www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall St. Elias Website

Everyone's favorite most Eastern parish ever has updated their website quite nicely. Check it out:

http://www.saintelias.com/ca/index.php

Dear UC,

The only question mark I have is their analysis of the Sign of the Cross, when they say that it was only at the Nikonian reforms that Kyivan Rus' adopted the three-fingered Sign.

Ukraine had close ties with Greece and followed the Greek and Orthodox universal customs as a result. It was Muscovy that developed its own customs, including the two-fingered Sign of the Cross from ancient times and hung onto them.

Orthodox scholars, then and now, would disagree that the "Old Rite" is older than the "New Rite" of the three-fingered Sign of the Cross.

But then . . .

Alex

I question highback phelons but hey, it's a great parish with many good people.

I highly enjoyed and gained from my covert visit there.

-uc

If you check the old photos high back vestments were everywhere among the Catholics. It is a much older and simpler style. The backing does not have to be there to make the back so stiff. The same cut at the neck was at one stage used in vestments in the west as well.

Also what today constitutes the modern Republic of Ukraine is only the southern most part of the old Kievan state. Constantinople changed and the Nikonian Reforms were an attempt to bring Rus inline with Constantinople usage. The old ritualists be they in Ukraine or anywhere else still use the old arrangement of the fingers for making the sign of the cross.

UC - the "high backs" apparently originated in Poltava and areas east of Kyiv. They were not originally "Muscovite" per se but were known in the Pecherska Lavra earlier than Moscow and were also known in the Old Rite.

"Highbacks Rule!!!"
DD

Alex writes that "Orthodox scholars, then and now, would disagree that the "Old Rite" is older than the "New Rite" of the three-fingered Sign of the Cross."

All the more shame to such pseudo-scholars! Let them learn better.

Incognitus

Diak,

I've heard that they come from the Poltava region but..... ehh... I just don't like the look but I'm sure I just have to get use to it.

I actually remember seeing a picture with the then Fr. Slypiy wearing one so they can't be all that bad.

Oh well.... high backs it is.

-uc

Dear Incognitus,

So you are calling Saint Dmitri Tuptalenko, Metropolitan of Rostov, a "pseudo-scholar" are you?

There are a few other Orthodox saints that you yourself probably commemorate in your parish litia service that would have also agreed with St Dmitri on this score.

One may disagree, but one doesn't have to be malevolent . . .

Don't you agree?

Alex

Dear Pavel,

You are more than correct, of course, about Ukraine.

What I'm really asking is how we might arrive at a commonly agreed view on how the Sign of the Cross in our tradition developed.

How do we know that the two-fingered Sign of the Cross was used prior to the development of the three-fingered Sign of the Cross?

Even the Old Believers have had to resort to what has been called "intellectual stretches" to try and find evidence that this was so.

The Kyivan Pechersk Psalter's traditional forward has included a disputation on this and a denial that the two-fingered Sign of the Cross was ever used universally, as the Old Believers claim (perhaps the Kyivan Caves Fathers were also "pseudo-scholars" as Incognitus would have it! ).

The only written evidence the Old Believers can come up with to confirm the two-fingered Sign of the Cross in antiquity is a saying ascribed to Bl Theodoret and also from the life of St Meletius who blessed with two fingers and fire proceeded etc. To this the Psalter replies that Meletius used two fingers to bless, as is proper for a priest or bishop to do - this is no proof he would have crossed HIMSELF with two fingers.

Then there is the Stoglav Muscovite Council that actually anathematized ANY Orthodox Christian who would refuse to make the Sign of the Cross with two fingers ("as indicated by Christ"). When did our Lord ever prescribe two fingers for the Sign of the Cross?

I'm asking, not accusing or naming anyone as a "pseudo-scholar" (as Incognitus doubtless would - he's even got Amado upset with him . . . I don't know if Alice and Anhelyna - great fans of his for some reason - even if they worked together, can get him out of this one! ).

How do we know Greece used the two-fingered Sign of the Cross and later changed to three?

Personally, I PREFER the two-fingered Sign of the Cross with the Jesus Prayer and I use it most of the time, especially with the rule of the Prayer.

I just would like to know some answers to the above questions!

You, Pavel, I know won't be dismissory of them as Incognitus would and I look forward to hearing from you (and not necessarily from Incognitus ).

Alex

Dear Alex,
Self-serving scholarship is always suspect - the tobacco companies spend millions in efforts to prove that smoking is unrelated to cancer; this is about as convincing as would be a society of Mafia scholars "proving" that there is no such thing as organized crime.

On the issue of the Sign of the Cross - the position of the fingers of the right hand as retained by the Old Ritualists originated, so far as is known, in the Roman Senate; it was a sign or indication that the Senator thus raising his hand had something of importance to say. It is not difficult to find Icons of the Lord Jesus Christ raising His Right Hand in exactly the same way. It is also not difficult to find pictures of the Popes blessing in the same fashion (including Pope Benedict XVI, incidentally). Selah.

Incognitus

17/30 January 2006 A.D. � Saint Anthony the Great

Dear Alex,
Dear, dear Alex. I�ll try to do this gently. You seem to be under the impression that there is no Kyivan source for the position of the right hand used by the Old-Ritualists in blessing oneself or others. I shall not speculate on how you could possibly have arrived at such an impression.

But you surely have access to one or more photographs of the Pantocrator in the center of the dome of Saint Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv. So take a look at the position of the Right Hand of Our Saviour.

If you would like something more up-to-date, you can probably find a nice photograph of the Icon of Our Saviour on the Icon-screen of Saint Sophia Catholicon in Rome (the icons for the icon-screen are the work of Father Juvenaly, of the Studites). Again, note the position of the Right Hand of Our Saviour.

That takes us from the eleventh century to the twentieth century. There are any number of other examples from the intervening centuries. I shall recommend you to the heavenly intercessions of Saint Ambrose of Bila Krinitsia.

As to Saint Dimitry of Rostov, he is in many ways admirable. But on this particular point, if he chose to involve himself on the Nikonian side of the controversy, I can only assume that he had very little choice, and/or that he had not had the opportunity to read what the Old-Ritualists were saying.

There are many indications of the same position of the Right Hand of Our Saviour (and the right hand of this or that other Saint, by the way) in iconography in Byzantine circles through the Paleologan period, but I have no trouble in believing that the Greeks had changed that position in common use well before the seventeenth century. I also have no trouble believing that, as is well known, Greek influence was strong both in Kyiv and in Western Ukraine, so that the �Nikonian� arrangement of the hand for the Sign of the Cross could easily have spread to parts of Ukraine. Until Nikon made an issue of the matter, there does not seem to have been much in the way of polemics on the topic. But there really is no serious room to doubt that the Old Ritualists were correct in their insistence that the older arrangement, which remains in use among them, is indeed the older tradition.

Incognitus

Dear Incognitus,

NOW I know your real identity! Your post above just gave you away!

Your secret is safe with me and I consider myself to be under oath!! It comes as a surprise but also as a blessing that you are here on this forum!

O.K., but the Orthodox Church teaches that the two-fingered Sign of the Cross IS the form for the hieratic blessing of the people and so your examples ONLY serve to prove that the two fingers were always used that way.

There is NO evidence that two fingers were ever used to trace the Sign of the Cross on oneself, apart from the testimony of Bl. Theodoret. But, as St John Damscene wrote, "Just because one sparrow has sung does not mean that spring is here!"

I'm only asking for actual evidence to show that Christians, apart from Old Believers, ever historically crossed THEMSELVES with two fingers.

Just asking, not wishing to make controversy since I myself prefer the Old Believer traditions . . .

Spasi Khrystos! (This would be considered bad grammar in Ukrainian . . . ).

Ciao, Big Guy!

I mean, kissing your right hand I again implore your blessing . . .

Alex

Well, I'm glad to plead guilty to being someone who is reasonably familiar with the iconography of the Paleologan period.

Icons are seldom done in some sort of cinematic style, so that we would be able to watch the saints making the Sign of the Cross. Much of the polemic on this issue has to do with the question of whether there should be two different hand positions - one for making the Sign of the Cross on oneself, and another for blessing someone else. But Nikon in fact introduced a double innovation in this regard, so my suggested iconographic references retain their full strength. If you wish, I can suggest some more recent icons from Nikonian sources which show the form Nikon wanted.

Incognitus (who gazes at icons quite often in a variety of places - but mostly in albums of iconography)

Dear (to me) Cognitus!

But surely you are cognizant of the fact that there is NO iconographic example of anyone crossing themselves with two fingers in the Byzantine tradition - apart from Old Believer icons.

You will find the entire issue discussed in the Orthodox Psalter (apart from that issued by Patriarch Joseph of Moscow).

Three fingers for the Sign of the Cross on oneself (and for laity and non-ordained monastics blessing an object/person) and two fingers for the hieratic blessing.

Nikon introduced the "IC XC" formation of the hieratic blessing, did he not? Is that what you are referring to?

You are not only NOT providing evidence (except in the sense of "they MUST have" crossed themselves with two fingers since they blessed this way)but you also appear to contradict the teaching of the Orthodox Church outside the tradition of the Old Believers, which tradition is set out quite clearly in the Psalter that Jordanville publishes.

That is not evidence. That is stretching and redefining evidence that has NEVER been accepted by mainstream Orthodoxy as conclusive of the two finger Sign of the Cross.

I am not against that form. And I venerate St Ambrose of Bila Krinitsa.

In fact, Reverend and Revered Sir, I have also helped produce a little video on the history of the Old Believers in Kyiv - which video indicates my name under the credits.

So . . . THERE!

Other than Old Believer sources, can you show ONE Orthodox source that would defend your position, other than yourself? If you have published a paper on this, could you direct me to it as well?

It's rather incredulous that you would make this a personal thing with me, as if I am somehow responsible for coming up with the entire argument!

Anyway, apart from making the spurious conclusion that because there are many icons indicating the hieratic blessing with two fingers, that this MUST mean they crossed themselves that way too, I await any further rational argument/presentation from you.

When you have time, of course. I appreciate you must be very busy!

Alex

Dear Alex,
Your video sounds as though it would be interesting.
Your argument appears to rest on the assumption that people used a different position of the hand to bless themselves than they used to bless others. But the sources you refer me to are all Nikonian; it is hardly surprising that Nikonian sources defend Nikonian ideas. Have you any pre-Nikonian sources for that suggestion?
Meanwhile you inspire me to think that I should finally learn how to create an avatar - and use the great Pantocrator from Saint Sophia in Kyiv for the purpose.

Incognitus