergyman (Father HLL) and a layman (Basil320, myself, and others who have affirmed the primacy of Pascha)?
Why does that matter to you?

Or are you simply splitting semantic hairs, and selectively calling out particular posters?  police
Why does that matter to you?
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,700


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #41 on: November 13, 2009, 01:17:02 AM »

PtA, let me take you through it:

Basil320's post:

Quote
Father HLL's Post #26 is the Church's Teaching.  Pascha being the "Feast of Feasts,"  a "singular event," is not really a matter for debate.

Your reaction to this:
Quote
What evidence can you provide for such dogmatic statements as "[This] is the Church's teaching," and "[It] is not really a matter for debate"?
My reply to it, backing Basil's position:
Quote
PtA, a considered look at the liturgical texts (Vespers, Matins, etc) for these feasts will be most instructive for you. The Resurrection texts are unequivocal in their clarity in proclaiming the primacy of the feast of Pascha. Lex orandi, lex credendi, my friend.

The above post of mine was clear, informative (in that it pointed to where the "dogma" - your word, not mine - of the primacy of Pascha could be found), polite, and friendly. You may already be comfortable with knowing that it is indeed the premier feast of the Orthodox calendar, but there may well be others on this forum who might be interested in confirming it for themselves. So what's wrong with helping others know more about our faith? Or does every post need to conform to a rigorous and high academic standard? C'mon, already! This place is a forum, not a university faculty.

I repeat: what is the difference between other posts affirming the primacy of Pascha, and mine? Or, to put it another way, on what grounds did you find this post of mine so objectionable?



« Last Edit: November 13, 2009, 01:18:11 AM by LBK » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,167


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #42 on: November 13, 2009, 01:48:31 AM »

PtA, let me take you through it:

Basil320's post:

Quote
Father HLL's Post #26 is the Church's Teaching.  Pascha being the "Feast of Feasts,"  a "singular event," is not really a matter for debate.

Your reaction to this:
Quote
What evidence can you provide for such dogmatic statements as "[This] is the Church's teaching," and "[It] is not really a matter for debate"?
My reply to it, backing Basil's position:
Quote
PtA, a considered look at the liturgical texts (Vespers, Matins, etc) for these feasts will be most instructive for you. The Resurrection texts are unequivocal in their clarity in proclaiming the primacy of the feast of Pascha. Lex orandi, lex credendi, my friend.

The above post of mine was clear, informative (in that it pointed to where the "dogma" - your word, not mine - of the primacy of Pascha could be found), polite, and friendly. You may already be comfortable with knowing that it is indeed the premier feast of the Orthodox calendar, but there may well be others on this forum who might be interested in confirming it for themselves. So what's wrong with helping others know more about our faith? Or does every post need to conform to a rigorous and high academic standard? C'mon, already! This place is a forum, not a university faculty.

I repeat: what is the difference between other posts affirming the primacy of Pascha, and mine? Or, to put it another way, on what grounds did you find this post of mine so objectionable?
I asked Basil 320 a specific question that I wanted him and him alone to answer, which I believe is my right to do an an Internet discussion board.  You misunderstood the motive of my question and deigned to give me the information you thought I wanted--you gave it to me in specific answer to my question, which no one else did, so of course I have reason to object solely to your response and to no one else's.  Now, even after ozgeorge and I both addressed this by telling you that what you offered is not what I requested, you continue to defend your actions in an effort to justify yourself.  Why can't you just accept the fact that you misunderstood my question and gave me information I didn't want and just walk away?  After all, even Basil 320 understands now the point of my question.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 29,802



« Reply #43 on: January 01, 2010, 02:05:43 AM »

Got a new book today, God and the God-Man, a collection of writings by St. Justin Popovich that had already been published in English, but wich I guess they wanted to put together in a single source. Anyway, I was reading through the first text, a nativity epistle fittingly enough, and thought of this thread...

"Therefore Nativity,  the day of the brith of the God-man, the Lord Jesus Christ, is the greatest and most important day in the history of all the worlds in which man moves and lives...

The God-man?--This is the most important Event in all the worlds of man: the Ultimate Event...

On account of all this, the Nativity of Christ is our only eternal joy: the Ultimate Joy. The Joy of all joys, the Joy above all joys. Therefore, again and again: Hristos se rodi! Christ is born! The God-man is born! Our deification is born! Our Divine-human transformation is born!"

Obviously there seems to be some exaggeration here (e.g. "the Nativity of Christ is our only eternal joy"), and I doubt St. Justin would want this taken out of the context of the rest of his writings (I seem to recall him placing emphasis on things like the resurrection elsewhere), but I just thought I'd post it to give us all something to think about this Nativity season.
Logged
Tags: Pascha Incarnation nativity Resurrection Christmas 
Pages: 1   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 0.159 seconds with 72 queries.