OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 02:15:10 PM *
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   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Use of "Agios o Theos"  (Read 3433 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« on: June 18, 2010, 12:28:58 PM »

Is the Agios o Theos in the west a supplication to the Holy Trinity or to our Lord Jesus Christ? I know for EO, the Trisagion is thought of strictly as a prayer to the Holy Trinity, and among OO, it is a prayer to the Lord Jesus Christ.

I ask because the "Popule Meus" sung for Good Friday seems to suggest that the "Holy God" is towards the Lord Jesus:

Quote
Popule meus, quid feci tibi? Aut in quo contristavi te? Responde mihi. V. Quia eduxi te de terra Ægypti: parasti Crucem Salvatori tuo.

Hagios o Theos. Sanctus Deus. Hagios Ischyros.
Sanctus Fortis. Hagios Athanatos, eleison hymas. Sanctus Immortalis, miserere nobis
.
Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
AWR
Greetings from the Southern Jersey Shore.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 240


Expelled from Paradise


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2010, 02:40:57 PM »

As I understand it, all prayer to God is to the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit, no matter who we address it to.
Logged
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #2 on: June 18, 2010, 05:20:49 PM »

As I understand it, all prayer to God is to the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit, no matter who we address it to.

lol... well, you know what i mean.
Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #3 on: June 18, 2010, 05:29:24 PM »

Quote
...[W]e declare that the addition which the vain-minded Peter the Fuller made to the Trisagium or "Thrice Holy" Hymn is blasphemous; for it introduces a fourth person into the Trinity, giving a separate place to the Son of God, Who is the truly subsisting power of the Father, and a separate place to Him Who was crucified as though He were different from the "Mighty One," or as though the Holy Trinity was considered passible, and the Father and the Holy Spirit suffered on the Cross along with the Son. Have done with this blasphemous and nonsensical interpolation! For we hold the words "Holy God" to refer to the Father, without limiting the title of divinity to Him alone, but acknowledging also as God the Son and the Holy Spirit: and the words "Holy and Mighty" we ascribe to the Son, without stripping the Father and the Holy Spirit of might: and the words "Holy and Immortal" we attribute to the Holy Spirit, without depriving the Father and the Son of immortality. For, indeed, we apply all the divine names simply and unconditionally to each of the subsistences in imitation of the divine Apostle's words. But to us there is but one God, the Father, of Whom are all things, and we in Him: and one Lord Jesus Christ by Whom are all things, and we by Him. And, nevertheless, we follow Gregory the Theologian when he says, "But to us there is but one God, the Father, of Whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom are all things, and one Holy Spirit, in Whom are all things:" for the words "of Whom" and "through Whom" and "in Whom" do not divide the natures (for neither the prepositions nor the order of the names could ever be changed), but they characterise the properties of one unconfused nature. And this becomes clear from the fact that they are once more gathered into one, if only one reads with care these words of the same Apostle, Of Him and through Him and in Him are all things: to Him be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.

For that the "Trisagium" refers not to the Son alone, but to the Holy Trinity, the divine and saintly Athanasius and Basil and Gregory, and all the band of the divinely-inspired Fathers bear witness: because, as a matter of fact, by the threefold holiness the Holy Seraphim suggest to us the three subsistences of the superessential Godhead. But by the one Lordship they denote the one essence and dominion of the supremely-divine Trinity. Gregory the Theologian of a truth says, "Thus, then, the Holy of Holies, which is completely veiled by the Seraphim, and is glorified with three consecrations, meet together in one lordship and one divinity." This was the most beautiful and sublime philosophy of still another of our predecessors.

Ecclesiastical historians, then, say that once when the people of Constantinople were offering prayers to God to avert a threatened calamity, during Proclus' tenure of the office of Archbishop, it happened that a boy was snatched up from among the people, and was taught by angelic teachers the "Thrice Holy" Hymn, "Thou Holy God, Holy and Mighty One, Holy and Immortal One, have mercy upon us:" and when once more he was restored to earth, he told what he had learned, and all the people sang the Hymn, and so the threatened calamity was averted. And in the fourth holy and great Ecumenical Council, I mean the one at Chalcedon, we are told that it was in this form that the Hymn was sung; for the minutes of this holy assembly so record it. It is, therefore, a matter for laughter and ridicule that this "Thrice Holy" Hymn, taught us by the angels, and confirmed by the averting of calamity, ratified and established by so great an assembly of the holy Fathers, and sung first by the Seraphim as a declaration of the three subsistences of the Godhead, should be mangled and forsooth emended to suit the view of the stupid Fuller as though he were higher than the Seraphim. But oh! the arrogance! not to say folly! But we say it thus, though demons should rend us in pieces, "Do Thou, Holy God, Holy and Mighty One, Holy and Immortal One, have mercy upon us."
- St. John Damascene
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #4 on: June 23, 2010, 11:22:19 AM »

The Trisagion in the Improperia is quite obviously addressed to the Son alone. If it were to the Trinity, it would make absolutely no sense in the context of the service (seen in its entirety here).

I personally think this is one of the most idiotic disagreements ever. Clearly the hymn can be sung, without "Who was crucified for us", as a hymn to the Trinity, and just as clearly it can be a hymn to the Son. With "Who was crucified for us", it's obviously only a hymn to the Son, because nobody, not OO, EO, or Latins, think the whole Trinity was crucified. This is as stupid as if, because "Glory to You, O Lord" can be said to the Trinity, the prayer "Glory to You, O Lord, who was crucified for us" is heretical because it is addressed to the Son.

zomg! "Soson imas" is sung to both Christ and the Theotokos! We must confuse their roles in our salvation! Heresy!
« Last Edit: June 23, 2010, 11:23:06 AM by yBeayf » Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,367



« Reply #5 on: June 23, 2010, 12:43:21 PM »

Hmmm, I would not read the Reproaches in quite that way. It seems to me that they could be read as the words of the Godhead Entire, for the repeated use of "I" is applied to acts which I think have to be assigned to the united Trinity (unless you want to tread on the edge of modalism). It is not clear that this is the right way to look upon it, though, as the Reproaches lean quite heavily on Jesus, the incarnate Son, as yet representing the wholeness of the Godhead. OTOH I think pretty much every Anglican would hold St. John Damascene's assignation of the three sections to the three Persons to be not entirely orthodox either, for (as the Athanasian Creed explains) the Father is holy, the Son is holy, and the Spirit is holy, though there is but one holy, mighty, and immortal.

I have to say I also do not understand exactly what the point of this "disagreement" is.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #6 on: June 23, 2010, 03:27:04 PM »

I don' think the Western trisagion is addressed only to Christ because of the context. Context in liturgical text is fleeting.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,367



« Reply #7 on: June 23, 2010, 05:09:04 PM »

Shanghaiski, I can't speak even for Anglicanism (because nobody can Wink) but I can't see anyone in the Anglican west understanding it as anything but addressed to the Godhead as a whole.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 23, 2010, 08:20:02 PM »

I personally think this is one of the most idiotic disagreements ever. Clearly the hymn can be sung, without "Who was crucified for us", as a hymn to the Trinity, and just as clearly it can be a hymn to the Son. With "Who was crucified for us", it's obviously only a hymn to the Son, because nobody, not OO, EO, or Latins, think the whole Trinity was crucified. This is as stupid as if, because "Glory to You, O Lord" can be said to the Trinity, the prayer "Glory to You, O Lord, who was crucified for us" is heretical because it is addressed to the Son.

zomg! "Soson imas" is sung to both Christ and the Theotokos! We must confuse their roles in our salvation! Heresy!

 Grin
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
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2010, 10:52:14 AM »

Clearly the hymn can be sung, without "Who was crucified for us", as a hymn to the Trinity, and just as clearly it can be a hymn to the Son. With "Who was crucified for us", it's obviously only a hymn to the Son, because nobody, not OO, EO, or Latins, think the whole Trinity was crucified.

Since the anti-Chalcedonians are outside of the Church, it doesn't really matter what their prayers say.

Quote
This is as stupid as if, because "Glory to You, O Lord" can be said to the Trinity, the prayer "Glory to You, O Lord, who was crucified for us" is heretical because it is addressed to the Son.

No, your comparison doesn't fit. It is more like saying, "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit who was crucified for us" or "Trinity who was crucified for us," because the "Holy God," "Holy Mighty," and "Holy Immortal" were always understood as each referring to a particular Person of the Trinity.

If you think the debate is a stupid one, then blame the heretic Peter the Fuller who introduced the innovation and anathematized anyone who didn't accept it.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,367



« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2010, 11:21:35 AM »

If you think the debate is a stupid one, then blame the heretic Peter the Fuller who introduced the innovation and anathematized anyone who didn't accept it.

Well, it is stupid if you are arguing against something which nobody does. And as far as I can tell, nobody does.
Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,605



WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2010, 11:51:29 AM »

The Trisagion as a hymn addressed to Christ with the addition of the phrase 'who was crucified for us' was used in Antioch from at least 320 AD and therefore could not have been an addition made by Peter the Fuller. Scholars, as opposed to polemicists, are agreed that the Trisagion had been in use in Antioch for more than 125 years before Chalcedon and in the Antiochian context was Christological.

It is also clearly documented that the Theodorean and Chalcedonian tradition in Antioch also used this same addition to the hymn which was addressed to Christ. We have records of Maronite (Chalcedonian) monks using the hymn to Christ with the addition. Indeed the Chalcedonian Maronites continued to use the hymn with the addition until the 16th century. There are also records from Cyprus that show that it was used in a Christological manner there as well.

I do know that one figure was condemned in Antioch, I don't have time to dig up the details, but he was condemned as a Nestorian for using the version, 'Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, Christ the King, who was crucified for us'. He wasn't condemned for not using the hymn in a Christological manner, he clearly did.

There are plenty of early OO writings about the Trisagion, I can't recall anyone being anathematised for not using it in a Christological manner. Generally the interest is in showing that there are two traditions and that the Christological tradition is early, even to the time of the burial of Christ when angels appeared and sang this hymn to Christ.

Father Peter
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2010, 12:35:04 PM »

Quote
Generally the interest is in showing that there are two traditions and that the Christological tradition is early, even to the time of the burial of Christ when angels appeared and sang this hymn to Christ.

Which tradition fits perfectly with its use in the Improperia.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 24, 2010, 08:41:39 PM »

No, your comparison doesn't fit. It is more like saying, "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit who was crucified for us" or "Trinity who was crucified for us," because the "Holy God," "Holy Mighty," and "Holy Immortal" were always understood as each referring to a particular Person of the Trinity.

All of the sources I have read indicate that a Christological interpretation of the Trisagion was common in Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and Ethiopia significantly before Peter the Fuller's addition.

If you think the debate is a stupid one, then blame the heretic Peter the Fuller who introduced the innovation and anathematized anyone who didn't accept it.

More like he anathematized anyone in the Exarchate of Antioch who did not accept it, because a Christological interpretation of the hymn was traditional in that region and to refuse the addition was thus an indication of Theodoreanism.
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
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,321


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #14 on: June 24, 2010, 09:26:05 PM »

More like he anathematized anyone in the Exarchate of Antioch who did not accept it, because a Christological interpretation of the hymn was traditional in that region and to refuse the addition was thus an indication of Theodoreanism.

Actually, if you read what Fr. Peter said (and I would think he has studied this more than any of us) he seems to indicate that there was never an anathema against people who omitted "Who was crucified for us."  He seems to be aware of only one anathema, and that was against a guy who used that phrase, but who also added words to it that would imply an exclusion of the Word of God, thus specifically giving it a Theodorean meaning.
Logged

"They mean it as a mark of shame, we must then wear it as a mark of hope..."
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/07/nun-sign-of-genocide.html
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2010, 09:30:57 PM »

More like he anathematized anyone in the Exarchate of Antioch who did not accept it, because a Christological interpretation of the hymn was traditional in that region and to refuse the addition was thus an indication of Theodoreanism.

Actually, if you read what Fr. Peter said (and I would think he has studied this more than any of us) he seems to indicate that there was never an anathema against people who omitted "Who was crucified for us."  He seems to be aware of only one anathema, and that was against a guy who used that phrase, but who also added words to it that would imply an exclusion of the Word of God, thus specifically giving it a Theodorean meaning.

Ummmm. Father did not explicitly establish that there was not an anathema of those who refused "who was crucified for us". Furthermore, this thread (in Iconodule's post) is not the first time I have read that Peter the Fuller anathematized those who refused to use "who was crucified for us". So I think I have reason to be skeptical of the idea that he did not.
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
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,321


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2010, 09:48:38 PM »

this thread (in Iconodule's post) is not the first time I have read that Peter the Fuller anathematized those who refused to use "who was crucified for us".

It's not the first time I've heard it either, but you know how accurate the "information" about us is out there.    Roll Eyes


This is what Fr. Peter said earlier that led me to my interpretation of his post:

Quote
There are plenty of early OO writings about the Trisagion, I can't recall anyone being anathematised for not using it in a Christological manner.

It could be I read him wrong.  If he sees this, he can clarify.   Smiley
Logged

"They mean it as a mark of shame, we must then wear it as a mark of hope..."
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/07/nun-sign-of-genocide.html
CoptoGeek
of Alexandria, the Christ-loving City
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church
Posts: 1,371



« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2010, 12:19:31 AM »

Quote
Generally the interest is in showing that there are two traditions and that the Christological tradition is early, even to the time of the burial of Christ when angels appeared and sang this hymn to Christ.

Which tradition fits perfectly with its use in the Improperia.

Well then clearly the Angles at the Tomb were "stupid" or heretics or both Roll Eyes
Logged

"Be oppressed, rather than the oppressor. Be gentle, rather than zealous. Lay hold of goodness, rather than justice." -St. Isaac of Nineveh

“I returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church with affection, finding in her our tormented and broken history“. -Salama Moussa
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,605



WWW
« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2010, 04:41:53 AM »

I have read through my sources some more.

As far as I can see the only person who was condemned in regard to the Trisagion in any sense at all was Calandion (I couldn't remember the spelling of his name) who was the intruding patriarch of Antioch between 479-484 when Peter the Fuller was expelled. Calandion introduced the phrase 'Christ the King' which was taken as being Nestorianising, and he was himself expelled when Peter the Fuller returned. Since he would have been expelled in any case on the return of Peter the Fuller I can't actually find that Peter issued any sort of condemnation himself of Calandion. Calandion was expelled, ostensibly, for having allied himself to the wrong political party at the time and for finding himself on the rebels side in regard to the Emperor Zeno.

During the entire time from at least 325 AD to the time of St Severus, the Alexandrians used the Trisagion without the Antiochian addition. Therefore it seems to me most unlikely, impossible actually, that Peter the Fuller issued an anathema against anyone not using the phrase 'who was crucified for us'.

We do know that monks in Constantinople created a dossier of forged correspondence with Peter the Fuller to promote their own agenda. I have not had time to go through all of these, certainly these forgeries seem to be the source of the idea that Peter the Fuller introduced the phrase. Grillmeier, who is no friend of Oriental Orthodoxy, is very clear that they are not only forgeries, but poor and theologically confused forgeries. Schwarz has determined that they were written by a Latin speaker in Greek which he had learned as a second language. Grillmeier makes no mention of Peter the Fuller anathematising anyone over this issue.

I would trust very little which is written about Peter the Fuller. Even looking around at older books this past day I see so much which is just error written from a Catholic point of view and without any recourse to the documents which even my poor studies have made me aware are available. We know that Peter the Fuller accepted the Henotikon which required a reconciliation with those who also accepted the document. whether or not they used the Trisagion in a Christological or Trinitarian manner, whether or not they used the additional phrase or not. Indeed apart from the additional addition of Calandion, it would seem to me that the Trisagion only ever became an issue in Constantinople, where the people seemed willing to riot at the drop of a hat, on those occasions when it seemed that the Antiochian use was being introduced.

Father Peter
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2010, 06:20:24 AM »

even to the time of the burial of Christ when angels appeared and sang this hymn to Christ.

Isn't the first known reference to the Angels singing the Trisagion at the tomb of Christ from the 9th Century or so?
Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,321


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #20 on: June 25, 2010, 11:24:57 AM »

Thank you, Father Peter, for taking the time to look all this up!   Smiley

Orthodox11,
I don't know the answer to your question, but for everyone's benefit, I want to paste something from an article about the litiurgy by Hegomen Athanasius Iskander:

http://www.coptichymns.net/module-pagesetter-printpub-tid-1-pid-315.html

(I got the article from a post by EA in another thread about the Trisagion.)


The Trisagion:

The “Agius”, is one of the oldest hymns in the Church. From ancient times it has been sung before the reading of the Gospel. [16] We know that it was always sung in Greek (even in Latin churches), because the New Testament was preached in the Greek Language. [17]

There is an old tradition in the Church about how this hymn originated, and it goes like this: When the holy Joseph and Nicodemus were burying the body of our Lord, doubts entered their minds concerning His Divinity. Suddenly, a choir of angels appeared to them singing defiantly, “Holy God, Holy mighty, Holy immortal.” The two righteous men, realizing their error, joined in the singing, and then as if to confess their sin and to ask for mercy and for giveness, they added to the angelic hymn the phrase, “O Thou Who was crucified for us have mercy on us.” The Church later adopted this hymn, adding a verse concerning the Virgin birth of our Lord and another concerning His resurrection and ascension. [18]

We have evidence to support this in our liturgi cal hymnody. The angelic origin of this hymn is recorded for us in the “Doxology of the Heavenly,” sung during the Offering of In­cense,

And the twenty four Priests,

In the church of the first_born,

Praise Him incessantly,

Proclaiming and saying,

Holy, O God:

The sick, O Lord, heal them.

Holy, O Mighty:

Those who slept, repose them.

Holy, O Immortal:

O Lord, bless Thine inheritance,

And may Thy mercy and Thy peace

Be a fortress unto Thy people.

The part attributed to the holy Joseph and Nicodemus is preserved for us in the beautiful burial hymn of Holy Friday called "Golgotha"

The two righteous men,

Joseph and Nicodemus,

came and took the Body of Christ.

They anointed Him with spices,

shrouded Him, and placed Him in a tomb.

They praised Him, saying,

“Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal,

Who was crucified for us, have mercy upon us.”

 
Logged

"They mean it as a mark of shame, we must then wear it as a mark of hope..."
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/07/nun-sign-of-genocide.html
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,321


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #21 on: July 22, 2010, 08:42:13 PM »

I do know that one figure was condemned in Antioch, I don't have time to dig up the details, but he was condemned as a Nestorian for using the version, 'Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, Christ the King, who was crucified for us'. He wasn't condemned for not using the hymn in a Christological manner, he clearly did.

I just saw something I want to add to this.  It just struck me as interesting, but it may be of no significance.  On the website of Holy Etchmiadzin there is a page that gives a history of the Armenian Church and its relations with other Churches.  Toward the bottom, it gives six conditions that were presented to the Armenians for unification with the Latins in 1307.  This is the sixth condition:

Quote
6. To sing the Trisagion adding Christ’s name: "Christ, who was crucified for us".

http://www.armenianchurch.org/index.jsp?sid=1&id=60&pid=4094
Logged

"They mean it as a mark of shame, we must then wear it as a mark of hope..."
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/07/nun-sign-of-genocide.html
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 #22 on: July 22, 2010, 10:19:02 PM »

The Maronites in History By Matti Moosa
http://books.google.com/books?id=8Ogp94y8CJgC&pg=PA69&dq=Trisagion&hl=en&ei=OPVITO6IE8GC8gaW_P3HDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Trisagion&f=false
has a chapter on the allegation that Peter added it, and the evidence that the Trisagion originated in Syria, and the addition predates Chalcedon, dating to Nicea I.

Its use at Chalcedon:
http://books.google.com/books?id=6IUaOOT1G3UC&pg=PA364&dq=Acts+of+Chalcedon+%22Holy+God%22+Trisagion&hl=en&ei=s_xITM7NGsGB8gaF0qm1Dg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false
« Last Edit: July 22, 2010, 10:23:16 PM by ialmisry » 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
Clare G.
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 90


« Reply #23 on: September 07, 2011, 11:43:33 PM »

I'm reviving this thread to ask about a reference to the "blaspehmous addition to the Thrice-holy Hymn" in the first Troparion of the First Ode of the service for St Euphrosyne (25 September, old calendar).

The last sentence of this Troparion in the HTM Menaion reads:
"Thou Thyself hast now overthrown the biasphemous addition to the Thrice-holy Hvmn, catching up the child to hear the astonishing song." [ἔθου τοῦ παιδὸς ἁρπαγὴν καὶ φωνήν; http://analogion.gr/glt/texts/Sep/25.uni.htm ]

Can anyone tell me what child is referred to here, or its relevance to St Euphrosyne?

[Edit: see also the first Troparion of the Third One: similar story.]
« Last Edit: September 07, 2011, 11:58:59 PM by Clare G. » Logged
Clare G.
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 90


« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2011, 01:58:59 AM »

Apologies to all. I found the answer in the Synaxarion for this day:

Commemoration of the great earthquake in Constantinople in the reign of Emoeror Theodosius the Younger, during which a boy was snatched up into the air [and to whom the Orthodox Trisagion was revealed by the Archangels].
Logged
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,757


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #25 on: September 09, 2011, 03:17:33 AM »

This thread is so depressing. Also Trullo bans the use of the "was crucified for us".
« Last Edit: September 09, 2011, 03:17:57 AM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"Simply put, if you’re not willing to take what is dearest to you, whether plans or people, and kiss it goodbye, you can’t be my disciple."
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 #26 on: September 09, 2011, 09:04:26 AM »

This is one of the sillier OO-EO issues.
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
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #27 on: September 09, 2011, 09:53:57 AM »

I have to apologize for my crappy attitude on display here.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
CoptoGeek
of Alexandria, the Christ-loving City
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church
Posts: 1,371



« Reply #28 on: September 14, 2011, 10:59:42 AM »

Up until the "Neo-Chalcedonian" period, the Chalcedonian arguments against "Who was Crucified for us" were the standard Antiochian Dyophysite arguments, contradicting St. Cyril's 12th Anathema.

Quote
If anyone does not confess that the Word of God suffered in the flesh, was crucified in the flesh, and tasted death in the flesh, becoming the first-born from the dead, although as God he is life and life-giving, let him be anathema.

After Constantinople II those arguments could no longer be used and it shifted to falsely accusing us of addressing it to the Holy Trinity.

Here is some background:

The Byzantine legacy in the Orthodox Church By John Meyendorff

http://books.google.com/books?id=9HQ3YU9SAG8C&pg=PA58&lpg=PA58&dq=%22Who+was+Crucified+for+us%22+Meyendorff&source=bl&ots=qyHinQxBEi&sig=0rq0VhgCCDjlr20Y0tP3J2XxkK8&hl=en&ei=erZwTp6uHsLqOcusmI4J&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Fr. Meyendorrf also wrote about it a bit more in another book that I'll try to look up when I get home.

And yes, I have been on a Fr. Meyendorff reading spree :-)

Memory Eternal to this great man.
Logged

"Be oppressed, rather than the oppressor. Be gentle, rather than zealous. Lay hold of goodness, rather than justice." -St. Isaac of Nineveh

“I returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church with affection, finding in her our tormented and broken history“. -Salama Moussa
CoptoGeek
of Alexandria, the Christ-loving City
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church
Posts: 1,371



« Reply #29 on: September 14, 2011, 11:01:23 AM »

I have to apologize for my crappy attitude on display here.

It's cool. I cringe at over 90% of what I post...and yet I can't stop :-)
Logged

"Be oppressed, rather than the oppressor. Be gentle, rather than zealous. Lay hold of goodness, rather than justice." -St. Isaac of Nineveh

“I returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church with affection, finding in her our tormented and broken history“. -Salama Moussa
CoptoGeek
of Alexandria, the Christ-loving City
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church
Posts: 1,371



« Reply #30 on: September 15, 2011, 08:16:07 AM »

Further:

Quote
The interpolation was meant to proclaim by using an expression from the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, an essential aspect of Cyrillian theology. The Word as the only "subject" in Christ is also the subject of the death "in the flesh" which is his own.  Undoubtedly the Trisagion was interpreted as a hymn to the incarnate Word, and the interpolated form of it was formally orthodox.  It would have been decidedly heretical had it been addressed to the Trinity, implying the passion of the three persons or of the divine essence.15 The Chalcedonian opposition would have been justified, therefore, if it had limited its objections to the fact that the hymn was interpreted in a Trinitarian sense in many churches and that consequently the use of the interpolated form was dangerously ambiguous. However, if one reads certain Chalcedonian texts relative to this controversy, one finds, against Theopaschism in all its forms, objections current in the anti-Cyrillian circles of Antioch before and after the Council of Ephesus.

15 footnote: This fact is admitted by contemporaries like Ephraim of Amida, Chalcedonian successor to Peter the Fuller in the See of Antioch (526-544).  In his book addressed to the Severian Zenobius of Emesa and analyzed by Photius, he showed that "the Easterners addressed this hymn to our Lord Jesus Christ, while the Byzantines and the Westerners linked the doxology to the consubstantial Trinity."

Fr. John Meyendorff, Christ in Eastern Christian Thought, p. 35

just wanted to include that for future inquiries on the matter.
Logged

"Be oppressed, rather than the oppressor. Be gentle, rather than zealous. Lay hold of goodness, rather than justice." -St. Isaac of Nineveh

“I returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church with affection, finding in her our tormented and broken history“. -Salama Moussa
Altar Server
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian(as of 12/18/10)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 834


Christos Anesti!


« Reply #31 on: September 15, 2011, 10:34:25 PM »

I would say in the case of the Good Friday Pre-sanctified liturgy in the west the "Agios" is addressed to Christ.....I also believe this is the only time the "Agios" is used in the Western Rite   
Logged

"Come ye take light from The Light that is never overtaken by night and glorify the Christ, who is risen from the dead"
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,757


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #32 on: September 15, 2011, 10:45:05 PM »

Up until the "Neo-Chalcedonian" period, the Chalcedonian arguments against "Who was Crucified for us" were the standard Antiochian Dyophysite arguments, contradicting St. Cyril's 12th Anathema.
I believe part of the confusion was the use of the phrase "the Logos" to refer, in Antiochian Christology, to either the Person of the Logos or to the Divinity of the Logos.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"Simply put, if you’re not willing to take what is dearest to you, whether plans or people, and kiss it goodbye, you can’t be my disciple."
Tags: trisagion Peter the Fuller 
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 0.12 seconds with 60 queries.