Coptic flashing icon!

[Anastasios]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o55SjyKVFRE

As tacky as this is, I have to admit it's kind of cool.

Anastasios

[ozgeorge]

  LOL! I love it!
Right up there with "Buddy Jesus"

[Papist]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o55SjyKVFRE

As tacky as this is, I have to admit it's kind of cool.

Anastasios

Looks fun. Perhaps irreverent though.

[Anastasios]

Looks fun. Perhaps irreverent though.

It's in a Church. That's what's even more funny.

[Papist]

It's in a Church. That's what's even more funny.

I would be horrorfied if I saw it in my Church. Even with all the Liturgical abuses in the Catholic Church, I couldn't imagine seeing such a thing in a Catholic Church.

[Anastasios]

I would be horrorfied if I saw it in my Church. Even with all the Liturgical abuses in the Catholic Church, I couldn't imagine seeing such a thing in a Catholic Church.

Well, you haven't been to eastern europe then...

[Anastasios]

I mean really it's not that bad. Some overzealous teenager probably put it together and gave it to his priest and the priest was like ok sure uh let's not hurt his feelings..

[Anastasios]

Well, the buddy Jesus was meant to be silly and is offensive, this Coptic thing is meant to be pious and is just tacky.

[Panagiotis]

I dont like it. Sorry.

Blessings,
Panagiotis

[Papist]

I mean really it's not that bad. Some overzealous teenager probably put it together and gave it to his priest and the priest was like ok sure uh let's not hurt his feelings..

I understand what you are saying, but we are talking about God's temple here.

[Anastasios]

I understand what you are saying, but we are talking about God's temple here.

You're in America, right? Have you ever travelled to Europe or the Middle East? I think you would be surprised at the difference in cultural norms.  In India for instance, I saw what was basically flashing Christmas lights around an altar or tabernacle (I don't want to be specific lest I bear false witness) in a Church.  My point at showing the link was not to say it was wrong per se--it certainly would have no place in an American church--but rather just because I found it interesting, quaint, tacky, sort of cool, the whole range of emotions, while still beleiving it was not per se badly intentioned. I agree it shouldn't be in a Church but I am an American like you and have certain cultural presuppositions. Obviously those people don't think it's all that blasphemous.

Anastasios

[minasoliman]

Oh ya, we got lots of those.   I visited that monastery/cathedral (St. Mina's off of Alexandria).  It is beautiful.

This is the icon of the first Abbott of the Monastery (HE the late Metropolitan Mina), may his memory be eternal.

I don't think though that this icon is directly in the main part of the Church.  This is near his burial shrine.  The actual Church with pews and altar don't have these types of icons to my knowledge.  I'll have to check my video in thanksgiving and refresh my memory.  I have these things recorded.

HH the late Pope St. Kyrillos the Sixth is also buried in a shrine right across from that other shrine, and there's a lighted icon effect as well of him near his burial shrine.

While I don't think it's blasphemous to have them in Church, I don't prefer them.  Maybe it's because I'm just not used to them.

God bless.

Mina

PS It is also somewhere in the vicinity (and I wish I recorded them) where you see various photos of HIM Haille Sellassie with St. Pope Kyrillos, which is PLENTY.  HIM loved the Pope.

[Papist]

You're in America, right? Have you ever travelled to Europe or the Middle East? I think you would be surprised at the difference in cultural norms.  In India for instance, I saw what was basically flashing Christmas lights around an altar or tabernacle (I don't want to be specific lest I bear false witness) in a Church.  My point at showing the link was not to say it was wrong per se--it certainly would have no place in an American church--but rather just because I found it interesting, quaint, tacky, sort of cool, the whole range of emotions, while still beleiving it was not per se badly intentioned. I agree it shouldn't be in a Church but I am an American like you and have certain cultural presuppositions. Obviously those people don't think it's all that blasphemous.

Anastasios

I see what you are saying. You raise some good points, and I would even say that you may be right. But I would need to think about it a bit more before I came to that conclusion.
Many blessings in Christ

[EkhristosAnesti]

I think that ultimately there can be no substantial argument made against the type of Icon in question. We can poke fun at it for being distasteful and tacky etc. but such responses are, as Anastasios has pointed out, influenced by our various predispositions that are shaped by our cultural, social, and various other contexts.

Let me try and propose a new perspective on this. Let us reflect for a moment on the Orthodox conception of Icons as "windows to heaven". Can we posit an interpretation of the purpose of the flashing effect which could properly relate to this theological perspective of the icon--a purpose with more meaning than one merely intended to make the icon "catchy" or "cool"? I would argue that we can: The icon was evidently designed in such a way so as to give the viewer the impression that they are being actively and presently blessed by the Saint of the icon (according to the manner in which the flashing effect animates his hand in the sign of the cross) in spite of his physical absence to do so before their very eyes. I guess the intention of the designer was to reinforce the idea that though His Eminence has departed from this world, he is now part of the Heavenly Church which is One with the earthly Church; he thus remains part of the Church, communing with Her, worshipping with Her, actively blessing Her congregation, absolving her congregation, interceding on behalf of her congregation etc.

That said, I nevertheless personally find it tacky too upon reflection, though I don't think I thought much of it when I first saw it in person upon my visit to His Holiness Pope St. Kyrillos' burial site in Alexandria. My main point is that there is certainly no objective basis for deeming it irreverent, nor is there any reasonable basis for its being compared to the "Buddy Jesus" graphic, which as Anastasios noted, was quite obviously intended to be silly.

[ozgeorge]

I think that ultimately there can be no substantial argument made against the type of Icon in question.

To have an icon of a Saint "bless" us is, I think, dangerously close to idolatry. The Pagan Greeks would use devises to make their idols appear to speak and move, so that the idol was identified as itself having the nature of a god. Christian Icons, on the other hand, depict hypostasis, and not nature. I think the idea of "animated" icons is something we need to be wary about. Where do we draw the line? Will our Iconostasis eventually be an array of video screens?
In the latest Shinto funerary practice in Japan, an animated automaton "priest" chants prayers and blesses the departed one.

[aserb]

ALL OF YOU. LOG BACK ON A WATCH MY CHRISTIAN BLOOD AND THEN PRAY FOR THE MARTYRS OF EGYPT AND THANK GOD FOR YOUR FREEDOMS.

[Anastasios]

ALL OF YOU. LOG BACK ON A WATCH MY CHRISTIAN BLOOD AND THEN PRAY FOR THE MARTYRS OF EGYPT AND THANK GOD FOR YOUR FREEDOMS.

Please refrain from  yelling at us.  As anyone here knows, I have a high regard for the Coptic Church and have said so on many occasions. This is not exactly the most important thing on my or anyone else's mind. However, people do discuss the little things on occasion. That doesn't take away from the plight of Coptic Christians under Muslim subjugation.

[Keble]

Only imagine what could be done with the notorious legendary dancing saints of St. Gregory of Nyssa!

 

[EkhristosAnesti]

ozgeorge,

Maybe I missed the point of your post, but as far as what seems clear to me regarding the point you're trying to make, I think my previous post pre-emptly addresses the issue you have in its primary stress on the idea of the Icon as the depiction of a heavenly reality, namely, the reality that this Saint remains a living and active Heirarch of the Church in spite of his departure from the earthly realm, and hence continues his Heirarchical functions (none of which, appropriately understood within the Orthodox context, have anything to do with his "nature")—interceding on behalf of his flock, absolving his flock of their sins, and blessing his flock by the sign of the Cross.

[Macarius]

it is not inside the church itself , i know this place well

[Macarius]

Oh ya, we got lots of those.   I visited that monastery/cathedral (St. Mina's off of Alexandria).  It is beautiful.

This is the icon of the first Abbott of the Monastery (HE the late Metropolitan Mina), may his memory be eternal.

I don't think though that this icon is directly in the main part of the Church.  This is near his burial shrine.  The actual Church with pews and altar don't have these types of icons to my knowledge.  I'll have to check my video in thanksgiving and refresh my memory.  I have these things recorded.

HH the late Pope St. Kyrillos the Sixth is also buried in a shrine right across from that other shrine, and there's a lighted icon effect as well of him near his burial shrine.

While I don't think it's blasphemous to have them in Church, I don't prefer them.  Maybe it's because I'm just not used to them.

God bless.

Mina

PS It is also somewhere in the vicinity (and I wish I recorded them) where you see various photos of HIM Haille Sellassie with St. Pope Kyrillos, which is PLENTY.  HIM loved the Pope.

Mina is right , this is not in the Church
i know this place very well

[ozgeorge]

ozgeorge,

Maybe I missed the point of your post, but as far as what seems clear to me regarding the point you're trying to make, I think my previous post pre-emptly addresses the issue you have in its primary stress on the idea of the Icon as the depiction of a heavenly reality, namely, the reality that this Saint remains a living and active Heirarch of the Church in spite of his departure from the earthly realm, and hence continues his Heirarchical functions (none of which, appropriately understood within the Orthodox context, have anything to do with his "nature")—interceding on behalf of his flock, absolving his flock of their sins, and blessing his flock by the sign of the Cross.

I see, so Coptic Orthodox Christians have no need to confess to a Priest here on Earth, they can just confess to a departed Saint who was ordained while on Earth, and he will absolve them. And obviously, there is no need for you to pray for departed priests and heirarchs since they can offfer the Eucharist for the repose of their own souls even when they're departed.....
Do you see where such idolatry leads? If it has managed to deceive someone as intelligent as yourself, what is it doing to people of weak or simple faith?

[Simayan]

Only imagine what could be done with the notorious legendary dancing saints of St. Gregory of Nyssa!

 

HAHA!!

This is all very funny. Perhaps not in the best taste, but hey, let the Priest and Parish Council do what they want.

[EkhristosAnesti]

I see, so Coptic Orthodox Christians have no need to confess to a Priest here on Earth, they can just confess to a departed Saint who was ordained while on Earth, and he will absolve them.

I don’t think I mentioned anything regarding the practical implications of the truth in question to the Orthodox life of the faithful believer on earth. Obviously the earth/heaven divide, though having no bearing on the real and transcendental unity between the earthly and heavenly Churches, nonetheless denies the earthly faithful believer’s ability to have personal confession with a Hierarch who is not physically present albeit truly living and active. Nevertheless, it is because the Saints are truly living and active that we invoke the general absolution of these hierarchs during the earthly Liturgy upon the belief that these Saints participate with us in a heavenly liturgy. Here is the relevant prayer of the priest said immediately following the Thanksgiving Prayer according to the Coptic Liturgy of St. Basil the Great:

“May your servants, ministers of this day, the hegomens, the priests, the deacons, the clergy, all the people and my weak self, be absolved from the mouth of the all-Holy Trinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and from the mouth of the one only holy catholic and apostolic church, and from the mouth of the beholder-of-God the evangelist Saint Mark the apostle and martyr, the patriarch Saint Severus, our teacher Dioscorus, Saint Athanasius the Apostolic, Saint Peter the priest- martyr and the high priest, Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Cyril, Saint Basil, and Saint Gregory, and from the mouths of the three hundred and eighteen assembled at Nicea, the one hundred and fifty at Constantinople, and the two hundred at Ephesus, and form the mouth of our honoured father, the high priest Abba....., and from the mouth of my abject self. For blessed and full of glory is Your holy name, O Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit, now and at all times and unto the age of all ages. Amen.”

Do you see where such idolatry leads?

Your objection to it as such sounds quite Protestant. Receiving the blessing of a Heirarch living in heaven is no more idolatrous than receiving the blessing of a Heirarch living on earth—as you can see I am resorting to pretty much the same logic used in response to the typical Protestant objection to the practice of requesting the intercession of the Saints. Whether or not you realise it, your baseless objections challenge the reality of a living and heavenly Church that remains in intimate communion with we who await to join them in due time.

[ozgeorge]

Your objection to it as such sounds quite Protestant. Receiving the blessing of a Heirarch living in heaven is no more idolatrous than receiving the blessing of a Heirarch living on earth—

EA, it's an Icon. It's an inanimate object. Inanimate objects do not have the authority to administer benedictions. If you put this icon in a brothel and plugged it in, by your logic, St. Mina would be blessing adultery and fornication.
Like I said, an Icon's similtude is like it's prototype with regard to hypostasis, not nature. Holy Orders changes the Nature of the person so that he becomes clergy, but this Nature is not present in the Icon. To say it is present is idolatry, plain and simple.

[EkhristosAnesti]

EA, it's an Icon. It's an inanimate object. Inanimate objects do not have the authority to administer benedictions. If you put this icon in a brothel and plugged it in, by your logic, St. Mina would be blessing adultery and fornication.

My position clearly does not entail the idea that a blessing is automatically and magically dispensed from the icon upon the completion of the animated making of the sign of the cross. I have clearly argued that the animation simply serves as a reminder to the viewer that the subject of the icon remains a living and active member of the Church—that they can request his prayers as they were requested whilst he were on earth, and receive his blessings as they were received on earth. It serves as a pointer to a higher reality—it is not that higher reality itself. This seems to support the very service of an icon as a window to heaven, as I have already suggested.

[Simayan]

I doubt this is the beginning of some mass Paganism-idol ritual where people actually THINK the icon is blessing them.

[minasoliman]

I doubt this is the beginning of some mass Paganism-idol ritual where people actually THINK the icon is blessing them.

Ya...I think that would be quite extreme to assume.  It's no different than Protestants saying that we actually worship the wood or ceramic surface when we're praying in front of an icon.

We would condemn such extremism, but that doesn't invalidate this "tacky" icon.

God bless.

Mina

[Amdetsion]

I have not seen this "icon" or "art work"; but having read the various points here and having seen a similar 'flickering' icon in the sanctuary of an Ethiopian Church I was visiting in the USA I must say that the I do not agree with the new-age, Ortho-protestantness of these pictures.

Icons are NOT designed they are written.

They are the truth of the Holy Gospel first and foremost.

To revise the Iconographical tradition to me is leading to or pointing to an already lax or laid back brand of Orthodoxy which seems to be more and more prevelent these days. I can not count how many times lately I see these ceramic statues in Orthodox Churches....shocking. Statues?

The flickering or shinning icons are NOT an improvement or and extention of Holy Iconographical Orthodox tradition no matter how this idea is supported.

But people have the right to express their faith. The Othodoxy of it is the thing we must measure.

I am happy the site is back

 

[EkhristosAnesti]

Amdetsion,

Your post goes on about how the icons in question presumably compromise the Orthodox Tradition of iconography, yet you failed to provide any substantial reason as to why that is so.

I hope to see more substance and less irrational (so-called) fundamentalism from those who wish to make serious issues out of this very negligble and harmless matter.

[ozgeorge]

I doubt this is the beginning of some mass Paganism-idol ritual where people actually THINK the icon is blessing them.

Do you know where the word "animate" comes from?

[EkhristosAnesti]

If one is to have any decent case in regard to this quite clearly ridiculous “pagan-idol” argument, they are going to have to prove either that the intention behind the icon was to present it as if it actually possessed life and hence itself were capable of actively blessing people, or that such is the manner in which it leads itself to being reasonably misapprehended and abused by those beholding it.

If they cannot do that, then that one’s case is—as Mina properly suggested—no more or less valid than the case of the Protestant which denounces icon veneration as idolatrous worship of the physical icon itself. The Protestant’s argument falls flat on its face precisely because icons do not exist within the Orthodox context for the purpose of divine worship, nor does the Orthodox practice of icon veneration lead itself to potentially being reasonably misapprehended as such by those so exercising such a practice.

Consequently, those who wish to do away with animated icons by virtue of their pedantic and irrational fears, must also, if they are to maintain any sort of consistency in their logic, do away with icons all together.

[ozgeorge]

Consequently, those who wish to do away with animated icons by virtue of their pedantic and irrational fears, must also, if they are to maintain any sort of consistency in their logic, do away with icons all together.

What do you mean by "consequently"?  Consequently to what?
Your "consequently" refers to nothing I have said. I believe your favourite term "straw man" applies here.
The logic is simple if you answer three questions:
1) Where does the term "animated" come from etymologically?
2) Is animation a quality of nature or hypostasis?
3) Do Icons depict nature or hypostasis?

"And the people bowed and prayed
to the neon god they made."
-Simon & Garfunkel. "The Sounds of Silence".

[EkhristosAnesti]

What do you mean by "consequently"?  Consequently to what?

Consequently to the application of the ridiculous Protestant logic that your whole argument rests upon. Please learn to read things in context.

The logic is simple if you answer three questions:
1) Where does the term "animated" come from etymologically?
2) Is animation a quality of nature or hypostasis?
3) Do Icons depict nature or hypostasis?

The logic is indeed simple for one who can manage to understand the substance of what I have been saying to you since my very first response to you in this thread: Your questions attempt to procure answers that are absolutely irrelevant ti the issue at hand in light of the obvious fact that people aren’t stupid enough to be mislead to believe that the animation is an attempt to depict the physical icon itself as if it were a living animate thing, anymore than people are stupid enough to be mislead to believe that prostrating before or kissing an icon is an attempt to venerate the mere physical substance of the icon itself.

I'm not sure how much longer I will be required to keep reiterating the very same simple and obvious point.

[ozgeorge]

prostrating before or kissing an icon is an attempt to venerate the mere physical substance of the icon itself.

That is not what consitutes idolatry. The Ancient Greeks also knew that their statues were hewn from marble and that they were not worshipping marble.

I'm not sure how much longer I will be required to keep reiterating the very same simple and obvious point.

You're welcome to reiterate it as often as you like, not that it is necessary or anyone is requiring you to do so. Perhaps because it is so "simple" you cannot see past it to what I'm actually saying. I can't respond to your oft-repeated "logic" since it has no bearing on what I'm saying.

[EkhristosAnesti]

That is not what consitutes idolatry. The Ancient Greeks also knew that their statues were hewn from marble and that they were not worshipping marble.

Which is besides the point nevertheless. What constitutes idolatry is intention and apprehension; it's got nothing to do with whether the subject of veneration is 2D or 3D, black and white or colour, animated or not etc. but rather how such things are intended and apprehended. That is substantially what I have been arguing since my first response to you.

I can't respond to your oft-repeated "logic" since it has no bearing on what I'm saying.

It quite clearly deems what you're saying to be irrelevant. Are the Saints living and active members of the Church? Yes. Do they actively intercede for us? Yes, hence we ask for their intercessions during the Liturgy (see the 'Commemoration of the Saints'). Do they actively worship with us? Yes, hence we invoke their absolution during the Liturgy (see the 'Absolution of the Ministers'). Do they bless us? Yes, hence we ask for their blessings during the Liturgy (see Congregation's response to the 'Commemoration of the Saints'). If an icon is designed in such a way so as to indicate or point to any of these higher realities--to remind us of them, to direct our consicences towards them, to prompt us to seek them--if such is the intention and apprehension of the icon, then how can it possibly be deemed idolatrous in a way that is any different to the Protestant's dismissal of icon veneration per se as idolatrous? It can't. Period.

[mourad]

its not even an icon! 

[Macarius]

It is not icon and this bishop is not considered as a saint and it is not inside the church , what is the problem then !!!!

[minasoliman]

Dear Macarius,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've seen "icons" of St. George like this.

God bless.

Mina

[Macarius]

Dear Macarius,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've seen "icons" of St. George like this.

God bless.

Mina

i have seen pictures like this but it was out the church itself , i don't like it by the way

[Amdetsion]

EkristosEnesti

I have read enough of your posts over my time on this site and have found that most times you are the model of true Orthodoxy in you views ( at lease in my opinion).

You may see the flashing icon as a small matter.

I see it as a medium-to-big matter due to its newness and lack of known and excepted Orthodox character.

I never saw the picture myself as I said. I also said that people have the right to express their faith. So I will not knock the usage if this kind of thing is needed and accepted by the Church fathers for use in divine worship.

I can not however feel good about it since I am an advocate for true Orthoodoxy and Iconography is a powerful true Christian expression which must be understood and protected. Many Orthodox Christians do not know the deep truths of Iconography. Most think that Icons are church decorations or pictures to admire. Of course they are niether.

I suggest that you immerse yourself in some research on the meaning and purpose of Orthodox Iconography. Then share with us how you support flashing or twinkling icons.

The whole idea of these electronic gizmos (made in China) as elements of divine worship is silly to me.

But I am a person who does not support the christmas tree either which so many Orthodox Christians has found a way to justify. This large colorful blinky thing is objectionable to me in a house, Church or anywhere.

So I will stay out of it form here.

 

[EkhristosAnesti]

Amdetsion,

My last response to you still applies. Once again you have argued that the "Icon" in question undermines Orthodox Iconography. Please explain how. The only reason you have suggested regards the idea that there is no patristic support for flashing icons. That's obviously quite an absurd argument from silence to make for flashing icons did not even exist for the Fathers to accept/reject in the first place.

By the way, I should emphasise--because some people in their desparation and insecurity of faith seem to have made an issue of this at other forums--that this is not some new "innovation" in Coptic Iconography, as if something Synodally discussed and approved. Some random person simply took a random photo of a departed Bishop and sought to commemorate him by putting flash/animation effects on the picture. It is not placed in the sanctuary or the Church itself, but rather next to his burial chamber. There is no deep intention behind it; the person behind it probably had no intention whatsoever than to do something he thought was "nice". In any event, there is clearly nothing wrong with the concept per se, and I await someone to make a substantial case of the issue if they feel the need to exaggerate this non-issue any further.

[Amdetsion]

EkhristosAnesti

I said before that you have nothing to defend with me.

You seem to be more concerend about how the opinions of other effect you.

If people are allowed to use blinking gizmos as images of worship or to define the way they feel about their faith than so-be-it.

If the fathers of the Church allow these behaviors than who am I or anyone else to say otherwise?
It-is what-it-is.

I see the blond haired, blue eyed, lilly white euro-centric Icons which are produced by the RCC. I also see the scrawny, human destruct of agony and despair reeling in ghastly posture in the grotesque christ like characturizations produced and distibuted by protestants all being used by the Orthodox Church. These images do not teach the word in purity but are socio-political / religio in intent.

My point to you is:
Blinking gizmos are not Icons and should not be used as the center of devine worship or an expression of the holy faith. This is dagerous and risky behavior. Who know where it will lead?

The Church has established all the standards long ago. Blinking lights are not Orthodox.

It is that simple.

Iconograhpy is not easy to understand. I can assure you that It is not the open ended liberalism freedom of expression that you seem to think it is.

Like a Russian Iconographer of our era recently stated: "An Icon is not a picture or a decoration to be admired. It is not to be seen  in the eye of the beholder, it is not art. It is the holiness, the truth, the expression of the ineffable word of God.... The true Icon is not painted it is written".

I gasped when I read that.

You can be sure that this Russian would also object to electronic "icons" that blink. As it is this Russian would not understand how you and I worship in chuches with pews. They stand at all times.

You have allot to learn about Icons and what they are to us.

Study my brother.....study!

[EkhristosAnesti]

Fr. Amdetsion,

It looks like we are going to keep running around in circles, because as of yet you have presumed much about my position and failed to respond to the actual arguments that I have offered with respect to this subject.

The first issue concerns whether the object in question is in fact an Icon or just a commemorative. Given the location, and the likely intention behind the creation and possession of the object in question, it probably falls under the latter category.

The second issue concerns whether the flashing effect in question poses any substantial threat of compromise to the Orthodox conception of Iconography presuming the subject of the flashing effect to be an Icon in the first place. This is a presumption I proceeded with in this thread since my initial purpose was to counter what I perceived to be arguments inspired by irrational paranoia. To prove that the arguments were of such a nature I chose to grant the presumption regarding the nature of the object in question rather than to take the easy way out by denying it to be an Icon, in the proper sense of the word, in the first place. If you go back and read my posts you will find that I offered an interpretation of the flashing effect's purpose and implications that promotes the Orthodox conception of Icons as "windows to heaven". Nowhere did I attempt to validate the role of the flashing effect as a decorative element, so your emphasis on the idea of Icons not being artwork is not necessary, and your condascending remarks (though offered with good intentions i'm sure) regarding my understanding of Orthodox Iconography are unwarranted.

[minasoliman]

Dear Fr. Amdetsion,

Perhaps we can also include another argument to the picture.  It is well known that St. John Chrysostom did not like the use of instruments in the liturgy.  And yet due to evangelization purposes, some churches use drums or organs as part of their culture, as a way to praise God in the Liturgy.

Likewise, the theology of iconagraphy can accomodate novel ways if such ways can help people pray better in Church.  If such is a cultural norm, then EA is arguing that iconographic theology is not in any way contradicted by the use of such "icons".

God bless.

Mina

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Oriental Orthodox Discussion (Moderator: Salpy) > Topic: Coptic flashing icon!