OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 23, 2014, 06:34:53 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 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: women should not speak in church  (Read 19000 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #90 on: November 30, 2007, 01:42:27 AM »

The issue is being respectful to the body and blood of Christ, not trying to legalistically define how long it remains in the bloodstream.  I would say that one should be careful the day they commune; if that day they cut themselves, they should wipe the blood and burn that rag. After a day, then it's not an issue. The point of a day is simply to allow some time to have passed. Whether some particle is there in the blood still or not is not the point of the discussion.

So it takes about, say, 12 hours for the presence of Christ to become sufficiently diluted by our biological functions that the issue becomes moot? Well, that's probably the straightest answer I've gotten yet, but still no sound science or theology for the position. Though I guess a scientific argument of sorts could be made if the eucharist is reduced to its physical nature, but even then, the molecules will integrate themselves into cells in the body and will last far longer than a single day...but if we're talking about the Eucharist in a spiritual sense, is it really good theology to say the body and blood of the God-Man can ever be said to be eliminated from our bodies?

Quote
As far as the 80 years example, while I am sure that sounds good to GisC as he is writing it, I hate to say it but it doesn't sound so great and convincing to me as I read it. Sorry buddy.  The Eucharist I would say dissipates into the natural elements when it is no longer recognizable as such, because it has moved outside of its function. One of course does not dispense of the water that is used to clean the vessels on a place where people walk, out of respect, but to say it is "in" that area of ground more than "other" areas is a bit absurd and again, missing the point.

As someone so immersed in secular notions of respect and culture, you should be amenable to these rituals of respect. Smiley

So in the end it's simply a matter of cultural respect? Don't get me wrong, I can look at certain cultural practices and say 'that's quaint, how nice'...but I fear that when culture becomes a device for oppression and misogyny I can no longer respect the practice. Perhaps it's time to take a stand and say that this particular cultural custom has far outlived its usefulness.

I would urge posters not to discuss menstruation. I mean come on.

Are you getting squirmish as a result of your cultural norms. 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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,446


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #91 on: November 30, 2007, 01:43:04 AM »

For the record, I don't really see the problem with women chanting in Church at all. I prefer Greek psalti style but a well formed choir is fine in my book, especially having a male and female choir alternate, I think that is cool.  Reading the epistle, I don't really see why that is necessary to introduce though.
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.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,446


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #92 on: November 30, 2007, 02:00:59 AM »

To start off, I don't really feel comfortable discussing any of this because I am simply content to pass down the practice that I have received and which I do not see as offensive or causing any great consternation. But, since a response is requested, I will carry on to the best of my feeble ability.

So it takes about, say, 12 hours for the presence of Christ to become sufficiently diluted by our biological functions that the issue becomes moot? Well, that's probably the straightest answer I've gotten yet, but still no sound science or theology for the position. Though I guess a scientific argument of sorts could be made if the eucharist is reduced to its physical nature, but even then, the molecules will integrate themselves into cells in the body and will last far longer than a single day...but if we're talking about the Eucharist in a spiritual sense, is it really good theology to say the body and blood of the God-Man can ever be said to be eliminated from our bodies?

I am unconcerned with science as there is no "scientific evidence" to support the Real Presence, nor do I think science could ever uncover the Real Presence since science deals with fallen nature and the Holy Eucharist is unfallen and deified; so really these are spiritual concerns, in the "fifth" or "sixth" dimension if you will Wink

Theologically, it seems to me the elements disperse into our bodies and are infused in us as "grace." After about a day, we have sinned enough for the grace to have found its way out. We can sadly in our fallen state only maintain that high level of communion with God for so long. I personally believe that very soon after the elements disperse in our bloodstream as grace they begin to go away and are soon gone because of our sinfulness and because they are no longer recognizable as the elements (and we have no reason to venerate communion outside of liturgy per se, but rather only have it in the context of the liturgy) but giving it a day seems the responsible thing to do "just in case."

Quote
So in the end it's simply a matter of cultural respect? Don't get me wrong, I can look at certain cultural practices and say 'that's quaint, how nice'...but I fear that when culture becomes a device for oppression and misogyny I can no longer respect the practice. Perhaps it's time to take a stand and say that this particular cultural custom has far outlived its usefulness.

Well I do believe that it is real, and not just a cultural thing, and I do believe that the ground for instance that that water goes into is sanctified. But it disperses at some point, and I don't see the point of questioning how long or how far it goes.  that just seems like a dumb thing to do. So it seems better to just be respectful and leave it at that. I am not going to address the menstruation issue because I think it is distasteful to talk about.

Quote
Are you getting squirmish as a result of your cultural norms. Wink

It's not that *I* am getting squirmish but we are in mixed company and I must confess that many are sensitive to this issue and I would prefer not to offend anyone's sensibilities on what is essentially a pastoral issue.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 02:05:04 AM by 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.
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,183


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #93 on: November 30, 2007, 02:16:05 AM »

I am simply not going to argue in detail with my friend Pravoslavbob since we have very different presumptions.  However, I would like to ask you a general question about your methodology if you don't mind.  Don't you think that perhaps you are creating a position, namely, that anything that has to do with blood is a Judaizing tendency, and as you say, "completely foreign to Holy Tradition" and then rejecting anything in history contrary to your position in a blanket fashion?

I would certainly be willing to consider anything you might want to suggest that I should consult that might change my mind about some of the things I have posted, without being polemical about it at all.

Quote
I would submit that the evidence that there is a canon against eating blood in meat,

I guess this would depend on the context, time and place of the canon etc.

Quote
along with the fact that priests are not supposed to celebrate liturgy while bleeding (whether you reject the idea or not does not change the fact that this has been the understanding of just about every priest I know including my own bishop)

Just to clarify matters, I presume you mean by "bleeding" not active bleeding, but bleeding which has been recently staunched.  Of course, if a preist had any kind of bodily fluid actively emanating from him I would say that he should not celebrate Liturgy because of the danger of getting it on holy things, which would not be reverent or proper.

Quote
or the fact that we are not the only "apostolic" church where one might hear of the rule concerning communing while menstruating (which, I am simply not going to get into the rights or wrongs of, again, I mean that is not really a topic for the forum since it's a pastoral issue, but I am just pointing out we are not solo in having that idea),

I don't think it is a pastoral issue (unless a particular woman has issues with it).  Public prayers of the Church refer to things concerning the womb.  However, if you think it is a pastoral question, I am more than happy to not discuss it.

Quote
leads me to believe that you might just be ignoring some of the very evidence that contradicts your position. Would you therefore say that all of the above is just judaizing stuff that crept in and got past all those Holy Fathers?

In terms of Church practice, my answer would be yes, as far as I can tell up to this point.  As you are aware, many things became regular practices in church despite certain Fathers being opposed to them.  For example: extremely infrequent communion.  You yourself referred to this practice as "a great abuse" in one of your posts a couple of years ago.  And yet, entire Orthodox nations see this practice as normative and desirable amongst the laity.  But I am still confident that this practice is wrong.  But again, if you want to PM me with some ideas on things to read, I am perfectly open to considering other points of view that I may have missed or unfairly dismissed.  In terms of the canon you site, as I intimated earlier, I would like to know more about it.

Quote
And is there any historical evidence (I am not demanding a citation, I'll take your word for it) or modern scholarly work (I would be quite interested in that) that addresses this judaizing tendency hypothesis?

There is definitely modern scholarly work that points to this tendency, and I believe historical evidence as well.  I'm afraid you'll have to search for it yourself for now, as the majority of my books are (hopefully temporarily!) in storage.
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,183


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #94 on: November 30, 2007, 02:24:24 AM »

It's not that *I* am getting squirmish but we are in mixed company and I must confess that many are sensitive to this issue and I would prefer not to offend anyone's sensibilities on what is essentially a pastoral issue.

Okay, I think I understand more now what you mean by referring to this as being a pastoral issue.
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,183


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #95 on: November 30, 2007, 02:30:21 AM »

Reading the epistle, I don't really see why that is necessary to introduce though.

You might not have this in the GOC, but in many Orthodox jurisdictions this genie has long escaped from the bottle, so to speak, and it is not a question of introducing it, since it must have been around for quite some time already. 

As an aside that might be related: can you tell me if, in the Greek Church, when two deacons are serving at liturgy, the second deacon reads the epistle?  This is the case amongst many if not all Slavs.
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,446


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #96 on: November 30, 2007, 02:32:37 AM »

I'll try to respond tomorrow. whew, time for bed. thanks for your input.
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.
Lightspeed1000
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 37


« Reply #97 on: November 30, 2007, 04:59:11 AM »

Ok then il cut the bull.


I am on a forum where 99.9% of the members are Orthodox Christians.

There is a young women who likes to teach me and also others about the church and the faith.

When she does this directly to me ,could you rightfully call me a  'Pig'  if i were to assume that this women should not be teaching me ,as i refer to 1 Timothy 2:11-16 which reads as follows-

"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.I do not permit a women to teach or to have authority over a man;she must be silent.For Adam was formed first,then Eve.
And Adam was not the one decieved;it was the woman who was decieved and became a sinner.
But women will be kept safe through childbirth,if they continue in faith,love and holiness with propriety."


Logged

no longer posting
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #98 on: November 30, 2007, 05:13:17 AM »

When she does this directly to me ,could you rightfully call me a  'Pig'  if i were to assume that this women should not be teaching me

No, I'd ask you to babysit my small children. Roll Eyes
You are of course completely free to be an Islamist nutjob, just don't expect the rest of us to join you.
Avert your eyes lest you fall into temptation, for this must surely be your ideal woman:

« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 05:25:31 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Lightspeed1000
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 37


« Reply #99 on: November 30, 2007, 05:24:30 AM »

Thanks mate

I dont know ,maybe St Pauls speaking in parables.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 05:26:51 AM by Lightspeed1000 » Logged

no longer posting
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #100 on: November 30, 2007, 05:28:43 AM »

I dont know ,maybe St Pauls speaking in parables.
Or may be, like everyone has tried to tell you on this thread, he is speaking in a specific time to a specific culture.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Lightspeed1000
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 37


« Reply #101 on: November 30, 2007, 05:53:49 AM »

Thank you for your reply,

I feel that if St Paul being an ambassador of Christ passes on this message to his brothers ,then in turn those brothers will keep those instructions,and keep passing them on throughout the ages to the Christians hoping that we can keep hold to these instructions and traditions,how can these instructions reach a point in time where they are ignored or forgotten or un heeded to.

Whats the difference between a Christian back then listening to St Paul say this personally to them   compared to A Christian who hears and reads this same message in his letters today?

If the New Testament doesnt relate to us today ,then what good is it to us?

We might as well not read it or just take it elsewhere from our home.

How can it be for that specific time and not for all time?

When and how does this message become invalid at a particular point in time?


Thank you
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 05:54:52 AM by Lightspeed1000 » Logged

no longer posting
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #102 on: November 30, 2007, 05:59:39 AM »

Or may be, like everyone has tried to tell you on this thread, he is speaking in a specific time to a specific culture.
Well, what about I Cor 6:9  Is that also speaking in a specific time to a specific culture, so that today, in our modern and enlightened world, we can forget about condemning what is mentioned there?
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 06:00:10 AM by stanley123 » Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #103 on: November 30, 2007, 06:25:42 AM »

Well, what about I Cor 6:9  Is that also speaking in a specific time to a specific culture, so that today, in our modern and enlightened world, we can forget about condemning what is mentioned there?
I wish people would take the trouble to read threads before asking the same questions that were already answered in them (and other threads as well).
No, stanley123. I'm not going to do your homework for you.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #104 on: November 30, 2007, 07:08:54 AM »

I wish people would take the trouble to read threads before asking the same questions that were already answered in them (and other threads as well).
No, stanley123. I'm not going to do your homework for you.
Basically, the point is that if you start ruling out certain passages in the Bible, saying that they are relevant only to a certain culture, then it leaves open the door to other groups to rule out what they want. And everyone know that this is being done today more than before by the gay and lesbian movement.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #105 on: November 30, 2007, 07:17:36 AM »

Basically, the point is that if you start ruling out certain passages in the Bible,
Who has ruled them out?
And while we're at it, when was the last time you attended a Love Feast (Agape)? The Church is clearly directed to do so in the Epistles- so why don't you celebrate it? How dare you "rule out certain passages from the Bible"?

And everyone know that this is being done today more than before by the gay and lesbian movement.
I wonder why it is that women are always seen as the "gatekeepers" of social morals? It as if women not covering their heads in Church will bring down civilization. If our civilization is that fragile, then it deserves to die.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #106 on: November 30, 2007, 07:23:21 AM »

Who has ruled them out?

My impression was that a strict interpretation as applicable to today's world of 1Cor 11, was being ruled out because it was alleged that St. Paul was speaking to a particular culture at a particular time? Was I wrong in this impression?
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #107 on: November 30, 2007, 07:38:43 AM »

My impression was that a strict interpretation as applicable to today's world of 1Cor 11, was being ruled out because it was alleged that St. Paul was speaking to a particular culture at a particular time? Was I wrong in this impression?
And my impression is that by the same standard, you have ruled out the passages in the very same Epistle (1 Cor. 11: 20-34) related to the Agape. Why is the Agape not practiced any more excerpt by a few Protestants and only once a year by the Orthodox on Pascha? Originally, it was celebrated with every Eucharist, and was integral feature of Church life. So it seems that this passage too was meant for a specific time and culture, because if it is not and is "eternal", then you and I are both guilty of omission by not celebrating the Agape.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 07:39:31 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #108 on: November 30, 2007, 07:55:01 AM »

And my impression is that by the same standard, you have ruled out the passages in the very same Epistle (1 Cor. 11: 20-34) related to the Agape. Why is the Agape not practiced any more excerpt by a few Protestants and only once a year by the Orthodox on Pascha? Originally, it was celebrated with every Eucharist, and was integral feature of Church life. So it seems that this passage too was meant for a specific time and culture, because if it is not and is "eternal", then you and I are both guilty of omission by not celebrating the Agape.
I don't remember ever saying that I advise against 1Cor 11 20-34. In fact, I mentioned in a different thread that a so-called paraliturgical Catholic devotion actually involved assisting at the Sacrifice of the Mass, which is in accord with my reading of 1Cor 11:23-29.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #109 on: November 30, 2007, 08:37:00 AM »

I don't remember ever saying that I advise against 1Cor 11 20-34. In fact, I mentioned in a different thread that a so-called paraliturgical Catholic devotion actually involved assisting at the Sacrifice of the Mass, which is in accord with my reading of 1Cor 11:23-29.
We obviously need a thread about the Agape to explain it. In the meantime, here is some information about the Agape from a source you are more likely to accept: The Catholic Encyclopaedia:


Quote
"This is what was known afterwards as the Liturgy of the Catechumens. Then followed the Eucharist, at which only the baptized were present. Two other elements of the service in the earliest time soon disappeared. One was the Love-feast (agape) that came just before the Eucharist; the other was the spiritual exercises, in which people were moved by the Holy Ghost to prophesy,"
Source.

"The Lord's Supper" which St. Paul is describing in 1Cor 11 20-34 was the Liturgy which included the Eucharist and the Agape (Love Feast). When St. Paul complains that at "The Lord's Supper":
"one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk." (1Cor 11:21) and
"Therefore, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, lest you come together for judgment."(1Cor 11:33-34)
what he is talking about is the Agape part of the Lord's Supper, which was a commonly shared meal in the Liturgy to which each of the Faithful would bring food. This part of the Lord's Supper has been dropped. In the Orthodox Church, we only celebrate it once a year on Pascha.
So do you see the problem? A practice described in the same epistle which you want to say is a "timeless command" has in fact been dropped in our time. If the practice of the Agape (which was an original part of the Christian Liturgy) is not timeless, then what makes you so sure that another part of the same Epistle is timeless? It's not a matter of "ruling things out of the bible" as you suggest, its a matter of the same Spirit Who guided the Church then is guiding it today, in a different time and place.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 08:37:41 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Sophie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #110 on: November 30, 2007, 08:45:15 AM »

We obviously need a thread about the Agape to explain it. In the meantime, here is some information about the Agape from a source you are more likely to accept: The Catholic Encyclopaedia:


"The Lord's Supper" which St. Paul is describing in 1Cor 11 20-34 was the Liturgy which included the Eucharist and the Agape (Love Feast). When St. Paul complains that at "The Lord's Supper":
"one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk." (1Cor 11:21) and
"Therefore, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, lest you come together for judgment."(1Cor 11:33-34)
what he is talking about is the Agape part of the Lord's Supper, which was a commonly shared meal in the Liturgy to which each of the Faithful would bring food. This part of the Lord's Supper has been dropped. In the Orthodox Church, we only celebrate it once a year on Pascha.

Do we? I was not aware of that. I have never known of a common meal with the members of my parish.
Logged

"Thoughts are like airplanes flying in the air. If you ignore them, there is no problem. If you pay attention to them, you create an airport inside your head and permit them to land!" (Priestmonk Christodoulos Aggeloglou, Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain Mount Athos, Greece, 1998,pp. 29-30, 48)
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #111 on: November 30, 2007, 09:07:23 AM »

Do we? I was not aware of that. I have never known of a common meal with the members of my parish.
The Agape Service takes place in the Afternoon of the Sunday of Pascha. The Gospel of the Empty Tomb (John 20:19-25) is read in as many languages as possible, and many churches hold their common paschal meal straight after it.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Sophie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #112 on: November 30, 2007, 09:32:14 AM »

The Agape Service takes place in the Afternoon of the Sunday of Pascha. The Gospel of the Empty Tomb (John 20:19-25) is read in as many languages as possible, and many churches hold their common paschal meal straight after it.

Right, I guess the bit about the many languages does not happen in Greece.  As far as the common paschal meal goes, judging by the fact that the people I know, all spend Easter Sunday with family and friends at home, the only time we all spend in church together is the Resurrection liturgy at midnight between Holy Saturday and Easter Sunday. I have meanwhile sent a SMS to a cousin who lives in Greece to ask whether they do have Agape in her parish as I know I could be missing something. I´ll let you know.

Sorry for deviating the thread a tiny bit. Otherwise I have no contribution to make to the OP, so I retire. Undecided
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 09:37:27 AM by Sophie » Logged

"Thoughts are like airplanes flying in the air. If you ignore them, there is no problem. If you pay attention to them, you create an airport inside your head and permit them to land!" (Priestmonk Christodoulos Aggeloglou, Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain Mount Athos, Greece, 1998,pp. 29-30, 48)
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #113 on: November 30, 2007, 09:53:13 AM »

Right, I guess the bit about the many languages does not happen in Greece.
Actually, it does.
The Priest's Service Book, as well as The Gospel Book used in the Church has the Gospel Reading phonetically written in Greek in many languages.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Christodoulos
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 396


« Reply #114 on: November 30, 2007, 10:15:23 AM »


As far as headcoverings...
St. Paul was writing to the Corinthians, a specific community with a specific problem- namely that the women in that community were doing something that was disturbing and unconventional with their head covering (by the way, it is debated among NT scholars as to whether this passage refers to a head covering or the way they actually wore their hair).  What they were doing was not a Jewish custom, more likely a Gentile custom.  St. Paul was doing nothing more than setting THAT PARTICULAR GROUP OF WOMEN straight.  I do believe in leaving it to the women to decide whether they are comfortable covering their heads.  I personally wear my hair appropriately for church, and do not feel that a head covering is needed to be pious and to pray.  I know women who cover their heads and wear pants to church.  What sense does that make?  St. Paul was writing in the context of a specific time, and I think to say that a woman is damned if she doesn't wear a scarf over her head is seriously underestimating the love and mercy of God, and taking St. Paul out of context. 

2.  It is SO TOTALLY between me and my spiritual father!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As always, I pray I'm not offending...  Please forgive me if I am.

God bless !

I want to add:

I think it is clear that St. Paul meant hair covering in the strict sense and to all christian women- it was a jewish tradition and also christian women covered their hair. We have writings of the Fathers speaking about covering and also from the Life of the Saints ( I think St. Matrona of Constantinopel for example)

It is not a "slavonic" thing it was also practised in greece ( and still is in some parishes more traditional) Romania, Serbia......and other countries..

I would say it is not only a personal thing ( perhaps at home) but not in the parish.

IN CHRIST
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,235


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #115 on: November 30, 2007, 11:05:00 AM »

Ok then il cut the bull.


I am on a forum where 99.9% of the members are Orthodox Christians.

There is a young women who likes to teach me and also others about the church and the faith.

When she does this directly to me ,could you rightfully call me a  'Pig'  if i were to assume that this women should not be teaching me ,as i refer to 1 Timothy 2:11-16 which reads as follows-
Maybe you just don't like ANYONE teaching you, and the teacher's female gender merely gives you something against which you can (mis)quote Scripture as an excuse to not submit.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 11:05:18 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #116 on: November 30, 2007, 11:13:48 AM »

Maybe you just don't like ANYONE teaching you, and the teacher's female gender merely gives you something against which you can (mis)quote Scripture as an excuse to not submit.

Good point. I wondered the same thing.  Is it the teacher or the teaching that Lightspeed really finds objectionable.

I have often found that I am more likely to try to discredit the teacher when one or both of the following is true:

* The teaching is difficult/uncomfortable, meaning that I must admit that I am wrong and make big changes.
* My pride gets in the way and I am bothered by someone knowing more than me.

In either case it is an issue of pride. 

I believe, sadly, that many cases where a man is using this particular scripture to avoid paying attention to the words/counsel of a woman are an issue of pride more than of following the Scriptures.  It just so happens that these men have a good, ready to be misused quote that can be easily utilized.
Logged

Carole
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #117 on: November 30, 2007, 12:32:40 PM »

 Sorry, but I don't see why I should retract what I have said above. First of all, the tradition of women wearing headcovering in Church held for almost 2000 years but then, at least in Catholicism in the west, was not adhered to after Vatican II. Various early Church fathers, including Hermas and  Clement of Alexandria recommended that women wear headcovering. For example, according to St. John Chrysostom: "... the man he compels not to be always uncovered, but only when he prays ... But the woman he commands to be at all times covered ... [he] also proceeded to say, "for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven." But if to be shaven is always dishonorable, it is plain too that being uncovered is always a reproach. And not even with this only was he content, but added again, saying, "The woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels." He signifies that not only at the time of prayer but also continually, she ought to be covered."(Homilies on First Corinthians, Homily 26, ver. 4) According to St. Jerome: "It is usual in the monasteries of Egypt and Syria for virgins and widows who have vowed themselves to God and have renounced the world and have trodden under foot its pleasures, to ask the mothers of their communities to cut their hair; not that afterwards they go about with heads uncovered in defiance of the apostle's command, for they wear a close-fitting cap and a veil."(Letter 147, 5) In other words, the veiling of women is a command of the Apostles. Also, early Christian art shows women wearing headcovering. In both the Orthodox tradition and in the Catholic tradition, the Mother of God is depicted as wearing headcovering. Catholic women are called to imitate the Mother of God in her humility. According to 2 Thessalonians 2:15, "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." According to Paul: "But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ" (11:3) So Paul grounds his reasoning in the teaching of the original creation. It is not a cultural issue, but rather a creational one. Another point against the cultural interpretation is that Paul argues for the necessity of headcovering "because of the angels."
The agape issue is for another thread, but anyway, we have it at many of our Churches regularly and I don't see where the agape is commanded with the same force of command and tradition as women wearing headcovering. In fact, at the local Old Calendar Greek Orthodox Church in our area, women always wear headcovering at the Divine Liturgy. And after each Divine Liturgy, there is an agape like celebration for everyone in the congregation.
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #118 on: November 30, 2007, 12:52:03 PM »

Just a nit-pick about terminology.  The proper term for the laity who assist in the distribution of the Holy Eucharist is, Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion. 

Eucharistic Ministers, are technically speaking, priests, who are the "Ordinary Ministers" of the Eucharist.

Interesting. Do you have an official source? I never realized this. I know many female Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, including one who was ordained as one when in High School.
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)
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #119 on: November 30, 2007, 01:23:49 PM »

Interesting. Do you have an official source? I never realized this. I know many female Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, including one who was ordained as one when in High School.

Yes.  The source is provided below but in short the sources for this clarification of terms are both the General Instruction of the Roman Missal and Redemptionis sacramentum (RS).

Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion are not "ordained."  They may be deputed for the purpose of serving as an EMHC but they are not ordained.

Links:
  Link #1 - USCCB
  Link #2 - EWTN

Quote
Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion may be used when the number of Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (bishops, priests and deacons) is inadequate.

    GIRM 162. The priest may be assisted in the distribution of Communion by other priests who happen to be present. If such priests are not present and there is a very large number of communicants, the priest may call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him, e.g., duly instituted acolytes or even other faithful who have been deputed for this purpose. In case of necessity, the priest may depute suitable faithful for this single occasion.

    RS 88 Only when there is a necessity may extraordinary ministers assist the Priest celebrant in accordance with the norm of law.

The quote above is from the EWTN page and discusses both the Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (defined therein as bishops, priests and deacons) and Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.  The document from EWTN quotes both the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) and Redemptionis sacramentum (RS).
Logged

Carole
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #120 on: November 30, 2007, 02:08:32 PM »

The quote above is from the EWTN page and discusses both the Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (defined therein as bishops, priests and deacons) and Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.  The document from EWTN quotes both the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) and Redemptionis sacramentum (RS).
The term extraordinary in ordinary English means going beyond what is usual or regular. However, it is by no means unusual to see women serving Holy Communion at the Catholic Church in our area. They do it at just about every Mass on every Sunday.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,076


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #121 on: November 30, 2007, 02:15:24 PM »

The term extraordinary in ordinary English means going beyond what is usual or regular. However, it is by no means unusual to see women serving Holy Communion at the Catholic Church in our area. They do it at just about every Mass on every Sunday.

While true in that sense, what is "extraordinary" is for those who are not ordained ministers to be distributing communion, and my hypothesis is that this is the context for the use of the word.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 02:15:38 PM by cleveland » 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.
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #122 on: November 30, 2007, 02:38:53 PM »

The term extraordinary in ordinary English means going beyond what is usual or regular. However, it is by no means unusual to see women serving Holy Communion at the Catholic Church in our area. They do it at just about every Mass on every Sunday.

Quote from: cleveland
While true in that sense, what is "extraordinary" is for those who are not ordained ministers to be distributing communion, and my hypothesis is that this is the context for the use of the word.

Cleveland is correct.  An Ordinary in ecclesiastical language, denotes any person possessing or exercising ordinary jurisdiction.  In this context "Ordinary Minister" denotes those ordained and thus possessing and exercising the ordinary jurisdiction to confect and distribute the Sacrament of Holy Communion. 

Extraordinary means those persons granted special permission to function in a specific capacity.  Thus Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.

Just like the Novus Ordo is the ordinary liturgy and the traditional Latin Mass is the extraordinary.  It isn't used in the general context of "usual" and "unusual."

The bishops, priest and deacons are the Ordinary Ministers.  Anyone else is an Extraordinary Minister. 

That they are "ordinarily" seen to be doing so is at best and overuse and at worst an abuse of the permission for their usage.
Logged

Carole
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #123 on: November 30, 2007, 02:58:38 PM »

Just take the Catholic fora approach as use only "EM" - then all the liberals are happy because they read it as Eucharistic minister and all the conservatives are happy because they read extraordinary minister.  Everybody wins. 
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #124 on: November 30, 2007, 03:02:15 PM »

Hmmmm...maybe we should use "OC" for "Orthodox Calendar"...naw  Smiley
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Posts: 6,410



« Reply #125 on: November 30, 2007, 03:24:29 PM »

Ok then il cut the bull.


I am on a forum where 99.9% of the members are Orthodox Christians.

There is a young women who likes to teach me and also others about the church and the faith.

Some questions:

Is what she is "teaching" true? 

Is it teaching as with a class or is it making points of information/knowledge as part of a discussion?

Is it correcting mistakes?

How do you know she "likes to teach"?  Could it be part of the discussion pattern?


Quote
When she does this directly to me ,could you rightfully call me a  'Pig'  if i were to assume that this women should not be teaching me ,as i refer to 1 Timothy 2:11-16 which reads as follows-

How does she do this "directly"?  By name? 

Is she giving information that you disagree with or did not know?

How do you feel with males 'teach' you?  What about an older woman?  Is she younger then you are?

And to reiterate:  Is what she 'teaches' true or factual?

As to your question, it would be rude to call you a "pig".  But by what authority would you dictate to her, to, in effect, tell her to shut up?  What makes your interpretation or use of the Scriptures the correct one to apply to persons  not under your control?

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Posts: 6,410



« Reply #126 on: November 30, 2007, 03:46:32 PM »

Sorry, but I don't see why I should retract what I have said above. First of all, the tradition of women wearing headcovering in Church held for almost 2000 years but then, at least in Catholicism in the west, was not adhered to after Vatican II.

If I may make a suggestion, the history of clothing and headgear and how it is done in different cultures can be a useful angle to look at some customs.  Clothing has useful and practical purposes as well as ritual meanings.  In times and places where washing hair was not easily done (unlike many places today with ready made shampoos and hot water) covering the hair was helpful. Climate also applies with hats/scarves/hoods keeping one warmer in cooler and wetter climates while protecting one from the sun in hotter places.

In various cultures including Jewish ones children and maidens did *not* cover their hair.  That was the sign of a married woman, so not all women would be required to wear a hat or scarf.

Quote
In both the Orthodox tradition and in the Catholic tradition, the Mother of God is depicted as wearing headcovering.

Not in all depictions or icons. Many, but not all, and if that is how St. Mary the Virgin dressed as a married Jewish woman in her time on Earth, then it is an accurate portrayal.

Quote
"But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ" (11:3) So Paul grounds his reasoning in the teaching of the original creation. It is not a cultural issue, but rather a creational one. Another point against the cultural interpretation is that Paul argues for the necessity of headcovering "because of the angels."

While the passage reads that the head of every man is Christ, it does not say that the head of every woman is every man.  And may I ask what you think the angels have to do with female hair?

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Amdetsion
Worship God with all thy strength and all thy might
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Patriarchate; Addis Abebe Ethiopia
Posts: 931


HH Abuna Pawlos - Patriarch of Ethiopia


« Reply #127 on: November 30, 2007, 04:07:45 PM »

Tamara

How are you?

Why is your bishop recruiting women to do the ministerial work?

Forgive me but this is very unusual for me.

I am not saying that as a women you can not do the work.

Are there a shortage of qualified men in your diocese?.


Logged

"ETHIOPIA shall soon stretch out her hands unto God".....Psalm 68:vs 31

"Are ye not as children of the ETHIOPIANS unto me, O children of Israel"?....Amos 9: vs 7
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Posts: 6,410



« Reply #128 on: November 30, 2007, 04:29:40 PM »

So am I.  And I am perfectly happy with having a female boss, a female church warden, etc.

You're able to look at it with some nuance and understanding.  Smiley

I have read or heard men using this passage though to say that they should not have to answer to a female boss in secular situations, including one who was in the military. That under no circumstances should a man have to do what a woman instructs them to do.   They have applied it sweepingly to All Women as being sub to all males.  Sad

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
St. Christopher
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #129 on: November 30, 2007, 06:48:27 PM »

Dr. Karras often raises some legitimate points in her work.  Unfortunately, partly through the testimony and argument of other scholars I have found her to be one who has an "axe to grind" in ways that make it difficult for me to trust her objectivity.  

I agree.
Logged
St. Christopher
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #130 on: November 30, 2007, 07:04:44 PM »

If I may, I would like to bring up something that is *required* for a person to read the Epistle:

Literacy.

In the past it was not universal or even  common in most of the world for the general population, both male and female.  Chances for education were limited and in parts of the world today they still are.  It is more common for a boy to go to school in parts of Asia and Africa then for a girl because she is expected to stay at home and do chores while the boy might have a chance for better paying work.  Even in Europe and the United States a drive for universal literacy has only been around in the last 200 years or so. 

Education was often found in monestaries and convents. Women were taught to read there and I have read of and heard nuns reading Scripture passages during worship.

What do you consider to be the date of the rise of feminism, please?  The call for rights for women is not a 20th century phenomenon and I would like to suggest that women who were not able to read or write or get other education were not able to spread develope ideas of equality either.

May I ask why the idea of a woman reading the scriptures aloud in church makes you uncomfortable, please?

Ebor
I would say the rise of feminism started in the nineteenth century and gained widespread acceptance in the twentieth.  Any example prior to 1800 couldn't be questioned.  Let me reword my question.  Can anyone give an example, outside of a monastery, of women serving in these ways?

1.  A woman reading Scripture or being a chanter goes against the plain meaning of the passage being discussed.
2.  I'm skeptical of any change in the Church's behavior that conicides with a change in culture.  That's why an example before 1800 would make me feel better.  It would show that it's not the effect of our culture influencing the Church.
Logged
Tamara
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Diocese of America
Posts: 2,208


+Pray for Orthodox Unity+


« Reply #131 on: November 30, 2007, 09:09:47 PM »

Tamara

How are you?

Why is your bishop recruiting women to do the ministerial work?

Forgive me but this is very unusual for me.

I am not saying that as a women you can not do the work.

Are there a shortage of qualified men in your diocese?.


Dear Deacon Amde,

I am doing well. He needed me to head up our women's diocesan retreats. There is so much work to be done that women must help do some of the ministry work. Men cannot possibly do it all. Our parishes would cease to function if women stopped leading the choir, chanting for services, teaching Sunday school, serving on the parish council, running spiritual book groups, leading youth groups, raising funds for charities, visiting the sick, feeding the hungry, etc, etc, etc. We are all members of the royal priesthood and we all must serve in various capacities. We will all be held accountable for how we used or did not use the talents and gifts God has given us.

sincerely, Tamara
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #132 on: December 01, 2007, 01:00:58 AM »

I have read or heard men using this passage though to say that they should not have to answer to a female boss in secular situations, including one who was in the military. That under no circumstances should a man have to do what a woman instructs them to do.   They have applied it sweepingly to All Women as being sub to all males.  Sad

Disobeying a direct command from a superior officer because she was a woman? I never heard of anything like this. I really hope for his sake that he didn't try to use that argument at his court martial, unless he has good friends at Ft. Leavenworth.
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
GreekChef
Prez
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America: Metropolis of Atlanta
Posts: 884



« Reply #133 on: December 01, 2007, 01:09:25 AM »

Dear Deacon Amde,

I am doing well. He needed me to head up our women's diocesan retreats. There is so much work to be done that women must help do some of the ministry work. Men cannot possibly do it all. Our parishes would cease to function if women stopped leading the choir, chanting for services, teaching Sunday school, serving on the parish council, running spiritual book groups, leading youth groups, raising funds for charities, visiting the sick, feeding the hungry, etc, etc, etc. We are all members of the royal priesthood and we all must serve in various capacities. We will all be held accountable for how we used or did not use the talents and gifts God has given us.

sincerely, Tamara

I am happy to see this post by Tamara.  The same was true of my home parish.  I was the choir director and reader from the age of 16 in my parish, as there was NOONE else to do it.  All of the ministries Tamara mentions above would also have fallen by the wayside in my home parish, had women like myself, my sister, and my mother (a convert, no less!!  *gasp*) stepped up. 

Why is it that people say "women shouldn't chant or read... except nuns?"  What makes a nun any less of a woman!  If you are going to abide so strictly by St. Paul's words, then show me where it says that it's okay for nuns to chant and read, but not other women? 

By the way, such strict adherance to these passages WITHOUT REGARD TO CONTEXT is EXACTLY what Sola Scriptura is about.  If you disregard the context, then you cannot achieve a proper interpretation and implementation of the scripture.  I refer to my previous post regarding context...



As far as headcoverings...
St. Paul was writing to the Corinthians, a specific community with a specific problem- namely that the women in that community were doing something that was disturbing and unconventional with their head covering (by the way, it is debated among NT scholars as to whether this passage refers to a head covering or the way they actually wore their hair).  What they were doing was not a Jewish custom, more likely a Gentile custom.  St. Paul was doing nothing more than setting THAT PARTICULAR GROUP OF WOMEN straight.  I do believe in leaving it to the women to decide whether they are comfortable covering their heads.  I personally wear my hair appropriately for church, and do not feel that a head covering is needed to be pious and to pray.  I know women who cover their heads and wear pants to church.  What sense does that make?  St. Paul was writing in the context of a specific time, and I think to say that a woman is damned if she doesn't wear a scarf over her head is seriously underestimating the love and mercy of God, and taking St. Paul out of context. 

Christodoulos,
My source for the above quote is Fr. Theodore Stylianopoulos, in his class at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology.  Fr. Ted is one of the foremost New Testament theologians and is a prolific author.  What is your source, please?
Logged

Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.
Matthew 18:5
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #134 on: December 01, 2007, 01:28:25 AM »

  And may I ask what you think the angels have to do with female hair?
OK. Here's a guess. Generally, angels are known to offer the prayers of the faithful to the Lord. According to the passage: 1Cor 10: “ Therefore ought the woman to have a sign of submission on  her head, because of the angels.”  So a guess on my part is that this  refers to the fact that angels are present at sacred gatherings in Church and that they will join with the faithful with greater enthusiasm if the faithful are submissive to God. And this is shown by women wearing headcovering. For example, we read Tobias 12: 12-15:” 12 When thou didst pray with tears, and didst bury the dead, and didst leave thy dinner, and hide the dead by day in thy house, and bury them by night, I offered thy prayer to the Lord. 13 And because thou wast acceptable to God, it was necessary that temptation should prove thee. 14 And now the Lord hath sent me to heal thee, and to deliver Sara thy son's wife from the devil. 15 For I am the angel Raphael, one of the seven, who stand before the Lord.”
Logged
Tags: women and the Church female ordination proper behavior deaconess head coverings 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   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 0.154 seconds with 71 queries.