Holy Fire

[MichaelArchangelos]

I was reading about the Miracle of the Holy Fire today. I remember discussing this issue with Silentchapel ages ago, before I decided to become Orthodox. He affirmed pretty well the authenticity of the miracle. However, Wikipedia has criticism of this miracle. One guy, Michael Kalopoulos, hosted a TV show where some scientists dipped candles in white phosphorous. They spontaneously ignited. While I doubt that the Patriarchs use that for the Holy Fire, Kalopoulos states "In Babylon there are two kinds of naphtha springs, a white (colourless, clear) and a black (crude oil) The white naphtha is the one that ignites with fire." (Strabon Geographica 16.1.15.1-24) He also states that phosphorus was used by Chaldean magicians to cause spontaneous fire.

So I was wondering, in the face of all these claims, has anyone here actually seen the Holy Fire? I would love to go and see it, but I don't have the money.

[repentant]

Does this spotaneous fire burn? The Holy Fire for 33 mins after it lights does not burn. Men have stuck their faces with beards in the flame, and nothing.

[Akathist]

Here is a great website with infor on Holy Fire including many pictures of people not being burnt from it. Also flashes of lights that occur in the air just before the Holy Fire arrives. http://www.holyfire.org/eng/

I realize this miracle is hard for those who don't want to believe in Christ to swallow. But it is a great gift to us Christian's every year. (And I do realize some Christian's dont believe it either, I just don't understand why they don't. Why do they need to put limits on what Christ can do?)

[Silentchapel]

Also remember that the Patriarch is searched (along with the tomb) by Jews or Moslems (to commemorate the Roman guards standing on the entrance of the tomb) in order to prevent any artifical means of igniting fire. I dare those sciencists to do that. :)

[MichaelArchangelos]

I was wondering, has anyone on the forum actually gone to Jerusalem at Pascha and seen the miracle?

[Silentchapel]

I can give a second hand experience. My sociology professor came from Jerusalem and shown us a pic of her holding her hand in a bunch of candles, smiling to the camera. Said that it was a strange sensation, but it didn't burn. But she remained an atheist.

[theoforos]

I was wondering, has anyone on the forum actually gone to Jerusalem at Pascha and seen the miracle?


I'd like to but I haven't. However, a priest from here with his wife went their last year, I think. They managed to squeeze themselves into the church after some horror filled moments in the crowd. They saw it and told they also saw a woman put her hand in the fire and it didn't burn her. They also told some people didn't quite get the idea that only the holy fire was supposed to be passed on to the others and started their own "unholy" fires by lighting their candles with a lighter and passed on that fire to other people.

[choirfiend]

Um, its really not THAT big of a deal in Orthodoxy. It happens. Great, other miracles happen all the time all over the world. So, unless you're from Jerusalem or decide to make a pilgrimage there (how many of us can afford to do that or have done so in recent war-torn times) then you won't find too many eyewitnesses in America.

[Xpycoctomos]

(And I do realize some Christian's dont believe it either, I just don't understand why they don't. Why do they need to put limits on what Christ can do?)


The same reason many people don't believe Fatima ever happened. It's not putting limits on Christ... it's just saying, "I don't think it happened... I could be wrong, but I just don't think it happened". As Choirfiend said, it's not that big a deal. It's a wonderful miracle (I happen to believe it happens) and it ends there.

If it were the most glorious of miracles, that atheist woman would ahve been converted. So, its a wonderful miracle, but if an Orthodox doubts it... that's fine with me. I don't think they lose or gain anythign buy it unless there is an underlying doubt in the possibility of miracles, but their doubt in this miracle certainly doesn't imply such an underlying problem, IMO.

[DonVA]

But don't you find it interesting in a world where people are demanding that God give them some kind of a sign that He Exists, then when He does, they shrug it off?

I'm sure the same could be said for any of the millions of other miracles witnessed around the world, but here's one that happens annually. We know where it will be, and we know when.

For the non-believers, "Here's your Sign."

[gtsecc]

Just remember, Holy Fire is not for cooking.

[Paisley]

The Holy Fire exists, and it doesn't just happen in Jerusalem.

[Xpycoctomos]

RJ,
Tell me...

[Xpycoctomos]

I can understand why someone WOUld believe about the Holy Fire... but why SHOULD they if they haven't been? So they are supposed to believe just becuase 1) some guy told them it was real and 2) Christ COULD do it?

I have good friends who have told me this or that in good faith but then later I come to realzie that I don't agree with their conclusion when i experience it (whatever it is, a movie, a person's personality etc) myself. We haven't different ways of judging the veracity of things. So, while do believe that this really happens (and precisely becuase of the two reasons listed about) I would never present it as proof of anything. If I went in person and expreienced it, surely I would feel more strongly about it. But how could I EXPECT anyone else (who hasn't gone) to be just as convinced as I am.

If tomorrow news comes out that there was an earthly scientific explanation for the Holy Fire, that's okay.There are greater miracles and proof of God's love than the Holy Fire. I think a lot of them are right here... the people who have come to the Church who no one would have ever thought would have converted. That's more amazing to me than a weeping icon. And lot of people came to the Church without the prodding of any particular supernatural miracel like a weeping icon/vision or seeing the Holy Fire. I am not trying to say that these miracles are unimportant or of no consequence, but it is secondary at best IMO.

John

PS: aside from all that, I do have to admit... the Holy Fire and the weeping icons do help strenthen my faith in my weaker moments. So, my case may be a bit overstated above, but my point is simply that one's beleif of nonblief in them has nothing to do with their belief in God's ABILITy to do miracles.

[Akathist]

Of course, I do not believe one should convert to EOC due to the Holy Fire or any other miracle. I also agree that miracles are not more imporant than keeping Tradition, Theology, praxis, striving for personal virtue, etc etc.

But the Eucharist is a miracle that happens through out the whole world every Divine Liturgy. Miracles are still a part of our faith. When it comes to the miracle of the Eucharist, it is central.

Think also about the service of Holy Unction. That is a service dedicated to miracles and it is a sacrement of the church.

So, I think it is fairly safe for Orthodox to view miracles as an important part of our faith. But of course, it is not more important than our personal praxis in the faith.

[Paisley]

I can understand why someone WOUld believe about the Holy Fire... but why SHOULD they if they haven't been? So they are supposed to believe just becuase 1) some guy told them it was real and 2) Christ COULD do it?



You could believe it because it also appeared in the OT, the burning bush, and in Acts. :liturgy:

[Xpycoctomos]

But the Eucharist is a miracle that happens through out the whole world every Divine Liturgy. Miracles are still a part of our faith. When it comes to the miracle of the Eucharist, it is central.


Well, I don't think anyone can be Orthodox and deny this miracle. i am not denying that sacraments are central to the Faith, of course they are. But the Holy Fire and weeping icons can hardly be compared to the Eucharist.

I am just saying I can completely sypathize with someone (even an Orthodox) who questions the Holy Fire.

The problem is that there is a lot of lore that has travelled around the Church throughout Her history. Not all of its true, no matter how many people believe it. Relics is a good example of this. I am skeptical that the Russian Church really has the hand of St John the Baptist as they claim because scholarship doesn't really prove this. Does that make me a bad orthodox (that's a rhetorical question, I know you don't think that makes me a bad Orthodox). Now, that's not a miracle, but its an example of having to depend completely upon heresay as is the case (for most of us) regarding the Holy Fire.

I believe in the Holy Fire becuase it is highly attested to (by orthodox and non-Orthodox alike) and... why not? But those aren't exactly compelling reasons lol.

Anyhow, don't take me too seriously here. I know you don't think that the Holy Fire is a litmus test for the faith and I agree with you that it is real. But this is just something that I can understand why others wouldn't agree with me.

John