Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Women in Religion
Challenging Traditionalist Views On Liturgical Praxis

Challenging Traditionalist Views On Liturgical Praxis

Last updated on: March 9, 2026 at 2:04 am by Henry Karlson

0 Comments

Challenging Traditionalist Views On Liturgical Praxis 2026-03-09T02:04:59-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Kristicak: Left, a man presents the clothes of a woman consecrated to God to his girl; center, a woman consecrated to god in Orante prayer position, praying; right: a woman sits with her baby / Wikimedia Commons

An issue I have with many so-called traditionalists, Catholic or Orthodox, is that they do not know history, and the development and changes which have happened in religious praxis throughout Christian history. They don’t know or appreciate tradition, that tradition is meant to be living and not a dead-end. They think various practices they like have always been and should always be what is practiced. Similarly, they think their interpretation of them has always been how they were always interpreted. In realty, much of what they think as being ancient is far more recent in origin and came from the cultural norms of the time when those developments happened. This is why, when they try to say their preference is more than a mere preference, but superior to all other possible ways of worship, if not actually necessary for all Christians to follow, they are wrong. They use their own cultural norms, or worse, the cultural norms of the recent past which are no longer applicable, to make say this. I often see this coming from Western (Latin) traditionalists; many of suggest that the “most reverent” way of receiving communion is by kneeling (and on the tongue, not in the hand). Some go so far as saying it is the only way to do so. Those who have studied history know that this was not how the faithful received communion in the earliest eras of Christian history; they either received at a table or, after various liturgical developments took place, standing up. Indeed, the Council of Nicea decreed that the faithful should not kneel, but stand, during the liturgy (as a sign of the joy Christians possess in light of the resurrection).

It would be absurd to say that Jesus, his apostles, their immediate successors, or the Council of Nicea, promoted inferior forms of piety, but that would have to be the conclusion one has if they believe the most reverent form of receiving communion is done while kneeling. So-called traditionalists thinking this, not only act, often out of show, to make sure people see they do what they tell others to do, they like to do so as a way to suggest this makes them better Christians than anyone else. In the end, the fall for the sin of pride, and in that pride, they end up thinking their way is superior to the way of Christ himself!

Liturgical developments can, and do happen, and we can see in the West, especially during the medieval era, changes in the way communion was received. This is because liturgy is meant to work with the culture at large. The cultural norms of the medieval era, ones which promoted kneeling, not just with communion, but in society at large, often for political reasons, are no longer the norms for us today. Liturgical changes were necessary to reflect current cultural norms. In the modern age, we like to emphasize the equal dignity of every human person, a principle which follows Catholic teaching, and so is justified to represent it by having the faithful stand when receiving communion (which is why the reason might be different from ancient times, but yet, the ancient representation demonstrates it is a perfectly acceptable praxis).

The debates surrounding communion and its reception serve as examples of a greater issue, and that is, the way traditionalists confuse culture, and the liturgical rites established in certain times, as norms which must never be changed. No culture is perfect. When Christians find a problem with a particular culture, they must work to fix those problems. If and when it is discovered that those problems made their way into the church and its liturgical practices, liturgical reform becomes necessary. This is especially the case with misogyny. Traditionalists embrace cultural norms from patriarchal societies which undermined the potential women had, and, whenever reforms promote fixing that problem, they resist it with every fiber of their being. Of course, those problems, if properly examined, go against the way of Christ, and with it, Christian doctrine. Sadly, they tend not to examine the implications of the doctrines and dogmas they otherwise affirm, for if they did, they would see they go against the cultural norms they have accepted. We can see this in the way traditionalists like to point to Mary, and Marian doctrines, while not understanding many of those doctrines were established as a way to confront misogyny, and not just any kind, but the kind traditionalists want to embrace. For example, I see often see so-called traditionalists declare that women should not be allowed in the sanctuary or near the altar; there is a history, which can be examined, that tells us how this practice developed, a history which includes the way liturgical theologians began to accept and use an over-literal reading of Levitical laws and applied them to the Christian context (which was never the intention of Scripture). They promoted the idea that men, not women, were welcome in certain spaces (even though tradition said Mary went to the holiest of spaces in the Temple!). This makes it seem that Scripture justifies their cultural beliefs and practices concerning genders (and with it, the inferior nature of women). In this way, cultural norms were followed instead of the teaching of Scripture, for Scripture tells us that the differences between the genders are relative and overcome in Christ (as Paul said, in Christ Jesus, there is neither male nor female). When we understand this and take it into consideration in our liturgical celebration, our liturgical practices, knowing how liturgy should embrace modern cultural advances, using symbols and practices which promote the best of those advance, we should work to promote the equality of the sexes in the liturgical setting, in the church, in the sanctuary itself. And, when we do so, we would be taking on and promoting elements found in the pre-Nicene era which were slowly eradicated from Christian praxis.

For, when we look to the the earliest eras of Christian history, we see women were elevated by the faithful. From the first century, we hear of a remarkable missionary St. Thekla, whose authority and responsibility seem to have challenged men and led to some of the push back against women. We also find women deacons, whose place in the church lasted for centuries. We also discern many women taking autonomy over their own lives by rejecting marriage (which led some of them being killed for denying men when men thought they had a right to control women). Slowly, we see the culture at large influencing the Christian community; as more converts came into it, bringing with them an anthropology that suggested women were inferior to men, we see the role of women in the church becoming less and less. Eventually, they were told there were places they did not belong (like in the sanctuary). We see this front at center at the Nestorian controversy and the debate concerning the title Theotokos for Mary. It was St. Pulcheria who emphasized the title, Theotokos, and she did so as a response to misogyny. She was, at the time, the sister of the emperor, one who dedicated herself to virginity, giving her a special place in the church community, as Sozomen indicated:

This princess was not yet fifteen years of age, but had received a mind most wise and divine above her years. She first devoted her virginity to God, and instructed her sisters in the same course of life. To avoid all cause of jealousy and intrigue, she permitted no man to enter her palace. In confirmation of her resolution, she took God, the priests, and all the subjects of the Roman empire as witnesses to her self-dedication. In token of her virginity and the headship of her brother, she consecrated in the church of Constantinople, a holy table, a remarkable fabric and very beautiful to see; it was made of gold and precious stones; and she inscribed these things on the front of the table, so that it might be patent to all.[1]

It was at this holy table, this altar, Pulcheria would receive communion. When Nestorius learned of this, he would not allow that practice continued. He took away her altar cloth and forbade her to receive communion at the altar. He closed the royal doors at Easter, saying no women should be allowed into the sanctuary. Many see this as the beginning of the Nestorian conflict. Pulcheria resisted Nestorius and his changes. She said she had a theological reason why he was wrong, and that was the status of Mary. She is the Mother of God, the Theotokos. She had been allowed into the Holy of Holies. She was closer to Christ, to God, than any man because God had dwelt in her during his pregnancy. Nestorius, in response, denied that she is the Theotokos, the mother of God, and said she was just the mother of the man, Jesus. God had not been in her like that. Pulcheria worked to have Nestorius’ heresy refuted. She was actively involved in having the Council of Ephesus (and later, Chalcedon), called. She stood up for the truth of Christ, but in and with it, the truth of the place of women in the church.

Nestorius’s actions show us that he took his cultural background and used it to deny the place of women had in the church, while Pulcheria showed that an authentic Christology must lead to promoting women and allowing them access to all places in the church. Sadly, that lesson had been forgotten over time, as women found themselves cut off from the altar and turned away from the sanctuary. For far too long, misogynous cultural practices held sway in the church. Things have changed recently, and that is why we see St, Pulcheria’s revolution once again bearing its fruit: women are once again found in the sanctuary. Sadly, in response to this, many are acting like Nestorius, trying to deny them what the church allows, doing so without understanding that traditional theology affirms the praxis they want to deny. This is why, whenever I see someone demand women to be kept away from the altar, I cannot help but think of the Nestorian element which lay behind their praxis, and point, like St. Pulcheria, to Mary, and say women most certainly have a right to the altar, for who can deny women their closeness to God when God has affirmed it?

There are many other cultural changes and revolutions seen throughout Christian history, each having its impact on Christian theology and praxix. It is important to look back to tradition, not just to some of it, but all of it. We should see how cultures have influenced Christian praxis, for good, but also for ill. When we see the bad, we should do what we can to purify our praxis, either going back to a tradition, a purer form, which existed before cultural corruption affected it, or engage modern doctrinal development and establish a praxis which reflects that development. We must not get so caught up in one form, in one stage, of praxis, and make it the end all and be all of praxis, which is exactly what I find so-called traditionalists tend to do. We should know that praxis, discipline, changes over time, and what is best for one age might not be best for all.

* This Is Another Post From My Personal (Informal) Reflections And Speculations Series

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

N.B.: While I read comments to moderate them, I rarely respond to them. If I don’t respond to your comment directly, don’t assume I am unthankful for it. I appreciate it. But I want readers to feel free to ask questions, and hopefully, dialogue with each other. I have shared what I wanted to say, though some responses will get a brief reply by me, or, if I find it interesting and something I can engage fully, as the foundation for another post. I have had many posts inspired or improved upon thanks to my readers.

[1] Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History. Book IX. In NPNF2(2): 419.

General Christian

Women in Religion

History and Religion

Previous Post

March 8, 2026

Reflections For Lent 2026 Part Three: The Fall Of Adam

Next Post

March 11, 2026 My Engagements With World Religions: Other Faiths

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"Gosh, did that hit the spot. I have been having great anxiety lately. And I ..."

Mark Wilson

Rejecting Doom: Christian Hope And Human ..."

"Justice and peace are two sides of the same coin. Where there is justice, there ..."

Dr.Cajetan Coelho

Justice First, Charity Beyond It: Serving ..."

"Thank you for your very, very powerful and very, very insightful analysis of the relationship ..."

alwayspuzzled

Justice First, Charity Beyond It: Serving ..."

"Given the amount of lethal malevolence that has prevailed in human history for the past ..."

alwayspuzzled

We Must Value Our Health

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion Abraham abuse Aesthetics AI Aliens Ambrose Ancestors and Everything Andrew Angels Animals Anne Anthony Antisemitism apologetics Apophatic Apostle John Aquinas Artificial Intelligence Asanga Ascension Asceticism Assumption Atheism Attachment Augustine Authority Avarice Balthasar Baptism Beauty Biden birthright citizenship Bishops Black History Books Buddhism Bulgakov Byzantine Calendar C.S. Lewis Calcidius Catholic Catholicism Catholicism Celibacy Charity Chastity children Chrismation Christ Christmas Christology Church Climate Change Common Good Communion Confession Confirmation Conscience Constantine conventions conversion councils Covid Creation Cross Dead Death Death Penalty Debate Deception Demagogues Demons Desert Monks Desert Mothers Desire destruction development Dialogue Dignity Dionsyius Dionysius Discipline Diversity Division Doctor Who doctrine dogma Dormition Dualism Easter Easter Series Ecumenical Councils Ecumenism Education Election Empathy Environment Error Eschatology eschaton Eternity Ethics Eucharist Evangelism Eve Evil evolution Faeries Faith Fear femininity Ficino Florence Florensky Folktale Fools Forgiveness Freedom Future gender Gentile Gentiles Glory Gnostic God gods Good Samaritan Goodness Gospel Government Grace Great Fast Guns Hate healing Health Heaven Hell Hellenism Heresy Hierarchy Hildegard Hinduism History Holiness Holy Spirit Holy Week Hope Horror Human rights humanity Humility hypocrisy ICE icon icons Identification Identity Idol II Nicea Immigration incarnation Individualism Informal Reflections Inklings Intention Inter-Religious Interfaith Internet Interpretation Intrinsic evil Irenaeus Islam Israel Jacob Jerome Jesus Jews John Chrysostom John of Damascus John the Baptist Joseph Judaism justice Justification kenosis Kindnesss Kingdom of God Kingdom of Heaven Law Law of Moses Lazarus Leaf by Niggle Lent Lenten Reflection Liberation Theology Lies Life Listen Literature Liturgy locutions Logic Logos Love Marriage Martyrs Mary Mass Maximos The Confessor Meanness Meditation Mercy Middle Path Migrants Mind Miracles Miriam Morals Moses Movies Music Muslims Myths Names Nationalism Native Americans New Year Nicea Nicholas Nothing Novatian Obedience Occam's Razor Ordination Origen Original Sin Orthodox orthopraxis Pagans Palamas Palm Sunday Paradise Paschaltide Paul Peace Pentecost person Peter piety PKD Plato pluralism Plurality Poem Poetry Poiltics Politics Poor Pope Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV Post Office Prayer Pride Pro-life Prodigal Son propaganda Prophecy Prophets Providence Putin Racism Reading Reason Reflection Refugees Relationships Religion Religion Series Religious Liberty Repent Republicans Rest Resurrection Rich Rites Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation Salvian Santa Science Scripture Self-Giving Sexuality Sibyl Sick Silence Sin Singlehood Social Justice Society Sodom Solovyov Speculations Spiritual Reflection St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Justin Martyr Suffering Sunday of the Paralytic Man Sunday of the Samaritan Woman Superhero Supreme Court Teaching Technology Thanksgiving The Father the Universe Theological Reflection Theology Theosis Theotokos Thomas Timaeus Time Tolerenace Tolkien Tradition Transfiguration Trinity Trump Truth Uncategorized Unity Universities USCCB Value Vatican II Vegetarian Vices Violence Virtue Vocations War Water Welcome Wisdom Womanhood Women Work World View Worship Writing Zacchaeus

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz