Women in Greece challange Medieval law
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Scholarly Pursuits
Forum Name: Current Affairs
Forum Discription: Debates on topical, current World politics
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=23150
Printed Date: 25-Apr-2024 at 07:59
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Women in Greece challange Medieval law
Posted By: Theodore Felix
Subject: Women in Greece challange Medieval law
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 03:28
|
Greek women flout medieval entry ban in monastery
9 January 2008 | 11:52 | Source: Beta, AFP THESSALONIKI -- A 1,000-year-old ban on women in the Greek monastic community of Mt. Athos crumbled, albeit briefly, yesterday. A mixed crowd of local villagers marched into the enclave to protest against the monks' alleged encroachment on public land, a protest leader said. Around 500 women and men from villages in the Halkidiki peninsula in northern Greece took a few steps into the territory of the self-governing community of some 20 monasteries before a police cordon stopped them, police and the organiser said. "It was a symbolic act, we have broken the 'avaton'," said protest organiser Kyriaki Malama, referring to the 1045 AD decree that forbids women access on grounds of impurity. "We demand that the Greek government and the European Union intervene to stop the monasteries from acting as if they are above the law." The demonstrators belong to a local community group locked in a court dispute with five of the monasteries over ownership of some 8,300 hectares of forest and land which they say belongs to their villages. "The monks' mission is to be a religious order, not one that does (real estate) business," Malama said. Police stated that there is a possibility of filing criminal charges against six women for breaking the laws of encroachment on monastery property. According to Greek law, women trespassing on Mt. Athos can, if found guilty, faces sentences of in between 12 months and two years in prison. Several feminist groups in Greece and other countries have tried to have the medieval law nullified. The European Parliament asked Greece to make gender rights equal in 2002 and 2003, both times with no results. http://www.b92.net/eng/news/comments.php?nav_id=46794 --------- That this law continues to be enforced is unbelievable. Its great that these women challenged it so nicely. more power to them! The main reason for thee protest may not have been to challenge the law, but the symbolism was just as important. |
Replies:
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 05:21
|
If the monks have unjustly encroached on public land, then the protest may have been justified. If the purpose of the protest was solely to oppose the prohibition against women entering the Holy Mountain, then it was not. The prohibition is obviously recognized by the government, and it has practical as well as theological implications.
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 05:53
|
If the Catholic Church allows women to have monasteries then why can't women following the Orthodox creed take monastic vows?
------------- |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 06:24
|
They can and do.
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 06:36
|
Ok then what is this about... AFIK monasteries have been seperate... that's the whole point of monastic life...
------------- |
Posted By: xristar
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 06:43
|
On Athos only men's monasteries exist. ------------- 
Defeat allows no explanation Victory needs none. It insults the dead when you treat life carelessly. |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 07:09
|
I don't see how this will bring about one, but if there is a want for a convent then one should be set up. ------------- |
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 08:51
they cant be established on Mount Athos.
AKAIK, this territory doesn't even fall under direct government control, and they are wasting their time in thinking they can influence the church, which is ment to be beyond government inteference. IIRC not even female animals are not allowed, though exceptions were made on the non female ban for humanitarian reasons but im not sure of the details. This is just protesting for the sake of it, while i might not understand why females are banned, or even disagree with it (if i did), i would totally respect this sacred and ancient orthodox sanctuary for what it is and move on to something more important like; equality of wages, maternity leave and much more relevant issues closer to home. edit: improved a poorly written post |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 15:21
Well said, Leonidas. 
You do recall correctly that female animals are not allowed, except for hm... cats and chickens, I believe (the former to keep down vermin, the latter to provide eggs for iconography). I had also heard, at some point, that Athos had temporarily lifted the ban to provide a haven for refugees, but I do not recall when or why. I'm sure you could find it somewhere.
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 16:23
|
The main character of Mount Athos is just this interdiction to women acces. If women would enter there, there will be no more Mount Athos.
There are such many places were a women haven't been, why should she go to Athos? The nuns can make a similar law region if they want 'equal rights'. And by the way, is known that the feminists are ugly, frustrated women. -------------  |
Posted By: Spartakus
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 17:20
|
They just want to take more land to make it farm land and build houses. Bloody villagers.......
------------- "There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. " --- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996) |
Posted By: Aelfgifu
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 18:53
|
Female POWER!
Down with men!
Now seriously.... It is a bit too much of a trifle to start protesting over, but a law that forbids women to go somewhere wased on nothing more than the fact that they are female (and more disgustingly, becuse females are 'impure') is pretty damn sad.
You sound a bit scared... or frustrated maybe? ------------- 
Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears. |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 19:07
Well, there is also the practical consideration of the effect that a sudden influx of women would have on the passions of the monks. The idea is that the mountain has been consecrated to the Theotokos.
Aye, that they can and do -- excepting, of course, the priest who must come to celebrate the divine liturgy.
Frustrated? Yes, and sometimes -- although not in this particular instance -- with good cause. Ugly? Ugly? In addition to being untrue, that statement is most uncharitable. I wonder how the Athonite monks would feel if they read it.
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 19:07
There are thousands of places where the access of people is interdicted (private places etc), so it's not big deal that a place is interdicted for women. Is not because women are impure, is just a tradition. For similar reasons, there are catholic monasteries where the access of common people is completely prohibited. As for feminists, just search images with Google and you'll understand: http://images.google.ro/images?q=feminist&svnum=10&um=1&hl=ro&start=20&sa=N&ndsp=20 - http://images.google.ro/images?q=feminist&svnum=10&um=1&hl=ro&start=20&sa=N&ndsp=20 ------------- |
Posted By: Spartakus
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 19:08
It is also sad to see holly sanctuaries , which exist for centuries, to be attacked by some land hangry villagers and a few bunch of women who do not know where the real problem between the sexes exists. ------------- "There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. " --- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996) |
Posted By: Aelfgifu
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 19:36
Yes... Although they should be able to contain themselves, considering as the women have already been ascertained as ugly by default in this thread.
  I need some clarification. Are we talking about the monastery itself (buildings and immediate surroundings), or simply the lands in posession of the monastery? That would make a difference...
I have never heard of monasteries banning visitors of the other sex at all... is that specific to the Orthodox Church?
Places are forbidden to certain persons for a certain reason, most certainly. Places that are forbidden for half the worlds population based on medieval notions of impurity is not quite the same as access to the men's restrooms. Traditions are no excuse for discrimination.
Hm... I do not really see anything... except for one single individual. And even if she is an feminist, and if she were the only feminist on the earth, your link here stall does not prove your point... whatever your point was.
really... and where exactly would that be, pray tell....  -------------
Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 20:13
Orthodox monasteries only in very few cases are not allowing persons of opposite sex (for example, in Romania there are only two). Mount Athos is such an exception. And this isn't made because women are impure but because it was felt necesary to exist a place on earth were the necesity and benefits of abstinence to be emphasized in a stronger way. Promoting the access of women in such places, or female priesthood and other inovations is not a manifestation of justice but a useless mania. The ones defending su8ch things doesn't see the human aspect, they are fixed on some stereotypical reasonings. The Holy Mount Athos was established as a place where only men are allowed due to a tradition which is very important for the Orthodox believers. Abolishing such things would efectively eliminate the most important symbol of Eastern Christianism and would have desastruous consequences for the Orthodox Church, actualy would mean its end. The priests, hyerarchs, monks and nuns would abandonate the public manifestations of their cult, including the church services and would adopt an individual form of living their religion with the permanent feeling of the imminent end of world. Because is prophetized that when the women would enter Athos will begin the end of the world.
Search for the next pages. Or better think logical: what reason would have a beautiful woman, married and satisfied with her life, to participate at feminist activities? And one more thing about feminism. I have read today something on a Romanian blog, the guys was saying that nobody is born woman or man. The gender, sexual orientation and being man or woman are three different things. We are born with a gender but we may decide if we become male or female and if we prefer men or women. So, the cause of feminism is false. ------------- |
Posted By: Antioxos
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 20:27
|
Well the women can have a look to Mount Athos from internet http://www.inathos.gr/athos/en/ - http://www.inathos.gr/athos/en/ ------------- 
By http://profile.imageshack.us/user/antioxos - antioxos at 2007-08-20 |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 20:29
There is also a ship that goes along the coast two times a day at distance of some hundreds meters. And I want say that visiting monasteries is a thing which should be drasticaly reduced or even interdicted in many cases, indiferently of gender. Because people are chosing the life of nun or monk for living isolated from society, not for seeing each day crowds of visitors photographying and filming, laughing etc. ------------- |
Posted By: Ponce de Leon
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 20:37
really... and where exactly would that be, pray tell.... [/QUOTE]
oooh! She got you on that one Sparty! 
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 21:04
I just do not see how women are "impure" to be there. However, protesting and encroaching upon "sacred" land isn't the solution either. There should be a reform in order to make a site available for a convent. Nevertheless that is not the approach to take in order to attain that goal either. Pissing people off only leads to reprisals and unwillingness and God knows people in the Balkans can be hardheaded about the most minuscule thing. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 21:07
That statement is rather offensive and stereotyping, and sexist. I don't think thats the proper way to address this issue. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 21:09
Yeah I have no clue how that "impure" theory still gets tolerated. ------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 21:24
OK.
Is nothing about impure. Haven't you read what I sayed? The fact that female animals are not allowed is not because they are impure but because this way is created a more female-less environment. The monks want to leave in chastity and seeing female animale would weaken this. Also they want live in material simplicity. Few decades ago there were not roads, electricity, only foot paths. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 21:25
So if those monks suddenly would meet women they would get completely crazy? that's revealing... ------------- |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 21:32
Indeed and it is, although perhaps not for the reason you suspect.
Keep in mind that these men have willingly renounced the world. Yet still they are subject to the same passions that afflict us all. No one is positing that they would commit any acts of fornication, but it would certainly present a distraction from their spiritual undertakings. These monks have given up their entire lives, so that they may "pray without ceasing" for all the world. To distract them from that worthy undertaking would be positively reprehensible.
There are monasteries where women are admitted, but the Holy Mountain is a special place, and the greatest spiritual center in the whole of Orthodoxy. It adds a unique spiritual benefit to the Orthodox world, precisely because it is an anomaly.
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 21:46
|
In Romania there are two monasteries where the access of women is not allowed. One is new, founded after 1990, the other being also not very old, the half of 19th century.
This is the monasteries most ascetical and where one can find the Orthodoxy at its highest integrity, because here the services are most strictly respected and everything works best. This is a proof that gender separation produces the best environment for contemplation life. At Athos still are monks and hermits completely defying world's richness, living in evangelical bareness and looking like beggers, being dressed in tatters: http://www.orthodoxphotos.com/Athonite_Hermits/index.shtml - http://www.orthodoxphotos.com/Athonite_Hermits/index.shtml (scroll down the page) ------------- |
Posted By: Spartakus
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 21:49
Surely not in a land where is full of monasteries out of civilization........ ------------- "There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. " --- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996) |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 22:36
|
How come noone is shocked by the fact that female animals are banned too? ------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 22:43
|
Don't be so shocked. In the Mountain there are wild animals and nobody kills the femels. As for domestic animals, the food of monks is frugal so they don't need cows, pigs etc. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 23:39
The article clearly implied that it is due to "female impurity." ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 23:41
Greatest spiritual center for men that is, if women cannot enjoy the same benefits of living in a convent on Mt. Athos then they are obviously excluded from general consensus. ------------- |
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 00:28
From what I've gathered these aren't religiously minded nuns who want a chance to worship with the monks. It's a bunch of secular feminists who want to frustrate traditionalists and force hundreds of years of non-interfering tradition to disappear in the name of the great femininity.
Agreed this place is designated as an independent monastic collective and by agreement by Greece they can govern themselves as they wish.
Not exactly.....
So therefore if you believe women should be allowed there, then men should be allowed into women's bathhouses and such because it obviously wouldn't upset the "social dynamic" there. Also Mt. Athos has allowed women before, as refugees from warfare, and I would say since war all ready screws up social dynamics it wasn't too much of a problem.
So your saying that if I was an anarchist then I should be allowed to storm Buckingham Palace and piss on the throne there, after all they're discriminating against me just for the sake of "royalist tradition". It's a matter of respect for other's beliefs, they were there first, it is up to them to decide their own rules and laws.
Um...............  , you may want to rephrase that, or at least I hope you want to rephrase that.........------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 08:17
Good post janus.
 The importance of Mt Athos is very high within orthodox spirituality/ It is also an a important source of senior orthodox clergy that don't marry (as opposed to priest who can). We are not talking about one or two forgotten monasteries. Its spiritual importance to the orthodox world, can be seen by early 19th century attempts by the Russians to gain some amount of sovereignty over it. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 08:22
The article is wrong on this aspect. Read other materials about this reglementation.. On the article on Wikipedia is stated: Monks feel that the presence of women alters the social dynamics of the community and therefore slows the path towards spiritual enlightenment. It is incorrect to suggest that the prohibition is in order to reduce sexual temptation. This myth has earned the Holy Mountain a certain amount of unnecessary notoriety.. So, is not even about sexual atraction. In Orthodox Christian theology, nothing is impure (there are several verses in Paul's epistles about this) except what is done doubting (if you belief that something is sin and do it, then is sin).
The Mountain was established like a place for men. Not because in Orthodox belief women are considered inferior. There is a reference in one of Paul's epistles that the man is the head of woman but I haven't met in dogmatical works or in the writings of Holy Fathers that this is correct. Personaly, I believe that the man is not the head of woman in a marriage or that the man are superior in anything. The fact that priesthood is restricted to men is because it needs to be a discipline in Church. As for a place where only wmen monasteries to be, it didn't appeared yet necesary because if would have felt that is necesary, would have been made.
I mean they want to have an as perfect environment as possible. Female domestic animals could sugest sexual ideas, as well as children (persons bellow 18 are not allowed in the Mountain, nor as monks or visitors). ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 09:53
|
How exactly does that bring discipline to the Church that men are priests? The early Church had had female priests and leaders. I know this is the case now, but the initial Church did not have such a strong emphasis on Male predominance in the Church. A similar thing happened in Islamic hierarchy where there were numerious important female leaders, imams, sheykhs but later a more patriarchical "clergy(a loose term considering that there is no official clergy in Islam)." One should not confuse Patriarchal traditions for discipline. ------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 12:44
Paul says that the bishop (in early decades of the Church this was meaning priest) should be man. If both women and men would be priests would appear complications, like cases of adultery among the altar servants. Never women have been priests, only deaconesses. Today the deaconesses no more exist but there is an interest to re-introduce them. ------------- |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 15:57
Well, it is in the writings of the fathers, but generally in commentaries on Scripture rather than doctrinal treatises. I take your point even so: the man is not the head of the woman in the sense that modern polemicists on either side of gender-activism have commonly understood the term. You are entirely correct to state that man is not superior to woman in nature. Oh, for the record, I believe the Scripture to which you refer is I Cor 11: 2-3. Paul explicates quite a lot about gender roles in I Corinthians, and there is a bit in... hm... I want to say I Timothy as well.
I think I might start a thread on this topic, and if I do so, I invite you to discuss it with me. I think this thread has shown that the non-Orthodox hold an alarming number of misconceptions about the Orthodox Church's view of gender roles. The problem, as I see it, is that the modern mind has trouble grasping the way in which the early Church understood the terminology.
Incorrect. While women fulfilled many roles in the early Church, they were never ordained presbyters. As Menumorut has noted, women were ordained as deacons until the female diaconate fell into disuse around the turn of the first millenium -- there are currently efforts underway to revitalize this ministry, which have borne some fruit. Women also served as prophetesses, as is evidenced by the testimony of Scripture, as well as some fragmentary acts of post-Apostolic liturgies (and, forgive me, but I forgot where I found the latter, and would be hard placed to locate it).
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 16:10
Of course. ------------- |
Posted By: Aelfgifu
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 16:19
A rather strong jump to go from allowing women to simply be present to promoting female priesthood. No one was suggesting any such thisn, so I see no reason for this strange turn. By the by, although I have not the least intention top promote female priesthood, as it is none of my concern if there are any or not, it is my view that opposing any debate on subjects like that is ignoring the human aspect of the matter and is the perfect example of stereotypical thinking. Just because priest have always been male is no reason to completely dismiss the possibility. There are male midwives and female doctors nowadays, and the world did not become worse because of it. Change is not bad by defenition.
This is nonsense. If a big strong institution like the church cannot overcome the presence of females, it would have died long before now. Besides, the idea that hundreds would fall from fate because women have walked that peninsula is not only prepostrous, but rather insulting to people's strength of faith as well.
I have had to ponder for a minute whether or not I would even bother to reply to this, as it obviously shows some real deep and impenetrable stupidity, ignorance and bigotry. But let me try...
Firstly, feminism is a way of thinking. Ways of thinking do not out themselves in peoples physical appearance. Saying that all feminists are ugly is like saying that all Christians are blondes, all communists have hooked noses and all kapitalists are fat. It is a dumb and idiot remark, and untrue to boot.
Secondly, a beautiful and married woman might be very interested in feminism. About twohundred years ago, women were not allowed to attend university, about a hundred years ago, women were not allowed to vote, about fifty years ago, married women were not allowed to own their own property or have payed jobs, about twenty years ago, women had little to nothing to say about the frequency and number of their pregnancies. The fact that women today can study, have jobs, vote for presidents and can decide to have no more than two kids are all very direct results of the hard work and preseverance of feminists. These things may not mean a lot to you, but they most certainly mean a lot to me, and many many other women with me.
And even today, in most countries, women earn less wages than men in the very same function. Feminists are the ones who think this is slightly unfair. Bus perhaps you think this is natural...
Now, you might think that a beautiful woman might have nothing more to wish for than a modern kitchen and a new washing machine, but it is my experience that most beautiful women who also have brains in their head actually have quite a lot they wish for, not least of all are a chance of self-development, the possibility of a carreer and full self-determination.
And believe it or not, but there are actually women, myself included, who do not think getting married is a womans ultimate goal and duty.
If you have anything to back this up, I might consider to think of a reply. as it is 'a romanian blog' is hardly enough to warrant any of my time.
Pissing on someones property is not really accepted as normal behaviour by any group, religion or culture. Walking across someones property is. I do not find your comparison all that strong.
Yes it is up to them to decide, I do not protest that. I just vented my personal opinion on their decision, and by your own words, my believes deserve respect just as well...  -------------
Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 16:46
Of course. There are bad chnges and good changes.
The interdiction of women access in Mountain was taken after a suposed apparition of Mother of God who consecrated this mountain only for male monks. It's a matter of faith, so you cann't question it after modern view. The food, meat or anything, is not impure but fast is necesary for educating us that we have not to follow the body's impulses. For similar reason, there have to be in the world a place were genders are not present together. And let's face the reality, there are many women for who tempting a monk is something interesting. Not all have the maturity to respect the efforts ofor chastity and purity of those men.
The reality is that, at least in the pictures found on web, I have not yet seen a feminist with an attractive presence, and actualy most of them seems to be unmarried. As for women's rights, I think that anyway they would have been put in practice by men, without the activism of women feminists. I disagree with you if you refer at abortion, I consider it a crime and any method of anticonception except the natural abstinence I consider wrong. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 17:11
For some people in the past it was a matter of faith that if the gods didn't get a human heart on a daily basis the sun would no longer rise. Doesn't change the fact that they were completely wrong.
I don't really think there are that many women who'd like to grab the opportunity and go to Mount Athos as soon as it's possible to tempt a monk. I'm not a woman myself of course, but I don't see why a monk of all people could be considered an interesting partner. Besides, even if they would, it would be a good way for those monks to show their faith. After all, resisting temptations is not difficult as long as those temptations are absent.
We have waited a few thousand years, but woman's rights did not really start to be put into practice before feminists started to make demands. It is of course true that feminists don't nescesarily have to be women, but I don't see a single reason why women should leave fighting for their rights to men. In fact it would be an oxymoron if fighting for womans' rights would be ok, as long as it are not women themselves fighting for it.
If there is one thing that is completely unnatural it is abstinence. ------------- |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 17:19
Ah, but the Christian is instructed to flee from temptation in general and sexual temptation in particular. We are not supposed to deliberately expose ourselves to it in order to build up resistance. Worldly things distract from the spiritual aspect of life, and those who are called to a quiet life of contemplation and prayer should not expose themselves to them. If you think this calling was lightly undertaken, you should go to Athos and discuss it with one of the monastics.
Which is precisely why the monks have undertaken it as part of their calling: it is a renunciation of the things of this world.
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 17:22
).
|
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 17:28
There is not only that apparition, also a Byzantine empress entered in Mountain with some gifts and Mother of God appeared and explained her that is her mountain and is only for men. Also there are other stories about women entering the mountain and happening bad things. By the way, one of the oldest documentary mentions of Vlachs (if not the oldest) is about Vlach women breaking the interdiction and entering the mountain.
Is not about that monks are interesting partners but the idea of corrupting a monk, like an adventure. Your arguing about facing the temptation is not correct. The objective of contemplative life is not gaining some anti-passion powers but to find God by life of permanent prayer.
There are other things which are unnatural too. We don't haver the duty to be natural, actualy the Christian faith call us to come over our nature. If you remain natural, you are condemned to be decomposed like the natural elements are. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 17:39
Those sound more like fairy tales than a strong juridical argument to me. And even if there was a strong juridical argument, laws can be changed.
But then it would be better to close Athos for all visitors. After all it may also be interesting for (homosexual) men to try to corrupt a monk.
I don't care about things being natural or unnatural, but you are contracting what you said earlier. You just said "any method of anticonception except the natural abstinence I consider wrong.", which to me implies that you consider anticonception other than abstinence wrong because it's unnatural. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 18:03
|
Flee from temptation, or resist temptation?
------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 18:27
Of course. Bad things can be done anytime.
I think that only to those with real religious interest should be allowed the visiting, not only Athos but any Orthodox monastery. I mean only those which are strugling to fulfil the evangelical precepts. As for homosexual monks, there is much myth about this. If someone is homosexual either try to repress this either to fulfil his wishes. If first, he may enter a monastery or not. Anyway, as far I know, for homosexuals the sentimental attraction is stronger than the bodily one, they don't have temptations like heterosexuals.
The use of word [inatural is different in the two situations. Is not so complicated to see how. In the case of abstinence seen as a way of life or a principle of life, we have to overcome the natural inclinations. In the case of family planning, the moral way of avoiding births is the abstinence, whic is a natural method in opposition with the medical and technical methods.
I repeat: the objectives of monkish life are others, transcedental. ------------- |
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 20:17
es_bih check http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=22053&PID=407399#407399 - this link out. Women never had the same roles as men in the early church.
You must not have been to many hardcore punk concerts
See this is the line of thought I cannot agree with. There are many many non-hermit monks who are active in the world and yet their faith allows them to maintain their celibacy. It shouldn't be about men being tempted because men will always be tempted as long as they still have hands  . It's just the way nature designed us, I can understand that the monks want as little distraction as possible so they are spending less time to fight temptation, but to say there is no temptation without women is ridiculous. Besides maybe some of those monks are homosexual, does the amount of men there affect their chastity?Mind you the purpose of a hermitage is to separate yourselves from the world. Which is why Mount Athos restricts it's visitors. I'm certain there is also a restriction on the amount of people that may come at any one time as to limit the distractions of the world.
People have many different fetishes and kinks and a woman might be attracted to the spiritual purity of a monk and want to take pride in the fact that they are better than all the women of the world because they were able to seduce the unseducable.
That's the point though yes? To rise above our bestial natures and to embrace our supernatural life.
Homosexuals act just like heterosexuals. Some are more for sentimental attraction and some just want to be promiscuous, just like not all heterosexuals act the same.
So to answer your question they are trying to go to a place within themselves where they have no temptations, so there is nothing to flee from and nothing to resist. ------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 20:54
I was not speaking about the posibility of monks failing in sins. A monk is commonly strong enough to resist a woman and probably they are not having much sex-appeal to incite women. I speak about the disturbing of the peace that monks are looking for, with looks, body language etc.
It's a daily limit of visitors, some tens and they can stay only four days.
The reasons people enter monastery are diverse. Some are going for economical reasons, some (girls and women) because they have had some bad experiences with men, but most because they feel an enthusiasm for imitating the Fathers, also some from some moral feelings. Understanding the real objectives appears after they enter monastery, from discussions with experienced monks and from lectures. I mean the life of unceased prayer, which also can be called life of contemplation, or of repentance. Is the same thing. So, the objectives are not the fight with the sin and temptations but the spiritual enlightement. ------------- |
Posted By: eaglecap
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 21:15
I agree!! but only on that point but not with them Several feminist groups in Greece ------------- Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 04:57
http://www.wcg.org/lit/church/ministry/women7.htm C.E. Cerling, Jr., "Women Ministers In The New Testament Church?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 19.3 (1976): 209-215 Jean Danilou, The Ministry of Women in the Early Church, 2nd edn. Glyn Simon, translator. Leighton Buzzard, Beds.: Faith Press, 1974. pp.31. ------------- |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 10:08
|
Look, I have to ask something to Aelf & Mix: Why do you care? So a few monasteries on a mountain don't permit women? This is completely irrelevant. I can't shop at the supermarket in the US embassy. Is this a restriction of my freedom of movement? Well, yes, but it doesn't matter, because its trivial. People have traditions, if it isn't hurting anyone leave it alone! For example, the Dutch have a tradition of being completely uninhibited, I don't try to change this, why are you trying to change the Greeks? ------------- |
Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 11:55
|
I agree that it is entirely a business of orthodox churches. On the other hand one should admit that religional traditions are too conservative. Sometimes they change with the development of a society but too slowly. In this particular case with Orthodox monasteries I would say is one of the examples of such conservatism. ------------- . |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 13:04
|
Anton, religion is not a tradition but an aspiration to truth. So, its forms of manifestation can be changed only if they are wrong in some aspects. ------------- |
Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 18:01
|
I would call it religional practics, Menumorut, -- a way to reach God (i.e. to understand the existance). These practices were created 2000 and were "tuned" for the state of mind of people living at that time. And what was true for those people might not be true for us and vice versa. These practices are however kept in form of church traditions and because of church are changing too slowly if you ask me. I am not sure that i explained well, what I mean. ------------- . |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 18:15
Most of these rules were created more recently, not 2000 ago. What was good and bad 2000 or 1000 years ago, is good or bad today in the same way. Th idea that world is progressing is relative. For me, it was not a progress but a regress. ------------- |
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 19:07
Just because church traditions change too slowly for you doesn't mean they need to speed up the pace. If the traditions are backwards they will lose worshipers, however with Mt. Athos this does not seem to be happening, thus religions only change when they must and as of yet the Orthodox church has shown that change is not necessary. ------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 19:26
In addition to women ministers es_bih from your own link....
Thus it is highly unlikely that women would be recognized as legitimate ministers of Christ.
This statement makes the question of women ministers moot because it is not the "early christian church", in the context of an unbroken line of christian tradition. Rather this could be construed as a segment of long extinct heresies and schisms in the Christian church. Gnostics had women preachers are we to include them into the current Christian church?
This is exactly keeping with the role of women in the Christian church, no formal titles of authority, but a role in guiding that authority, much the same as a president's wife influences certain decisions.
I would not dispute the fact that women were deaconesses but they had a far different role than that of deacons in the church. Mostly they were in charge of teaching women Christianity in a culture where sexual division was high.
I have acted as a lecter for my church on numerous occasions, this does not make me an authority figure in the church and neither does it make women authority figures. ---------- Also this source the Worldwide Church of God is an organization less than a hundred years old with a membership less than 50,000 people. Also it is a self-proclaimed evangelic church meaning that trappings of sola scriptura are the main source of faith. This means that they reject the evolution of Christianity as a world religion and instead rely just on the static and convuluted works of the Bible to define their doctrine. ------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2008 at 19:40
I am not sure I understand you. I expressed my point of view. If you don't like it is your right.
Neither you can prove this nor I can prove the opposite. Moreover, if for instance church will try to change its position to more conservative one on certain principle questions I myself will stop going there. As many sensible but religious people I suppose.
What does it mean "must"? Who determines this "must"? ------------- . |
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 13-Jan-2008 at 01:24
I thought you were eluding to the fact that the Orthodox church was backwards and needed to update it's belief system to allow women onto Mt. Athos. I was merely stating that progression isn't always positive, the germanic tribes decimating Rome were quick and progressive yet they didn't necessarily improve Roman authority now did they? If I have offended it was not my intend looking at the statement it does seem a bit harsh, trust me it's more sarcastic than threatening.
Certainly it's occured many times in the past. A church who cannot maintain its authority in the eyes of the people will lose those people to other churches. Although I guess technically backwards is a subjective term, I meant it in the fact that traditions are less appealing than other available faiths.
Basically the body of worshippers chooses when a church must change because if a church doesn't change when the churches community does it loses the community to another religion. ------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 13-Jan-2008 at 02:36
|
I make a difference beteen backward and conservative. ------------- . |
Posted By: xristar
Date Posted: 14-Jan-2008 at 15:04
|
Wow, this thread has evolved much since I posted last! Now, if anyone cares to hear my oppinion, having visited Mt. Athos (as a pilgrim): Mt. Athos is a peninsula, with virgin nature. It has something like 30 medieval monasteries. It used to have some villages in ancient times, but in the middle ages it barely had any population. It was declared by the Byzantine law as an autonomous holy region, where only monasteries should exist. Till this day Mt. Athos doesn't have permanent villages (apart from a tiny port with a toll post, and the governmental center, with the governmental buildings and some inns). The autonomity of Mt.Athos was respected by the Ottomans who conquered the area, and then by the Greek state who occupied it in the early 20th cent. The mountain doesn't have anything apart from monasteries and their dependant facilities (including isolated monks etc) and paths through the forests to connect them. Females and young males are not allowed. Typically tourists are also not allowed. Anyone who goes there is either a pilgrim or a worker (to help build new infrastructure, or maintain the ancient monasteries). You have got to get permission to enter, for a limited number of days, and find in which monasteries you will stay. In the monastery the monks treat you not like a tourist, but as a pilgrim. You stay in cells (in the first monastery I went we were 20 strangers in one big cell, with one toillet). The monks wake you up in 3 or 4 am in the morning (mind you, they use byzantine hour system there), and you all go to the central church to pray. At 8.00 am you are called to eat in a large hall with big tables, with all the monks , mostly bean soup, with a fruit, and wine. Later, the monks attain their jobs, which is mostly farming for supplies for the monastery, while the pilgrims are free. After 8.00 pm the gates are closed, and you can see only absolute darkness out of the cell's window. Life follows medieval ways. The monasteries are all medieval. Some don't have electicity everywhere (the church of Megisti Lavra had only candles, which at 4.00 am with all the black dressed monks making a circle create a mystical and surreal picture). I personally feel that forbidding women from entering may be a little sexist and unfair. But on the other had, as someone already said, these people were already there. Do women feel the religious need to visit holy places? They are free to do so, in the Holy Lands, on in verious monasteries of the world. Mt.Athos has nothing SO special. Do women (and their men) simply have materialistic motives (as in this case to take some of the virgin uncultivated land belonging to the monasteries to make farmlands out of them, and make money?) I won't help them, that's for sure. Do women feel simply they need to attack and invade this territory? That's simply as unjustified as a country attacking another with no casus belli, -they have to respect the will of these free people. Nonetheless, the Greek state (and I guess the whole orthodox world) will be there to protect them. Unless the leaders of Mt.Athos decide to allow women, I think every effort to abolish the Avaton (by the EU or feminist organizations) is a direct violation of these people's rights. -------------
Defeat allows no explanation Victory needs none. It insults the dead when you treat life carelessly. |
Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 14-Jan-2008 at 15:26
For whatever it's worth, I entirely agree with this. |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 14-Jan-2008 at 23:08
I know it's far away and whatever I think of it is completely irrellevant, but that doesn't mean I am not allowed to have an opinion about it. Insisting on having an opinion about everything is a typically Dutch deviation. ------------- |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 09:28
, ok, that is a good answer.Why not the opposite opinion then? ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 10:56
|
4 pages. About peeing in Buckhingham palace, about gays seducing monks, about Monks having impure thoughts about cats. God almighty!.
Its a monestry. We have 33 churches in Islamabad. I am as a muslim not allowed to enter any of them, except with premission. They can have whatever rules they like, unless they are advesrly affecting the rights of others. Thats that. ------------- |
Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 11:48
|
As many have said so far...Mt Athos is an independent state within Greece. It has its own laws, that can only be challenged by the ecumenical patriarch and not by the Greek state. When this state was created in the "Tortuga" of the mediteranean (as I call it due to the pirate settlements there), those people wanted to take distance from the joys of life and devote themselves to god. That is difficult to do if you have uncontrolled entrance of tourists and especially if those are of the opposite sex. It is pitty that women can't experience that wonderful nature and the medieval feeling but those are the rules. -------------  
Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va! |
Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 13:43
|
Also, not all monasteries belong to Greek Orthodox Church. As far as I know there are Russian, Bulgarian and Serbian monasteries there. ------------- . |
Posted By: xristar
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 13:46
|
Correct. One of each.
-------------
Defeat allows no explanation Victory needs none. It insults the dead when you treat life carelessly. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 15:51
Wrong. All the monasteries in the Mountain are jurisdictionaly dependent og Constantinople patriarchy. Traditionaly, some of the monasteries are peopled each one mostly by one of the Orthodox peoples. Panteleimon by Russians (at the beginning of 20th century there were 1500 monks), actualy today more by Ukrainians (some tens), Zographos by Bulgarians, Chilandar by Serbs. In the past Cutlumus was peopled by Romanians and Iviron Georgians but they were all of Greek origin and actualy Greek monasteries. Today the Romanians are concentrated in the Prodromu skete (is big and looking like a monastery but its status is of skete), Lacu skete (a hermitage village) and Vatopedion, where there is the bigest group of Romanians (70, if I'm not wrong). Prodromu belongs to the Lavra monastery and the Romanian community is one of most enthuziast. Romanians are spread too in other monasteries and hermitages. ------------- |
Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 16:12
|
Well, I do not know. I found St.Panteleimon monastery in a list of Russian Patriarchy churches abroad. ------------- . |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 17:02
Menumorut is correct. Though the monasteries of the Holy Mountain do have a traditional degree of self-government, they are canonically obligated to commemorate the Ecumenical Patriarch, who is their direct episcopal overseer. The failure of the monks of Esphigmenou to do so was the cause of their expulsion, which is still a matter of some contention.
That said, there are monks from a variety of nationalities on Athos, which may be the cause of some of the confusion. The mountain itself, however, is under the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Antioxos
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 21:50
|
Well i have something very interesting for you , the letter that the monks send to Hitler after the occupation of Greece .
This letter ask from Hitler to undertake mount Athos under his personal protection .
The main reason of this letter was to avoid to be mount Athos under the Bulgarian occupation.It would be very interesting if any other Greek forumer can translate this letter to English because i don't have this capability .
The compliments in the last paragraph didn't help Hitler to survive.
 Εν Αγίω Όρει τη 13/26 Απριλίου 1941
Προς την Αυτού Εξοχότητα τον Αρχικαγκελλάριον του ενδόξου Γερμανικού Κράτους Κύριον Αδόλφον Χίτλερ εις Βερολίνον. Εξοχότατε, Οι βαθυσεβάστως υποσημειούμενοι Αντιπρόσωποι των Είκοσιν Ιερών Βασιλικών Πατριαρχικών καί Σταυροπηγιακών Μονών του Αγίου Όρους Άθω, λαμβάνομεν την εξαιρετικήν τιμήν νʼ απευθυνθώμεν προς την Υμετέραν Εξοχότητα καί παρακαλέσωμεν Αυτήν θερμώς, όπως, ευαρεστημένη, αναλάβη υπό την Υψηλήν προσωπικήν Αυτής προστασίαν καί κηδεμονίαν τον Ιερόν τούτον Τόπον, του οποίου Ηγούμενοι καί αντιπρόσωποι τυγχάνομεν, διαδεχομένη εν τούτω τους ιδρυτάς καί Ευεργέτας του Ιερού τούτου Τόπου Βυζαντινούς Αυτοκράτορας καί διαδόχους τούτων. Το Άγιον Όρος, Εξοχώτατε, συνέστη εις Πανορθόδοξον μοναχικήν πολιτείαν, εις ήν ανέκαθεν διαβιούν εν αγαστή ομονοία μοναχοί ακωλύτως προσερχόμενοι από διάφορα ορθόδοξα Έθνη, κατά τον Θ΄ μ.Χ. αιώνα, πνευματικώς μέν εξαρτωμένων από του Οικουμενικού Πατριαρχείου Κωνσταντινουπόλεως, πολιτικώς δέ αυτοδιοικούμενον υπό της Ιεράς Συνάξεως των Αντιπροσώπων των Είκοσιν Ιερών καί Κυριάρχων Μονών καί πολιτειακώς υπαγομένων υπό την προστασίαν καί κηδεμονίαν των Βυζαντινών Αυτοκρατόρων καί των διαδόχων Αυτών. Το Αυτονομιακόν τούτο πολίτευμα περιεθριγκώθη διʼ αλλεπαλλήλων τυπικών καί Χρυσοβούλων των ιδρυτών καί ευεργετών των Ιερών μονών Βυζαντινών Αυτοκρατόρων Βασιλείου του Μακεδόνος(882), Ιωάννου Τσιμισκή(972), Κωνσταντίνου Μονομάχου(1046), Στεφάνου Δουσάν(1346) καί άλλων Σλαύων, Ουγγροβλάχων Ηγεμόνων καί των μετέπειτα Σουλτανικών Φιρμανίων τελευταίως δε υπό του Καταστατικού Χάρτου του 1926, ούτινος δύο αντίτυπα εσωκλείομεν. Το ουτωσί καθιερωθέν προνομιακόν καί αυτοδιοίκητον καθεστώς του Ιερού τούτου Τόπου, αποτελέσαν αντικείμενον συζητήσεων καί επικυρώσεων διαφόρων διεθνών συνθηκών περιεθριγκώθη τέλος, διά του 62ου άρθρου της Βερολινείου συνθήκης του έτους 1878, έχοντος ούτω, οι μοναχοί του Όρους Άθω οθενδήποτε καί αν κατάγωνται θα διατηρήσωσι τά κτήματα καί τα πρότερα αυτών δικαιώματα καί θʼ απολαύωσιν, άνευ ουδεμιάς εξαιρέσεως, πλήρους ισότητος δικαιωμάτων καί προνομίων. Των εν Αγίω Όρει ενασκουμένων Μοναχών, ανεξαρτήτως τόπου προελεύσεως καί Εθνικότητος, σκοπός καί αποστολή καθ' όλον τον υπερχιλιετή βίον του Αγίου Όρους, υπήρξεν η διατήρησις, προαγωγή καί εξασφάλισις των Ιερών αυτού σκηνωμάτων, η διά της ακαταπονήτου φιλεργίας των εν αυτώ ενασκουμένων μοναχών καλλιέργεια της τε εκκλησιαστικής καί κλασσικής φιλολογίας καί καλλιτεχνίας, ο ασκητικός βίος καί η διηνεκής προσευχή υπέρ του σύμπαντος κόσμου. Την διατήρησιν του καθεστώτος τούτου της αυτονόμου μοναχικής πολιτείας, ικανοποιούντος πλήρως άπαντας τους εν Αγίω Όρει ενασκουμένους ανεξαρτήτως εθνικότητος Ορθοδόξους μοναχούς καί εναρμονιζόμενοι προς τον σκοπόν καί την αποστολήν αυτών, παρακαλούμεν καί ικετεύομεν θερμώς την Υμετέραν Εξοχότητα όπως αναλάβη υπό την υψηλήν προστασίαν καί κηδεμονίαν Αυτής. Τον Βασιλέα των Βασιλευόντων καί Κύριον των Κυριευόντων εξ όλης ψυχής καί καρδίας ικετεύοντες, όπως επιδαψιλεύση τη Υμετέρα Εξοχότητι υγείαν καί μακροημέρευσιν επ' αγαθώ του ενδόξου Γερμανικού Έθνους. Υποσημειούμεθα βαθυσεβάστως. http://ermionh.blogspot.com/2006/12/blog-post_116560968583864746.html - http://ermionh.blogspot.com/2006/12/blog-post_116560968583864746.html
-------------
By http://profile.imageshack.us/user/antioxos - antioxos at 2007-08-20 |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2008 at 22:12
|
Certainly Antioxos; it's always a pleasure to be asked to translate. It goes like this:
Hey Hitler,
How's it going? This occupation thing is all well and good, but it's startin' to cramp up our monastic-coolness, so we were wondering if you could just go ahead and piss off -- you know, leave us the hell alone, so we could pray. Anyway, thanks in advance.
The monks
In case you hadn't noticed, I am also incapable of translating it.
Kyriacos Markides had a little blurb on the letter in Mountain of Silence, though it didn't contain a translation, as far as I remember. It would be interesting if one of our Greek forumers would take the time to translate it.-Akolouthos, Supporter of Monastic-Coolness
|
Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2008 at 04:17
|
Should women and ordinary laymen be granted access to Athos, it would be a blow against the practice of excluding people from territory based on religious grounds. Though I doubt it would have massive consequences elsewhere, it would set an interesting precedent for those who would desire Mecca be opened to non-Muslims. ------------- |
Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2008 at 08:31
Yes, Panteleimon is Russian...One of the most glorious monasteries of the past hosting up to 2000 monks and workers around the 18th century. -------------
Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va! |