Abstaining from the Holy Eucharist or Divine Liturgy due to Menstruation

[MariaRegina]

I realize that the Holy Orthodox Church teaches that the Holy Faith was once given to the Apostles for all times and for all places, but this TRADITION of men that women are not to commune if they have any issue of blood was not given by Christ. After all, He allowed the woman with the issue of blood to touch His garment, and she was healed.

 

[ikonographics]

Pope St. Gregory the Great (+605)
Menstruation and Holy Communion:
To St. Augustine of Canterbury,
Enlightener of England
(Published in The Orthodox Church, Dec 1987)
A
WOMAN SHOULD NOT BE FORBIDDEN
to enter the Church during the times of her monthly
period; for the workings of nature cannot be considered sinful, and it is not right that she
should be refused admittance since her condition is beyond her control. We know that
the woman who suffered an issue of blood, humbly approaching behind our Lord,
touched the hem of his robe and was at once healed of her sickness. If, therefore, the
woman was right to touch our Lord's robe, why may one who endures the workings of
nature not be permitted to enter the church of God? And if it is objected that the woman
in the Gospels was compelled by disease while these latter are bound by custom, then
remember, my brother, that everything that we endure in this mortal body through the
infirmity of its nature is justly ordained by
God since the fall of man. For hunger, thirst,
heat, cold and weariness originate in this infirmity of our nature; and our search for food
against hunger, drink against thirst, coolness against heat, clothing against cold, and
rest against weariness is only our attempt to obtain some remedy in our weakness. In
this sense the menstrual flow in the woman is an illness. So if it was a laudable
presumption of the woman who, in her disease, touched our Lord's robe, why may not
the same concession be granted to all women who endure the weakness of their nature?
A woman, therefore, should not be forbidden to receive the Mystery of Communion at
these times. If any, out of a deep sense of reverence, do not presume to do so, this is
commendable. But if they do so, they do nothing blameworthy. Sincere people often
acknowledge their faults even when there is no actual fault, because a blameless action
may often spring from a fault. For instance, eating when we are hungry is no fault, yet
being hungry (in our present way) originates in Adam's sin. Similarly, the monthly
courses of women are no fault. They are caused by nature. But the defilement of our
nature is apparent even when we have no deliberate intention to do evil, and this
defilement springs from sin. So may we recognize the judgment which our sin brings

upon us. And so may people who sinned willingly bear the punishment of their sin
unwillingly.
Therefore when women, after due consideration, do not presume to approach the
Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord during their monthly period, they are to be
commended. But if they are moved by devout love
of this Holy Mystery to receive it as
pious practice suggests that they do, they are not to be discouraged. For while the Old
Testament makes outward observances important, the New Testament does not regard
these things as highly as the inward disposition, which is the sole criterion for allotting
punishment. For instance, the Law forbids the eating of many things as unclean, but in
the Gospel the Lord says: "Not that which goes into the mouth defiles a person, but that
which comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man." He also said, "Out of the mouth
proceed evil thoughts" (See Mark 7:18-20). Here Almighty God shows clearly that evil
actions spring from the root of evil thoughts. Similarly the apostle Paul says: "To the
pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure. And later he
indicates the cause of their corruption, adding, "For their very minds and consciences
are defiled" (Titus 1:15). If, therefore, no food is unclean to one of a pure mind, how can
a woman who endures the laws of nature with a pure mind be considered impure?

 

[Dorothea]

Did the lions really consume St. Ignatius of Antioch?
Sorry, I am too tired right now to search, but I though that they left his body intact.

He wanted the lions to finish all of him and leave nothing of him to have to worry about collecting later. But a couple of his bones were left, and that's what the Christians gathered and kept of him.

 

[MariaRegina]

Thank you for posting this homily. It is interesting how certain priests and hierarchs like to pick and choose which of the Holy Fathers to follow and which ones to avoid. However, St. Gregory the Great did give us the Pre-Sanctified Liturgy.

Pope St. Gregory the Great (+605)
Menstruation and Holy Communion:
To St. Augustine of Canterbury,
Enlightener of England
(Published in The Orthodox Church, Dec 1987)

A WOMAN SHOULD NOT BE FORBIDDEN

to enter the Church during the times of her monthly period; for the workings of nature cannot be considered sinful, and it is not right that she should be refused admittance since her condition is beyond her control. We know that the woman who suffered an issue of blood, humbly approaching behind our Lord, touched the hem of his robe and was at once healed of her sickness.

If, therefore, the woman was right to touch our Lord's robe, why may one who endures the workings of nature not be permitted to enter the church of God? And if it is objected that the woman in the Gospels was compelled by disease while these latter are bound by custom, then remember, my brother, that everything that we endure in this mortal body through the infirmity of its nature is justly ordained by God since the fall of man. For hunger, thirst, heat, cold and weariness originate in this infirmity of our nature; and our search for food against hunger, drink against thirst, coolness against heat, clothing against cold, and rest against weariness is only our attempt to obtain some remedy in our weakness.

In this sense the menstrual flow in the woman is an illness. So if it was a laudable presumption of the woman who, in her disease, touched our Lord's robe, why may not the same concession be granted to all women who endure the weakness of their nature?

A woman, therefore, should not be forbidden to receive the Mystery of Communion at these times. If any, out of a deep sense of reverence, do not presume to do so, this is commendable. But if they do so, they do nothing blameworthy.

Sincere people often acknowledge their faults even when there is no actual fault, because a blameless action may often spring from a fault. For instance, eating when we are hungry is no fault, yet being hungry (in our present way) originates in Adam's sin. Similarly, the monthly courses of women are no fault. They are caused by nature. But the defilement of our nature is apparent even when we have no deliberate intention to do evil, and this defilement springs from sin. So may we recognize the judgment which our sin brings upon us. And so may people who sinned willingly bear the punishment of their sin unwillingly.

Therefore when women, after due consideration, do not presume to approach the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord during their monthly period, they are to be commended. But if they are moved by devout love of this Holy Mystery to receive it as pious practice suggests that they do, they are not to be discouraged.

For while the Old Testament makes outward observances important, the New Testament does not regard these things as highly as the inward disposition, which is the sole criterion for allotting punishment. For instance, the Law forbids the eating of many things as unclean, but in the Gospel the Lord says: "Not that which goes into the mouth defiles a person, but that which comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man." He also said, "Out of the mouth proceed evil thoughts" (See Mark 7:18-20). Here Almighty God shows clearly that evil actions spring from the root of evil thoughts. Similarly the apostle Paul says: "To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure. And later he indicates the cause of their corruption, adding, "For their very minds and consciences are defiled" (Titus 1:15). If, therefore, no food is unclean to one of a pure mind, how can a woman who endures the laws of nature with a pure mind be considered impure?

 

[Kristos]

My priest told me that if I start menstruating I should not come to church, but rather go to the hospital

Sorry - I felt the need for some humor in this thread

 

[Ann_of_Love]

My priest told me that if I start menstruating I should not come to church, but rather go to the hospital

Sorry - I felt the need for some humor in this thread

You are silly

 

[Ignatius21]

I realize that the Holy Orthodox Church teaches that the Holy Faith was once given to the Apostles for all times and for all places, but this TRADITION of men that women are not to commune if they have any issue of blood was not given by Christ. After all, He allowed the woman with the issue of blood to touch His garment, and she was healed.

The sick, diseased, dying and leprous did not defile Christ by touching him. They were healed and made clean, and received forgiveness of sins.

 

[MariaRegina]

The sick, diseased, dying and leprous did not defile Christ by touching him. They were healed and made clean, and received forgiveness of sins.

Oh, wow. Taking your prepositional phrase and inverting it....

By touching Christ in the Holy Eucharist, the sick, diseased, dying and leprous do not defile Him as He is the Bread of Life and the Giver of Life (St. John 6).

 

[Ignatius21]

Oh, wow. Taking your prepositional phrase and inverting it....

"Me, fail English? That's unpossible!"

 

[ChirpChirp]

Great post thank you for sharing!
I remember one year I was preparing for Easter and halfway through Holy Week I got my period. I really wanted to finish my spiritual journey though and asked God to let me know if I am doing something horrible by continuing to go to church. Quite on the contrary my journey was easier than usual and I did not feel any guilt at all, but happiness and spiritual peace

Pope St. Gregory the Great (+605)
Menstruation and Holy Communion:
To St. Augustine of Canterbury,
Enlightener of England
(Published in The Orthodox Church, Dec 1987)
A
WOMAN SHOULD NOT BE FORBIDDEN
to enter the Church during the times of her monthly
period; for the workings of nature cannot be considered sinful, and it is not right that she
should be refused admittance since her condition is beyond her control. We know that
the woman who suffered an issue of blood, humbly approaching behind our Lord,
touched the hem of his robe and was at once healed of her sickness. If, therefore, the
woman was right to touch our Lord's robe, why may one who endures the workings of
nature not be permitted to enter the church of God? And if it is objected that the woman
in the Gospels was compelled by disease while these latter are bound by custom, then
remember, my brother, that everything that we endure in this mortal body through the
infirmity of its nature is justly ordained by
God since the fall of man. For hunger, thirst,
heat, cold and weariness originate in this infirmity of our nature; and our search for food
against hunger, drink against thirst, coolness against heat, clothing against cold, and
rest against weariness is only our attempt to obtain some remedy in our weakness. In
this sense the menstrual flow in the woman is an illness. So if it was a laudable
presumption of the woman who, in her disease, touched our Lord's robe, why may not
the same concession be granted to all women who endure the weakness of their nature?
A woman, therefore, should not be forbidden to receive the Mystery of Communion at
these times. If any, out of a deep sense of reverence, do not presume to do so, this is
commendable. But if they do so, they do nothing blameworthy. Sincere people often
acknowledge their faults even when there is no actual fault, because a blameless action
may often spring from a fault. For instance, eating when we are hungry is no fault, yet
being hungry (in our present way) originates in Adam's sin. Similarly, the monthly
courses of women are no fault. They are caused by nature. But the defilement of our
nature is apparent even when we have no deliberate intention to do evil, and this
defilement springs from sin. So may we recognize the judgment which our sin brings

upon us. And so may people who sinned willingly bear the punishment of their sin
unwillingly.
Therefore when women, after due consideration, do not presume to approach the
Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord during their monthly period, they are to be
commended. But if they are moved by devout love
of this Holy Mystery to receive it as
pious practice suggests that they do, they are not to be discouraged. For while the Old
Testament makes outward observances important, the New Testament does not regard
these things as highly as the inward disposition, which is the sole criterion for allotting
punishment. For instance, the Law forbids the eating of many things as unclean, but in
the Gospel the Lord says: "Not that which goes into the mouth defiles a person, but that
which comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man." He also said, "Out of the mouth
proceed evil thoughts" (See Mark 7:18-20). Here Almighty God shows clearly that evil
actions spring from the root of evil thoughts. Similarly the apostle Paul says: "To the
pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure. And later he
indicates the cause of their corruption, adding, "For their very minds and consciences
are defiled" (Titus 1:15). If, therefore, no food is unclean to one of a pure mind, how can
a woman who endures the laws of nature with a pure mind be considered impure?

 

[MariaRegina]

The sick, diseased, dying and leprous did not defile Christ by touching him. They were healed and made clean, and received forgiveness of sins.

"Me, fail English? That's unpossible!"

Not a fail at all.

I was profoundly struck by your sentence, especially since we Orthodox Christians have been reading from John 6 during this past week, but at first glance, your sentence was just a tad ambiguous. English is that way.

My first reading: The sick, diseased, dying and leprous did not defile Christ by touching Him, but by their sins, they have defiled His holy image. One priest at a retreat said that we should be like a Holy Icon of Christ to all we meet. St. Peter the Apostle was such an icon of Christ that he healed many by his shadow, by a cloth that had touched him, or by his words in prayer.

 

[ArmyMatt]

He wanted the lions to finish all of him and leave nothing of him to have to worry about collecting later. But a couple of his bones were left, and that's what the Christians gathered and kept of him.

I think his heart was left as well, with God emblazoned on it in gold or something

 

[Dorothea]

I think his heart was left as well, with God emblazoned on it in gold or something

Really? I didn't know that! The story I read of his life was from the Animals and Man book that was wonderful.

 

[Mariya116]

My priest told me that if I start menstruating I should not come to church, but rather go to the hospital

Sorry - I felt the need for some humor in this thread

I've tried to do that! No use. Ugh, you come on this forum - one thread about menstruation, another about homosexuality. Geez, can we get out of people's pants??? I'm thinking of starting threads with my subpar depressed poetry, just for a bit change on this board.

 

[rusmeister]

I've tried to do that! No use. Ugh, you come on this forum - one thread about menstruation, another about homosexuality. Geez, can we get out of people's pants??? I'm thinking of starting threads with my subpar depressed poetry, just for a bit change on this board.

The problem is, Mariya, that the advocates of these things insist on asserting and imposing their desires on us, and on our children. You cannot say "Live and let live." it would be like a Polish pacifist saying such a thing on the eve of the German invasion. One side or the other will dominate society and persecute the other view.

 

[Mariya116]

I believe that yes, I can live and let live. I've done that all my life in my very diverse and dearly beloved tri-state area. I see same-sex couples in the Greenwich Village all the time, and maybe I don't understand how that kind of attraction works and maybe I'd even rather see them with pretty young girls instead (we need more handsome guys who are single and straight, LOL!), but somehow I've never had the urge to run up and assault the couple.

 

[MKJ]

I've tried to do that! No use. Ugh, you come on this forum - one thread about menstruation, another about homosexuality. Geez, can we get out of people's pants??? I'm thinking of starting threads with my subpar depressed poetry, just for a bit change on this board.

Teen Angst:

A Celebration of Really Bad Poetry

 

[Mariya116]

Teen Angst:

A Celebration of Really Bad Poetry

Now we're talking! LOL thanks, going to that site now!

 

[Cappadocious]

I've tried to do that! No use. Ugh, you come on this forum - one thread about menstruation, another about homosexuality. Geez, can we get out of people's pants??? I'm thinking of starting threads with my subpar depressed poetry, just for a bit change on this board.

The problem is, Mariya, that the advocates of these things insist on asserting and imposing their desires on us, and on our children.

As a menstruation advocate, I will not rest until all American men, women and children are menstruating at all times.

 

[Kristos]

As a menstruation advocate, I will not rest until all American men, women and children are menstruating at all times.

That's what my priest said!