Greek Travel Pages

Location information

Listed 10 sub titles with search on: Religious history for wider area of: "GREECE Country EUROPE" .

Religious history (10)

In the footsteps of St. Paul the Apostle



HELLAS (Ancient country) GREECE

The First Missionary War

by Michael Routery, dedicated to all those who have died because of the cross

General Beliefs of the Ancient Greeks

  The Greeks had a number of rituals that they applied to various events happening in their daily lives. Some were minor, happening several times during the week. Others were more rare, and were used only when the situation called for it.
  For the most part, Greek religion was an everyday event. The Greeks did not have a specific day on which they performed their worship ceremonies, like the Christian Sunday. Instead, the Greeks were constantly aware of the presence of the gods. To the Greeks, the gods were present in everyday places like the market, on the streets and in the people's houses. The gods were not confined to their temples or to their heaven. They were free to roam wherever they chose. Because of this, the Greeks were always aware of the gods' presence and were comforted by them.
  In front of all houses stood a little shrine, a statue that was dedicated to a certain god. Usually these shrines were dedicated to either Apollo of the roads, or to Hermes, patron of all travelers and the bringer of luck. These houses also had a god to watch over the food and the family's possessions, and a god to watch over the yard. Every fire burning in every fire place was sacred, and the Greeks even had a goddess named Hestia managing and protecting the fires.
  The worship ceremonies at the gods' homes (like a temple) were relatively rare. Usually the gods could be found all around, ready to protect and heal their followers. However, when the time came that they did in fact worship at the temples, certain rules had to be followed.
  The temples were very holy, some more holy than others. Some temples could only be entered during certain times of the year, while others might only be entered by the priest and nobody else. When the priest did enter, it was on very rare occasions, and he only entered for special reasons. These special reasons might include cleaning the temple or delivering a gift to the god or goddess.
  There were also sacred areas, usually gardens, that could never be walked upon by humans. For example, the grove of Demeter and Kore at Megalopolis, and the ground sacred to Zeus on the top of Mt. Lykaion were both off-limits. Anyone who wandered into the sacred areas would lose his or her shadow and die within the year. Many times, the gods personally determined a spot to be holy. A spot which had been struck by lightning was fenced in, and never walked on again. If a person had been killed by the lightning, he was not removed, but buried in the spot where he died. Nothing could be removed from a sacred area, even trees from a sacred grove (a grove is a type of forest). If there was garbage or other types of waste lying on the ground, it was the property of the gods and must not be touched. The land was not cultivated, or farmed, and was therefore overcome with weeds and rocks.
  During the more special events of a person's life, like birth, death, and marriage, certain rituals were required. At the point of birth, certain herbs were laid beside a woman in labor to fight off evil. On the fifth day after the child was born, the child was carried around the fireplace, and through this ritual was accepted into the family (unless he or she was to be exposed).
  When someone died, the Greeks believed a number of evil forces surrounded the dead person. A purification of the dead person was necessary to stop the evil from spreading, with the ultimate goal of getting rid of the evil completely. If these purification rituals were not performed, the evil could be passed to anyone who came near the dead body. Outside of the house that contained the dead body was a bowl of water that the people visiting could use to wash themselves with. This cleansed them of the evil attached to the house. Everything associated with the house, like water, food and fire, was unclean and had to be fetched from outside sources.
  Being “clean” was very important to the Greeks. This meant being without evil. One must be clean before sacrificial rituals, prayer, or when entering a shrine. For example, women who had just given birth were rejected from a shrine for forty days, and those who had come into contact with them were restricted for only two days. Those Greeks who had had a death in the family were restricted for twenty to forty days, and could not visit the gods until they became worthy once again.


The Revelation to John

SPARTI (Ancient city) LACONIA

Spartan Religion

The Catholic Encyclopedia

FILIPPI (Ancient city) KAVALA


  A titular metropolitan see in Macedonia. As early as the sixth century B. C. we learn of a region called Datos, overrun by the inhabitants of Thasos, in which there was an outlying post called Crenides (the little springs), and a seaport, Neapolis or Cavala. About 460 B. C. Crenides and the country lying inland fell into the hands of the Thracians, who doubtless were its original inhabitants. Philip of Macedonia took possession of it, and gave it his name. In 168 B. C. the Romans captured the place.
  Although the Church of Philippi was of apostolic origin, it was never very important; it was a suffragan bishopric of Thessalonica. Towards the end of the ninth century it ranked as a metropolitan see and had six suffragan dioceses; in the fifteenth century it had only one, the See of Eleutheropolis. The Archdiocese of Cavala was reunited to the metropolis in December 1616. In 1619, after a violent dispute with the Metropolitan of Drama, Clement, the titular of Philippi, got permission to assume the title of Drama also, and this was retained by the Metropolitan of Philippi until after 1721, when it was suppressed and the metropolis of Drama alone continued.

S. Vailhe, ed.
Transcribed by: Douglas J. Potter
This extract is cited June 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.


Greek Rites

(1) Rite, Language, Religion
These are three things that must always be distinguished. A rite is a certain uniform arrangement of formulae and ceremonies used for the Holy Eucharist, the Canonical Hours, the administration of other sacraments and sacramentals. These offices, as far as we know, have never been performed in the same way throughout Christendom. There have always been different rites, equally legitimate, used in different places by Christians. Obviously each rite was originally composed in some language.
  But rite is not language; the various rites cannot be classified according to their languages. There are many different rites in the same language; on the other hand the same rite, remaining the same in every detail, is constantly translated. Except those of the Armenians, Nestorians, and Abyssinians, all Eastern liturgies were originally written in Greek. Even the exceptions are only modified derivations from Greek originals. If, then, we take the language in which a rite was originally composed as our test, we must describe all Eastern liturgies as Greek. Indeed, the two great Western parent rites (of Rome and Gaul) represent, as a matter of fact, modified developments from Greek originals too. So we should come to the conclusion that every rite in the Church, every historic liturgy in Christendom is a Greek Rite. If, on the other hand, we make our test present use in the Greek language, we must separate the Byzantine Liturgy said in Greek at Constantinople from what is word for word the same service said in Old Slavonic at St. Petersburg.
  It is clear then that language is no clue as to rite. At the head of all Eastern liturgies, foundations of two great classes, are the Liturgies of Alexandria and Antioch. They are not only different rites, their difference underlies the fundamental distinction by which we divide all others into two main groups; and both are Greek. And the same Byzantine Liturgy is used unchanged in about fourteen different languages.
  A second false criterion that must be eliminated is that of religion. It would be convenient for classification if members of each Church used the same rite different from that of any other Church. But this is by no means the case. The historic origin and legal position of the various rites is a much more complicated question. The same liturgies (but for a few modifications made by the Roman authorities in the interest of dogma) are shared by the various schismatical Churches. Indeed, Catholics and Schismatics often use the same books. The Orthodox Church, that has for many centuries aimed at an ideal of uniformity in the Byzantine Rite (in different languages), till the thirteenth century used those of Alexandria and Antioch too. Now she has restored the Antiochene Liturgy for certain rare occasions. Other schismatical bodies have, it is true, each its own rite, though this rite generally contains alternative liturgies. It will be seen then that these three points are three quite different questions that must not be confused. In the case of any Christian bishop or priest we may ask: what is his Church or sect, what rite does he use and in what language? And the answers may represent all kinds of combinations. A Catholic may use the Roman Rite in Old Slavonic, the Alexandrine Rite in Coptic, the Byzantine in Georgian. An Orthodox priest may use the Byzantine Rite in Arabic or Japanese.
(2) The Essential Note of a Rite
We have seen then that neither its language nor the sect of people who use it can be taken as essential to a rite. The real note that defines it is the place where it was composed. All rites had their origin in some one place or city that was an ecclesiastical centre for the country round. After the service had been put together and used here, by a natural process of imitation churches around began to copy the order observed in the great town. The greater the influence of the city where the rite arose, the more widely the rite spread. It was not a question of inherent advantages. No one thought of choosing the rite that seemed most edifying or beautiful or suitable. People simply copied their chief.
  The rites were formed at first in the patriarchal cities: Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople. Jerusalem had already given hers to Antioch. The bishops of each patriarchate naturally thought that they could not do better than celebrate the holy mysteries in the same way as their patriarch. We know in the West how, long before there were any laws on the subject, every one began to copy what was done at Rome. It seemed safest to follow Rome in the matter. So it was in the East with regard to their patriarchal sees. Local customs are gradually suppressed in favour of the patriarch's way of doing things. It was a sign of adherence to the Catholic centre - Alexandria, Constantinople, or whichever it might be - to agree entirely with it in rite. Lastly come laws determining this tendency.
  The Roman Rite is used throughout the Roman patriarchate, by the clergy subject to the pope as their patriarch, and only by them; the Alexandrine Rite belongs to Egypt - where the patriarch of Alexandria has jurisdiction; that of Antioch to Syria; that of Constantinople to the Byzantine territory. Such was the principle for many centuries everywhere. But a rite in spreading out from the patriarchal city where it was composed does not itself change. Since the invention of printing, especially, and the later tendency to stereotype every detail of the sacred functions, each rite, wherever used, is made to conform rigidly with its standard form as used in the central church.
  The real distinction of rites is not by language nor by the religion of those who may use them, but according to the places where they were composed. The correct and scientific way of describing any rite, therefore, is always by the name of a place. Thus we have the Roman and Gallican Rites in the West; in the East the Rites of Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, etc. This is the really essential note of any rite, that it keeps even when translated into other languages.
(3) What is a Greek Rite?
  An obvious corollary of what has been said is that we had much better never speak of a “Greek Rite” at all. Like the cognate expression “Greek Church” it is a confused and unscientific term, the use of which argues that the speaker has a mistaken conception of the subject. What is called a Greek Rite will always be the rite of some city - Alexandria or Constantinople, and so on. If one wishes to emphasize the fact that the Greek language is used for it, that statement may be added. At Athens and Constantinople they use the Byzantine Liturgy; it may be worth while to add that they use it in Greek, since at St. Petersburg and Sofia they follow exactly the same rite in Old Slavonic.
  The name Greek Rites, however, still too commonly used, applies to the three classical Eastern uses whose original forms in Greek are still extant. These are the parent rites of Alexandria and Antioch and the widely spread Byzantine Rite. The Alexandrine Liturgy, ascribed to St. Mark, is no longer said in Greek anywhere. It is the source of the Coptic and Abyssinian Rites. Except for the services of Egypt and her daughter-Church of Abyssinia, the Greek Liturgy of St. James stands at the head of all Eastern rites.
  People who speak of the Greek Rite generally mean that of Constantinople. The name is an unfortunate example of false analogy. We have all learnt in school of Greek and Roman history, Greek and Roman classics and architecture, and we know the Roman Rite. It is tempting to balance it with a Greek Rite, just as Homer balances Virgil. How different the real situation is this article shows. The Byzantine Rite, to which should always be given its own name, is the most widespread in Christendom after that of Rome. It was formed first in Cappadocia, then at Constantinople, by a gradual process of development from that of Antioch. The names of St. Basil (died 379) and St. John Chrysostom (died 407) are, not altogether wrongly, attached to the chief periods of this development. From Constantinople the rite then spread throughout by far the greater part of Eastern Christendom.
  As the power of the patriarchs of the imperial city grew, so did they gradually succeed in imposing their use on all bishops in communion with them. Now, except for the two insignificant exceptions noted above, the Byzantine Rite is used throughout the Orthodox Church. The Use of Constantinople is also followed by a great number of Catholic Uniats, Melchites in Syria and Egypt and others in the Balkans, the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, Italy, etc. These people represent the old Patriarchate of Constantinople in the Catholic Church; but that Church has never, like her Orthodox rival, set up a principle of uniformity in rite.

Adrian Fortescue, ed.
Transcribed by: Douglas J. Potter
This extract is cited June 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.

You are able to search for more information in greater and/or surrounding areas by choosing one of the titles below and clicking on "more".

Ferry Departures

Copyright 1999-2019 International Publications Ltd.