There is no argument that the Church should be accepting of all. If someone is disabled, special arrangements should be made to ensure that they feel welcome and comfortable. The opinion above suggests ramps and automatic door openers for churches. Ramps are required by code. Unless a church is grandfathered in, it cannot open its doors to anyone without a ramp — and that is a good thing.
The opinion writer also draws attention to the suffering and daily impediments faced by people with disabilities. This is true and heartbreaking. We could not call ourselves Christians if we were not considerate of their suffering, nor would we be Christian if we failed to offer them the opportunity to attend church.
However, the writer, who identifies herself as an advocate for the disabled, does not clarify how guide dogs would enable blind parishioners to hear or participate in the liturgy. Much of her argument focuses on access to church buildings—ramps and automatic doors. The ramp issue has largely been addressed through code. Automatic door openers are not widely available, but it is unclear how a guide dog would solve that problem.
According to the lawyer Tsougarakis, the archbishop’s ruling concerned guide dogs in churches, yet the opinion writer did not address this angle. We should hear from families or caretakers of blind parishioners about how a guide dog would be indispensable during church attendance. Obviously, a blind person may rely on a dog to walk to church. But does the dog know the destination is the church? Animals do not use GPS. A guide dog warns its owner of obstacles — nothing more.
Moreover, most churches in America are accessible only by car. This is not Greece, where a church is located on every block. It is reasonable to assume that a family member or attendant would assist a blind person in traveling to church. And if that is not possible, any parishioner would likely consider it a privilege to offer such assistance. Once at church, if the companion cannot continue helping, a board member could guide the person to a pew, and the priest can come to the pew to offer Communion and antidoron. Unless there are additional needs that only a dog can fulfill, it is unclear what role the dog would have during the liturgy. Obviously, the dog does not participate in the liturgy.
Our culture today is increasingly animal-friendly, which is a positive development. However, animals are not human. Even well-trained dogs have been known to attack other dogs or people—especially small children, and sometimes even their owners. What would happen if multiple dogs were present in church? Would they bark at each other?
The opinion writer also did not address the “poop and pee” issue. Tsougarakis did, suggesting that if a dog soils the church, it would no longer be allowed inside—meaning the owner would be excluded as well. This kind of reasoning is typical of Tsougarakis’s so-called “deep” thinking.
The opinion writer praises the archbishop for his concern for “the least of us.” The archbishop has also shown “concern” by providing gluten-free prosforo for Communion. I wonder how that worked out, and how many actually benefited. Do people call ahead to request gluten-free prosforo, prepared precisely for when they attend church? Many churches struggle to procure regular prosforo, let alone gluten-free prosforo for fewer than 1% of people who have celiac disease.
This is not the archbishop’s genuine concern for “the least of us.” If he truly had such concern, he would have intervened—or at least responded—to the situation of the poor family ousted from St. Basil’s. Rather, the archbishop seems intent on proving his bona fides in “moving the Church forward” and modernizing it.
The Orthodox Observer, which publishes only “opinions” that are not truly opinions but praise pieces for the archbishop, will not publish anything unless it lavishly endorses his supposed concern “for the least of us.” Parishioners’ hard-earned money funds the Observer, yet it does a disservice to the faithful by competing in its praises of the dear leader — much like North Korean publications praise Kim Jong Un, or Chinese state media praises Xi Jinping.
Let’s hear from care givers to a sight disabled person. Is a guide dog indespensible in enabling a sight disabled parishioner to attend church?
Christ (aka the Church) was always accessible to the disabled. The Gospel is full of such examples. And yet, the Gospel itself also shows us what is both intuitive and historically accurate. Every disabled person, even the man who they lowered on his palette down from the roof/ceiling had someone to help the disabled person get to his destination. When Christ told the blind man to go wash himself at the pool of Siloam, he didn’t say “let the dog guide you there”. It is clear that a fellow human being guided him there, and that has been the practice of the Church for 2000 years. Therefore, to say that the Church has not been accessible to the disabled is an unfortunate false statement.
And even worse, to applaud an “elevation of animals” to a level “above human beings” constitutes a return to Egyptian era hieroglyphic idolatry. Apart from the fact that this recent decision to allow dogs in Church buildings during services is clearly an innovation that has no historical precedent in Liturgical practice, we will remind the readers (and Mrs. Morphesis) for the umpteenth time that the Prayers of the Catechumens as they have been cemented into our Liturgy from the days of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom provide the answer here…
“Let the Catechumens depart…Let no Catechumen remain…” Catechumens are human beings, aren’t they? So by adding the recent Synodal decree “…but let the dogs in…” clearly elevates animals to a status higher than humans…
Divine worship, especially Liturgy is where the Church militant and Church triumphant meet… Dogs are not members of the Body of Christ. Period. Therefore, “Let no dogs remain, either” is something that the Church Fathers got right, and nobody should question that…NOBODY. I have asked to see the list of bishops who signed, and the list of any bishops who didn’t vote for this…they collectively have sworn to uphold the Dogmas and Traditions and Decisions of the Ecumenical Councils….this is a clear violation, so those who voted for this should resign immediately.
While we sympathize with those having physical ailments and disabilities, we must apply our God-given logic to supersede any feelings of emotion when dealing with matters of Faith and Tradition.
Great article Markos. I want to add that by delegating our duty to “look out for the least of them” to the dogs, we are only throwing off responsibility that we have towards the disabled. Why not organize volunteers to pick up and drop off the blind, and accompany them throught the liturgy? Who wouldn’t agree that such a scenario is truly what Christ would have wanted. If Christ was O.K. with leaving responsibility of succoring our fellow humans to the dogs, he wouldn’t have insited in our duty to “the least of them”.
Yes. A dog is “man’s best friend”. But a dog should not and can not replace us in our duty to fellow humans.
My wife has the highest level of allergy to dogs. She cannot be in the same room with them or it is like she suddenly contracts pneumonia. In this culture where dogs have become like human beings, my wife is unable to fly, stay in hotels, or go grocery shopping (at times). Now she will be excluded from attending Greek Liturgies.
I wrote extensive comments on the previous Helleniscope article on this topic, about openening up a huge legal can of worms because if we let any animals in to “service” the disabled, we then have to define who is disabled. Anyone and Everyone can claim a psychological disability such that they cannot go anywhere with their emotional support animal, most of which aren’t even trained, and can be any kind of animal. Before seeing eye dogs came on the scene, blind people used a white cane and learned braille. And every other PERSON – walking, talking, seeing, logical PERSON – not a mute, barking DOG – asked them if they needed any help ON THE STREET. Howe much more IN A CHURCH? Michael’s wife has an allergy to dogs. I have a phobia of dogs. What about us, your eminence? If Michael’s wife starts anaphylaxing in the pews and I start screaming, then what? How many different objections do you have to hear to abort yet another unprecedented, unnecessary, and uncanonical social experiment?
Furthermore, we have accessibility laws in Canada for the disabled. This means that any disabled person must be able to ACCESS a public place – by ramp, elevator, seating, or any other type of assistance. As long as a disabled person can ACCESS a place, by ANY means, animals are not needed. The issue is ACCESS. The issue is not the ANIMAL!
I can’t believe we’re even having this discussion of having dogs allowed in an Orthodox church. It’s totally sacrilege! As a special educator, I empathize but I can emphatically say, as I agree with Bob, “leaving responsibility of succoring our fellow humans to the dogs, Christ wouldn’t have insited in our duty to “the least of them.” It’s our moral obligation to take care of eachother and our breathren. Volunteers and fellow parishioners on alert each Sunday, are a wonderful idea to assist the disabled and elderly, as needed; as it already happens in many of our parishes. People should call the church ahead and secure assistance for their visits. We are NOT protestants nor will we ever be no matter how hard Elpi and Bart try to make us believe, we are one of them. You want your dog in church, go join a protestant congregation.
During my mother’s funeral in Greece, the family dog came running into the church after the casket to sit underneath it. The priest made a gesture to his helpers and the dog was chased out immediately. The dog then sat by the door outside waiting for us to finish as he then followed us to the cemetery…. Point is, the priest wasn’t having it. And he was right!
“It is my prayer and hope that this beautiful initiative and policy change spreads like wildfire in the hearts of the faithful, church, and parish leadership, creating a new season of inclusiveness and acceptance for the faithful and for our visitors. There must be no physical barriers to entering God’s house. ”
Awww, bless her heart. Does she realize she is painting us who disagree (vehemently) as un-inclusive, non-accepting and “old season”??
Did Mrs Morfesis black out when THIS Archbishop, all the hierarchs, the parish leadership, etc ad nauseum LOCKED US ALL OUT of “God’s house” during covid19 ???
No physical barriers, mmhmm?!
As I profess during every celebration of the Divine Liturgy of St John the Chrysostom in The Creed,
I believe in the power of the Holy Spirit, but was NOT allowed in any way to enter my church. Even if I wished to enter it alone, say at dawn, risking no one’s health.
And will all the lies and nonsense ever be explained? To this date not addressed: who weaponized this virus, was it truly as deadly as claimed, why were the innocents MANDATED to take an admittedly experimental/unproven “vaccine”, including down to infants who the “experts” admitted were not at increased risk. But “in the over-abundance of caution”, our Church turned its back on Christ and instead obediently kissed the hand of Fauci, et al.
Casinos, liquor stores, supermarkets could continue functioning, but the Churches were locked closed. It made no sense from the start, even when we were being assaulted 14/7 with lies. The Church failed, in an abandonment of Faith, but with abundant caution!
It’s all just hanging over us like a big motzah ball, to date truly unaddressed, unexplained.
The PR firm the GOAA hired must still be formulating their crisis plan.
As far back as Homer, before written language, civilized Man realized that the way to DESECRATE a house of worship was to bring in animals. Animals were only ever brought into a holy temple to sacrifice them.
The Lord did create “innocent animals”, and He also chose to not give them the understanding of their Creator.
They do not belong in a church, which btw is exempted from this Federal Law. It is not just another place of “public accommodation”. An Orthodox church is intended to be a piece of Heaven on Earth. And if we are to consider ourselves WORTHY of claiming to be orthodox Christians, it is our responsibility to keep it such.
Firstly, I want to thank you for sharing my article from the Orthodox Observer within this forum reaching a greater audience. Secondly, thank you for your tempered approach and your legitimate questions and concerns. You are correct – I did focus on accessibility issues (including disability door access buttons) which I pray will become commonplace in our community centers. I did not delve deeply into all the facets of having a service animal, also referred to as a “Leader dog” or “Seeing eye dog” in our parishes. You have given me the opportunity to do so here.
It is not only the blind, but those with serious medical issues that require service animals – I am including the following excerpt from ‘American Service Animals” website:
“Service dogs are specially trained canines that are taught to perform specific tasks on behalf of their master. The tasks that a service dog can perform are incredibly varied depending on the specific needs they were trained to aid a person with. Service dogs are used for helping those who suffer from epilepsy, severe anxiety, and blindness among other things. Service dogs are generally used by people who have disabilities that prevent them from leading a normal life that most healthy individuals can enjoy.
Highly trained service dogs are capable of performing all kinds of tasks such as pulling a wheelchair, alerting someone that they are about to have a seizure, or guiding them down a busy sidewalk. The main purpose of a service dog is to provide their owner with security and comfort in their daily lives as they go about their day. As such, it is imperative that service dogs are able to remain by the side of their owner at all times.
Due to this, service animals are highly trained not just to accomplish their specific tasks that are tailored to the needs of the owner, but also to remain calm at all times. The socialization of a service dog is essential to ensure they can perform their duties even on busy roads or crowded restaurants. Service dogs must be comfortable and adaptable to all kinds of environments and situations so they can reliably perform the necessary tasks required of them.”
Please Note this line from the above: “As such, it is imperative that service dogs are able to remain by the side of their owner at all times.”
This is so much more than as you say an animal to “alert someone of obstacles.”
A service animal for those with disability or a life-threatening condition – are highly trained to assist and guide. The are not a GPS dog – this is about a highly personal relationship between the handler and their guide dog. If anything, they exhibit calm and security. And silence.
This is not about elevating an animal above a human. This is about again – the inherent dignity of a human being. Giving full access to the faithful to enter, participate, and be present at our services.
With respect, I do not think you fully understand the role, relationship and duty of a service animal. It is more than a “guide.” It is security. Stability. Safety. Imagine taking a cane from someone. Or a walker. Or wheelchair. You would not do so. Now imagine – taking a guide dog from someone who is with that dog 24/7. It is an extension of their being. An integral, inseparable part of their daily life.
This is not a role that can be fulfilled by a parish council member. Though I support the education and training of Parish Council and church leaders along with all the faithful to better understand how we can accommodate and support those with disabilities, those navigating illnesses seen and unseen. This is what I meant by “spread like a wildfire.” We can all benefit from emboldening our role as the “hands and feet of the Lord.”
I am using the “least of these” biblically. “Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me” (Matthew 25:40). It was not a comment on the history of His Eminence Archbishop Elpidophoros’ decisions in all matters.
I can see from your words that you care. I am advocating yes, again, for having mercy for those who suffer in ways seen and unseen. We have an opportunity at hand to do so and permission.
Acts of mercy are not a desecration. If our church as we say is truly a “hospital for the sick” then we should live by these words not just say them. Our Lord is the Master Physician of our souls and bodies. His name is healer. The High Priest. The name above all names. God created man and He created the creatures of the earth – to be our helpmate.
This is not sentimentality nor elevating animals above humans. This is about recognizing that not all of God’s children (my first identity above all others) has the same ease of life. For those who do not – let us allow them their God given dignity to be independent and move in this world without one more frustration, limitation, judgment, and indeed penalty over their life. When our Lord took shame on the cross so that we could be free from sin and bondage. God have mercy on us all.
Mr. Karpodinis,
I meant to address my above comment to your directly.
Might I add (general points):
To guard against a legalistic and religious spirit – which distorts “faith and tradition” which contaminates and pours not the love of Christ and His never-ending cup of mercy but legalism, pride, self-righteousness, self-superiority, and judgment – relying on formality and appearance. For we operate under grace as St. Paul teaches in Roman 6:14. “For sin will have dominion over you since you do not submit to the law, but are under grace.”
We are concerned with honoring and preserving the Early Church – the Church of the Apostles, our lineage, our ancestry, our brothers and sisters in Christ. Then if that is the case – let us be on Fire for God. To be bold spiritual warriors. To not only say that our church is a “hospital for the sick” during our sermons – but BE the LIVING HOSPITAL for Healing. Welcome all who suffer. Without exception. In any way they need to be assisted. This is true freedom in CHRIST.
God wants the heart. Only the heart has mercy. This is not an exercise of intellect. This is what it means to be a fool for Christ. There was no room at the Inn for our Blessed Theotokos, Ever Virgin Mary, and St. Joseph. Our Lord was birthed surrounded by the warm breath of the animals in a manger (or cave). Rejected by the world – honored by God.
Luke 14: Jesus said: “When you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.”
I have given Helleniscope permission to give you my contact information if you would like to further discuss.
Be well.