Questions about Orthodoxy

[HyacinthBouquet]

:wave:

Hi everyone,

Sorry to have started on the wrong foot in another thread.

I just wanted to ask a few questions about the Orthodox faith.

1. Do you believe in mortal sins?
2. Do you have formal confession and is it compulsory?
3. Is there any leniency over contraception if the woman has serious medical problems?
4. Do you believe that people should attend Church every Sunday.
5. What reasons do you have for not believing that the Pope is the descendent of St Peter and that he is infallible?
6. Do you think that the Catholic Church and Orthodox Church will ever join in the future?
7. Are there many Orthodox Churches in the UK?

[Ioan cel Nou]

1. Do you believe in mortal sins?

We don't categorise sins into mortal and venial like the Roman Catholics, if that's what you mean.

2. Do you have formal confession and is it compulsory?

We do and it is. It's very different from Roman Catholic confession, though. For one thing there is no confessional and so no attempt at anonymity and for another it has more the character of a spiritual counseling session. It's a wonderful sacrament.

3. Is there any leniency over contraception if the woman has serious medical problems?

I'm sure there would be. One of the best things about Orthodoxy in my opinion is that we don't go for one size fits all solutions but pastoral aspects of the faith are worked out individually between the person and their priest. It's worth noting also, that the general attitude of the Church to non-abortifacient contraception is not so rigid as Rome's (though some people advocate that its should be - I respectfully disagree with that more extreme stacnce, personally).

4. Do you believe that people should attend Church every Sunday.

As often as is possible, yes. Not everyone can attend every Liturgy, though.

5. What reasons do you have for not believing that the Pope is the descendent of St Peter and that he is infallible?

Personally I'd reverse that question. What reasons does Rome have for believing he is? Having said that, he is a successor to Peter as is the Patriarch of Antioch and the Patriarch of Alexandria, he's just not the successor. As for infallibility, there's simply no precedent for believing in the infallibility of an individual in our Tradition and it was only defined by Rome in 19th century (and then against stiff opposition). There's simply no room for that idea in Orthodoxy.

6. Do you think that the Catholic Church and Orthodox Church will ever join in the future?

Maybe, God willing, if Rome drops the innovations of the second millennium, but I do not expect to see it in my lifetime.

7. Are there many Orthodox Churches in the UK?
Yes, quite a lot. If you want to visit one then give me a shout and I'll help you find one.

James

[Lukaris]

Welcome to the TAW, just saying hello & do not have time to reply but you will receive well informed replies from others here.:wave:

[Orthosdoxa]

James gave good answers.

Welcome. :wave:

[xenia]

James gave very good answers but I feel talkative this morning so I'll give my response as well.

1. Do you believe in mortal sins?

We don't have the categories of venial and mortal sins. In the Catholic world if you die with an unconfessed mortal sin you... go to hell? Purgatory? I don't know. We don't believe in purgatory either.

2. Do you have formal confession and is it compulsory?

From what I've seen, this varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. At one church I attended it did not seem that anyone ever went to confession, or so said the priest to me once. At the Russian church here in town it appears to me that the ppl only receive communion if they went to confession the night before. (Sometimes no one goes up for communion except the little kids.) At my parish, it is hoped that we will all confess at least 4 times a year, ideally before a major fasting period. It is "formal" in that it's more than sitting in the priest's office and talking about yer troubles. We stand with our confessor before the icon of Christ, give a concise accounting of our sins, receive some words of counsel if needed, then we kneel and are absolved. Formal yet informal, as are most things in Orthodoxy.

3. Is there any leniency over contraception if the woman has serious medical problems?

Many Orthodox ppl appear to use contraception, judging from the sizes of their families. I don't know what the teaching is about it, though. Abortion is considered a sin.

4. Do you believe that people should attend Church every Sunday.

Yes.

5. What reasons do you have for not believing that the Pope is the descendent of St Peter and that he is infallible?

Because the papacy is an innovation and was not taught from the beginning. From the beginning the church was counciliar.

6. Do you think that the Catholic Church and Orthodox Church will ever join in the future?

Could happen but the Catholics would have to give up some things they hold dear, such as the papacy. If what is intended is that the Orthodox become subordinated into the RC system under the Pope (like the Byzantine Catholics) with our quaint customs tolerated then I would say I sure hope not.

7. Are there many Orthodox Churches in the UK?

I think so.

[Xpycoctomos]

:wave:

Hi everyone,
Hi :)


1. Do you believe in mortal sins?

Not officially. The idea exists (you'll find it in some prayer books) due to western influence and certainly many church fathers have subscribed to similar ideas or warning against some sins as being more deadly than others and even St Paul talks about this. But the list of sins as given by the Catholic Churhc is not a very Orthodox approach to sin.

however, it is also not orthodox to act as if all sins are to be dealt with in the same way. Killing is generally seen a very severe sin that needs to be handled either EXTREMELY serverely and/or with the utmost precaution and sensitivity. Whereas a simply childhood lie would probably be dealt with less seriously. All sins separate us from God, but two questions remain 1) How much and 2) How difficult is it to get back up after that sin? The answers to these can vary greatly according to both the kind of sin and the person who sinned.

But there is not an official set list of "Really bad sins" and "Not-so-serious sins" that is promoted in the Orthodox Church. Orthodoxy tends to be much more "case-by-case" then "here's the rule, it's either followed or broken."

2. Do you have formal confession and is it compulsory?
Yes and yes. how often? That depends on the priest. The minimum is a year. Some priests (depending on the jursidiction) say you have to come every week you plan on communing or they strongly suggest it. In the OCA (one of the bigger jurisdictions in the N America) it seems that it tends to be suggested to go every 4-6 weeks.
3. Is there any leniency over contraception if the woman has serious medical problems?
The official answer is no. But, you will find that in Orthodoxy, as I said earlier, things are dealt with on a case-by-case situation. This answer would be properly dealt with in a conversation with someone's priest. Chances are, for medical conditions, most priests wouldallow this. However, anything possibly abortive is off limits and so, this would include the Pill (whereas condoms do not work in this way). We have had many threads on this and you will see that Church History and Common Nowday opinion and practice within the OC do not always match up. But this is a very serious issue that is to be dealt with in counsel with a priest. It is not, however, a hard-set rule like in the RCC where there is no room discussion on the matter.

4. Do you believe that people should attend Church every Sunday.
Yes. Again, we do not have the "day of obligation" as the RCC does. If you cannot make it... you cannot make it. God knows your heart. Were you REALLY to sick to make it to Church that day or was it just a little more difficult to get out of bed and so your were just weak that day and making up excuses? This has been me. there have been Sundays I have had to miss for various reasons. Then there have been sundays that I have "had" to miss for, what I later realized was pretty lame and just an excuse and so, I confess this.

5. What reasons do you have for not believing that the Pope is the descendent of St Peter...
Some Orthdoox do believe that the Pope in some way representED (past tense) St Peter in a special way that others perhaps didn't. But it really has nothing to do with the question of why we don't and have never afforded the Pope the status of Supreme Leader of the Church. there are MANY valid views on the Pope within the Orthodox Church and they vary greatly.

Most of the "issues" are really just red herrings (even if unintentionally) becuase it's not about the pope's connection to peter and it's not even about whether Peter is the Rock or not. That has nothing at all to do with how one should or should not view the Pope. The fact is, the Pope is not Peter and never has been. in fact, the first bishops were not the apostles. The Apostles were Apostles and the first Bishops were appointed by Apostles and were just that, Bishops, not Apostles. The First pope was not Peter anymore than the first president was Ben Franklin.

and that he is infallible?
I think the real question is "why should we believe that he is infallible?" The burden of proof lies on them, not us. That is perhaps not the most helpful answer, and others will shed more light on that, but it at least gives you insight (I hope?) into where we're coming from. From our point of view, "infallibility" of a bishop has NEVER been a gift afforded to any bishop in the history of the Church. To us it is a deviation from the norm.


6. Do you think that the Catholic Church and Orthodox Church will ever join in the future?

I don't know. Not within my lifetime. But I pray that we are one day able to do so but I also pray that we go about this cautiously and not fgloss over important issues but truely deal with them.
7. Are there many Orthodox Churches in the UK? I believe so, but others will get (have gotten) to you on that.

God bless and Welcome to TAW!

[Akathist]

About the compulsatory nature of confession.

Confession is required... but the frequency of it varies a lot.

In my parish there are people who come to services only once or twice a year. They receive the Eucharist so I know that they must have had confession. Most likely they came the evening before or maybe set up a time during the week.

Typically in my parish as long as you are "regularly" going to confession you can recieve the Eucharist. This means that if the Priest wants confession every 6-8 weeks for someone they can receive the Eucharish every week and confess only at that rate.

But, "regularly" could mean four times a year... in the season before Christmas (Advent), in the season before "Easter" (Pascha is what we call Easter and the season before it is "Lent"). In the season before the honoring of St. Peter and St. Paul and in the season before we commemorate and honor the ending of the physical life of Theotokos (Mary).

There is a direct connection between the Eucharist and Confession for older children and adults. Younger children receive without confession. At what age a child starts to go to confession is determined by the Priest.

About attending services. We do consider it very important to attend services. However, each situation is judged within the context of the situation. For example. I have no excuse for missing services as I have a car and the parish is only a 20 minute drive.

But, I know people whose closest parish is four or five hours away (and some who have a longer drive). Weekly attendence is a great hardship to them. Therefore, it is not so much a sin for them to miss as it is for me to miss. (if it is a sin at all... God judges such things)

So, while we consider it important, we do understand that there are situations to consider. The Priest is our Spiritual Advisor (we call him a Spiritual Father) and the Priest would talk about what is the right amount of attending for somone in thier particular situation.

I guess I am trying to explain that not everything is spelled out in black and white.

[Knowledge3]

Practical Christianity.

[HyacinthBouquet]

Thank you all for your help and information. :)

I think I ought to explain why I seem to be talking from an RC viewpoint. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic and stayed in that church for almost 40 years. It is, therefore, hard for me to shake off the infallibility-of-the-Pope idea.

As you can see from my faith icon, I now attend an Anglican Catholic Church but there is so much confusion in that Church at the moment. So many different factions and some of them are planning to go back to the Pope whilst others say they are Catholic but do not want to go back to the Pope. The Church we go to has 7 sacraments but another Anglican Church down the road only has 2 sacraments. The order of service is also completely different between two Anglican Churches.

I just want somewhere to take my children where they will learn their faith within some structure. Where people know what they believe. So, I will take them to the nearest Orthodox Church to where we live. I vaguely know of one a few miles away so I'll look that up.

The face-to-face confession worries me, however. Well, not me, personally, but my son. I just don't think he will agree to it. He is at a sensitive age at the moment (pre-teens). Would he be expected to go to confession yet? He is 11.

Anyway, thank you all again for all your help.
God bless you all.
:groupray:

[lighthousekid]

Do you have any stuff that is not in the Bible? How do you know is it true?

[nestoj]

When he is ready, he will go. It's better to start early, but don't press him. I had my first confession at the age of 27. It's not the best thing to do, but I'm just trying to point that these things take time and confidence in confessor.

nestoj
God helps

[nutroll]

Do you have any stuff that is not in the Bible? How do you know is it true?

The answer to that simple question is complicated. There is nothing in the Orthodox Church that is contrary to the Bible. Essentially, the Orthodox Church is completely Biblical, without being "Bible-based." The reason for this is that basing Christianity on the Bible puts the cart before the horse. The Bible did not come about until the Church was already established. It arose out of the Church. The Apostles didn't sit down and look through the Bible and determine what they should believe and how they should practice, so why should we as modern Christians do so? The Apostles were inspired by the Holy Spirit, not only to write great works that would later be assembled into the book that we call the Bible, but their inspiration also went into how they practiced their faith, and ultimately, they passed on both to later generations of Christians. The Holy Spirit has given us more than just a book on which to base our lives. The Holy Spirit has preserved the writings and the Traditions of the Apostles within the Church itself. You will never find anything in our Tradition that goes against Scripture (though there might be some things that are difficult to reconcile without being taught) because Scripture and Tradition all flow from the same source, and are preserved in the same way. Not everything we do is based on a passage in scripture, but the writings of the Church Fathers are full of quotes from Scripture, all the things that we do have been supported time and again through Scripture, because Scripture is the language of our Church.

[Lukaris]

Do you have any stuff that is not in the Bible? How do you know is it true?
Yes, since scripture and tradition are intertwined. The early patristic writings conform to scripture and attest to some tradition outside of scripture. It was from these early fathers in which the Biblical canon was compiled; the early fathers succeeded the apostles and the Holy Orthodox church has transmitted the faith of Gospel to the present day. (ps Nutroll: did not see your post as I was posting).

[Sacrum Silentium]

John 21:25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.

[lighthousekid]

Yes, since scripture and tradition are intertwined. The early patristic writings conform to scripture and attest to some tradition outside of scripture. It was from these early fathers in which the Biblical canon was compiled; the early fathers succeeded the apostles and the Holy Orthodox church has transmitted the faith of Gospel to the present day. (ps Nutroll: did not see your post as I was posting).
But what if they just did not know everything 100% right? How can we know now?

[zhilan]

Also, the priest would talk to your son a lot, and make him comfortable. People are usually scared of it, that's totally normal, and no one is going to pressure him into a situation he's not ready for. It's like going to the doctor, if he'd never gone before, he'd probably be embarrassed and scared about opening himself up to a doctor he doesn't know. But after a long period of getting to know the doctor and coming to understand why going to the doctor is good for him, he would begin to feel more comfortable and maybe even want to go to the doctor when he feels it can help him.

But again, don't worry, the Orthodox Church is very low pressure. If anything, we get accused of moving too slowly! =)

[nutroll]

But what if they just did not know everything 100% right? How can we know now?
How do we know that the Bible got everything 100% right? Seeking intellectual proof is fruitless, but seeking to know the truth in our hearts through prayer is fool proof. The Orthodox Church knows that the teachings of the early Church Fathers and the Saints throughout history are beneficial to us, not because they can be proven through logic, but because when put into practice, they draw us closer to God, and they manifest the fruits of the Holy Spirit. And we don't think that the Early Church Fathers were infallible, or that they couldn't have been wrong about some things, but that they were inspired by the Holy Spirit to speak wisdom and truth. What they taught is always tested against Scripture, against the writings of other Fathers of the Church, and against the living witness of the Church.

[SeraphimSarov]

But what if they just did not know everything 100% right? How can we know now?
Because the gates of hades will not prevail against Christ's Church. One could question the very canon of the Bible in that vein, since we have no way of verifying that the individual books were divinely inspired except by the testimony of our venerable and God-bearing fathers.

[Lukaris]

But what if they just did not know everything 100% right? How can we know now?
We believe that they have continued to transmit the unadulterad faith of the Gospel of Jesus Christ guided by the Holy Spirit. This is exemplified by the very compilation of scripture that formed the Holy Bible and that Holy Tradition is conformable to scripture. Let me give examples: there were many false writings such as those of the Gnostics which had differing concepts of who Jesus Christ was and denied bodily resurrection and it was the Holy Spirit which guided the fathers to discern writings that were sacred vs those which were not. Remember this was during times of varying persecutions & tolerations of Christians prior to Constantine. While the canon was rendered official during or after Constantine, most earlier lists (2nd cent) listed almost the same New & Old Testaments. There were a few writings such as the book of Enoch which were generally considered truth but verification of authorship was lacking so these became a source of much tradition. Are there times when the shepards (clergy) of the church erred? Yes, in fact a couple of our major saints (John Chrysostom & Maximos the Confessor for ex.) were brutalized by the hierarchs of their day. This is similar to our Saviour denouncing the Pharisees & Sadducees for killing the prophets & erecting monuments to them afterward. This was not usually the case however and within context not all Pharisees were against our Saviour (Nicodemus & Joseph of Arimithea for ex.). The Holy Spirit did not leave the church despite some human errors within it since it is within our faith that our Saviour's divinity, his salvation for us, the Trinity of God, his instructions to us to live a holy life of prayer, fasting, & alms giving have been preserved by his Holy church. I am just an amateur at this but I hope this is helpful. PS: let me give a clear cut case of faith & tradition being intertwined. Abortion is clearly condemned by the church and the Holy Bible upholds that so. Nonetheless, there is no DiRECT reference in it to this in the Bible. There is a catechism from Apostolic times called the Didache (teaching) which reflects & refers directly to the Gospel teachings of our Saviour & also mentions that abortion is the taking of life. This is a clear example of Holy tradition within scripture & orally being transmitted.

[Xpycoctomos]

Thank you all for your help and information. :)

I think I ought to explain why I seem to be talking from an RC viewpoint. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic and stayed in that church for almost 40 years. It is, therefore, hard for me to shake off the infallibility-of-the-Pope idea.

As you can see from my faith icon, I now attend an Anglican Catholic Church but there is so much confusion in that Church at the moment. So many different factions and some of them are planning to go back to the Pope whilst others say they are Catholic but do not want to go back to the Pope. The Church we go to has 7 sacraments but another Anglican Church down the road only has 2 sacraments. The order of service is also completely different between two Anglican Churches.

I just want somewhere to take my children where they will learn their faith within some structure. Where people know what they believe. So, I will take them to the nearest Orthodox Church to where we live. I vaguely know of one a few miles away so I'll look that up.

The face-to-face confession worries me, however. Well, not me, personally, but my son. I just don't think he will agree to it. He is at a sensitive age at the moment (pre-teens). Would he be expected to go to confession yet? He is 11.

Anyway, thank you all again for all your help.
God bless you all.
:groupray:
As for the last concern, I think (understandably) you are putting the cart before the horse. Right now you don't even know if you will become Orthodox. non-Orthodox don't do confessioni n the Orthdoox Church.

Also, priest deal with confessing pre-teens adn, actually, people of all ages who are very nervous about face-to-face confession. They are very sensitive to this fact and especially to people who convert (IF you even convert). Their is no ONE way to do. Sometimes it is done leaning over an icon of Christ or the Gospel. Other times it is done just sitting in a room with the priest (my priest does this when requested, he calls it "Greek style"). Some people find the former way less intimidating while others find the latter more comfortable. The priest can lead it like a discussion or just listen to the laundry list of sins and then comment where he feels the person needs help/wisdom/counsel. It will be inevitable that your son will feel nervous at his first confession. So will you!

But, I really wouldn't worry about this right now. Just visit the parish (try to find others in your area if possible).

let us knwo how your visit goes!

Xpy

[lighthousekid]

Because the gates of hades will not prevail against Christ's Church. One could question the very canon of the Bible in that vein, since we have no way of verifying that the individual books were divinely inspired except by the testimony of our venerable and God-bearing fathers.
I don't know, but everybody says "we are right". Maybe there is no way to know for sure :(

[MariaRegina]

Thank you all for your help and information. :)

I think I ought to explain why I seem to be talking from an RC viewpoint. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic and stayed in that church for almost 40 years. It is, therefore, hard for me to shake off the infallibility-of-the-Pope idea.

As you can see from my faith icon, I now attend an Anglican Catholic Church but there is so much confusion in that Church at the moment. So many different factions and some of them are planning to go back to the Pope whilst others say they are Catholic but do not want to go back to the Pope. The Church we go to has 7 sacraments but another Anglican Church down the road only has 2 sacraments. The order of service is also completely different between two Anglican Churches.

I just want somewhere to take my children where they will learn their faith within some structure. Where people know what they believe. So, I will take them to the nearest Orthodox Church to where we live. I vaguely know of one a few miles away so I'll look that up.

The face-to-face confession worries me, however. Well, not me, personally, but my son. I just don't think he will agree to it. He is at a sensitive age at the moment (pre-teens). Would he be expected to go to confession yet? He is 11.

Anyway, thank you all again for all your help.
God bless you all.
:groupray:

Please talk with an Orthodox Priest. He can answer your questions better than we can, because he can deal with your specific needs, which you may not want to discuss here.

Regarding your son, our son made his first confession in Holy Orthodoxy when he was 11. He had gotten into some bad habits, habits that he really didn't want to discuss with his parents (us), although we knew about them. However, he was glad to have a priest who would not judge him, but help him overcome his problems.

Our son was the one who proposed that we look into the Orthodox Church in the first place because he feared Catholic Priests. Since 95% or so of the Orthodox priests are married, he was delighted. He very happy that our pastor had sons around the same age.

Better still, confession was not in a closed room, so our son didn't need to fear being molested.

[Lukaris]

I do not presume to evaluate your knowledge or convictions re the Gospel of Jesus Christ but only advocate a possible approach to the Orthodox Christian faith (and I hope to convey an approach that is properly salvic). Read Romans chprs 1& 2 which St. Paul announces the salvation of Jesus Christ & our sinful predicament. Next read chapter 7 of the book of Acts in which St. Stephen outlines the unfolding of our Saviour's purpose within the Old Testament from Abraham on. Next read chptr 1 of the Gospel of John which amazingly tells of our Saviour within the Trinity (..."the word was God.."), John the Baptist, the selection of apostles etc. Now read chapters 5, 6, & 7 of Matthew which outline the imperative of the Gospel & how we are to receive it in our daily life. For consistent witness to the faith in the early church google & read the Didache, the letter of St Aristedes who initially was tolerant sympathizer of Christians & defended their integrity but also refuted paganism). Lastly read the Orthodox wording of the Nicene Creed (go to www.goarch.com (http://www.goarch.com)) I pray I am giving an adequate basic approach to the Christian truth of Holy Orthodoxy. My time to post is extremely limited so I would otherwie provide more info and none of the above material should take long to read (1 1/2 hrs tops?). If this is not helpful forgive me a sinner. If it is try to communicate with others here or a clergyman. THIS POST IS MEANT FOR REPLY #21 QUOTE FAILED TO REGISTER

[Akathist]

About your son, it will take time before the two of you enter the Church so I suspect it will resolve itself in time.

Also, it is not "face to face". We face the icon of Christ in my parish and the Priest is slightly behind us.

Sometimes when my Priest and I are discussing something related to his giving me Spiritual direction, etc, then we will talk face to face. But the majority of confession time is my facing the icon.

Remember the confession is to Christ. The Priest is the witness and the one to say the prayers, and of course also the one who advises.

[SeraphimSarov]

I don't know, but everybody says "we are right". Maybe there is no way to know for sure :(
The point isn't to be right. There's no competition. The fact is that St. Paul told us to carry on the traditions given to us and not to listen to false preachers. That is in addition to the fact that Christ told us that hell would not prevail over His Church. If you believe that St. Paul's words were inspired, there is logically an origin to the belief that these words were inspired, and there must be the Church that has done what St. Paul instructed.
It gets confusing when you're not sure where to go from that point, but think of it this way: only a handful of groups have existed since Pentecost. Claiming that there is some group out there that came into existence long after Pentecost that has preserved the Truth is absolutely absurd, since that would mean that at one point, Christ's Church ceased to exist and came into existence elsewhere. So, you're left with only a number of choices, and a few can be immediately eliminated just because of blatant innovations to the Faith (in my opinion, anyway).

I'm rambling here and I may be inaccurate at points, but my point is this: it's hard, and it takes a lot of searching, but in the end, the important thing to understand is that the Truth does not change, and the Truth has been, is, and always will be. To say that the Truth doesn't exist or to say that the Truth is just scattered everywhere and unknowable is, in my opinion, contrary to the testimony of our Christ.

I hope I made at least a shred of sense?

[Dorothea]

:wave:

3. Is there any leniency over contraception if the woman has serious medical problems?


Hi, April. I just wanted to answer this with what the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese says on contraception:


Sexual relations are related to the mutual fulfillment of the spouses and then to child-bearing. The decision, therefore, to suspend fertility through the use of contraceptives is not necessarily in violation of natural law. Regarding this matter, Metropolitan Chrysostomos Zapheris notes the following: "While the Orthodox Church fully acknowledges the role of procreation in the marital sexual act, it does not share the deterministic understanding of the act ... which ignores love as a dimension of great value in sexual intercourse between husband and wife."

Creation of new life requires serious, prayerful, honest and sincere reflection. While some forms of contraception are more admissible than others, it is clear that abortion is not an acceptable form of birth control. The decision to regulate the size of one's family is the personal responsibility of the spouses. A serious commitment to the Gospel, however, precludes decisions that are based solely on hedonistic, selfish and prideful reasons. We do well, at this point, to remember the words of a noted Orthodox theologian: "Since Christ's resurrection a realm of non-death has opened up in the opacity of the world ... Contrary to widespread opinion, my body is not myself. It is my self only when it belongs to Christ, when it takes its place in the stream of life of the communion of saints, in the fountainhead of living water of the Body of Christ."
http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7106.asp

I really think if the woman is at risk, the church would be lenient.

[Ioan cel Nou]

As for the last concern, I think (understandably) you are putting the cart before the horse. Right now you don't even know if you will become Orthodox. non-Orthodox don't do confessioni n the Orthdoox Church.

Also, priest deal with confessing pre-teens adn, actually, people of all ages who are very nervous about face-to-face confession. They are very sensitive to this fact and especially to people who convert (IF you even convert). Their is no ONE way to do. Sometimes it is done leaning over an icon of Christ or the Gospel. Other times it is done just sitting in a room with the priest (my priest does this when requested, he calls it "Greek style"). Some people find the former way less intimidating while others find the latter more comfortable. The priest can lead it like a discussion or just listen to the laundry list of sins and then comment where he feels the person needs help/wisdom/counsel. It will be inevitable that your son will feel nervous at his first confession. So will you!

But, I really wouldn't worry about this right now. Just visit the parish (try to find others in your area if possible).

let us knwo how your visit goes!

Xpy
And when I confess (Romanian practice is not quite the same as that described by Xpy), what I called 'face to face' is really more like face to feet. We tend to confess kneeling in front of he priest with his stole (is that the right word? I'm never sure what the items of clerical dress are called) over our heads. I can't see much more than the tips of his shoes poking out from under his vestments. It is intimidating the first time but it really is the most wonderful feeling to confess like this. Afterwards the world just looks different somehow. In my case confession actually enabled me to finally quit smoking after literally years of trying and failing miserably, so I can attest to the fact that it can have a very positive effect on your life if you let it.

James

[Xpycoctomos]

And when I confess (Romanian practice is not quite the same as that described by Xpy), what I called 'face to face' is really more like face to feet. We tend to confess kneeling in front of he priest with his stole (is that the right word? I'm never sure what the items of clerical dress are called) over our heads. I can't see much more than the tips of his shoes poking out from under his vestments. It is intimidating the first time but it really is the most wonderful feeling to confess like this. Afterwards the world just looks different somehow. In my case confession actually enabled me to finally quit smoking after literally years of trying and failing miserably, so I can attest to the fact that it can have a very positive effect on your life if you let it.

James
I forgot about that. I did that twice with a Romanian priest-monk at a monastery. I liked that.

Then in madrid there was a Romanian conclave of people and I went to their Church and we did confession literally face to face as I knelt on a kneeler in front of him (i don't remember if he was kneeling, but he was eye level to me).

Then in Romania in Putna I did confession. The priest-monk didn't know English (and I don't know Romanian) but we were somehow able to communicate (me my sins, and he his gentle chastisement and advice) and I am not sure how we did it. He told a monk there who knew quite a bit of English that he fully believed it was the work of the Holy spirit that we were able to do it. I do to. But I did it face to face with him. We just both sat in chairs and looked at eachother as we spoke (like an intense conversation). That was probably an exception to the norm becuase of the odd circumstance.

I have a question for you. One time, I went to a Romanian monastary in the US. I got there about a half hour before liturgy and I waited in line. We did confession one by one. But then he waited until we were all done and he gave all of us absolution together. Does that sound right? I don't mean "Should he have done that?" I mean, does that match any custom you know of. Correct me on any details I may have messed up, but that's how I remember it.

Thanks.

Xpy

[AxionEsti]

Remember, "Ye shall know them by their fruits."

If you compare the RCC with the EO, remember this.

[nestoj]

And when I confess (Romanian practice is not quite the same as that described by Xpy), what I called 'face to face' is really more like face to feet. We tend to confess kneeling in front of he priest with his stole (is that the right word? I'm never sure what the items of clerical dress are called) over our heads. I can't see much more than the tips of his shoes poking out from under his vestments. It is intimidating the first time but it really is the most wonderful feeling to confess like this. Afterwards the world just looks different somehow. In my case confession actually enabled me to finally quit smoking after literally years of trying and failing miserably, so I can attest to the fact that it can have a very positive effect on your life if you let it.

James
That's the way we do it here to, although there is no kneeling, we are bowed (usually to the side where altar is), but nevertheless all I see is floor.

nestoj
God helps

[Theophorus]

1. Do you believe in mortal sins?

As Xpy said, not officially, but sometimes you'll things like this.

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t99/chopin139/7dsins.gif

[Xpycoctomos]

That's the way we do it here to, although there is no kneeling, we are bowed (usually to the side where altar is), but nevertheless all I see is floor.

nestoj
God helps
yeah, that's how I do it... standing up. But usually it is over an icon stand over to the side (in plain view of everyone, but there is chanting so no one can hear you) with the stoll over my head as the priest leans over to hear you. Somoe people have bad backs and so these are also good times for our priest to do it "Greek style" lol.

Xpy

[Xpycoctomos]

As Xpy said, not officially, but sometimes you'll things like this.

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t99/chopin139/7dsins.gif
And i have to say, these kinds of things can help a lot.

[Theophorus]

And i have to say, these kinds of things can help a lot.
I agree

[lighthousekid]

Is fantasy a sin? :o :(

[Orthosdoxa]

depends. what exactly do you mean by fantasy?

[lighthousekid]

depends. what exactly do you mean by fantasy?
I don't know. I just saw the graph with the strange cross above

[Orthosdoxa]

Well, I suppose it would mean you're avoiding the reality that God has given you, so it can't be good. And face it, that's a loaded word, that often implies sexual or other forbidden fantasies. Perhaps others could expound more.

(though I find myself fantasizing about a pizza LOADED with cheese, and the fast just began - oy!!!)

[Sacrum Silentium]

I feel you there, my mind keeps taking me to the leftover loaded spaghetti in the fridge with some heated up garlic bread.

I should be in bed.

[Akathist]

I see fanatsy listed as a sin of pride. I suspect that it is not just craving food but also it is more to do with the part mentioned above about not wanting to accept what God has given us. To fantasize about glory, etc.

Pride is a very hard sin to deal with as I think our society values pride and rewards it.

Looking at the list, all seven of these sins are hard to over come though. I like lists like this as they remind me so much of how much more I have to work on.

But keep in mind that we don't have the same concept that some sins are "venial" and others "deadly". Sin is sin. It is true that there are some sins that would not stop me from receiving the eucharist and some that if I did I would refrain until confession. So, I agree, we do some distinquishing too.

But within context not always across the board to others. What is a sin that keeps me from the Eucharist might not keep someone else for example. We are not so legalistic in that sense.

_______________

In my parish we stand or kneel for confession and the priest is slightly behind but he does put the stole on over our heads for most if not all of the confession. I forgot to mention that. I find the stole comforting. It is like the loving emprace of my Lord as I ask for forgiveness.

[buzuxi02]

I don't know. I just saw the graph with the strange cross above
That strange cross is a russian cross along with the "instruments" of the Passion.

The small bar on top is meant to be the sign put over Jesus head when he was crucified "Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews")-John 19.19

The small lower bar which is slanted is the footrest on the cross.

the instruments of the passion:

The circle in the center of the cross represent the crown of thorns put on Jesus head. In Orthodox Churches especially during Holy Thursday night thorny wreaths are places over the cross as pictured.

The spear on the right, is meant to be the spear used by the roman soldier to pierce Christ's side.

The one on the left is a totem pole which the sponge of vinegar was placed when Christ called out "i thirst' on the cross.

[Ioan cel Nou]

I forgot about that. I did that twice with a Romanian priest-monk at a monastery. I liked that.

Then in madrid there was a Romanian conclave of people and I went to their Church and we did confession literally face to face as I knelt on a kneeler in front of him (i don't remember if he was kneeling, but he was eye level to me).

Then in Romania in Putna I did confession. The priest-monk didn't know English (and I don't know Romanian) but we were somehow able to communicate (me my sins, and he his gentle chastisement and advice) and I am not sure how we did it. He told a monk there who knew quite a bit of English that he fully believed it was the work of the Holy spirit that we were able to do it. I do to. But I did it face to face with him. We just both sat in chairs and looked at eachother as we spoke (like an intense conversation). That was probably an exception to the norm becuase of the odd circumstance.

I have a question for you. One time, I went to a Romanian monastary in the US. I got there about a half hour before liturgy and I waited in line. We did confession one by one. But then he waited until we were all done and he gave all of us absolution together. Does that sound right? I don't mean "Should he have done that?" I mean, does that match any custom you know of. Correct me on any details I may have messed up, but that's how I remember it.

Thanks.

Xpy
Could be. Nothing I'm familiar with but it might be possible. I'm also not familiar with confessing any other way than I described even in Romania, though. Group absolution, though, often with no confession as such, is something that I would usually associate with the Greeks here.

James

[lighthousekid]

That strange cross is a russian cross along with the "instruments" of the Passion.

The small bar on top is meant to be the sign put over Jesus head when he was crucified "Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews")-John 19.19

The small lower bar which is slanted is the footrest on the cross.

the instruments of the passion:

The circle in the center of the cross represent the crown of thorns put on Jesus head. In Orthodox Churches especially during Holy Thursday night thorny wreaths are places over the cross as pictured.

The spear on the right, is meant to be the spear used by the roman soldier to pierce Christ's side.

The one on the left is a totem pole which the sponge of vinegar was placed when Christ called out "i thirst' on the cross.
Thanks :)

[Philothei]

Could be. Nothing I'm familiar with but it might be possible. I'm also not familiar with confessing any other way than I described even in Romania, though. Group absolution, though, often with no confession as such, is something that I would usually associate with the Greeks here.

James
I heard the general "absolution prayer" in a Serbian church.... too not only Greek...let us not throw more "bad practices " to Greeks. And BTW I do not like it and I think it is supreficial.

God bless,
Philothei


God bless,
Philothei

[Xpycoctomos]

I heard the general "absolution prayer" in a Serbian church.... too not only Greek...let us not throw more "bad practices " to Greeks. And BTW I do not like it and I think it is supreficial.

God bless,
Philothei


God bless,
Philothei
Actually I have to disagree with that. There is nothing superficial about general absolution. Remember, the confessions were private and personal.

Generally speaking when General Absolution is criticized, this is because the confession is also general (like in the Lutheran Church). I can tell you that when this kind and Holy Monk (and no, I did not take what you were saying to be a personal affront to the decency or Orthodoxy of the monk in question) gave absolution to the 5 or so of us... it was not in anyway superficial.

I'm not sure why he did. It couldn't ahve been to save time. At most he saved like, two minutes doing it this way? So, I have to think that this was some kind of tradition from somewhere (regional? I don't know, obviously it's not THE main tradition of Romania since our Romaniaphile friend isn't familiar with it, but I can't imagine he just made it up... if I remember correctly, most of the other people were Romanian themselves and didn't seem surprised or confused when he did it).

Xpy

[Philothei]

Remember, the confessions were private and personal.


Are you sure that was what you wanted to say?

kind of contradicts... the previous sentence...

[Philothei]

Generally speaking when General Absolution is criticized, this is because the confession is also general (like in the Lutheran Church). I can tell you that when this kind and Holy Monk (and no, I did not take what you were saying to be a personal affront to the decency or Orthodoxy of the monk in question) gave absolution to the 5 or so of us... it was not in anyway superficial.


Xpy, relax... I did not judge the confession-absolution prayer practice.. I think you missunderstand what I said. I was replying to antother poster, not yours. Sorry for the confussion. When confession is prior to general absolution it is legit and I agree. When "general" absolution takes place for the whole "unconfessed" congregation is where I have a problem... and tha twas the case for the Serbian church and our own Greek churches (very few got to admit) I have seen this practice...

Hope that explains...:scratch:

Sorry again for the mixup.

God bless,
Philothei

[Xpycoctomos]

Generally speaking when General Absolution is criticized, this is because the confession is also general (like in the Lutheran Church). I can tell you that when this kind and Holy Monk (and no, I did not take what you were saying to be a personal affront to the decency or Orthodoxy of the monk in question) gave absolution to the 5 or so of us... it was not in anyway superficial.


Xpy, relax... I did not judge the confession-absolution prayer practice.. I think you missunderstand what I said. I was replying to antother poster, not yours. Sorry for the confussion. When confession is prior to general absolution it is legit and I agree. When "general" absolution takes place for the whole "unconfessed" congregation is where I have a problem... and tha twas the case for the Serbian church and our own Greek churches (very few got to admit) I have seen this practice...

Hope that explains...:scratch:

Sorry again for the mixup.

God bless,
Philothei
Makes sense. tha is a shame. And quite unOrthdoox. For example in the Russian Church the only time such is allowed is when a ship is sinking. Now, obviously there could be other more relevant situations that would equally require such an action (like if there were an Orthodox conference held in the Twin Towers on 9/11 (I don't there there was though, but as an example). A regular liturgy is certainly not one of those as you say.

Xpy

[Xpycoctomos]

Remember, the confessions were private and personal.


Are you sure that was what you wanted to say?

kind of contradicts... the previous sentence...
No. Absolution is not the confession. Absolution follows confession. General absolution is just that. When absolution is given at the very end of the confession. The sacrament is really the latter part... but the two go together like faith and works.

So, what that monk did was general absolution. But the confession was personal and private.

[Philothei]

now I get it what you mean.... In any case, in the GOA parishes you might see this practice in major feast days such as Easter and Christmas... when everyone takes communion... I guess the priest wants to make sure he is not "responsible" for his congregation's unworthy partaking of the Eucarist. Instead I think the priest has the responsibility to make it known that communion has to be accompanied by frequent confession. The ROCOR churches are very strict... I experienced that when I wanted (years back) to take my sunday school class to a ROCOR church in the area....O ,boy the priest called me to let me know that the children will not be able to commune.... because he would have to have confession with them pior to liturgy...

God bless,
Philothei

[ma2000]

Actually I have to disagree with that. There is nothing superficial about general absolution. Remember, the confessions were private and personal.

Generally speaking when General Absolution is criticized, this is because the confession is also general (like in the Lutheran Church). I can tell you that when this kind and Holy Monk (and no, I did not take what you were saying to be a personal affront to the decency or Orthodoxy of the monk in question) gave absolution to the 5 or so of us... it was not in anyway superficial.

I'm not sure why he did. It couldn't ahve been to save time. At most he saved like, two minutes doing it this way? So, I have to think that this was some kind of tradition from somewhere (regional? I don't know, obviously it's not THE main tradition of Romania since our Romaniaphile friend isn't familiar with it, but I can't imagine he just made it up... if I remember correctly, most of the other people were Romanian themselves and didn't seem surprised or confused when he did it).

Xpy
Are you sure the priest didn't say actually the prayer the priest says before confession? We call it "molitva"/"molifta". The priest asks forgiveness for the sins of the people and advices them to confess all their sins.
In the churches I've been, usually people come confessing in large numbers. The practice is to confess before taking communion so at least four times a year you will see the church full for most of the day. People come, the priest prays the "molifta" for the ones who are present. Then these people come to confess their sins. The priest absolves them of their sins (it's actually a short prayer which is said every time one confesses his sins), but before everyone left, the church is already full with other people who came to confess. So, the priest prays the "molifta" again for the newcommers. That might look like a general absolvement.
I've heard only of one Romanian priest who practices group confession. I've never heard of group absolvement.
But I'm ceratinly not judging, I don't want to upset anyone with this post.
God bless!

[Xpycoctomos]

Are you sure the priest didn't say actually the prayer the priest says before confession? We call it "molitva"/"molifta". The priest asks forgiveness for the sins of the people and advices them to confess all their sins.
In the churches I've been, usually people come confessing in large numbers. The practice is to confess before taking communion so at least four times a year you will see the church full for most of the day. People come, the priest prays the "molifta" for the ones who are present. Then these people come to confess their sins. The priest absolves them of their sins (it's actually a short prayer which is said every time one confesses his sins), but before everyone left, the church is already full with other people who came to confess. So, the priest prays the "molifta" again for the newcommers. That might look like a general absolvement.
I've heard only of one Romanian priest who practices group confession. I've never heard of group absolvement.
But I'm ceratinly not judging, I don't want to upset anyone with this post.
God bless!
So, you're suggesting that perhaps the group thing wasn't AFTER but actually BEFORE confession.

To be sure that I'm understanding you correctly, If you are right, then the priest would have 1) gathered us all up around him (as this was a small group... 5 people or o) and said a special prayer that is said BEFORE confession. Then we would all go back to our seat/pew whatever and wait as we confess privately with the priest one by one. After each person confesses, the priest absolves the penitent privately and individually.

If I have that right, then that is totally possible. I know that the confession itself was totally private (I've never seen otherwise and that is a shame that some orthodox Churches take on such a practice general confession), but it is possible that the group thing was before rather than after and, so, absolution was done individually.

let me know if I am following you.

Xpy

[MariaRegina]

Has anyone read the life of St. John of Kronstadt?

He had permission to do general confessions because the crowds were so large. He would start by mentioning the sins that were commonly confessed and then encourage people to mention out loud their sins. People were shouting their sins.

[ma2000]

So, you're suggesting that perhaps the group thing wasn't AFTER but actually BEFORE confession.

To be sure that I'm understanding you correctly, If you are right, then the priest would have 1) gathered us all up around him (as this was a small group... 5 people or o) and said a special prayer that is said BEFORE confession. Then we would all go back to our seat/pew whatever and wait as we confess privately with the priest one by one. After each person confesses, the priest absolves the penitent privately and individually.

If I have that right, then that is totally possible. I know that the confession itself was totally private (I've never seen otherwise and that is a shame that some orthodox Churches take on such a practice general confession), but it is possible that the group thing was before rather than after and, so, absolution was done individually.

let me know if I am following you.

Xpy
Yes, that is what normally happens in here and I think that was what happened then.

[Ioan cel Nou]

Yes, that is what normally happens in here and I think that was what happened then.
That makes more sense certainly. I think you're right. And as for the Greeks and general absolution, it wasn't that that I was criticising but the lack of confession beforehand. I just don't think it's right and here in England it seems to be the norm.

James

[Xpycoctomos]

That makes more sense certainly. I think you're right. And as for the Greeks and general absolution, it wasn't that that I was criticising but the lack of confession beforehand. I just don't think it's right and here in England it seems to be the norm.

James
man. that is a shame. I didn't know that at all. As a Lutheran-become-Orthodox, that was/is a big criticism I have of my former Church. Very sad indeed.

[Ioan cel Nou]

man. that is a shame. I didn't know that at all. As a Lutheran-become-Orthodox, that was/is a big criticism I have of my former Church. Very sad indeed.
I haven't been to enough Greek churches to personally vouch for it, but nobody at my Romanian parish was at all fazed when I mentioned my experience and, in fact, clergy have noted to me that, outside of the monastery in Essex (which I have never visited but is apparently quite traditional) it is indeed common. It's sad, but to be honest the state of many Greek parishes here is that they are more ethnic club than Orthodox church - I even had a Greek priest warn me away from some parishes for exactly that reason.

James

[Chocolatesa]

I don't know, but everybody says "we are right". Maybe there is no way to know for sure :(

That's what I thought too until I read the conversion stories here:
http://foru.ms/t3005537-conversions-to-orthodoxy.html

One of the parishes I go to practices general confession, as in no part of it is in private with only the priest, as well as private confession (I assume, I've only been there once)

[Xpycoctomos]

The reason we know it's a shame is that there are canons that strictly forbid the practice except in certain circumstances (that are very severe, like a ship sinking) and there is very sound reasoning. General confession, at the very least, robs the pentitents of its therapeutic, psychological and emotional benefits. I'm not saying that the absolution given afterward is not valid. God can work through the penitent (I believe) in spite of the mistakes of the clergy. But it is certainly MUCH less than preferable.

Also, St john of Kronstadt (an excellent example) was an amazing man and living saint. So certainly that should be treated as an exception to the rule. (By the way Aria, I wasn't trying to argue with you in metioning the example you brought up, I just wanted to use it demonstrate my point).

Xpy