Justifying The Holy Anger of St. Nicholas
In the
year 325, Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea, the very first
ecumenical council. More than 300 bishops came from all over the Christian
world to debate the nature of the Holy Trinity.
Arius,
from Egypt, was teaching that Jesus the Son was not equal to God the Father.
Arius forcefully argued his position at length.
As Arius
vigorously continued, Nicholas became more and more agitated. Finally, he could
no longer bear what he believed was essential being attacked. The outraged
Nicholas got up, crossed the room, and slapped Arius across the face!
The
bishops were shocked. It was unbelievable that a bishop would lose control and
be so hotheaded in such a solemn assembly. They brought Nicholas to
Constantine. Constantine said even though it was illegal for anyone to strike
another in his presence, in this case, the bishops themselves must determine
the punishment.
The
bishops stripped Nicholas of his bishop’s garments, chained him, and threw him
into jail. That would keep Nicholas away from the meeting. When the Council
ended a final decision would be made about his future.
During
the night, Jesus and Mary his Mother, appeared, asking, “Why are you in jail?”
“Because of my love for you,” Nicholas replied. Jesus then gave the Book of the
Gospels to Nicholas. Mary gave him an omophorion, so Nicholas would again be
dressed as a bishop. Now at peace, Nicholas studied the Scriptures for the rest
of the night.
When the
jailer came in the morning, he found the chains loose on the floor and Nicholas
dressed in bishop’s robes, quietly reading the Scriptures. When Constantine was
told of this, the emperor asked that Nicholas be freed. Nicholas was then fully
reinstated as the Bishop of Myra.
The
Council of Nicaea agreed with Nicholas’ views, deciding the question against
Arius.
The work
of the Council produced the Nicene Creed.
Source:
http://www.stnicholascenter.org/pages/bishop-nicholas-loses-his-cool/
Analyzing the Inscriptions of Psalms
The
People of God have long been accustomed to the titles, ascriptions, and even
historical settings that preface various of the Psalms. Sometimes, in fact,
these "Psalm Inscriptions" are the object of properly theological
interest, not only in commentaries on the Psalter, but also in separate works.
The most famous among the latter, arguably, are two treatises of St. Gregory of
Nyssa, who found in the Psalm titles a coherent, systematic treatment of
ascetical theology.
Because
these inscriptions are not normally considered integral to the inspired text,
their study pertains to exegetical — not canonical — history.
The
dating of them has not been convincingly fixed, but generally they are
described as "late," meaning anytime between the Exile and the
Septuagint — the early fifth through the late fourth centuries. It is difficult
to demonstrate, on the other hand, that all this material necessarily came from
the same period and provenance. Indeed, I am persuaded that it did not.
David's
name appears more often than any other in the Psalm inscriptions — 73 times. Of
these, fourteen instances ascribe individual psalms to specific episodes in
David's life.
The most
notable of these, surely is Psalm 51 (50), the Miserere, which is ascribed to
the occasion when David received a word or two from the prophet Nathan — some
business about adultery and murder, if memory serves.
Of the
fourteen inscriptions that assign individual psalms to specific occasions in
David's life, nine are related to the period of his exile as a fugitive from
the insane wrath of Saul.
These
assignments, which are rather imaginative, can be strung together, related
step-by-step to episodes during David's time of desert exile. They are worth
listing in the historical sequence in which they appear in 1 Samuel 19-31.
In this
arrangement, the first assignment is Psalm 59 (58), which its inscription
relates the very beginning of David's exile: Saul's officers watching through
the night, planning to arrest him in the morning (1 Samuel 19:11-12).
The
second is Psalm 56 (55), assigned to David's seizure and temporary detainment
by the Philistines (21:10-15).
This
incident is also the assigned setting of the third example, Psalm 34 (33), but
here there is a historical problem: Whereas David plays an idiot before Achish
in the scene in First Samuel, this psalm title speaks of "Ahimelech,"
an obvious confusion. The mistake prompts me to think a different — less
careful — scribe was responsible for this inscription.
The
fourth example, Psalm 142 (141), places David "in the cave." This
appears to be the cave of Adullam in 1 Samuel 22:1.
The fifth
example relates Psalm 52 (51) to the treachery of Doeg the Edomite (22:9-19),
who is thus identified as the boastful man with the vicious tongue. This
assignment is probably the most persuasive.
The sixth
example is Psalm 54 (53), the inscription of which relates it to David's
betrayal to Saul by the Ziphites (23:14-23).
The
seventh example, Psalm 57 (56), is tied to David's "close call" with
Saul in the cave near Engedi (24:3-8).
The
eighth example, which places David "in the wilderness of Judah," is
Psalm 63 (62). The assignment is apparently a general reference to this whole
period of David's life.
The final
example, Psalm 18 (17), celebrates the end of David's exile, when Saul is slain
in the Battle of Mount Gilboah. The text of this psalm is virtually identical
to 2 Samuel 22.
One is
impressed that nine of these fourteen biographical references are assigned to a
relatively short period in David's life: the time of his desert exile. One is
also struck that six of them are found in the "second book" of the
Psalter, clustered between Psalms 52 and 63 (51 and 62). Five of those are
assigned to discrete incidents within 1 Samuel 19-24. At least five of them,
and perhaps six, appear to come from the same hand, which means that they
appeared at the same time in a particular manuscript of the second book of the
Psalter.
The
impulse prompting that early copyist to make these biographical references is a
matter of speculation, but surely the proper path in this speculation is to
consider what those references did, in fact, achieve. There are two things, I
believe.
First, by
assigning these particular psalms — I have in mind those clustered in the
second book of the Psalter — to the period of David’s persecution and distress,
our scribe effectively identified the suffering just man, a very prominent a
figure in the Psalter, with the Anointed One. In other words, the Lord’s
Suffering Servant was made identical to the Lord’s Messiah.
Except
for the incident of Absalom's rebellion (the assignment of Psalm 3), the period
of David's desert exile offered that ancient copyist the most persuasive
opportunities to make that identification.
Second,
our scribe’s interest in the period of David’s wandering in the desert evokes a
comparison with Israel’s corresponding experience during the years following
the Exodus. In the Psalter, this latter period receives extensive consideration
(cf. Psalms 78 ([77], 95 [94], 105 [104], 106 [105], etc.).
Such a
comparison, however, serves mainly to highlight a contrast: Whereas Israel,
during its forty years in the desert, was repeatedly unfaithful to the Lord,
David was entirely faithful during his desert sojourn. Tempted, in several
instances, to assert his own will and take the future into his own hands, the
Suffering Servant consistently surrendered his destiny and placed his soul in
the hands of God.
This
contrast will later appear in those Gospel scenes where Jesus, the true Messiah
and Suffering Servant, is tempted, as Israel in the desert was tempted of old.
Like David, He remains faithful. We also know Jesus’ fondness for that period
of David’s life (cf. Luke 6:1-5).
By Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon
Source: http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/reardon-psalm-inscriptions
A Brief Overview of Liturgical Colors in the Orthodox Church
I love the
change of liturgical colors because it helps mark the seasons with a different
focus so quickly and beautifully. But one in Orthodox churches we run into such
variety about what color is used for what season or feast it seems confusing.
Well, it is confusing, sort of anyway.
Before
the fourteenth century no Christian church had assigned colors for seasons,
fasts or feasts the way we understand them now. There was only a very broad
guideline. In the Orthodox Church the colors are specified in what is called
the Typikon, but in the Typikon there are only three colors called for:
general, dark and bright. That’s as specific as it gets. General is taken to
mean gold. Dark is often thought of a purple (but can be red, burgundy, or even
black). Bright is white but historically could also simply mean one’s nicest or
most beautiful set.
So where
did all of these colors come from? In the early 1500s the Roman Church came
upon a set pattern of colors and seasons. They used five colors: white, red,
green, violet, and black — although Spain was allowed to use blue as well. The
Orthodox Church saw the use of colors used in the West and adopted (and
altered) that pattern. This is usually thought to have come through Russian and
perhaps from Czar Peter the Great’s experience with the West. But the adoption
in the Orthodox Church was not uniform and the old Typikon still stands. Even
different areas of Russia have slightly different customs for liturgical
colors.
To make
the even more confusing, as Antiochians, we have adopted the Russian pattern
and altered it, and again we are not uniform in our use of colors either. One
custom is to always use gold on Sundays, even in fasts, because Sunday is the
day of Resurrection. Neat idea, but honestly 90% of our parishioners would
never see a different color being worn, so that is not a very common custom.
Bishop BASIL of Wichita gave a pattern for the clergy of the Diocese of Wichita
and Mid-America which represents a common pattern for us and many clergy simply
use his table. I myself use a modified form of it.
And yet
there are new things happening still. I say new things but they aren’t really.
Many people “know” that we wear violet/purple for Lent. That has been pretty
standard now for over a hundred years in the US. But now we are beginning to
see the use of burgundy too. The issue there is that violet/purple was not a
set color until the 19th century with artificial dyes and could vary widely.
Burgundy is a very ancient color that is “dark” and was used for Lent, so it’s
not really a new thing.
A common
pattern that I am familiar with is:
- Gold is for general seasons; a bright or
metallic gold can be for feasts.
- Red is for the Cross and Martyrs.
- Red/burgundy is used for the Nativity Fast
(Advent).
- White is for Christmas/Theophany/Pascha
(Easter) and for Saints who were not martyrs.
- Violet/burgundy is for Lent. Sometimes black
is used for weekdays of Lent leaving the Sundays for violet/burgundy.
- Black can be used for Holy Week and funerals
outside of the Paschal season.
- Blue is used for the Theotokos and
ever-Virgin Mary.
- Green is used for Pentecost.
There are
many variations to that pattern and none of them is absolutely correct because
in reality the Typikon is still the “official” guide and there it speaks of
only three colors. As confusing as all of this is, the change of colors really
does mean something. The emphasis of the Church’s liturgical life is moving and
it’s wonderful that the Church allows our eyes to see it quickly.
It is not
only the priest and deacon’s vestments that change color, but also the altar
coverings and the altar servers’ vestments. This makes a very dramatic impact.
It is also expense to change all of the servers’ vestments. Some parishes have
all of the colors for the servers’, others only have gold, white, red, purple
and blue, others have fewer. But it ought to be a real goal of parishes to
provide as many of these colors for the servers’ as they can afford. It really
does make an impact.
So thank
God that we make use of colors to teach and draw attention to our liturgical
year. We are truly blessed.
By Fr. John Guy Winfrey
Source: https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/byzantinefrontier/liturgical-colors/
Catalog of Good Thoughts for December 6th, 2017
About the Small 1,400-year-old Icons Uncovered in Jerusalem
Israel
Archaeologists have announced the discovery of a 1,400-year-old Christian
devotional aid (dubbed a “Prayer Box”) made of bone, with two paintings
believed to portray the Virgin Mary and Jesus. The size of the box (a tiny 0.8
x 0.6in, or 2 x 1.5cm), led experts to think the object was designed to be worn
round the neck, possibly by a pilgrim.
Small
icons of Christ and the Theotokos, hinged as a diptych (here is an example) are
well-known to Orthodox Christians today, being useful portable, personal
devotional aids. What is fascinating about this discovery is that it shows such
items were around even in the first millennium. There are plenty of examples of
icons being found and used in churches and monasteries from their earliest
histories, but this is the first discovery of an early icon not made for
adorning a church, but for personal use. Whether the owner used it for personal
devotion, protection, or both, is a mystery, as throughout the Church’s history
Icons have served Christians in many ways.
As
reported by the Associated Press:
JERUSALEM
(AP) — A tiny, exquisitely made box found on an excavated street in Jerusalem
is a token of Christian faith from 1,400 years ago, Israeli archaeologists said
Sunday.
The box,
carved from the bone of a cow, horse or camel, decorated with a cross on the
lid and measuring only 0.8 inches by 0.6 inches (2 centimeter by 1.5
centimeter), was likely carried by a Christian believer around the end of the
6th century A.D, according to Yana Tchekhanovets of the Israel Antiquities
Authority, one of the directors of the dig where the box was found.
When the
lid is removed, the remains of two portraits are still visible in paint and
gold leaf. The figures, a man and a woman, are probably Christian saints and
possibly Jesus and the Virgin Mary.
The box
was found in an excavation outside the walls of Jerusalem’s Old City in the
remains of a Byzantine-era thoroughfare, she said. Uncovered two years ago, it
was treated by preservation experts and extensively researched before it was
unveiled at an archaeological conference last week.
The box
is important in part because it offers the first archaeological evidence that
the use of icons in the Byzantine period was not limited to church ceremonies,
she said.
Part of a
similar box was found three decades ago in Jordan, but this is the only
well-preserved example to be found so far, she said. Similar icons are still
carried today by some Christian believers, especially from the eastern Orthodox
churches.
The relic
was found in the City of David excavation, a Jerusalem dig named for the
biblical monarch believed to have ruled a Jewish kingdom from the site.
The
politically sensitive dig is located in what is today the Palestinian
neighborhood of Silwan, just outside the Old City walls in east Jerusalem, the
section of the holy city captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war and claimed
by the Palestinians as their capital.
Source: https://iconreader.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/tiny-6th-century-icons-found-in-jerusalem/
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)
About Our Blog
Welcome to the official blog of the Catalogue of St.Elisabeth Convent! The blog includes recent ministry updates of the convent, sermons, icons, personal stories and everything related to Orthodox Christianity. Join our Catalog of Good Deeds and become part of the ministry of St.Elisabeth Convent! #CatalogOfGoodDeeds
Most Popular Posts
Partners
