3-Day Paramoni for Nativity

Hello Everyone, I pray you all had a Blessed New-Year !

My concern is that for the Nativity Paramoni this year it is 3 days,
do we Chant Iestermagi all 3 days ??

And also, (for the Big guys on the forum) what do we for this 
Saturday Nights Midnight Praises (Hymns/Tunes/Readings wise) ?

God Bless!


  • All hymns are here: http://tasbeha.org/hymn_library/cat/76

    The liturgies of all 3 days are EXACTLY the same....that goes for rites, hymns and tunes.

    For Midnight praises staring Eve of Friday (thursday night), it's an annual tasbeha with the following observations:
    - Avmask/f="You were born"
    - No Tennav or Nim ghar (any more till Resurrection)
    - All tunes are in the annual tune
    - There is an Psali for the Paramoun to be said in due time (there is one for each day--you say the one that matches the theotokia
    - There is an psali for each day
    - There is a commentary/tarh for each section (you can say all commentaries)
    - Amen Alleluia with the Feast's Response
  • Which tune for the psalis, commentaries, doxologies ?

    In another question, what is special to the paramoni period (3 days) Hymn wise, etc. ?
  • As @minatasgeel pointed out, all hymns are in an annual tune. Yes you say yestermagi all three days, and the special hymns are doxologies, and psalies, Mina provided the link above..
    Ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ϧⲉⲛ Ⲡϭⲥ
  • Thanks @ophadece

    there isn't really any tunes that are "special" other than Eistermagi and its madeeha. 
  • Hymns should be in the kiahk tune according to all the older manuscripts and ritual texts
  • ???

    @tasgeel affandy and @ophadece, could someone please clarify...

    and @dg920 which "older manuscripts" and "ritual texts" ?
  • What I mentioned is the "current" rite 
    I am not gonna say anything else :-)
  • bro come on ! ;)
  • I am not kidding....the first disclaimer of anyone out there who studies liturgical texts has always to consider the time and place of that specific text or rite being studies. Rites develop as needed. Despite the changes being warranted or not, they are to be followed as the holy Synod and Bishops are in charge of setting the rites to be followed.

    Anyone can find manuscripts these days and extract an entire rite of the specific liturgical service....but that doesn't mean we must just follow them blindly. 
  • Thanks @Jojo_Hanna, @minatasgeel and @dg920. Like Mina had said already which I am sure you all know of course, we have ample evidence of variations in sources, including manuscripts and liturgical texts and it is a fact that some rites were practised differently in different regions, and some not at all in others. Therefore the efforts of unification of rites are to be commended and followed, only for the sake of unity, not obscuring certain sources (for example yestermagi is Sa'idic why Bohairicise it? Agios yestin is a Coptic Sa'idic Bohairic Fayyumic Greek mix why modify it?). So in the end what is set now is to be preserved. However, unlike @minatasgeel has said I don't agree to follow the synod's decisions or bishops' blindly, as they have been coming out with new great (sarcastic) innovative ideas not following the teaching of Christ. But seriously though, what choice do I have?
    Ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ϧⲉⲛ Ⲡϭⲥ
  • @opha what do you mean : innovative ideas not following the teaching of Christ ?
  • Well, unfortunately this is not the best forum to discuss this but I had mentioned it before anyway.. I am not happy about changing the katamaros readings on the 23rd of Kiahk (or 22nd leap year) because Christ's words sound harsh.. We don't follow the calendar year used outside of the church and yes I am aware of having to change the date of the feast of Nativity to comply with the political pressure but that's another argument..
    Ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ϧⲉⲛ Ⲡϭⲥ
  • When did these "decisions" take place ?
  • Only recently, but I don't know the exact dates.. Must be in the last 5 or 10 years..
    Ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ϧⲉⲛ Ⲡϭⲥ
  • Wow! I never knew that!
    If you get the chance, I'd like to know more about this please !
  • Dear @Jojo_Hanna
    Maybe other members who are better clued up on synod's decisions can shed more light. I am probably not the best person to explain historic facts about what has happened, but simply speaking I don't like the idea of choosing less forceful language that Christ used because "people want to be happy in the new year celebration". 23rd of Kiahk is the commemoration of David the prophet and like all the other days of the prophets the church chose the passage of the woes, why change it? Lack of wisdom is the answer.. There is actually a nice piece of irony here, that in the Coptic new year we read the passage of Christ reading from the prophet Isaiah and we continue the reading until the part that says the people in the synagogue were filled with wrath and they gathered against him to throw Him off the cliff! What a way to celebrate the Coptic new year! Yes of course because she is wise teaching us many other messages such as He was not of this world, our happiness is not like the world's, and that we can be more cruel to Christ when He tries to remind us of His will, among many other messages..
    Don't start me on the icons in the new cathedral and churches newly refurbished, where is the synod? Where is the synod from the youth who don't fast yet take Communion? Where is the synod from the priests and bishops marrying youth from different denominations (and sometimes religions)? Suffice to say that the church needs to match the rules of the world and accept the use of mobile phones, TV screens including video clips, iPads and tablets and of course cameras. I have recently noticed that it is getting incorporated into the rites soon (sarcasm) that after each liturgy, the faithful take photos with the ministers (hahaha).
    Of course I am not going to mention the length of the liturgy or the newly discussed Christmas date, to relieve us a little of the apostles fast...
    Ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ϧⲉⲛ Ⲡϭⲥ
  • edited January 2019
    Concerning the reading of the Kiahk 23:
    1- There were MANY katameroses out there...i mean many separate books with different readings for different days and different occasions. We have manuscripts....we have copts and foreign scholars that are working on studies in those manuscripts. Example: consider the Gospels of the sundays of Lent (The kingdom of God, the temptation, prodigal son...etc), and consider the commentaries for those sundays in the book published by Anba Mettaous. You will find NO CONNECTION with the two at all, even though there should be. guess why is that?! because those commentaries were written for a specific Lent katameros (i think found in St. Makarious Monastery) that had those readings

    2- The readings of Kiahk 23 was not a unique reading. It used to always barrow from the reading said to all the prophets...that's where all the "Woes" come from because all the prophets were there for darker days in the OT.

    3- In the borrowed reading of Kiahk 23, there was no mention of David the prophet at all

    4- Is it logical to preach that David the King is like any of the other prophets and his legacy should be like another dark time in the life of the Jewish people?! Isn't he the person that God said, "He has a heart like Mine"?? Is it logical to not highlight the fatherhood of David the king, in the flesh, to Christ the Messiah?!

    I am not gonna even get into have the holy Synod, as a whole, has authority from God and His Apostles to make all changes they see fit in His Church. Have we forgotten that they have the keys for the kingdom of heaven?! 
  • Hi Mina,
    I can see that you are getting defensive.. No need to be defensive, I hope I have not offended you anyway..
    That's exactly what I mean; the passage of the woes is the same like in all commemoration of the prophets days. We still read the same passage on the day of commemoration of Isaiah the prophet rather than choosing a text mentioning his name, same thing for Daniel the prophet, Jonah, etc etc.
    Now the synod is given the authority like all the other clergy men but that doesn't make them immune to mistakes..
    Ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ϧⲉⲛ Ⲡϭⲥ
  • edited January 2019
    I am not as defensive, but you are stuck on one or two pieces of knowledge and ignoring the rest that might of been considered in making these changes by the Synod. The only argument we are still getting to not change, more like creating a more fitting reading, is we been doing it this way, and therefore we are not changing....that is not a good argument in a faith that is based on the development of our spirit towards God throughout our life. 

    Concerning the Synod...you may need to ignore our egyptian-ness and find articles and books about ecclesiastical canon law to see what authority does a church synod has. 

  • Once again I can see I annoyed you this much, I am really sorry. I hope I know how not to annoy you with my being stuck on a particular topic or argument.. Sorry again @minatasgeel..
    We don't change based on our spiritual development, this is the first time I hear such a statement. We are Orthodox, so we keep the teachings we have received the same without changing. It's admirable that at a time with increasing knowledge and varying practices we sought unification and I think it has been largely achieved, so to keep changing further and further for baseless arguments is to me unacceptable..
    I am not going to ignore my Egyptian-ness, the saints and scholars all over the world recognise the role of the Egyptian forefathers in protecting the Orthodox faith..
    Ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ϧⲉⲛ Ⲡϭⲥ
  • @minatasgeel where can we find (get) "articles and books about ecclesiastical canon law to see what authority does a church synod"
    @ophadece I've actually been meaning to take your opinions about the Icons in the Cathedral...(wdym about priests and BISHOPS getting MARRIED ETC... ??)
  • "our spiritual development" is our Christian life. As a Christian, we are not saved by one action or one testimony of faith...but we are Christian and can continue being Christians, that is to continue being saved, by only coming closer to God by time. Our Christian life is not static but it develops to be more fulfilling--'give us our Christian perfection'. If you don't develop spiritually, then you are not really accomplishing anything by saying "I am a Christian" to everyone.

    @ophadece...the orthodox faith is not changing here. The word 'orthodox' doesn't refer to 'not changing' but it refers to the 'upright path'=the 'upright faith.' Our faith here doesn't change. Our faith is practiced into rite, that our way of worship, but our rites are not the faith or the God that we worship.
  • Hi @Jojo_Hanna
    I meant bishops and priests marrying (praying the marriage ceremony) people from different denominations and/or faiths..
    Hi @minatasgeel,
    You said "in a faith that is based on the development of our spirit towards God throughout our life". Please do not change your argument now to make it out as though you mean something else. "Spiritual development" was my expression, so thank you very much for expanding on it but that was not your argument. Orthodox is a term that has more than one criterion, and one of the criteria is unchanging. Please refer to the good Orthodox sources. Now I am not going to argue faith vs rites because I know you, and I know your position, unless you are just trying to win your argument with me at all costs. If that's the case, then don't worry I am not going to argue anymore but I guess you too may already know my position, I hope..
    Ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ϧⲉⲛ Ⲡϭⲥ
Sign In or Register to comment.