Speak lovingly of Mary

[CaliforniaJosiah]

This is a thread about talking lovingly and I think it is within the realm of this issue to actually "present" of how lovingly we in the EO trad. we speak of her...thus my posts... I do not desire to have any further theological debate with you or anyone else as everything has been already stated.... here is the link you can find more information.... actually it was posted some posts prior to this....


show me in your tradtiion how you "honor" Theotokos? do you honor her with hymn of praise? I would be very interested to find out....

LLOJ did not exactly "praise" her of "spoke lovingly" as he posted a Christmas carol about Christ... That of course pin points to the incarnation so I can see how indirectly it relates somehow...

Posting hymns is a way of veneration and calling her blessed just like the Bible teaches us to do...

Since I don't know many Orthodox brothers or sisters, and as far as I understand, the EO has the same two Marian dogmas that Lutherans do (Mary is the Mother of God and Mary was a virgin at the birth of Our Lord), I can't comment on the others.

But the issue I raised is: is it distinctively and above all LOVING to dwell (to the level of DOGMA) on how often Mary had sex - if at all? See, my feeling about this is that it might be best to respectfully honor Her privacy in regard to Her sexual practices, and to leave this where Her Son and the Holy Bible leave it - alone, being silent. But I've been told (repeatedly) that being silent about her sex life is "vulgar" "rude" and "disrespectful" (the 3 most common words thrown at me, mostly in PM's but also in this thread). Rather, it as been repeatedly and boldly stressed to the very highest level, the "loving" thing is speak as loudly and clearly as possible about Her sex life.

I think the hymns you quoted are beautiful and wonderful (as I stated). I also deeply love, adore, revere and hold Our Lady in highest esteem. I love Our Mother more than my own (as I'm sure you do). I will do NOTHING to pierce Her Sacred Heart, hurt, embarrass, offend or cause pain to Her (and thus to Her Son). So, if it's "vulgar" and "rude" to obsess on how often someone has sex (and I've avoided the stern words so often aimed at me), then maybe that's an issue we should stay away from? Well, MY position is that since Her Son is silent on this, I (also Her son) will be, too. For one and only one reason: I love and respect Her. IF I thought it profoundly respectful to discuss how often you or my mother or my sister has sex (if at all), perhaps I'd have no great "issue" with the dogmatic obsession to the very highest level of what is critical in this dogma, but frankly, to be blunt, I consider such none of my business. Well, take no offense, but I love Our Lady more than you, my mother and my sister combined.


IMHO, what this thread as documented, is that Catholics want it both ways: they want to insist that it's "rude, vulgar and disrespectful" to dogmatically obsess over one's sex life while dogmatically obsessing over one's sex life. They see no double standard, irony or contradiction in this at all for one reason: They MUST defend the power of the RCC, THAT is the only issue. For me, that's not an issue at all, Mary's heart is the issue.


Friend, I NEVER said the position is wrong or unbiblical or heresy. I NEVER question the love or integrity or sincerity of anyone (I KNOW the love of Mary among Catholics is great and sincere - and I share it). I just pointed out a couple of ironies from the CATHOLIC perspective here (neither seems to apply to the EO, I've learned). AND that some who love Mary choose to be silent on Her sex life EXACTLY for the reason sooo many Catholics have stated: It's rude, vulgar and disrespectful (only I don't use the harsh words they use toward me, because I KNOW they don't mean to be vulgar or rude or disrespectful - and clearly they don't think they are being so since thier value here is 180 degrees turned around and inside out when speaking about Mary - they have two entirely different values on this: one for Mary and one for everyone else, what's always vulgar isn't when speaking of Mary).




Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah




.

 

[Philothei]

I think the hymns you quoted are beautiful and wonderful (as I stated). I also deeply love, adore, revere and hold Our Lady in highest esteem. I love Our Mother more than my own (as I'm sure you do). I will do NOTHING to pierce Her Sacred Heart, hurt, embarrass, offend or cause pain to Her (and thus to Her Son).

Again where in your trad. is there any mention of honoring Theotokos as she is called in the Bible "ever blessed"....regardless of PV or not....Maybe you can dig up or some others some information about it except for the "AVE MARIA"?

If anyone has any songs about her please post it would be wonderful to share in Christ.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Again where in your trad. is there any mention of honoring Theotokos as she is called in the Bible "ever blessed"....regardless of PV or not....Maybe you can dig up or some others some information about it except for the "AVE MARIA"?

If anyone has any songs about her please post it would be wonderful to share in Christ.

This is a favorite of mine...............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfyEpmQM7bw&feature=related

 

[GBTWC]

help
http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7299877

 

[Rick Otto]

quote=Philothei Again where in your trad. is there any mention of honoring Theotokos as she is called in the Bible "ever blessed"....regardless of PV or not....Maybe you can dig up or some others some information about it except for the "AVE MARIA"?

Our tradition is written scripture. It's in there.

If anyone has any songs about her please post it would be wonderful to share in Christ.

Which songs did the apostles teach?
Or is just anyone qualified to add to tradition?

 

[Uphill Battle]

You keep saying you do not understand me... and all that... What exactly you did not understand? That tradition is the source of the bible or that EV has the same source?

I think you do understand but you just run out of proof for the opposite...

I can' understand what point you are trying to make. Your post meanders around alot, and your sentences don't end. I'm having difficulty following along.

here Thekla is very clear about the "inconsistancies" you turn it around that there are not... But from a scholarly textural and historical perspective there are and that again does not mean that the Gospecl is in conflict. .... You confuse one for the other... The bible does have inconsistances but does not have conflict. Thus to say that the EV is not 'recorded' as such in the Bible does not necessarily means that it is not "proven' in it... The same (and I know you do not like to hear it...but was told again and again) applies to the Holy Trinity...as it is present in the bible but is "name" as such is not in the bible. We deduce it from the scripture but it is not "evidenced" as per the exact words as "Trinity" neither is the the theological meaning of it.....

you're not doing anything but repeating yourself, and pointing to a post that I've already addressed.

Shall I go and on?

no... please don't.

The inconsistancy of the Protestant idea about EV is thus based in the secular idea of the scientific method that declares all beliefs be the RC or EO as invalid.

false. I do not believe that all beliefs of the RC or EO are invalid. Nor, is my viewpoint secular. Science has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Doing so one truly wonders how far that 'scientific" method intents to go... as far as finding historical evidence for the Bible??

there is historical evidence for the bible.

The Text we use today has not come from the time of 1st century Ad... Rather it is a copy from another copy and so forth...Does this validate its authenticity since any kind of tradtion is questionable?

you should actually research this. There are more extant copies and framents of scripture than ANY other written work, most that are accepted without question, I.E. Homer's Illiad.

do we actually have a writing of the Apostles? You do go on faith alone for establishing the Bible into an authoritative text of christianity... why would you not do the same for the EV of Mary? That is indeed a "mystery" to us.(EO)....and for you to ponder....

I go on acceptable evidence FOR faith. having faith in and of itself is rather useless. Things don't become true, no matter how much faith you have in it. Rather, I seek reason to have faith in it. And I have found Faith in Christ, because it is truth, both from a spiritual standpoint, but also because of the veracity of the record regarding him.

no such record exists for EV. Just people starting to talk about it centuries later, and then it becoming Dogma (or accepted truth, depending on what side of the Apostolic fence you sit on.)

It is to say, that given the usage of the term in Greek and in Semitic usage, there is no reason to automatically conclude "sibling". I don't think thats dishonest.

that is not what you said. you said they probably would not. I find that less than credible, as it's first usage would be brothers. They MAY not, but to say it was unlikely they would, is a bit dishonest.

I'm referring to the promises of God (the "shalls") in the OT, and the length of time for the promises to be fulfilled. Given this, I don't find a reason in the Annunciation passages in Luke to think Mary understood the conception of the announced child to be immediate.

other than the context of her response.

the amount of time that passed between promise and fulfilment in the OT is absolutely irrelevant to what we are discussing.

The teaching is the PV. Its not the same as the descriptions which explain the details, and points to the vagueness of the term adelphos.

no. If you can't give a real reason as to why it's true, it shouldn't be accepted as true.

we have people saying "we know Mary is ever virgin!" but can't give an answer why, other than our "sacred traditon (sic) says so.

In reference to the Lukan passage, and acknowledging the vagueness of the term "adelphos", and the giving of Mary to John. A similar instance would be "Mary's sister (adelphi) Mary" in John. Different descriptions of the relationship to Mary may be given, but this doesn't change the teaching that Mary had a sister Mary.

so? you know that Adelphos may or may not be used to describe brothers. So, you find another instance where it was used for another purpose (which I've already acknowledged) and use it as proof that it MUST mean it in the Lukan passage? That's very poor reasoning!

I am distinguishing between the teaching and the descriptions given about the teaching. They are different issues.

they are not seperable. If you cannot get your story straight, I wonder why you think it should be believable.

It seems this conflates the teaching with descriptions about a teaching. The teaching - the belief that is held is the PV. The descriptions that "surround" the teaching/belief, in response to the question of relationship of the adelphos to Christ, is a description, not a belief.

I know. But as I said before, if you can't give good reasonable description, it doesn't really make much sense to believe it.

I didn't say that. I was stating that I had spent a great deal of time researching the matter: the use of adelphos in the LXX, the use of adelphos in Greek literature, etc. When I described the useages, the response was typically "doesn't apply", or "isn't so". The same in the matter of the Lukan passage.

that's what happens when you take context and pitch it out the window to support what you already believe, I guess.

There is no explicit statement that they married, nor does what people thought mean that they were, and had children.


Gabriel hereafter consistently says "the child and His mother" -- which on balance muddies the earlier - vague - passage. Also, if you compare the use of eos/until/ with its use throughout the OT and NT, again, the issue is not so clear.

more pretending.

ah well, you believe it if you want. It's practically ignoring what's written, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Then nothing can be said absent explicit scriptural statement; where that is not found, no particular position is most consistent.

I have never stated that explicit statement must be there. ANY mention would be nice. ANYthing regarding EV. Not one word is whispered in the bible other than Eisegetical references to a gate.

you pretty much ignore the line of evidence, as I've posted numerous times. you just keep repeating "It isn't explicitly stated, so it's not true." If you demand this, then half of what your church teaches is completely untrue. (ok, not neccessarily half, but you know what I mean.)

Well, this Greek would not assume that as it is all over the Bible and means also Breathren. Also it is well known that Jesus had no brothers and sisters so .... not a chance not ONE Greek would say that....

lol..... fooling who? She is already called "unweded bride' as she is EV in our tradition. what? a piece of paper tells us if someone was "actually" virgin in marriage or not??

It does not... and you cannot prove it. We can since we have "martyria" from our worshiping Service of St. James starting as early as 1st century AD...

bully for you. You wouldn't assume that. color me suprised, that an EO wouldn't immediately assume that, when one of the key tenets of their beliefs rests on the fact that it may NOT be actual brothers.

stop the presses.

 

[Thekla]

false. I do not believe that all beliefs of the RC or EO are invalid. Nor, is my viewpoint secular. Science has absolutely nothing to do with this.

I think she's referring to scholasticism and laterCartesian epistomology that has influenced western thinking ...

there is historical evidence for the bible.

some, and a bit is quite recent from what I know; you likely have more sources (I've not been much interested in this field) and it would be interesting to hear about them ...

you should actually research this. There are more extant copies and framents of scripture than ANY other written work, most that are accepted without question, I.E. Homer's Illiad.

I have; there are (at least per the citation I provided in this thread or another) very few from the 1st. century. Largely passages, iirc. up to through the 2nd century.

I go on acceptable evidence FOR faith. having faith in and of itself is rather useless. Things don't become true, no matter how much faith you have in it. Rather, I seek reason to have faith in it. And I have found Faith in Christ, because it is truth, both from a spiritual standpoint, but also because of the veracity of the record regarding him.

no such record exists for EV. Just people starting to talk about it centuries later, and then it becoming Dogma (or accepted truth, depending on what side of the Apostolic fence you sit on.)

As I explained before, there is dogma (received and not widely 'announced' or shared, sort of family info) and kerygma (announced, so to speak). The teaching of the PV falls under the former - "family info." (St. Basil uses the direction in which we pray as an example).

Though I haven't run into this distinction in western expressions of Christianity, its been around in the EO for awhile (the distinction was described by St. Basil in the 4th c. in an apologetic on the Holy Spirit).
At any rate, these "dogmas" did not typically enter the written record until there was a challenge that threatened the "coherence" of Christianity. Another example of such "inner teaching" was mentioned at two (iirc) Ecumenical Councils while discussing the nature of Christ: the term and description of the "Angel-Logos" (a term referring to the pre-incarnate Christ in the OT). The term was known and used by two of the three parties (views), and its meaning was accepted by two of them. There is no known previous written record on the Angel-Logos. Yet it was used and understood by two groups who were also in disagreement on other teachings.

that is not what you said. you said they probably would not. I find that less than credible, as it's first usage would be brothers. They MAY not, but to say it was unlikely they would, is a bit dishonest.

The closest parallel I can think of off-hand to adelphos is "affiliated". So, when someone is mentioned as being affiliated to another, the mind scans the range of possible relationships. This is what I mean. Or "relative" might be another parallel.

other than the context of her response.

how so ?

the amount of time that passed between promise and fulfilment in the OT is absolutely irrelevant to what we are discussing.

could you describe why it is not important ?

no. If you can't give a real reason as to why it's true, it shouldn't be accepted as true.

we have people saying "we know Mary is ever virgin!" but can't give an answer why, other than our "sacred traditon (sic) says so.




so? you know that Adelphos may or may not be used to describe brothers. So, you find another instance where it was used for another purpose (which I've already acknowledged) and use it as proof that it MUST mean it in the Lukan passage? That's very poor reasoning!

they are not seperable. If you cannot get your story straight, I wonder why you think it should be believable.

I'll try to use another parallel to describe what I mean. There is a teaching that Christ was nailed to the cross. In this case, the Gospel says He was nailed through the "xeir". The word "xeir" means "hand, arm". So among those who accept the teaching, some will think the nail went through the hand, some the forearm, some the upper arm, etc. Yet all accept the teaching that a nail pirced the "xeir".

The definition of the term "adelphos" does not make the teaching of the PV. There is the teaching of the PV. Some use adelphos as a rebuttal to the teaching. Others are interested to know what the relationships of the adelphos to Christ were. The variety of potential responses does not the change the teaching.

The use of adelphi in the Gospel of John as an example of the use of adelphos, and its broad meaning. Certainly, if only sibling is meant by the term, then this passage leaves another question to be resolved by those who only narrowly define adelphos. I also referenced its broad use in the LXX. These are examples from within the Bible that exhibit usage. Why is it problematic to give examples ?

I know. But as I said before, if you can't give good reasonable description, it doesn't really make much sense to believe it.

I don't know what you require for "a good reasonable description". I've largely been responding to criticisms that others have made (the adelphos passages) and have supported what I've said using research and examples. Those making the criticisms might do the same for their position; supported statements instead of polemic.

that's what happens when you take context and pitch it out the window to support what you already believe, I guess.

Can you show how I've done this ?

more pretending.

the repeated dismissive charges are tiresome; can you describe what, for you, qualifies as pretending and what qualifies as analysis ?

ah well, you believe it if you want. It's practically ignoring what's written, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

You've made a claim; could you support it ?

I have never stated that explicit statement must be there. ANY mention would be nice. ANYthing regarding EV. Not one word is whispered in the bible other than Eisegetical references to a gate.

there are more, but when everything is dismissed as a matter of course (ex., that Joses and Joseph are the same name in different languages) whats the point of doing the work ?

you pretty much ignore the line of evidence, as I've posted numerous times. you just keep repeating "It isn't explicitly stated, so it's not true." If you demand this, then half of what your church teaches is completely untrue. (ok, not neccessarily half, but you know what I mean.)

Look, Uphill Battle, its your tradition to use the scripture as your primary source. If this is the case, you should adhere to your standard. You can claim they were married, but there isn't any real evidence. The terminology as much supports as it doesn't support. You can certainly draw that conclusion from reading the scripture, but other conclusions can be drawn as well. If you're not going to rely on tradition, then its best, imo, to remain "agnostic" ("I don't know") on this one rather than to create a tradition.

As for myself, I don't recall saying that they were or were not married.

 

[Thekla]

Our tradition is written scripture. It's in there.


Which songs did the apostles teach?
Or is just anyone qualified to add to tradition?

The Psalms are still chanted.
The Gospel is typically chanted by the Priest.
The hymns have been written over the centuries; some of the oldest are the baptismal hymn (the lines from Galatians- I'll post it below), the vespers hymn (O Gladsome Light). Dating is hard to establish, as the earliest hymns were chanted before record was made of their use (typically offhand references - I don't know that there was a particular record made of hymnography, and it wasn't really much written about until the 7th??? c.)

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica] A life-giving fount, thou didst conceive the Dew * that is transcendent in essence, 0 Virgin Maid, * and thou hast welled for our sakes the nectar of joy eternal, * which doth pour forth from thy fount * with the water that springeth up * unto everlasting life * in unending and mighty streams; * wherein, taking delight, we all cry out: Rejoice, 0 thou Spring of life for all men.[/FONT]



This hymn intersperses a line from the Hymn "Axion Estin" (Truly it is proper to call you blessed ... a hymn of the Theotokos, reflecting the scripture that "all generations will call me blessed") with passages from Luke.

Christ is the Water of Life. The Israelites were provided water from the rock, in response to the prayer of Elias, rain fell from the clouds. Christ, who came to us "as rain on fleece" in the Incarnation, is the Water that was Incarnate from the Life*-giving Spring", the Theotokos.
*Christ, our Life, our Light

The words follow the "video"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7CiTYHt8UI&feature=related





-Τὴν Θεοτόκον καὶ μητέρα τοῦ Φωτός, ἐν Ὕμνοις τιμῶντες μεγαλύνομεν.
-Μεγαλύνει ἡ ψυχή μου τόν Κύριον καί ἠγαλλίασε τό πνεῦμά μου ἐπί τῷ Θεῷ τῷ σωτῆρι μου.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ὅτι ἐπέβλεψεν ἐπί τήν ταπείνωσιν τῆς δούλης αὐτοῦ. Ἰδού γάρ ἀπό τοῦ νῦν μακαριοῦσί με πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαί.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ὅτι ἐποίησέ μοι μεγαλεῖα ὁ δυνατός καί ἅγιον τό ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, καί τό ἔλεος αὐτοῦ εἰς γενεάν καὶ γενεάν τοῖς φοβουμένοις αὐτόν.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ἐποίησε κράτος ἐν βραχίονι αὐτοῦ, διεσκόρπισεν ὑπερηφάνους διανοίᾳ καρδίας αὐτῶν.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Καθεῖλε δυνάστας ἀπό θρόνων καί ὕψωσε ταπεινούς, πεινῶντας ἐνέπλησεν ἀγαθῶν καί πλουτοῦντας ἐξαπέστειλε κενούς.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ἀντελάβετο Ἰσραήλ παιδός αὐτοῦ μνησθῆναι ἐλέους, καθώς ἐλάλησε πρός τούς πατέρας ἡμῶν, τῷ Ἀβραάμ καί τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ ἕως αἰῶνος.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
---------------------------------------- --
-Let us extol the Theotokos, the Mother of Light, in hymn.
-My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-For He hath regarded the lowliness of Ηis handmaiden. For behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-For He that is mighty hath magnified me and holy is His Name. And His mercy is on them that fear Him throughout all generations.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
- He hath shewed strength with His arm. He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-He hath put down the mighty from their seat and hath exalted the humble and meek. He hath filled the hungry with good things and the rich He hath sent empty away.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-He remembering his mercy hath holpen His servant Israel as He promised to our forefathers, Abraham and His seed for ever.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".


This hymn is chanted at baptisms and also used for particular feasts.
If you're interested, I'll post the vespers hymn also.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TEXYshbYp8

 

[Philothei]

The Psalms are still chanted.
The Gospel is typically chanted by the Priest.
The hymns have been written over the centuries; some of the oldest are the baptismal hymn (the lines from Galatians- I'll post it below), the vespers hymn (O Gladsome Light). Dating is hard to establish, as the earliest hymns were chanted before record was made of their use (typically offhand references - I don't know that there was a particular record made of hymnography, and it wasn't really much written about until the 7th??? c.)

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]A life-giving fount, thou didst conceive the Dew * that is transcendent in essence, 0 Virgin Maid, * and thou hast welled for our sakes the nectar of joy eternal, * which doth pour forth from thy fount * with the water that springeth up * unto everlasting life * in unending and mighty streams; * wherein, taking delight, we all cry out: Rejoice, 0 thou Spring of life for all men.[/FONT]



This hymn intersperses a line from the Hymn "Axion Estin" (Truly it is proper to call you blessed ... a hymn of the Theotokos, reflecting the scripture that "all generations will call me blessed") with passages from Luke.

Christ is the Water of Life. The Israelites were provided water from the rock, in response to the prayer of Elias, rain fell from the clouds. Christ, who came to us "as rain on fleece" in the Incarnation, is the Water that was Incarnate from the Life*-giving Spring", the Theotokos.
*Christ, our Life, our Light

The words follow the "video"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7CiTYHt8UI&feature=related





-Τὴν Θεοτόκον καὶ μητέρα τοῦ Φωτός, ἐν Ὕμνοις τιμῶντες μεγαλύνομεν.
-Μεγαλύνει ἡ ψυχή μου τόν Κύριον καί ἠγαλλίασε τό πνεῦμά μου ἐπί τῷ Θεῷ τῷ σωτῆρι μου.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ὅτι ἐπέβλεψεν ἐπί τήν ταπείνωσιν τῆς δούλης αὐτοῦ. Ἰδού γάρ ἀπό τοῦ νῦν μακαριοῦσί με πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαί.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ὅτι ἐποίησέ μοι μεγαλεῖα ὁ δυνατός καί ἅγιον τό ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, καί τό ἔλεος αὐτοῦ εἰς γενεάν καὶ γενεάν τοῖς φοβουμένοις αὐτόν.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ἐποίησε κράτος ἐν βραχίονι αὐτοῦ, διεσκόρπισεν ὑπερηφάνους διανοίᾳ καρδίας αὐτῶν.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Καθεῖλε δυνάστας ἀπό θρόνων καί ὕψωσε ταπεινούς, πεινῶντας ἐνέπλησεν ἀγαθῶν καί πλουτοῦντας ἐξαπέστειλε κενούς.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ἀντελάβετο Ἰσραήλ παιδός αὐτοῦ μνησθῆναι ἐλέους, καθώς ἐλάλησε πρός τούς πατέρας ἡμῶν, τῷ Ἀβραάμ καί τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ ἕως αἰῶνος.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
---------------------------------------- --
-Let us extol the Theotokos, the Mother of Light, in hymn.
-My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-For He hath regarded the lowliness of Ηis handmaiden. For behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-For He that is mighty hath magnified me and holy is His Name. And His mercy is on them that fear Him throughout all generations.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
- He hath shewed strength with His arm. He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-He hath put down the mighty from their seat and hath exalted the humble and meek. He hath filled the hungry with good things and the rich He hath sent empty away.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-He remembering his mercy hath holpen His servant Israel as He promised to our forefathers, Abraham and His seed for ever.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".


This hymn is chanted at baptisms and also used for particular feasts.
If you're interested, I'll post the vespers hymn also.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TEXYshbYp8

Thanks Thekla I have forgotten about that Megalynaria It was beautiful

 

[Philothei]

Our tradition is written scripture. It's in there.


Which songs did the apostles teach?
Or is just anyone qualified to add to tradition?

The Liturgy of St. James was the oldest service we know. It depends if you think of 1st century apostolic times... The hymn to Theotokos announcing the good news coming from her womb as part of the service.

Also if your tradition is written scripture then how come you sing songs during services? That is an oxymoron....To my knowledge most Protestant Churces have a "hymnal" in their pews that they sing from.....Are those hymns from the Apostolic times? At least we can claim that ....But then again our Chruch was established 33 AD.

 

[Philothei]

I can' understand what point you are trying to make. Your post meanders around alot, and your sentences don't end. I'm having difficulty following along.

simple just do not answer my posts I do not insult you by telling you that you write "horrible" so why you are doing this???NO point just put me on ignore if you wish...

 

[Philothei]

framents of scripture

You shoule only believe in fragments then ......cause the rest are cut and paste and writings of people who put them together much later like 3-4 century. The Bible as you claim is a very thin book....hehehe.....according to your standards...

Rather, I seek reason to have faith in it. And I have found Faith in Christ, because it is truth, both from a spiritual standpoint, but also because of the veracity of the record regarding him.

And how do you know it is truth? You accept the Bible on faith alone and if you do not then your "research" does not cover you....But then again you will repeat the same and the same to hold to your position... No point to this. Accepting the Bible and not accepting the Tradition that it came from is a contradiction and most of you know it but do not want to accept.... And circular we go....

 

[Thekla]

• P1 - Matthew 1:1-9,12,14-20. 3rd century. Found at Oxyrhynchus in 1896, now in the University of Pennsylvania.
• P2 - John 12:12-15 in Greek on the verso, with Luke 7:18 in Sahidic on the recto. 5th or 6th century. In book form, at the Museo Archeologico, Florence.
• P3 - Luke 7:36-43; 10:38-42. 6th century. In book form. In the Rainer Collection, Vienna.
• P4 - Luke 1:74-80; 5:3-8,30-6:4. 4th century. In book form. Found in Egypt joined to a manuscript of Philo; now in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris.
• P5 - John 1:23-31,33-41; 20:11-17,19-25. 3rd century. An outer sheet of a single-quire book. Found at Oxyrhynchus and now in the British Museum.
• P6 - John 11:45. University of Strassburg.
• P7 - Luke 4:1,2. Archaeological Museum at Kieff.
• P8 - Acts 4:31-37; 5:2-9; 6:1-6,8-15. 4th century. In the Berlin Museum.
• P9 - 1 John 4:11-13,15-17. 4th or 5th century. In book form. Found at Oxyrhynchus; now in Harvard University Library.
• P10 - Romans 1:1-7. 4th century. Found at Oxyrhynchus; now in Harvard University Library.
• P11 - 1 Corinthians 1:17-20; 6:13-18; 7:3,4,10-14. 5th century. In the Imperial Library at Petersburg.
• P12 - Hebrews 1:1. 3d or 4th century. In the Amherst Library.
• P13 - Hebrews 2:14-5:5; 10:8-11:13; 11:28-12:17. 3rd or 4th century. Found at Oxyrhynchus; now in the British Museum.
• P14 - 1 Corinthians 1:25-27; 2:3-8; 3:8-10,20. 5th century. In book form; at Catherine's Monastery, Mt. Sinai.
• P15 - 1 Corinthians 7:18-8:4; Philippians 3:9-17; 4:2-8. 4th century. Found at Oxyrhynchus.
• P16 - Romans 12:3-8. 6th or 7th century. Ryland's Library, Manchester.
• P17 - Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8. 3rd century. Ryland's Library, Manchester.
• P18 - Hebrews 9:12-19. 4th century. Found at Oxyrhynchus.
• P19 - Revelation 1:4-7. 3rd or 4th century. Found at Oxyrhynchus.

from here:http://www.bible-researcher.com/isbetext02.html


EDIT: this seems to be a more complete list, but is too large to post here

http://www.kchanson.com/papyri.html

papyri are listed first, then codex form

 

[Philothei]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7CiT...eature=related​

-Τὴν Θεοτόκον καὶ μητέρα τοῦ Φωτός, ἐν Ὕμνοις τιμῶντες μεγαλύνομεν.
-Μεγαλύνει ἡ ψυχή μου τόν Κύριον καί ἠγαλλίασε τό πνεῦμά μου ἐπί τῷ Θεῷ τῷ σωτῆρι μου.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ὅτι ἐπέβλεψεν ἐπί τήν ταπείνωσιν τῆς δούλης αὐτοῦ. Ἰδού γάρ ἀπό τοῦ νῦν μακαριοῦσί με πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαί.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ὅτι ἐποίησέ μοι μεγαλεῖα ὁ δυνατός καί ἅγιον τό ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, καί τό ἔλεος αὐτοῦ εἰς γενεάν καὶ γενεάν τοῖς φοβουμένοις αὐτόν.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ἐποίησε κράτος ἐν βραχίονι αὐτοῦ, διεσκόρπισεν ὑπερηφάνους διανοίᾳ καρδίας αὐτῶν.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Καθεῖλε δυνάστας ἀπό θρόνων καί ὕψωσε ταπεινούς, πεινῶντας ἐνέπλησεν ἀγαθῶν καί πλουτοῦντας ἐξαπέστειλε κενούς.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
-Ἀντελάβετο Ἰσραήλ παιδός αὐτοῦ μνησθῆναι ἐλέους, καθώς ἐλάλησε πρός τούς πατέρας ἡμῶν, τῷ Ἀβραάμ καί τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ ἕως αἰῶνος.
"Τὴν Τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβείμ, καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ, τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεόν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν, τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον, σὲ μεγαλύνομεν".
---------------------------------------- --
-Let us extol the Theotokos, the Mother of Light, in hymn.
-My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-For He hath regarded the lowliness of Ηis handmaiden. For behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-For He that is mighty hath magnified me and holy is His Name. And His mercy is on them that fear Him throughout all generations.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
- He hath shewed strength with His arm. He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.


At many of the Divine Services, the Deacon exclaims: Commemorating our Most-Holy, Most-Pure, Most-Blessed and Glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary with all the Saints.... And here we can see three basic truths expressed concerning her.

"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-He hath put down the mighty from their seat and hath exalted the humble and meek. He hath filled the hungry with good things and the rich He hath sent empty away.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".
-He remembering his mercy hath holpen His servant Israel as He promised to our forefathers, Abraham and His seed for ever.
"More honourable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption thou gavest birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify thee".

And that is how we talk about her Ever Virginity:

At many of the Divine Services, the Deacon exclaims: Commemorating our Most-Holy, Most-Pure, Most-Blessed and Glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary with all the Saints.... And here we can see three basic truths expressed concerning her.

and CJ.....thank you for proving my point......with your post...that being vulgar has nothing to do with calling her Ever Virgin. It is a matter of skopos and disposition...

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

And that is how we talk about her Ever Virginity:
and CJ.....thank you for proving my point......with your post...

Thanks.

And yes, the post is about the RCC, not EO.





.

 

[Philothei]

Thanks.

And yes, the post is about the RCC, not EO.





.

thanks for the clarification...

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I find it to be extremely offensive and crass.

That's the issue WarriorAngel invited us to discuss: Is the DOGMA that Mary had no sex ever potentially offensive or crass, or is it above all respectful and distinctively loving?

I would never call it offensive and crass, but I DID raise the POSSIBILITY that it could be regarded as such. Normally, the issue of how often a wife has sex is regarded as private and confidential, generally not regarded as a matter of highest importance that all people of all ages must know and if they deny such they are a heretic and thereby their salvation is in question. Thus, for those who love, adore, revere and hold Our Lady in highest esteem, for those of us who regard Her as our Mother, WarriorAngel's issue here IS very relevant and important: Is SHOUTING this (as dogma) distinctively LOVING or might it be regarded as "crass and extremely offensive?" Those who care about Her heart think it's an important question.





.

 

[Thekla]

When one considers the things of God, and those who serve him, where the mind goes and what is said exposes the disposition of the heart.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

When one considers the things of God, and those who serve him, where the mind goes and what is said exposes the disposition of the heart.

disposition....heart.......REPENT!

Jeremiah 17:10 I YHWH, searching heart, examining the affections/kidneys/ 03629 kilyah and giving to man Ways of him, as Fruit of his doings. [Reve 2:23]

Reve 2:23 And the offspring of her I shall be killing in death, and shall be knowing all the Out-Calleds that I am the One searching kidneys/nefrouV <3510> and hearts and I shall be giving to Ye each according to the works of Ye. [Jeremiah 17:10]

Go St. TYNDALE!

 

[Thekla]

disposition....heart.......REPENT!

Jeremiah 17:10 I YHWH, searching heart, examining the affections/kidneys/ 03629 kilyah and giving to man Ways of him, as Fruit of his doings. [Reve 2:23]

Reve 2:23 And the offspring of her I shall be killing in death, and shall be knowing all the Out-Calleds that I am the One searching kidneys/nefrouV <3510> and hearts and I shall be giving to Ye each according to the works of Ye. [Jeremiah 17:10]

Go St. TYNDALE!

"With fire they have burned down Thy sanctuary,
they have profaned even unto the ground the habitation of Thy name.
They said in their heart, even the whole kindred of them together: Come,
let us abolish all the feasts of God from the earth."
Psalm 73 (LXX)