I am still researching, thinking about and writing on this subject.
It is very interesting, but it requires that we take a comprehensive view of what the Fathers say and that Church has taught in various places and at various times.
Bear with me, I hope to have something for folk to read and comment on soon.
so when a male has an ejaculation, they shouldn't have comunion? but they do that by choice. women don't choose whether to have her menstrual cycle or not.
also, it was males who actually wrote these rules. how biased is that likely to be? as far as i'm concerend i haven't heard about Jesus saying anything about that. if he didn't mentioned it..doesn't it mean it isn't supposed to be an issue? I'm sure someone is gonna come up with quotes from someone in the bible..but did jesus himself say anything?
[quote author=mnc_hnn link=topic=9640.msg119222#msg119222 date=1284229174] so when a male has an ejaculation, they shouldn't have comunion? but they do that by choice. women don't choose whether to have her menstrual cycle or not.
Nocturnal emissions in males are involuntary - most of the time you can't choose whether or not to have one.
[quote author=mnc_hnn link=topic=9640.msg119222#msg119222 date=1284229174] so when a male has an ejaculation, they shouldn't have comunion? but they do that by choice. women don't choose whether to have her menstrual cycle or not.
also, it was males who actually wrote these rules. how biased is that likely to be? as far as i'm concerend i haven't heard about Jesus saying anything about that. if he didn't mentioned it..doesn't it mean it isn't supposed to be an issue? I'm sure someone is gonna come up with quotes from someone in the bible..but did jesus himself say anything?
I think we're still waiting for Father Peter's response. I'm not sure, but I found this by Bishop Youssef:
The Second Canon of St. Dionysius, the thirteenth Archbishop of Alexandria, and student of Origen who lived, in the mid-third Century states: “Concerning menstrous women, whether they ought to enter the temple of God while in such a state, I think it superfluous even to put the question. For I opine, not even they themselves, being faithful and pious, would dare when in this state either to approach the Holy Table or to touch the body and blood of Christ.”
To support his opinion, Dionysus refers to the New Testament, “For even the woman who had the 12-year discharge and was eager for a cure touched not him but only his fringe.” And finally, rooting the purity law in ancient Jewish tradition, he explicitly conflates Christian altar space with Temple space, stating that anyone “who is not completely pure in both soul and body shall be prevented from approaching the holy and the holy of holies.” It is important that the holiness of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ be kept within us after the Holy Communion. A person bleeding for any reason either due to a physical illness, menstruation or a cut should not partake of the Holy Communion. In such cases we consider them as non-fasting and not unclean.
We are in the New Testament now, I believe that purity no longer is a physical thing, it's a thing of the heart.. especially when it comes to the menstrual cycle, it is not something that has anything to do with our behaviour and should thus not be taken into account when we consider holiness or purity..
also, no one is pure in both body and soul, we go the Lord exactly for that reason: to be purified!
I just came across this topic and I am very proud of the Coptic youth who initiated this discussion. It shows that we submit ourselves to the Church's teachings and do not just follow our own opinion.
Following is what the Church teaches on this subject. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to ask.
In the OT, women under period were not allowed to touch holy things and were separated at home. After birth, women were not clean 40 days for boys and 80 days for a girl.
Also men were declared unclean for gonorrhea till healed and be separated if in an army and so on.
These orders were found in ancient nations like the Egyptians, so very well may have been passed on by the early fathers through Adam.
Nocturnal Emissions:
Scripture: Deuteronomy 23:9-14
Canons: • Pope Dionysius the 14th pope in his 4th canon: “Those who have nocturnal emissions involuntarily while sleeping, their conscious is their judge whether to have communion”
[This means that bad dreams reflect an impurity in the heart especially if the dream is enjoyed. If it happens naturally, the person can get absolution and receive communion.]
• Pope Timothy the 22nd in his 12th canon: “If the ejaculation happened as a result of lust, the person should not take communion. But, if it happens as a result of Satan’s temptation, he ought to take communion for the tempter will not cease his attacks”
[Psychologically, ejaculation happens for fear of ejaculation (e.g. clergy afraid of ejaculation on Sunday). So, the tempter will fight us in order to prevent us from receiving communion and thus we should not yield.]
• St Athanasius in his epistle 48 to Amun: Addresses the issue of ejaculation as a natural process if it happens normally, and if so does not prevent communion.
Menstruation:
Period for women prevents communion. The problem is not purity of women but the issue of bleeding. The same is true if man has gonorrhea and prevents communion.
• 2nd canon of Pope Dionysius: Women ought not to receive communion, touch the holy of holies, nor enter the church but pray somewhere else (because in those days, churches were consecrated including the sanctuary)
[Nowadays this canon cannot be applied for the Church allows everyone to attend and the sanctuary is not consecrated to allow for such attendance (as it used to be in the old days); only the altar is consecrated. However, communion should still not be received.]
• Pope Timothy in his 7th canon: Q: “Can a woman receive communion while menstruating?” A: “No, till she becomes pure again”
• This tradition is present in other Churches as explained in a book called “The Testament of Our Lord”, not received in our church but has the tradition of the apostles. It prevents the baptizing and giving communion to women under period.
ohh.. cool.. but ummm... also then why is it that women were not clean 40 days for boys and 80 days for a girl. is there a reason that there is a 40 day difference between them??? hmmm... anyway thanks cya
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=9640.msg133593#msg133593 date=1300800801] Period for women prevents communion. The problem is not purity of women but the issue of bleeding. The same is true if man has gonorrhea and prevents communion.
Whats the issue with bleeding? Why should it matter? Doesn't The Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ became one with our Spirit not our body.
then why is it that women were not clean 40 days for boys and 80 days for a girl.
The reason is God's compassion for women. Let me explain.
As you know women were in charge of the house tasks like cleaning, cooking, ... etc which are evident in the stories of Sarah, Rebecca, Ruth, and others. Also, Jews were eager to have boys than girls for they were awaiting the Messiah so in their tradition when they had a boy, they would celebrate and shower the woman with love and comfort. But if they got a girl, they think that God does not love them and make the woman work. So, God gave this commandment to stop hurting the woman if she got a girl and by having her unclean for 80 days, she could not cook or touch anything for she would defile it.
Now the Church received this commandment as it is for till today, the mentality of preferring boys over girls is still taking place especially in Upper Egypt and other parts of the world.
Any bodily fluid that emanates from the body within the 9 hours of communion is considered breaking the fast. This is not my opinion but is the Church's teaching.
Any bodily fluid that emanates from the body within the 9 hours of communion is considered breaking the fast. This is not my opinion but is the Church's teaching.
This is not accurate. It is permitted to go to the toilet, it is permitted to clean our teeth etc etc etc.
There is an issue with various bodily processes and the current practice of the Coptic Orthodox Church is to be relatively restrictive, within the bounds of pastoral need.
This will - eventually - be discussed in my long delayed paper.
I am really glad to hear that you are researching an comment on this topic. I look forward to reading it. It is a great blessing for everyone here in the forums to read your input.
You are not serious that I am talking about bodily excretions. This is ridiculous. I am talking within the context of my earlier post.
Now regarding brushing the teeth, the Coptic Fathers have a different teaching. It is recommended that you do not brush your teeth in the morning but late at night.
There are Fathers who say that we should clean our teeth and if we swallow a little water by accident it should not prevent us receiving communion since these are the accidents of life that Satan wishes to use to prevent the faithful from communing.
Here is what St Timothy of Alexandria says in his authoritative canons..
“If anyone fasting with a view to communion, while washing his mouth, or in the bath, has swallowed water involuntarily, ought he to commune? Answer: Yes, Since Satan has found an occasion whereby to prevent him from partaking of communion, he will keep on doing this more frequently.”
I think that it is necessary to not be quite so absolute in insisting on the canons, these are for bishops and priests to apply as a matter of pastoral care. There are often canons which contradict each other from very respected Fathers, but this is because they are not to just be applied indiscriminately.
I think that it is necessary to not be quite so absolute in insisting on the canons, these are for bishops and priests to apply as a matter of pastoral care.
First notice that I used the word recommend in my earlier post. I did not say it is a must. We were taught this way, it is still being taught that way. There are Arabic sites that list this as one of the rules to communion. And all of these are not geared to clergy but laity. So, please do not assume that I am just speaking my mind.
I understand that you do not know Arabic, but there is a voluminous teachings that were written in Arabic that unfortunately you may be missing. I pray the day will come when we have our ritual books and the Arabic Father teachings translated.
Second, it is not proper to say that the canons were written just for the clergy. There are canons that deal with the clergy from a ritual perspective and there are ones that deal with the laity. Yes, I agree that people need to go to their spiritual father to ask guidance, but that requires knowledge of the rules on part of the laity.
We as Orthodox, should hold the teachings of the fathers as much as we can so long as the circumstances permit. Yes, there may be cultural differences, for example between England and Egypt, but if it is in our ability to practice the small things the Church teaches that would be a blessing.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=9640.msg133941#msg133941 date=1300988082] Now regarding brushing the teeth, the Coptic Fathers have a different teaching. It is recommended that you do not brush your teeth in the morning but late at night.
I though it was exactly the opposit, cause you are not allowed to spit after communion
I am not disagreeing with holding to the teachings of the Church, I am disagreeing with simply producing canons when people have questions as if that answered everything.
There may well be Arabic texts, but there are also Greek texts. St Timothy of Alexandria is clearly a very serious and important source of teaching and should be read in conjunction with other later materials.
Canons are produced in particular circumstances and should not be applied to any and every situation as if they were universal. This is why they are to be applied by clergy in a pastoral context, and not by laity, certainly not by laity in the context of other people's lives. It is fairly universal Orthodox teaching in all jurisdictions that laity should not apply canons to themselves or others but should rely on their spiritual father.
There are canons about fasting for instance, but His Holiness is very insistent indeed in his writings that fasting is a matter of the rule provided by the spiritual father and is not a matter of simply applying a canon.
I don't disagree with you commitment to the tradition at all, it is entirely commendable and I respect it very much. But I do disagree when a person quotes a canon as if that was all there was to the Christian life. In the case of every behavioural canon it is a matter of 'Yes, but..' because the aim of the canons is the salvation of souls not simply obedience to a rule.
I am disagreeing with simply producing canons when people have questions as if that answered everything.
So, I guess you are objecting to the method of presentation. That is fine.
I wish I have the time to explain everything in detail but I do not. So, my hope is if at least I produce the teaching then someone else, may be you, could come along and take it further. Or if there is a question on a certain part we can discuss it.
This brings to mind the exchange you and I had regarding the black hat.
Canons are produced in particular circumstances and should not be applied to any and every situation as if they were universal.
Yes, I do agree. But people need to be aware of these canons or at least the rules that evolved as a result of those canons. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Some Copts, especially the new generation in the US, do not know neither the rules nor the canons. As a result, we see young and adult females go and take communion while they have their period. Others, take communion while not fasting nor fasting the nine hours.
There are canons about fasting for instance, but His Holiness is very insistent indeed in his writings that fasting is a matter of the rule provided by the spiritual father and is not a matter of simply applying a canon.
I am not sure what are you referring to. Can you please be specific.
But I do disagree when a person quotes a canon as if that was all there was to the Christian life.
I agree and I am sorry you misunderstood my objective.
In the case of every behavioural canon it is a matter of 'Yes, but..'
What are behavioral canons? Can you please provide example(s) so that I can put in context what you're referring to?
[quote author=Father Peter link=topic=9640.msg133936#msg133936 date=1300983817] This is not accurate. It is permitted to go to the toilet, it is permitted to clean our teeth etc etc etc.
hahaha..this made me laugh :D It would Be a disaster if we were not allowed to go to the toilet :P
Your posts are a little contradicting and confusing, but if I understood correctly, our church fathers teach us not to brush before communion? Would you mind posting the Arabic sites you mentioned with the list of rules? I would be more than willing to (find someone) translate for Fr. Peter as I also believe they are Satanic preventions that deprive us from communion. If we became peculiar with every detail before communion, first off the excuse list would be infinite (and stupid) and second, we would never feel worthy (evil kind of worthy, not the humble, good kind) to receive Christ.
My parents taught me that there is no excuse to deprive myself from communion. If I sinned, I would still take communion then make an appointment to confess. If I upset someone, I would apologize then take communion. If I ate before communion and came after the Gospel... just kidding.
No one is pure enough to receive Christ, but through His mercy, He miraculously allows Himself to enter our sinful states; so we shouldn't be pointing at insignificant excuses to prevent it.
Some Copts, especially the new generation in the US, do not know neither the rules nor the canons. As a result, we see young and adult females go and take communion while they have their period.
That's not true. Please don't make things up to validate your point.
Others, take communion while not fasting nor fasting the nine hours.
I have a hunch that you have no sources to back any of this up.
[quote author=T✞TL link=topic=9640.msg133959#msg133959 date=1300993700] If I sinned, I would still take communion then make an appointment to confess.
Hmm. Is this the teaching of the Church, or just what your parents told you? (Not saying your parents are going against the Church; just asking because I'm new so I don't know what the Church says about confession and communion.)
Comments
It is very interesting, but it requires that we take a comprehensive view of what the Fathers say and that Church has taught in various places and at various times.
Bear with me, I hope to have something for folk to read and comment on soon.
Father Peter
also, it was males who actually wrote these rules. how biased is that likely to be? as far as i'm concerend i haven't heard about Jesus saying anything about that. if he didn't mentioned it..doesn't it mean it isn't supposed to be an issue?
I'm sure someone is gonna come up with quotes from someone in the bible..but did jesus himself say anything?
so when a male has an ejaculation, they shouldn't have comunion? but they do that by choice. women don't choose whether to have her menstrual cycle or not.
Nocturnal emissions in males are involuntary - most of the time you can't choose whether or not to have one.
Thank you.
so when a male has an ejaculation, they shouldn't have comunion? but they do that by choice. women don't choose whether to have her menstrual cycle or not.
also, it was males who actually wrote these rules. how biased is that likely to be? as far as i'm concerend i haven't heard about Jesus saying anything about that. if he didn't mentioned it..doesn't it mean it isn't supposed to be an issue?
I'm sure someone is gonna come up with quotes from someone in the bible..but did jesus himself say anything?
wow
The Second Canon of St. Dionysius, the thirteenth Archbishop of Alexandria, and student of Origen who lived, in the mid-third Century states: “Concerning menstrous women, whether they ought to enter the temple of God while in such a state, I think it superfluous even to put the question. For I opine, not even they themselves, being faithful and pious, would dare when in this state either to approach the Holy Table or to touch the body and blood of Christ.”
To support his opinion, Dionysus refers to the New Testament, “For even the woman who had the 12-year discharge and was eager for a cure touched not him but only his fringe.” And finally, rooting the purity law in ancient Jewish tradition, he explicitly conflates Christian altar space with Temple space, stating that anyone “who is not completely pure in both soul and body shall be prevented from approaching the holy and the holy of holies.” It is important that the holiness of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ be kept within us after the Holy Communion. A person bleeding for any reason either due to a physical illness, menstruation or a cut should not partake of the Holy Communion. In such cases we consider them as non-fasting and not unclean.
also, no one is pure in both body and soul, we go the Lord exactly for that reason: to be purified!
.. just my opinion..
I think it is an interesting and important subject. It goes far beyond the narrow issue itself.
Father Peter
We're eagerly awaiting your view on this issue!
Following is what the Church teaches on this subject. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to ask.
In the OT, women under period were not allowed to touch holy things and were separated at home. After birth, women were not clean 40 days for boys and 80 days for a girl.
Also men were declared unclean for gonorrhea till healed and be separated if in an army and so on.
These orders were found in ancient nations like the Egyptians, so very well may have been passed on by the early fathers through Adam.
Nocturnal Emissions:
Scripture:
Deuteronomy 23:9-14
Canons:
• Pope Dionysius the 14th pope in his 4th canon:
“Those who have nocturnal emissions involuntarily while sleeping, their conscious is their judge whether to have communion”
[This means that bad dreams reflect an impurity in the heart especially if the dream is enjoyed. If it happens naturally, the person can get absolution and receive communion.]
• Pope Timothy the 22nd in his 12th canon:
“If the ejaculation happened as a result of lust, the person should not take communion. But, if it happens as a result of Satan’s temptation, he ought to take communion for the tempter will not cease his attacks”
[Psychologically, ejaculation happens for fear of ejaculation (e.g. clergy afraid of ejaculation on Sunday). So, the tempter will fight us in order to prevent us from receiving communion and thus we should not yield.]
• St Athanasius in his epistle 48 to Amun:
Addresses the issue of ejaculation as a natural process if it happens normally, and if so does not prevent communion.
Menstruation:
Period for women prevents communion. The problem is not purity of women but the issue of bleeding. The same is true if man has gonorrhea and prevents communion.
• 2nd canon of Pope Dionysius:
Women ought not to receive communion, touch the holy of holies, nor enter the church but pray somewhere else (because in those days, churches were consecrated including the sanctuary)
[Nowadays this canon cannot be applied for the Church allows everyone to attend and the sanctuary is not consecrated to allow for such attendance (as it used to be in the old days); only the altar is consecrated. However, communion should still not be received.]
• Pope Timothy in his 7th canon:
Q: “Can a woman receive communion while menstruating?”
A: “No, till she becomes pure again”
• This tradition is present in other Churches as explained in a book called “The Testament of Our Lord”, not received in our church but has the tradition of the apostles. It prevents the baptizing and giving communion to women under period.
cya
Period for women prevents communion. The problem is not purity of women but the issue of bleeding. The same is true if man has gonorrhea and prevents communion.
Whats the issue with bleeding? Why should it matter? Doesn't The Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ became one with our Spirit not our body.
As you know women were in charge of the house tasks like cleaning, cooking, ... etc which are evident in the stories of Sarah, Rebecca, Ruth, and others. Also, Jews were eager to have boys than girls for they were awaiting the Messiah so in their tradition when they had a boy, they would celebrate and shower the woman with love and comfort. But if they got a girl, they think that God does not love them and make the woman work. So, God gave this commandment to stop hurting the woman if she got a girl and by having her unclean for 80 days, she could not cook or touch anything for she would defile it.
Now the Church received this commandment as it is for till today, the mentality of preferring boys over girls is still taking place especially in Upper Egypt and other parts of the world.
Thanks.
Any bodily fluid that emanates from the body within the 9 hours of communion is considered breaking the fast. This is not my opinion but is the Church's teaching.
Thanks.
Stavroforos,
Any bodily fluid that emanates from the body within the 9 hours of communion is considered breaking the fast. This is not my opinion but is the Church's teaching.
Thanks.
I hope you're not serious.
There is an issue with various bodily processes and the current practice of the Coptic Orthodox Church is to be relatively restrictive, within the bounds of pastoral need.
This will - eventually - be discussed in my long delayed paper.
Father Peter
I am really glad to hear that you are researching an comment on this topic. I look forward to reading it. It is a great blessing for everyone here in the forums to read your input.
Mechaiel
You are not serious that I am talking about bodily excretions. This is ridiculous. I am talking within the context of my earlier post.
Now regarding brushing the teeth, the Coptic Fathers have a different teaching. It is recommended that you do not brush your teeth in the morning but late at night.
Thanks.
Here is what St Timothy of Alexandria says in his authoritative canons..
“If anyone fasting with a view to communion, while washing his mouth, or in the bath, has swallowed water involuntarily, ought he to commune? Answer: Yes, Since Satan has found an occasion whereby to prevent him from partaking of communion, he will keep on doing this more frequently.”
I think that it is necessary to not be quite so absolute in insisting on the canons, these are for bishops and priests to apply as a matter of pastoral care. There are often canons which contradict each other from very respected Fathers, but this is because they are not to just be applied indiscriminately.
Father Peter
I understand that you do not know Arabic, but there is a voluminous teachings that were written in Arabic that unfortunately you may be missing. I pray the day will come when we have our ritual books and the Arabic Father teachings translated.
Second, it is not proper to say that the canons were written just for the clergy. There are canons that deal with the clergy from a ritual perspective and there are ones that deal with the laity. Yes, I agree that people need to go to their spiritual father to ask guidance, but that requires knowledge of the rules on part of the laity.
We as Orthodox, should hold the teachings of the fathers as much as we can so long as the circumstances permit. Yes, there may be cultural differences, for example between England and Egypt, but if it is in our ability to practice the small things the Church teaches that would be a blessing.
Thanks.
Now regarding brushing the teeth, the Coptic Fathers have a different teaching. It is recommended that you do not brush your teeth in the morning but late at night.
I though it was exactly the opposit, cause you are not allowed to spit after communion
There may well be Arabic texts, but there are also Greek texts. St Timothy of Alexandria is clearly a very serious and important source of teaching and should be read in conjunction with other later materials.
Canons are produced in particular circumstances and should not be applied to any and every situation as if they were universal. This is why they are to be applied by clergy in a pastoral context, and not by laity, certainly not by laity in the context of other people's lives. It is fairly universal Orthodox teaching in all jurisdictions that laity should not apply canons to themselves or others but should rely on their spiritual father.
There are canons about fasting for instance, but His Holiness is very insistent indeed in his writings that fasting is a matter of the rule provided by the spiritual father and is not a matter of simply applying a canon.
I don't disagree with you commitment to the tradition at all, it is entirely commendable and I respect it very much. But I do disagree when a person quotes a canon as if that was all there was to the Christian life. In the case of every behavioural canon it is a matter of 'Yes, but..' because the aim of the canons is the salvation of souls not simply obedience to a rule.
I wish I have the time to explain everything in detail but I do not. So, my hope is if at least I produce the teaching then someone else, may be you, could come along and take it further. Or if there is a question on a certain part we can discuss it.
This brings to mind the exchange you and I had regarding the black hat. Yes, I do agree. But people need to be aware of these canons or at least the rules that evolved as a result of those canons. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Some Copts, especially the new generation in the US, do not know neither the rules nor the canons. As a result, we see young and adult females go and take communion while they have their period. Others, take communion while not fasting nor fasting the nine hours. I am not sure what are you referring to. Can you please be specific. I agree and I am sorry you misunderstood my objective. What are behavioral canons? Can you please provide example(s) so that I can put in context what you're referring to?
Thanks and God Bless
This is not accurate. It is permitted to go to the toilet, it is permitted to clean our teeth etc etc etc.
hahaha..this made me laugh :D
It would Be a disaster if we were not allowed to go to the toilet :P
Your posts are a little contradicting and confusing, but if I understood correctly, our church fathers teach us not to brush before communion? Would you mind posting the Arabic sites you mentioned with the list of rules? I would be more than willing to (find someone) translate for Fr. Peter as I also believe they are Satanic preventions that deprive us from communion. If we became peculiar with every detail before communion, first off the excuse list would be infinite (and stupid) and second, we would never feel worthy (evil kind of worthy, not the humble, good kind) to receive Christ.
My parents taught me that there is no excuse to deprive myself from communion. If I sinned, I would still take communion then make an appointment to confess. If I upset someone, I would apologize then take communion. If I ate before communion and came after the Gospel... just kidding.
No one is pure enough to receive Christ, but through His mercy, He miraculously allows Himself to enter our sinful states; so we shouldn't be pointing at insignificant excuses to prevent it.
If I sinned, I would still take communion then make an appointment to confess.
Hmm. Is this the teaching of the Church, or just what your parents told you? (Not saying your parents are going against the Church; just asking because I'm new so I don't know what the Church says about confession and communion.)