OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 31, 2014, 03:40:45 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 2 3 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Miters or Mitres  (Read 2901 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« on: June 12, 2013, 12:46:52 AM »

So something really bugs me.  We know from history that the current episcopal mitre predates the Ottoman Empire.  Yet every online source we have says that the current Mitre did not predate it.  Also, typically the statement is that it is the imperial mitre, which it is not, since the imperial mitre of the 15th century was drastically different from the episcopal mitre. 

When we see the relics of hierarchs from the 12th-14th century, we find mitres very similar to what we have today. 

For example, here we see one of the mitres of St. Gregory Palamas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StGregoryPalamasReliquary.png

And here, we see that of the Roman (Byzantine) Emperor:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Palaio.jpg

So I know what you are thinking:  this priest has a bee in his bonnet.  Maybe, but the bee is that of historical ignorance.  People find stupid things on the internet and then it gets cut and pasted over and over until it is "truth" on every website available.  And we still, yes we STILL, in this age, have all those who from hierarchy to laity don't know that the epiklesis is NOT the 3rd hour prayers (and Lenten at that!) but rather the consecratory prayers, to the point in which we even still hear slavic priests and even bishops saying that the Greeks, Middle Easterners and Africans have "done away with the epiklesis"...  sigh.  And just as bad, there are "Greeks"--hierarchy to laity--who don't know that certain Slavic practices are older than modern Greek practice and even inherited from the Greeks in times past (the reverse is also true of different subjects, but the point is mutual ignorance and suspicion).  What kind of a witness is this to those who are outside and looking into the legitimacy of the Orthodox Church?  It is shameful. 

But yes, the very thing that prompted this thread is the very fact that there is not one source online that I have found that says something that is historically accurate on the subject of the mitre-the turban of the archierea.  Can someone point me to at least one beam of light online that actually probes this to a real historical conclusion?  We know that the Kamelavkion has existed since the 8th century (different forms in east and west, in the west more like the skufia, in the east more like the modern kamilavka), contrary to the claims of some here. 
 
Logged
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,743



« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2013, 01:55:29 AM »

Well, of course I am going to disagree...

Here, we have the crown of Emperor Nicephorus Phocas (10th century):





Where can we find crowns of our modern bishops, which look just like that, in early forms? It is clear it did not happen over night at least, certainly not before the 11th century. How old is the Papal tiara? it is not an ancient tradition either (well.. comparatively...). I cannot find any evidence of crowns being used by bishops before the 11th century at least

I think people just generally say they used the crown mitre after the fall of constantinople because by then it was done basically everywhere, and besides what emperor is there to object?

One will probably have to ask a professor for a real answer to your question though ;P
Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #2 on: June 12, 2013, 02:37:55 AM »

Well, of course I am going to disagree...

Here, we have the crown of Emperor Nicephorus Phocas (10th century):





Where can we find crowns of our modern bishops, which look just like that, in early forms? It is clear it did not happen over night at least, certainly not before the 11th century. How old is the Papal tiara? it is not an ancient tradition either (well.. comparatively...). I cannot find any evidence of crowns being used by bishops before the 11th century at least

I think people just generally say they used the crown mitre after the fall of constantinople because by then it was done basically everywhere, and besides what emperor is there to object?

One will probably have to ask a professor for a real answer to your question though ;P

Well, it is believed to have belonged to Nikephoros Phokas (963-969).  And yes, it did not arrive at the time of the Apostles.  But you know that, and I never claimed that.  I know that rounded tiaras belonged to emperors.  That is not the point.  The point is that bishops wearing them predates the date that is claimed universally on the internet.  Most of the Byzantine crowns, however, resembled the MP's non-liturgical headdress (rounded coming down about the ears).  BTW I am a professor. 
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 8,760



« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2013, 05:47:15 AM »

Well, I might not be a professor but I do happen to be the Queen of England. I could easily get my lackeys to fetch images from manuscripts which shows that the Palaeologid Emperors wore crowns that are identical to modern-day mitres. I might even look for those images myself if people want to see those images. Buckingham Palace is a big place and the lackeys like to hide themselves, so I guess that if people want to see it I'll look for them.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2013, 05:52:02 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

On a OC.net diet.

"Chi son?  Sono un poeta. Che cosa faccio? Scrivo. E come vivo?  Vivo."
-Giacomo Puccini
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,741


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2013, 07:48:45 AM »

Well, I might not be a professor but I do happen to be the Queen of England. I could easily get my lackeys to fetch images from manuscripts which shows that the Palaeologid Emperors wore crowns that are identical to modern-day mitres. I might even look for those images myself if people want to see those images. Buckingham Palace is a big place and the lackeys like to hide themselves, so I guess that if people want to see it I'll look for them.

I've always wanted to meet you. Is the tea in England as good as they say it is?
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 12, 2013, 08:18:58 AM »

I think Father is raising a fundamental problem we Orthodox have within our big, semi-dysfunctional tent. That is we don't understand, or accept, the true meaning of external traditions. In the pre modern era, minor differences in priestly garb, liturgical rubrics, headgear, chant etc.. really were unknown to the average cleric or lay person.

Today, in our information hungry world, these long standing regional variants become points of discord among both the ill informed as well as leaders who should know better.

For example, I am sure that Father has heard the complaint, from both Russian and Greek oriented Orthodox, the Ukrainian and Rusyn rubrics are some how not Orthodox in that they differ a little bit from post Nikonian Russian practice and post 16th century Greek practice. Yet, much of this predates the period of the Unia, and bears some structural similarity to the priestly old believer rubric. As we come ever closer to the yet elusive goal of North American "unity" it is important for all of us to learn more about the how, when and why behind such matters.

If a yet to be established "central command" simply decreed a common mandatory rubric for North America without  all of us gaining a fuller understanding of such matters, all hell will surely break out and the calendar fights of the past and present will seem quaint by comparison.

We all need less "I heard" or "we do this or that" in order to move forward.
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #6 on: June 12, 2013, 01:48:57 PM »

^Exactly.  Another example is the complaint by some of the "shortened" Carpatho-Rusyn text of Liturgy and other services.  Actually it is not "shortened," it was just never lengthened.  It is identical to the Barbarini codex and to the early Rusyn codices.  Instead of willy-nilly hack n' slash editing on the part of local editing, why not just use the preserved "shorter" version which was never cut as preserved in the Rusyn lands?  Heaven forbid we go directly from the Great Entrance to the Kiss of Peace the way it used to be everywhere and the way it has always been in Rusyn lands.     
Logged
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #7 on: June 12, 2013, 02:07:54 PM »

I think the issue is the approach that has been used over the last 50 years in Orthodox Academic circles. First off, those who are teaching this field of study are all going through an education process that at some point involves the Church of Rome, and I think that sets up the idea of liturgy from one source. Secondly, they approach it from a field of historicity rather than anthropological.  Having studied both approaches during my undergraduate studies, our study of liturgical development deserves more of an anthropological study since it seems like many of our historical studies have gotten things very wrong.

To understand the difference, the one who studies something historically will go visit a site (if they even bother to actually go and visit) and bring a book with them, and look at all the writings to make their conclusion.

The one who studies something anthropologically will go to a site and study everything they can about the site and the people who are present around the site. They will observe, look for first hand accounts, and take a much broader approach to one single issue.

They both may be studying the same onion. The historical approach is the cut the onion in half and look at all the layers together to see how we get from the core to the outer layer. The anthropological approach is to peal back each layer of onion and look at them separately, take each layer on its own merit.   

Each process has its advantages and disadvantages.

It would be interesting to see the study of liturgy from an anthropological view. Perhaps I have found what my PhD pursuit should be.
Logged

Joseph
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 8,760



« Reply #8 on: June 12, 2013, 02:17:39 PM »

We know from history that the current episcopal mitre predates the Ottoman Empire.  Yet every online source we have says that the current Mitre did not predate it.  Also, typically the statement is that it is the imperial mitre, which it is not, since the imperial mitre of the 15th century was drastically different from the episcopal mitre.  

This 15th-century emperor is staring at you.



« Last Edit: June 12, 2013, 02:21:10 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

On a OC.net diet.

"Chi son?  Sono un poeta. Che cosa faccio? Scrivo. E come vivo?  Vivo."
-Giacomo Puccini
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #9 on: June 12, 2013, 03:57:13 PM »

We know from history that the current episcopal mitre predates the Ottoman Empire.  Yet every online source we have says that the current Mitre did not predate it.  Also, typically the statement is that it is the imperial mitre, which it is not, since the imperial mitre of the 15th century was drastically different from the episcopal mitre.  

This 15th-century emperor is staring at you.





Right.  What's your point?  Apparently you missed the other post where I said:
"I know that rounded tiaras belonged to emperors.  That is not the point."
Clearly this crown is quite different in style from the bulbous mitres of St. Gregory Palamas.  It is rounded with earbands, just as I stated above. 

Now back to the central issue.  Can you find a single source on the internet on mitres that does not duplicate the claim that episcopal mitres did not predate the fall of Byzantium, or were simply a "transfer" of the (fallen) imperial crown?   



Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #10 on: June 12, 2013, 04:01:18 PM »

I think the issue is the approach that has been used over the last 50 years in Orthodox Academic circles. First off, those who are teaching this field of study are all going through an education process that at some point involves the Church of Rome, and I think that sets up the idea of liturgy from one source. Secondly, they approach it from a field of historicity rather than anthropological.  Having studied both approaches during my undergraduate studies, our study of liturgical development deserves more of an anthropological study since it seems like many of our historical studies have gotten things very wrong.

To understand the difference, the one who studies something historically will go visit a site (if they even bother to actually go and visit) and bring a book with them, and look at all the writings to make their conclusion.

The one who studies something anthropologically will go to a site and study everything they can about the site and the people who are present around the site. They will observe, look for first hand accounts, and take a much broader approach to one single issue.

They both may be studying the same onion. The historical approach is the cut the onion in half and look at all the layers together to see how we get from the core to the outer layer. The anthropological approach is to peal back each layer of onion and look at them separately, take each layer on its own merit.   

Each process has its advantages and disadvantages.

It would be interesting to see the study of liturgy from an anthropological view. Perhaps I have found what my PhD pursuit should be.

I agree with what you say.  However, my biggest problem is the cut and paste method of putting forth information from website to website without any verification that the information is at all sound, and then people use this for study because, they reason, since it is universally cut and pasted, it must therefore be true.   
Logged
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #11 on: June 12, 2013, 04:09:28 PM »

I think the issue is the approach that has been used over the last 50 years in Orthodox Academic circles. First off, those who are teaching this field of study are all going through an education process that at some point involves the Church of Rome, and I think that sets up the idea of liturgy from one source. Secondly, they approach it from a field of historicity rather than anthropological.  Having studied both approaches during my undergraduate studies, our study of liturgical development deserves more of an anthropological study since it seems like many of our historical studies have gotten things very wrong.

To understand the difference, the one who studies something historically will go visit a site (if they even bother to actually go and visit) and bring a book with them, and look at all the writings to make their conclusion.

The one who studies something anthropologically will go to a site and study everything they can about the site and the people who are present around the site. They will observe, look for first hand accounts, and take a much broader approach to one single issue.

They both may be studying the same onion. The historical approach is the cut the onion in half and look at all the layers together to see how we get from the core to the outer layer. The anthropological approach is to peal back each layer of onion and look at them separately, take each layer on its own merit.   

Each process has its advantages and disadvantages.

It would be interesting to see the study of liturgy from an anthropological view. Perhaps I have found what my PhD pursuit should be.

I agree with what you say.  However, my biggest problem is the cut and paste method of putting forth information from website to website without any verification that the information is at all sound, and then people use this for study because, they reason, since it is universally cut and pasted, it must therefore be true.   

Welcome to the internet.
Logged

Joseph
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #12 on: June 12, 2013, 04:21:37 PM »

I think the issue is the approach that has been used over the last 50 years in Orthodox Academic circles. First off, those who are teaching this field of study are all going through an education process that at some point involves the Church of Rome, and I think that sets up the idea of liturgy from one source. Secondly, they approach it from a field of historicity rather than anthropological.  Having studied both approaches during my undergraduate studies, our study of liturgical development deserves more of an anthropological study since it seems like many of our historical studies have gotten things very wrong.

To understand the difference, the one who studies something historically will go visit a site (if they even bother to actually go and visit) and bring a book with them, and look at all the writings to make their conclusion.

The one who studies something anthropologically will go to a site and study everything they can about the site and the people who are present around the site. They will observe, look for first hand accounts, and take a much broader approach to one single issue.

They both may be studying the same onion. The historical approach is the cut the onion in half and look at all the layers together to see how we get from the core to the outer layer. The anthropological approach is to peal back each layer of onion and look at them separately, take each layer on its own merit.   

Each process has its advantages and disadvantages.

It would be interesting to see the study of liturgy from an anthropological view. Perhaps I have found what my PhD pursuit should be.

I agree with what you say.  However, my biggest problem is the cut and paste method of putting forth information from website to website without any verification that the information is at all sound, and then people use this for study because, they reason, since it is universally cut and pasted, it must therefore be true.   

Welcome to the internet.

Exactly, and it is not bothersome until you have a whole fleet of students who do papers on a subject and then, instead of quoting real books, they are quoting internet sites.  Or, worse yet, you have a meeting where certain important ecclesiastical matters are being decided, there is a disagreement, and someone looks up the subject on the internet on their phone (rather than delving into real sources), and that "decides" the matter. 
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #13 on: June 12, 2013, 04:23:48 PM »

^And that is only slightly superior to those who make crucial decisions without looking up or verifying anything at all.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #14 on: June 12, 2013, 07:11:41 PM »

Father,

Imperial regalia passed to the Ecumenical Patirarch first and gradually out to other bishops until all bishops wore them.  We see this with the sakkos and epigonation, so it would stand to reason that the mitre followed the same pattern.  Could it not be possible that prior to the Ottomans, the Ecumenical Patriarch and some senior archbishops like those of Thessalonika had use of the mitre and it did not become common for all bishops until after. When did bishops start to appear in iconography with mitres as opposed to bareheads?  I remember in my reading one of the complaints the Greek bishops at Florence had was the Latins celebrated Liturgy with mitres while the Greeks celebrated humbly in bare heads.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 12, 2013, 10:14:22 PM »

Father,

Imperial regalia passed to the Ecumenical Patirarch first and gradually out to other bishops until all bishops wore them.  We see this with the sakkos and epigonation, so it would stand to reason that the mitre followed the same pattern.  Could it not be possible that prior to the Ottomans, the Ecumenical Patriarch and some senior archbishops like those of Thessalonika had use of the mitre and it did not become common for all bishops until after. When did bishops start to appear in iconography with mitres as opposed to bareheads?  I remember in my reading one of the complaints the Greek bishops at Florence had was the Latins celebrated Liturgy with mitres while the Greeks celebrated humbly in bare heads.
[/b]

Now there is a real church dividing issue for you. Wink
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2013, 01:06:39 AM »

Father,

Imperial regalia passed to the Ecumenical Patirarch first and gradually out to other bishops until all bishops wore them.  We see this with the sakkos and epigonation, so it would stand to reason that the mitre followed the same pattern.  Could it not be possible that prior to the Ottomans, the Ecumenical Patriarch and some senior archbishops like those of Thessalonika had use of the mitre and it did not become common for all bishops until after. When did bishops start to appear in iconography with mitres as opposed to bareheads?  I remember in my reading one of the complaints the Greek bishops at Florence had was the Latins celebrated Liturgy with mitres while the Greeks celebrated humbly in bare heads.

Oh yeah?  Well if mitres were so late, then how did St. John Chrysostom get one?:  
http://orthodoxwiki.org/File:John_Chrysostom_enthroned.jpg

In all seriousness, though, even with your arguments, the initial point remains the same, that the widespread internet claim that bishops did not wear mitres prior to the fall of Constantinople is not true.  Although I seem to remember that the argument was that they celebrated the oblation with head covered was the complaint.  It was St. Symeon of Thessalonica who pointed out that only the Pope of Alexandria by an ancient custom wore a mitre during the anaphora, the rest of the patriarchs and bishops went bear-headed.  

The Epigonation is earlier, however.  It is mentioned in the early Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, and is mentioned in letter from Patriarch Peter of Antioch to Patriarch Michael Kerularios.  It pre-existed the move from phelonion to sakkos (which some argue is a cross polination from Latin practice of the dalmatic and revival of earlier eastern practice of varient dalmatic, and others argue is an imperial move, but still existed by the 11th century).  With regard to the sakkos, some have argued on this front, which came first, the chicken or the egg?  It is possible that the imperial sakkos came as the result of the emperor adopting, by special ecclesiastical status (as with many other things), the adoption of the new vestiture of the bishops, or at least of senior bishops.  Either way, it does not matter.  The point is that our modern internet sourcing is horrible and spreads lies.      
« Last Edit: June 13, 2013, 01:07:34 AM by Father H » Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #17 on: June 13, 2013, 01:10:23 AM »

^BTW, I forgot where I read it, but there was one iconographer who argued that it is wrong to represent anyone but Christ in the mitre iconographically, that Bishops should always be represented bear-headed yielding the portrayal of great high priesthood to Christ.  Would be interested to hear LBK's input on that. 
Logged
Antonis
Prodigal
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 1,137


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #18 on: June 13, 2013, 01:30:33 AM »

It's interesting to see information contrary to what is espoused as indisputable truth online about these subjects.

Thanks, Father.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2013, 01:30:56 AM by Antonis » Logged

For peace in the whole world,
for the stability of the holy churches of God,
and for the unity of all,
let us pray to the Lord.
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 8,760



« Reply #19 on: June 13, 2013, 07:45:09 AM »

Oh yeah?  Well if mitres were so late, then how did St. John Chrysostom get one?:  
http://orthodoxwiki.org/File:John_Chrysostom_enthroned.jpg

Because the icon is late.
Logged

On a OC.net diet.

"Chi son?  Sono un poeta. Che cosa faccio? Scrivo. E come vivo?  Vivo."
-Giacomo Puccini
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #20 on: June 13, 2013, 08:40:37 AM »

^BTW, I forgot where I read it, but there was one iconographer who argued that it is wrong to represent anyone but Christ in the mitre iconographically, that Bishops should always be represented bear-headed yielding the portrayal of great high priesthood to Christ.  Would be interested to hear LBK's input on that. 

I see you are also guilty of spreading false information. You has said twice now that bishops should be "bear" headed. This would be a heresy (and a new one at that) so you could be called a heresicarch (congrats). It would be inappropriate to depict a bishop with a "bear" since they tend to be scary, well except for maybe the Panda, and the Polars are cute in the Coca-Cola commercials.

"Bear" has a completely different meaning then "bare" which is the word I think you are meaning to use.
Logged

Joseph
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #21 on: June 13, 2013, 09:56:00 AM »

^BTW, I forgot where I read it, but there was one iconographer who argued that it is wrong to represent anyone but Christ in the mitre iconographically, that Bishops should always be represented bear-headed yielding the portrayal of great high priesthood to Christ.  Would be interested to hear LBK's input on that. 

I see you are also guilty of spreading false information. You has said twice now that bishops should be "bear" headed. This would be a heresy (and a new one at that) so you could be called a heresicarch (congrats). It would be inappropriate to depict a bishop with a "bear" since they tend to be scary, well except for maybe the Panda, and the Polars are cute in the Coca-Cola commercials.

"Bear" has a completely different meaning then "bare" which is the word I think you are meaning to use.

That is cold. Smiley  As would be a bare head in cold Ukrainian climes. Wink
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #22 on: June 13, 2013, 10:14:13 PM »

Oh yeah?  Well if mitres were so late, then how did St. John Chrysostom get one?:  
http://orthodoxwiki.org/File:John_Chrysostom_enthroned.jpg

Because the icon is late.

Right, hence the statement which followed "but seriously."   
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #23 on: June 13, 2013, 10:31:23 PM »

^BTW, I forgot where I read it, but there was one iconographer who argued that it is wrong to represent anyone but Christ in the mitre iconographically, that Bishops should always be represented bear-headed yielding the portrayal of great high priesthood to Christ.  Would be interested to hear LBK's input on that. 

I see you are also guilty of spreading false information. You has said twice now that bishops should be "bear" headed. This would be a heresy (and a new one at that) so you could be called a heresicarch (congrats). It would be inappropriate to depict a bishop with a "bear" since they tend to be scary, well except for maybe the Panda, and the Polars are cute in the Coca-Cola commercials.

"Bear" has a completely different meaning then "bare" which is the word I think you are meaning to use.

Actually, I never said that bishops should be bear headed or bare headed, I said that the iconographer said it.  I personally am not invested whether they have a mitre on or not, but would like to know LBK's opinion on it.  Probably not the animal that was the spelling slip, but the spelling error is amusing as I hope that all Bishops are bearing heads in iconography, as headless bishops would be frightening to most of the faithful.  But I didn't even mean bare-headed, but rather mitreless, as there was nothing mentioned against klobuks or anything, just mitres (the view was the Christ alone be presented as mitred great high priest).             
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #24 on: June 13, 2013, 10:39:38 PM »

So far, all I have received from this thread is that we need an emperor again. And he should take his chair back.
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.
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #25 on: June 13, 2013, 11:13:54 PM »

Here is a picture of what a Bear Headed Bishop looks like...
Logged

Joseph
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,743



« Reply #26 on: June 14, 2013, 03:25:17 AM »

EMERGENCY EMERGENCY!!! HOW DO I REDUCE THIS IMAGE?! NEVERMIND...

Well, of course I am going to disagree...

Here, we have the crown of Emperor Nicephorus Phocas (10th century):





Where can we find crowns of our modern bishops, which look just like that, in early forms? It is clear it did not happen over night at least, certainly not before the 11th century. How old is the Papal tiara? it is not an ancient tradition either (well.. comparatively...). I cannot find any evidence of crowns being used by bishops before the 11th century at least

I think people just generally say they used the crown mitre after the fall of constantinople because by then it was done basically everywhere, and besides what emperor is there to object?

One will probably have to ask a professor for a real answer to your question though ;P

Well, it is believed to have belonged to Nikephoros Phokas (963-969).  And yes, it did not arrive at the time of the Apostles.  But you know that, and I never claimed that.  I know that rounded tiaras belonged to emperors.  That is not the point.  The point is that bishops wearing them predates the date that is claimed universally on the internet.  Most of the Byzantine crowns, however, resembled the MP's non-liturgical headdress (rounded coming down about the ears).  BTW I am a professor.  

Sorry if it sounded like I was claiming you thought they were from the apostolic era!!

And sorry I did not really get your point in my first reply, I did not really understand the OP. One part was about crowns another about something with the liturgy.

You said that the crown is only "believed" to have belonged to Nikephoros. Well, I can also say that crown was only "believed" to have belonged to Saint Gregory Palamas! Since there is no source that says that is really the crown of Palamas, the only evidence is that a crown is on top of the reliquary. My personal opinion is it was put there later as a tribute. For instance, we also see a crown on the relics of Saint Demetrios:





 I will speak more some other time about the emperor's crown (I need to sleep, and it takes a long time to find all those old byzantine gifts to european monarchs so long ago which depicted the emperor...) but I think it is fair to say at least that the crown was not used in Russia even after the fall for quite some time... not even during the time of the Nikon Reforms were those crowns used in Russia.

Also claimed is that the internet is universally saying that the crown was not used by bishops before the fall. I do not think the internet hardly has any sources at all on this subject, it simply is not well researched at least in the english language. Of course this is no good in our modern era, where students simply use the internet for everything, using wikipedia sources as sources... googling and sourcing whatever comes up! but what can they do? Google scholar will be empty! The library is not going to have anything on it! They will probably need to learn Greek, go to Greece, attend some fancy university, and then they might hear the truth as to when these crowns really first started!

When I said professor, I meant a professor who is an expert in this subject ;P but I did not know you are a professor!


Anyway, I have found a source which you might find interesting. I looked all around the greek internets, and found this short article about vestments and their history by a retired professor! on an official section made by the Church of Greece in order to educate the faithful on various things...
http://www.discussion.gr/zoiekklisias/txt1.html You will need it translated to english though. here speaking about the mitre...

Quote
Αλλ’ η σημερινή μίτρα του επισκόπου κατά πολύ απέχει τόσο από την παλαιά (αρχαία) όσο και της παλιοχριστιανικής περιόδου. Μίτρα στην θύραθεν και στην εκκλησιαστική γραμματεία εκαλείτο, αρχικά, μια απλή ταινία υφαντή, από δέρμα ή από έλασμα που περιέβαλε την κεφαλή για την συγκράτηση της κόμης, θα έλεγα ως ένας ιμάς-κεκρύφαλος. Με αυτήν την έννοια την αναφέρει ο π. χ. Ευριπίδης στις Βάκχες, 833, («ἐπί δε κάρᾳ δ’ ἔσται μίτρα) και στην Εκάβη, 924. Επίσης ο ελεγειακός Καλλίμαχος στον «ὕμνο εἰς Δῆλον», 166 κ. ά (Πρβλ. και λατ.capitta ligamentum, ιταλ. Beretta κ. ο.κ.). Στους Ελληνορωμαίους άρχοντες απέκτησε κάποιο διάκοσμο και έγινε διάδημα. Συνήθως το έφεραν βασιλείς και αξιωματούχοι. Είναι οι «διαδεδεμένοι την κεφαλήν» κατά τα βυζαντινά κείμενα. Το διάδημα-μίτρα ήταν πολλάκις ακτινωτό και χρυσό, και των βασιλέων αδαμαντοκόλλητο (ως π. χ το ακτινωτό του Ιουστινιανού), το φορούσαν δε ή απευθείας στην κεφαλή, ή στην βάση του σκούφου, (συνήθως ερυθρού). Σιγά-σιγά όμως το έλασμα- μίτρα ενώθηκε με τον σκούφο και έγινε η απαραίτητη βάση του. Αυτό τότε το βασιλικό στέμμα και η μίτρα περίπου (βλ. την μορφολογική της σχέση με τα περίκλειστα θολωτά βυζαντινά βασιλικά στρέμματα, μετά τον Ιουστινιανό (6ος αι.) και κυρίως της περιόδου των Μακεδόνων, Κομνηνών και Παλαιολόγων). Όταν, τώρα, μετά την Άλωση ενώθηκαν στο πρόσωπο του Εθνάρχη Πατριάρχη τα δύο αξιώματα (πολιτικό και εκκλησιαστικό) και ο αρχιερέας ονομάστηκε και Δεσπότης (με αρνητικές συνέπειες αυτού του τίτλου) , πήρε τότε και το πλούσιο βασιλικό στέμμα τη θέση της, ως τότε, απλής, ή με σκούφο ενωμένης μίτρας. Το απέκτησε βέβαια ο Εθνάρχης μαζί με τον πολυποίκιλτο βασιλικό σάκκο. Αυτά, στη συνέχεια, τα απέκτησαν και όλοι οι αρχιερείς, για να καταλήξει αργότερα το αρχικό σεμνό διάδημα στην υπερ-υψωμένη, συμπαγή, με πολύτιμους λίθους και εικονίδια κοσμημένη μίτρα ως, κατά κάποιο τρόπο, συνέχεια ( ; ) της μίτρας της παραδόσεως. Αλλ’ όπως τελικά διαμορφώθηκε, υπενθυμίζει, εκ πρώτης όψεως, την Ασιατική κίδαρη (τιάρα) και κυρίως την υψηλή ημισφαιρική και διάλιθη Ασσυριακή, αν και δεν προέρχεται άμεσα από αυτήν, όπως προείπαμε (4). Μάλλον όμως προσεγγίζει σε ορισμένα δυτικά βασιλικά στέμματα, που βέβαια επέδρασαν αρχικά και διαμόρφωσαν και την μίτρα της Ρωσικής Εκκλησίας. Και ως είναι γνωστό, το Οικουμενικό μας Πατριαρχείο (με Πατριάρχη τον Ιωάσαφ Β΄) παρακάλεσε τον ρώσο τσάρο, το 1557, να του αποστείλει μίτρα. Αλλά δεν έγινε επειδή στο μεταξύ απέθανε ο Ιωάσαφ.

come have cyrillic come in and explain the text ;P if you do not know it... because i do not know it...
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 03:38:12 AM by Gunnarr » Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #27 on: June 14, 2013, 01:45:35 PM »

Here is a picture of what a Bear Headed Bishop looks like...


Obviously a representative of the MP. (Calm down all....) Wink
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #28 on: June 14, 2013, 08:28:25 PM »

So far, all I have received from this thread is that we need an emperor again. And he should take his chair back.

I know.  Mods should put this thread to death, and dig up the emperor and put him on his throne and put all of the bishops' mitres on his head.  
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 08:51:47 PM by Father H » Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #29 on: June 14, 2013, 09:07:02 PM »

EMERGENCY EMERGENCY!!! HOW DO I REDUCE THIS IMAGE?! NEVERMIND...

Well, of course I am going to disagree...

Here, we have the crown of Emperor Nicephorus Phocas (10th century):





Where can we find crowns of our modern bishops, which look just like that, in early forms? It is clear it did not happen over night at least, certainly not before the 11th century. How old is the Papal tiara? it is not an ancient tradition either (well.. comparatively...). I cannot find any evidence of crowns being used by bishops before the 11th century at least

I think people just generally say they used the crown mitre after the fall of constantinople because by then it was done basically everywhere, and besides what emperor is there to object?

One will probably have to ask a professor for a real answer to your question though ;P

Well, it is believed to have belonged to Nikephoros Phokas (963-969).  And yes, it did not arrive at the time of the Apostles.  But you know that, and I never claimed that.  I know that rounded tiaras belonged to emperors.  That is not the point.  The point is that bishops wearing them predates the date that is claimed universally on the internet.  Most of the Byzantine crowns, however, resembled the MP's non-liturgical headdress (rounded coming down about the ears).  BTW I am a professor.  

Sorry if it sounded like I was claiming you thought they were from the apostolic era!!

And sorry I did not really get your point in my first reply, I did not really understand the OP. One part was about crowns another about something with the liturgy.

You said that the crown is only "believed" to have belonged to Nikephoros. Well, I can also say that crown was only "believed" to have belonged to Saint Gregory Palamas! Since there is no source that says that is really the crown of Palamas, the only evidence is that a crown is on top of the reliquary. My personal opinion is it was put there later as a tribute. For instance, we also see a crown on the relics of Saint Demetrios:





 I will speak more some other time about the emperor's crown (I need to sleep, and it takes a long time to find all those old byzantine gifts to european monarchs so long ago which depicted the emperor...) but I think it is fair to say at least that the crown was not used in Russia even after the fall for quite some time... not even during the time of the Nikon Reforms were those crowns used in Russia.

Also claimed is that the internet is universally saying that the crown was not used by bishops before the fall. I do not think the internet hardly has any sources at all on this subject, it simply is not well researched at least in the english language. Of course this is no good in our modern era, where students simply use the internet for everything, using wikipedia sources as sources... googling and sourcing whatever comes up! but what can they do? Google scholar will be empty! The library is not going to have anything on it! They will probably need to learn Greek, go to Greece, attend some fancy university, and then they might hear the truth as to when these crowns really first started!

When I said professor, I meant a professor who is an expert in this subject ;P but I did not know you are a professor!


Anyway, I have found a source which you might find interesting. I looked all around the greek internets, and found this short article about vestments and their history by a retired professor! on an official section made by the Church of Greece in order to educate the faithful on various things...
http://www.discussion.gr/zoiekklisias/txt1.html You will need it translated to english though. here speaking about the mitre...

Quote
Αλλ’ η σημερινή μίτρα του επισκόπου κατά πολύ απέχει τόσο από την παλαιά (αρχαία) όσο και της παλιοχριστιανικής περιόδου. Μίτρα στην θύραθεν και στην εκκλησιαστική γραμματεία εκαλείτο, αρχικά, μια απλή ταινία υφαντή, από δέρμα ή από έλασμα που περιέβαλε την κεφαλή για την συγκράτηση της κόμης, θα έλεγα ως ένας ιμάς-κεκρύφαλος. Με αυτήν την έννοια την αναφέρει ο π. χ. Ευριπίδης στις Βάκχες, 833, («ἐπί δε κάρᾳ δ’ ἔσται μίτρα) και στην Εκάβη, 924. Επίσης ο ελεγειακός Καλλίμαχος στον «ὕμνο εἰς Δῆλον», 166 κ. ά (Πρβλ. και λατ.capitta ligamentum, ιταλ. Beretta κ. ο.κ.). Στους Ελληνορωμαίους άρχοντες απέκτησε κάποιο διάκοσμο και έγινε διάδημα. Συνήθως το έφεραν βασιλείς και αξιωματούχοι. Είναι οι «διαδεδεμένοι την κεφαλήν» κατά τα βυζαντινά κείμενα. Το διάδημα-μίτρα ήταν πολλάκις ακτινωτό και χρυσό, και των βασιλέων αδαμαντοκόλλητο (ως π. χ το ακτινωτό του Ιουστινιανού), το φορούσαν δε ή απευθείας στην κεφαλή, ή στην βάση του σκούφου, (συνήθως ερυθρού). Σιγά-σιγά όμως το έλασμα- μίτρα ενώθηκε με τον σκούφο και έγινε η απαραίτητη βάση του. Αυτό τότε το βασιλικό στέμμα και η μίτρα περίπου (βλ. την μορφολογική της σχέση με τα περίκλειστα θολωτά βυζαντινά βασιλικά στρέμματα, μετά τον Ιουστινιανό (6ος αι.) και κυρίως της περιόδου των Μακεδόνων, Κομνηνών και Παλαιολόγων). Όταν, τώρα, μετά την Άλωση ενώθηκαν στο πρόσωπο του Εθνάρχη Πατριάρχη τα δύο αξιώματα (πολιτικό και εκκλησιαστικό) και ο αρχιερέας ονομάστηκε και Δεσπότης (με αρνητικές συνέπειες αυτού του τίτλου) , πήρε τότε και το πλούσιο βασιλικό στέμμα τη θέση της, ως τότε, απλής, ή με σκούφο ενωμένης μίτρας. Το απέκτησε βέβαια ο Εθνάρχης μαζί με τον πολυποίκιλτο βασιλικό σάκκο. Αυτά, στη συνέχεια, τα απέκτησαν και όλοι οι αρχιερείς, για να καταλήξει αργότερα το αρχικό σεμνό διάδημα στην υπερ-υψωμένη, συμπαγή, με πολύτιμους λίθους και εικονίδια κοσμημένη μίτρα ως, κατά κάποιο τρόπο, συνέχεια ( ; ) της μίτρας της παραδόσεως. Αλλ’ όπως τελικά διαμορφώθηκε, υπενθυμίζει, εκ πρώτης όψεως, την Ασιατική κίδαρη (τιάρα) και κυρίως την υψηλή ημισφαιρική και διάλιθη Ασσυριακή, αν και δεν προέρχεται άμεσα από αυτήν, όπως προείπαμε (4). Μάλλον όμως προσεγγίζει σε ορισμένα δυτικά βασιλικά στέμματα, που βέβαια επέδρασαν αρχικά και διαμόρφωσαν και την μίτρα της Ρωσικής Εκκλησίας. Και ως είναι γνωστό, το Οικουμενικό μας Πατριαρχείο (με Πατριάρχη τον Ιωάσαφ Β΄) παρακάλεσε τον ρώσο τσάρο, το 1557, να του αποστείλει μίτρα. Αλλά δεν έγινε επειδή στο μεταξύ απέθανε ο Ιωάσαφ.

come have cyrillic come in and explain the text ;P if you do not know it... because i do not know it...

Thanks for the article.  It is brief but at least is something different than the typical cut and paste stuff found elsewhere.  Are you saying that the mitre was not used in Russia until after the Nikonian reforms?  You will have a tough time convincing the Old Believers of that. 
Logged
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #30 on: June 14, 2013, 09:45:32 PM »

So far, all I have received from this thread is that we need an emperor again. And he should take his chair back.

I know.  Mods should put this thread to death, and dig up the emperor and put him on his throne and put all of the bishops' mitres on his head.  

I recall a famous "Isa oc.net special" picture depicting an exhumed Pope holding court so why not?
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #31 on: June 14, 2013, 11:43:23 PM »

I made the mistake of naming the subject "miter or mitres," as the topic is wider (podkarpatska understood the broader point).  Nevertheless, it is good that I did so. 

I will tell you where this all came from.  Several priests that I have talked to have stated the popular opinion that "we have got to stop dressing our Bishops up like the emperor and singing the emperor's chant (eis polla eti despota) to them."  The reason given is that, if all this started with transferring the emperor's prerogatives to the bishop at the fall of Constantinople, then we should cease doing it, immediately.  My point is that I am not convinced that this is the case. 

Sooooo, let us say that I am wrong, that indeed, all of this started with the fall of Constantinople.  I assume that Gunarr and Cyrillic, our two young feisty 'converts' on this thread, agree that it should be done away with.  Otherwise, how can you defend its continued use?  If it is the case as both of you said, it is wholly unecclesial.     
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #32 on: June 14, 2013, 11:44:21 PM »

So far, all I have received from this thread is that we need an emperor again. And he should take his chair back.

I know.  Mods should put this thread to death, and dig up the emperor and put him on his throne and put all of the bishops' mitres on his head.  

I recall a famous "Isa oc.net special" picture depicting an exhumed Pope holding court so why not?

lol.  "Isa oc.net special" should be trademarked. 
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: 12,662



WWW
« Reply #33 on: June 15, 2013, 12:13:34 AM »

I made the mistake of naming the subject "miter or mitres," as the topic is wider (podkarpatska understood the broader point).  Nevertheless, it is good that I did so.  

I will tell you where this all came from.  Several priests that I have talked to have stated the popular opinion that "we have got to stop dressing our Bishops up like the emperor and singing the emperor's chant (eis polla eti despota) to them."  The reason given is that, if all this started with transferring the emperor's prerogatives to the bishop at the fall of Constantinople, then we should cease doing it, immediately.  My point is that I am not convinced that this is the case.  

Sooooo, let us say that I am wrong, that indeed, all of this started with the fall of Constantinople.  I assume that Gunarr and Cyrillic, our two young feisty 'converts' on this thread, agree that it should be done away with.  Otherwise, how can you defend its continued use?  If it is the case as both of you said, it is wholly unecclesial.    

I disagree.

Afterall, our bishops are not mere "men", but, are anointed to lead Christ's Church, no?

When we approach the bishop and ask his blessing, are we expecting the "man" in the fancy robes to have some super duper powers that he will wave his hand over us, mumble something and make our lives all happy?  No.  We ask him, but, through him, we anticipate Christ's blessing.

While Christ came to serve, and did not wear "fancy" clothes, that's because He came to teach us, to show us the way, of how we ought to behave, dress, speak, etc.

The bishop, to me, has the Holy Spirit working through him (as do our clergy), more-so, than via laity.  He is our "leader" and as such, ought to be distinguished from the rest of us.  If Christ, any one of His Saints, or His anointed bishops, were to show up on my doorstep, I would feel it necessary to dress them in the finest clothes I had, feed them the best food I had, give them everything of the best that I could give them.  No?  It would be an honor to do so.

Same with our church buildings.  Christ was born in a shepherds cave.  He never lived on earth in a palace.  He often slept under the stars.  However, now that we "can", we build lovely churches.  These churches are better decorated than our homes, because our homes are merely ours, but, the church, it is set aside as God's house.  We decorate it in order to distinguish from any other buildings.  Not only does the manner of decoration, the gilding, the rugs, etc. make it "pretty", when we walk in we immediately realize we are someplace special.

In other words, the "fancy" decorations are to set the Church and her Bishops (clergy) apart, so that we realize that they are special, because they truly are.

We are not all called to be priest, nor bishops.

We ought to honor and revere all things set aside by God, for God.

Besides, do not we also put on our "Sunday best" when we go to church?  Why shouldn't our clergy do the same?
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 12:15:17 AM 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
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #34 on: June 15, 2013, 12:27:59 AM »

I made the mistake of naming the subject "miter or mitres," as the topic is wider (podkarpatska understood the broader point).  Nevertheless, it is good that I did so.  

I will tell you where this all came from.  Several priests that I have talked to have stated the popular opinion that "we have got to stop dressing our Bishops up like the emperor and singing the emperor's chant (eis polla eti despota) to them."  The reason given is that, if all this started with transferring the emperor's prerogatives to the bishop at the fall of Constantinople, then we should cease doing it, immediately.  My point is that I am not convinced that this is the case.  

Sooooo, let us say that I am wrong, that indeed, all of this started with the fall of Constantinople.  I assume that Gunarr and Cyrillic, our two young feisty 'converts' on this thread, agree that it should be done away with.  Otherwise, how can you defend its continued use?  If it is the case as both of you said, it is wholly unecclesial.    

I disagree.

Afterall, our bishops are not mere "men", but, are anointed to lead Christ's Church, no?

When we approach the bishop and ask his blessing, are we expecting the "man" in the fancy robes to have some super duper powers that he will wave his hand over us, mumble something and make our lives all happy?  No.  We ask him, but, through him, we anticipate Christ's blessing.

While Christ came to serve, and did not wear "fancy" clothes, that's because He came to teach us, to show us the way, of how we ought to behave, dress, speak, etc.

The bishop, to me, has the Holy Spirit working through him (as do our clergy), more-so, than via laity.  He is our "leader" and as such, ought to be distinguished from the rest of us.  If Christ, any one of His Saints, or His anointed bishops, were to show up on my doorstep, I would feel it necessary to dress them in the finest clothes I had, feed them the best food I had, give them everything of the best that I could give them.  No?  It would be an honor to do so.

Same with our church buildings.  Christ was born in a shepherds cave.  He never lived on earth in a palace.  He often slept under the stars.  However, now that we "can", we build lovely churches.  These churches are better decorated than our homes, because our homes are merely ours, but, the church, it is set aside as God's house.  We decorate it in order to distinguish from any other buildings.  Not only does the manner of decoration, the gilding, the rugs, etc. make it "pretty", when we walk in we immediately realize we are someplace special.

In other words, the "fancy" decorations are to set the Church and her Bishops (clergy) apart, so that we realize that they are special, because they truly are.

We are not all called to be priest, nor bishops.

We ought to honor and revere all things set aside by God, for God.

Besides, do not we also put on our "Sunday best" when we go to church?  Why shouldn't our clergy do the same?


Liza, I assume that you are disagreeing with "position 1" in the following list: 
Position 1:  that the bishops are wearing emperor's clothes and should not be wearing them (apparently the position of gunarr and cyrillic)
Position 2 (the argument that I have been making):  that these clothes including mitre predate the fall of constantinople and are wholly appropriate for a bishop to be wearing. 

   
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: 12,662



WWW
« Reply #35 on: June 15, 2013, 12:31:09 AM »


Absolutely!

I was disagreeing with those who think we ought not to have our bishops dressed in "fancy" clothes.

...and agreeing with you, Father.  Smiley
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
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #36 on: June 15, 2013, 12:45:12 AM »


Absolutely!

I was disagreeing with those who think we ought not to have our bishops dressed in "fancy" clothes.

...and agreeing with you, Father.  Smiley

Right, because even in the Apostolic Constitutions, we have mention of a bright white robe worn by the bishop.  We have further mention of St. James wearing a mitre in Liturgy in the Panarion of St. Epiphanios.  Likewise, St. John the Apostle and Theologian is described by Polycrates (c199-200AD) as a "priest wearing the mitre":  http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/polycrates.html

Why should not the successors to the apostles wear a mitre, if the apostles wore them?  
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 12:47:01 AM by Father H » 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: 12,662



WWW
« Reply #37 on: June 15, 2013, 01:08:37 AM »


I think those who are "against" such things, are just jealous because they don't get to wear them.   angel

I know I was tickled when I got to hold the bishop's staff.  I learned what a jezel (sp?) is.  Smiley
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 01:11:13 AM 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
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 8,760



« Reply #38 on: June 15, 2013, 09:56:26 AM »

Sooooo, let us say that I am wrong, that indeed, all of this started with the fall of Constantinople.  I assume that Gunarr and Cyrillic, our two young feisty 'converts' on this thread, agree that it should be done away with.  Otherwise, how can you defend its continued use?  If it is the case as both of you said, it is wholly unecclesial.     

So unless a specific type of headgear has been worn by the apostles it is 'unecclesial' and should be done away with? If anyone is feisty it isn't me. I don't care what you think about crown-shaped mitres while you think those crowns important enough to hurl ad-hominems over. One should be able to expect better from a professor and a priest.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 10:03:49 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

On a OC.net diet.

"Chi son?  Sono un poeta. Che cosa faccio? Scrivo. E come vivo?  Vivo."
-Giacomo Puccini
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 8,760



« Reply #39 on: June 15, 2013, 10:08:44 AM »

Liza, I assume that you are disagreeing with "position 1" in the following list: 
Position 1:  that the bishops are wearing emperor's clothes and should not be wearing them (apparently the position of gunarr and cyrillic)
Position 2 (the argument that I have been making):  that these clothes including mitre predate the fall of constantinople and are wholly appropriate for a bishop to be wearing.   

Absolutely!

I was disagreeing with those who think we ought not to have our bishops dressed in "fancy" clothes.

...and agreeing with you, Father.  Smiley

I'm quite disappointed that you went with his false dichotomy. There is an option three. Those mitres do not predate the late Byzantine era but they aren't illegitimate.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 10:09:34 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

On a OC.net diet.

"Chi son?  Sono un poeta. Che cosa faccio? Scrivo. E come vivo?  Vivo."
-Giacomo Puccini
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #40 on: June 15, 2013, 11:49:04 AM »

There is a difference between decrying something as wrong and deciding it is time to lay something aside.  Pope Paul VI did so with the papal tiara.  He did not say future popes should not use it but they have followed his lead.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #41 on: June 15, 2013, 12:16:05 PM »

Apparently, the work of sanctification can be laid aside whilst we argue over dress.
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.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #42 on: June 15, 2013, 12:28:26 PM »

I don't really know if that mitre on top of St. Gregory Palamas' sarcophagus was his. The icon on it definitely isn't from the 13th/14th Century because it's a westernized icon. Also, the mitre doesn't look old, but quite recent, no older than 250 years.

It's like that icon supposedly painted by St. John of Damascus, which we actually are sure dates to the 14th or 15th Century, but could be a re-painting of the original.

Mosaics of St. Justinian done in the 6th Century:


At the same time, you can see the Archbishop without a mitre:


9th Century Mosaic of St. John Chrysostom, without a mitre:


10th Century Mosaic of Emperor Leo IV:


10th Century Mosaic of Emperors Constantine & Justinian:


11th Century Mosaic of Emperor Constantine IX and Empress Zoe:


11th Century depiction of St. John Chrysostom:


12th Century Mosaic of the Emperor John II Komnenus and Empress Irene:


We don't really see icons/images of Bishops with mitres until about the 15th/16th Centuries. However, we do see Emperors/Empresses depicted with them.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 12:31:02 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #43 on: June 15, 2013, 01:14:43 PM »

I will tell you where this all came from.  Several priests that I have talked to have stated the popular opinion that "we have got to stop dressing our Bishops up like the emperor and singing the emperor's chant (eis polla eti despota) to them."  The reason given is that, if all this started with transferring the emperor's prerogatives to the bishop at the fall of Constantinople, then we should cease doing it, immediately.  My point is that I am not convinced that this is the case.

Father,

I've always been amused by the experience of an Indian priest when attending a hierarchical liturgy in the Russian tradition.  Describing it to some colleagues, he marveled at the elaborate vesting ceremony, the wonderful music, the fluidity of the movements, etc.  But one major complaint of his was that much of the Liturgy of the Word was given over to "bishop worship" in the form of those very same imperial chants, crowns, etc.  Smiley  In Syriac tradition, we have chants for when a bishop solemnly enters or exits a church before or after services, but that's about it (if he walks in as a service is in progress, he just walks in without any fuss).  During the Liturgy or any other divine services, there's nothing like what the Byzantines have for their bishops: the only things that mark a bishop are the distinctive vestments (the omophorion and the "mitre", which is really a type of veil) and insignia (crosier, hand-cross, panagia). 

I don't know if the other Oriental traditions have anything like what the Byzantines have, but my limited experience leads me to suspect that they don't.  There are certainly differences in how a bishop serves as opposed to a priest, but it's not as developed a distinction as in the Byzantine rite.  For us, a bishop serves, for the most part, like a priest (or more properly, a priest serves like a bishop, but without a few episcopal elements).  That difference always led me to believe the standard line that the fall of Constantinople had something to do with the Byzantine adoption of imperial customs for the bishops.  If it was earlier, why wouldn't we have it?  Even the Chalcedonian schism didn't prevent, for example, the Syrians from incorporating some of the poetic canons written by John of Damascus into our liturgical services. 

Hardly a scientific observation, but an observation anyway.       
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
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: 12,662



WWW
« Reply #44 on: June 15, 2013, 01:54:25 PM »

Liza, I assume that you are disagreeing with "position 1" in the following list:  
Position 1:  that the bishops are wearing emperor's clothes and should not be wearing them (apparently the position of gunarr and cyrillic)
Position 2 (the argument that I have been making):  that these clothes including mitre predate the fall of constantinople and are wholly appropriate for a bishop to be wearing.  

Absolutely!

I was disagreeing with those who think we ought not to have our bishops dressed in "fancy" clothes.

...and agreeing with you, Father.  Smiley

I'm quite disappointed that you went with his false dichotomy. There is an option three. Those mitres do not predate the late Byzantine era but they aren't illegitimate.

Don't be disappointed....because I really don't care "when" they exactly started.    

They have a long history, and have been ingrained into our traditions long enough, that I see no problem with them.

I don't know the origin of half of the stuff I see in church....and yet, none of it is a stumbling block to me.

My purpose for being there is not to dissect everything, but, to worship God....all these other things are only there to assist me in doing so.



« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 02:05:02 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
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #45 on: June 15, 2013, 10:01:19 PM »

Liza, I assume that you are disagreeing with "position 1" in the following list:  
Position 1:  that the bishops are wearing emperor's clothes and should not be wearing them (apparently the position of gunarr and cyrillic)
Position 2 (the argument that I have been making):  that these clothes including mitre predate the fall of constantinople and are wholly appropriate for a bishop to be wearing.  

Absolutely!

I was disagreeing with those who think we ought not to have our bishops dressed in "fancy" clothes.

...and agreeing with you, Father.  Smiley

I'm quite disappointed that you went with his false dichotomy. There is an option three. Those mitres do not predate the late Byzantine era but they aren't illegitimate.

Don't be disappointed....because I really don't care "when" they exactly started.    

They have a long history, and have been ingrained into our traditions long enough, that I see no problem with them.

I don't know the origin of half of the stuff I see in church....and yet, none of it is a stumbling block to me.

My purpose for being there is not to dissect everything, but, to worship God....all these other things are only there to assist me in doing so.





It shouldn't really matter to anyone "when" things started, at least in terms of legitimacy. It's part of our tradition. But I love history and learning the origins and reasons behind things.

I have private opinions about things, like opposition to long hair and mitres, but I'm not going to say that they should be changed, it should just be optional. If a Bishop doesn't want to wear a miter, he shouldn't have to.
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: 12,662



WWW
« Reply #46 on: June 15, 2013, 10:20:42 PM »

Again, I would kindly disagree.

He is not wearing the mitre for "himself", but, for "Christ".

Correct me if I am wrong, but, I do believe that during the Liturgy the bishop, who is Christ's disciple wears the mitre.  However, at key moments, he takes it off.  Why?  

For example, while reading the Holy Gospel, he takes it off, because we are listening to Christ's teaching.  During the Great Entrance, he takes it off, etc.

These moments simply qualify that the mitre is not for the man who is wearing it, otherwise, he would be wearing it all the time.

I think if a man is called to be a bishop, and volunteers, than he ought to carry out all the duties of a bishop, whether he is comfortable with it or not.

Same holds true for clergy.

When someone bows to kiss the hand of a priest, it's not so much the "man" they are kissing, but, the office that he holds.  With his hands he distributes the Eucharist.  We are told that if we meet an angel and a priest along the road, we are to first greet and kiss the priest's hand before acknowledging the angel.

Therefore, the priest who removes his hand before it is kissed is doing his office a disservice.  While I completely honor the humility this shows, truly....I still think it is wrong, because the person isn't kissing Joe, or Tom, or Mike who is wearing the fancy robes.  They are kissing one of Christ's anointed priests, and the hand through which Christ Himself blesses them.

« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 10:22:06 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
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 15, 2013, 10:26:58 PM »

These moments simply qualify that the mitre is not for the man who is wearing it, otherwise, he would be wearing it all the time.

How "necessary" is the mitre for a bishop when serving the Liturgy?  In our tradition, our "mitre" is always a part of the vestments of a bishop.  If he vests for the Liturgy, he wears it, period.  But it seems that in the Byzantine tradition, it's a bit more optional.  Bishops can, for example, serve "as priests" instead of "as bishops", and then they wear the omophorion and panagia, but usually not the mitre (instead, they wear the monastic headdress).  In Greek traditions, it's not uncommon for bishops at a hierarchical Liturgy to wear their monastic headdress if they're not the presider.  So is it possible that a bishop could regularly opt not to use the mitre?  Syriac tradition bishops don't have a choice, even if they wanted one.     
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #48 on: June 15, 2013, 10:51:13 PM »

These moments simply qualify that the mitre is not for the man who is wearing it, otherwise, he would be wearing it all the time.

How "necessary" is the mitre for a bishop when serving the Liturgy?  In our tradition, our "mitre" is always a part of the vestments of a bishop.  If he vests for the Liturgy, he wears it, period.  But it seems that in the Byzantine tradition, it's a bit more optional.  Bishops can, for example, serve "as priests" instead of "as bishops", and then they wear the omophorion and panagia, but usually not the mitre (instead, they wear the monastic headdress).  In Greek traditions, it's not uncommon for bishops at a hierarchical Liturgy to wear their monastic headdress if they're not the presider.  So is it possible that a bishop could regularly opt not to use the mitre?  Syriac tradition bishops don't have a choice, even if they wanted one.     

I've only seen bishops serving wearing mitres. If they don't serve, they don't vest.
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.
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: 12,662



WWW
« Reply #49 on: June 15, 2013, 10:57:20 PM »


Bishop wearing mitre...



and not....





and again, in mitre.



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
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #50 on: June 15, 2013, 11:13:33 PM »

There are times when clergy wear headgear while serving and times when they do not. For example, they take off their mitres and whatnot at the Gospel. (The possible exception might be with monastics--but I'm not  sure. Monks I've seen uncovered their heads.)
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.
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: 12,662



WWW
« Reply #51 on: June 15, 2013, 11:41:59 PM »


Exactly!
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
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #52 on: June 15, 2013, 11:44:44 PM »

https://mospat.ru/en/2009/07/05/news3615/

A concelebration: the two patriarchs wear mitres, but all other concelebrating bishops wear monastic headdress for the Liturgy.  
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #53 on: June 16, 2013, 09:48:13 AM »

https://mospat.ru/en/2009/07/05/news3615/

A concelebration: the two patriarchs wear mitres, but all other concelebrating bishops wear monastic headdress for the Liturgy. 

Greek innovations.

Interestingly visitting MP Bishops also adopted this there.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #54 on: June 16, 2013, 02:19:27 PM »

Greek innovations.

Could be, but do you have any proof for this? 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #55 on: June 16, 2013, 04:50:06 PM »

Slavs don't do it, Antiochians don't do it, Romanians don't do it...
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #56 on: June 16, 2013, 05:00:16 PM »

Slavs don't do it, Antiochians don't do it, Romanians don't do it...

The Greeks are sorta lazy. Smiley
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.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #57 on: June 16, 2013, 05:09:32 PM »

More-or-less 20 year ago Patriarch Demetrius was visiting Warsaw. I was told that in Greek tradition only Church's Primates are allowed to wear mitres during the service so the Greek Bishops, who was accompanying him did not have their ones. They tolerated our Polish Bishops in theirs but when approximately 10 mitred Archpriests enterred the sanctuary they finally got nervous.

One of the Greek Bishops called one of the Polish Priests and told him: Do you know, who is he? He's the Patriarch of Constantinople. Tell them to take THAT THINGS off!

(Un)fortunately it was a newly-ordained Priest and he was too humble to ask his older colleagues to do it.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #58 on: June 16, 2013, 05:22:50 PM »

More-or-less 20 year ago Patriarch Demetrius was visiting Warsaw. I was told that in Greek tradition only Church's Primates are allowed to wear mitres during the service so the Greek Bishops, who was accompanying him did not have their ones. They tolerated our Polish Bishops in theirs but when approximately 10 mitred Archpriests enterred the sanctuary they finally got nervous.

One of the Greek Bishops called one of the Polish Priests and told him: Do you know, who is he? He's the Patriarch of Constantinople. Tell them to take THAT THINGS off!

(Un)fortunately it was a newly-ordained Priest and he was too humble to ask his older colleagues to do it.

Come to think of it, I've seen icons of Greek bishop saints, unless my memory is hallucinating, vested, but wearing monastic headgear. Maybe a post-Turkokratia thing?
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.
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 8,760



« Reply #59 on: June 16, 2013, 05:41:13 PM »

More-or-less 20 year ago Patriarch Demetrius was visiting Warsaw. I was told that in Greek tradition only Church's Primates are allowed to wear mitres during the service so the Greek Bishops, who was accompanying him did not have their ones. They tolerated our Polish Bishops in theirs but when approximately 10 mitred Archpriests enterred the sanctuary they finally got nervous.

One of the Greek Bishops called one of the Polish Priests and told him: Do you know, who is he? He's the Patriarch of Constantinople. Tell them to take THAT THINGS off!

(Un)fortunately it was a newly-ordained Priest and he was too humble to ask his older colleagues to do it.

Come to think of it, I've seen icons of Greek bishop saints, unless my memory is hallucinating, vested, but wearing monastic headgear. Maybe a post-Turkokratia thing?

Indeed. This one for example:

« Last Edit: June 16, 2013, 05:41:56 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

On a OC.net diet.

"Chi son?  Sono un poeta. Che cosa faccio? Scrivo. E come vivo?  Vivo."
-Giacomo Puccini
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #60 on: June 16, 2013, 06:16:30 PM »

Again, I would kindly disagree.

He is not wearing the mitre for "himself", but, for "Christ".

Correct me if I am wrong, but, I do believe that during the Liturgy the bishop, who is Christ's disciple wears the mitre.  However, at key moments, he takes it off.  Why?  

For example, while reading the Holy Gospel, he takes it off, because we are listening to Christ's teaching.  During the Great Entrance, he takes it off, etc.

These moments simply qualify that the mitre is not for the man who is wearing it, otherwise, he would be wearing it all the time.

I think if a man is called to be a bishop, and volunteers, than he ought to carry out all the duties of a bishop, whether he is comfortable with it or not.

Same holds true for clergy.

When someone bows to kiss the hand of a priest, it's not so much the "man" they are kissing, but, the office that he holds.  With his hands he distributes the Eucharist.  We are told that if we meet an angel and a priest along the road, we are to first greet and kiss the priest's hand before acknowledging the angel.

Therefore, the priest who removes his hand before it is kissed is doing his office a disservice.  While I completely honor the humility this shows, truly....I still think it is wrong, because the person isn't kissing Joe, or Tom, or Mike who is wearing the fancy robes.  They are kissing one of Christ's anointed priests, and the hand through which Christ Himself blesses them.



It isn't really a matter of wearing the mitre for Christ. It's a piece of clothing that was imposed on Orthodox Bishops during Turkish rule, and imported into Russia through Greek influences. It's not as essential as an omophor, which has been here since the early days. We've only had mitres in our Church for 400-500 years, about 1/4 of our entire history.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #61 on: June 16, 2013, 08:06:06 PM »

Slavs don't do it, Antiochians don't do it, Romanians don't do it...

Which Antiochians?  These Antiochians?

https://mospat.ru/en/2011/11/13/news52076/
http://www.antiocheurope.org/en/news/details/528/Visit-of-His-Grace-Bishop-Ghattas-Hazim-to-the-parish-of-St.-Demetrius-in-Cologne_-Germany

I'm really interested in knowing what the origin of this practice is.  Is it a matter of Greek innovation (or laziness, as earlier suggested), or is the real innovation the (over)use of the mitre by the others?  It certainly seems dispensable in the Byzantine rite in a way the omophorion is not.   
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #62 on: June 16, 2013, 08:18:27 PM »

These for example:

http://www.orthodoxarkansas.com/wp-content/uploads/AntiochArchdioceseSynod1.png

I was told by someone that it's universal Antiochian practice but it does not seem so.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #63 on: June 16, 2013, 09:29:12 PM »

I was told by someone that it's universal Antiochian practice but it does not seem so.

Yeah, I've seen that photo before, and others like it.  That's why I'd really like to know how this tradition of sometimes using mitres and other times using monastic headgear came about, and what the actual "rules" are.  "Greek laziness" is too facile an explanation, and it's not even true.  Greek tradition is different from Slavic tradition, but it's not "lazier".   
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,535



« Reply #64 on: June 16, 2013, 09:34:30 PM »

These for example:

http://www.orthodoxarkansas.com/wp-content/uploads/AntiochArchdioceseSynod1.png

I was told by someone that it's universal Antiochian practice but it does not seem so.

And here's another photo along those lines:
http://orthodoxwiki.org/images/8/89/Antiochian_bishops.jpg
Logged
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Annie Och
Posts: 4,099



« Reply #65 on: June 16, 2013, 09:54:21 PM »

I'm not sure how much this contributes, but here's my Antiochian bishop with and then without (and later with again) his mitre from Pentecost 2012 at my parish. Interestingly, a ROCOR I believe from Holy Cross Monastery is also present.



I think he takes off his mitre for the Gospel reading, but from another set from his visit in 2008. It does seem he puts it back on at some point, but I'm not sure when.


Logged

Liberalochian: Unionist-Ecumenism Lite™
ag_vn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 407



« Reply #66 on: June 17, 2013, 02:49:47 AM »

Antiochians don't do it...

Actually they do it. When they concelebrate with the Patriarch, they don't wear mitres. The same is true for the Greeks.



Met. Philip is not Patriarch.



And here's another photo along those lines:
http://orthodoxwiki.org/images/8/89/Antiochian_bishops.jpg


The photo is from the consecration of Bishops Mark, Thomas and Alexander, so naturally they wear mitres. But they were the only bishops besides Pat. Ignatius, who wore mitres at that liturgy. The rest of the consecrating Metropolitans and Bishops were wearing klobuks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrLBGKwrt5o

Only the Patriarch and the newly consecrated bishops wear mitres on a similar occasion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YWIlbSmLW8

The enthronement of Pat. John X in Beirut. The only bishops wearing mitres are the Patriarch himself and Archbishop Chrysostomos II of Cyprus and Met. Christopher of Prague as Primates of their churches. The rest of the representatives wear klobuks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErEgDHxJX5U
Logged
ag_vn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 407



« Reply #67 on: June 17, 2013, 03:13:55 AM »

I'm not sure how much this contributes, but here's my Antiochian bishop with and then without (and later with again) his mitre from Pentecost 2012 at my parish. Interestingly, a ROCOR I believe from Holy Cross Monastery is also present.


I think no one means that Greek and Antiochian hierarchs do not wear mitres at all. The tradition is that they do not do it when concelebrating with their Patriarch. During the Patriarchal Liturgy in Boston in 2008, Pat. Ignatius was the only one with a mitre.
http://www.antiochianladiocese.org/public/sv/gallery.php?ssid=452
Logged
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #68 on: June 17, 2013, 09:43:53 AM »

These for example:

http://www.orthodoxarkansas.com/wp-content/uploads/AntiochArchdioceseSynod1.png

I was told by someone that it's universal Antiochian practice but it does not seem so.

Never mistake the liturgical practices of the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America to be the norm for Antiochian practice.
Logged

Joseph
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #69 on: June 19, 2013, 06:21:04 PM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #70 on: June 19, 2013, 07:07:57 PM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 
It is pretty common among Greek Catholics for bishops to serve like this.  Recently Major Archbishop Sviatoslav concelebrated with Pope Francis like this.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #71 on: June 19, 2013, 07:53:18 PM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 
It is pretty common among Greek Catholics for bishops to serve like this.  Recently Major Archbishop Sviatoslav concelebrated with Pope Francis like this.

It's not just among Greek Catholics. ACROD's Bishops typically serve this way on normal Sundays at the Cathedral parish if the other priests are away. If anyone is curious, the Metropolitan in the video is Orthodox and of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. ( Yet another example of customs of the Ruthenians derided by Russians as being "latinizations" actually being of Greek origin. )
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #72 on: June 19, 2013, 07:59:40 PM »

I've only seen once in real a bishop doing this (weekday Liturgy in a monastery he was an abbot of).
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #73 on: June 19, 2013, 08:01:46 PM »

These for example:

http://www.orthodoxarkansas.com/wp-content/uploads/AntiochArchdioceseSynod1.png

I was told by someone that it's universal Antiochian practice but it does not seem so.

Never mistake the liturgical practices of the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America to be the norm for Antiochian practice.

There's not one practice in North America either, apparently. Just as there is not one Antiochian liturgical book that is not riddled with errors, in English at least.
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.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #74 on: June 19, 2013, 10:42:49 PM »

It is pretty common among Greek Catholics for bishops to serve like this.  Recently Major Archbishop Sviatoslav concelebrated with Pope Francis like this.

I saw a picture of that, but it seemed to me the Major Archbishop was wearing the sakkos.  Was I wrong? 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #75 on: June 20, 2013, 10:09:46 AM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.
Logged

Joseph
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #76 on: June 20, 2013, 10:12:00 AM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

Same with us.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #77 on: June 20, 2013, 10:35:36 AM »

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

So what are the rules on "headgear" for bishops in the Byzantine rite?  It seems that the mitre is not an essential element of a bishop's vesture when serving.  Is it ever "required", or is it just customary in some forms of celebration more than others? 

In our Church, a bishop basically vests like a priest, with the exception of the "mitre" and omophorion, which are always worn at every Liturgy.  They are essential. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #78 on: June 20, 2013, 10:37:06 AM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine.  

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

And then he is assisted by two presbyters who wear mitres. Makes sense not.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #79 on: June 20, 2013, 10:40:52 AM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine.  

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

And then he is assisted by two presbyters who wear mitres. Makes sense not.

Where do you see this?
Logged

Joseph
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #80 on: June 20, 2013, 10:42:02 AM »

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

So what are the rules on "headgear" for bishops in the Byzantine rite?  It seems that the mitre is not an essential element of a bishop's vesture when serving.  Is it ever "required", or is it just customary in some forms of celebration more than others? 

In our Church, a bishop basically vests like a priest, with the exception of the "mitre" and omophorion, which are always worn at every Liturgy.  They are essential. 

You know what they say about rules and bishops, it is more like the pirates code, they are guidelines.
Logged

Joseph
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #81 on: June 20, 2013, 10:44:05 AM »

You know what they say about rules and bishops, it is more like the pirates code, they are guidelines.

Oh, sure.  But I didn't imagine it extended to vestments.  Even the most rubrically emancipated bishop I've seen in our Church still wore/wears all the proper vestments. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #82 on: June 20, 2013, 10:57:47 AM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

And then he is assisted by two presbyters who wear mitres. Makes sense not.

Where do you see this?

Presbyters in mitres? All the time.

I also remember seing a picture of Metr. Jonah in phelon and mitre.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
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 #83 on: June 20, 2013, 10:58:47 AM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 
It is pretty common among Greek Catholics for bishops to serve like this.  Recently Major Archbishop Sviatoslav concelebrated with Pope Francis like this.

It's not just among Greek Catholics. ACROD's Bishops typically serve this way on normal Sundays at the Cathedral parish if the other priests are away. If anyone is curious, the Metropolitan in the video is Orthodox and of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. ( Yet another example of customs of the Ruthenians derided by Russians as being "latinizations" actually being of Greek origin. )
I recall this also in the OCA-on one occasion especially because Abp. Job of blessed memory remarked that he stood for a moment, waiting for the Gifts to be elevated, until he realized he was serving as a priest, and they weren't going to elevate themselves.
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 #84 on: June 20, 2013, 11:00:03 AM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

And then he is assisted by two presbyters who wear mitres. Makes sense not.

Where do you see this?

Presbyters in mitres? All the time.

I also remember seing a picture of Metr. Jonah in phelon and mitre.
Mitring priests was dropped by the OCA in the 1980's some time, but was practiced before.
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
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #85 on: June 20, 2013, 11:05:36 AM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

And then he is assisted by two presbyters who wear mitres. Makes sense not.

Where do you see this?

Presbyters in mitres? All the time.

I also remember seing a picture of Metr. Jonah in phelon and mitre.
We are talking about the video. Yes presbyters in mitres is a horrible Russian practice introduced by Catherine the Great. It really needs to be done away with (along with most of the Russian award systems that developed in the 1800's). Your comment has nothing to do with the discussion, and just confuses the conversation. I really doubt the priest assisting in this video would ever wear a mitre.
Logged

Joseph
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #86 on: June 20, 2013, 11:26:52 AM »

We are talking about the video.

No. We are talking about bishops' vestments in general.

Quote
Yes presbyters in mitres is a horrible Russian practice introduced by Catherine the Great. It really needs to be done away with (along with most of the Russian award systems that developed in the 1800's).

"My funny hats are more Orthodox than your funny hats".

Quote
Your comment has nothing to do with the discussion, and just confuses the conversation.

You could try writing less general and authoritative and it wouldn't be so confusing. You know, adding "in my tradition", "I've never encountered", "I'm not aware of" might help a lot.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #87 on: June 20, 2013, 11:52:35 AM »

We are talking about the video.

No. We are talking about bishops' vestments in general.

No the comment was on the video, hence why it was being quoted.
Logged

Joseph
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #88 on: June 20, 2013, 11:58:13 AM »

Your comment has nothing to do with the discussion, and just confuses the conversation.

You could try writing less general and authoritative and it wouldn't be so confusing. You know, adding "in my tradition", "I've never encountered", "I'm not aware of" might help a lot.

When it comes to variances in liturgical practices I may be one of the few experts on the subject in the world. I doubt anyone else has bishops from multiple jurisdictions calling them up and asking them about liturgical practice.

Anything else I would say to you at this point would just be an ad homien. I am done with you.
Logged

Joseph
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #89 on: June 20, 2013, 12:20:40 PM »

Yes presbyters in mitres is a horrible Russian practice introduced by Catherine the Great. It really needs to be done away with (along with most of the Russian award systems that developed in the 1800's).

Interesting.  In our tradition, the chorepiscopos is allowed to use some pontificals (canonically, he has some powers that a regular priest does not have, although he is not a bishop).  He may wear a red cassock instead of black, wears a pectoral cross, uses a staff, and in the Liturgy also makes use of a hand-cross, and uses the "mitre", but in a different way from the way bishops wear it. 

The Syriac "mitre" is really more of a "veil", worn over the head.  On top of this goes the phelonion and omophorion, and the hood is lowered or raised by the bishop when the rubrics indicate.  But for a chorepiscopos, the "mitre" is merely draped over the shoulders on top of the phelonion.  He never makes use of the omophorion.

The Russian use of a mitre for priests is only an "award"?  It doesn't come with a status that confers other rights/privileges?         
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #90 on: June 20, 2013, 01:45:13 PM »

It doesn't come with a status that confers other rights/privileges?         

No.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #91 on: June 20, 2013, 01:50:20 PM »

Yes presbyters in mitres is a horrible Russian practice introduced by Catherine the Great. It really needs to be done away with (along with most of the Russian award systems that developed in the 1800's).
The Russian use of a mitre for priests is only an "award"?  It doesn't come with a status that confers other rights/privileges?         

Yes, most everything that the Russian clergy wear outside of the normal vestments everyone else wears are awards that come from the pay scale developed under Czarist Russia in the 17 and 18 hundreds.
Logged

Joseph
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 #92 on: June 20, 2013, 02:07:00 PM »

Yes presbyters in mitres is a horrible Russian practice introduced by Catherine the Great. It really needs to be done away with (along with most of the Russian award systems that developed in the 1800's).

Interesting.  In our tradition, the chorepiscopos is allowed to use some pontificals (canonically, he has some powers that a regular priest does not have, although he is not a bishop).  He may wear a red cassock instead of black, wears a pectoral cross, uses a staff, and in the Liturgy also makes use of a hand-cross, and uses the "mitre", but in a different way from the way bishops wear it.  

The Syriac "mitre" is really more of a "veil", worn over the head.  On top of this goes the phelonion and omophorion, and the hood is lowered or raised by the bishop when the rubrics indicate.  But for a chorepiscopos, the "mitre" is merely draped over the shoulders on top of the phelonion.  He never makes use of the omophorion.

The Russian use of a mitre for priests is only an "award"?  It doesn't come with a status that confers other rights/privileges?        
We had one of your chorbishops visit once.  He explained his status as doing the job of the bishop but with none of the rights/powers/privileges of the bishop.

Btw, as I have contended elsewhere, the presbyterate arose out of the chorepiscopate.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2013, 02:07:52 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
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #93 on: June 20, 2013, 03:57:19 PM »

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

So what are the rules on "headgear" for bishops in the Byzantine rite?  It seems that the mitre is not an essential element of a bishop's vesture when serving.  Is it ever "required", or is it just customary in some forms of celebration more than others? 

In our Church, a bishop basically vests like a priest, with the exception of the "mitre" and omophorion, which are always worn at every Liturgy.  They are essential. 

You know what they say about rules and bishops, it is more like the pirates code, they are guidelines.

Arrr!
Logged
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #94 on: June 20, 2013, 04:02:05 PM »

I thought of this thread when I watched the video at this page:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/06/divine-liturgy-in-catacomb-of-st.html

Obviously, the setting is unusual, but I think it's nice to see a bishop serve as a priest.  Maybe a mitre could've/should've been used, but I think this works just fine. 

When a bishop serves like this he never uses the mitre or Trikiria and Dikiria. He may choose to still use the staff to cense and when he preaches.

And then he is assisted by two presbyters who wear mitres. Makes sense not.

Where do you see this?

Presbyters in mitres? All the time.

I also remember seing a picture of Metr. Jonah in phelon and mitre.
Mitring priests was dropped by the OCA in the 1980's some time, but was practiced before.

Great story about the late Archbishop, ever the "rusnak."  Smiley

ACROD only mitred one priest priest in its history, seventy years or so ago. The Ukrainians seem to like the practice, though, both Orthodox and the Greek Catholic ones as well. 
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #95 on: June 20, 2013, 04:18:43 PM »

It is pretty common among Greek Catholics for bishops to serve like this.  Recently Major Archbishop Sviatoslav concelebrated with Pope Francis like this.

I saw a picture of that, but it seemed to me the Major Archbishop was wearing the sakkos.  Was I wrong? 

Yes, he wore the sakkos and small omophor.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #96 on: June 20, 2013, 10:34:52 PM »

We had one of your chorbishops visit once.  He explained his status as doing the job of the bishop but with none of the rights/powers/privileges of the bishop.

Btw, as I have contended elsewhere, the presbyterate arose out of the chorepiscopate.

Are you sure the presbyterate itself rose out of the chorepiscopate, or do you mean that the "independent' ministry exercised by presbyters rose out of the chorepiscopate? 

And I think I know which chorbishop of ours you're talking about: he's a character (Smiley), his explanation (not terribly accurate) doesn't surprise me.  Chorbishops nowadays are basically "archpriests" (an award).  They don't have any extra authority unless specifically delegated (ideally, they'd function like deans of regions within dioceses).  But they do have some ancient canonical prerogatives (e.g., they can ordain chanters, readers, and subdeacons) which they almost never exercise because they require episcopal permission.  In other words, today they're basically pretty priests.     
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,032


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #97 on: June 20, 2013, 11:18:58 PM »

We had one of your chorbishops visit once.  He explained his status as doing the job of the bishop but with none of the rights/powers/privileges of the bishop.

Btw, as I have contended elsewhere, the presbyterate arose out of the chorepiscopate.

Are you sure the presbyterate itself rose out of the chorepiscopate, or do you mean that the "independent' ministry exercised by presbyters rose out of the chorepiscopate? 

And I think I know which chorbishop of ours you're talking about: he's a character (Smiley), his explanation (not terribly accurate) doesn't surprise me.  Chorbishops nowadays are basically "archpriests" (an award).  They don't have any extra authority unless specifically delegated (ideally, they'd function like deans of regions within dioceses).  But they do have some ancient canonical prerogatives (e.g., they can ordain chanters, readers, and subdeacons) which they almost never exercise because they require episcopal permission.  In other words, today they're basically pretty priests.     

Are they celibate?
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,531


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #98 on: June 20, 2013, 11:21:54 PM »

They can be chosen from among the celibate or married clergy.  If they are of the latter, it is the highest office they can hold.  If they are from among the celibate clergy and are also monastics (we have non-monastic celibate clergy too), they basically look like bishops unless you see them vested for the Liturgy. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,743



« Reply #99 on: June 25, 2013, 12:59:23 AM »

I made the mistake of naming the subject "miter or mitres," as the topic is wider (podkarpatska understood the broader point).  Nevertheless, it is good that I did so. 

I will tell you where this all came from.  Several priests that I have talked to have stated the popular opinion that "we have got to stop dressing our Bishops up like the emperor and singing the emperor's chant (eis polla eti despota) to them."  The reason given is that, if all this started with transferring the emperor's prerogatives to the bishop at the fall of Constantinople, then we should cease doing it, immediately.  My point is that I am not convinced that this is the case. 

Sooooo, let us say that I am wrong, that indeed, all of this started with the fall of Constantinople.  I assume that Gunarr and Cyrillic, our two young feisty 'converts' on this thread, agree that it should be done away with.  Otherwise, how can you defend its continued use?  If it is the case as both of you said, it is wholly unecclesial.     

 I don't know if Many Years was used only for the Emperor. Although when the Emperor was crowned, they did sing Many Years (This is according to De Ceremonies) I don't really care about that.

As for my opinion as to whether the mitre should still be used, I guess I would say I would not complain if they stopped using it. I would complain though if they stopped using the staff.

I don't know what to think about the long cape that has to be carried around.

those are my opinions

Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
Tags: mitre 
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 0.318 seconds with 127 queries.