› ›

23rd Kiahk reading

ophadeceophadece
edited January 2015 in General Announcements
Dear all,
First of all nofri romba emwari. Secondly last night in our church I found out that abouna printed off a new set of readings for the 23rd of Kiahk. Like some other people I got confused and another deacon explained to me that the synod made a recent decision to change the readings so that the Gospel does not address the people with Jesus's words of woes..
I have no idea what is happening to the Coptic church except that we are going crazy because it's the end of days.. how can I find any words to describe that? Why change the readings on a prophet's departure day? For the sake of the new year? It's not even the Coptic new year! More importantly why prioritize and demote rituals already there for hundreds of years or thousands? Because God is harsh on the people? No seriously? Because His word in this particular reading is too tough for the occasion? No way.. they must be joking.. really not only that that is a joke it is a stark act of demeaning the church and her rituals.. in fact I hope you understand my point because I cannot even put words together to describe this nonsense..
I may probably ask the synod to reconsider the nativity Gospel as it refers to the Herod's killing of the children of Bethlehem.. oh gorid and gruesome for a major Lordly feast.. or Gabriel's announcement to Zechariah.. the angel could not threaten somebody to be silent.. he's an angel, you know what that means? In the angelic month of Mary during Kiahk! No no just cut that part out.. and reconsider all the epistles talking about the consequences of not being on the right faith.. and surely that political part of Peter and Paul fighting.. how does it contribute to the edification of the congregation by any means?
oujai khan ebshois

Comments

  • qawe
    edited January 2015
    @ophadece
    "Why change the readings on a prophet's departure day?"

    Actually, the new readings are much more suitable to the departure of King David.

    "Because His word in this particular reading is too tough for the occasion?"

    Don't you think it is too tough for the occasion? Personally I think it is, but obviously you disagree, do you mind explaining why?

    And more importantly, don't you think that rituals can be changed? The apostles did not use these same readings on 23rd Kiahk.
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    Ya Ophadece.....why do you always have an issue against change despite any legit reasons for it?! ya ragel 7aram 3alik

    First, before anything, I must say that the Coptic Orthodox Church Synod has the right to change any rite, dogma, and ritual they may see fit as it is the authority giving to them from God through the Apostles, Saint Mark the first Pope and the popes and bishops after him. The Pope, our coptic Pope, is not infallible...but we consider the Synod as a whole, infallible.

    Second, New Years always comes on Kiahk 23, which is David's commemoration. It has gotten the attention of people because many hear those readings--it is not surprising that during tht day there may be more people in churches than usual. It was found that the readings has nothing to do with David the prophet. Actually, the reading it self is borrowed from another coptic day and is not unique. So the Synod took the decision to set new readings for that day. Fathers put together readings (and I have to say that those are appropriate ones), the Synod approved and now we have a new unique reading for Kiahk 23. If it helps people sleep better at night, I reiterate that the readings itself we not changed but new readings were put together for scratch.

  • ophadeceophadece
    I find the argument the holy synod is absurd doesn't make sense.. if many people come to the liturgy on these special days it's a bigger reason to keep the readings the same for a whole host of reasons.. and who divides the word of God into more palatable to less palatable and tasty.. hehe.. oh yeah I know the answer it's the synod..
    so if the Chinese people attend the liturgy on the Chinese New year day, shouldn't we ask for a change into reading the part of st. Thomas? Or let's say Christmas day which should coincide with the 16th of Kiahk, shouldn't that also change?
    I wonder if in a few years time we hear churches singing joyful tunes on the 23rd of Kiahk or even esmow abeklom, that's if it's not happening already.. oh my bad that issue was discussed on this very forum before.. ok..
    oujai khan ebshois
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    I am really sick right now, and a little dizzy from meds, but i'll try to comment.

    You have misunderstood the reason behind the change. The Synod DID NOT change the readings for the sake of the occasion but because the reading that was set had NOTHING TO DO WITH DAVID THE PROPHET. The days readings in the coptic calendar are concentrated on the saints commemoration of that specific day. The original reading was Toba 8th which is the commemoration of Moses the Prophet. Almost every reading of that day has Moses mentioned and not once David is mentioned (actually, only in the psalms introduction). Is that fitting for the great Prophet David who is the father of our Lord in the flesh?! I think not.

    And I don't even think you cared to read the new text. ALMOST every reading mentions David the Prophet in a way or another. The readings has NOTHING to do with the New Year celebration. Not once, "Bless the crown of the year" is found in the readings. 3ayez eh taniiiiii.

    Again, all I am seeing are attacks against change with no consideration of whatsoever to reasons behind change. Within the new reading, the Vespers Gospel is from John 7:40-53:
    "...Then the officers came to the chief priests and Pharisees, who said to them, “Why have you not brought Him?” The officers answered, “No man ever spoke like this Man!” Then the Pharisees answered them, “Are you also deceived? Have any of the rulers or the Pharisees believed in Him? But this crowd that does not know the law is accursed.” Nicodemus (he who came to Jesus by night, being one of them) said to them, “Does our law judge a man before it hears him and knows what he is doing?” They answered and said to him, “Are you also from Galilee? Search and look, for no prophet has arisen out of Galilee.” And everyone went to his own house.

    Are we going to be Pharisees who just judge a change before those who have propose it present their view?! EVEN THOUGH, they do not need permission to make the change but it is given to them, from God Himself?!!!!!
  • qawe
    edited January 2015
    @minatasgeel
    "we consider the Synod as a whole, infallible."

    Wrong. The Church is infallible, not the Synod.

    EDIT: I find this part of your post particularly troubling - "First, before anything, I must say that the Coptic Orthodox Church Synod has the right to change any... DOGMA... they may see fit as it is the authority giving to them from God through the Apostles, Saint Mark the first Pope and the popes and bishops after him"

    I would like to ask, if the Synod changes a dogma, which dogma would be true? Is it the original dogma or the new, altered dogma? They obviously can't be both true, as they contradict one another (ie are mutually exclusive).
  • ArchdeaconArchdeacon
    I think that while the Synod has the aforementioned authority to change the reading, the most frustrating this here is that nobody knew about it.  There was literally no press release, no announcement sent to the churches, not even a typical Coptic rumor spreading around.  There was massive confusion all over the world.  This is the kind of thing that really stands out to me.  Here you have the highest authority in the Church making a high impact decision and not thinking it's worth it to tell people.  What does that say?  To me, it says that the Synod didn't think the people paid enough attention to the readings in the first place to care whether or not they changed.  Oh, the irony!

    That being said, I do share ophadece's grievances.  There is definitely a trend among the people in the lands of immigration to try to assimilate to the Western calendar.  When Pope Tawadros visited Canada last year, several people asked about moving the date of the Nativity Feast to Dec. 25.  I think this is something that will be a big topic in the near future.  We have had about a decade now of some dioceses and churches adopting a policy of total assimilation: all English liturgies, all readings in English, singing western (sometimes Protestant) songs instead of Coptic hymns, completely ignoring Coptic language, history, and traditions, etc.  Eventually the people raised in these environments are going to want to go all the way and cut off all ties to anything Coptic.

    Instead of letting this thread consist of a bunch of us wallowing away in loathing and curmudgeonry, I would like to pose the question to all of you: What you do if you were the Pope in this situation?
  • ophadeceophadece
    @minatasgeel,
    Thank you for your detailed reply and educating me too, I'm not being sarcastic.. but why does it have to be 2013, or 14 for the change to take effect.. what are the readings on any other prophet's departure commemoration? What are those on any apostle's departure commemoration? Am I really complaining of change just because it's a change? I value what's called heritage and what the fathers left..
    @Archdeacon,
    Thank you with a passion.. I didn't want to open up into this kind of discussion but that's exactly what I cannot agree more with.. an answer to your question: stick to what we have now and not cause any unintentional divisions within the church. Indeed, I heard that some people in Canada broke the fast on the 25th of December already just based on what the pope argued so simply!
    oujai khan ebshois
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    @Archdeacon...I was told about this reading around December second and the arabic reading was shared through many around that time. The church father found out around that time and told me and when I compiled the text in one file, english and arabic, it was shared through our church page on facebook. I am going to assume that Abouna found out from the diocese priest meeting. The arabic was shared through Anba Rafael page and the youth bishopric also and probably a couple of more online forums and sites. Churches in Egypt were find dealing with this change. Each Bishop is responsible for sharing this, and then each priest and deacon. Not all deacons NEED to know of the change at the day of but if they are connected to the rest of the world, they'll kno...i might be too hard on everyone else with that last sentence so pardon me for it.
    About your second half of your comment about changes happening in the land of immigration...there is just too much to comment on....but all I can say for now is do the research and discern between the churches--see which church do what's right and those who are doing/did what's wrong. To be general in just condemning all the church in the land of immigration is simply unchristian and not proper. 

    @ophadece...why this took affect this year?! it's because this matter only came up to the Synod's meeting back in June 2014 (not that it was on other bishops' minds for sometime). I said it before, David the Prophet has a higher respect than other prophets...I don't know about the apostles commemorations. How about you do that research? find our what the readings for all the apostles and disciples and compare those with the ones for St.Mark's feasts (I am waiting for your findings)
    YES, you are simply complaining about change without considering its reasons. Value heritage but don't get drowned in the age that this heritage was created in. The Jewish laws were part of Christ's heritage to but He came, fulfilled all of them and then purified them for us to have the Christian faith.  
  • davidschanterdavidschanter
    On the topic of heritage, why are we not allowed to modify it in a logical manner that has biblical and spiritual backing? Is there a limit to the time period our heritage is to come from? If so, when is the cutoff? The 1200s? the 1800s? God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. If we put God in front of us when it comes to modifying our heritage, then our heritage is the same as it always has been.  
  • ophadeceophadece
    edited January 2015
    @minatasgeel,
    ok first things first, it's going to be a piece of cake to do that research.. I'm glad you assigned it to me but these days I'm only logging on and off interruptedly, so give me another week or so. But quickly scrolling through the Coptic app of Copticdroid I tell you this: 20th of Kiahk, Haggai the prophet, 5th of Kiahk Nahum the prophet, and 25th of Tut I believe Jonah the prophet, JONAH THE PROPHET. What are the readings? You guessed it! I certainly haven't heard of a higher ranked prophet and a lower ranked one.. only Moses is described as an archprophet in the commemoration of saints and a few other hymns.. and talk about a more appropriate reading for a prophet and refer to Jonah the prophet's departure! Seriously people of this age in their wisdom are messing up the church rituals and the consistency in teaching because they have other opinions.. and yes, as you said before AS AND WHEN THEY PLEASE..
    as for me, I'm not someone who objects for the sake of objection but you may want to think who I remind you of! Who is the figure you project on me.
    Oujai khan ebshois
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    Ophadece, i want the research done about the Apostles....not prophets. 
  • qawe
    edited January 2015
    Archdeacon said:

    Eventually the people raised in these environments are going to want to go all the way and cut off all ties to anything Coptic.

    What's wrong with that?
    Archdeacon said:

    singing... (sometimes Protestant) songs instead of... hymns

    I agree with you on this.
    ophadece said:

    Indeed, I heard that some people in Canada broke the fast on the 25th of December

    If it's true, then I'm equally disgusted (especially if they didn't start fasting earlier to compensate). These people should not have been communed during the Nativity Liturgy (if they even bothered attending).
  • qawe
    I'm reposting this @minatasgeel, as I believe you have fallen gravely into error.

    "EDIT: I find this part of your post particularly troubling - "First, before anything, I must say that the Coptic Orthodox Church Synod has the right to change any... DOGMA... they may see fit as it is the authority giving to them from God through the Apostles, Saint Mark the first Pope and the popes and bishops after him""

    I would like to ask, if the Synod changes a dogma, which dogma would be true? Is it the original dogma or the new, altered dogma? They obviously can't be both true, as they contradict one another (ie are mutually exclusive).
  • ophadeceophadece
    @qawe,
    I'm sorry I don't understand why you used the present perfect and past tenses talking about the nativity liturgy. It's happening in the future.. or because some people may read this after a while?
    oujai khan ebshois
  • qawe
    ophadece said:

    @qawe,
    I'm sorry I don't understand why you used the present perfect and past tenses talking about the nativity liturgy. It's happening in the future.. or because some people may read this after a while?
    oujai khan ebshois

    You're right it's happening in the future, on the 6th/7th January. I wasn't talking about the normal Kiahk liturgy on the 25th.
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    qawe said:

    I'm reposting this @minatasgeel, as I believe you have fallen gravely into error.

    "EDIT: I find this part of your post particularly troubling - "First, before anything, I must say that the Coptic Orthodox Church Synod has the right to change any... DOGMA... they may see fit as it is the authority giving to them from God through the Apostles, Saint Mark the first Pope and the popes and bishops after him""

    I would like to ask, if the Synod changes a dogma, which dogma would be true? Is it the original dogma or the new, altered dogma? They obviously can't be both true, as they contradict one another (ie are mutually exclusive).


    The point I am trying to make is not which change the Synod makes is right or wrong but the fact that it, as one entity, has the authority to do so as given to it by God. Did Christ give us any dogma before he ascended?! No. He left it for His apostles to do so, to set the true faith in Him.
  • ophadeceophadece
    @minatasgeel,
    what are you saying? I don't expect that from you dear @minatasgeel.. I believe you know what the definition of dogma is. Also remember that Christ has done innumerable things, if all were written St John believed that the books of the whole world and in it won't suffice..
    oujai khan ebshois
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    @ophadece...it's funny how that verse is thrown around these days...and in our case here, it doesn't really matter. What did the Lord do that was not written in the Bible and has a direct effect on our Synod setting an appropriate day reading for a prophet's commemoration?
    Christ spent 40 days with the Apostles before His Ascension. We believe that what He discussed with them then is in the Didache and Didascalia....do those have all of our church readings in them?! You tell me because I do have to admit, it been a while since i looked at those writings.
    I think I understand what dogma is....but are our Church readings considered dogmatic in any way, for them not to be changed?! I'll go a step further, is keep our coptic heritage dogmatic in any way?
  • qawe
    minatasgeel said:

    qawe said:

    I'm reposting this @minatasgeel, as I believe you have fallen gravely into error.

    "EDIT: I find this part of your post particularly troubling - "First, before anything, I must say that the Coptic Orthodox Church Synod has the right to change any... DOGMA... they may see fit as it is the authority giving to them from God through the Apostles, Saint Mark the first Pope and the popes and bishops after him""

    I would like to ask, if the Synod changes a dogma, which dogma would be true? Is it the original dogma or the new, altered dogma? They obviously can't be both true, as they contradict one another (ie are mutually exclusive).


    The point I am trying to make is not which change the Synod makes is right or wrong but the fact that it, as one entity, has the authority to do so as given to it by God. Did Christ give us any dogma before he ascended?! No. He left it for His apostles to do so, to set the true faith in Him.
    @minatasgeel
    I must strongly disagree. Christ gave us ALL our doctrines before he ascended. The apostles and fathers just expressed it with more precise definitions to guard against heresy.

    Dogma cannot be changed, since the Truth cannot be changed. Moreover, doctrines cannot be added since Christ gave us the whole truth in His Incarnation since He is "the Way, the Truth and the Life".
  • qawe
    minatasgeel said:

    qawe said:

    I'm reposting this @minatasgeel, as I believe you have fallen gravely into error.

    "EDIT: I find this part of your post particularly troubling - "First, before anything, I must say that the Coptic Orthodox Church Synod has the right to change any... DOGMA... they may see fit as it is the authority giving to them from God through the Apostles, Saint Mark the first Pope and the popes and bishops after him""

    I would like to ask, if the Synod changes a dogma, which dogma would be true? Is it the original dogma or the new, altered dogma? They obviously can't be both true, as they contradict one another (ie are mutually exclusive).


    The point I am trying to make is not which change the Synod makes is right or wrong but the fact that it, as one entity, has the authority to do so as given to it by God. Did Christ give us any dogma before he ascended?! No. He left it for His apostles to do so, to set the true faith in Him.
    @minatasgeel
    I must strongly disagree. Christ gave us ALL our doctrines before he ascended. The apostles and fathers just expressed it with more precise definitions to guard against heresy.

    Dogma cannot be changed, since the Truth cannot be changed. Moreover, doctrines cannot be added since Christ gave us the whole truth in His Incarnation since He is "the Way, the Truth and the Life".
Sign In or Register to comment.