|
1 members (KostaC),
448
guests, and
115
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,524
Posts417,637
Members6,176
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by Administrator: Eli wrote:
[b]Thank you so much, but one who knows that my choices are not between the country club and a book has already made the same most generous offer and it has been accepted.
Do you really need to be this sarcastic towards someone who has offered to do something nice for you?
Admin  [/b]I was very deeply hurt by your chastisement of me. I do not take gifts from people who are willing to publicly slap my face as you did here. The idea that I was using my inability to afford a book at the moment as an excuse to "break Forum rules" was not true or a necessary or a charitable thing to say. I had no intention of breaking the rules in the fist place or challenging you or anyone else about any rules, and as you can see I actually did move my tangential concerns off to the side when you told me to move. If you need an apology from me for being hurt and showing it, then you have it. Eli
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by Deacon Lance:
[QB] Eli,
If only you had read the rest of the article and the article on ther Annunciation your ignorance would have been dispelled.
"Antioch. In Antioch, on the feast of St. Philogonius, Chrysostom preached an important sermon. The year was almost certainly 386, though Clinton gives 387, and Usener, by a long rearrangement of the saint's sermons, 388 (Religionsgeschichtl. Untersuch., pp. 227-240). But between February, 386, when Flavian ordained Chrysostom priest, and December is ample time for the preaching of all the sermons under discussion. (See Kellner, Heortologie, Freiburg, 1906, p. 97, n. 3). In view of a reaction to certain Jewish rites and feasts, Chrysostom tries to unite Antioch in celebrating Christ's birth on 25 December, part of the community having already kept it on that day for at least ten years. In the West, he says, the feast was thus kept, anothen; its introduction into Antioch he had always sought, conservatives always resisted. This time he was successful; in a crowded church he defended the new custom. It was no novelty; from Thrace to Cadiz this feast was observed -- rightly, since its miraculously rapid diffusion proved its genuineness. Besides, Zachary, who, as high-priest, entered the Temple on the Day of Atonement, received therefore announcement of John's conception in September; six months later Christ was conceived, i.e. in March, and born accordingly in December.
Finally, though never at Rome, on authority he knows that the census papers of the Holy Family are still there. [This appeal to Roman archives is as old as Justin Martyr (Apol., I, 34, 35) and Tertullian (Adv. Marc., IV, 7, 19). Julius, in the Cyriline forgeries, is said to have calculated the date from Josephus, on the same unwarranted assumptions about Zachary as did Chrysostom.] Rome, therefore, has observed 25 December long enough to allow of Chrysostom speaking at least in 388 as above (P.G., XLVIII, 752, XLIX, 351).
Constantinople. In 379 or 380 Gregory Nazianzen made himself exarchos of the new feast, i.e. its initiator, in Constantinople, where, since the death of Valens, orthodoxy was reviving. His three Homilies (see Hom. xxxviii in P.G., XXXVI) were preached on successive days (Usener, op. cit., p. 253) in the private chapel called Anastasia. On his exile in 381, the feast disappeared.
According, however, to John of Nikiu, Honorius, when he was present on a visit, arranged with Arcadius for the observation of the feast on the Roman date. Kellner puts this visit in 395; Baumstark (Oriens Chr., 1902, 441-446), between 398 and 402. The latter relies on a letter of Jacob of Edessa quoted by George of Beelt�n, asserting that Christmas was brought to Constantinople by Arcadius and Chrysostom from Italy, where, "according to the histories", it had been kept from Apostolic times. Chrysostom's episcopate lasted from 398 to 402; the feast would therefore have been introduced between these dates by Chrysostom bishop, as at Antioch by Chrysostom priest. But L�beck (Hist. Jahrbuch., XXVIII, I, 1907, pp. 109-118) proves Baumstark's evidence invalid. More important, but scarcely better accredited, is Erbes' contention (Zeitschrift f. Kirchengesch., XXVI, 1905, 20-31) that the feast was brought in by Constantine as early as 330-35.
The Feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary (25 March), also called in old calendars: FESTUM INCARNATIONIS, INITIUM REDEMPTIONIS CONCEPTIO CHRISTI, ANNUNTIATIO CHRISTI, ANNUNTIATIO DOMINICA. In the Orient, where the part which Mary took in the Redemption is celebrated by a special feast, 26 December, the Annunciation is a feast of Christ; in the Latin Church, it is a feast of Mary. It probably originated shortly before or after the council of Ephesus (c. 431). At the time of the Synod of Laodicea (372) it was not known; St. Proclus, Bishop of Constantinople (d. 446), however, seems to mention it in one of his homilies. He says, that the feast of the coming of Our Lord and Saviour, when He vested Himself with the nature of man (quo hominum genus indutus), was celebrated during the entire fifth century. This homily, however, may not be genuine, or the words may be understood of the feast of Christmas."
So the very Encyclopedia you cite to defend your false claims explains the Nativity was celebrated in the East (somewhere from 379 to 398) before the Annunciation (somehwere around the time of Ephesus in 431). I spoke of the magnitude of the feast, Father Deacon. Not that it was never celebrated. I am not the only one to make this distinction and note that the magnitude of the feast of the nativity, in the east, has never been what it became eventually in the west. My only real point was, given the history and difficulty of the development of the feast of the nativity, that in the minds of the Fathers, the conception of the Incarnation had greater influence on the theology of the Incarnation and the naming of the Theotokos, than did his passage out of the birth canal into the world. I have no compelling evidence to convince me to retract that idea. Eli
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by Deacon Lance:
[QB] Eli,
"'Tokos' does not mean whatever that tortured translation "birthgiver" means."
According to you. But then you are not a liturgist or an expert in Koine Greek. No. But I have friends in low places in GOARCH who are and I will happily agree with what they say for they agree with me.  Eli
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337 Likes: 24
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337 Likes: 24 |
"I spoke of the magnitude of the feast, Father Deacon. Not that it was never celebrated.
I am not the only one to make this distinction and note that the magnitude of the feast of the nativity, in the east, has never been what it became eventually in the west."
Well then you are incorrect there as well. The Nativity has been a celebration of greater magnitude than the Annunciation in the East, the liturgical evidence is clear.
That the Nativity did not eclipse Pascha, as it did in certain ways in the West is true. But the Liturgical evidence shows that after Pascha, The Nativity and Theophany are the Greater Feasts of Christ distinguished by certain characteristics that other Great Feasts do not share.
Fr. Deacon Lance
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by Deacon Lance:
"I spoke of the magnitude of the feast, Father Deacon. Not that it was never celebrated.
I am not the only one to make this distinction and note that the magnitude of the feast of the nativity, in the east, has never been what it became eventually in the west."
Well then you are incorrect there as well. The Nativity has been a celebration of greater magnitude than the Annunciation in the East, the litrugical eveidence is clear.
That the Nativity did not eclipse Pascha, as it did in certain ways in the West is true. But the Liturgical evidence shows that after Pascha, The Nativity and Theophany are the Greater Feasts of Christ distinguished by certain characteristics that other Great Feasts do not share.
Fr. Deacon Lance That was not quite so clear at the time of the council where Theotokos was used to distinguish against the false use of Christotokos, as it is today in hindsight and I think that Newadvent article makes it clear. It is the best on-line source that I could find to make that point. As I said that is not the only place where the discussion of emphasis has taken place over time. I think that Jarislav Pelikan [eternal memory] makes the same observation in one of his writings. I don't remember if it was in his large history or in his book on the Virgin Mother. At any rate the emphasis in that council was on Christo and Theo and not on tokos, and again 'tokos.' And I will also note again that in those centuries 'tokos' could be used without the ambiguities of artificial insenination or surrogate motherhood. Eli
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337 Likes: 24
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337 Likes: 24 |
"No. But I have friends in low places in GOARCH who are and I will happily agree with what they say for they agree with me." Well you stick with them and I will stick with St. John Maximovitch. 
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,767 Likes: 30
John Member
|
|
John Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,767 Likes: 30 |
Originally posted by Elitoft: Originally posted by Administrator: [b] Eli wrote:
[b]Thank you so much, but one who knows that my choices are not between the country club and a book has already made the same most generous offer and it has been accepted. Eli, Do you really need to be this sarcastic towards someone who has offered to do something nice for you? Admin [/b]
The idea that I was using my inability to afford a book at the moment as an excuse to "break Forum rules" was not true or a necessary or a charitable thing to say.
I had no intention of breaking the rules in the fist place or challenging you or anyone else about any rules, and as you can see I actually did move my tangential concerns off to the side when you told me to move.
If you need an apology from me for being hurt and showing it, then you have it.
Eli [/b]Eli, You really must consider that it was you who mentioned that you could not afford the book and then continued to discuss the book as if you were now somehow justified in ignoring the moderator�s request that only those who had read the book should discuss it. Anyone who behaves this way will be called to account. In this thread Father Deacon Lance has been very clear in what he has posted. You are coming across as if you are purposefully being obtuse. Admin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by Administrator: Originally posted by Elitoft: [b] Originally posted by Administrator: [b] </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Eli wrote: [b]Thank you so much, but one who knows that my choices are not between the country club and a book has already made the same most generous offer and it has been accepted. Eli, Do you really need to be this sarcastic towards someone who has offered to do something nice for you? Admin [/b]
The idea that I was using my inability to afford a book at the moment as an excuse to "break Forum rules" was not true or a necessary or a charitable thing to say.
I had no intention of breaking the rules in the fist place or challenging you or anyone else about any rules, and as you can see I actually did move my tangential concerns off to the side when you told me to move.
If you need an apology from me for being hurt and showing it, then you have it.
Eli [/b]Eli, You really must consider that it was you who mentioned that you could not afford the book and then continued to discuss the book as if you were now somehow justified in ignoring the moderator�s request that only those who had read the book should discuss it. Anyone who behaves this way will be called to account. In this thread Father Deacon Lance has been very clear in what he has posted. You are coming across as if you are purposefully being obtuse. Admin [/b]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by Administrator:
In this thread Father Deacon Lance has been very clear in what he has posted. You are coming across as if you are purposefully being obtuse.
Admin [/QB] Obtuse? I disagree with the use of "Birthgiver" which is poor English and not at all a direct literal translation of 'tokos.' I have offered argumentation in opposition to that which Father Deacon argues. I am not being obtuse. I am disagreeing with Father Deacon's position and offering reasons why I am in disagreement. Also I realize that you must be aggravated with me for posting what I did in response to Father Serge's text last night and this morning. I thought since the text was there in front of everyone it would be all right for me to discuss it there, even if I did not have the book in my lap. Obviously I was in error, and did not see it as either error or rebellion on my part. My deepest apology for causing any distress for you or Father Serge or Brother Michael. Eli
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by Deacon Lance: "No. But I have friends in low places in GOARCH who are and I will happily agree with what they say for they agree with me."
Well you stick with them and I will stick with St. John Maximovitch. I will happily stick with them and the bulk of Orthodox textual translators, of which St. John was not. Though indeed he did other and greater wonderworks! Eli
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
The Feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary (25 March), also called in old calendars: FESTUM INCARNATIONIS, INITIUM REDEMPTIONIS CONCEPTIO CHRISTI, ANNUNTIATIO CHRISTI, ANNUNTIATIO DOMINICA. In the Orient, where the part which Mary took in the Redemption is celebrated by a special feast, 26 December, the Annunciation is a feast of Christ; in the Latin Church, it is a feast of Mary. It probably originated shortly before or after the council of Ephesus (c. 431). At the time of the Synod of Laodicea (372) it was not known; St. Proclus, Bishop of Constantinople (d. 446), however, seems to mention it in one of his homilies. He says, that the feast of the coming of Our Lord and Saviour, when He vested Himself with the nature of man (quo hominum genus indutus), was celebrated during the entire fifth century. This homily, however, may not be genuine, or the words may be understood of the feast of Christmas." I just found this very interesting commentary on the Annunciation from an Orthodox site. I think that the final paragraph is instructive. Note that this feast stood on its own at a time when many places still celebrated the nativity as part of the Epiphany which was the historical precedent for when the Church celebrated the nativity, and that co-mingling of the two feasts continued in many places during the several centuries it took to finally settle the date and develop the pre-festal fasts and independent liturgies. Annunciation
When Mary became of age, according to Hebrew custom of the time, she could no longer stay at the Temple, but had to either return to her parents or marry. Since Joachim and Anna had died, and Mary had proclaimed her vow of celibacy to the High Priest, it was decided to betroth her to an elderly distant relative who would protect and care for her. She, therefore, went to live in Nazareth with the elderly Joseph, who was a carpenter. Here according to tradition, while Mary was reading from the prophet Isaiah about the birth of the Messiah to a virgin, the angel Gabriel appeared to her. "And the angel came in unto her and said, "Hail, thou who art highly favored, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women.' And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying and cast about in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, 'Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favor with God. And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb and bring forth a Son, and shalt call His name JESUS. He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David, and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of His Kingdom there shall be no end.' Then said Mary unto the angel, 'How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?' And the angel answered and said unto her, 'The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee. Therefore also that Holy Being who shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.' . . . And Mary said, 'Behold the handmaid of the Lord. Be it unto me according to thy word." And the angel departed from her" (Luke 1: 28-38).
In the Russian language this holy day is called Blagovescheniye - "the announcement of glad tidings," because this was the first time that the glad tidings of the coming of the Savior were proclaimed to the world. Annunciation generally falls during the Great Lent, but it is of such great importance that it is still celebrated even if it coincides with Holy Friday or Pascha.
|
|
|
|
|
