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
why do priests cover there heads in liturgy??
Why do priests cover their heads?
1Cr 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.
1Cr 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
Isnt it only women who are suppose to??
1Cr 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.
1Cr 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
Isnt it only women who are suppose to??
Comments
even from the Old Testament the priests were to wear a turban... and cover their heads!
Akhadna el baraka... neshkor Allah!
priest are different then us, normal people. not fully, so don't attack me for saying this.
they are God's and they always work in HIS sight with HIS will.
"But what does the Word of God SAY?
1Cr 11:4 EVERY MAN praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, DISHONOURETH HIS HEAD.
Does EVERY MAN praying or prophesying, having his head covered dishonoureth his head OR NOT?
Perhaps a Christian shouldn't read the bible but rather leave that to someone who has been put into a position of lording over God's heritage."
I dont know what else to say, the verse is pretty straight forward, i told him not to read it literally. Does anyone know any other verses that when read literally are clearly untrue atleast that way i can show him that he shouldnt read the verse the way he does.
Im trying to explain this to a guy as we speak, but he jsut keep saying
"But what does the Word of God SAY?
1Cr 11:4 EVERY MAN praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, DISHONOURETH HIS HEAD.
Does EVERY MAN praying or prophesying, having his head covered dishonoureth his head OR NOT?
Perhaps a Christian shouldn't read the bible but rather leave that to someone who has been put into a position of lording over God's heritage."
I dont know what else to say, the verse is pretty straight forward, i told him not to read it literally. Does anyone know any other verses that when read literally are clearly untrue atleast that way i can show him that he shouldnt read the verse the way he does.
Certainly. Last week's Gospel has a PERFECT example.
[quote=Gospel of St. Luke]
If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple. And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.
Christ doesn't mean for us to hate our family and ourselves to follow Him. He certainly does not want us to carry a large, heavy piece of wood in the shape of a cross for His sake.
Likewise it is with this verse. Not everything can be taken literally.
This is another case of proof texting. I see no reason not to take the verses in question literally. The question becomes, however, who is Paul addressing? I would argue that he is addressing the laity and not the clergy. As such, it is laymen who should not cover their heads when praying and prophesying (although the latter doesn't really apply in this day and age so much anymore). Reading a verse in its proper historical and literary context is vital in understanding the message the author is trying to convey. As others have mentioned, what the priest wears on his head is symbolic of a crown, but it is also an indication of his rank as priest, in that he has, in fact, been separated to perform the sacraments as opposed to a regular layperson.
As for the claim that Christ message to hate our family should not be taken literally, I also think that is a mistake. But, here again, context is important. Why would God incarnate, who IS love, tell us to hate? We are taught to 'love not the world, neither the things pertaining to the world for the world passes away and the lusts thereof'. Clearly, any attachments we have to the world will hinder our progression towards being more Christ-like. So, should we hate our fathers, our mothers, our sisters, our brothers, even our own selves? Yes, if they hinder us from Christ. Anything that can take us away from Christ and fellowship in Him is to be hated and despised. That is what Christ meant, and that is why, it is VERY literal.
So, I think, Paul is talking, not about a hat or veil, but the length of one's hair as a covering.
Interesting to see two ways of dissecting the same verse.
We also know that as St. Anthony was praying in the desert, an angel appeared to him in his boredom and introduced to him the art of palm weaving. During that same time, the angel also gave St. Anthony the kolonsoa and the tunic a monk is obliged to wear. A monk is a man so if God does not want men to wear hats, why did the angel send the kolonsoa to St. Anthony?
PK
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
This is another case of proof texting. I see no reason not to take the verses in question literally. The question becomes, however, who is Paul addressing? I would argue that he is addressing the laity and not the clergy. As such, it is laymen who should not cover their heads when praying and prophesying (although the latter doesn't really apply in this day and age so much anymore). Reading a verse in its proper historical and literary context is vital in understanding the message the author is trying to convey. As others have mentioned, what the priest wears on his head is symbolic of a crown, but it is also an indication of his rank as priest, in that he has, in fact, been separated to perform the sacraments as opposed to a regular layperson.
As for the claim that Christ message to hate our family should not be taken literally, I also think that is a mistake. But, here again, context is important. Why would God incarnate, who IS love, tell us to hate? We are taught to 'love not the world, neither the things pertaining to the world for the world passes away and the lusts thereof'. Clearly, any attachments we have to the world will hinder our progression towards being more Christ-like. So, should we hate our fathers, our mothers, our sisters, our brothers, even our own selves? Yes, if they hinder us from Christ. Anything that can take us away from Christ and fellowship in Him is to be hated and despised. That is what Christ meant, and that is why, it is VERY literal.
Forgive me, I know I'm the last one to talk about theological issues, but I don't really agree with what you said about hating everyone that may hinder us from God...
From my experience with christianity and my knowledge of the saints, I saw that 'hate' shouldn't even be in our vocabulary. Especially hating yourself... You're stuck with yourself, if you hate yourself, then the most logical thing to do would be to go as far away from God as you possibly can..
I've always been taught that just as Christ loved everyone, all of them to the most terrible of sinners, so should we always do that too. God IS love, anyone who hates cannot be truly His discipile. When someone hinders us from God, we should try to get away from them (run away from temptation), without hurting them if that's possible, but always LOVE them and pray for their salvation. We should be little fountains, each of us, overflowing with the love of our Father.
So I think yes, many verses in the Bible are to be taken figurativly, not literally. Eg: when one eye bothers you it's better to take it out..
God bless you
Please pray for my weakness
You are certainly entitled not to agree with me, and I would wager that there are no theological experts on this site at all. I was merely presenting a view that what Christ said should be taken literally. That being said, to say that the word 'hate' is a foreign concept in Christianity is, in my opinion false. We know that God is love, and no one will argue that. But God most certainly does hate. The question becomes: what is it that He hates? I think it's obvious. God hates sin. He cannot stand it. Thus, it stands to reason that we should also hate sin, and anything that can take a hold on us and lead us to sin. This is why, my entire argument revolves around having attachments that hinder us from Christ. I'm not saying to hate anyone. What I'm saying is to hate the relationship IF it takes you away from Christ. Again, I appeal to a theologian of great stature, St. John. He tells us to 'love not the world neither the things pertaining to the world'. He also tells us that 'love of the world is enmity with God'. That's pretty harsh language, wouldn't you agree? And very uncompromising. I will also provide you another example where ties to the world, which hinders us from Christ, is frowned upon by Him. Luke recounts the following story to us:
[quote=Luke 9:59-62]But he said to him, 'Lord, let me first go and bury my father.' But he said to him, 'Leave the dead to bury their own dead; but as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.' Another said, 'I will follow you, Lord; but let me first say farewell to those at my home.' Jesus said to him, 'No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.'
Again, it's clear, any ties we have to the world, which hinders us from Christ, should be despised.
So even if a person is taking you away from God, if God forgives, we have to forgive, and if God loves, we have to love. If it is in your power to help them, you should help them. Maybe God meant for you to be the one to bring them back to His arms. If you feel you might lose yourself while helping them, then you should flee from temptation, but always keep loving them and praying for them.
What if St. Monica would have hated her son instead of loving him so much she poured so many tears for him and said so many prayers for his sake, she would have hated him ?
That's just my understanding of christianity, anyways I'm glad we agree:
[quote author=Κηφᾶς link=topic=7402.msg97960#msg97960 date=1228490170]
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
I'm not saying to hate anyone.
So I must have misunderstood you when you said:
[quote author=Κηφᾶς link=topic=7402.msg97921#msg97921 date=1228345221]
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
So, should we hate our fathers, our mothers, our sisters, our brothers, even our own selves? Yes, if they hinder us from Christ.
God bless you
Please pray for my weakness
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
This is another case of proof texting. I see no reason not to take the verses in question literally. The question becomes, however, who is Paul addressing? I would argue that he is addressing the laity and not the clergy. As such, it is laymen who should not cover their heads when praying and prophesying (although the latter doesn't really apply in this day and age so much anymore). Reading a verse in its proper historical and literary context is vital in understanding the message the author is trying to convey. As others have mentioned, what the priest wears on his head is symbolic of a crown, but it is also an indication of his rank as priest, in that he has, in fact, been separated to perform the sacraments as opposed to a regular layperson.
As for the claim that Christ message to hate our family should not be taken literally, I also think that is a mistake. But, here again, context is important. Why would God incarnate, who IS love, tell us to hate? We are taught to 'love not the world, neither the things pertaining to the world for the world passes away and the lusts thereof'. Clearly, any attachments we have to the world will hinder our progression towards being more Christ-like. So, should we hate our fathers, our mothers, our sisters, our brothers, even our own selves? Yes, if they hinder us from Christ. Anything that can take us away from Christ and fellowship in Him is to be hated and despised. That is what Christ meant, and that is why, it is VERY literal.
I agree with what you are saying, but it is hard to argue that Paul was reffering to only the congregation and not the clergy men, as he clearly stated "NO MAN should cover his head", and never once even making any refference to clergy men in that chapter at all.
I'm not sure if at that point there was a rank of clergy, so at that time he wouldn't refer to clergy if the rank doesnt exist.
Yeah thats what I mean, like i understand WHY the priest cover their heads, but the verse is clear and makes no exceptions. Its one of those things where no matter how good an explanation you have of why our priests cover their heads, it just doesnt make sense with what the Bible clearly states.
[quote author=Hisservant link=topic=7402.msg97976#msg97976 date=1228568880]
I'm not sure if at that point there was a rank of clergy, so at that time he wouldn't refer to clergy if the rank doesnt exist.
This is incorrect. The four orders of the Church had been established at the time Paul wrote his epistle. The following is an excerpt from an article taken from the OSB. Based on this, my argument still stands.
I had something that I wanted to share
The priest in our Coptic Church dress like the twenty four elders around the throne of God "Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold on their heads." Rev 4:4
So this is why they have crowns
and also because it was originally a hood covering the head and neck. It symbolizes the helmet of salvation resembling the soldier's helmet as a sign of his spiritual vigilance during prayer.
Hope that I helped
Amen
"I have held many things in my hands and I have lost them all , but those which I have placed in God's hands, those I still posses" St Augustine
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
This is another case of proof texting. I see no reason not to take the verses in question literally. The question becomes, however, who is Paul addressing? I would argue that he is addressing the laity and not the clergy. As such, it is laymen who should not cover their heads when praying and prophesying (although the latter doesn't really apply in this day and age so much anymore). Reading a verse in its proper historical and literary context is vital in understanding the message the author is trying to convey. As others have mentioned, what the priest wears on his head is symbolic of a crown, but it is also an indication of his rank as priest, in that he has, in fact, been separated to perform the sacraments as opposed to a regular layperson.
As for the claim that Christ message to hate our family should not be taken literally, I also think that is a mistake. But, here again, context is important. Why would God incarnate, who IS love, tell us to hate? We are taught to 'love not the world, neither the things pertaining to the world for the world passes away and the lusts thereof'. Clearly, any attachments we have to the world will hinder our progression towards being more Christ-like. So, should we hate our fathers, our mothers, our sisters, our brothers, even our own selves? Yes, if they hinder us from Christ. Anything that can take us away from Christ and fellowship in Him is to be hated and despised. That is what Christ meant, and that is why, it is VERY literal.
All do respect Kefas, I believe that the context 'hate' in fact refers to love. The love that we must have for Our Lord, has to be much greater than those of our friends and family. This dwarves the love we have for them to make it resemble 'hate'.