Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
Trisagion
Dear All
Bit of a chestnut this one!
The Russian, Greek etc Trisagion seems to be directed towards the memebers of the Trinity whereas the Coptic one seems to be directed to Christ Our Lord only.
In a book I read by an Athonite monk he uses this fact as evidence that the Copts had deviated from the Apostolic faith by adding to the Trisagion.
I haven't a clue about this, it seems good to pray to our Saviour or the Holy Trinity.
However, as a Russian Orthodox who sometimes prays from the Agpeya and also as someone who longs to see unity among Orthodox Christians I would like some clarification and maybe a bit of explanation as to the differences.
In case you didn't know what we say in the EO churches is;
Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal have mercy on us (three times)
God bless you
Bit of a chestnut this one!
The Russian, Greek etc Trisagion seems to be directed towards the memebers of the Trinity whereas the Coptic one seems to be directed to Christ Our Lord only.
In a book I read by an Athonite monk he uses this fact as evidence that the Copts had deviated from the Apostolic faith by adding to the Trisagion.
I haven't a clue about this, it seems good to pray to our Saviour or the Holy Trinity.
However, as a Russian Orthodox who sometimes prays from the Agpeya and also as someone who longs to see unity among Orthodox Christians I would like some clarification and maybe a bit of explanation as to the differences.
In case you didn't know what we say in the EO churches is;
Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal have mercy on us (three times)
God bless you
Comments
The Oriental Orthodox continue to use it as a Christological hymn, while the Eastern Orthodox use it as a Trinitarian hymn, and some polemicists as a stick to beat the Oriental Orthodox with. The fact is that it was first of all a Christological hymn, and that secondly there is no problem with a variety of use when the meaning of the hymn is clear in each tradition.
Even during the time of the Christological controversies the hymn was clearly used in a Christological sense outside of Constantinople and even staunch two-nature supporters used it in a Christological manner in Antioch.
Father Peter
I read the following article a while ago and I think it does shed some light on how OO tradition of the Trisagion hymn orginated. http://www.coptichymns.net/module-library-viewpub-tid-1-pid-315-page-4.html
The answer to this question, and the source behind the Trisagion is given in the Hymn "Golgotha".
The story I heard was that - its not that they doubted, but that they were saying to themselves "How can this happen to God!?" and then Christ's eyes apparently opened, to which they said "Holy God! Holy Immortal! Holy Mighty! Have mercy upon us".
Avi enje nizekeos, Yousef nem Nikodemous:
THis is a very interesting subject. I cannot believe someone here raised it as I was about to create the same topic.
I wanted to know more about this story. What exactly happened? As I said, I just "heard" that Christ opened His eyes.. is that correct??
On the Trisagion.
You also discuss with us the trisagion in which you have written that the Greeks say: Sanctus es Deus, Sanctus es Pater omnipotens. Let it be known to you that the Chalcedonians do not refer all the trisagion to the Father, as you write, but to the Trinity, because they say: “Sanctus es Deus Pater, Sanctus es omnipotens Filius, Sanctus es immortalis Spiritus Sancte, miserere nobis.” We Syrians, with the Armenians, the Egyptians, the Abyssinians, the Nubians, and the Indians, refer the trisagion to the Son.
There are some who say that when Joseph brought down the body of our Lord from the Cross, people saw that angels had set up three choirs, the first of which saying: “Sanctus es Deus” and the second: “Sanctus es omnipotens” and the third: “Sanctus es Immortalis;” then Joseph and Nicodemus were moved by the Spirit and said: “Qui crucifixus es pro nobis - i.e. for mankind - miserere nobis”. This was immediately received in the Churches, and Ignatius the fiery, the disciple of John, established it in the Churches. Some others, however, say that it has been established after Nestorius had been rejected from the Church, but they are wrong. The Fathers said that it was that Person,with the human nature which was crucified, who, although God, omnipotent and immortal, wished to become flesh for us, and not another kind of nature.
The Chalcedonians say that the trisagion is derived from the Sanctus found in Isaiah. As the Seraphim glorify the three persons of the Trinity with the thrice repeated Sanctus, so we also should refer the trisagion to the Trinity. Against them we will write as follows:- The One whom Isaiah saw on a high throne and the seraphim round him is the Son. This we know from John the Evangelist who says: “These things said Isaiah about Him when he saw His glory.” Cyril, John Chrysostom, and other Doctors teach us that it was the Son, the Word, that Isaiah saw on the throne and not the Father.
We also believe that it is He who is the door and that it is through Him that we go to the Father. He says: “I am the door; by me if any man enter in, he shall find life.” In the fact that we refer the trisagion to the Son we may go up to the Father and say: “Our Father who art in heaven.” And in referring the glory to the Son we speak in the Holy Spirit: “No man can say: ‘Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit.’”
We say further that the Seraphim said: “Holy, Holy, Holy, heaven and earth are full of His glory,” and they did not say: “Thou art holy O God, Thou art holy O Omnipotent, Thou art holy O Immortal.” If the Doctors have explained the thrice repeated “holy” as referring to the three persons (of the Trinity), and if the Sanctus of the liturgy also: “Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus Dominus Omnipotens, pleni sunt” etc., refers to the three persons, although addressed to one of them only, let them show us from where they learned that the trisagion of “Sanctus es Deus” refers to the Trinity.
The prophet says only: “Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus,” and the words “Deus, Omnipotens, Immortalis” have been added afterwards.
That this trisagion refers to the Son to whom it is appropriate is known by the following: we say “Holy art Thou O God the Son,” because He became flesh although remaining God; and we say: “Holy art Thou O Omnipotent,” because He put on our weak body although remaining omnipotent in His divinity; and we say: “Holy art Thou O Immortal,” because He died in the flesh although remaining immortal like God. What passage is it of the heretic Macedonius or of any other who attributed mortality to the Holy Spirit that the Chalcedonians want to refute when they say: “Holy Thou art O immortal Holy Spirit?” They have really no apology to offer. The words of the trisagion have been attributed by the
Doctors to the Son because He became flesh, put on the weak and mortal human body, and was addressed by them as “God,” “omnipotent,” “immortal,” and “who hast been crucified for us” in the flesh.
If they refuse this and say that the trisagion refers to the Trinity, let them only say: “Holy, holy, holy,” and not: “Holy art Thou O God,” and the remaining “Omnipotent” and “Immortal.” The Nestorians and the Chalcedonians, in order to take from the middle the question of the crucifixion, and to introduce the division of nature and natures, and count in Christ two attributes, powers, and wills, and in order not to admit that we crucify the Son in the flesh, avoided the reference of the trisagion to the Son and attributed it to the Trinity, not paying sufficient attention to what Paul said: “God forbid that I should glory save in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.” John the evangelist also said: “glory to the cross.” The theologian said in his discourse on the passover: “We had need of a God becoming flesh and dying in order that we may live with Him. We died that we may be purified, and we rose with Him.
Many miracles occurred at that time: God was crucified, the sun suffered eclipse and then shone again. It was necessary that the creatures should suffer with the Creator.” Now where does this Doctor put division in Christ? Where does he say that man died or that human nature was crucified? He openly declared that God became flesh, died and was crucified. Let it be also known to you that if, as the Greeks believe, the
trisagion refers to the Trinity, and the sentence Qui crucifixus es pro nobis is taken away from it, it would not only refer to the Trinity, as they say, but also to angels and demons; which is blasphemy. The angel or the demon might indeed say: “I am a God,” because they are Spirits; and Satan said about himself: “I will ascend above the stars of heaven, and I will be like God,” and Paul also said: “Whose minds the god of this world hath blinded.” Satan calls also himself “omnipotent,” because he is constantly watchful in his war against the saints, and he even made
bold and fought the Christ. He is also “immortal” because he does not die.
Consider well, therefore, where the trisagion might lead, if we did not add to it Qui crucifixus es pro nobis; indeed the trisagion of the Greek may reach Satan! When, however, the words Qui crucifixus es pro nobis are added to it, no one can refer “crucifixion” to an angel or a demon, because this would be impossible; nor could then the trisagion be referred to a mere man, because “immortality” which is expressed in it is not referred to a man. The trisagion is, therefore, to be truly referred to the Son, and Word God who became man, and who is both mortal and immortal: mortal in the flesh, and immortal in His Godhead, and He was crucified on our behalf.
You mentioned that the Armenians at the Nativity say one thing and at the Epiphany say another thing, and on some other occasion some other thing. This, however, does not matter, since they refer the trisagion to Christ. As we say in the Passion week: “O Christ, who by His passion delivered us from error,” and as at the beginning of the Gospel we say: “At the time of the Nativity of our Lord,” or “at the time of His Baptism, at the time of His Economy, at the time of His resurrection” as the case may be, so also the Armenians do with the trisagion, and use it according to
circumstances.
Father Peter
I agree with Boricua. Christological or Trinitarian the important thing is that the hymn is theological and spiritual. When one address Christ in the Trisagion he addresses the Trinity also. In praising and glorifying the Divinity of Christ one praises the Son. Christ himself said that him and his Father are one, sharing the same Divine Essence. He is the Image of the Invisible God. Praise to the Son is Praise to the Father. With regards to the Holy Spirit, the Apostle says also, "No one can say Christ is Lord except through the Holy Spirit". So in essence, praising and glorying the Son involves the two other persons of the Trinity. Metropolitan Kallistos Ware mentioned a similar theme when he mentioned that the "Jesus" Prayer is actually a "Trinitarian prayer" for the same reasons I mentioned above. "Jesus Christ (Said through the Holy Spirit), Son of God (God the Father) Have mercy on me!" Directed to Trinity or Directed to Christ is one in the same. It saddens me that some of our EO brethren might use this difference as a means to attack and/or demean Oriental Orthodoxy.
Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal Have Mercy on Us
Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal Who arose from the Dead, Have Mercy on Us
Indeed, He is Risen!
the above posts are amazing.
i want to ask a simple question,
in the coptic church we say
agios, o theos, agios, es shiros, agios athanatos.. ...eleison emas
and i think this bit is greek (correct me if i'm wrong..)
but i want to know if the other bits ('o ek partheno gen netis', and 'o es stavrotis di imas' and 'o anestas ek ton nekron kel anelthon es tos oranos') are coptic or greek.
don't worry i'm not going to say the agios differently (unless i'm in a greek orthodox church ;) ...) but i want to know which bits are greek and which coptic.
i like the way i get some greek teaching 'extra free' when i am trying to learn a bit of coptic.
O come let us worship God our King
O come let us worship and fall down before Christ our King and our God.
O come let us worship and fall down before Christ Himself, our King and our King[i]
Compare with the COPT Agpeya version
[i]O Come, let us worship;
O Come,let us ask Christ our God.
O Come,let us worship;
O Come,let us ask Christ our King.
O Come,let us worship;
O Come.let us ask Christ our Saviour.
Is the Coptic one more Christ centred?
ths is an excellent topic, and i nearly understand it ;)
the above posts are amazing.
i want to ask a simple question,
in the coptic church we say
agios, o theos, agios, es shiros, agios athanatos.. ...eleison emas
and i think this bit is greek (correct me if i'm wrong..)
but i want to know if the other bits ('o ek partheno gen netis', and 'o es stavrotis di imas' and 'o anestas ek ton nekron kel anelthon es tos oranos') are coptic or greek.
don't worry i'm not going to say the agios differently (unless i'm in a greek orthodox church ;) ...) but i want to know which bits are greek and which coptic.
i like the way i get some greek teaching 'extra free' when i am trying to learn a bit of coptic.
The whole hymn is greek. The parts that are added are not in coptic.
church ;) ...) but i want to know which bits are greek and which coptic.
i like the way i get some greek teaching 'extra free' when i am trying to learn a bit of coptic.
From what I know; following the schism, new liturgies were composed in the Coptic language. However, when it comes to the trisagion and to the short greetings like Irini passi etc,they were left in their original Greek form since the faithful in those days as a result of Greek language and culture influence had known and sang the hymn in the Greek language .So that part of the liturgy continued to be written in Greek with Coptic characters,while the Ethiopians translated every bit of the liturgy into Ge'ez.
PS: I saw Deacon's reply after I posted.Sorry for the redundency