Author Topic: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage  (Read 2139 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,730
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #90 on: May 29, 2015, 06:52:28 AM »
The question I have is how those who are rigorists on the issue of divorce deal with Canon 9 of St. Basil. According to St. Basil, whose canons have always comprised a major portion of Eastern canon law, a man may divorce his wife and take another on the grounds of fornication. In principle, a wife ought also to be able to do this, although in this canon, he forbids it, stating that it is contrary to custom.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2015, 06:52:51 AM by Cavaradossi »
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,439
  • "I pledge allegiance to the flag..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #91 on: May 29, 2015, 01:42:08 PM »
Hi Mor Eprhem. Well, up until relatively recently, this was not an issue in the Roman Catholic Church and was considered settled by all orthodox and well-informed Catholics. But ok, if you and Wandile really prefer, we'll leave the West out of this.

Let's be clear...I don't mind bringing the West into this.  But Wandile pretty much demanded it.  I don't think it was very sincere, but there it is. 

Quote
Now, please show me one example of a manifestly false statement you think Cardinal Burke, Pell, Mueller or any conservative theologian has made that you say "any first year seminarian or well read layman would know are wrong"?

Quote
Second and third marriages, unlike the first marriage, are celebrated among the Orthodox with a special rite, referred to as “penitential.” Since in ancient times the rite of second marriages omitted the crowning of the spouses - which Orthodox theology sees as the essential moment of the wedding - second marriages are not a true sacrament, but to use the Latin terminology, a “sacramental,” which allows the new spouses to consider their union as fully accepted by the ecclesial community. The secondary wedding ceremony is also applied in the case of widowed spouses.

The non-sacramental nature of second marriages finds confirmation in the disappearance of Eucharistic communion from Byzantine marriage ceremonies, being replaced by a cup understood as a symbol of life together. This appears to be an attempt to “de-sacramentalize” the marriage, perhaps on account of the growing embarrassment that second and third marriages induced because of the exemption from the principle of the indissolubility of the bond, which is directly proportional to the sacrament of unity: the Eucharist.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350806?eng=y
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

New thread topic.  Rate the sexual attractiveness of members of OC.net on a scale of 1-10.

Mor Ephrem: 11/10

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 39,284
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #92 on: May 29, 2015, 11:48:44 PM »
Henry VIII impiously thought he could put away his wife and desire another, yet the Pope heroically withstood this insanity.
LOL.
He wasn't so heroic when he gave Henry's aunt what Henry called "that shameless sentence from Rome."
Henry was off in England, but Catherine's nephew occupied Rome. Heroism had nothing to do with it.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 39,284
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #93 on: May 29, 2015, 11:59:30 PM »
a novelty, like many others, imposed by the Byzantine emperor on much of the East.

bs.
Point blank history actually

Quote
.Leo VI caused a major scandal with his numerous marriages which failed to produce a legitimate heir to the throne. His first wife Theophano, whom Basil had forced him to marry on account of her family connections to the Martinakioi, and whom Leo hated, died in 897, and Leo married Zoe Zaoutzaina, the daughter of his adviser Stylianos Zaoutzes, though she died as well in 899. Upon this marriage Leo created the title of basileopatōr ("father of the emperor") for his father-in-law.

After Zoe's death a third marriage was technically illegal, but he married again, only to have his third wife Eudokia Baïana die in 901, Instead of marrying a fourth time, which would have been an even greater sin than a third marriage (according to the Patriarch Nicholas Mystikos) Leo took as mistress Zoe Karbonopsina. He married her only after she had given birth to a son in 905,[36] but incurred the opposition of the patriarch. Replacing Nicholas Mystikos with Euthymios, Leo got his marriage recognized by the church (albeit with a long penance attached, and with an assurance that Leo would outlaw all future fourth marriages)...On March 1, 901, Nicholas was appointed patriarch. However, he fell out with Leo VI over the latter's fourth marriage to his mistress Zoe Karbonopsina. Although he reluctantly baptized the fruit of this relationship, the future Constantine VII, Nicholas forbade the emperor from entering the church and may have become involved in the revolt of Andronikos Doukas. He was deposed as patriarch on February 1, 907 and replaced by Euthymios...Sergius; the pope sent papal legates to Constantinople, who confirmed the pope’s ruling in favour of the emperor, on the grounds that fourth marriages had not been condemned by the Church as a whole.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_VI_the_Wise#Leo.27s_marriages
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Mystikos
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Sergius_III

you fail history again.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Vanhyo

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 83
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Bulgaria
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #94 on: May 30, 2015, 11:42:05 AM »
To my understanding to orthodox church is very strict when it comes to divorce and remarriage.

Someone once shared with me that according to The Orthodox Church (forgive me if i am not quoting with the correct words)

First marriage is blessed
Second marriage is shameful
Third marriage is lawlessness

Clergy who allow third marriage are doing so on their own consciences/putting their head on the table or something like that
« Last Edit: May 30, 2015, 11:55:17 AM by Vanhyo »

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,053
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #95 on: May 30, 2015, 03:05:35 PM »
To my understanding to orthodox church is very strict when it comes to divorce and remarriage.

Someone once shared with me that according to The Orthodox Church (forgive me if i am not quoting with the correct words)

First marriage is blessed
Second marriage is shameful
Third marriage is lawlessness

Clergy who allow third marriage are doing so on their own consciences/putting their head on the table or something like that
Where did you get this piece of claptrap? ???
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,292
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #96 on: May 30, 2015, 06:29:03 PM »
To my understanding to orthodox church is very strict when it comes to divorce and remarriage.

Someone once shared with me that according to The Orthodox Church (forgive me if i am not quoting with the correct words)

First marriage is blessed
Second marriage is shameful
Third marriage is lawlessness

Clergy who allow third marriage are doing so on their own consciences/putting their head on the table or something like that
Where did you get this piece of claptrap? ???
That would be a paraphrase of Pope St Gregory the Great: “The first marriage is legal, the second is a concession, the third is a transgression of law, and one beyond this, the life of a swine, which does not have many examples of its evil.” (Homily 37.8)ould be Pope St Gregory the Great
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline wgw

  • Amateur Liturgical Enthusiast
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,230
  • The above Syriac icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #97 on: May 30, 2015, 06:31:21 PM »
Which indicates that he permitted such marriages while frowning upon them deeply.  I am inclined to agree, but we do perform second and third marriaepges with a penitential character.

However these days so many people have gone over to the law of swine.
Antisemitism, racism and prejudicial nationalism should have no place in Orthodoxy.  For to paraphrase  St. Paul, there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither male nor female, slave or freeman, in the Christian Church.

Offline Apotheoun

  • "Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,431
  • St. John Maximovitch
    • The Taboric Light
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #98 on: May 30, 2015, 11:58:18 PM »
To my understanding to orthodox church is very strict when it comes to divorce and remarriage.

Someone once shared with me that according to The Orthodox Church (forgive me if i am not quoting with the correct words)

First marriage is blessed
Second marriage is shameful
Third marriage is lawlessness

Clergy who allow third marriage are doing so on their own consciences/putting their head on the table or something like that
Where did you get this piece of claptrap? ???
That would be a paraphrase of Pope St Gregory the Great: “The first marriage is legal, the second is a concession, the third is a transgression of law, and one beyond this, the life of a swine, which does not have many examples of its evil.” (Homily 37.8)ould be Pope St Gregory the Great
It is St. Gregory the Theologian, and not Pope St. Gregory, who wrote that text. Here is the quotation taken from his Homily 37:8 from the NPNF series: "The first is law, the second is indulgence, the third is transgression, and anything beyond this is swinish, such as has not even many examples of its wickedness."
"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite

Offline wgw

  • Amateur Liturgical Enthusiast
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,230
  • The above Syriac icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #99 on: May 31, 2015, 01:20:56 AM »
Well perhaps an unspoken Catholic dictum is when in doubt regarding which Gregory wrote something, ascribe it to St. Gregory the Great.

However, St.Gregory Diologos was truly a good Patriarch of Rome, the most worthy man to hold that office since St. Clement.  Most of the pre schism Roman Patriarchs with the exception of the odd villain like Victor, Honorius or in my biased Oriental opinion, Leo I, who dared to appropriate the Pagan title Pontifex Maximus, and in so doing IMO demeaned the Roman Patriarchate, were theologically conservative, thoroughly reliable figures, but only two spring to mind as exceptional leaders, Ss. Clement and Gregory Diologos.  Most of the Fathers we venerate were either lay monastics or theologians, or the Bishops of relatively minor sees, with the Alexandrian Popes being somewhat disproportionately represented (Ss. Mark, Peter the Martyr, Alexander. Athanasius, Cyril, and for the OO, Dioscorus).  Cappadocia was even more disproportionately represented.  However St. Gregory Diologos was definitely a breakthrough leader; although I would disagree with him about Chalcedon and the role of his fourth century predecessor, every action he is recorded as doing I support.  I love the probably apocryphal story of his encounter with Angle slaves that made him resolve to restore communication with the British church and evangelize the conquerors of the former British province.  But there is much that he certainly did do that cannot be ascribed to mere hagiography that I think was superb.
Antisemitism, racism and prejudicial nationalism should have no place in Orthodoxy.  For to paraphrase  St. Paul, there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither male nor female, slave or freeman, in the Christian Church.

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,431
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #100 on: June 08, 2015, 11:31:08 PM »
Well perhaps an unspoken Catholic dictum is when in doubt regarding which Gregory wrote something, ascribe it to St. Gregory the Great.

However, St.Gregory Diologos was truly a good Patriarch of Rome, the most worthy man to hold that office since St. Clement.  Most of the pre schism Roman Patriarchs with the exception of the odd villain like Victor, Honorius or in my biased Oriental opinion, Leo I, who dared to appropriate the Pagan title Pontifex Maximus, and in so doing IMO demeaned the Roman Patriarchate, were theologically conservative, thoroughly reliable figures, but only two spring to mind as exceptional leaders, Ss. Clement and Gregory Diologos.  Most of the Fathers we venerate were either lay monastics or theologians, or the Bishops of relatively minor sees, with the Alexandrian Popes being somewhat disproportionately represented (Ss. Mark, Peter the Martyr, Alexander. Athanasius, Cyril, and for the OO, Dioscorus).  Cappadocia was even more disproportionately represented.  However St. Gregory Diologos was definitely a breakthrough leader; although I would disagree with him about Chalcedon and the role of his fourth century predecessor, every action he is recorded as doing I support.  I love the probably apocryphal story of his encounter with Angle slaves that made him resolve to restore communication with the British church and evangelize the conquerors of the former British province.  But there is much that he certainly did do that cannot be ascribed to mere hagiography that I think was superb.

Very happily married to my second wife. My first wife died from cancer, Memory eternal. My present wife is also a convert from RC to Orthodoxy.  She is divorced from a very abusive relationship from her first husband.  Married in the church and very happy.

Offline truthseeker32

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 425
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOA-Denver
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #101 on: June 09, 2015, 12:53:20 PM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,730
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #102 on: June 10, 2015, 08:54:16 AM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Charles Martel

  • Traditional Roman Catholic
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,330
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #103 on: June 14, 2015, 03:59:25 PM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.
Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.

Offline kelly

  • UNSUBSCRIBED
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,852
  • St. Olga Nikolaevna
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Alpaca ministries
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #104 on: June 14, 2015, 04:00:31 PM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.

No, they just say there was never a marriage to begin with.
"But we must live in the world, having peace in our soul. We must live amidst strangers; we must suffer, struggle, and firmly believe. We must seek our consolation in prayer and not doubt the love and compassion of God. He is above everyone and everything."

This user posts here but probably shouldn't.

Online Cyrillic

  • The Laughing Cavalier
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,002
  • Φέρ' ὕδωρ φέρ' οἶνον, ὦ παῖ!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #105 on: June 14, 2015, 04:03:18 PM »
The RCC does not grant mulligans.

They do grant an awful lot of annulments.
At nunc desertis cessant sacraria lucis:
aurum omnes victa iam pietate colunt.
-Propertius, Elegies III.XIII:47-48

νίκας τοῖς Βασιλεῦσι κατὰ βαρβάρων δωρούμενος

Offline kelly

  • UNSUBSCRIBED
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,852
  • St. Olga Nikolaevna
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Alpaca ministries
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #106 on: June 14, 2015, 04:09:32 PM »
The RCC does not grant mulligans.

They do grant an awful lot of annulments.

I will never understand that. How do they keep marrying people but so many turn out to not have been really married? It doesn't give you a lot of confidence in their ability to dispense sacraments.
"But we must live in the world, having peace in our soul. We must live amidst strangers; we must suffer, struggle, and firmly believe. We must seek our consolation in prayer and not doubt the love and compassion of God. He is above everyone and everything."

This user posts here but probably shouldn't.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,629
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #107 on: June 14, 2015, 08:57:33 PM »
The RCC does not grant mulligans.

They do grant an awful lot of annulments.

I will never understand that. How do they keep marrying people but so many turn out to not have been really married? It doesn't give you a lot of confidence in their ability to dispense sacraments.
I wonder if these accidents happen with their other sacraments.

"Oops, we just discovered that all of Father John's baptisms between January 1 and June 1 were actually non-effectual. Will all those who were sprinkled during that time period please come in sometime within the next week so you get a legit baptism this time!"
Guys! They're not intercoursing. It's just an unfortunate angle.

Offline kelly

  • UNSUBSCRIBED
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,852
  • St. Olga Nikolaevna
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Alpaca ministries
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #108 on: June 14, 2015, 09:00:49 PM »
The RCC does not grant mulligans.

They do grant an awful lot of annulments.

I will never understand that. How do they keep marrying people but so many turn out to not have been really married? It doesn't give you a lot of confidence in their ability to dispense sacraments.
I wonder if these accidents happen with their other sacraments.

"Oops, we just discovered that all of Father John's baptisms between January 1 and June 1 were actually non-effectual. Will all those who were sprinkled during that time period please come in sometime within the next week so you get a legit baptism this time!"

What a great way to give everyone scruples.
"But we must live in the world, having peace in our soul. We must live amidst strangers; we must suffer, struggle, and firmly believe. We must seek our consolation in prayer and not doubt the love and compassion of God. He is above everyone and everything."

This user posts here but probably shouldn't.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,584
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #109 on: June 14, 2015, 11:22:06 PM »
The RCC does not grant mulligans.

They do grant an awful lot of annulments.

I will never understand that. How do they keep marrying people but so many turn out to not have been really married? It doesn't give you a lot of confidence in their ability to dispense sacraments.
I wonder if these accidents happen with their other sacraments.

"Oops, we just discovered that all of Father John's baptisms between January 1 and June 1 were actually non-effectual. Will all those who were sprinkled during that time period please come in sometime within the next week so you get a legit baptism this time!"

That has indeed happened in the RCC. Here's one instance of it, where hundreds of baptisms had to be "legitimized":

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/australian_priests_stop_new_age_baptism_retake_trinitarian_formula/
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,431
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #110 on: Yesterday at 11:27:06 AM »
The RCC does not grant mulligans.

They do grant an awful lot of annulments.

I will never understand that. How do they keep marrying people but so many turn out to not have been really married? It doesn't give you a lot of confidence in their ability to dispense sacraments.

I get a kick out of the annulment thingy... I've personally have been close to three couples who were married , had kids, and divorced and got annulments.

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,431
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #111 on: Yesterday at 11:28:25 AM »
The RCC does not grant mulligans.

They do grant an awful lot of annulments.

I will never understand that. How do they keep marrying people but so many turn out to not have been really married? It doesn't give you a lot of confidence in their ability to dispense sacraments.
I wonder if these accidents happen with their other sacraments.

"Oops, we just discovered that all of Father John's baptisms between January 1 and June 1 were actually non-effectual. Will all those who were sprinkled during that time period please come in sometime within the next week so you get a legit baptism this time!"

 8)

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,431
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #112 on: Yesterday at 11:29:27 AM »
The RCC does not grant mulligans.

They do grant an awful lot of annulments.

I will never understand that. How do they keep marrying people but so many turn out to not have been really married? It doesn't give you a lot of confidence in their ability to dispense sacraments.

Exactly.....

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,431
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #113 on: Yesterday at 11:32:01 AM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.

It becomes very obvious to us Orthodox that if you can grant annulments that 2nd or 3rd marriages can become a reality....  Declaring that it wasn't a sacramental marriage has become very easy to come by lately. 
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 11:32:50 AM by JoeS2 »

Offline Misplaced Book

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 244
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Constantinople
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #114 on: Today at 12:50:26 AM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.

It becomes very obvious to us Orthodox that if you can grant annulments that 2nd or 3rd marriages can become a reality....  Declaring that it wasn't a sacramental marriage has become very easy to come by lately.

An Annulment is merely the name for the legalistic contortions and gymnastics required to have a divorce but to not actually call it one.

"A rose by any other name....."
“What I see around me would drive me insane if I did not know that no matter what happens, God will have the last word.”- St. Paisios the Athonite

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,593
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #115 on: Today at 05:18:39 AM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.

It becomes very obvious to us Orthodox that if you can grant annulments that 2nd or 3rd marriages can become a reality....  Declaring that it wasn't a sacramental marriage has become very easy to come by lately.

An Annulment is merely the name for the legalistic contortions and gymnastics required to have a divorce but to not actually call it one.

"A rose by any other name....."

It's actually patristic and a perfect expression of sacramental theology. It can and had been abused especially in the Americas and Europe
"We shall steer safely through every storm, so long as our heart is right, our intention fervent, our courage steadfast, and our trust fixed on God"
-St. Francis De Sales

Venerable Benedict Daswa and Blessed Isidore Bakanja, Martyrs of Africa, pray for the Church today

Offline Misplaced Book

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 244
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Constantinople
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #116 on: Today at 06:10:28 AM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.

It becomes very obvious to us Orthodox that if you can grant annulments that 2nd or 3rd marriages can become a reality....  Declaring that it wasn't a sacramental marriage has become very easy to come by lately.

An Annulment is merely the name for the legalistic contortions and gymnastics required to have a divorce but to not actually call it one.

"A rose by any other name....."

It's actually patristic and a perfect expression of sacramental theology. It can and had been abused especially in the Americas and Europe

And yet your arguments have been rebutted repeatedly here and on CAF (I used to post there myself before my banning....I lurk from time to time.   The ignorance over there is still a problem, despite Cavaradossi's efforts,  God bless him)

Who are you trying to convince?  Us?  Or yourself?
« Last Edit: Today at 06:11:07 AM by Misplaced Book »
“What I see around me would drive me insane if I did not know that no matter what happens, God will have the last word.”- St. Paisios the Athonite

Offline TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,629
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #117 on: Today at 11:17:31 AM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.

It becomes very obvious to us Orthodox that if you can grant annulments that 2nd or 3rd marriages can become a reality....  Declaring that it wasn't a sacramental marriage has become very easy to come by lately.

An Annulment is merely the name for the legalistic contortions and gymnastics required to have a divorce but to not actually call it one.

"A rose by any other name....."

It's actually patristic and a perfect expression of sacramental theology. It can and had been abused especially in the Americas and Europe
Considering that in Orthodoxy, a marriage is not a contract, an anullment makes literally no sense whatsoever.

Also, since it is a "perfect expression of sacramental theology", what other sacraments are subject to anullment? Do you also anul baptisms?  What about confession? How about annointing the sick?
Guys! They're not intercoursing. It's just an unfortunate angle.

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,730
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #118 on: Today at 04:17:15 PM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.

It becomes very obvious to us Orthodox that if you can grant annulments that 2nd or 3rd marriages can become a reality....  Declaring that it wasn't a sacramental marriage has become very easy to come by lately.

An Annulment is merely the name for the legalistic contortions and gymnastics required to have a divorce but to not actually call it one.

"A rose by any other name....."

It's actually patristic and a perfect expression of sacramental theology. It can and had been abused especially in the Americas and Europe
Considering that in Orthodoxy, a marriage is not a contract, an anullment makes literally no sense whatsoever.

Also, since it is a "perfect expression of sacramental theology", what other sacraments are subject to anullment? Do you also anul baptisms?  What about confession? How about annointing the sick?

I don't think that's entirely true. In cases involving deceit, bigamy, consanguinity and the like, I'm pretty sure that such marriages can be annulled, as the Church simply can recognize that no marriage could have happened. Suppose, for example, to take an extreme case, that a man and a woman marry, only for it later to be revealed that the woman is a transsexual who was originally a man. Since a man cannot marry a man, an annulment and not a divorce would be the proper procedure. A divorce in such a case would make no sense, because objectively the couple could not have been married in the first place.

The difference is that the present system of Roman Catholic annulment has gone completely bonkers. Now, people essentially can claim a defect of intent on the part of those who confer the sacrament (the married couple), and declare after the fact that their marital problems essentially prove the defect in intent (along with maybe the maid of honor/best man giving some hammy story to demonstrate how the bride/groom did not really understand the sacrament of marriage at the time of marriage). Orthodoxy obviously has no equivalent to this.
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,629
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #119 on: Today at 04:37:53 PM »
I don't think that's entirely true. In cases involving deceit, bigamy, consanguinity and the like, I'm pretty sure that such marriages can be annulled, as the Church simply can recognize that no marriage could have happened. Suppose, for example, to take an extreme case, that a man and a woman marry, only for it later to be revealed that the woman is a transsexual who was originally a man. Since a man cannot marry a man, an annulment and not a divorce would be the proper procedure. A divorce in such a case would make no sense, because objectively the couple could not have been married in the first place.

The difference is that the present system of Roman Catholic annulment has gone completely bonkers. Now, people essentially can claim a defect of intent on the part of those who confer the sacrament (the married couple), and declare after the fact that their marital problems essentially prove the defect in intent (along with maybe the maid of honor/best man giving some hammy story to demonstrate how the bride/groom did not really understand the sacrament of marriage at the time of marriage). Orthodoxy obviously has no equivalent to this.
You could get an annulment, but it would be from the government, not from the Church. I have never heard of the Orthodox Church granting an annulment. If you sever a marriage, it requires repentance. It doesn't matter what term you use to denote the severing or what the reason is for it.
Guys! They're not intercoursing. It's just an unfortunate angle.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,439
  • "I pledge allegiance to the flag..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #120 on: Today at 05:22:58 PM »
I don't think that's entirely true. In cases involving deceit, bigamy, consanguinity and the like, I'm pretty sure that such marriages can be annulled, as the Church simply can recognize that no marriage could have happened. Suppose, for example, to take an extreme case, that a man and a woman marry, only for it later to be revealed that the woman is a transsexual who was originally a man. Since a man cannot marry a man, an annulment and not a divorce would be the proper procedure. A divorce in such a case would make no sense, because objectively the couple could not have been married in the first place.

The difference is that the present system of Roman Catholic annulment has gone completely bonkers. Now, people essentially can claim a defect of intent on the part of those who confer the sacrament (the married couple), and declare after the fact that their marital problems essentially prove the defect in intent (along with maybe the maid of honor/best man giving some hammy story to demonstrate how the bride/groom did not really understand the sacrament of marriage at the time of marriage). Orthodoxy obviously has no equivalent to this.
You could get an annulment, but it would be from the government, not from the Church. I have never heard of the Orthodox Church granting an annulment. If you sever a marriage, it requires repentance. It doesn't matter what term you use to denote the severing or what the reason is for it.

I think we don't usually speak of "annulments" in the Church because in the majority of cases we are dealing with marriages that began legitimately and failed.  But I think Cavaradossi is right in saying that, in particular circumstances, the Church could nullify a marriage rather than granting a divorce. 
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

New thread topic.  Rate the sexual attractiveness of members of OC.net on a scale of 1-10.

Mor Ephrem: 11/10

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,593
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #121 on: Today at 06:09:26 PM »
I don't think that's entirely true. In cases involving deceit, bigamy, consanguinity and the like, I'm pretty sure that such marriages can be annulled, as the Church simply can recognize that no marriage could have happened. Suppose, for example, to take an extreme case, that a man and a woman marry, only for it later to be revealed that the woman is a transsexual who was originally a man. Since a man cannot marry a man, an annulment and not a divorce would be the proper procedure. A divorce in such a case would make no sense, because objectively the couple could not have been married in the first place.

The difference is that the present system of Roman Catholic annulment has gone completely bonkers. Now, people essentially can claim a defect of intent on the part of those who confer the sacrament (the married couple), and declare after the fact that their marital problems essentially prove the defect in intent (along with maybe the maid of honor/best man giving some hammy story to demonstrate how the bride/groom did not really understand the sacrament of marriage at the time of marriage). Orthodoxy obviously has no equivalent to this.
You could get an annulment, but it would be from the government, not from the Church. I have never heard of the Orthodox Church granting an annulment. If you sever a marriage, it requires repentance. It doesn't matter what term you use to denote the severing or what the reason is for it.

I think we don't usually speak of "annulments" in the Church because in the majority of cases we are dealing with marriages that began legitimately and failed.  But I think Cavaradossi is right in saying that, in particular circumstances, the Church could nullify a marriage rather than granting a divorce.

I think we can all agree the church does not nullify marriages rather it makes a statement of fact/ gives a decree of nullity...
"We shall steer safely through every storm, so long as our heart is right, our intention fervent, our courage steadfast, and our trust fixed on God"
-St. Francis De Sales

Venerable Benedict Daswa and Blessed Isidore Bakanja, Martyrs of Africa, pray for the Church today

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,593
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #122 on: Today at 06:19:35 PM »
Step 1: Post an attack against Eastern Orthodoxy with no intention of actually having a productive dialogue

Step 2: Refuse to acknowledge any good rebuttals to your attack, claiming they are outside the scope of the conversation

Outcome?: Guaranteed victory!!

It's a rather pathetic form of argumentation, I must admit. I could also delude myself into thinking I'm winning an argument by trying to control what can and cannot be spoken. The challenge of course, would be in convincing others of the same when it is so plain what is happening.
There is no argument.

What God had joined, may no MAN put asunder. end of story.

There is no 2nd or 3rd try.


The RCC does not grant mulligans.

It becomes very obvious to us Orthodox that if you can grant annulments that 2nd or 3rd marriages can become a reality....  Declaring that it wasn't a sacramental marriage has become very easy to come by lately.

An Annulment is merely the name for the legalistic contortions and gymnastics required to have a divorce but to not actually call it one.

"A rose by any other name....."

It's actually patristic and a perfect expression of sacramental theology. It can and had been abused especially in the Americas and Europe

And yet your arguments have been rebutted repeatedly here and on CAF
Really a matter of opinion depending on which side you are. Secondly it is a matter of fact that annulments are patristic and correct theology. To deny this is to misunderstand the sacrament of marriage. Most of the time detractors believe in polemical ideas of what Catholics believe and Eastern Orthodox is no exception (easily seen here)

Quote
(I used to post there myself before my banning....I lurk from time to time.   The ignorance over there is still a problem, despite Cavaradossi's efforts,  God bless him)
Obviously, Caf is huge and most people aren't wanabee theologians and church historians like many of us here although even OC.net is prevalent with ignirance disguised as knowledge but really is polemics. That's on both sides. Secondly Cavaradossi enlightens on the EO view. In that sense he does away with a lot of ignorance but as far as refuting catholic arguments goes, CAF history shows he barely if ever refutes catholic arguments especially when coming up against posters like Gabriel of 12, Vico, Mardukum and Randy Carson (Although he is more equipped to dealing with protestants) who easily do away with EO objections. I guess this again is a matter of opinion. Just like how I and many others (who have read the debates at Florence)  believe Mark of Ephesus got ripped apart in the filioque debate with John of Montenero but EO will see it the opposite way.

Quote
Who are you trying to convince?  Us?  Or yourself?
Just trying to get rid of the ignorance here  ;)
« Last Edit: Today at 06:23:37 PM by Wandile »
"We shall steer safely through every storm, so long as our heart is right, our intention fervent, our courage steadfast, and our trust fixed on God"
-St. Francis De Sales

Venerable Benedict Daswa and Blessed Isidore Bakanja, Martyrs of Africa, pray for the Church today

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,439
  • "I pledge allegiance to the flag..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #123 on: Today at 06:35:54 PM »
I don't think that's entirely true. In cases involving deceit, bigamy, consanguinity and the like, I'm pretty sure that such marriages can be annulled, as the Church simply can recognize that no marriage could have happened. Suppose, for example, to take an extreme case, that a man and a woman marry, only for it later to be revealed that the woman is a transsexual who was originally a man. Since a man cannot marry a man, an annulment and not a divorce would be the proper procedure. A divorce in such a case would make no sense, because objectively the couple could not have been married in the first place.

The difference is that the present system of Roman Catholic annulment has gone completely bonkers. Now, people essentially can claim a defect of intent on the part of those who confer the sacrament (the married couple), and declare after the fact that their marital problems essentially prove the defect in intent (along with maybe the maid of honor/best man giving some hammy story to demonstrate how the bride/groom did not really understand the sacrament of marriage at the time of marriage). Orthodoxy obviously has no equivalent to this.
You could get an annulment, but it would be from the government, not from the Church. I have never heard of the Orthodox Church granting an annulment. If you sever a marriage, it requires repentance. It doesn't matter what term you use to denote the severing or what the reason is for it.

I think we don't usually speak of "annulments" in the Church because in the majority of cases we are dealing with marriages that began legitimately and failed.  But I think Cavaradossi is right in saying that, in particular circumstances, the Church could nullify a marriage rather than granting a divorce.

I think we can all agree the church does not nullify marriages rather it makes a statement of fact/ gives a decree of nullity...

Whatever helps you sleep at night, friend.  I know what I meant by the word "nullify" as opposed to the other word I used (i.e., "divorce"). 
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

New thread topic.  Rate the sexual attractiveness of members of OC.net on a scale of 1-10.

Mor Ephrem: 11/10

Offline TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,629
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #124 on: Today at 07:12:02 PM »
I don't think that's entirely true. In cases involving deceit, bigamy, consanguinity and the like, I'm pretty sure that such marriages can be annulled, as the Church simply can recognize that no marriage could have happened. Suppose, for example, to take an extreme case, that a man and a woman marry, only for it later to be revealed that the woman is a transsexual who was originally a man. Since a man cannot marry a man, an annulment and not a divorce would be the proper procedure. A divorce in such a case would make no sense, because objectively the couple could not have been married in the first place.

The difference is that the present system of Roman Catholic annulment has gone completely bonkers. Now, people essentially can claim a defect of intent on the part of those who confer the sacrament (the married couple), and declare after the fact that their marital problems essentially prove the defect in intent (along with maybe the maid of honor/best man giving some hammy story to demonstrate how the bride/groom did not really understand the sacrament of marriage at the time of marriage). Orthodoxy obviously has no equivalent to this.
You could get an annulment, but it would be from the government, not from the Church. I have never heard of the Orthodox Church granting an annulment. If you sever a marriage, it requires repentance. It doesn't matter what term you use to denote the severing or what the reason is for it.

I think we don't usually speak of "annulments" in the Church because in the majority of cases we are dealing with marriages that began legitimately and failed.  But I think Cavaradossi is right in saying that, in particular circumstances, the Church could nullify a marriage rather than granting a divorce.
Obviously, I'm no expert on the matter, but in reading this article, it makes it sound as if even issues that would be grounds for nullification under RC rules, are still considered as an ecclesiastical divorce from an Orthodox perspective. I pretty much get hives at the thought of reading and trying to figure out canon law, so I didn't dare go further than this article.  :P

http://www.saintdemetrios.com/our-faith/divorce
Quote
In accordance with Church Canon Law, an Ecclesiastical Divorce is granted only under certain circumstances In accordance with the 21 November 1973 encyclical of His Eminence, Archbishop Iakovos, a divorce is given and considered valid, when a marriage is entered into by force, blackmail or false reasons.

    one or both parties is guilty of adultery.
    one party is proven to be mad, insane or suffers from a social disease which was not disclosed to the spouse prior to the marriage.
    one party has conspired against the life of the spouse.
    one party is imprisoned for more than seven years.
    one party abandons the other for more than three years without approval.
    one partner should be absent from home without the other's approval, except in in stances when the latter is assured that such absence is due to psycho-neurotic illness.
    one partner forces the other to engage in illicit affairs with others.
    one partner does not fulfill the responsibilities of marriage, or when it is medically proven that one party is physically impotent or as the result of a social venereal disease.
    one partner is an addict, thereby creating undue economic hardship.
« Last Edit: Today at 07:12:36 PM by TheTrisagion »
Guys! They're not intercoursing. It's just an unfortunate angle.

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,730
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #125 on: Today at 07:23:38 PM »
I guess this again is a matter of opinion. Just like how I and many others (who have read the debates at Florence)  believe Mark of Ephesus got ripped apart in the filioque debate with John of Montenero but EO will see it the opposite way.

You of course neglect to mention that St. Mark of Ephesus was essentially censored at Florence (much like how another discussion forum censors people very heavily, especially the sedevacantists who hurt its agenda the most), since the distinction between essence and energy was forbidden to be brought up (so much for an honest union at that latrocinium held in Florence). Even still, he put up a great defense for a man with his hands tied behind his back. They didn't even allow him to mention St. Maximus' letter to Marinus (knowing that it would disprove their position). What sort of an honest debating procedure is that? Read his other theological output. He was far ahead of his contemporaries, like that heretic Bessarion.
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,439
  • "I pledge allegiance to the flag..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Tradition vs EO 2nd and 3rd marriage
« Reply #126 on: Today at 07:25:58 PM »
Obviously, I'm no expert on the matter, but in reading this article, it makes it sound as if even issues that would be grounds for nullification under RC rules, are still considered as an ecclesiastical divorce from an Orthodox perspective. I pretty much get hives at the thought of reading and trying to figure out canon law, so I didn't dare go further than this article.  :P

http://www.saintdemetrios.com/our-faith/divorce
Quote
In accordance with Church Canon Law, an Ecclesiastical Divorce is granted only under certain circumstances In accordance with the 21 November 1973 encyclical of His Eminence, Archbishop Iakovos, a divorce is given and considered valid, when a marriage is entered into by force, blackmail or false reasons.

    one or both parties is guilty of adultery.
    one party is proven to be mad, insane or suffers from a social disease which was not disclosed to the spouse prior to the marriage.
    one party has conspired against the life of the spouse.
    one party is imprisoned for more than seven years.
    one party abandons the other for more than three years without approval.
    one partner should be absent from home without the other's approval, except in in stances when the latter is assured that such absence is due to psycho-neurotic illness.
    one partner forces the other to engage in illicit affairs with others.
    one partner does not fulfill the responsibilities of marriage, or when it is medically proven that one party is physically impotent or as the result of a social venereal disease.
    one partner is an addict, thereby creating undue economic hardship.


But we need not limit ourselves to "issues that would be grounds for nullification under RC rules" in order to say whether "annulment" vs "divorce" would be the way to go.  Cavaradossi mentioned the case of a "marriage" between a man and a transsexual who was originally a man.  That's a bit more than "mad, insane, or suffers from a social disease".  I would suggest the case of two people married by a priest who is not actually a priest.  Perhaps he [was once a priest but was legitimately defrocked and] has gone into business for himself, or the church involved is actually in schism, etc., and this was not known to the couple, who made their decisions in good faith.  In such cases, "marriage" could not have happened. 

You could go through the procedures for an ecclesiastical divorce anyway, but you're not really divorcing if the marriage you are abandoning could not possibly have ever occurred.  The legitimate authority may grant a "divorce", but there may be legitimate reasons for regarding it as an annulment instead.  It's not common, but it's not impossible.     
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

New thread topic.  Rate the sexual attractiveness of members of OC.net on a scale of 1-10.

Mor Ephrem: 11/10