Articles for tag: marriage

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.
%%tb-image-alt-text%%

Marriage “in Christ” — Part IV

Holy Communion

Holy Eucharist is central in everything

Based on our analysis of the sacrament of Orthodox Marriage in the previous three installments, we offer the following concluding remarks.

In the first place what we need to realize is that we don’t have mysteries, but only one Mystery, the Mystery of Christ and His Body, the Holy Church (which is the same thing), Who sanctifies and fills all things with the Grace of the Holy Spirit, by the Good-will of God the Father.

Thus, St. Dionysios the Areopagite reserves the term Mysteries (pl.) only for the Divine Eucharist. What we now call sacraments he calls them rites or services (τελεταί). According to him without the Eucharist the other services would be incomplete.1 They derive their completion only from the gifts flowing from the streams of the Eucharistic cup. In the ancient Church all the sacraments were attached to the Divine Liturgy with the reception of the Immaculate Mysteries (τὰ ἄχραντα μυστήρια), which sealed and completed them with their abundant Grace.

The Divine Liturgy not only includes the Holy Eucharist, but it is celebrated for the sole purpose of receiving the Holy Eucharist. Liturgy is the Mystery of the Divine Eucharist (τὸ Μυστήριον τῆς Θείας Εὐχαριστίας).2 If any other services offer the holy Eucharist it is because of its previous inclusion in the Divine Liturgy. And here lies the problem: the “sacrament” of marriage is no longer attached to or connected with the Holy Eucharist. What is needed is to reconnect the rite of marriage to what gives it fulfillment and completion and where it belongs: the Divine Liturgy.

Holy Eucharist in marriage makes sense

We realize that in the holy sacrament of Marriage, as in holy Baptism, we receive (that is, we used to receive) more than the Lord’s blessing and His grace; we receive (at least, we used to receive) the Lord Himself, the Giver of all blessings! Receiving the Lord Himself is proper and right in the holy sacrament for two reasons: First, it seals a couple’s union “in Christ”. In the past, if a couple became Christian and were already married civilly, the only act required of them to complete their union “in Christ” was to partake of the Divine Eucharist; and second, because, as in baptism, in this union we have a new birth—a new entity—for out of two we now have one, and this new one, is born spiritually on this day. For this reason it is proper to approach the altar and partake of the Immaculate Mysteries, and thus seal the union “in Christ.”

Marriage is an image of Christ and the Church

There is also a special reason why the Divine Eucharist needs to complete the marital union. As we have seen, St. Paul compares the union of a man and a woman to the mystical union of Christ and the Church, that is those who believe in Him. The Lord unites with His Church as a husband is united with his wife:

“I will betroth you to Me forever…I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness.” (Hos. 2:19.20)

And the betrothed that is the soul united with her Beloved responds,

“My Beloved is mine and I am His.” (Song of Songs 2:16)

There is a strong spiritual union between Christ and the believers:

“He who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with Him.” (1 Cor. 6:17)

The strongest and perfect union with the Lord takes place in the partaking of the most Immaculate Mysteries.

Holy Communion is the foundation of marriage

When a couple receives the Holy Mysteries on the day of their wedding (before the priest who prays over them that the Lord bless them, unite them and “crown them into one flesh”), it is “in the Lord.” Receiving the Holy Mysteries when they return the following Sunday (having most likely consummated their union), is not “in the Lord.” Receiving the Lord on the wedding day transforms a couple to a new life, and crowns them “in glory and honor.” Receiving the Lord together at another time does not.

Holy Communion is the foundation of a couple’s communion with each other. Marital life for Christians is a life of virtue, sobriety, chastity and temperance—as celibate life is. The Apostle shows us the way: “Let those who have wives live as though they had none” (1 Cor. 7:29). The goal is the same: our “undivided devotion to the Lord” (v. 35). The scope of marriage is not procreation, but “an aid for the whole life,” as Clement of Alexandria (+c. 215) beautifully says:

All who seek [mere] pleasure in marriage are condemned. Marriage for others may find its meaning in voluptuous joy, but for those who practice philosophy [i.e. Christians], marriage finds its meaning in accordance with the Logos, because it teaches husbands not to treat their wives as lovers by dishonoring their bodies, but to preserve marriage as an aid for the whole life and for the excellence of virtue and temperance.3

The “aid”, marriage, goes beyond this present life; it also prepares us for the next, the lasting one. And this aid is mutual, that is why the couple is “yoked” to each other (Mt. 19:6, Mk. 10:9).

A call to be true to the Church’s mission

Now that in our society not the religious wedding rite but the civil ceremony is legally recognized by the state, it is no longer necessary for the Church to make concessions and deviate from Her faith and holy tradition in order to accommodate Her nominal members. Instead of drowning in the ocean of economy (οἰκονομία) ignoring the holy Canons, the Church should stay true to Her mission to lead us to the truth and to the new life “in Christ,” and not sway according to the whims of Her alienated members.

In an age when morality is laughed at and trampled upon, when pansexuality reigns supreme, and is accepted even by Church members, when the sacred marriage blessed by God in His holy Church is thought to be no different than unnatural homosexual “marriage,” what should the Church do? Let Herself be washed away by the tsunami of godlessness? The words of the Apostle addressed to the profligate Corinthians apply in our culture as much, if not more.

The Church should not oppose civil marriage, because it frees Her to strictly administer the sacrament (mystery) of ecclesiastical marriage, which includes the Holy Mysteries, to those who are “worthy” members4. The Church hierarchy, perhaps, has not realized that civil marriages give Her the freedom she used to have during the first centuries. The Church needs to reclaim her right to marry couples—according to Her rules—She needs to re-establish “the obvious connection between Church marriage and Eucharist,”5 that She has lost.

Conclusion

Before we close, something else to reflect and ponder upon: Although “mixed marriages” are prohibited, ecumenism has already accepted them “κατ᾽ oἰκονομίαν” (which has become the rule) and this practice would have been codified at the pseudo-synod of Crete, were it not for the objection of the Orthodox Church of Georgia, which kept the resolution at bay.

Think of this: if non-Orthodox are admitted to participate in one sacrament of the Church—marriage (even without Holy Communion)—on what grounds can the Church exclude them from other sacraments? On what rationale are non-Orthodox commemorated by name in the sacrament of Holy Matrimony, but they cannot be commemorated together with the names of Orthodox in the holy Prothesis? And why can’t they be anointed with the Holy Unction or given an Orthodox burial? On what grounds are they not permitted to receive Holy Communion? I close with this question, waiting for your answers. Just keep in mind: what we want is to live, and die, “in Christ.”

  1. “Now we affirm that the completion of the other church services [συμβόλων, i.e. the sacraments of Baptism, Ordination, etc.] derives from the gifts of the Eucharist. For it scarcely ever happens, that any church service [τελετή, i.e. sacrament] is done without the most Divine Eucharist, as head [κεφαλαίῳ] of the things done in each, ministering the collecting of the person initiated to the One, and completing his communion with God, by the Divinely transmitted gift of the perfecting Mysteries. If, then, each of the Hierarchical initiations, being indeed incomplete, will not make perfect our communion and our gathering to the One, even its being initiation is precluded on account of the lack of completeness.” (Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 3.1, PG 3:452)
  2. See “Centrality of the Eucharist in The Heavenly Banquet, pp. 61-62.
  3. “The Stromata, or Miscellanies” II.xxiii, ANF II, p. 378. I followed the translation of Sommer (see Note 7), p. 302 (except for the parenthetical words that render the meaning and for the emphasis added).
  4. “In good standing,” to use the contemporary expression, does not mean “members who have fulfilled their financial obligations”, but those who are ascertained by their spiritual Father.
  5. John Meyendorff, Marriage,St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1975, p. 30.
Photo of author

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.
%%tb-image-alt-text%%

Marriage “in Christ” — Part III

holy-communion
I will take the cup of salvation, and will call on the name of the Lord.

Most people, especially those already married, know that the cup they partake consists of plain wine. But how many are those who know that this cup stands in place of the “cup of salvation,” the Holy Eucharist, which they ought to be receiving in its stead, but no longer do? And how many of them know that marriage is holy, and it is called a sacrament, because of its connection with that, or rather with the One that gives sacramentally to all Church services?

What makes it a marriage?

How impoverished the sacrament of marriage has become when missing from it is the central Mystery of our Faith, the Divine Eucharist, substituted by a “symbolic” common cup of plain wine – even if blessed! How come the “cup of salvation”, as it is called in the hymn chanted right after the “crowning”, has been substituted by a resemblance of it? Why the symbol and not the real thing? Because we are not worthy of it! Let me explain.

Let us point out something of crucial significance: until the ninth century the marriage rite was celebrated in conjunction with the Divine Liturgy.1 Even until the fifteenth century when a separate marriage rite was developed, newlyweds continued to receive the Body and Blood of the Lord. How? In the same way it is done in baptisms: from the “Reserved Gifts,” as attested by St. Symeon of Thessalonica.

And immediately (the priest) takes the holy chalice with the Presanctified Gifts, and exclaims: “The Presanctified Holy Gifts for the holy [people of God].” And all respond: “One is Holy, One is Lord,” because the Lord alone is the sanctification, the peace and the union of His servants who are being married. The priest then gives Communion to the bridal pair, if they are worthy.2

So they did not automatically receive the Gifts, as the Saint says, but only if they were worthy. Thus, after saying that “the Lord alone is…the union of His servants who are being married” he states:

Indeed, they must be ready to receive Communion, so that their crowning be a worthy one and their marriage valid. For the perfection [τέλος] of every sacrament [τελετῆς] and the seal [σφραγίς] of every mystery is Holy Communion… so that those who get married must be worthy of Holy Communion; they must be united before God in a church, which is the house of God, because they are children of God, in a church where God is sacramentally present in the Gifts.

Then further down he adds:

But to those who are not worthy of Communion, for example those who are being married a second time, and others – the Divine Gifts are not given, but only the common cup, as a partial sanctification, as a sign of good fellowship and unity with God’s blessing.

St. Symeon does not clarify who those “others” are, who are not worthy3 to receive Holy Communion at the very Church service in which they are honored—their wedding day! I would think he means couples that do not live a life “in the Lord.” In our days most couples have probably consummated their union prior to appearing before the altar of the Lord. In certain regions (Cyprus, for example) it is expected during the engagement period. Such marriages are not “in the Lord,” and would fall into the “other” category.

Even so, the Church condescended to human weakness, and allowed such couples to get married (after going through a period of penance) and even to be crowned, but at a ceremony outside the Divine Liturgy, at which they were offered only the common cup—plain wine, not Holy Communion—and this is tragic. Allow me to explain further.

If someone would ask us, at what point of the Sacrament of Marriage can we safely say that the couple is married, what would we answer? (After all, there are no “I do’s”) If someone would answer, At the crowning, there is some merit to this answer, although someone, as we saw above, finds the act itself of crowning objectionable, because even the heathens were crowned. How about after circling around the “ad hoc” altar table? Perhaps… But why? What is so special about circling the table three times while singing three hymns? We do not find anything substantive to justify it as the main act. What is it then, that which seals the marriage?

Before answering the question, let us turn to the rite of Baptism, which was in liturgical unity with the Sacrament of Holy Eucharist until the 15th century.4 Even after its separation from the Divine Liturgy, it kept the same pattern. Later on, when the rite of Marriage was established as a separate service, it followed the pattern of Holy Baptism, which can be easily detected. Having said that we ask: Which is the highlight of the baptismal service? The act of baptism, of course (and of the Chrismation that follows, with which it forms a unity). And what happens after both are administered? After a few prayers are said by the priest to give time to the newly illumined to get dressed, the triple circling around the font takes place. Well, in the wedding ceremony we also have a triple circling. But what act precedes it, which is the cause of the rejoicing expressed by a ceremonial dance? The crowning? No. The crowning comes later on, followed by the readings. What then? It follows immediately after the “common cup,” which is in place of the cup of salvation. This act, then—not the drinking from the common cup, but the partaking of the Holy Mysteries—is the core event,5 as it was from the beginning, which is now missing!

The significance of the reception of the Holy Mysteries is also shown not only by what follows this act, but also by what precedes it. What is that? The recitation of the Lord’s Prayer. As we say in our book,

The place of the Lord’s Prayer immediately before Holy Communion provides a commentary as to what the Church considers to be the “daily bread” which we ask our Father in heaven to give us—none other than the Lord Himself.6

For this reason the Lord’s Prayer was introduced in the Divine Liturgy in the Fourth century.7 Let us remember that the holy Baptism, the wedding service, as well as all the services (sacraments) of the Church, used to take place within or in conjunction with the Divine Liturgy.8 But while Holy Communion is administered at the end of the baptismal service, it is woefully missing from the marital service. (Let us say parenthetically that although the Eucharistic participation is present in Holy Baptism, it is disconnected from the Synaxis (Liturgy) of the faithful. It too needs to be reconnected to the Divine Liturgy.)9

The centrality of the reception of the Holy Mysteries is also shown by the hymn chanted during the partaking of the “common cup”: “I will take the cup of salvation, and will call on the name of the Lord” (cf. Ps. 115:4/116:13), chanted by the people, even now, when the cup is no longer the cup of salvation, but a cup of plain wine. It is a testimony to the time when the wedding couple, and all the people present, received the Holy Mysteries. Still the hymn has remained, as a vestige from the past, a reminder of what is missing: the Sacrament that seals every sacrament.

Perhaps the centrality of Holy Communion in the marriage rite is shown best in the practice of the Church in ancient times. In explaining what marriage is “in the eye of God,” Tertullian answers:

when God joins ‘two into one flesh;’ or else, finding (them already) joined in the same flesh, [He] has given His seal to the conjunction.10

This is the clearest evidence that Holy Communion is what seals and completes a Christian marriage. If a couple became Christian and were already married civilly, the only act required of them to complete their union “in Christ” was to partake of the Divine Eucharist.11 As we have seen, Tertullian already attests that reception of the Holy Mysteries sealed the couple’s union “in the Lord.”

Another practice of the Church carried on confirms the ancient practice. Even today when married converts are received in the Orthodox Church they are not remarried, even though a marriage, or any other sacrament, outside the Orthodox Church is not recognized.12 What seals the union of a couple is the reception of the Holy Sacraments after their admittance to the Church. No crowning, no ceremonial dance, no common cup; none of them takes place. None of these is essential. What is of essence is our union in Christ, particularly in Holy Communion. I think I have answered the question about what constitutes the main act of the marital union and the cause for celebration: it is not the crowning, but the completion of a union already decided by a couple by their partaking of the Holy Sacraments as a couple, which seals their union.

Although the detachment of the wedding from the Divine Liturgy has entered into the tradition of the Church, reception of the Holy Eucharist is still possible, by offering for communion the Presantified Gifts instead of the common cup. This is recommended by St. Nikodemos:

Let the priest not fill the cup with common wine and bread but with Holy Communion when the newlyweds have no canonical obstacle.13

Personally, I would like to see the wedding restored to its rightful place, performed within the Divine Liturgy, with the couple partaking of the Divine Eucharist—if they are worthy.

Ideally, a return to the full incorporation of the wedding into the Divine Liturgy is preferable. But how? There is a way, already tried by the Church: by restoring the so-called “Byzantine Wedding,”14 that is a wedding incorporated into the Divine Liturgy. The benefits of such a wedding are many: chiefly, the ancient practice of the Church is recovered (in which weddings, baptisms and funerals were conducted in the context of the Divine Liturgy), and the centrality of the Divine Liturgy (with its unitive act of Holy Communion) is preserved. Obviously, not every wedding will be celebrated this way, especially in large churches. But in small churches, and when both members are “worthy” Orthodox, such a wedding should become normative.15

holy-communion
The author giving Holy Communion to his mother.

A wedding performed before the Ecclesia of God is an ecclesial act; it involves the entire community. Marriage, despite the appearances, is not only a family affair. As the baptism is not a personal or a family affair, so with marriage. The couple is intricately connected with the Divine Liturgy, which is an affair of the people of God in communion with their heavenly Father and with each other. If we understand the connection of marriage with the liturgical act of the Church, we will understand that marriages celebrated in parks, seashores, or anywhere else outside the house of God are out of place. Let’s repeat: marriage is an ecclesial act, taking place in the midst of the ecclesia.

  1. Meyendorff, o.c., p. 24. St. Basil (+379) excluded from communion those entering a second or third marriage. (Canon IV, Rudder, p. 792)
  2. De honesto et legitimo conjugio, 282 (PG 155: 512-513). See Love, Sexuality, and the Sacrament of Marriage by John Chryssavgis (Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1996), pp. 74-75.
  3. Practically, “worthy” means having no impediment, as is the case with holy Ordination (except in the latter case “more” is required). Infants are “worthy” to receive Holy Communion because they don’t resist the grace of the Holy Spirit.
  4. See the study of Metrop. John (Zizioulas) of Pergamos, “Holy Baptism and Divine Liturgy” (in Greek), Ειδική Συνοδική Επιτροπή Λειτουργικής Αναγεννήσεως (Κανονισμός 139/1999), (pp. 9-27).Rubrics for conducting baptism within the Divine Liturgy, can be found in, Entering the Orthodox Church-The Catechism and Baptism of Adults by Metrop. of Nafpaktos Hierotheos (Birth of the Theotokos Monastery, 2004), pp. 183-87.
  5. St. Symeon of Thessalonica confirms that, “the reception of the awesome Communion by the one baptized is the completion of this and of every mystery.” (De Sacramentis LXVII-LXVIII (PG 155:85B)
  6. The Heavenly Banquet, p. 306.
  7. Sometimes we hear, “The couple does not utter a word during the Service.” This is not true. All the responses to the prayers and petitions belonging to the people belong to them as well, especially “The Lord’s Prayer,” as they are about to receive the Bread of Life and the Cup of Salvation.
  8. See “Centrality of the Eucharist” in The Heavenly Banquet, pp. 61-62. Let us say at this point that the number seven was introduced late from the West. Theodore the Studite (turn of the 8th c.) mentions six mysteries. Marriage is not among them nor Holy Unction or Confession. Instead he lists monastic vows (he call it perfection) and the funeral service (Ep. II, 165 to Gregory; PG 99:1524B).
  9. This is also proposed by Zizioulas, o.c., p. 25.
  10. De Monogamia 9, ANF III, p. 66. Tertullian writes about 160 years after Christ.
  11. During the first three centuries marriage was primarily a civil matter. In later years the right to legalize marriages was given exclusively to the Church. Emperor Justinian with his 74th Neara (538) required that marriages needed to be solemnized in church before witnesses, while Emperor Leo the Wise with his 89th Neara (893) placed all marriages entirely under the jurisdiction of ecclesiastical courts. Under Emperor Alexis Komnenos (1184) the Wedding Ceremony as we know it today was established. See Zeses, o.c., p. 63 and Kallinikos, o.c., p. 55.
  12. In this parenthetical note let us state that this includes baptism – especially baptism. See our blog post, “My desire was to be received through Baptism.” See also “The Catechumens” in The Heavenly Banquet, p. 153, particularly Note 441, and “One Baptism” also in The Heavenly Banquet, pp. 211-12, particularly Note 652.
  13. Χρηστοήθεια τῶν Χριστιανῶν (ἔκδ. Ρηγοπούλου Β., Θεσσαλονίκη 1991), p. 46.
  14. Several years back, when I was in Greece, I had the opportunity to attend, for the first time, the celebration of a wedding according to the ancient tradition of the Church, that is, a wedding celebrated within the context of the Divine Liturgy. It is called “Byzantine Wedding.” (See here for how it is conducted.)
  15. We had suggested this in our book The Heavenly Banquet (p. 62): “In recent years we have seen an occasional return to the celebration of marriages within the Liturgy (called ‘Byzantine’ weddings). In small communities not only could this be easily done, but it would also be a communal (ecclesial) event—the way it is supposed to be. The same is true with baptisms. This way we would realize that the Holy Eucharist is the ‘Mystery of Mysteries,’ the central, unifying element of the sacramental life of the faithful, as ‘was the Eucharistic practice of the Early Church.’ We must recapture this orientation and perspective of the early Church. We must return to our healthy roots.”
Photo of author
The Orthodox Witness website is published by Anthony Hatzidakis.

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.
%%tb-image-alt-text%%

Marriage “in Christ” — Part II

Marriage crowns

The real meaning of marriage crowns

“O Lord our God, crown them with glory and honor.”

We now turn to examine in brief the rite of crowning, considered by many to be the climax of the wedding ceremony. Crowns1 were already in use in the Graeco-Roman world, not only in civil marriages, but on many other occasions as well. For this reason Tertullian finds it unbecoming for Christians to be crowned at weddings, and rails against this heathen custom. He writes:

We have recounted, as I think, all the various causes of the wearing of the crown, and there is not one which has any place with us: all are foreign to us, unholy, unlawful, having been abjured already once for all in the solemn declaration of the sacrament. For they were of the pomp of the devil and his angels, offices of the world, honors, festivals, popularity huntings (sic), false vows, exhibitions of human servility, empty praises, base glories, and in them all idolatry, even in respect of the origin of the crowns alone, with which they are all wreathed.2

According to him, it is not becoming for Christians to participate with heathens in all these things or to copy their ways, and therefore he forbids the use of crowns as idolatrous. As for their specific use in weddings he writes:

[Heathen] marriage, too, decks the bridegroom3 with its crown; and therefore we will not have heathen brides, lest they seduce us even to the idolatry with which among them marriage is initiated. You have the law from the patriarchs indeed; you have the apostle enjoining people to marry in the Lord.4

Even so, the Church eventually adapted the heathen custom of crowning, giving it, however, an altogether different meaning. St. John Chrysostom explains:

Garlands are wont to be worn on the heads of bridegrooms, as a symbol of victory, betokening that they approach the marriage bed unconquered by pleasure. But if captivated by pleasure he has given himself up to harlots, why does he wear the garland, since he has been subdued?5

Therefore the newlyweds are crowned for having finished the race successfully (cf. 1 Cor. 9:24-27 and 2 Tim. 4:6-8), overcoming the temptations of the flesh and for having arrived at their wedding day chaste, pure, virgin. St. Symeon Archbishop of Thessalonica (+1429) is explicit and direct:

“For this reason are crowned those who are virgin and pure, for being pure when they are united, and for having kept their virginity until their marriage.”6

This is why we hear the hymn to the holy Martyrs:

O holy Martyrs, who have fought the good fight
and were crowned as victors,
do intercede with Christ our God
to have compassion and to save our souls.7

The same, of course, is expected of all Christians: to fight “the good fight” in order to maintain their purity. This is what the crowning signifies. Also, the first hymn to the most holy Virgin, besides presenting to the couple, and to all of us, an ideal person to imitate, is chanted because of its repeated reference to the Virgin:

O Isaiah, dance with joy,
for the Virgin has indeed conceived,
and had a Son, Emmanuel, God with us,
who truly is God and man.
His name is called Daybreak from on high
and by extolling Him
we call blessed the young Virgin.

Strong proof of this interpretation also comes from another source. There is a short service contained in the Greek Euchologion.8 This service takes place on the eighth day after the wedding, that is, on the Sunday following the Wedding Day, since weddings were performed on the Lord’s Day (Κυριακή). According to an old custom, the couple wears the stephana (wreaths) for seven days. On the eighth day they return to church, where, after the Divine Liturgy, they receive a blessing whereupon their wreaths are taken off their heads, to be taken to their home and be placed in the stephanothiki (the case for the wedding wreaths) over their bed.20

This short service consists of two prayers; the first one is said by the priest over the couple; the second is read by the couple itself (something unique, as far as I know). This is what the first prayer says:

Lord our God, who blessed the annual cycle [in Greek stephanos, meaning wreath] of the year, and gave these wreaths [stephana] to be placed upon those who have joined each other in lawful wedlock as recompense for their chastity [σωφροσύνης], having presented themselves pure [ἁγνοί] at the marriage established by You; bless also at the taking off the present wreaths from the heads of those who were united to each other and preserve their union unbroken; so that they may always give thanks to Your all-holy name, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, now and forever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.9

It is very clear that the newlyweds were crowned with a wreath as a reward for their chaste and pure life. Like the Apostle, they too have fought the good fight and have kept their purity, therefore upon them is laid the crown (stephanos) of righteousness by the Lord, the righteous judge (cf. 2 Tim. 4:7-8).10

Digamists and trigamists, that is those who entered into a second or third marriage, were not crowned, up until at least the ninth century, as Patriarch Nicephoros the Confessor states: “A digamist is not blessed with crowns, but, on the contrary is even amerced [censured] to abstain from Communion for two years; and a trigamist for three years.”11 St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite (+1809) explains the reason: “Because crowns belong to those who are victorious conquerors, and not those who have been defeated by the pleasures of the flesh.”12 It seems that such marriages were not even performed in the church, since the wedding ceremony was part of the Liturgy, which necessarily involved reception of the holy Sacraments. The couple came to receive holy Communion at the end of the imposed penance, and thus seal their union “in the Lord.” Until then, they were married legally, but not ecclesiastically.

All this may seem otherworldly to us, living in our permissive and lax society, but this has been the Christian teaching since the beginning. St. Polycarp of Smyrna (+155), a disciple of St. John the Theologian, writes: “[T]he younger men must be blameless in all things, caring for purity [ἁγνείας] before everything and curbing themselves from every evil.”13 St. John Chrysostom too stresses that young men should be trained in chastity, “so that their brides may receive their bodies pure and unpolluted, so their love will be more ardent.”14 His advice for girls is to be “pious, modest” and the like. It does not include being pure, because it is a given.

Of course the struggle is not over once one is married. The Church, and Christ Her founder expect all the faithful to be chaste not only before the wedding but also after it, exercising temperance and living a life of continence,15 so that they may receive from the Lord “the crown of life” (Rev. 2:10). Couples are expected to exercise self-control (1 Cor. 7:5) and keep their marriage “honorable in everything [they do],16 and the [marriage] bed undefiled” (Heb. 13:4). Married life has its demands, and requires fortitude and virtue. It is not casual that all three prayers read by the priest over the newlyweds mention crowns – the first for them to receive “a crown of everlasting glory,”17 the second for God to remember them as He remembered “His holy Forty Martyrs on whom [He] sent down crowns from heaven,”18 and the third asks God to “crown them into one flesh.”19 Crowns stand for victories after a contest, in this instance of a married life “in the Lord.”

  1. Crowns (stephana) means wreaths or garlands, consisting mostly of laurel leaves – not diadems of gold with precious stones, although such crowns were introduced after the 9th century, together with the misunderstanding that a couple is crowned king and queen of their household.
  2. De corona militis, ANF III, p. 102. The subject of the whole treatise is that Christians should not be crowned. A discussion on the subject can be found here: “The History of Marriage Within Orthodoxy”. The crowning by Christians at weddings mentioned by Tertullian was most likely not yet liturgical, but rather a social custom, which later was incorporated into the liturgical life of the Church. Notice that marriage is already called “sacrament”. Keep in mind this writing belongs to his Montanist period.
  3. It seems only the grooms were crowned in the western Church, whereas in the east both groom and bride were crowned. See “A History of Christian Marriage” (pp. 45-63), Report to the 78th General Convention (2015?), p. 50.
  4. Ibid., p. 101. Again, he repeats his favorite expression, “in the Lord,” clearly understanding it as meaning marrying a Christian, having a Christian marriage.
  5. Hom. ix on I Tim. 2 (PG 62:546), NPNF I, vol. 13, p. 437.
  6. De honesto et legitimo conjugio, caput CCLXXVI (PG 155:195A). Men who had not kept their virginity had to undergo a penance before being admitted to communion when they married (Canon 31 of Council of Elvira).
  7. Our rendering. Words in italics in this and the following hymn have been added to match the melody.
  8. The two Greek-English Priest’s Service Books in use in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese do not include this service, which was already obsolete at the time of St. Symeon of Thessalonica (see Πρωτοπρ. Δημητρίου Β. Τζέρπου, Σύμβολα καὶ Συμβολισμοὶ κατὰ τὴν τέλεση τοῦ Ὀρθοδόξου Γάμου, pp. 683-705).
  9. Μικρὸν Εὐχολόγιον, Ἀποστολικὴ Διακονία (2009), p. 125.
  10. “The Taking Up of the Crowns” takes place presently towards the end of the service. The last moving request made as the crowns are being lifted up should not be missed: “Take up their crowns into Your Kingdom, and preserve them undefiled, blameless and beyond reproach to the ages” (The Priest’s Service Book, p. 119).
  11. Rudder, Second Canon, p. 963.
  12. Ibid., Note.
  13. “The Epistle of St. Polycarp to the Philippians” 5, The Apostolic Fathers, p. 179/170. What follows is also of interest: “For it is a good thing to refrain from lusts in the world, for every lust warreth against the Spirit, and neither whoremongers nor effeminate persons nor defilers of themselves with men shall inherit the kingdom of God, neither they that do untoward things. Wherefore it is right to abstain from all these things, submitting yourselves to the presbyters and deacons as to God and Christ. The virgins must walk in a blameless and pure conscience.”
  14. Hom. ix on I Tim., NPNF I, vol. 13, p. 437.
  15. I chuckled at a translation of the Apolytikion of St. Nicholas, which rendered “ἐγκρατίας” as “abstinence,” instead of “continence” or, better yet, “temperance.”
  16. ἐν πᾶσι is taken by Prof. Trembellas, following the Fathers, of neuter gender. “Keep marriage honorable ‘in all things,” “in everything,” “in every respect,” “entirely,” “in every way” (NIV, God’s Word, Darby); not, “by all” (masculine gender, that is “people”), as most translations have it. The phrase it taken as exhortatory (ἔστω), like the rest of the verses, whereas St. John Chrysostom understands it as an assertion (ἐστί).
  17. The Priest’s Service Book, p. 103. The Greek text is τὸν ἀμαράντινον τῆς δόξης στέφανον, “the wreath of glory that fades not.” (Cf. 1 Pet. 5:4)
  18. Ibid., p. 105.
  19. Ibid., p. 107.
  20. The heading image shows a stephanothiki.
Photo of author

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.
%%tb-image-alt-text%%

Marriage “in Christ” — Part I

“That they all may be one; even as thou, Father, art in me,
and I in thee, that they also may be in us.” (John 17:21)

What makes the Orthodox Christian marriage a mystery (sacrament) of the Church? People love the Orthodox wedding service. They love its beauty, its joyous celebration, the crowning, the “dance of Isaiah,” the sharing by the couple of a glass of wine, and the joyous sounds – all without any instrumental accompaniment! It’s just beautiful! Yes, but what is it that makes this wedding ceremony a mystery? And what is it that makes it even a marriage? After all, the familiar to all “I do’s” are entirely missing!

In this four part series, it is our intention to address these questions, and explain not the overstressed symbolism, but the essence of Orthodox marriage. We don’t intend to trace the historical evolution of marriage or to write a monograph on marriage. Others have done this.1 After discussing our purpose in life as Christians, we will examine the purpose of marriage, what the true highlight of the wedding rite is, and look at the essential elements that make marriage a Church mystery.

Our life “in Christ”

Everything a Christian does is—and, in any case, should be—“in Christ.” The great Apostle enjoins us: “Whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Col. 3:17). Our union with Christ constitutes the goal of our lives as Christians. The life of a Christian is life “in Christ.” What does “in Christ” mean? It expresses the unity we have with Christ our Lord and God, and our membership in His Body, the Holy Church; it means that we are inseparable from Him (Rom. 8:39), that through Him and because of Him we are “sanctified” in Him (1 Cor. 1:2); it means that we live holy lives dedicated to Him, and that through the Theanthropos Christ we are united with the Father by the uncreated grace of the Holy Spirit.

Our Lord and Savior expressed our intimate union “in Him” in His prayer to His Father: “That they all may be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us” (John 17:21). St. Paul uses several expressions for our unity with the Lord, all having the same meaning, such as (only samples are given):

  • “In Christ Jesus our Lord” (1 Cor. 15:31)
  • “in the Lord Jesus” (Phil. 2:19)
  • “in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 3:24, Phil. 1:1)
  • “in Christ” (Rom. 9:1)
  • “in the Lord” (Col. 3:18)
  • “in Him” (Eph. 1:4.6-13, 2 Cor. 13:4), etc.

So also does St. Peter, according to whom “in Christ” constitutes a point of reference of Christian conduct and life (1 Pet. 3:16, 5:10). He addresses the followers of Christ as

  • “all of you that are in Christ” (1 Pet. 5:14).

To be “in Christ” expresses not only our individual unity with Him, but also our unity with all the other members of His Body, the Holy Church:

  • “You are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28).

This unity with the Lord is not static, but dynamic. We “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18), and in that knowledge, and by His grace, our love for Him increases, and our love for each other also grows “in Him.” In no better way can the members of the Church express their unity “in Christ” than when they receive the Lord in Holy Communion. In the Divine Liturgy we pray, “…and unite all of us to one another who become partakes of the one Bread and Cup in the communion of the Holy Spirit.”2 When the faithful are united with Christ they are united with each other. Therefore “in Christ” finds its ultimate fulfillment especially in our participation of the Divine Eucharist, in the partaking of the Body and Blood of the Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Christian marriage is a union “in Christ”

In particular, marriage, an event of such great significance in the life of Christians, should be “in Christ.” In the sacred union of a man with a woman the Apostle Paul sees a figure, an image or an antitype of the ineffable union of Christ with His spotless spouse, the Church:

“This mystery is great, and I am referring to [the union of] Christ and the Church” (Eph. 5:32).3

As an image of the Great Mystery, marriage also becomes a source of the grace of the Holy Spirit for the couple married “in Christ,” just as an icon transmits grace from the One depicted. In the parable of the Great Supper the Lord compared the Kingdom of heaven to a “Marriage feast” and indicated the depth of His union with the Church He established by presenting Himself as the Bridegroom of the Church (Mt. 22:2,3).

In a Christian marriage the couple comes before Almighty God and the assembly of the faithful, His holy Church, to receive God’s blessing and to seal their union “in Christ.” The union of a Christian couple should be done “in the Lord,” as the Apostle states (1 Cor. 7:39), a union that continues throughout their lives. This is also petitioned in the second prayer of the wedding service: “That they may live according to Your will… and having pleased You in every way may shine as the stars of heaven, in You, O Lord.”4 But what specifically did the Apostle mean by this expression, “in the Lord”?

To marry “in the Lord” may mean, “according to the law of God,” or living in “undivided devotion to the Lord” (1 Cor. 7:35). St. Athanasios calls it, living in “honorable matrimony,”5 following in this respect St. Paul, who says, “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled” (Heb. 13:4), words echoed in the petition of the marriage rite: “Cause their marriage to be honorable; preserve their marital bed undefiled.”6 What the Apostle may also mean is made somewhat clearer in his second Letter to the Corinthians, where he tells them,

Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What harmony has Christ with Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God (2 Cor. 6:14-16).

This is also how Tertullian, an early witness of the Church (c. 155 – c. 240), understands the apostolic injunction:

“No Christian should intermarry with a heathen… we will not have heathen brides, lest they seduce us even to the idolatry with which among them marriage is initiated.”

He then refers to the Apostle: “you have the Apostle enjoining people to marry in the Lord.”7 This understanding is corroborated by the tradition of the Church that does not allow a marriage between an Orthodox and a heretic or a non-Christian.8

Ultimately, “in the Lord” in 1 Cor. 7:39 means, in a Christian-like manner, it means “in the Church,” with the blessing of the Church. The earliest witness that marriage “in the Lord” meant in the Church, or with the Church’s blessing, is found in the Letter of St. Ignatios the God-bearer to St. Polycarp, where he states that a Christian marriage is blessed by the bishop:

If any one is able to abide in chastity (ἁγνείᾳ) to the honor of the flesh of the Lord, let him so abide without boasting. If he boasts, he is lost; and if it is known beyond the bishop, he is polluted. It becomes men and women too, when they marry, to unite themselves with the consent of the bishop that the marriage may be after the Lord and not after concupiscence. Let all things be done to the honor of God.9

It is truly amazing to read these lines so early in the life of the Church. Tertullian also attests to the same ecclesial meaning in a much-quoted saying:

Whence are we to find words enough fully to tell the happiness of that marriage which the Church cements, and the oblation confirms, and the benediction seals?10

The liturgical nuances of this expression unmistakably refer to a Church service that includes a blessing and, more importantly, the Eucharist, because this is what Oblation is. From this and other evidence we have from apocryphal accounts and from catacomb art, one can draw the conclusion that “there must have been specifically Christian ceremonies to go with the legal obsequies,”11 which included a blessing by the bishop, the joining of hands, the crowning over the heads of the couple, and the reception of the Divine Mysteries within the Eucharistic celebration.12

  1. For example, John Meyendorff, Marriage, An Orthodox Perspective (SVSP, 2000,3R) and “Introduction” by Catharine P. Roth to the book St. John Chrysostom – On Marriage and Family Life (SVSP, 1986), pp. 7-24. There are many good studies in Greek, including, Christian Marriage and Family by Constantinos Kallinikos (Athens, 1958), and Thomas Zeses, Be Magnified, Groom… (Athens, 1992).
  2. “Anaphora of the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great.” The Heavenly Banquet: Understanding the Divine Liturgy by Father Emmanuel Hatzidakis (Orthodox Witness, 20133), p. 373.
  3. The word mystery (μυστήριον) used here does not have the meaning it has today. The Apostle makes it emphatically clear that the “mystery” is not the marriage of a couple, but the union of Christ with the Church, of which the marital union is a type, a symbol, an image of the “great mystery” of Christ’s union with the Church, that is with the members of His Body. As we stated in The Heavenly Banquet, “The Lord compared the Kingdom of Heaven to a Great Banquet (Lk. 14:16), even a marriage feast, in which the heavenly King’s Son is married (Mt. 22:2. Cf. Mt. 25:10). The marriage is between the Son of God and each soul: ‘Christ is the Bridegroom, and the Church and the soul are the bride.’” (p. 44) See also Rev. 19:7: “Let us rejoice and exult and give Him glory, for the marriage feast of the Lamb has come, and His Bride has made herself ready.” This is also made clear in the second prayer of the wedding service: “Blessed are You, O Lord our God, celebrant of the mystical and pure marriage, and Law-giver of the corporal one…” (The Priest’s Service Book by Father Evagoras Constantinides (1989), p. 102 – my translation.)
  4. The Priest’s Service Book, p. 105. Let us note that here is addressed the Trinitarian God, as is done explicitly in the following prayer, which may be an ecphonesis of the previous longer prayer.
  5. Letter x. 4, NPNF IV, p. 529.
  6. Prayer before the Lord’s Prayer, see The Priest’s Service Book, p. 113.
  7. Against Marcion vii, ANF III, pp. 443-44, and De Corona xiii, ANF III, p. 101.
  8. The Council of Laodicea (343) forbids members of the Church to marry heretics: “One must not intermarry with any heretics, or give one’s sons or daughters to them, but rather ought one to take theirs, if they should promise to become Christians” (31st Canon, Rudder, p. 565). This Canon was confirmed by the Quinisext Ecumenical Council in Trullo (672), which reads: “Let no Orthodox man be allowed to contract a marriage with a heretical woman, nor moreover let any Orthodox woman be married to a heretical man. But if it should be discovered that any such thing is done by any one of the Christians, no matter who, let the marriage be deemed void, and let the lawless marriage tie be dissolved. For it is not right to mix things immiscible, or let a wolf get tangled up with a sheep, and the lot of sinners get tangled up with the portion of Christ. If, therefore, anyone violates the rules we have made let him be excommunicated” (Canon 72, Rudder, p. 376).
  9. Letter of St. Ignatios to St. Polycarp 5.2, J. B. Lightfoot and J. R. Harmer, eds., The Apostolic Fathers (Baker Book House, 1984), p. 133 and 161. St. Ignatios the God-bearer wrote his letters on the way to Rome, where he became food to the beasts at the Coliseum, probably in the year 116 or 117.
  10. Tertullian, Ad uxorem (To his wife), II, viii-6, ANF IV, p. 48. The entire treatise should be required reading for newlyweds. The book, On Marriage and Family: Classic and Contemporary Texts, by Matthew Levering, ed. (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2005) is a collection of texts on the subject that includes Tertullian. For the benefit of the reader I transfer here what Tertullian says toward the end of his treatise:

    For even on earth children do not rightly and lawfully wed without their fathers’ consent. What kind of yoke is that of two believers of one hope, one desire, one discipline, one and the same service? Both are brethren, both fellow servants, no difference of spirit or of flesh; nay, they are truly “two in one flesh.” Where the flesh is one, one is the spirit too. Together they pray, together prostrate themselves, together perform their fasts; mutually teaching, mutually exhorting, mutually sustaining. Equally are they both found in the Church of God; equally at the banquet of God; equally in straits, in persecutions, in refreshments. Neither hides from the other; neither shuns the other; neither is troublesome to the other. The sick is visited, the indigent relieved, with freedom. Alms are given without danger of ensuing torment; sacrifices attended without scruple; daily diligence discharged without impediment: there is no stealthy signing, no trembling greeting, no mute benediction. Between the two echo psalms and hymns; and they mutually challenge each other which shall better chant to their Lord. Such things when Christ sees and hears, He rejoices. To these He sends His own peace. Where two are, there withal is He Himself. Where He is, there the Evil One is not.

  11. See Carl J. Sommer, We Look for a Kingdom – The Everyday Lives of the early Christians (Ignatius Press, 2007), pp. 306-07.
  12. On the front cover of Meyendorff’s book already mentioned (p. 1, Note 1) appears an image of the front side of a medallion of a golden marriage belt (Dumbarton Oaks Collection, Washington, D. C.), dated VI or VII century. It shows a marriage scene, with a couple standing, groom on the right and bride on the left, both crowned and holding hands, with Christ standing behind them holding the Gospel book (where the Bishop stands εἰς τύπον καὶ τόπον Χριστοῦ, as a “type and in place” of Christ). The Greek inscription reads: “Concord, grace and health from God.”I came upon this superb study when my own paper was nearly completed. Much of what I say – and don’t say – is there, and better said.
Photo of author

GIVING WITNESS TO THE TRUE CHURCH

Orthodox Christians all over the world have received the unchanging Christian Faith, passed down from the Holy Apostles to their successors, and continue to practice it today in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church – The Orthodox Church.
%%tb-image-alt-text%%

On Christian marriage, parenthood and family

On the occasion of the feast of the Nativity of the holy Theotokos, and the commemoration of her holy parents the day after, we will offer a few thoughts on marriage, parenthood and family. To be sure this unpretentious sermon is not meant to be a Magna Carta on the Christian family.

We could of course provide broad guidelines on the home and its relation to the individual, state and religion; the marriage and its sacred character; mutual love, faith, tolerance and help between the spouses; indissolubility of marriage; fruit of the womb being the fruit of marriage; collaborating with God in forming a Christian family; Christian child-rearing; respect, obedience and care on part of the children for their parents, especially in their old age; the home as “Church at home”—all important issues, each of which could easily take the length of an entire sermon.

We are a small community here, and perhaps it isn’t our place to address global issues, take position on world events, and attempt broad declarations. We will not do that. We’ll leave this task to others, higher up. We must, however, say a few needful words on these important subjects.

Morality in our society

Today morality has been relativized and redefined. Christian communities have been influenced by these trends in our western culture, and adopted as normal behavior that clearly runs against the biblical witness and the unanimous tradition of the Church. The Orthodox Church stands as a beacon of truth and a bastion of morality for two thousand years. She stands firm against modern re-definements of morality. A Russian Prelate, Metropolitan Kirill, said the following appropriate words:

[U]ntil recently all the Christians had unanimous views at least on man and the moral norms of his life. Today this unity has been broken… Some Christian communities have unilaterally reviewed or are reviewing the norms of life defined by the Word of God. Why is it happening precisely today, in the beginning of the 21st century? Why have some Christian circles come to favor so much the idea of evolving moral norms? … [T]he greatest impact on this position has been made, in my view, by the non-religious spirit of this world. … Post-modernism in a broad sense implies a compatibility of incompatible views and positions. Perhaps this attitude is justified in some spheres of society but it cannot be justified for Christians in the realm of morality. Believers cannot recognize at the same time the value of life and the right to death, the value of family and validity of same-sex relations, the protection of child’s rights and the deliberate destruction of human embryos for medical purposes.1

We should not be confused by the mixed and confusing signals emanating out of our agnostic society. For us, Orthodox Christians, morality, like dogma, is not subject to change, to adaptation, to development. The Orthodox Church rejects the philosophy of moral relativism. Instead of looking at the secular world, the Church is anchored to the word of God, to the solid tradition of the Fathers, and to her Saints, who have applied in their lives the source of morality and objective truth, in the person of the incarnate God, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Christian marriage

Let us now look briefly at the Orthodox Christian marriage. The Orthodox Church has elevated marriage, by sanctifying the union of two people in a holy sacrament, a holy mystery. And if this does not seem particularly impressive or even significant to you, consider this: Marriage, outside the Orthodox Church, is essentially a contractual agreement between two consenting parties, a legal transaction, whether in a civil or a religious ceremony; whereas in the Orthodox Church such agreement is formally absent, because the essential element of this mystery (as of any other mystery) is God’s grace invoked upon the couple, which binds them together “in the Lord.”

The Church affirms “equal rights and mutual obligations” between spouses. They can work harmoniously, however, only as long as the union is “in the Lord.” This much is affirmed by St. John Chrysostom, who “speaks about the necessity of continual mutual respect between the spouses, love, and equality of rights and obligations. The chief goal should always be unity and for its sake one should sacrifice one’s point of view or preference. The perfect union of the spouses will occur when Christ is in their midst. St. John Chrysostom states that the foremost purpose of marriage is the moral and spiritual advancement and perfection of the spouses.”2

Christian parenthood

Raising them Right, advice on the proper upbringing of children by a Saint and Bishop of the Church, Saint Theophan the Recluse.

Now coming to Orthodox Christian parenthood we note first of all that the birth we honor today is the fruit of the prayers of the holy couple of Joachim and Anna. They didn’t turn to in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood, not even to adoption. Their hope, trust, and confidence was in the Lord, and in Him only. We then see how unselfishly and gratefully they dedicated their offspring to God. The holy Theotokos was God’s gift to them—and to humanity. Through her the Son of God would become incarnate, could become incarnate through her—and through no one else.

Do we rear our children in the faith? As we mentioned in a previous post on the subject of bringing up our children, a great aid to young couples, but also to Grandparents and God-parents as well, is a great little book, Raising Them Right, written by St. Theophan the Recluse, and translated by another contemporary spiritual man, Fr. Seraphim Rose. This book is excellent for family reading and discussion, whether at home or at the church. How do we expect our children to grow in the faith and in holiness, as they grow in stature and in years? We must feed them and nurture them from our faith, from our holy life.

What training are we imparting to our children at home? Do we train them in prayer, in the reading of the holy Scripture, in the exercise of the virtues? What example do we provide for them? What effort do we make to steer them away from TV, from frivolous and indecent shows, from games and parties, from wasting this valuable gift of God, time, and instead suggest to them to read the life of a Saint and to be involved in their church? But how would they do that, if they don’t see us doing it?

Family

The “traditional family” is the main target for advocates of social immorality today.

The “traditional family” is the main target for advocates of social immorality today. Today we witness that the very concepts of marriage and family are blurred. Our society wishes to think that it cares for its children every bit as much as previous generations did, however the growing evidence points to the contrary. Today we witness the great sickness and cultural decay that pervades our society, and we must resist by staying close to each other and to the Church.

As Orthodox Christians we must remain strong and immovable in our faith and moral and ethical values that spring from it. The holy child we honor today, and her pious parents, exemplify the Christian virtues we are called to imitate: strong faith and trust in God that powered their lives, conjugal fidelity, mutual trust and respect, perseverance, tolerance, prayer, and love. They are our heroes and our role models.

May the holy example of pious Joachim and Anna, together with that of Zacharias and Elisabeth and other holy couples, inspire and strengthen us, my dear brothers and sisters, to fulfill our duties and responsibilities before God. May the light of Christ shine through us as it does through this holy couple. Amen.

Fr. E.H./Sep. 9, 2007

  1. “The Light of Christ and the Church”, Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, Address at the Third Ecumenical Assembly in Sibiu, Romania, September 5, 2007, Sibiu, Romania.
  2. This quote is from the Introduction to the book Married Saints of the Church, by Monk Moses of the Holy Mountain (St. Xenia Skete, 1991, p. vi). In its 175 pages you will find the lives of 300 married Saints, 2 to 3 per page, an easy and very informative read. Incidentally, if you read Greek I also recommend to you two other great little books: Ὁ Χριστιανικὸς Γάμος καὶ ἡ Οἰκογένεια by the Protopresbyter Constantine Kallinikos, and Τὸ Ἱερὸ Μυστήριο τοῦ Γάμου, by Protopresbyter Charalambos Hatzopoulos.
Photo of author
Continue Shopping →
Item added to cart.
0 items - 0,00 $
Checkout