I visited a local OCA parish for theit Nativity of the Theotokos DL this morning. The choir director is a friend of mine. I used to attend there before coming to the Byzantine Catholic Church. To my surprise, I was advised by their priest that in order to sing in the choir, I would need to get a personal blessing and state that I am Orthodox. This requirement is supposed to be coming from his bishop. Has anyone else encountered this?

If correct, it sort of makes me wonder if non-Orthodox should be permitted to attend services without a blessing. Not many converts to be had that way.

As with many things in Orthodoxy, there is no standard set of rules for all Orthodox churches regarding the participation of non-Orthodox in Orthodox liturgical services. There are several schools of thought; practices will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

The most extreme places will only allow non-Orthodox to observe services from the narthex.

Others will allow non-Orthodox to be in the nave, but that's about it.

Some say that, since the liturgical services are the public prayer OF the Church, only members of the Orthodox Church can perform the necessary functions, including singing in the choir.

Others hold that non-Orthodox can do anything except receive the Sacraments. So, non-Orthodox can light candles, kiss icons, venerate the Cross, receive anointing on feasts, receive blessed bread, but can't receive Communion, go to Confession, etc. How those of this view regard singing in the choir varies.

There are plenty of cases where non-Orthodox are permitted or invited to sing at Orthodox services, and vice versa. As I said before, it will often depend upon jurisdiction, location, what the service is, and so on.

The OCA might have something in their Clergy Guidelines forbidding the participation of non-Orthodox in "public" liturgical roles, but I don't know for sure. However, out of good will, it is probably best to just follow the rules of the parish priest.

Dave

Jim,

This may be a local requirement, but it would make sense ensuring that the choir director is one in good standing and that he or she is knowledgable in church music. I am sure that some non-EO came and were totaly unfamiliar with the church music, thus causing problems in services. This could be the reason for this requirement.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

Jim,

It sounds to me like there may be some "politics" going on in the choir. Was this the same priest who was there when you regularly attended? The same bishop? I can seem some of the logic in the requirements about singing in the choir since choirs can be such ego charged envirionments. I have sung in an OCA choir earlier this year, with the priest's knowingledge and having known the choir director many years. Your experience seems to be on the extreme end of the spectrum I would hope it is not the norm.

It would make little sense to require the same just to attend liturgical services. It would definitely reduce the number of converts. OTOH the people who stay would definitely be serious about the Orthodox Church!

Steve

That's quite strange. In more than one OCA parish or mission I have had priests who know me come over and hand me something and tell me to sing (and in other jurisdictions) who knew beforehand I was Greek Catholic.

Not all Orthodox act like that, of course. I asked one of the lay leaders there if visitors will be welcome for the upcoming visit of the Wonderworking Icon of Sitka. He said absolutely, though the visit is targeted at the surrounding Hispanic community, and is sponsored by the OCAs Hispanic Mission.

Steve is probably right about the politics aspect. However, the same priest now requires every man who enters the sanctuary to remove his shoes first. Not many go there anymore. They get a blessing at the foot of the ambon for reading, instead. Apart from the initial confrontation, I was welcomed by everyone else, who said they missed me and my wife, and wished my wife and I would come back. She wisely didn't attend, but many sent their love and regards.

If I go there again to help out the choir director, I could always slide in a few minutes after the service starts. After all, the choir is in the back, upstairs. I just don't want to cause problems for the choir director, who is a real friend, and if it is really Bishop Tikhon's requirement, I should accept that. It says, "Visitors are not welcome", however, to anyone who does not know the Orthodox very well, and I have been advised privately that this policy is not applied all over his diocese, so it does make me wonder whether he issued it.

I see this situation differently than everyone else. So this probably means I’m wrong. But I think I have a well-reasoned perspective that I’ll share anyway. With the little information available I’d have to defend the pastor’s ruling that only members in good standing participating in the choir.

First, I want everyone to note that the priest was NOT talking about Jim coming to church and the liturgy as a participant. So this is NOT about being open to converts and visitors in general. Rather this is an issue on liturgical service as a representative for the Church.

The priest, deacon, reader, cantor or choir and servers are all offices of the Church. In the ideal situation all of these posts is occupied by one set apart for the task from the community by tonsure or ordination. Now in most of our Churches the reader, singers and servers are not, but they are performing an office that is an official functionary of the Church in the absence of once specifically and permanently called to the task.

I don’t believe anyone would think for a moment to nominate himself as a server then vest and enter the sanctuary without a blessing from the priest of that liturgy. The question then is why should the kliros be any different? Those of us who lead the singing for the parish are not self-appointed.

The cantor or choir is a representative of the community and should exemplify the best the community has to offer. We see this even in the general religious culture. The expression "He’s not a choirboy" implies that being selected as a member of a choir means one is exemplary in their conduct. A pastor and Bishop should take an active interest in who is representing their church at the kliros.

Another aspect of religious culture in general, but especially in the east, is obedience. We are all subject to authority and need to respect the authority over us regardless of whether or not we agree with the decisions of the authority. In fact, the monastic writings are full of exhortation to obedience for obedience sake. We are often not in a position to see the whole picture. Following the instructions of authority also provides the opportunity for discernment on our part. Why is this instruction given to me? What does this different role than I want the role I’ve been asked to play? What can I learn from this experience?

Now I don’t mean we blindly accept whatever happens as a doormat. We do need to question the instructions we receive in order to understand the reasons involved. But these may not be forthcoming right away. The desert fathers are full of spiritual stories where a young monk is given inexplicable instructions without good reason by his master who refuses to explain. Later, the story winds up with the novice discovering for himself the reason. This is often considered a better learning tool than simply telling the novice.

In Jim’s particular case I would suspect the reason is his change in jurisdiction. He left the Orthodox and now is a cantor in the Byzantine Catholic Church. I imagine that many in this local congregation know this transition has occurred. The pastor may be concerned that allowing Jim to sing in his choir validates for his congregation that he finds switching from Orthodox to Byzantine Catholic acceptable.

Jim’s situation is different than even a visiting cantor from another tradition. We certainly have come a long way in tolerance in recent years. Closer to the split in our Church the animosities between communities ran high and even attendance of Orthodox at Catholic Churches or the reverse was actively discouraged. In recent years I’ve known Orthodox cantors to serve our churches and Catholic cantors to serve at Orthodox parishes around the Pittsburgh area. My own parish even hosted a cantor training classes that included both Orthodox and Catholic cantors.

But these situations all involve cantors who were always in one tradition or the other. I can see how the conversion of someone from Orthodox to Catholic would be a legitimate possible concern for a pastor or a bishop and a legitimate reason to ask that person not to serve at the kliros when attending that church.

I basically agree with Steve's observations. Had I known what was going to happen, I would not have gone over to help. And I will not do so again. I've advised my friend that I do not want to contribute to putting her position in jeopardy.

However, the OCA choir director was put in a difficult position by her own parish priest. The priest could have execised greater discretion by discussing it with her afterwards, making clear that it must not happen again. He chose, instead, to make it at issue just before the service, when I was already there. Had he made it clear previously to his choir director that "non-Orthodox" are forbidden from singing as visitors to the choir, the incident might not have occurred at all. The situation does call to question his abilities in pastoral care.

It could have also cost him a choir director, because it also has to do with a necessary span of control for the director. Interfere with the director's ministry too bluntly, aka micromanaging, and you can wind up with bigger headaches than you started out with. She has a job to do, and he should not have to interfere in it if she is experienced- and she is experienced, as well as being a trained crisis counselor.

Essentially, Steve is right, however. I trusted that things were ok there with regard to my visiting in the choir, and found out otherwise. Their call.

It is, of course, true that policy varies, and that one should respect the local rules.

However, Jim also writes that "the same priest now requires every man who enters the sanctuary to remove his shoes first."

This is Just A Bit Much. That is definitely the custom in the Coptic Church, both Orthodox and Catholic, but I've never heard of such a practice in Eastern Orthodoxy. Does the priest remove his own shoes? (He might like to be aware that light liturgical slippers are available from Coptic supply houses). If this simply an idiosyncratic priest imposing his own preference on an Eastern Orthodox congregation, the bishop should be told about it. If, on the other hand, the bishop has such a rule, well, that is a liturgical development of quite considerable interest to everyone who follows the Eastern Christian liturgical traditions, and all of us should be told about it.

Incidentally, for those who may visit a Coptic Church - obviously one should not enter the altar unless invited, in which case one should definitely remove one's shoes - but it is also considered good manners to remove one's shoes when venerating relics, icons and so on.

Incognitus