www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall women & communion

I was once told by a female friend that Orthodox women are not allowed communion when they are having their period. What is the theological significance of this practice? Isn't it kind of legalistic/superstitious to say that a bodily function ordained by God Himself makes a woman "unclean?" Also is it true one should not go to communion for 1-3 days after having intercourse (within marriage, of course).

Friend,

Christ is Risen!

I think that this kind of question is best directed to an Orthodox priest. Since you don't say if the woman who told you that is Orthodox it is hard to evaluate from this information. I have heard that an Orthodox priest cannot celebrate with a bleeding wound perhaps there is a connection. Again, it seems only proper that this question should be directed to an Orthodox priest not a Byzantine Catholic message board.

Tony

Dutchman,

It is good to have you back. But I assure you women may go to communion even during that time.

Axios

Dear OD,

The general rule is that women are not allowed to even come into Church when they have their period.

We know that during the baptismal rite, the mother is "Churched" or purified by prayer to come back to regular attendance at the Divine Liturgy.

These are practices aimed more at hygiene, but they are sanctioned by the Church.

Individual pastors have leeway in interpreting them and it is important to refer to them in all cases.

Alex

This discussion comes up every so often, and is usually paired with the thread about whether nocturnal emissions make men "unclean" too.

The prohibition against menstruating women in church/receiving communion clearly derives from the Old Testament prohibitions. It's one of the very few to have survived - and it is by NO means universally observed/required/sanctioned.

Alex dear, what does hygiene have to do with it????

Sharon

Dear Mother Sharon,

I guess in the "unclean" sense - I'll take your word for it that it has nothing to do with hygiene!

The Eastern Church does prescribe a lengthy service of repentance for those men who experience nocturnal emissions too . . .

I'm turning all red here . . .

If I don't stop talking about this, I just might experience one tonight as well . . .

Alex

Dear Orthodox Dutchman,

After praising Alex so effusively in another thread of the Forum, I find it necessary to bash him a bit here.

It has nothing to do with hygiene!!!!!

It has everything to do with holiness.

The Hebrews strictly kept the rules that many Orthodox still keep to.

"Haima" or blood is holy since blood carries the life of the person. They were prohibited from drinking the warm flowing blood of animals immediately after slaughter since this is what the pagans did to capture the animal's "life." Cannibals did this for the same reason. Moabites and others sacrificed children and drank the blood immediately, while it still carried the child's life.

God's prohibition of this (blood drinking) is confirmation that His gift of life is in the blood of the animal. What He wanted was that His people would turn to him directly for sustenance and not try (in vain) to steal this sustenance from other living creatures.

Knowing this, doesn't the significance of the eucharist make even more sense? We drink the blood of the only worthy sacrifice, the Christ!

So the flow of blood is a holy event, as is any thing that touches on the life-sustenance and life-creation of the human person. Women who have their monthly cycle are participating in the very process that allows new human lives to come into the world. Thus it is holy and they abstain for those days. The actual giving birth is even more holy, and thus carries with it a period of 40 days abstinance from the eucharist. During childbirth, much blood is lost.

For those who still think that the Church looked/looks upon women and their childbirth as "unclean" in our modern sense, explain why the Church never prohibited pregnant women from communing!!!!

It is all about the blood and it's connection with life, and thus, holiness.

The act of sexual intercourse also is part of the the process of procreation, bringing new life into the world, and thus is also holy in its own way. Thus married couples are to refrain on the eves of receiving the eucharist. I would think that this would be apparant to any married person, but it obviously bears repeating in our sex-mad cultural context.

The canons speak to nocturnal emissions: if they be out of lust for a woman, then the man should neither serve nor commune. If they are more biological in nature, related to the male's cycle of creation of new sperm and discharge of old ones, then he need not abstain from the chalice.

The celebrant also encumbers responsibility to his community to serve them. Thus while he must try to keep to the canons, he also may need to sometimes break the canon for the sake of those who have prepared for the eucharistic meal. This he would confess and repent of later.

Holy means "set apart" or "other" in Hebrew, with the obvious scriptural connotation of being set aside for the glory of God. Some things are just too holy to be combined withn other holy things. With God, everything is holy and held at once. He is holiness and glory. But with us, why, we're only humans.

Truly He is Risen!
Andrew

Dear Reader Andrew,

As I told the Rev. Fr. Thomas, I don't compare myself to you and other graduands of St Vladimir's Seminary!

And if I were right ALL the time, I'd be applying for you-know-who's job in Rome . . .

And holiness aside, when my wife is experiencing what we are talking about here, I myself give her a wide berth . . .

Alex

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Axios:

"I assure you women may go to communion even during that time."

Axios,

you give a very categorical answer, which obviously is not entirely in step with tradition, what do you base your statement on??

Christian

Dear All:

While I personally think this is ONE tradition that can go into the circular file, I have two questions:

1. What makes this Hebrew tradition any better than the others? Put another way, why were we able to do away with mandatory circumcision but this one satyed?

2. If a woman's monthly cycle and child-bearing are holy times, what is the logic behind telling her to absatin from the eucharist? The Great Fast is a holy time and the church sets aside the Presanctified to strengthen us. Why can't the woman be strengthened during her personal "holy times?"

Yours,

kl

Dear KL,

I eagerly await commentary on your excellent questions!

Alex

Guys,
I thought I was fairly well read on Orthodox tradition, but obviously this is a topic not often mentioned. Never heard of it.

You guys are weird, sorry, but I'm sure all the other women would also like you to drop the subject.

Tradition aside, stop it. Weird weird weird.

There's plenty of other things to talk about.
denise

The whole issue has to deal with blood. In the faith of Israel blood was sacred. Kosher laws were related to blood-letting. Shedding blood was an issue, including this particular issue regarding women.

Should we return to a first century Palestinan Jewish understanding of the workings of a human body and enforce it on today's society? I think not. What did Paul say about the Law?

We have half the world's population to thank for their contribution to life. We have women to thank for bearing and caring for us until birth and beyond.

The most beautiful aspect of our liturgical tradition is the 'sacrifice' of the Divine Liturgy where ordinary bread becomes for us the precious and life-saving Body of Christ. Those who are sinning and fail to repent should be the ones from whom the chalice be withheld, not loving mothers life-giving.

Birthgiving is a little bit different today. New mothers are discharged from direct medical care in a very short time. How long did it take for a new mother to finally recover and return to church back in the first few centuries after the first Pentecost? How many died during giving birth?

My wife was well enough, even after a week-long ordeal of post-partum complications, to be able to return to church (the following week) and have our son baptized, chrismated and communicated (within three weeks); hardly too long of a time to be warranted with a re-admittance rite to communion because of automatic excommunication.

Joe

The actual practice of the Orthodox Church

I guess a lot of this depends upon one's mindset and one's perspective.

I spend a great deal of my days dealing with blood exposure in the workplace (healthcare, corrections, etc.) and I don't see blood as holy at all. It's a part of being a human being, and also an efficient carrier of pathogens like hepatitis, HIV, syphilis, haemorrhagic fevers, and now (perhaps) even SARS.

It is not surprising that the ancients had their perspectives on blood (and other body fluids/parts), but as our understanding of the human body has developed, so should our understanding of its spiritual relevance.

To be perfectly honest, I am oftentimes struck by the incredible complexity and beauty of God's creation in the human person. In terms of sanctity and sanctification, it is the whole human person, mind and body, including all of its functions, that is sacred. I'm not sure that it serves us well to dissect separate functions or elements for praise or condemnation - the totality is God's handiwork and it should be respected and cared for as the Temple of the Holy Spirit. We need to ensure that all of God's created children are incorporated into the total life of the community, with every possible avenue of grace open to them, including the sacraments.

Christ is Risen!!