Health

Is it possible to go to church during your period?

Pin
Send
Share
Send
Send


The church porch is located in the western part of the temple, it is a corridor between the temple entrance and the courtyard. The pretense has long served as a place of hearing for non-baptized, announced people, those who were barred from entering the temple for a certain time.

Is there something offensive for a Christian to be outside the church ministry, participation in confession, communion for a while?

Menstrual days are not a disease, a sin, but the natural state of a healthy woman, emphasizing her ability to give children to the world.

Why then the question arises - is it possible to confess during menstruation?

The Old Testament pays a lot of attention to the concept of cleanliness when entering before God.

To sewage treated:

  • diseases in the form of leprosy, scabies, ulcers,
  • all kinds of effusions from both women and men
  • touching the dead body.

The Jews before the exit from Egypt were not one people. In addition to the worship of the One God, they borrowed a lot from pagan cultures.

Judaism believed that impurity, a dead body - one concept. Death is the punishment of Adam and Eve for disobedience.

God created man, his wife, perfect in beauty and health. Human death is associated with a reminder of sinfulness. God is Life, every unclean thing has no right to even touch Him.

Confirmation of this can be found in the Old Testament. The book of Leviticus, chapter 15 clearly states that "not only wives are considered unclean during the flow of blood, but every person who touches them."

For reference! During menstruation, it was forbidden not only in the temple, but also in everyday life, communication, personal touch between any person and an “unclean” woman. This rule concerned the husband, forbidding all kinds of sexual activities during menstruation.

At the birth of a child, blood is also released, so the young mother was considered unclean for 40 days at the birth of a boy, 60 after the birth of a girl.

Pagan priestesses were separated from the rites because of weakness, in their opinion, magical power disappeared from the blood.

The era of Christianity has made its amendments in this matter.

New Testament - a new look at purity

The coming of Jesus radically changes the concept of a sin offering, the significance of purity.

Christ clearly says that He is Life (John 14: 5 - 6), the past is over.

The Savior Himself touches the youth’s mortal bed, resurrecting the widow’s son. (Luke 7:11 - 13)

A woman suffering from bleeding for 12 years, knowing about the prohibition of the Old Testament, herself touched the edge of His garment. At the same time, many people touched her, because there was always a lot of people around Christ.

Jesus immediately felt the healing power coming out of him, called the once sick man, but did not throw stones at her, but told her to act bolder.

Important! Nowhere in the New Testament is it written about the impurity of the hemorrhage.

The apostle Paul, sending a letter to the Romans, chapter 14, says that he himself has no unclean thing. People come up with “uncleanness” for themselves, then they believe in it.

The apostle writes about the first epistle to Timothy, chapter 4, everything must be accepted, giving thanks to God, who has done everything well.

Menstruation is a process created by God, they can not treat impurities, much less to separate someone from the protection, the grace of God.

In the New Testament, the apostles, speaking of impurities, imply the use of food products that are prohibited by the Torah, which is unacceptable for Jews. Pork related to unclean food.

The first Christians also had a problem - is it possible to take communion during menstruation, they had to take the decision themselves. Someone, following the traditions, canons, did not touch anything holy. Others believed that nothing could separate them from God's love, except for sin.

Many men and women believers during their periods confessed and received communion, not finding in the words, the sermons of Jesus, a prohibition.

The attitude of the early church and the holy fathers of the time to the question of the monthly

With the advent of the new belief, there were no clear concepts in either Christianity or Judaism. The apostles separated themselves from the teachings of Moses, without denying the inspiration of the Old Testament. At the same time, ritual impurity was practically not discussed.

The early fathers of the early church, such as Methodius Olimpiysky, Origen, Martyr Justin, treated the issue of purity as a concept of sin. Unclean, in their terms, means sinful, this applied to women, the time of menstruation.

Origen attributed not only menstruation, but also sexual intercourse to impurities. He ignored the words of Jesus that the two, by copulating, are transformed into one body. (Mat.19: 5). His stoicism, asceticism was not confirmed in the New Testament.

The Antioch doctrine of the third century banned the teachings of the Levites. Didaskalya, on the contrary, denounces Christians, who for the time of menstruation left the Holy Spirit, separating the body from the church ministries. The fathers of the church of that time consider that the same bleeding patient is the basis for his exhortation.

Clementy of Rome gave the answer to the problem - whether it is possible to go to church during menstruation, arguing if the person who stopped attending the Liturgy or receive communion, left the Holy Spirit.

A Christian who has not crossed the threshold of the temple during menstruation, is not related to the Bible, can die without the Holy Spirit, and how to be then? Saint Clement in the “Apostolic decrees” asserted that neither the birth of a child, nor critical days, nor pollutions pollute a person, cannot separate him from the Holy Spirit.

Important! Clementy of Rome condemned Christians for empty speeches, but he considered childbirth, bleeding, and bodily defects to be natural things. He called bans the invention of stupid people.

St. Gregory Dvoeslov also stood on the side of women, claiming that the natural, God-created processes in the human body, cannot be the reason for the prohibition to attend church services, to confess, to take communion.

Further, the issue of female impurity during menstruation was raised at the Gangrsky Cathedral. The priests who gathered in the year 341 condemned the Eustathians, who considered not only menstruation as impurity, but also sexual intercourse, forbidding the priests to enter into marriage. In their false teaching, the difference between the sexes was destroyed, or rather, the woman was equated to a man in dress, behavior. The fathers of the Gangrsky Sobor condemned the Eustinian movement, defending the femininity of Christians, recognizing all the processes in their body as natural, created by God.

In the sixth century, Gregory the Great, Pope of Rome, took the side of the faithful parishioners.

To Saint Augustine of Canterbury, who raised the question of menstrual days, impurity, the Pope wrote that the guilt of Christians in these days is not, she cannot be forbidden to confess, to take communion.

Important! According to Gregory the Great, praise is worthy of women who abstain from Communion because of reverence, and who received him during menstruation because of their great love for Christ, are not condemned.

The teaching of Gregory the Great lasted until the seventeenth century, when it was again forbidden for Christians to enter the church during menstruation.

Early Russian Church

The Russian Orthodox Church has always been characterized by strict laws concerning women's critical days, any kinds of expirations. It does not even raise the question - is it possible to go to church during menstruation. The answer is unequivocal and not negotiable - no!

Moreover, according to Nifont Novgorodsky, if birth begins right in the temple and the child is born there, then the whole church is considered defiled. It is sealed for 3 days, re-sanctified by reading a special prayer, which can be found by reading "The Questioning of Kirik."

All those present at the same time in the temple were considered unclean; they could leave it only after the cleansing prayer of the Book of Trebnik.

If a Christian woman came to the temple "clean", and then she had a bleeding, she urgently had to leave the church, otherwise half-yearly penance was waiting for her.

The cleaning prayers of the Book of the Temnik are still recited at churches immediately after the birth of a baby.

This question is a lot of controversy. The problem of touching an “unclean” woman in pre-Christian times is understandable. Why today, when a child is born in a sacred marriage and is a gift from God, does his birth make the mother, everyone who touches her defiled?

Modern clashes in the Russian church

Only 40 days later, a Christian is allowed into the temple, under the condition of complete "purity." The rite of churches or introductions is performed on it.

The modern explanation for this phenomenon is the tiredness of the woman in labor, she allegedly needs to recover. How then to explain that the seriously ill are recommended to visit the temple more often, to take the sacrament, being purified by the blood of Jesus?

The servants of the present time understand that the laws of the Book of Requests are not always confirmed in the Bible and the Holy Scriptures of the Fathers of the Church.

Marriage, procreation and impurity are somehow difficult to tie together.

1997 made adjustments on this issue. The Holy Synod of Antioch, His Beatitude Patriarch Ignatius IV decided to change the texts of the Book of the Book of Relics regarding the sanctity of marriage and the purity of Christians who gave birth to a child in the union consecrated by the church.

The Cretan Conference of 2000 recommends that when holding a church or the introduction of a young mother, bless her, and not talk about impurity.

Important! When introducing a mother, the church blesses the child's birthday if the mother is physically strong.

After Crete, the Orthodox churches received urgent recommendations to convey to all parishioners that their desire to attend the temple, confess, and take the sacrament is welcome regardless of critical days.

St. John Chrysostom was critical of the canonists who claimed that visiting the temple on critical days was unacceptable.

Dionysius of Alexandria advocated the observance of the canons, however, life showed that not all laws are observed by modern churches.

The canons should not rule the Church, for they are written for temple services.

Questions about critical days wear a mask of piety based on pre-Christian teachings.

The modern Patriarch Pavel Serbsky also does not consider a woman during a critical day spiritually impure or sinful. He asserts that during menstruation a Christian can confess, receive communion.

His Holiness Patriarch writes: “Monthly cleansing of a woman does not make her ritually, prayerly unclean. This impurity is only physical, bodily, as well as discharges from other organs. In addition, since modern hygiene products can effectively prevent the temple from becoming unclean by accidental bleeding ... we believe that from this side there is no doubt that a woman can go to church during the monthly cleansing with necessary care and hygiene measures , kissing icons, taking anti-food and consecrated water, as well as participating in singing. ”

Important! Jesus Himself cleansed women and men with His blood. Christ became the flesh of all Orthodox. He trampled upon bodily death by giving people a spiritual life, independent of the condition of the body.

As it was before?

In the oldest part of the Bible - the Old Testament, it was said that “unclean” people should not enter the temple. This category included:

  • leprosy patients
  • all who suffer from purulent-inflammatory diseases,
  • people who have defiled themselves by touching a decomposing body (corpse),
  • women with physiological bleeding.

It has been argued that one cannot visit a temple under any of these conditions.

An interesting fact: at a time when mothers who gave birth to a boy were allowed to go to church 40 days after giving birth, a girl was allowed after 80.

What do they think now?

Under the New Testament, adjustments were torn down to the list of people who should not go to church. Although certain restrictions for women have not gone away. The ban on women visiting the temple during their periods was caused by hygiene considerations.

It was always believed that the temple is a holy place, and no blood can be shed on its territory. Previously, there was no reliable hygienic means of protection, therefore, for women during menstruation, church visits were prohibited.

There is another opinion, why a woman can not attend the temple with the monthly. Who is to blame for being expelled from the gardens of Paradise? On the woman. Probably, therefore, women were not allowed to God. Apparently, in order not to remind you of old misdemeanors. For this reason, during menstruation, as well as for forty days after the birth of the infant, until the postpartum hemorrhage is complete, the woman is not allowed to enter the temple.

To date, there is no reasonable ban on female visits during the menstruation period of the temple. In the Testament there are chapters in which the disciples expressed that the desecration of faith brings evil, which comes from the heart of man, and not physiological discharge. In the New Testament, the main emphasis is placed on the inner spirituality of man, and not on natural processes that do not depend on him.

Is it forbidden for a woman to go to church during menstruation?

In the temple can not shed human blood. If, for example, a person in the church cuts a finger and bleeding begins, he must leave it until the blood stops. Otherwise, it will be considered that the holy place was desecrated, and it became necessary to re-illuminate it.

It can be concluded that during menstruation, if you use high-quality hygiene products (pads, tampons), you can go to church, since there will be no human blood spill. At the same time, the opinions of the clergy on this issue diverge, some even contradict each other.

Some believe that women with menstrual bleeding have no place in the church. You can enter, read a prayer and leave. Others - adherents of more radical views, say that it is strictly forbidden to attend the church during the month. However, there are those who claim that menstruation should not influence behavior in any way, that during this period nothing should be changed in church life, one should continue to read prayers, put candles, confess and take communion.

Proponents of both views can provide evidence of their own judgments, although they can be challenged. Those who support the first opinion are largely based on information from the Old Testament, saying that in ancient times women with bleeding should have been away from the people and the church. But a clear explanation of why this should be so, can not provide. Because at that time women had a fear of staining with the blood of a holy place due to the fact that there was no necessary means of hygiene.

It has often been noted that there is no woman’s fault in this physiological process. Yet in ancient times, women in Russia avoided visiting the church these days.

Some of the saints made statements that nature made women a generous gift, endowing them with this unique ability to cleanse the body. They argued that the phenomenon was created by God, therefore, there can be no talk about dirt and uncleanliness.

It would be wrong to deny a woman to visit the temple during menstruation, based on data from the Old Testament. If you carefully and deeply study the church, you can come to the conclusion that the ban on going to church during the menstruation period is already morally obsolete.

How to still do?

Attend the temple girls allowed on all days. If you take into account the opinion of a greater number of clergymen, and during menstruation it can be done. But it would be better on these days to refuse to perform the sacrament of baptism and wedding. It is advisable, if possible, not to touch the crosses, icons and other shrines. In addition, the church calls on these days not to confess and not to take communion.

Creation of the first man and woman

If you want to know how the Most High created our Universe, then you should carefully study the Old Testament. It says that the first people were created on the 6th day by God in the image and likeness of him and received the names of Adam (man) and Eve (woman).

As a result, it turns out that initially the woman was clean, she did not have to go monthly. And the process of conception and the birth of children should not have been tormenting. In the world of Adam and Eve, in which complete perfection reigned, there was no place for anything unclean. The body, thoughts, acts and souls of the first people permeated purity.

However, as is known, such an idyll lasted only a short time. The cunning Devil took upon himself the image of a serpent and began to tempt Eve to partake of the forbidden fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. In exchange, the woman was promised to receive power and higher knowledge. And she could not resist - she tried the fruit herself, and also gave her husband to try it.

It was in this way that the fall into sin occurred, which spread to the whole human race. Adam and Eve were forever banished from Paradise as a punishment. The woman was doomed to torment. It was said that since then the process of conception and the birth of offspring will bring her suffering. Here since the woman, according to the Bible, and consider unclean.

What the Old Testament forbids

For our distant ancestors, the rules and laws of the Old Testament played a huge role. Не зря ведь в тот период времени создавалось огромное количество храмов, в которых люди пытались установить связь со Всевышним, а также делали подношения ему.

Что же касается представительниц прекрасного пола, то их не считали полноправными членами общества, а относили в дополнение к мужчинам. И, конечно, никто не забывал про прегрешение, совершённое Евой, после которого у неё началась менструация. That is, the monthly at that time was a kind of reminder of how the first woman was guilty before God.

In the Old Testament it was very clearly indicated who has and who does not have the right to visit the Holy Temple of God. So the prohibition on entry was imposed in the following situations:

  • on lepers,
  • during the seedworm,
  • for those who touched the dead,
  • for those who have suffered from purulent discharges,
  • for women during menstruation,
  • for women who gave birth to a boy - up to forty days, and for those who gave birth to a girl - up to eighty days.

At a time when the Old Testament was relevant, everything was perceived from a physiological point of view. So dirty body said that its owner - unclean.

Women were strictly forbidden to go to church, and also to places where many people gathered. It was forbidden to shed blood in sacred places.

These rules functioned until the appearance of Jesus Christ and until the time when the New Testament came into effect.

Jesus Christ allowed to go to the temple with the monthly

The Savior focused on the spiritual, trying to help people realize the truth. After all, he came to this world to atone for all human sins, in particular, and the sin of Eve.

If a person did not have faith, it means that all his actions automatically fell into the category of spiritless. The presence of black thoughts made a person unclean, no matter how clean and flawless his physical shell was.

The Temple of God ceased to be perceived as a specific place on Earth, and transformed into human souls. Jesus assured people that the soul is actually the Temple of God, His Church. At the same time there was an equalization in the rights of representatives of both sexes.

I want to talk about one situation, outraged all the priests. When the Savior was in the Temple one lady, who for many years suffered from constant blood loss, squeezed through the crowd of people and touched his garments.

Jesus felt unhappy, turned to her and said that from now on she was saved by his faith. It was since then that a split occurred in the human mind: some people remained faithful to the purity of the physical (adherents of the Old Testament, who were firmly convinced that women under no circumstances should not attend the church during the month), and the second part listened to the teachings of Jesus Christ ( adherents of the New Testament and spiritual purity, who began to neglect this prohibition).

When the Savior was crucified on the cross, the New Testament became relevant, according to which the shed blood began to symbolize a new life.

What do priests say about this ban?

As for the representatives of the Catholic Church, they have long found an answer for themselves to the question whether it is possible to go to church with menstruations. Menstruation in this case is considered as a completely natural phenomenon, therefore there are no prohibitions on attending church during it. In addition, the blood has not irrigated church floors for a long time due to the presence of a large number of hygiene products.

But the Orthodox Holy Fathers can not find the right solution about this. Some are ready to give a million reasons why you can not go to church with monthly. And others argue that there is nothing reprehensible in visiting the Temple if your soul wants it so much.

There is also a third category of clergy who allow a woman to come to the temple, however, forbid her to take part in some sacred ordinances, namely, baptism, wedding, confession.

What is forbidden to do in the temple during menstruation

The bans mainly relate to purely physical moments. So, for reasons of hygiene, women should not sink into the water, so that others do not see how her blood is mixed with water.

The wedding process is quite long and not every weakened female body will be able to sustain it to the end. And this in turn is fraught with fainting, and also - weakness and dizziness.

During confession, the psycho-emotional aspect is involved, and, as is known, the representatives of the weaker sex have a slightly inadequate state during their periods (and behave accordingly). Therefore, if a woman would decide to confess at this time, she would risk to let out a lot of superfluous things, of which she would later regret for a long time. As a consequence, it is necessary to definitely give up confession during critical days.

So is it possible to go to church with monthly or not?

In the modern world it is not uncommon when the mixing of sinful and righteous occurs. No one knows for sure who invented the ban in question. All people perceive information in the form in which it is more convenient for them to do this.

The church is a room just like it was in the times of the Old Testament. So, all by inertia continue to observe the rules established by it. And try not to go to the temple with the monthly.

But in the modern democratic world many changes have been made. If earlier the main sin in visiting a church with menstruations was to shed blood in the temple, then today you can completely cope with this problem — enough hygiene products (tampons, gaskets) that absorb blood and do not allow holy sites to come up are invented. So, the woman is no longer considered unclean.

However, there is also a reverse side of the coin. During menstruation, the self-purification process takes place in the female body. This means that the female person is still considered unclean and is forbidden to go to the temple.

But the New Testament takes the side of the fair sex. According to him, if you feel the spiritual need to touch the shrine, be filled with divine support, then attendance at the church is acceptable and even recommended!

After all, the Savior provides his help to those who sincerely believe in him. And how clean while your body does not matter too much. Therefore, it turns out that adherents of the New Testament are not forbidden to go to church during critical days.

However, there are some amendments. Based on which, if the Church and the Temple of God is the very soul of man, then it is not necessary that he visit any particular place, wanting to get help. Accordingly, a woman can just as well turn in prayer to the Lord and from her apartment. And if her prayer was sincere, sincere, then she will certainly be heard, and much faster than in the case of visiting the temple.

In conclusion

Still, no one can give you an exact answer to the question of whether it is allowed to go to church on a monthly basis. Everyone will express their point of view on this matter. And based on this, the answer to the question posed should be sought not in books and articles, but in the depths of one’s own soul.

A ban may or may not be present. At the same time, considerable importance is given to the motives and intentions with which the lady is going to go to the temple. For example, if her desire is to be forgiven, to repent of perfect sins, then it is acceptable to attend church at any time. The most important thing is to keep the soul clean.

In general, during the period of menstruation, it is advisable to think about the actions you commit. Often, these days, women, in principle, have no particular desire to leave their home. Therefore, to summarize, a visit to the Temple of God during menstruation is allowed, but only if your soul really needs it!

At the end of the topic we recommend to view a thematic video:

The origins of the creation of man and woman

Step-by-step creation of the universe can be studied in the Bible in the Old Testament. Man created God in his likeness on day 6 - the man of Adam and the woman Eve. This means that the woman was created pure initially, without periods. Conception of the child and giving birth should have been without torment. There was nothing bad in the perfect world. Everything was pure: body, thoughts, thoughts, actions. However, such perfection did not last long.

The devil in the form of a serpent tempted Eve to eat an apple. After which she was to become powerful, like God. The woman tasted the apple herself, gave her husband a try. As a result, they both sinned. And it fell on the shoulders of all mankind. Adam and Eve were expelled from the holy land. God was angry and predicted a woman to suffer. “From now on, you will be conceived in torment, give birth in torment!” He said. From this point on, a woman is theoretically considered unclean.

Ban in the Old Testament

The life story of the people of that time was based on rules and laws. Everything was spelled out in the Old Testament. The Holy Temple was created to communicate with God, to offer sacrifices. The woman, as a matter of fact, was considered as addition of the man, and at all was not considered as the full member of a society. Eva's sin was well remembered, after which she began her period. As an eternal reminder that a woman has created.

In the Old Testament it was clearly stated who should not attend the Holy Temple, and in what condition:

  • with leprosy
  • by seed failure,
  • touching the corpse
  • with purulent discharge,
  • during menstruation,
  • after giving birth to women who have given birth to a boy 40 days, a girl 80 days.

In the Old Testament period, everything was considered from a physical point of view. If the body is dirty, then the person is unclean. Moreover, a woman during critical days could not only visit the Holy Temple, but also public places. She stayed away from the assembly, the crowds. Blood should not be shed in a holy place. But then came the era of change. Jesus Christ came to earth with his New Testament.

Abolition of filth by the New Testament

Jesus Christ tried to reach the soul of man, all attention is focused on the spiritual. He is sent to atone for the sins of mankind, including Eve. Works without faith were considered dead. That is, a person is clean externally, was considered spiritually unclean because of his black thoughts. The Holy Temple has ceased to be a specific place on the territory of the earth. He moved into the soul of man. “Your soul is the Temple of God and His Church!” He said. Men and women became equal.

The situation that happened at one moment caused the indignation of all the clergy. A woman who suffered from heavy bleeding for many years, squeezed through the crowd, touched the garments of Jesus. Christ felt the energy go away from him, turned to her, and said: “Your faith saved you, woman!” From that moment on, everything was mixed up in people's minds. Those who remained faithful to the physical and Old Testament, adheres to the old opinion - a woman cannot go to church during her period. And those who followed Jesus Christ, follow the spiritual and New Testament, this rule was abolished. The death of Jesus Christ became the point of reference, after which the New Testament entered into force. And the spilled blood gave rise to a new life.

The opinion of the priests about the ban

The Catholic Church has long resolved the issue of critical days. The priests considered that menstruation is a natural phenomenon, they see nothing wrong with that. Blood has long been spilled on the floor of the church due to hygiene products. Orthodox priests still can not agree in opinion. Some advocate the opinion that it is absolutely impossible for women to go to church during menstruation. Others relate to this neutral - you can visit, if such a need arises, do not limit yourself. Still others shared the view that a woman can enter a church during critical days, but some sacraments cannot be performed:

Anyway, the prohibitions are more related to physical moments. It is not possible to sink into the water during critical days for hygienic reasons. Blood in the water is not a very nice picture. Wedding lasts a very long time, a weakened woman's body during menstruation can not stand it. And the blood can run hard. There are dizziness, fainting, weakness. Confession affects more psycho-emotional state of a woman. In the period of menstruation, it is vulnerable, vulnerable, and not herself. May tell a story about something which will later be regretted. In other words, during menstruation a woman is insane.

So you can go to church or not with monthly

In the modern world, both sinful and righteous are mixed up. No one really knows how it all began. The priests are not the spiritual ministers who were in the times of the Old or New Testament. Everyone hears and perceives what he wants. Rather, that is more convenient for him. And this is the case. The church, as the room remained from the time of the Old Testament. So, those who are visited the holy temple, should adhere to those rules that are associated with it. During the month can not go to church.

However, the modern world of democracy makes another amendment. Since blood was shed in the temple as a defilement, the problem is now completely solved. Hygiene products - tampons, gaskets do not allow blood to flow to the floor. In practice, the woman has ceased to be unclean. But there is another side to the coin. During menstruation, the female body is cleansed. New replenishment of blood makes it possible to function with new forces. Hence, the woman is still unclean. You cannot go to the church during your period.

But there is a New Testament, when the physical does not matter. That is, if there is a need to touch the shrines for healing, to feel the support of God, you can attend the temple. Moreover, in such moments need. After all, Jesus helps only those who really need something. And asks it with a pure soul. And the cook looks like his body at this moment, it doesn't matter. That is, for those who value spiritual and New Testament more, it is possible to go to church during menstruation.

There are corrections again. Because the Church and the Holy Temple is the soul of man. He has no reason to go to a specific room to ask for help. It’s enough for a woman to turn to God anywhere. A request coming from a pure heart will be heard faster than when you attend church, by the way.

Summing up

Nobody will give an exact answer to the question whether it is possible to go to church during menstruation. To this, everyone has their informed opinion. The decision must be taken by the woman herself. Ban and eat and not. And it is worth paying attention to the reason for visiting the church. After all, it is no secret that women go to the holy temple to get rid of something, to attract something. In other words, they make strong cuffs, love spells, drying, drying, even wishing death to other people. So, during the monthly energy of the woman weakens. Sensitivity may increase, prophetic dreams will begin to occur. But there is no power in words until it is strong in spirit.

If the goal of visiting a church is to ask for forgiveness, to repent of sins, you can walk in any form, your period is not a hindrance. The main thing is not an impure body, but a pure soul after that. Critical days are the best time to think. Another interesting fact is that during menstruation you don’t want to go anywhere at all, neither to church, nor to visit, nor to shop. Everything is purely individual, depends on the well-being, state of mind, needs. You can go to church during critical days if you really need it!

Point of view in the Old Testament and the New Testament

Explanations about why during the month can not be in the church can be found in the Old Testament. It is there that there is a mention of the fact that it is forbidden to enter the church during the feminine “impurity”. Menstruation is the period when a woman is considered “dirty”. It is based on the fact that some excretions are derived from her body. Many believed that such a process is a punishment for the fact that their ancestor had once committed a sinful fall.

At the same time, clergymen are trying in every possible way to protect their parishes from any mention of human mortality. It is believed that during menstruation there is some way to cleanse the womb from a dead egg. And in the church there can be no deadly objects.

Other scholars of the scriptures say that the Lord’s punishment can be a long process of giving a life to a child, but the presence of bleeding from the genitals suggests that the human race can continue. In addition, there were no normal modern personal hygiene products and she could soil the floor.

This involved not only visiting the holy place, but also taking part in ceremonies. Then there was no question of whether it is possible to take Communion with monthly. Since it was considered not respect for the Lord and the church customs. The ban was imposed on the touch to the church utensils. There was also a statement that everyone who touched her during this period also became unclean and all things around her.

What the New Testament says

This Scripture already states that all creatures of God are beautiful and everything that happens to them is also normal. And to prevent a woman from visiting these days, the temple is not necessary. It was believed that the most important thing is that it is in the soul of a person, and not what happens to his body. A more modern interpretation is not so demanding on this aspect, since not only the human consciousness has changed, but also the social charters of life. The church has now become more tolerant. Но это не означает, что необходимо пренебрегать всеми правилами и поступать так, как Вам захочется.

Современная трактовка

Ответ священника о посещение церкви во время месячных может также зависеть от того, где именно находится обитель Господа. В наше время люди в городах стали обращать меньше внимания на некоторые правила и поэтому допускают погрешности. Многие священники разрешают входить в здание и молится, но нельзя прикасаться к иконам и прочему, а также ставить свечи.

Бывает и такое, когда священнослужитель не сможет отказать женщине в помощи. Есть некоторые исключения, когда стоит нарушить требования. These include:

  • длительное кровотечение,
  • серьезное состояние больной, которое может закончится летальным исходом,
  • тяжкая и долгая болезнь.

Что нельзя делать в «критические» дни

Как уже было сказано, есть некоторые обряды и таинства, которые не проводят во время менструальных выделений. Among them:

А что делать если решили окрестить ребенка и уже дату назначили, а тут жизнь внесла свои коррективы? Можно в церковь с месячными крестить ребенка или переносить? И так:

  • If you play the role of a child’s mother, in this case you cannot enter the church exactly until 40 days after his birth, and if such a situation occurs after this period, then you will simply be asked not to enter during the sacrament, but to come after. But all this is very individual and depends on the temple and the priest.
  • If you are a godmother, then try to clarify all the features and concerns of your moments earlier, because you cannot perform the rite of baptism of a baby on “critical” days.

The same applies to all other rites, as you will have to touch some church things, which is considered unacceptable and profane. I consider the most important prohibition to hit blood on books, icons and candles. But in the modern world this can be avoided.

Modern traditions are allowed to be present during menstruation in the church and in this they see nothing obstructing. Although representatives of those who observe the old traditions believe that the spilling of any blood is unacceptable in a sacred place, where Bloodless Sacrifice takes place. But abstinence from communion for some time will not harm the soul. In turn, some believe that such patience will bring her more divine grace.

Remember that before you do any actions, you should get acquainted with the rules of the community where you want to go. It is worth adhering to those traditions which are accepted by the greater part of the episcopate. We must also take into account our own feelings. Often it is worth listening to what our soul and heart tells us. If you have an urgent need to come to the temple and read a prayer, then you should not think about whether it is possible to visit the monastery during menstruation or not. Just do as you see fit. Everyone can do as he sees fit and be responsible for such actions before the Lord himself.

When visiting the temple is not allowed

Visiting the temple for many people the possibility of repentance, prayer, requests and strengthen the forces. But such grace in turn requires a person to be knowledgeable and to follow church canons and rules of conduct in the church. The Orthodox traditions established by our ancestors are not intended to limit, but to streamline the actions of the parishioner in the temple. This does not mean that other visitors to the temple have the right to make harsh remarks to a person just starting to church. Unfortunately, such cases are not rare. But you need to treat them as suppressing your own pride.

In order to avoid such situations, it is better to read special literature before the first campaign to the temple, and with the most difficult and controversial questions contact the priest. Because around the church life, rituals and sacraments there are always a lot of myths and errors. For example, women and girls are very concerned about the question, is it possible to visit the temple during critical days. It is believed that a woman in this period is “unclean” and with her presence will only desecrate the holy place.

Let's see. For God there are no “unclean” people, he loves everyone in a fatherly way. And man is more often “unclean” with his soul than his body. And he came to the temple just for purification. All stereotypes associated with the ban on visiting the temple to women during menstruation, come from the Middle Ages. When hygiene was still bad, a drop of blood falling to the floor could desecrate God's house.

Now, when everything is more than normal with personal hygiene, this rule has become formal. A woman can go to the temple, but you cannot participate in church sacraments. Women and girls may confess, but they will not be allowed into Communion. On such days it is impossible to attach to icons, a cross, holy relics, get married and baptize children.

An exception

But if we are talking about a disease or a death condition, there is no place for rules and prejudices. The priest has the right to commune or to congregate such a woman.

According to church rules, a woman after childbirth does not have the right to attend the temple for 40 days. And after this period, the priest must read the permissive prayer over her, "Prayers to the wife of the parent, on fourty days."

At the same time, one should not forget the Gospel story, when a woman suffering from bleeding touched the edge of Christ’s clothing and received healing. All people have the right to the mercy of God, regardless of their physical condition.

Is it possible to go to church when menstruating according to the Old and New Testaments?

In the Old Testament, the period of menstrual bleeding in women is considered a manifestation of "impurity." It is with this scripture that all the prejudices and prohibitions imposed on women during their periods are connected. In Orthodoxy, the introduction of these prohibitions was not observed. But also was not carried out and their cancellation. This gives grounds for disagreement of opinions.

The influence of the culture of paganism cannot be denied, but the idea of ​​external impurity for a person was revised and began to symbolize the truths of theology in Orthodoxy. Thus, in the Old Testament, impurity was tied to the theme of death, which, after the fall of Adam and Eve, took possession of humanity. Concepts such as death, illness, and bleeding talk about deep damage to human nature.

For the mortality and impurity of man they deprived the divine society of the opportunity to dwell near God, that is, people were driven to the ground. This attitude to the period of menstruation is observed in the Old Testament.

Most people consider unclean that which comes out of the body through certain human organs. They perceive it as something superfluous and completely unnecessary. Such things include discharge from the nose, ears, cough, and much more.

Menstruation in women is the cleansing of the uterus from tissues that are already dead. This purification occurs in the understanding of Christianity as an expectation and hope for further conception and, of course, the emergence of a new life.

The Old Testament says that the soul of every person is in his blood. Blood during menstruation was considered doubly terrible, as it contains the dead tissues of the body. It was argued that the woman is cleared, freed from this blood.

Many consider (referring to the Old Testament) that it is impossible to go to church at such a period. People attribute this to the fact that the woman is responsible for the failed pregnancy, blaming her for this. And the presence of excreted dead tissue defiles the church.

In the New Testament, views are revised. Physical phenomena of sacred and special significance in the Old Testament are no longer valuable. The emphasis goes to the spiritual component of life.

The New Testament tells that Jesus healed a woman who had her period. It was as if she touched the savior, but this was not at all a sin.

The Savior, not thinking that he could be condemned, touched the menstruating woman and healed her. Thus, he praised her for strong faith and devotion. Such behavior would previously have been condemned without fail, and in Judaism it was considered at all to be equated with the contempt of the saint. It was this record that caused changes in interpretations about the possibility of visiting the church and other holy places during menstruation.

According to the Old Testament, not only the woman herself during the critical days is not pure, but any person who touches her (Leviticus 15:24). According to Leviticus 12, similar restrictions apply to the woman who gave birth.

In ancient times, not only the Jews gave such instructions. Pagan worships also prohibited women from performing menstruation from performing various duties in the temple. Moreover, communication with them during this period was recognized as desecration of oneself.

In the New Testament, the Virgin Mary adhered to the requirements of ritual purity. It is said that in the temple she lived from two to twelve years, and then she was engaged to Joseph and she was sent to live in his house so that she could not defile the “vault of the Lord” (VIII, 2).

Later, Jesus Christ, preaching, said that evil intentions come out of the heart and this defiles us. His sermons said that conscience affects "cleanliness" or "impurity." The Lord does not blame the bleeding women.

Similarly, the apostle Paul did not support the Jewish view of the rules of the Old Testament on matters of this kind of purity; he preferred to avoid prejudices.

Jesus Christ in the New Testament believes that the most important concept of ritual purity is transferred to the spiritual level, not the material one. In comparison with the purity of spirituality, all bodily manifestations are considered insignificant and not so important. Accordingly, menstruation is no longer considered a manifestation of impurity.

Currently, there is no solid ban on women attending church during their periods.

In the chapters of the Testament, students often repeated statements that the faith was defiled by evil from the human heart, and not by bodily secretions. In the New Testament, special attention is focused on the internal, spiritual state of a person, and not on the physical processes that are independent of the human will.

Is there a ban on visiting the holy place today?

The Catholic Church expresses the view that the natural process in the body can in no way be an obstacle to visiting the temple or conducting ceremonies. The Orthodox Church can not come to a common opinion. Opinions are different and sometimes even contradictory.

The modern Bible does not tell us about the strictest ban on church attendance. This holy book confirms that the process of menstruation is a completely natural phenomenon of earthly existence. He should not become a hindrance to a full church life and hinder the belief and conduct of the necessary rites.

Currently, there is no solid ban on women attending church during their periods. In the temples it is forbidden to spill human blood. If, for example, a person in the temple has injured a finger and at the same time a wound is bleeding, then you should exit until the bleeding stops. Otherwise, it is believed that the temple is defiled and it will need to be re-consecrated. From this it follows that during menstruation, with the use of reliable hygiene products (tampons and gaskets), you can visit the temple, since bloodshed will not occur.

But the views of the ministers of the temple on the question of what is allowed during menstruation and what is not allowed to do in the church are different and even contradictory.

Some say that such women can do nothing in a holy place. You can go in, pray and have to go. Some clergymen who hold radical views on this issue consider attending church a woman with monthly unacceptable behavior. During the Middle Ages there was a strict ban on women visiting the temple on such days.

Others argue that menstruation should not influence behavior in any way and it is necessary to fully “live the church life”: to pray, to put candles, not to give up confessions and participles.

Evidence of their judgments is from two parties, although they are different controversial. Those who uphold the first judgment rely heavily on the Old Testament, saying that previously bleeding women were away from people and the temple. But they do not explain why this was so. After all, women were then afraid to profane the holy place with blood, due to the lack of necessary hygiene products.

The latter insist that in antiquity women attended church. For example, the Greeks (in this they differ from the Slavs), the churches did not consecrate, and therefore there is nothing to defile them. In such churches, women (not paying attention to monthly bleeding) were attached to the icons and led normal church life.

It was often mentioned that a woman is not guilty, that she has to periodically endure such a physiological state. And yet, in the past, the girls of Russia tried to avoid appearing in churches in such special periods.

Some saints expressed that nature rewarded the female sex with such a unique feature of the purification of a living organism. They insisted that the phenomenon was created by God, and therefore cannot be dirty and unclean.

It is wrong to forbid a woman to attend the church during the menstruation period, based on the opinion of strict Orthodoxy. Careful and in-depth study of the church and the modern solution of theological conferences found a common view that women are obsolete views to visiting holy places during the critical days.

Nowadays, there is even a condemnation of people who are categorically minded and based on the old foundations. They are often equated with adherents of myths and superstitions.

You can or can not go to the temple on critical days: how to act in the end

Women can go to church any day. Considering the opinion of the majority of ministers of the church, women can attend church on critical days. However, it would be preferable during this period to reject such sacred rites as weddings and baptisms. If possible, it is better not to touch the icons, crosses and other shrines. Such a ban is not strict and should not hurt women's ego.

The church calls on women on such days to refuse Communion, with the exception of long and serious illnesses.

Now from the priests you can often hear that you do not need to pay special attention to the natural processes of the body, because only sin defiles a person.

The physiological process of menstruation granted by God and nature should not interfere with belief and separate a woman from church even temporarily. It is not right to drive a woman out of the temple only for the fact that she is undergoing a monthly physiological process, from which she herself suffers independently of her will.

About mosque attendance during menstruation by Muslims

Most Islamic scholars are convinced that women should not go to the mosque during menstruation. But this does not apply to all. Some representatives believed that no prohibition of this kind should exist. It should be noted that even a negative attitude to mosque visits by women during menstruation does not in any way refer to extreme cases when the need is great and indisputable. Outside of discussion is the situation when a woman defiles a mosque with her discharge in the direct, physical sense. The strictest ban is really imposed on such behavior. However, women are allowed to attend a prayer on id.

Is it possible to go to church with monthly?

Editorial note: The article by the nun Vassa (Larina) provoked a lively discussion on the English-language Internet - a lot of discussions, links, detailed response publications. The portal “Orthodoxy and Peace” translated the main texts of the discussion into Russian.

Translated from English by Yulia Zubkova specifically for “Orthodoxy and Peace”. The editors of the portal thank the nun Vassa for their great help in the work on the Russian text.

Nun Vassa (Larina)

When I entered the nunnery of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) in France, I was introduced to the restrictions imposed on my sister during her period. Although she was allowed to go to church and pray, she was not allowed to take communion, to attach to icons or to touch the antidor, to help the prosphora or distribute them, to help in cleaning the temple, or even to light a lamp or lamp hanging in front of the icon my own cell - this last rule was explained to me when I noticed an unlit lamp in the icon corner of another sister. I do not remember any of us trying to question these establishments, to substantiate them with anything - we simply assumed that menstruation is a kind of “impurity”, and therefore we need to stay away from things consecrated so that somehow defile them.

Today, the Russian Orthodox Church has different rules regarding “ritual non-purity”, which vary from coming to parish, and most often it depends on the local priest. Sergiy Bulgakov’s popular “Handbook” proceeds from the fact that the “church rules” prohibit women during menstruation from both coming to the temple and receiving communion. [1] In Russia, however, women are generally allowed to come to church during menstruation, but they cannot take Communion, kiss icons, relics, cross, touch prosphora and antidor, or drink holy water. [2] At parishes outside Russia, as far as I know, women usually only abstain from communion.

An article written by His Holiness the Patriarch of Serb Paul, called “Can a woman always come to the temple?” [3], is often cited as an example of a moderate opinion that allows a woman with menstruation to participate in everything except the sacrament, which seems to be against the concept of "ritual impurity." However, Patriarch Paul advocates another traditional restriction that prohibits a woman from entering the temple and participating in any Sacraments for forty days after she gave birth to a child. [4] This prohibition, also based on the concept of “ritual non-purity”, is observed in the parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad known to me, both in Germany and in the USA.However, evidence can be found on the sites of the Moscow Patriarchate that this practice is not supported everywhere, and is called into question in parishes under the jurisdiction of Moscow. [5]

Today, in the light of “feminist” theology [6] and the traditionalist reaction to it [7], there is a temptation to approach the issue of “ritual non-purity” in a political or social way. Indeed, the rather humiliating everyday implications of the restrictions mentioned above can strain women, who are used to the sociopolitical culture of the West, to a certain degree. However, the Orthodox Church traditionally has no social and political agenda, [8] which makes this argument inappropriate for the Church from this point of view. Moreover, the fear that something may be “humiliating” for a woman is alien to Orthodox piety, which focuses on humility: when we encounter obstacles, restrictions, grief, etc., we learn to know our sinfulness, to increase in faith and the hope of the saving grace of God.

Thus, setting aside the interests of equality, I would like to draw your attention to the theological and anthropological content of the concept of “ritual non-purity”. For our church life is not reduced, ultimately, to following certain rules, reading certain prayers and proper prostration, or even to humility as such. The point is the theological and anthropological significance of all this. By doing these things, we confess a certain meaning, a certain truth of our faith. Therefore, today I ask the question: in what meaning refusal of the participle during menstruation? What does this say about the female body? What is the meaning of the prohibition to enter the temple after the birth of a baby? What does this say about childbearing? And most importantly, is the concept of “ritual inactivity / purity” consistent with our faith in Jesus Christ? Where does it originate and what does it mean for us today?

Consider biblical, canonical and liturgical sources to try to answer these questions. [9]

Old Testament

The earliest biblical evidence of ritual restrictions for women during menstruation is found in the Old Testament, Leviticus 15: 19-33. According to Leviticus, not only the menstruating woman was unclean — any person who touched her also became unclean (Leviticus 15:24), acquiring some kind of impurity by touch. In subsequent chapters of Leviticus (17-26, the Law of Holiness), sexual relations with his wife at this time were strictly prohibited. It was believed that childbirth, like menstruation, also imparts impurity, and similar restrictions were imposed on the woman who gave birth (Leviticus 12).

Jews were far from the only ones in the ancient world who introduced such regulations. Pagan cults also included prohibitions related to the care of “ritual purity”: menstruation was believed to defile and make pagan priestesses unable to perform their religious duties in temples [10], clergymen should avoid menstruating women at any cost under fear of desecration [11], it was considered that the birth of a child also defiles. However, the Jews were a special case. In addition to their exceptional disregard for blood (Leviticus 15: 1-18), [13] the ancient Jews held the belief in the danger of female bleeding, which was gradually asserted, and strengthened even more in late Judaism: the Mishnah, the Tosefta and the Talmud are even more detailed on this subject than the bible. [15]

The Proto-Gospel of James and the New Testament

At the very dawn of the New Testament, the Most Holy Virgin Mary obeys the requirements of “ritual purity”. According to Proto-gospel of Jacob, the apocryphal text of the 2nd century, which served as the source of several holy days of the Mother of God, the Blessed Virgin lives in the temple between the ages of two and twelve, when she was betrothed to Joseph and sent to live in his house “Lest she defile the sanctuary of the Lord”(Viii, 2) [16].

When Jesus Christ began to preach, a completely new message was heard in the villages of Judea, calling into question the deep-rooted position of piety, both in the Pharisees and in the ancient world as a whole. He proclaimed that only evil intentions that come from the heart defile us (Mark 7:15). Our Savior thus placed the categories of "purity" and "impurity" exclusively in the area of ​​conscience [17] - the sphere of free will in relation to sin and virtue, freeing the faithful from the ancient fear of desecration from uncontrollable phenomena of the material world. He himself does not hesitate to converse with a Samaritan woman, and this was also considered by the Jews to be somewhat profane. [18] Moreover, the Lord does not reproach a short-haired woman for touching His garments in the hope of being healed: He heals her and praises her faith (Matthew 2: 20-22). Why does Christ reveal the woman to the crowd? St. John Chrysostom replies that the Lord “Opens her faith to everyone so that others are not afraid to imitate her”.[19]

Similarly, the apostle Paul abandons the traditional Jewish approach to the Old Testament rules regarding "purity" and "impurity", allowing them only for reasons of Christian charity (Romans 14). It is well known that Paul prefers the word "holy" (άγιος) to the word "pure" [20] to express closeness to God, thus avoiding Old Testament prejudices (Rom 1: 7, Cor 6: 1, 7:14, 2 Cor 1: 1, etc.)

Early Church and Early Fathers

The attitude of the early Church to the Old Testament was not simple and cannot be described in detail as part of this work. Neither Judaism nor Christianity had a clear separately formed identity in the first centuries: they shared a common approach to certain things. [21] The Church clearly recognized the Old Testament as inspired Scripture, at the same time moving away from the times of the Apostolic Council (Acts 15) from the precepts of the Mosaic Law.

Although the apostolic men, the first generation of church writers after the apostles, hardly dealt with the Mosaic Law regarding “ritual impurity”, these restrictions are widely discussed a little later, from the middle of the 2nd century. By that time, it becomes clear that the “letter” of the Mosaic Law had become alien to Christian thought, since Christian writers are trying to give it a symbolic interpretation. Methodius Olympian (300), Justin Martyr (165) and Origen (253) interpret the Levitical categories of “purity” and “impurity” allegorically, that is, as symbols of virtue and sin [22], they also insist that baptism and the Eucharist are sufficient sources of “cleansing” for Christians. [23] In his treatise, Methodius Olimpiis writes: “It is clear that the one who was once purified through the new birth (baptism) cannot be more tainted by what is mentioned in the Law"[24]. In a similar vein, Clement of Alexandria writes that spouses no longer need to bathe after intercourse, as prescribed by the Mosaic Law, "because", Says St. Climent,"The Lord has cleansed the faithful through baptism for all marriage».[25]

Still, Clement’s seemingly open attitude to sexual relations in this passage is not typical for the authors of that time [26], and even for Clement himself. [27] For these authors, it was more characteristic to consider any prescriptions of the Mosaic Law to be symbolic, with the exception of those related to sex and sexuality. In fact, the writers of the early Church were inclined to regard any manifestation of sexuality, including menstruation, matrimonial relations, and childbirth as “unclean” and thus incompatible with participation in the liturgical life of the Church.

The reasons for this were many. In an era when the teachings of the Church had not yet crystallized into a particular dogmatic system, a multitude of ideas, philosophies, and overt heresies hovered in the theological air, some of which fell into the works of early Christian writers. Pioneers of Christian theology, such as Tertullian, Clement, Origen, Dionysius of Alexandria and other highly educated men of the time, were partly influenced by pre-Christian religious and philosophical systems that dominated the classical education of their time. For example, the so-called axiom of stoicism, or the stoic point of view, according to which sexual intercourse is justified only for the purpose of childbearing [28], is repeated by Tertullian [29], Lactantium [30] and Clement of Alexandria [31]. Moses ban in Leviticus 18:19 on sexual intercourse during menstruation thus acquired a new rationale: it was not only “desecration”, if it did not result in childbirth, it was a sin even in marriage. Notice in this context that Christ mentions sexual intercourse only once in the Gospel: “... and two will become one flesh” (Matthew 19: 5), without mentioning child-bearing. [32] Tertullian, who adopted the ultra-ascetic heresy of Montanism in later years, went further than many others, and even considered prayer after intercourse impossible. [33] The famous Origen was notoriously influenced by the modern eclecticism of average Platonism, with its characteristic disregard for the whole physical and material world in general. His ascetic and ethical doctrines, being originally biblical, are also found in Stoicism, Platonism, and to a lesser extent in Aristotelianism. [34] It is not surprising, therefore, that Origen views menstruation as “unclean” in himself and in itself. [35] He is also the first Christian writer to accept Old Testament concepts in Leviticus 12 on childbirth as unclean. [36] Perhaps it is important that the cited theologians came from Egypt, where Jewish spirituality peacefully coexists with developing Christian theology: the Jewish population, gradually diminishing from the beginning of the 2nd century in the main city of Alexandria, had an often imperceptible but strong influence on local Christians who were mostly converted from the Jews. [37]

Syrian Didaskalia

The situation was different in the Syrian capital of Antioch, where a strong Jewish presence posed a tangible threat to Christian identity. [38] Syrian Didkaliya, evidence of a Christian controversy against the Jewish traditions of the 3rd century, prohibits Christians from observing Levitical laws, including those relating to menstruation. The author admonishes women who abstained from prayer, the lessons of Scripture and the Eucharist for seven days during menstruation: “If you think, women, that you are deprived of the Holy Spirit during the seven days of your cleansing, then if you died at that time, you will go away empty and without any hope. " Didaskalia further convinces women in the presence of the Holy Spirit in them, making them able to participate in prayer, readings and the Eucharist:

“Now think about it and acknowledge that prayer is heard through the Holy Spirit, and that the Scriptures are the words of the Holy Spirit and are holy. Therefore, if the Holy Spirit is within you, why are you alienating your soul and not approaching the work of the Holy Spirit? ”[39]

He instructs other members of the community as follows:

“You should not be separated from those who have periods, because even a bleeding woman was not rooted when she touched the edge of the Savior’s clothes, she was rather considered worthy to receive absolution from her sins.” [40]

It is noteworthy that this text exhorts women with menstruation to take the sacrament and reinforces their admonition by the example of the Holy Scripture about a bleeding woman in Matthew 9: 20-22.

Gangrsky Cathedral

About a century later, approx. In the middle of the 4th century, we find canonical evidence against the concept of “ritual impurity” in the legislation of the local cathedral, which was convened in Gangra (105 km north of Ankara) in 341 AD. [41] on the north coast of Asia Minor, who condemned the extreme asceticism of the followers of Eustache Sevastiusky (377). [42] The Eustathian monks, inspired by the dualistic and spiritualistic teachings common in Syria and Asia Minor at the time, downplayed marriage and the married priesthood. Against this, Rule 1 of the Council states: “If anyone censures marriage, and his wife is faithful and pious, copulates with her husband, disdains or blames it, for it is not able to enter the Kingdom: let it be under an oath”. [43] Evstafiane refused to take the sacrament from the married priesthood for reasons of "ritual purity" [44], this practice was also condemned by the Council, its fourth rule:

“How can anyone speak of a presbyter who has entered into marriage thinks that it is not worthy to receive the offering when he has performed a liturgy: let him be under an oath.” [45]

Interestingly, Eustinianism was an egalitarian movement that advocated full gender equality. [46] It was encouraged in this way, when women followers of Eustache had cut their hair and dressed like men in order to get rid of any similarity of femininity, which, like all aspects of human sexuality, was considered “profane”. It should be noted that this practice of Yevstafian women resembles radical types of modern feminism, which, as it were, strive to get rid of all the differences of the female from the male. The Council condemns this practice in its 13th rule: "If a certain wife, for the sake of imaginary asceticism, applies robe, and, instead of ordinary women's clothes, will put on his masculine clothing: let him be under an oath.". [47]

By rejecting Eustathian monasticism, the Church rejected the notion of sexuality as profane, protecting both the sanctity of marriage and the divinely created phenomenon called a woman.

Rules of the Egyptian Fathers

In the light of these completely orthodox ancient canons, how can the Church today put into practice canons that unequivocally support the notions of “ritual non-purity”? [48] ​​As it was noted earlier, the literature of the Church, including the texts of canons, was not formed in a vacuum, but in the sociocultural historical reality of the ancient world, which very much believed in ritual purity and demanded it. [49] The earliest canonical rule imposing restrictions on women in a state of ritual impurity is Rule 2 of Dionysius of Alexandria (264), written in AH 262:

«About wives who are in cleansing, whether it is permissible for them to enter the house of God in such a state, I read and ask too much. For I do not think that they, if the essence of the faithful and pious, being in such a state, dared to either proceed to the Holy Meal, or touch the Body and Blood of Christ. For the wife, who had been bleeding for 12 years, for the sake of healing, did not touch Him, but only on the edge of His clothing. It is not forbidden to pray in whatever state and no matter how located, to commemorate the Lord and ask for help. But to proceed to the fact that there is a Holy of Holies, may it be banned by an altogether not pure soul and body.».[50]

Note that Dionysius, like the Syrian Didkaliya, refers to a bleeding woman in Matt. 9: 20-22, but comes to the very opposite conclusion: that a woman cannot take the sacrament. It was assumed that Dionysius actually prohibited women from entering the sanctuary (altar) but not into the church itself. [51] This hypothesis is not only contrary to the text of the cited canon, it also suggests that the laity once took the sacrament in the altar. Recent liturgical studies have disproved the notion that the laity ever partook in the altar. [52] Therefore, Dionysius meant exactly what he wrote, and exactly as many generations of Eastern Christians understood [53]: a woman with menstruation should not enter the temple of God, because she is not completely pure spiritually and physically. I wonder if this implies that all other Christians are completely pure, "katharoi." Most likely, that is not, because the Church condemned those who called themselves “katharoi”, or “pure”, the ancient sect of Novatians, at the First Ecumenical Council in Nicea in 325 A.C. [54]

Orthodox commentators of the past and present also explained the Dionysian rule as something related to taking care of conceiving children: a 12th century commentator Zonar (after 1159 AD), denying the concept of ritual impurity, comes to the embarrassing conclusion that the true reason for these restrictions for women - "prevent men from sleeping with them ... to enable the conception of children". [55] So are women stigmatized unclean, not allowed into the temple and to the Holy Communion to prevent men from sleeping with them? Without considering the premise of “sex only for childbearing” of this armenment, he raises other, more obvious questions: are men somehow more likely to sleep with women who were in the church and accepted the Sacrament? Why, otherwise, should women abstain from communion? Some priests in Russia offer a different explanation: women are too tired in this state to listen carefully to the prayers of the liturgy and therefore cannot prepare themselves adequately for Holy Communion. [56] Exactly the same reasoning is proposed in the case of women who have given birth to a child: they need to rest for 40 days. [57] That is, shouldn't the sacrament be served to all tired, sick, elderly or for some reason weak people? What about the hearing impaired? After all, it is also difficult for them to attentively listen to the prayers of the Liturgy.
Anyway, there are several other canonical texts that impose restrictions on women in “uncleanness”: Rule 6-7 Timothy of Alexandria (381 н.э.), который распространяет запрет и на крещение [58] и Правило 18 так называемых Канонов Ипполита, относительно родивших женщин и повитух. [59] Примечательно, что oба эти правила, как и Правило 2 Дионисия, египетского происхождения.

Святой Григорий Великий

Похожим образом обстояли дела на Западе, где церковная практика обычно считала женщин во время менструации «нечистыми» до конца 6-го/начала 7-го столетия.[60] В это время Святитель Григорий, Папа Римский (590-604 н.э.), отец Церкви, которому традиция (неверно) приписывает составление Литургии Преждеосвященных Даров, высказал другое мнение по данному вопросу. В 601 году, св. Августин Кентерберийский, «апостол Англии», (604) писал святителю Григорию и спрашивал, можно ли разрешать женщинам с менструацией приходить в церковь и к Причастию. Я процитирую святителя Григория подробно:

«Не следует запрещать женщине во время месячных входить в церковь. Ведь нельзя ставить ей в вину ту излишнюю материю, которую природа извергает и то, что с ней бывает не произвольно. For we know that a woman suffering from hemorrhage humbly set herself up behind the Lord, touched the edge of His garment, and her ailment immediately left her. So, if a suffering from hemorrhage could touch the Lord’s clothing with praise, how can it be against the law that those who experience monthly bleeding go to the temple of the Lord?

... It is impossible at such a time and prohibit a woman to take the sacrament of Holy Communion. If she does not dare to accept him out of great reverence (ex veneratione magna), she is worthy of praise (laudanda est), and if she accepts, she is not condemned (non judicanda). Well-meaning souls see sin even where there is no sin.

For what is happening from sin is often accomplished innocently: when we are hungry, it happens without sin. At the same time, the fact that we experience hunger is the fault of the first man. Menstruation is not a sin. In fact, this is a purely natural process. But the fact that nature is disturbed to the extent that it appears stained (videatur esse polluta) even against human will is a consequence of sin ...

So, if a woman herself thinks about these things, and decides not to start accepting the sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord, she will praise her righteous thought. If she accepts [Holy Communion], being embraced by the love of this sacrament according to the custom of her pious life, it should not be, as we have said, to prevent her from doing so. ” [61]

Notice that Svt. Gregory understands the Gospel story of a bleeding woman - like Syrian Didascalia - as an argument vs prescriptions of ritual non / purity.

In the early Middle Ages, the policy introduced by St. Gregory ceased to apply, and women with menstruations were not allowed to take communion and often taught them to stand in front of the Church entrance. [62] These practices were common in the West as early as the 17th century. [63]

"Ritual impurity" in Russia

As for the history of such customs in Russia, the concept of “ritual impurity” was known to pagan Slavs long before they adopted Christianity. Pagan Slavs, like the ancient pagans in general, believed that any manifestation of sexuality ritually defiles. [64] This belief remained essentially unchanged in Ancient Russia after its baptism.

The Russian Church had very strict rules regarding women's "uncleanness". In the 12th century, Bishop Nifont of Novgorod, in The Question of Kirik, explains that if a woman happened to have a child inside the church, the church should be sealed for three days, and then re-sanctified with a special prayer. [65] Even the king's wife, the tsarina, had to give birth outside of her home, in a bath or “soap”, so as not to defile the inhabited building. After the child was born, no one could leave the bathhouse or enter it until the priest arrived and read the cleansing prayer from the Book of Trebnik. Only after reading this prayer could the father enter and see the child. [66] If a woman's monthly period began when she was standing in the temple, she should have left it immediately. If she did not do this, she was supposed to have penance at 6 months of fasting with 50 bows of earth per day. [67] Even if the women were not in a state of “uncleanness,” they took the sacrament not at the Royal Doors with the lay men, but at the Northern Gate. [68]

Prayers of the Requiem

The special prayer of the Book of the Russian Orthodox Church, which even today is read on the first day after the birth of a child, asks God "to cleanse the mother of filth ..."And continues"and forgive your servant this, the little one, and the whole house, nebzhe be born a young man, and who touched her, and everyone who finds it ...". [69] I would like to ask why we ask for forgiveness for the whole house, for the mother and of alltouchedTo her? On the one hand, I know that the Levitical laws contained the concept of desecration through touch. Therefore, I know why the Old Testament believers considered it a sin to touch the “unclean”. And I know that the pagans were afraid of the outflow of blood both during childbirth and during menstruation, because they believed that it attracted demons. However, I cannot tell you why today the faithful are asking for forgiveness for touching a woman or being the woman who gave birth to a child, because I simply don’t know.

Another series of prayers is read 40 days later, when the mother is allowed to come to the temple for the rite of church worship. On this occasion, the priest prays for his mother as follows:

«cleanse from all sin, and from all filth ... yes, without hostility, partake of the holy communion of thy saints ... wash it with filth, and filth of the soul, in the performance of forty days: I create you worthy and communion of honest body and your blood .. " [70]

Today it is often said that a woman does not go to church forty days after the birth of a child due to physical fatigue. However, the quoted text speaks not about her ability to participate in liturgical life, but about her dignity. The birth (not conception) of her child, according to these prayers, became the cause of her physical and mental "impurity" (filth). This is similar to Dionysius of Alexandria’s discussion of menstruation: it makes a woman not entirely clean "in both soul and body."

New developments in Orthodox Churches

It is not surprising that some Orthodox Churches are already striving to change or delete the texts of the Book of the Book, based on dogmatically vulnerable ideas about procreation, marriage and impurity. I will quote the decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch, which took place in Syria on May 26, 1997, under the chairmanship of His Beatitude Patriarch Ignatius IV:

It was decided to give the patriarchal blessing to change the texts of the small Requiem regarding marriage and its holiness, prayers for women who gave birth and enter the temple for the first time, and texts of requiem services.[71]

The theological conference, which met in Crete in 2000, came to similar conclusions:

Theologians should ... write a simple and adequate explanation of the church service and adapt the language of the rite itself to reflect the theology of the Church. This will be useful for men and women who should be given a true explanation of the service: that it exists as an act of offering and blessing the birth of a child, and that it should be done as soon as the mother is ready to resume normal activities outside the home ...

We ask the Church to assure women that they are always welcome to come and take Holy Communion for any liturgy when they are spiritually and ceremoniously ready, regardless of the time of the month. [72]

An earlier study of the Orthodox Church in America also offers a fresh look at “ritual uncleanness”:

the notion that women in the menstrual period cannot take Holy Communion or kiss the cross and icons, or bake bread for the Eucharist, or even enter the vestibule of the church, not to mention the altar zone, these are ideas and practices that are moral and dogmatic untenable from the point of view of strict Orthodox Christianity ... St. John Chrysostom condemned those who promoted such an attitude as unworthy of the Christian faith. He called them superstitious and mythical.. [73]

Such statements can be embarrassing, since they obviously neglect certain canonical rules, first of all the 2nd rule of Dionysius of Alexandria. But such embarrassment is most often based on the incorrect assumption that the church “truth” is as if connected and guaranteed at the same time by some immutable, inviolable, and forever for it mandatory code of canons. If this were so — if the true welfare of the church organism depended on the fulfillment of the canons, then this organism would have crumbled many centuries ago. For a significant number of canons from the Book of Rules (from the official canonical code of the Orthodox Church) have not been respected for centuries. The church provides Her pastors with a considerable degree of freedom in relation to canonical legislation, so that the church hierarchy ultimately decides, according to divine “oikonomia” (house-building), how and when to apply canons — or not. In other words, the Church governs the canons - not the canons of the Church.

We indicate only some of the canonical rules that are not being fulfilled today. Rules 15 of the Council of Laodicea (c. 363/364) and 14 of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (787) prohibit readers and singers from reading or singing in the temple to the uninitiated. But in our almost every parish the uninitiated sing and read - men, women, and children. Rules 22 and 23 of the same Council of Laodicea forbid readers, singers, and servants to wear orarion, which is given only to deacons who wear it on their shoulders, and to subdeacons who wear it crosswise on both shoulders. However, today at the episcopal services of the Russian Orthodox Church, one can often notice uninitiated minions who wear a cruciform shouting like subdiacons. Rule 2 of the Council of Constantinople, which was in the church of St. Sophia in 879, states that a bishop cannot be a monk. More precisely, this rule declares the incompatibility of monastic vows with the episcopal dignity. The current practice of our Church is clearly contrary to the principle that is approved by this canon. Rule 69 of Trullo Cathedral (691/2) prohibits all lay people - except the emperor - from entering the altar. I note that I have never seen women violating this canonical rule. But men and boys enter the altar fairly freely in all Russian Orthodox churches I visited. It would be possible to ask whether it is mandatory for both women and men to comply with canonical legislation, or the canons somehow morerequired for women?

Be that as it may, my goal is neither to justify nor to condemn the violation of the above canons. Such a judgment, as already said, is the prerogative of the church hierarchy. I mean only to point out the obvious fact that we neglect the set of canonical rules. In fact, this is quite consistent with the traditional practice of the Orthodox Church, and does not in itself constitute a threat to her well-being: as we can see, the Church accomplished and accomplishes Her saving mission in violating and even perfect abandonment of certain canonical rules - every day and for centuries.

Conclusion

I will write a brief conclusion, because the texts speak for themselves. Careful consideration of the sources and nature of the concept of “ritual impurity” reveals a rather embarrassing, and in fact non-Christian phenomenon under the mask of Orthodox piety. Regardless of whether this concept has fallen into church practice under the direct influence of Judaism and / or paganism, it has no basis in Christian anthropology and soteriology. Orthodox Christians, men and women, were cleansed in the waters of baptism, buried and resurrected with Christ, who became our flesh and our humanity, trampled death by death and freed us from its fear. And yet we have kept the practice, which reflects the Old Testament fear of the material world. Therefore, the belief in "ritual impurity" is not primarily a social issue, and the trouble is not primarily in the humiliation of women. Rather, it is about the humiliation of the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ and its saving consequences.

Notes:

1. The handbook of the clergyman (Kharkov 1913), 1144.
2. See Questions and Answers of Father Maxim Kozlov on the website of the Tatiana Church in Moscow: www. st - tatiana. ru / index. html? did = 389 (January 15, 2005). Cp. A. Klutschewsky, “Frauenrollen und Frauenrechte in der Russischen Orthodoxen Kirche,” Kanon 17 (2005) 140-209.
3. First published in Russian and German in the quarterly journal of the Berlin Diocese of the ROCOR in Germany: “Can a woman always attend a temple?” Bulletin of the German Diocese 2 (2002) 24-26 and later online: http://www.rocor.de/ Vestnik 20022 /.

four . This prohibition is observed according to the Book of Orders of the Russian Orthodox Church. Cm . English translation: Book of Needs of the Holy Orthodox Church, trans. by G. Shann, (London 1894), 4-8.
five . See the sites of the parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate in the United States: www. russianchurchusa. org / SNCathedral / forum / D. asp? n = 1097,
and www. ortho - rus. ru / cgi - bin / ns.
6 See Conclusions of the Inter-Orthodox Consultation on the Place of Women in the Orthodox Church and the Question of the Ordination of Women (Rhodes, Greece, 1988). Cm . also
www.womenpriests.org/traditio/unclean.
7 For example, K. Anstall, “Male and Female He Created Them”: An Examination of the Mystery of Human Gender Maximos the Confessor Canadian Orthodox Seminary Studies in Gender and Human Sexuality 2 (Dewdney 1995), esp. 24-25.
eight . Cp. G. Mantzaridis, Soziologie des Christentums (Berlin 1981), 129ff, id., Grundlinien christlicher Ethik (St. Ottilien 1998), 73.
9 . Those wishing to deepen my very brief overview of historical and canonical sources regarding ritual impurity can be referred to the following expository research: E. Synek, “Werber nicht v ö llig rein ist an Seele und Leib ...” Reinheitstabus im Orthodoxen Kirchenrecht, ”Kanon Sonderheft 1, (München-Egling a.d. Paar 2006).
ten . E. Fehrle, Die kultische Keuschheit im Altertum in Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 6 (Gießen 1910), 95.
eleven . Tamzhe, 29.
12 . Ibid, 37.
13 . Cp. R. Taft, “Women at Church in Byzantium: Where, When - and Why?” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 52 (1998) 47.4
14 . I. Be’er, “Blood Discharge: The Code for Biblical Literature,” in A.Brenne r (ed.), A Feminist Companion from Exodus to Deutoronomy (Sheffield 1994), 152-164.
15 . J. Neusner, The Idea of ​​Purity in Ancient Judaism (Leiden 1973).
sixteen . M. James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford 1926), 42. Cp. Taft, “Women” 47.
17 D. Wendebourg, “Die alttestamentli chen Reinheitsgesetze in der frühen Kirche,“ Zeitschrift20für Kirchengeschichte 95/2 (1984) 149-170.
18 . Cp. Samariter, “Pauly-Wissowa II, 1, 2108.
19. In Matthaeum Homil. Xxxi al. XXXII, PG 57, col. 371.

20. Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 150.
21. E. Synek, “Zur Rezeption Alttestamentlicher Reinheitsvorschriften ins Orthodoxe Kirchenrecht,” Kanon 16 (2001) 29.
22 See references from Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 153-155.
23. Justin, Dialog. 13, Origen, Contr. Cels. VIII 29.
24 V, 3. C p. Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 154.
25 Stromata III / XII 82, 6.6
26 With noticeable problems with. Irineas, who did not consider sexuality as a result of the Fall. See Adv. Haer. 3. 22. 4. Cp. J. Behr, “Marriage and Asceticism,” unpublished paper at the 5th International Conference on the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow Nov. 2007), 7.
27. J. Behr, Asceticism and Anthropology in Irenaeus and Clement (Oxford 2000), 171-184.
28 S. Stelzenberger, Die Beziehungen der frühchristlichen Sittenlehre zur Ethik der Stoa. Eine moralgeschichtliche Studie (Munich 1933), 405ff.
29. De monogamia VII 7, 9 (CCL 2, 1238, 48ff).
thirty . Div. Institutiones VI 23 (CSEL 567, 4 ff).
31. Paed II / X 92, 1f (SC 108, 176f).
32. Cf. Behr, “Marriage and Asceticism,” 7.
33. De exhortatione castitatis X 2-4 (CCL 15/2, 1029, 13ff). From f. Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 159.
34 Many studies have been written about the relationship of Origen with the philosophical currents of his time. For a summary of current research on the topic, see D. I. Rankin, From Clement to Origen. The Social and Historical Context of the Church Fathers, (Aldershot-Burlington 2006), 113-140.
35 Cat.in Ep. ad Cor. XXXIV 124: C. Jenkins (ed.), “Origen on 1 Corinthians,” Journal of Theological Studies 9 (1908) 502, 28-30.
36 Hom. in Lev. VIII 3f (GCS 29, 397, 12-15).
37. See L. W. Barnard, “The Background of the Early Egyptian Christianity,” Church Quarterly Rev. 164 (1963)
434, also M. Grant, Roman World (London 1953), 117, 265. Cr. references from Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 167.
38 Cm . M. Simon, Recherches d’Histoire Judéo-Chrétenne (Pa ris 1962), 140ff., And M. Grant, Jewish Christianity at Antioch in the Second Century, ”Judéo-Christianisme (Paris 1972) 97-108. Cp. Links from Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 167.8
39 Didaskalia XXVI. H. Achelis-J. Fleming (eds.), Die ältesten Quellen des orientalischen Kirchenrechts 2 (Leipzig 1904), 139.
40 In the same place 143.
41 Popodovodatysm. T. Tenšek, L’ascetismo nel Concilio di Gangra: Eustazio di Sebaste nell’ambiente ascetico
42 J. Gribomont, “Le monachisme au IVe s. en Asie Mineure: de Gangres au messalianisme, ”Studia Patristica 2 (Berlin 1957), 400-415.
43. P. Joannou, Fonti. Discipline générale antique (IVe- IXes.), Fasc. IX, (Grottaferrata-Rome 1962), t. I, 2,
89. EnglishTransfer (Pedalion) D. Cummings (Chicago 1957), 523.
44. Cm . Tenšek, L’ascetismo 17-28.9
45. Joannou, Discipline 91, The Rudder 524.
46. Tenšek, L’ascetismo 28.
47 Joannou, Discipline 94, The Rudder 527.
48. A later development of the concept of ritual impurity inVisantism. P. Viscuso, “Purity and Sexual Definement in Late Byzantine Theology,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 57 (1991) 399-408.
49. Cf. H. Hunger, “Christliches und Nichtchristliches im byzantinischen Eherecht,“ Österreichisches Archiv für Kirchenrecht 3 (1967) 305-325.
50 . C. L. Feltoe (ed.), The Letters and Others of Dionysius of Alexandria (Cambridge 1904), 102-
103. Pop water and authenticity. P. Joannou, Discipline générale antique (IVe- IXes.) 1-2 (Grottaferratta-Rom 1962), 2, 12. The translation is adapted according to Kormchy 718.
51. Patriarch Paul, “Can a woman always visit the temple?” 24.
52. R. F. Taft, A History of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Volume VI. The Communion, Thanksgiving, and Concluding Rites, Rome 2008 (OCA 281), 204-207, 216.
53. See Theodore Balsamon’s commentary (ca. 1130 / 40- post 1195) on this rule: In epist. S. Dionysii Alexandrini ad Basilidem episcopum, can. 2, PG 138: 465C-468A.
54. Can. 8, Rallis - Potlis II, 133.
55. English translation of Kormchi 719. Patriarch Pavel literally quotes Zonar in “Can a woman always go to church” 25.11
56. Klutschewsky, “Frauenrollen” 174.
57. See Questions and Answers of Father Maxim Kozlov on the website of the Tatiana Church in Moscow: www.st-tatiana.ru/index.html?did=389.
58. CPG 244, Joannou, Discipline II, 243-244, 264.
59. W. Riedel, Die Kirchenrechtsquellen des Patriarchats Alexandrien (Leipzig 1900), 209. See, P. Bradshaw (ed.), The Canons of Hippolytus, English trans. by C. Bebawi (Bramcote 1987), 20.

60. P. Browe, Beiträge zur Sexualethik des Mittelalters, Breslauer Studien zur historischen Theologie XXIII (Breslau 1932). On the development of the concept of ritual impurity in the West in connection with priesthood celibacy, see H. Brodersen, Der Spender der Kommunion im Altertum und Mittelalter. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Frömmigkeitshaltung, UMI Dissertation Services, (Ann Arbor 1994), 23-25, 132.12

61. PL 77, 1194C - 1195B.
62. Unspeed out on her life for a woman, for example, aux origines de la morale sexuelle occidentale (VIe-XIe s.) (Paris 1983), 11 , 73-82.
63. Ibid., 14.
64. E. Levin, 900–1700 (Ithaca-London 1989), 46.
65. Questioning Kirika, Russian Historical Library VI (St. Petersburg 1908), 34, 46.
66. I. Zabelin. Home life of the Russian tsars in the XVI I XVII centuries (Moscow 2000), volume II, 2-3.
67. Requiem (Kiev 1606), ff. 674v-675r. Quoted from Levin, Sex and Society 170.
68. B. Uspensky, Tsar and Patriarch (Moscow 1998), 145-146, notes 3 and 5.
69. “A Prayer on the First Day of Always to Give Birth to a Young Man's Wife,” Trebnik (Moscow 1906), 4v-5v.
70. “Prayers to the wife of the puerperal for fourteen days,” ibid., 8-9.14
71. Synek, “Wer aber nicht,” 152.
72. There is also 148.
73. Department of Religious Education, Orthodox Church in America (ed.), Women. (42-43).

one . Table book of the clergyman (Kharkov 1913), 1144.
2 See Questions and Answers on Maxim Kozlov on the website of the Tatiana Church in Moscow:
www. st - tatiana. ru / index. html? did = 389 (January 15, 2005). Cp. A. Klutschewsky, “Frauenrollen und Frauenrechte in der Russischen Orthodoxen Kirche,” Kanon 17 (2005) 140-209.
3 . Впервые опубликовано на русском и немецком в ежеквартальном журнале Берлинской епархии РПЦЗ в Германии: “Может ли женщина всегда посещать храм?” Вестник Германской епархии 2 (2002) 24-26 и позднее онлайн: http :// www . rocor . de / Vestnik /20022/ .

4 . Этот запрет соблюдается согласно Требнику Русской Православной Церкви. См . английскийперевод : Book of Needs of the Holy Orthodox Church, trans. by G. Shann, (London 1894), 4-8.
5 . См. сайты приходов московского патриархата в США: www . russianchurchusa . org / SNCathedral / forum / D . asp ? n =1097,
и www . ortho – rus . ru / cgi – bin / ns .
6 . См. Выводы Межправославной консультации о месте женщины в Православной Церкви и вопросе рукоположения женщин (Родос, Греция, 1988). См . also
www.womenpriests.org/traditio/unclean .
7 . Например , K. Anstall, “Male and Female He Created Them”: An Examination of the Mystery of Human Gender in St. Maximos the Confessor Canadian Orthodox Seminary Studies in Gender and Human Sexuality 2 (Dewdney 1995), esp. 24-25.
8 . Cр. G. Mantzaridis, Soziologie des Christentums (Berlin 1981), 129ff, id., Grundlinien christlicher Ethik (St. Ottilien 1998), 73.
9 . Желающих углубить мой весьма краткий обзор исторических и канонических источников относительно ритуальной нечистоты можно отослать к следующему исперпывающему исследованию: E . Synek , „ Wer aber nicht v ö llig rein ist an Seele und Leib …” Reinheitstabus im Orthodoxen Kirchenrecht,” Kanon Sonderheft 1, (München-Egling a.d. Paar 2006).
10 . E. Fehrle, Die kultische Keuschheit im Altertum in Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 6 (Gießen 1910), 95.
11 . Тамже , 29.
12 . Там же, 37.
13 . Cр. R. Taft, “Women at Church in Byzantium: Where, When – and Why?” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 52 (1998) 47.4
14 . I. Be’er, “Blood Discharge: On Female Impurity in the Priestly Code and in Biblical Literature,” in A.Brenne r (ed.), A Feminist Companion from Exodus to Deutoronomy (Sheffield 1994), 152-164.
15 . J. Neusner, The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism (Leiden 1973).
16 . M. James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford 1926), 42. Cр. Taft, “Women” 47.
17 . D. Wendebourg, “Die alttestamentli chen Reinheitsgesetze in der frühen Kirche,“ Zeitschrift20für Kirchengeschichte 95/2 (1984) 149-170.
18 . Cр. Samariter,“ Pauly-Wissowa II, 1, 2108.
19. In Matthaeum Homil. XXXI al. XXXII, PG 57, col. 371.

20. Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 150.
21 . E. Synek, “Zur Rezeption Alttestamentlicher Reinheitsvorschriften ins Orthodoxe Kirchenrecht,” Kanon 16 (2001) 29.
22 . См. ссылки у Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 153-155.
23 . Justin, Dialog. 13, Origen, Contr. Cels. VIII 29.
24 . V, 3. C р . Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 154.
25 . Stromata III/XII 82, 6.6
26 . Сзаметнымисключениемсв . Иринея, который не рассматривал сексуальность как результат грехопадения. См. Adv . Haer. 3. 22. 4. Cр. J. Behr, “Marriage and Asceticism,” unpublished paper at the 5th International Theological Conference of the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow Nov. 2007), 7.
27 . J. Behr, Asceticism and Anthropology in Irenaeus and Clement (Oxford 2000), 171-184.
28 . S. Stelzenberger, Die Beziehungen der frühchristlichen Sittenlehre zur Ethik der Stoa. Eine moralgeschichtliche Studie (München 1933), 405ff.
29 . De monogamia VII 7, 9 (CCL 2, 1238, 48ff).
30 . Div. Institutiones VI 23 (CSEL 567, 4 ff).
31 . Paed. II/X 92, 1f (SC 108, 176f).
32 . Сf. Behr, “Marriage and Asceticism,” 7.
33 . De exhortatione castitatis X 2-4 (CCL 15/2, 1029, 13ff). С f . Wendebourg , “ Reinheitsgesetze ” 159.
34 . Множество исследований было написано по поводу взаимоотношений Оригена с философскими течениями его времени. Резюме современных исследований по теме см. у D . I . Rankin , From Clement to Origen . The Social and Historical Context of the Church Fathers, (Aldershot-Burlington 2006), 113-140.
35 . Cat.in Ep. ad Cor. XXXIV 124: C. Jenkins (ed.), “Origen on 1 Corinthians,” Journal of Theological Studies 9 (1908) 502, 28-30.
36 . Hom. in Lev. VIII 3f (GCS 29, 397, 12-15).
37 . См. L. W. Barnard, “The Background of Early Egyptian Christianity,” Church Quarterly Rev. 164 (1963)
434, также M. Grant, The Jews in the Roman World (London 1953), 117, 265. Cр. ссылки у Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 167.
38 . См . M. Simon, Recherches d’Histoire Judéo-Chrétenne (Pa ris 1962), 140ff., And M. Grant, Jewish Christianity at Antioch in the Second Century, ”Judo-Christianisme (Paris 1972) 97-108 Cp. Links from Wendebourg, “Reinheitsgesetze” 167.8
39 Didaskalia XXVI. H. Achelis-J. Fleming (eds.), Die ältesten Quellen des orientalischen Kirchenrechts 2 (Leipzig 1904), 139.
40 In the same place 143.
41 Popodovodatysm. T. Tenšek, L’ascetismo nel Concilio di Gangra: Eustazio di Sebaste nell’ambiente ascetico
42 J. Gribomont, “Le monachisme au IVe s. en Asie Mineure: de Gangres au messalianisme, ”Studia Patristica 2 (Berlin 1957), 400-415.
43. P. Joannou, Fonti. Discipline générale antique (IVe- IXes.), Fasc. IX, (Grottaferrata-Rome 1962), t. I, 2,
89. EnglishTransfer (Pedalion) D. Cummings (Chicago 1957), 523.
44. Cm . Tenšek, L’ascetismo 17-28.9
45. Joannou, Discipline 91, The Rudder 524.
46. Tenšek, L’ascetismo 28.
47 Joannou, Discipline 94, The Rudder 527.
48. A later development of the concept of ritual impurity inVisantism. P. Viscuso, “Purity and Sexual Definement in Late Byzantine Theology,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 57 (1991) 399-408.
49. Cf. H. Hunger, “Christliches und Nichtchristliches im byzantinischen Eherecht,“ Österreichisches Archiv für Kirchenrecht 3 (1967) 305-325.
50 . C. L. Feltoe (ed.), The Letters and Others of Dionysius of Alexandria (Cambridge 1904), 102-
103. Pop water and authenticity. P. Joannou, Discipline générale antique (IVe- IXes.) 1-2 (Grottaferratta-Rom 1962), 2, 12. The translation is adapted according to Kormchy 718.
51. Patriarch Paul, “Can a woman always visit the temple?” 24.
52. R. F. Taft, A History of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Volume VI. The Communion, Thanksgiving, and Concluding Rites, Rome 2008 (OCA 281), 204-207, 216.
53. See Theodore Balsamon’s commentary (ca. 1130 / 40- post 1195) on this rule: In epist. S. Dionysii Alexandrini ad Basilidem episcopum, can. 2, PG 138: 465C-468A.
54. Can. 8, Rallis - Potlis II, 133.
55. English translation of Kormchi 719. Patriarch Pavel literally quotes Zonar in “Can a woman always go to church” 25.11
56. Klutschewsky, “Frauenrollen” 174.
57. See Questions and Answers of Father Maxim Kozlov on the website of the Tatiana Church in Moscow: www.st-tatiana.ru/index.html?did=389.
58. CPG 244, Joannou, Discipline II, 243-244, 264.
59. W. Riedel, Die Kirchenrechtsquellen des Patriarchats Alexandrien (Leipzig 1900), 209. See, P. Bradshaw (ed.), The Canons of Hippolytus, English trans. by C. Bebawi (Bramcote 1987), 20.

60. P. Browe, Beiträge zur Sexualethik des Mittelalters, Breslauer Studien zur historischen Theologie XXIII (Breslau 1932). On the development of the concept of ritual impurity in the West in connection with priesthood celibacy, see H. Brodersen, Der Spender der Kommunion im Altertum und Mittelalter. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Frömmigkeitshaltung, UMI Dissertation Services, (Ann Arbor 1994), 23-25, 132.12

61. PL 77, 1194C - 1195B.

62. Unspeed out on her life for a woman, for example, aux origines de la morale sexuelle occidentale (VIe-XIe s.) (Paris 1983), 11 , 73-82.
63. Ibid, 14.
64. E. Levin, Ithaca-London 1989, 46.
65. Questioning Kirika, Russian Historical Library VI (St. Petersburg 1908), 34, 46.
66 I. Zabelin. Home life of the Russian tsars in the XVI I XVII centuries (Moscow 2000), volume II, 2-3.
67. Requiem (Kiev 1606), ff. 674v-675r. Quoted by Levin, Sex and Society 170.
68 B. Uspensky, Tsar and Patriarch (Moscow 1998), 145-146, notes 3 and 5.
69 “A prayer on the first day of the birth of the boy’s wife forever,” Trebnik (Moscow 1906), 4 v -5 v.
70 “Prayers to the wife of the puerperal for fourteen days,” ibid., 8-9.14
71 Synek, “Wer aber nicht,” 152.
72. There same 148.
73. Department of Religious Education, Orthodox Church in America (ed.), Women and Men in the Church. (42-43).

Pin
Send
Share
Send
Send