a very quick question

edited December 1969 in Hymns Discussion
ekhrestos anesty
what should be sung after the thanksgiving prayer in major feasts, holy fifties, joyful days? Nisawa or sotis? Opinions, practices, and proofs please
oujai khan ebshois


  • It does not make a difference.  There is no specific choice.  People tend for the Psalm relative to its festive sound, but it really is without any real precedence or teaching.
  • ilovestmark, that is not true, just because lately in the US and in Egypt the tradition(small t) is to say nisavev does not mean that that is the correct thing to do at all. Nisavev is strictly a papal hymn according to the rites, to be said in the presence of the pope are bishop only. All other times, you say sotis. Nisavev has nothing that is related text wise to festal occasions. The same(to my disappointment as well, although I still would like to say them) is applied with the long is pateer and long Tobh hina.

    Pray for me and my weakness,
  • I did not say it was correct.  I just put it into perspective.
  • I believe the latter portion of my post identified that thought.
  • Being that the pope prays for all his churches, the papal hymn (this being my opinion) could be sung at each liturgy. It isn't necessary for him to be present in the church to do so. I believe in the diocese in the states, they always mention the bishop in charge of their diocese although the bishop isn't there...
  • I really do not mind the use of the Episcopal Psalm, because I love anything that has to do with Pope Shenouda.  I would not call it something wrong; just non-traditional.

    I can give a long list that is in practice of "wrong things" that are done.  Maybe I should start that as a thread.
  • There is a difference between specific papal hymns and annual hymns that mention HH(and then you would obviously mention the bishop of your diocese). I'm speaking specifically about Nisavev. Do not get me wrong this isn't an attack on HH at all, I love him and anything that has to do with him. I don't mind its use either, I'm merely mentioning to ophadece that according to the Rites, it should ONLY be said in the presence of the pope or bishop. It doesn't say on feast days as well. As far as Is pateer and Tobh Hina, more recently I've heard that it is become more acceptable to chant them on feasts, but older generally say to be said in the presence of the bishop or pope. Yeah, there are a lot of things that are wrong that happen, what's your point?

    Pray for me and my weakness
  • Nisavev is the Psalm of Episcopal Investiture.

    I know it is not correct to say, but it is also not wrong.

    I am not condoning it, nor am I condemning its use.
  • It's not something I would get too rigid in relating.

    I'm just saying:  it is nice to hear the Pope being mentioned.  There was a time 20 yrs ago when people were afraid to mention His name in the Rites of the Church.

    We used to add many of the Papal hymns to uplift the people during the crisis, and to remind them the peril of Our Holy Father, and that our duty was to pray fervently for his release.

    God grant His Holiness, many peaceful years--that we may enjoy his fatherhood and that he may enjoy his children that are under his care.  And in the end we may all enjoy Our Father Who is in the Heavens.
  • [coptic]<C anecty
    ]sep`hmot `ntoten emasw.
    oujai qen `P[C[/coptic]
  • Guys i think you are over-thinking this.

    first, i have to respond to jshouk response:
    that doesn't make since. The pope yes is the head of the Church on earth but there are dioceses that are lead by bishops. do you know that a bishop should not be in another bishop's diocese with out his permission?! and even if he did, he must never sit on the throne; simply because it's not his. It's basically the same with the pope but this is never seen anymore because come on.....when will the pope go any where and we will not know about?!!! You are right in some since and this applies to some hymns where we ASK FOR THEIR SAFETY all the time...like aspasmos adam and hetinies and some other. but there are specific hymns that should only be said if a bishop is "present"....ni-saviv is one of those.

    The rite of ni-saviv is to only be said when a bishop is present. That's the rule, that's final.

    NOW, in my church, Saint Mark's Jersey City, NJ. we ALWAYS were/are very proud of being the first official church is the USA. We are also part of the "Archdiocese" where it is lead and headed by the pope himself. SO what we normally do, which is not really really right, is say all the papal hymns (like nisaviv, tobhina, eespateer, marochasf and akitshi) including only his holiness mainly and mostly during the feasts: Nativity and Resurrection. Our deacons are great deacons and they have been for a long time. Sometimes things we do other just copy and not really know why. Some others just ATTACK our tradition without knowing why either (i did argue with someone from cali about this where he plainly said YOU GUYS ARE WRONG).....
    That tradition does not stay for the festive days; atleast not in all hymns. Ni-saviv is the only one that we might, JUST MIGHT just say during the fifties.

    I am sure ilovesainmark can understand what i am saying being an old-comer to our church here.
  • [quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=9115.msg113417#msg113417 date=1271449972]

    I'm just saying:  it is nice to hear the Pope being mentioned.  There was a time 20 yrs ago when people were afraid to mention His name in the Rites of the Church.

    Just wondering... why were people afraid to mention his name in the Rites of the Church? Because of his exile? Could you please explain for us who don't know? Thanks
  • Actually, I have forgotten how much time has passed.  It was close to 30 yrs ago that our Pope was in exile.

    There were churches in the United States and in Egypt that did not pronounce the name of Pope Shenouda III in the litanies.  Some churches fudged by saying the word Pope without an appended name.

    It was a very difficult period in the history of the Church.  It was not by coincidence that he was in exile for exactly 40 months.  5 September 1981 began his exile and His Holiness was released triumphantly on 5 January 1985.

    The two loudest voices for the release of His Holiness came under the direction of His Grace Bishop Antonious Markos, Bishop of African Affairs.  He conducted all of his activities in the precincts outside of Egypt, since he was not restricted by movement or comment relative to the Government of Egypt.  In the North American enclave, by St. Mark in Jersey City.  It is an absolute fact.  Fr. Gabriel, of blessed memory, moved mountains for the sake of loyalty to our Holy Father, Pope Shenouda as the only and rightful Pope of the Coptic Orthodox Church. 

    The Papal hymns were said all of the time, just to hear His Holiness name.  Proclamations for voluntary fasting was carried out every week for His Holiness, extra Liturgies were assigned, proclamations produced in the National Council of Churches and the U.S. Congress, Press releases on a bi-weekly basis, banners were put up, pictures of the Pope everywhere and even placed on the iconostasis as a constant reminder, conferences, seminars, open letters in the newspapers:  New York Times, Wasington Post, travel to the Vatican and Lebanon to the Middle East Council of Churches, and many more things.  All of this was done through the leadership and auspices of St. Mark in Jersey City.  This is the main reason, why this church has a special place in the heart of Pope Shenouda.  He keeps a very watchful eye on this parish.

    When others tried to challenge these assertions, and with false claims I might add, He has definitively affirmed all of the above in public proclamations when visiting.  It is affirmed by the Holy Synod.  St. Mark in Jersey City is a true Mother and a good Mother.  She has a mark in history that can never be erased or counterfeited.

    In regard to St. Mark in Jersey City, it is not the first registered parish in North America, that distinction is for St. Mark--Toronto, Canada.

    St. Mark in Jersey City, NJ has the distinction of being the first Coptic Orthodox Church building not in only in all of North America, but also the entire Western Hemisphere.  Understand the distinction, St. Mark Toronto was the official registry, yet in Jersey City, the first church building was purchased, established, and put to use.  St. Mark Toronto did not have a permanent home until years after their registration in 1965.  They were renting until they put together permanent quarters later in the 70's long after Jersey City.

    St. Mark in Jersey City has a dubious history.  I have not seen the church in years, but I have many fond memories.

    This constitutes a sort of reply to the last two posts.
  • Thanks!

    But i still don't really understand why some churches would omit his name. What were their reasons for doing this? That doesn't make any sense to me.
  • The Egyptian Government had deposed Pope Shenouda to the Monastery of St. Bishoy in the Desert.  This came after His Holiness dissented over violent acts of murder, rape, arson in different provinces of Egypt directed towards the Christians.  The Government labeled this as fomenting secterian violence, and in essence put His Holiness in the same category as the Muslim Brotherhood that raised havoc throughout the country.  Sadat himself was corrupt and was trying to maintain his rule.  He was far from being the peaceful man that the Western Countries tried to label.  He was corrupt, evil, maniacal, tyrannical, and illiterate.

    The (Satanic) President Sadat rescinded the Legislative proclamation (that was from 1971) of Pope Shenouda III as the Pope of Alexanria and Patriarch of the See of St. Mark, he carried this out in front of the People's Assembly (Maglis El-shaab--the Egyptian Parliament).  It was received with clapping and cheers by the parliament.  He envoked a proclamation that Five Bishops Committee would carry out the affairs of the church:  Metropolitan Athanasius, Bishop Samuel, Bishop Maximus, Bishop Gregorious, and Bishop Yoannis.  All of these bishops are now deceased.

    So, according to the Egyptian Government, Pope Shenouda III was no longer the Pope.  The committee became the Ruling Ecclesiastical authority of the Church.  Regardless of the fact that according to all Ecclesiastical Canons he was still Pope, the Government wanted to assert itself as in charge of the Church.  Hence, some Churches, relative to their priests, were cowards and did not mention His Holiness Pope Shenouda in the Rites and Liturgies.

    The Committee of Five, as they were known, felt that although it was ecclesiastically unacceptable to carry out this task, that it was better than the Government appointing Muslim mullahs or even Christian Laity as being in charge instead of Pope Shenouda.

    I guess relative to my previous post and this one, it gives the whole synopsis.
  • ilovesaintmark,
    I know that St. Mark's wasn't the true first parish but it was the first that had the congregation and the owned building. Actually some even say that Brooklyn Church was the first parish without a church in the US.....

    It would be great to meet you anytime ilovesaintmark.

    btw, the Pope's throne we have in church is just the craziest thing ever because since his holiness last visit to the church, that was over 10 year ago, no one have sat on it or moved it....it's there for him to come and sit at anytime.
  • The first true parish in North America:  St. Mark--Toronto, Canada
    The first true parish in United States (definitively registered 1968):  St. Mark--Jersey City, NJ
    The first true building, purchased and used in Western Hemisphere:  St. Mark--Jersey City, NJ

    St. Mark was registered inclusive of New Jersey and New York.  That is where someone may assume Brooklyn was involved.  They used to have a traveling parish.  Liturgies were done in people's homes.  They settled at the Armenian Cathedral of St. Vartan in Manhattan for a long period, and thereafter purchased the current church in February 1970.  It is funny how things have come full circle.  There is a Coptic Orthodox mission parish now registered in Manhattan and they have been using the same Cathedral for their Liturgies.

    St. Mark in Los Angeles has been playing a little game with dates to try to take the title.  It is lame and childish, I might add.  You cannot change history.  The documentation does not support it.  I would like to see these records, but as they say:  "there ain't none" (colloquial).

    There are enough of us around the United States that feel dearly about St. Mark, that are not going to let any rewriting of history to happen.  There is ample documentation otherwise.  Where is the documentation from Los Angeles?

    St. Mark used to be the Center of the Archdiocese.  The Episcopal Throne at St. Mark, is for the bishop of the diocese, which happens to be His Holiness.  It does not matter if he does not come daily to sit on it.  It reminds everyone of how special the parish is, its place in history, and that our father is always with us.

    Here is a thought, there is a throne for His Holiness in several places:  Alexandria, St. Bishoy's Monastery, etc.  He does not go there every day but by protocol and honor they are visually and physically present.
  • There is a throne even in my small Church for my bishop, and no-one else sits on it, and it is a reminder of his episcopate.

    Doesn't every Church have a throne for the bishop when he visits?

    Father Peter
  • [quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=9115.msg113643#msg113643 date=1271864614]
    Doesn't every Church have a throne for the bishop when he visits?

    Each church should but it's not really a necessity since bishops are not always there. In cathedrals where the bishop is always there, there is one for sure.
  • No, not every church has a throne (even in diocese or abroad) In the US there are only 3 Dioceses. The southern, LA and the newly established one for eastern seaboard states( North carolina, south carolina etc) Other than that, the remaining churches are directly under HH. And many do not have thrones.
  • The places that I mentioned are Churches that are under Patriarchal Jurisdiction.  I was not alluding that all churches should have a throne.

    St. Mark in Alexandria is the Patriarchal Cathedral.  It is actually the true mother cathedral.  It is where the initial list of patriarchs are buried.  It is over the site of the first Cathedral that was erected by St. Mark--himself.

    St. Bishoy Monastery is the Patriarchal Center in the Western Desert.
  • Actually, every place that doesn't have a bishop (which includes diocese whose bishop departed) or is lead by a "general bishop" is under Patriarchal Jurisdiction.
  • we don't have a throne but i have been to many churches where they do have one but the bishop doesn't sit in it. IDK why.
  • [quote author=geomike link=topic=9115.msg113659#msg113659 date=1271899849]
    we don't have a throne but i have been to many churches where they do have one but the bishop doesn't sit in it. IDK why.

    he's simply not the bishop of the diocese.
  • Hello everyone!

    Sorry I haven't read every post to be honest, but I just wanted to share something about this hymn that might help explain why it is placed i this part of the liturgy.

    I learned that Nisavev was placed here obviously because a Bishop of some sort was visiting. As the Bishop would walk in, they would not wear their Liturgical Vestments until after the offertory. This hymn would be sang to give time for the Bishop to get dressed in his liturgical vestments.

    So theoretically, this hymn doesn't make sense to be said without a bishop being present. But to be honest, it is obviously a very festive hymn, and since the Papal message is read on feasts it is nice to say the papal hymns remembering HH's presence among His congregation.

    Pray for me and for my love for our Savior.
Sign In or Register to comment.