OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 23, 2014, 04:35:20 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: nuns in altar area  (Read 3245 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« on: October 25, 2007, 03:41:29 PM »

I saw a video of the Divine Liturgy in Lebanon where a nun was allowed in the altar area behind the altar rail (this church didn't really have an iconostas), and she censed the Holy Gifts during the Great Entrance. Is this common? I thought women were not allowed behind the iconostas. Is it because she's a nun?
« Last Edit: October 25, 2007, 03:42:00 PM by samkim » Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,109


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2007, 03:48:36 PM »

Is this common?

At womens' monasteries?  Yes.

I thought women were not allowed behind the iconostas. Is it because she's a nun?

The be most accurate, no one is allowed behind the iconostasis who does not have the blessing to do so.  The reason why it ends up being "no women" is because women (as it stands) cannot be subdeacons, deacons, priests, or bishops.

But in places where necessity dictates, and spiritual maturity facilitates, women have been given the blessing to enter the sanctuary, as sextons (to clean), or as servers (in the case of womens' monasteries).  So yes, it is partially because she's a nun - that's why the bishop would feel more comfortable giving her the blessing, because he knows she has a certain maturity and respect for what she's doing.  And no, it technically has nothing to do with being a nun - it's all about the bishop.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2007, 04:09:01 PM »

... has nothing to do with being a nun - it's all about the bishop.

Please , say that again!
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,184


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2007, 04:27:08 PM »

The be most accurate, no one is allowed behind the iconostasis who does not have the blessing to do so.  The reason why it ends up being "no women" is because women (as it stands) cannot be subdeacons, deacons, priests, or bishops.

Unless you believe the (apocryphal?) story that a "no women behind the icon screen" canon or rule came into existence to stop Byzantine empresses from interfering with the services......Are there other reasons?
« Last Edit: October 25, 2007, 04:29:09 PM by Pravoslavbob » Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,109


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2007, 04:38:57 PM »

Unless you believe the (apocryphal?) story that a "no women behind the icon screen" canon or rule came into existence to stop Byzantine empresses from interfering with the services......Are there other reasons? 

Hmmm.  I'm really fuzzy on that part of canon law.  I should dig up my Pedalion and look it up.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2007, 05:07:30 PM »

Unless you believe the (apocryphal?) story that a "no women behind the icon screen" canon or rule came into existence to stop Byzantine empresses from interfering with the services......Are there other reasons?

But of course, the canons explicitly forbid the barring of Imperial Authority from the altar...this custom may be able to keep others out of the altar, but not an Empress.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2007, 05:16:57 PM »

Chumming the waters?
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2007, 05:19:52 PM »

Chumming the waters?

If that's what you call a historical interest in Roman secular and ecclesiastical law. Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #8 on: October 25, 2007, 05:39:33 PM »

Cite the canon, please.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #9 on: October 25, 2007, 05:57:32 PM »

Cite the canon, please.

'Let it not be permitted to anyone among all the laity to enter within the sacred altar, with the exception that the Imperial power and authority is in no way or manner excluded therefrom whenever it wishes to offer gifts to the Creator, in accordance with a certain most ancient tradition.' (VI 69)
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Simayan
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate - GOA
Posts: 816



« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2007, 08:55:14 PM »

'Let it not be permitted to anyone among all the laity to enter within the sacred altar, with the exception that the Imperial power and authority is in no way or manner excluded therefrom whenever it wishes to offer gifts to the Creator, in accordance with a certain most ancient tradition.' (VI 69)

I'm not surprised, really.

Though whats interesting is that this states NO laity can be near the altar, which would include altar boys.

Where do Deaconesses fall into all of this?
Logged

"He will wipe every tear from their eyes, and there will be no more death, nor mourning nor crying nor suffering, for the old order of things has passed away."
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2007, 09:50:51 PM »

I'm not surprised, really.

Though whats interesting is that this states NO laity can be near the altar, which would include altar boys.

Where do Deaconesses fall into all of this?

Deaconesses are an order of the Clergy, they would have been in the altar, some disagree with me and we have had threads on this board which discuss it at length, I don't really feel like hashing it out again.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2007, 10:41:59 PM by greekischristian » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2007, 10:29:24 PM »

I'm not surprised, really.

Though whats interesting is that this states NO laity can be near the altar, which would include altar boys.

Where do Deaconesses fall into all of this?

Altar boys were traditionally given minor orders to do this and even today are blessed to enter the altar; they may not touch the altar itself though (one must be a subdeacon to do this).

Deaconesses should be in the altar to receive communion when they exist because after all, they are ordained at the altar and are clergy.  St Nektarios ordained a deaconess and that is good enough for me, although I don't push the issue because I think that modernists would misuse it at this time and nuns and the Philoptochos society handle many of the deaconess duties well already making it superfluous.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #13 on: October 25, 2007, 11:54:54 PM »

'Let it not be permitted to anyone among all the laity to enter within the sacred altar, with the exception that the Imperial power and authority is in no way or manner excluded therefrom whenever it wishes to offer gifts to the Creator, in accordance with a certain most ancient tradition.' (VI 69)

As I thought: Your implication that this applies to an empress - your take. I am unconvinced.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #14 on: October 26, 2007, 01:11:19 AM »

As I thought: Your implication that this applies to an empress - your take. I am unconvinced.
I think I would side on you with this one, at the time the canon was written the Empress only had "Imperial Power and Authority" when there was either a weak or no emperor. While she may wield influence in the eyes of the law she lacked "Power and Authority." It isn't until 797, over 100 years after this canon was written, that the rule of Irene of Athens gives "Imperial Power and Authority" to an Empress alone.

It is important to understand historical context when trying to interpret canons.
Logged

Joseph
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,184


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #15 on: October 26, 2007, 01:24:06 AM »

Deaconesses are an order of the Clergy, they would have been in the altar, some disagree with me and we have had threads on this board which discuss it at length, I don't really feel like hashing it out again.

Certainly there's good evidence showing that they communed at the altar and that as Anastasios said, that they were ordained at the altar.
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #16 on: October 26, 2007, 01:25:19 AM »

As I thought: Your implication that this applies to an empress - your take. I am unconvinced.

My bad, how could I have possibly assumed that Βασιλικης would include the Βασιλισσα. Roll Eyes Perhaps your objection is based on some strange belief that Βασιλικης refers only to the Βασιλευς, well, if that is the case then it should be noted that St. Irene's title was indeed Βασιλευς. Or perhaps you are trying to make a distinction between an Empress gegnant and an Empress consort (the point of which I don't really understand considering presence of Empress regnants in the Empire); the only example I can think of where an Emperess consort was denied entry into the altar was St. Irene, the wife of Theodosius II, by Nestorius of all people and I seem to recall this disrespect of Imperial Authority being viewed as evidence of his heresy. Maybe you have other examples, but how I see it you're not standing in the best of company right now. Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #17 on: October 26, 2007, 01:34:36 AM »

I think I would side on you with this one, at the time the canon was written the Empress only had "Imperial Power and Authority" when there was either a weak or no emperor. While she may wield influence in the eyes of the law she lacked "Power and Authority." It isn't until 797, over 100 years after this canon was written, that the rule of Irene of Athens gives "Imperial Power and Authority" to an Empress alone.

It is important to understand historical context when trying to interpret canons.

I don't believe that's really true, St. Theodora was co-regent with St. Justinian.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #18 on: October 26, 2007, 05:54:04 AM »

My bad, how could I have possibly assumed that Βασιλικης would include the Βασιλισσα. Roll Eyes Perhaps your objection is based on some strange belief that Βασιλικης refers only to the Βασιλευς, well, if that is the case then it should be noted that St. Irene's title was indeed Βασιλευς. Or perhaps you are trying to make a distinction between an Empress gegnant and an Empress consort (the point of which I don't really understand considering presence of Empress regnants in the Empire); the only example I can think of where an Emperess consort was denied entry into the altar was St. Irene, the wife of Theodosius II, by Nestorius of all people and I seem to recall this disrespect of Imperial Authority being viewed as evidence of his heresy. Maybe you have other examples, but how I see it you're not standing in the best of company right now. Wink

Nice smokescreen. Post the canon in Greek  AND demonstrate its relevance here.  Better yet, (not that I don't trust you  Roll Eyes), put up the URL.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2007, 06:18:41 AM by Αριστοκλής » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #19 on: October 26, 2007, 08:54:38 AM »

I don't believe that's really true, St. Theodora was co-regent with St. Justinian.
I would have thought they would do a better job teaching the history of the later Roman Empire at HC then at SVS. You really need to review your Roman Emperors. St. Theodora was co-regent with her son Michael III because he was a very weak Emperor, three dynasties and 400 years after Justinian.

Ohh and that means the canon was written 200 years before the example of St. Theodora. Remember that there was dramatic change in Church architecture over that 200 years with the introduction of the Iconostasis.

I am sure the father of Trullo would have never thought about having a Empress rule the Empire as the first regent just as I doubt any of the fathers of our country never thought there could ever be a female president.
Logged

Joseph
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #20 on: October 26, 2007, 11:51:50 AM »

I would have thought they would do a better job teaching the history of the later Roman Empire at HC then at SVS. You really need to review your Roman Emperors. St. Theodora was co-regent with her son Michael III because he was a very weak Emperor, three dynasties and 400 years after Justinian.

Umm, I think you have the wrong St. Theodora, I'm talking about the wife of St. Justinian. You know, the actress who married the Nephew of the Empeor, saved the throne of Justinian from the mobs of the city, and reformed Roman law to give women unprecedented rights and protections. Yes, there was more than one Empress Theodora...and I'm the one who doesn't know Roman History? Roll Eyes

Quote
Ohh and that means the canon was written 200 years before the example of St. Theodora. Remember that there was dramatic change in Church architecture over that 200 years with the introduction of the Iconostasis.

I am sure the father of Trullo would have never thought about having a Empress rule the Empire as the first regent just as I doubt any of the fathers of our country never thought there could ever be a female president.

I think you have a misunderstanding of how Roman Law, and thus canon law, worked. There is good reason why St. Irene took the title of Βασιλευς rather than Βασιλισσα, Roman Law had various authorities that were granted to the person who held the title Βασιλευς, but no law stating that a woman cannot take that title, linguistic conventions are not codified and thus are moot. Basically, if they wanted this statue to refer only to men, they should have stated as much, since they didn't their intentions (which you have yet to even prove) are irrelevant. You are attempting to impose English Common Law and your ideas about US Constitutional Law on the Roman Ecclesiastical Civil Law, from the legal perspective (though not always social perspective) of the Empire the gender of the Emperor is irrelevant because there is no law directly refering to it, only cultural conventions. Thus, when women did ascend the throne and people objected to their rule they had to resort to illegal means to dispose them, the force of law was on the side of the Imperial Authority.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2007, 11:52:34 AM by greekischristian » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,360


metron ariston


« Reply #21 on: October 26, 2007, 12:02:05 PM »

I saw a video of the Divine Liturgy in Lebanon where a nun was allowed in the altar area behind the altar rail (this church didn't really have an iconostas), and she censed the Holy Gifts during the Great Entrance. Is this common?

I have never been to a convent that didn't have nuns serving in the altar. Very common.

Some convents, at which there is no attached priest, even have the gerontissa lead a modified reader's service for Vespers, etc. At the point whereat the deacon would cense, the gerontissa goes behind the iconostasion, takes a small, hand-held censer, and censes everything more or less in the same order as the deacon would (without walking in front of the holy table itself).
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #22 on: October 26, 2007, 12:12:46 PM »

Nice smokescreen. Post the canon in Greek  AND demonstrate its relevance here.  Better yet, (not that I don't trust you  Roll Eyes), put up the URL.

I don't know where it is online in either Greek or English, I have an electronic version of the english, but it's not online. The only copy of the Greek I have is in print in the Pedalion. When I get home from work this evening, however, I will try to remember to post the canon in Greek. As for demonstrating its relevance, I would have thought that 'the Imperial power and authority is in no way or manner excluded...[from the sacred altar]' is rather self explanatory. But I might be able to look up a few statutes from Roman Law and a few linguistic histories this evening if it's absolutely necessary. Undecided
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #23 on: October 26, 2007, 12:52:37 PM »

Roman law? You're straining on this one, lad. The only thing self-evident is your desire never to be proven wrong in your opinion.

Please do post it in Greek. It is the one just before 'women are not to speak in church', correct?
« Last Edit: October 26, 2007, 01:55:20 PM by Αριστοκλής » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #24 on: October 26, 2007, 04:26:01 PM »

from the legal perspective (though not always social perspective) of the Empire the gender of the Emperor is irrelevant because there is no law directly refering to it, only cultural conventions. Thus, when women did ascend the throne and people objected to their rule they had to resort to illegal means to dispose them, the force of law was on the side of the Imperial Authority.
This is correct from a Roman Law perspcetive that there is no gender in that law thus allowing at a much later time, some 400 years after the Justinian Code, for a woman to take on the role of Emperor. It still has no bearing on the reality of what was the practice and the law at the time the canon was written.

And St. Theodora the Harlot was not even consider to be in the Church for most of her life. It is because of the end of her life and the repentance that she showed during tha later part of her life that he is counted among the saints. While Justinian claimed her to be of equal rule with him it was never codified and that should say a lot considering that he rewrote most of the Roman Code of Law at that time. A great example from our own time is that of President Clinton (William Jefferson, not Hillary); while Bill served and ruled, Hilary was given a large role in the rule of the country from all persepctive but she was never the president (under Common, Constitutional or Roman Law).

Logged

Joseph
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #25 on: October 26, 2007, 05:16:37 PM »

This is correct from a Roman Law perspcetive that there is no gender in that law thus allowing at a much later time, some 400 years after the Justinian Code, for a woman to take on the role of Emperor. It still has no bearing on the reality of what was the practice and the law at the time the canon was written.

Imperial Authority is Imperial Authority, the point is that gender is completely irrelevant since not codified in the statue.

Quote
While Justinian claimed her to be of equal rule with him it was never codified and that should say a lot considering that he rewrote most of the Roman Code of Law at that time.

She was granted the title of Augusta (Βασιλευς/Βασιλισσα wouldn't be used until the reign of Heraclius) and oaths had to be made to her as well as Justinian (and God, the Theotokos, etc., of course), which was unprecedented. (There is an example of this in the Novels of Justinian, maybe I can find it this evening.)

As far as codification, Emperors arn't codified, laws and statutes are codified. By your reasoning Justinian wasn't an Emperor either because it was not 'codified'; however, he did have the title 'Ausustus' bestowed upon him, as Theodora had the title 'Augusta' bestowed upon her, this title effectively placed them above the law they had the right to codify the law but were not subject to it.

Quote
A great example from our own time is that of President Clinton (William Jefferson, not Hillary); while Bill served and ruled, Hilary was given a large role in the rule of the country from all persepctive but she was never the president (under Common, Constitutional or Roman Law).

There are several Empresses who fit that description, but Theodora would not be one of them. A better example would be William and Mary.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #26 on: October 26, 2007, 08:10:57 PM »

As requested here's canon 69 of Trullo in Greek (sorry, I don't have a polytonic font):

Μή εξέστρω τινί τών απάντων έν λαικοίς τελούντι, ένδον ιερού εισιέναι θυσιαστηρίου, μηδαμώς επί τούτο τής Βασιλικής είργομένης εξοθσίας καί αυθεντίας, ηνίκα αν βοθληθείη προσάξαι δώρα τώ πλάσαντι, κατά τινα αρχαιοτάτην παράδοσιν.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #27 on: October 29, 2007, 10:59:45 AM »

Thanks for following through. I wanted to see the Greek to assess if your declension razzle-dazzle was relevant to the conversation...nice 'rope-a-dope-' though.  Wink
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
BasilCan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 204


« Reply #28 on: November 01, 2007, 10:44:03 PM »

As earlier stated in this post, you will notice nuns normally serving in the altar in women's monasteries. The "normal" rule seems to be that only those who are blessed or have a purpose can enter the altar. I have heard of older women blessed by priests, bishops and priest monks to clean the altar and relight the vigil candle if necessary. What you saw was a video from Lebanon. In this country, you will see Catholic influences on the services (like everyone going up for communion and some have even seen girl altar servers). What you see there is not normally found in most Orthodox countries.

Basil
Logged
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,184


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #29 on: November 15, 2007, 10:48:01 AM »

In this country, you will see Catholic influences on the services (like everyone going up for communion ....

If this is a "Catholic" influence, then I'm glad for it, since in most cases it is what should be happening throughout the Orthodox world, as this is a return to original Christian discipline surrounding communion.
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
Tags: deaconess 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.102 seconds with 57 queries.