Out of curiosity, how seriously was the Old Testament being observed at the time of the Theotokos and Christ? Would it have even been feasible for the Theotokos to dwell in the Holiest of Holies at that time or would it have caused outrage among the Jews? Given that they were eating pork around that time (evidenced by the story of Christ and the demon pigs) it would appear that they weren't taking it too seriously. This may offend some, and I hope I don't sound like one of those Protestants who try to demonize the Church by saying it adopted pagan Roman elements, but is it possible that the Jews at the time, due to being around the influence of their Roman occupiers, would have been more lenient toward a female hanging out around the Holy of Holies since the Roman temples had females and priestesses who played an important role in their pagan religions? Clearly I don't know enough about the OT, service texts, and hymnography to understand the whole underlying theological parallels, typology, and symbolism behind this topic, but is denying that she literally dwelt in the Holy of Holies really that blasphemous? Someone here earlier said that in the Feasts we don't commemorate "allegories" but real persons and events; are they sure about that? What would you call Noah's Flood, Jonah and the Whale, and the Garden of Eden? We commemorate all of those stories and yet they most likely never happened in a purely literalistic fashion (unless we've become Protestant), and the Fathers seemed to interpret them in a typological fashion more so than they did a literalistic one. If that's the case, why can't we do the same with the Theotokos Holy of Holies story?