The Eucharist and women's menstural cycles

[Mickey]

He seems to enjoy doing this, and it is getting a bit tedious.

 

[grandfather]

In Holy orthodoxy…we are obedient to our Spiritual directors.
Yes. Both practices are acceptable… Why is it so hard for you to understand this?
Doubtful…St Gregory was quite Orthodox. It goes without saying that he knew about obedience to a Spiritual director.
You do not understand obedience to the spiritual father/mother.
In the end…it is about obedience to one’s spiritual mother/father after long talks and counseling and confession.
Yeah…I am thinking that most did not receive during menses.

Mickey,

I think you agree with Saint Gregory. You posted the quote from him and seem to affirm it.
The essence of it is that he declares individual women are at liberty to do as they wish.

On any given matter, either individuals are at liberty to do as they wish, or they are obedient to another. It can not be both.

Why would anyone need to go to confession over this matter? What sin is there? What reason is there for long talks and counselling, or a spiritual director, in regards to this issue, especially in light of Saint Gregory’s statement that you agree with?

Out of curiosity I would like to ask what you think personally. Do you think the natural functions of the body make a woman impure or unfit to receive the Eucharist? Or, do you think it is spiritual impurity that makes one unfit? Do you think the natural functions of the body make one spiritually impure or unclean?

You seem to be saying that each person’s spiritual director, mother or father determines this sort of thing on a case by case basis and that I am unable to understand this, because I do not understand obedience. You say Saint Gregory is right, because he understands obedience to a spiritual director, and all the spiritual directors are right even if they disagree with him. It could be that a given woman after long talks, counselling and confession should not receive, but maybe another woman after the same process with another director or the same one should receive. I think that is what I understood you to say. If that is not what you meant I misunderstood you.

This all seems to make perfect sense to you and you find nothing illogical in it. I can not answer you to tell you why I am unable to understand what you say. Truly, I am not a very intelligent person and that could explain why I am confused by it and why I am tedious.

Nevertheless, even from this confused condition I wish for you and all the Orthodox every grace.

 

[Marybeloved]

Mickey,

I think you agree with Saint Gregory. You posted the quote from him and seem to affirm it.
The essence of it is that he declares individual women are at liberty to do as they wish.

On any given matter, either individuals are at liberty to do as they wish, or they are obedient to another. It can not be both.

Why would anyone need to go to confession over this matter? What sin is there? What reason is there for long talks and counselling, or a spiritual director, in regards to this issue, especially in light of Saint Gregory’s statement that you agree with?

Out of curiosity I would like to ask what you think personally. Do you think the natural functions of the body make a woman impure or unfit to receive the Eucharist? Or, do you think it is spiritual impurity that makes one unfit? Do you think the natural functions of the body make one spiritually impure or unclean?

You seem to be saying that each person’s spiritual director, mother or father determines this sort of thing on a case by case basis and that I am unable to understand this, because I do not understand obedience. You say Saint Gregory is right, because he understands obedience to a spiritual director, and all the spiritual directors are right even if they disagree with him. It could be that a given woman after long talks, counselling and confession should not receive, but maybe another woman after the same process with another director or the same one should receive. I think that is what I understood you to say. If that is not what you meant I misunderstood you.

This all seems to make perfect sense to you and you find nothing illogical in it. I can not answer you to tell you why I am unable to understand what you say. Truly, I am not a very intelligent person and that could explain why I am confused by it and why I am tedious.

Nevertheless, even from this confused condition I wish for you and all the Orthodox every grace.

Grandfather, I find nothing illogical in your posts. You’re right, the quotation posted says it’s up to the individual. So you don’t see any reason for the possibility of a person being told by their spiritual father not to receive. This is just custom I think, it may not be based on any matter of faith or morals at all. If it is, then I agree with your assessment- no bodily process can make any one unclean or unworthy to receive. If not, then just chalk it up to custom.

 

[LilyM]

In centuries past this was not uncommon for Catholic women as well.

And similar customs such as staying away from church altogether for a time after childbirth (after which the new mother would return and receive a special blessing in a ceremony known as ‘churching’.)

 

[ConstantineTG]

The only thing that makes a member of the Church spiritually unfit to receive the Eucharist is unrepentant sin. It is spiritual uncleanness or defilement that is the problem, not bodily.

This is not the case in the past.

Jesus disciples did not wash their hands and perform the proscribed rituals before they ate. He did not tell them to uphold this tradition, because it came from their mothers and fathers. Yet their hands were unwashed, physically dirty.

First time I read of this. The Apostles were observant Jews as was Jesus. Remember, Jesus did not abolish the law, He fulfilled it. Jesus never broke laws for the sake of breaking them. Like the Sabbath rest, Jesus never abolished it but rather put common sense into people that if a greater good can be accomplished by working on the Sabbath, one should do that work.

If some Orthodox mothers and fathers, or clergy teach from their tradition that it is permissable for a menstruating woman to receive and others say it is forbidden, then they contradict one another in their traditions. If all Orthodox agree on the matter they have unity. If not you have relativism.

There was a time this was universal, even in the Roman Catholic Church. Of course today it is seen as more of a small tradition rather than a major one. The Roman Catholic Church has many little traditions that differ from culture to culture. So don’t call differences in traditions relativism. We do acknowledge that there are essential beliefs in our faith which all must have, and there are minor traditions that allow for variation.

Either a menstruating woman should not receive, because she is defiled in some bodily way or it does not matter, because she is not defiled. If she is not defiled spiritually (or bodily either for that matter) she should not be kept from the grace of the sacrament.

How many times would I have to post that the issue is not ritual purity but rather the bleeding itself because of the belief that the blood of Christ runs in your veins after you have received the Eucharist. Okay, you are going to mention that in the next paragraph but I don’t know why the previous paragraph needs to be brought up over and over again when that is not the issue.

If in the past some people thought menstruating women would leak out Christ’s blood that is irrelevant. Now that it is known this is nonsense if one insists on upholding the tradition for the sake of tradition even though there is no basis for it in reality, no spiritual basis, then it is nothing more than meaningless bodily observance. The tradition is meaningless.

I think this is insensitive to the sensibilities of other people who wish to uphold their traditions. No one is forcing you to adopt it, why are you forcing them to adopt your view on it?

 

[grandfather]

This is not the case in the past.

First time I read of this.

 

[Mickey]

On any given matter, either individuals are at liberty to do as they wish, or they are obedient to another. It can not be both.

You do not understand spiritual directors. If a woman feels that she is not properly disposed to receive during menses…she discusses it with her spiritual director…who is usually her confessor. He will either give his blessing for her to refrain…or tell her that he feels it is more beneficial for her to receive during these times (if she is properly prepared).

The spiritual father does not impose
his/her personal ideas and devotions,
but he helps the disciple to find
his/her own special vocation
Metropolitan Kallistos

 

[grandfather]

[No message]

 

[grandfather]

You do not understand spiritual directors.

 

[Mickey]

A spiritual director may not tell you it is permissible to have an abortion in this or that special circumstance.

Apples and oranges.

There is a universal norm established by Saint Gregory.

Indeed. Included in his quote is the fact that those who refrain are to be praised. And it is a given that we always confer with our spiritual directors.

If a woman feels trepidation and consults a priest the only advice he can give her is that there is no impediment to her receiving and she should do as she sees fit.

We always confer with our spiritual director. You do not understand.

If any director would do otherwise he is wrong.

You are in no position to pass judgement. As I indicated earlier…he would give a blessing to refrain…or recoommend that she receive (if prepared).

There are Catholic priests who tell married women that it is up to their conscience on whether or not they should take birth control pills.

I do not know about this…perhaps you can start a thread.

 

[Mickey]

Pope Saint Gregory, as referenced by Mickey himself.

“But if any one out of profound respect does not presume to do it, she is to be commended;”
St Gregory the Great

 

[Mickey]

Now we know they were wrong and there is no spiritual or physical reason to maintain a practice that developed in ignorance. Ignorance is no longer an excuse or reason for it.

As I said earlier…I knew Eastern Catholic priests that told me they would not be able to receive/continue celebration if they cut themselves and could not stop the bleeding. I think I also heard this from a Roman Catholic priest. I wonder if there is anything written about it.

We do not inject the Blood of Christ into our veins

St. Cyril of Jerusalem, “Catechetical Lectures”, ca. 350 AD
"Let us, then, with full confidence, partake of the Body and Blood of Christ. For in the figure of bread His Body is given to you, and in the figure of wine His Blood is given to you, so that by partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ, you might become united in body and blood with Him. For thus do we become Christ-bearers. His Body and Blood being distributed through our members.

 

[Mickey]

In centuries past this was not uncommon for Catholic women as well.

And similar customs such as staying away from church altogether for a time after childbirth (after which the new mother would return and receive a special blessing in a ceremony known as ‘churching’.)

Yes. Many parishes within Holy Orthodoxy have maintained some of the ancient traditions. Heck…some of our ladies still cover their heads!

 

[porthos11]

I only read quickly through the thread so forgive me if I missed anything but it seems like “Orthodox” this this discussion have all been lumped together. The OP made the context quite clear: his wife is Coptic.

Coptic Orthodoxy belongs to the Alexandrian Rite and are non-Chalcedonian (i.e. “Oriental” Orthodox as opposed to “Eastern” Orthodox), having separated from the Great Church after the Fourth Ecumenical Council, so their separation from us and Byzantine Orthodoxy goes back further. Thererfore, this will likely be a surprise to our Eastern Orthodox brethren as it is to us Catholics.

Liturgical restrictions during menses are a discipline in the Alexandrian churches and indeed have their roots in the Old Testament. If you read up on the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, you will see how “Jewish” their practices are. Heck, they even claim to have the original Ark of the Covenant. It shouldn’t be surprising that the Coptic Orthodox have similar disciplines.

 

[Paxvobis]

I have a friend who’s Russian Orthodox. They don’t go to Holy Communion when they’re on their periods.