Ecclesiastical Laws
Ecclesiastical Laws (1)
Two Questions from Hurghada
Our son (M.M.) from the Church of Anba Shenouda in Hurghada sent us several questions about certain intellectual currents there. We answer in this issue two of them:
Concerning the Priest (Qass) and the Archpriest (Qummus)
Question: “Is it true that a priest is not permitted to hear confessions nor to administer Holy Communion, and that this is only the function of the archpriest (qummus)?”
Answer: Legally, the priest has everything that the archpriest has with regard to all the sacraments of the Church, as well as with regard to all the liturgical prayers. What distinguishes the archpriest—according to rank—is a specialization in administration.
There is no ecclesiastical law whatsoever that prevents a priest from hearing confessions or from administering Communion. From where, then, did you get this strange idea?!
There have been priests who lived their entire lives as priests and did not receive the rank of archpriest. Was their priesthood lacking in anything?
As an example of this is Priest Mansi Yohanna, priest of Mallawi and author of many writings; he reposed without receiving the rank of archpriest, and he carried out his priestly work fully. Also, Saint Anba Isidore the priest was a father of confession for about 3,000 monks and used to pray the Divine Liturgy and give them Communion. Likewise was Saint John Kama the priest in the region of the Monastery of the Syrians. Was the priesthood of these lacking?
I myself did not receive the rank of archpriest throughout my life, and I was a father of confession for the monks of the monastery while in the rank of priest, and I was promoted from it directly to the rank of bishop.
There was a period in the early Church when there were only the rank of priest and the rank of bishop, alongside the deacons. There were no archpriests. Sometimes some priests were given administrative authority, which was not an additional rank in the priesthood. It is known that when a priest is promoted to archpriest, the hand is not laid upon him again, because he has already received the rank of priesthood with all its priestly authorities.
The general ecclesiastical canons begin with the phrase: “Any bishop or priest or deacon…” Thus, there is absolutely no distinction in priesthood between priest and archpriest. What belongs to the archpriest belongs to the priest. As for matters of administration, they do not relate to the service of the holy sacraments of the Church or its liturgical prayers.
There are many churches in the mission fields that are served only by priests. Do these not practice the sacrament of confession with their children, nor administer Communion?!
A village that has only one church served by a priest, or a city in the diaspora, or even an entire state served by a priest—what do these do?! Is their service invalid, or is there a deficiency in their priesthood?! Or do they not celebrate the Divine Liturgies nor hear confessions?!
From where did you receive this deviant teaching that causes doubt and confusion?! And what is its source in the Holy Bible or in the teaching of the Church?
If there is a church that has a number of priests and an elderly archpriest is entrusted with the task of hearing confessions because of his age, experience, and spirituality, and because his health may not greatly help him in movement and visitation, then this is a matter of preference and suitability, not of law. For legally, when one of the deacons is ordained a priest, by virtue of the ordination he receives all the priestly authorities. And if one of the fathers the bishops wishes to exempt a newly ordained young priest from the task of receiving confessions in a church that has older priests and an elderly archpriest, until this new priest gains experience, this is a form of organization, but it is not from the ecclesiastical laws. Moreover, age is not a fixed measure, nor is recent ordination a fixed measure. There may be young men who have a gift in spiritual guidance more than elders.
Tadros, the disciple of Saint Anba Pachomius the Great, had such a gift by which he was able to guide the monks of the monasteries while he was still a young man. Saint John the Short also had the gift of spiritual guidance, and the fathers used to gather around him and reveal to him their thoughts while he was a young man.
The matter, then, is a matter of spiritual maturity, gift, understanding, competence, and spiritual knowledge, not a matter of age or of the rank of priest or archpriest.
Saint Paul the Apostle says to his disciple Timothy: “Let no one despise your youth” (1 Tim 4:12). The Holy Bible tells us that “Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite” was more wise and understanding than Job’s three friends, even though he was young in days and they were elders (Job 32:6). He had endured them much, not speaking, waiting for “many years” to show wisdom. But finally he said, “It is not the great in years who are wise, nor the aged who understand justice” (Job 32:7, 9). God spoke through the mouth of Elihu, and no one was able to argue with him. He paved the way for God’s words with Job. And David the Prophet says in the great psalm:
“I understand more than the elders, because I keep Your precepts” (Ps 119).
It is assumed that the elders—the aged and the older—have experience, wisdom, and knowledge. But this is not a fixed rule nor a permanent rule. There may be a young man filled with wisdom and faith like Stephen, having mighty spiritual work, and there may be elders who have no work and no experience. There may be a young man newly ordained who is promoted to archpriest, and an old priest who remains a priest. Where, then, are the criteria?!
Saint John the Baptist began his ministry when he was a young man of thirty. And in six months, or eight, or at most in less than a year, he was able to prepare the way before the Lord Christ, prepare for Him a ready people, and lead entire cities to repentance.
And Athanasius the young deacon was more prominent than the elders at the Council of Nicaea.
Thus, the matter is not a matter of age nor a matter of rank, but rather spiritual maturity, competence, and suitability. This is with regard to confessions. As for administering Communion to the people, and that it is restricted to the archpriest and not the priest, this is a strange, strange matter that I hear for the first time.
And I say to the people in general: do not be led behind a new thought unfamiliar to you, other than what you have received from the beginning. And in all spiritual, pastoral, and canonical principles, remember the saying of Scripture:
“Not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Cor 3:6).
Is It Permissible for a Menstruating Woman to Receive Communion?
We also received:
Question: Is it permissible for a woman during her menstruation or after childbirth to receive the holy sacraments? And is it permissible for a woman to enter the sanctuary during Communion? And if not, why is there differentiation between man and woman?
Answer: As an introduction to the answer, I say that there is no differentiation in treatment between man and woman, each within the limits of his or her nature. As Scripture says:
“Neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord” (1 Cor 11:11).
As for the law concerning the menstruating woman and the woman after childbirth, you can read about it in the Book of Leviticus (Lev 12:1–8), (Lev 15:19–33). Scripture is explicit in saying: “She shall touch no holy thing, nor come into the sanctuary until the days of her purification are fulfilled” (Lev 12:4).
The same prohibition was said concerning a man with a discharge (Lev 15:1–15), whether it was an illness needing healing and purification, or a nocturnal emission. The same prohibition was said in the case of a man and woman lying together (Lev 15:16–18).
The prohibition of the menstruating woman or the woman after childbirth is a reminder of the first sin, so that we may remember its punishment and the redemption that saved us from it. Sin had an eternal punishment—“you shall surely die”—and the Lord saved us from this by redemption. There was also an earthly punishment that remained even after redemption, merely as a reminder so that our souls may be humbled by the remembrance of sin and our thanksgiving may continue by remembering salvation from it. This punishment for the man was to eat his bread by the sweat of his brow (Gen 3:19), and the man still practices this punishment without complaint. As for the woman, her punishment was: “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; in pain you shall bring forth children” (Gen 3:16).
Outside the times of pregnancy and childbirth, there is the law of menstruation, while the law of the woman after childbirth is an extension of the punishment of childbirth.
Therefore, the woman should benefit spiritually from this punishment and not complain about it, and the man should benefit from the punishment of toil in obtaining his livelihood and not rebel against it.
Would that women would humble themselves in contemplating the example of Saint Mary the Virgin, who is sung for her purity, holiness, and greatness, and how she is the holiest of all the women of the earth. When she reached the age of puberty, they brought her out from dwelling in the Temple and she came under the care of a man, Joseph. And although her birthgiving of the Lord Christ was a holy birth by the Holy Spirit who came upon her, she nevertheless submitted to the law, and that wondrous phrase was said about her: “Now when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed” (Luke 2:22).
In the canons of the Church it is mentioned in the second canon of Saint Dionysius of Alexandria, the 14th Pope:
It is not permitted for women during their menstruation to approach the holy table and receive the holy Body of Christ and His precious Blood. Nor is it permitted for them to enter the church. As for the duty of offering prayers, they perform it in another place.
And in the seventh canon of Saint Timothy of Alexandria, Patriarch 22, he was asked: Is it permissible for a woman while in her menstrual period to participate (receive Communion)? He answered: No, until she returns pure. Thus, the woman who approaches Communion while menstruating is a woman who dares against the holy things, and the priest who allows her to receive Communion while knowing her condition is a priest negligent with the holy sacraments. If he, moreover, calls for this, he is deviant in doctrine.
As for the sanctuary, it is not permitted to be entered except by the servants of the altar, that is, the ranks of the priesthood and the men of the clergy only. Since the woman is not among the servants of the altar, she does not enter the sanctuary. In the state of her purity she receives Communion outside the sanctuary, and likewise the men who do not have a rank among the ranks of the altar. Here also there is equality.
We give the woman her right within the limits of Scripture and the canons of the Church. As for courtesy at the expense of doctrine, it is a matter that conscience does not accept.
An article by His Holiness Pope Shenouda III – in Watani newspaper – dated 30-8-1987.
For better translation support, please contact the center.
