OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 28, 2014, 06:28:54 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Obstacle #1: What God has joined together...  (Read 16506 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The Iambic Pen
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic - Church of Old Rome
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite
Posts: 123



« on: November 29, 2007, 05:19:43 AM »

In my study of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and my attempt to find the Church, I have discovered two moral issues that separate the two bodies.  One is contraception, which I will likely address later on, but for now I want to briefly address the idea of remarriage after divorce.  I presume that the Orthodox believe that when a man and a woman get married, they are married in the eyes of God, not just in the eyes of the state.  So, when a couple divorces, and (for example) the innocent party later approaches the Church requesting remarriage, does the Church believe that the civil divorce the individual obtained actually means his or her previous marriage has ended?  Or, do they believe that, for example, the offending party's adultery ended the marriage before the official divorce?  If God joins a couple together in a second marriage, by what authority was the first marriage declared over?

I'm not interested in debating the rightness of the Catholic or Orthodox view of all of this, as this was done many times over at CAF.  I just want to understand the Orthodox justification for their own position.  Thanks and God bless!
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2007, 05:37:44 AM »

As background one might want to use our search function and do a search on 'divorce' to read the  many past threads on this topic (to prep for any discussion). I just did a search but found too many to link here.  Smiley
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2007, 06:08:01 AM »

As background one might want to use our search function and do a search on 'divorce' to read the  many past threads on this topic (to prep for any discussion). I just did a search but found too many to link here.  Smiley

 Smiley?

 Cry

Just my two cents on the OP, but for the Church the guilty party's actions (taking that they aren't repenting of it) is what ends the marriage.  The obtaining of a civil divorce, from the Church's position, is the formal statement that they had rendered asunder.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 06:13:08 AM by ialmisry » Logged

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
The Iambic Pen
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic - Church of Old Rome
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite
Posts: 123



« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2007, 08:30:01 AM »

Thanks!  I'll check out that search function.  I may return with more questions...

God bless!
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2007, 09:19:41 AM »

In my study of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and my attempt to find the Church, I have discovered two moral issues that separate the two bodies.  One is contraception, which I will likely address later on, but for now I want to briefly address the idea of remarriage after divorce.  I presume that the Orthodox believe that when a man and a woman get married, they are married in the eyes of God, not just in the eyes of the state.  So, when a couple divorces, and (for example) the innocent party later approaches the Church requesting remarriage, does the Church believe that the civil divorce the individual obtained actually means his or her previous marriage has ended?  Or, do they believe that, for example, the offending party's adultery ended the marriage before the official divorce?  If God joins a couple together in a second marriage, by what authority was the first marriage declared over? 

Since the Orthodox don't view marriage as being contractual (we don't ask the consent question in our service for this reason), but rather the marriage is only the joining of the two parties by God who then bestows on them the blessings of married life, only God (working through His Earthly workers) can end a marriage.  Civil divorce is as meaningless as civil marriage: one needs to get them in order to proceed with the Church functions, but they have no bearing on the church's decision.

So what ends the marriage?  Well, for starters, death does not (the church prefers that widows/widowers remain single, and if they marry again they are to do so in the penitential second marriage service).  Only God's Earthly workers can release a person from their marriage - which is why in the Orthodox church one must get an ecclesiastical divorce before getting a second marriage (I think this point goes directly to answering your question).

In order to ascertain whether a divorce is to be given, the Church (through the "spiritual court of first instance") operates with the guidelines that Christ set forth in the Gospel, and an expansion of those guidelines (on a case-by-case basis).
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2007, 09:54:35 AM »

I'd be interested in hearing this explication too. The EO teaching on divorce and remarriage was a huge obstacle for me back when I was considering the two communions.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2007, 04:30:47 PM »

The EO teaching on divorce and remarriage was a huge obstacle for me back when I was considering the two communions.
But I find the USA Catholic position on marriage annulments to be ridiculous. I mean the most trivial thing like spending too much time in the gym today can cause a marriage that happened thirty years ago to be annulled on the basis of defective consent which no one can really say one way or another if it was so or not thirty years ago. So in reality, in the USA, they can annul any marriage they want.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 04:31:22 PM by stanley123 » Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #7 on: November 29, 2007, 04:59:14 PM »

But I find the USA Catholic position on marriage annulments to be ridiculous. I mean the most trivial thing like spending too much time in the gym today can cause a marriage that happened thirty years ago to be annulled on the basis of defective consent which no one can really say one way or another if it was so or not thirty years ago. So in reality, in the USA, they can annul any marriage they want.

Of course it's ridiculous. It's wrong and a scandal and to the shame of the American Church. The American tribunals are not infallible, so I fear for the couples who got their pieces of paper from an American annulment mill. Only God knows their culpability.

It's not a teaching, however, but a gross abuse (e.g. Johann Tetzel and the sale of indulgences in the German churches).

« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 05:01:47 PM by lubeltri » Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #8 on: November 29, 2007, 06:13:44 PM »

Hello,

Well, for starters, death does not (the church prefers that widows/widowers remain single, and if they marry again they are to do so in the penitential second marriage service).

Do the Orthodox take wedding vows? In the Catholic Church they are "till death do us part" - that means that death ends a marriage. Also read Christ's statement to the Sadducees: Matthew 22:23-30.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #9 on: November 29, 2007, 06:18:12 PM »

Do the Orthodox take wedding vows?

In a word:  No.
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #10 on: November 29, 2007, 06:57:20 PM »

In a word:  No.

Well, you are partially correct here, that is no vows are exchanged in the church. However, there is a sacramental Betrothal service that takes place in the Narthex prior to the bride and groom being led into the church for the sacrament of matrimony and I believe at this time vows are taken but I could be mistaken.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 06:59:53 PM by JoeS » Logged
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #11 on: November 29, 2007, 07:52:23 PM »

From what I remember of our wedding this spring, the only thing we did in the narthex was exchange rings.  At some point our priest asked us if we were promised to another, but I can't remember if that was in the narthex or not.  Needless to say, I was a bit excited and nervous at the time so my memory isn't so good.  But no, there were no vows, no "til death do us part."  As I've reminded Mr. Y, he can't get rid of me that easily.     Cheesy
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 07:53:09 PM by EofK » Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #12 on: November 29, 2007, 08:20:56 PM »

Hello,

Then what makes the marriage sacramental and covenantal and not just civil and contractual?

Do the Orthodox even view marriage as a sacrament? Is there anything holy about marriage, or is it just a necessary evil to bring more children into the world?
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #13 on: November 29, 2007, 08:35:21 PM »

Holy Matrimony is a Holy Mystery - yes, it is a 'sacrament'.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #14 on: November 29, 2007, 09:40:44 PM »

Hello,

Then what makes the marriage sacramental and covenantal and not just civil and contractual?

Do the Orthodox even view marriage as a sacrament? Is there anything holy about marriage, or is it just a necessary evil to bring more children into the world?

Huh?  That sounds a lot more like the Latin view of things.  With the absence of vows, our marriage service is arguably less contractual than the Western one (and let's not even get started on the West's Augustinian tendencies regarding sex).
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #15 on: November 29, 2007, 10:52:35 PM »

Hello,

Holy Matrimony is a Holy Mystery - yes, it is a 'sacrament'.

If it is a Holy Mystery, how can it be dissolved (i.e., what God hath joined let no man put asunder - and such)?
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 10:53:11 PM by Athanasios » Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
GreekChef
Prez
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America: Metropolis of Atlanta
Posts: 884



« Reply #16 on: November 29, 2007, 10:54:45 PM »

Hello,

Then what makes the marriage sacramental and covenantal and not just civil and contractual?

Do the Orthodox even view marriage as a sacrament? Is there anything holy about marriage, or is it just a necessary evil to bring more children into the world?

I'm just going to say please read cleveland's post carefully.  He expressed perfectly the EO view of marriage.
Since the Orthodox don't view marriage as being contractual (we don't ask the consent question in our service for this reason), but rather the marriage is only the joining of the two parties by God who then bestows on them the blessings of married life, only God (working through His Earthly workers) can end a marriage.  Civil divorce is as meaningless as civil marriage: one needs to get them in order to proceed with the Church functions, but they have no bearing on the church's decision.

So what ends the marriage?  Well, for starters, death does not (the church prefers that widows/widowers remain single, and if they marry again they are to do so in the penitential second marriage service).  Only God's Earthly workers can release a person from their marriage - which is why in the Orthodox church one must get an ecclesiastical divorce before getting a second marriage (I think this point goes directly to answering your question).

In order to ascertain whether a divorce is to be given, the Church (through the "spiritual court of first instance") operates with the guidelines that Christ set forth in the Gospel, and an expansion of those guidelines (on a case-by-case basis).
Logged

Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.
Matthew 18:5
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #17 on: November 29, 2007, 10:59:10 PM »

Hello,

Huh?  That sounds a lot more like the Latin view of things.  With the absence of vows, our marriage service is arguably less contractual than the Western one (and let's not even get started on the West's Augustinian tendencies regarding sex).

The vows make the marriage covenantal, not contractual. You'd probably want to read up on the Catholic Church's views on marriage and sex.


Arcanum

Casti Connubii

Theology of the Body

Catechism of the Catholic Church, Sacrament of Marriage (click next to go through the sections)
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #18 on: November 29, 2007, 11:03:39 PM »

Hello,

Since the Orthodox don't view marriage as being contractual (we don't ask the consent question in our service for this reason), but rather the marriage is only the joining of the two parties by God who then bestows on them the blessings of married life, only God (working through His Earthly workers) can end a marriage.  Civil divorce is as meaningless as civil marriage: one needs to get them in order to proceed with the Church functions, but they have no bearing on the church's decision.

The Catholic Church doesn't view it as contractual either (on the contrary, it is a covenant), but we view the ministers of the Sacrament as the two people being wed. The reason an annulment can be recognized (that is stating that the Sacrament never occurred - and I do think that it is granted far more readily than should be in America) is because one of the ministers, through various reasons, did not have the proper intention for the Sacrament (a key component of any Sacrament's validity).
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #19 on: November 29, 2007, 11:15:40 PM »

The vows make the marriage covenantal, not contractual.

*breaks out the dictionary*

"Covenant:  an agreement or promise to do or not do do a particular thing; to enter into a formal agreement; to bind oneself in contract..."

So how is that not just a play on words?
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #20 on: November 29, 2007, 11:24:04 PM »

Hello,

*breaks out the dictionary*

"Covenant:  an agreement or promise to do or not do do a particular thing; to enter into a formal agreement; to bind oneself in contract..."

So how is that not just a play on words?

You better break out the Catholic dictionary. Tongue

COVENANT, BIBLICAL

In the Old Testament an agreement between God and Israel in which God promised protection to the Chosen People in return for exclusive loyalty. "If you obey my voice and hold fast to my covenant, you of all nations will be my very own" (Exodus 19:5). Moses presented Yahweh's offer to his people, who promptly "answered as one, 'All that Yahweh has said we will do.'" The compact was sealed (Exodus 19:8 ). Many years later Jeremiah prophesied that a new covenant would be offered. "Deep within them," Yahweh promised, "I will plant my law, writing it on their hearts" (Jeremiah 31:31-34). Ezekiel foresaw that God would "make a covenant of peace with the, an eternal covenant" (Ezekiel 37:26). Its universal character was foreshadowed by Isaiah, to whom it was revealed by Yahweh, "so that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth" (Isaiah 49:6). In the New Testament, when Paul was explaining to the Corinthians the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper, he repeated Christ's words: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, Whenever you drink it, do this as a memorial of me" (I Corinthians 11:25). This master idea of the New Testament is reinforced in the Letter to the Hebrews: "It follows that it is a greater covenant for which Jesus has become our guarantee" (Hebrews 7:22). Christ himself is the new covenant between God and his people. (Etym. Latin convenire, to agree, to come together.)




This gives a good idea of what a Catholic thinks of when thinking of a covenant. Scott Hahn gives a good definition of this in his Conversion Story:

...a covenant differs from a contract about as much as marriage differs from prostitution. In a contract you exchange property, whereas in a covenant you exchange persons. In a contract you say, "This is yours and that is mine," but Scripture shows how in a covenant you say, "I am yours and you are mine."




Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #21 on: November 29, 2007, 11:30:10 PM »


...a covenant differs from a contract about as much as marriage differs from prostitution. In a contract you exchange property, whereas in a covenant you exchange persons. In a contract you say, "This is yours and that is mine," but Scripture shows how in a covenant you say, "I am yours and you are mine."

That's a caricature of contracts.  A contract is an exchange of a promise, or a set of promises, not a strict property swap like you're trying to say.  You still aren't offering any difference between the two other than to say that the two are different.

And for the record, as long as you keep trying to use legal terms (you know, like contractual), I'm going to keep using my legal dictionary, not a Latin one. police
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #22 on: November 29, 2007, 11:33:56 PM »

Hello,

That's a caricature of contracts.  A contract is an exchange of a promise, or a set of promises, not a strict property swap like you're trying to say.  You still aren't offering any difference between the two other than to say that the two are different.

And for the record, as long as you keep trying to use legal terms (you know, like contractual), I'm going to keep using my legal dictionary, not a Latin one. police

Would you say that God's covenants throughout salvation history are merely contracts?


And don't the Orthodox always complain that the Catholic Church is too legalistic - so what's the problem with using a Catholic legal dictionary. Grin
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #23 on: November 29, 2007, 11:39:25 PM »

And don't the Orthodox always complain that the Catholic Church is too legalistic - so what's the problem with using a Catholic legal dictionary. Grin

The sheriff in these parts is Orthodox, so we get to use our dictionary, not yours. Tongue
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #24 on: November 29, 2007, 11:52:40 PM »

Hello,

The sheriff in these parts is Orthodox, so we get to use our dictionary, not yours. Tongue
That may be so, but as I have said elsewhere - unless we understand the terminology of each other, there can be no fruitful dialogue. How can communication occur if we don't even understand each other's language. Wink
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #25 on: November 29, 2007, 11:54:13 PM »

Hello,

The sheriff in these parts is Orthodox, so we get to use our dictionary, not yours. Tongue

So do you think that God's covenants throughout salvation history are merely legal contracts? Is that the Orthodox definition?
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #26 on: November 30, 2007, 12:51:47 AM »

Do the Orthodox even view marriage as a sacrament? Is there anything holy about marriage, or is it just a necessary evil to bring more children into the world?
Marriage is quite holy, for the reason that it has the ability to bring about salvation. Having to live completely for another person serves to put to death all selfishness, and therefore makes us more Christ-like. Children also are for our salvation. Having to care for a child who can do nothing herself brings humility and servanthood, and again makes us more Christ-like. Children are brought into the world not out of obligation but out of love. They are a gift from God to aid us in salvation. Therefore marriage is indeed a sacrament.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #27 on: November 30, 2007, 01:17:00 AM »

In a word:  No.

LOL.  You won't be saying that at your wedding, will you?
Logged

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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #28 on: November 30, 2007, 01:30:12 AM »

Since the Orthodox don't view marriage as being contractual (we don't ask the consent question in our service for this reason), but rather the marriage is only the joining of the two parties by God who then bestows on them the blessings of married life, only God (working through His Earthly workers) can end a marriage.  Civil divorce is as meaningless as civil marriage: one needs to get them in order to proceed with the Church functions, but they have no bearing on the church's decision.

So what ends the marriage?  Well, for starters, death does not (the church prefers that widows/widowers remain single, and if they marry again they are to do so in the penitential second marriage service).  Only God's Earthly workers can release a person from their marriage - which is why in the Orthodox church one must get an ecclesiastical divorce before getting a second marriage (I think this point goes directly to answering your question).

In order to ascertain whether a divorce is to be given, the Church (through the "spiritual court of first instance") operates with the guidelines that Christ set forth in the Gospel, and an expansion of those guidelines (on a case-by-case basis).

The ecclesiastical divorce is an odd artifact of history, between the Muslim law on personal status and the Empire abolishing civil marriage (the betrothal service is the relic: couples would bring their civil marriage to be blessed.)

The Church has nort been give authority to rend asunder.  The civil divorce ends the marriage the same way that absence of repentence prevents confession.  The acceptance of the civil divorce is the Church's admission that the guilty party has cut themselves off from the grace of the Holy Mystery.  This only becomes an issue in the economy  of opening the innocent to the Chruch's grace in a second marriage (the same operation in remarriagte in widowhood).  Hence the penetential nature of second marriage.
Logged

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
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #29 on: November 30, 2007, 04:42:32 AM »

Of course it's ridiculous. It's wrong and a scandal and to the shame of the American Church. The American tribunals are not infallible, so I fear for the couples who got their pieces of paper from an American annulment mill. Only God knows their culpability.

It's not a teaching, however, but a gross abuse (e.g. Johann Tetzel and the sale of indulgences in the German churches).


I don't think it is as simple as that. This has been going on for about 40 years now and everyone knows about it, and nothing is done. So the practice of easy annulments is officially approved in the USA. In fact, if anyone gets a marriage annulment by a Catholic tribunal in the USA, he is free to remarry in any Catholic Church in the entire world. So it is official. And in the USA just about any marriage can be annulled for the most trivial of reasons.
Annulment of marriages is actually a teaching of the RCC. It really is not a credible position to take to say that a couple has been married for twenty years and raised a family and there never was any question of a defective marriage until say the wife decided to take a fling and she found herself a new boyfriend. Now that the wife has a new boyfriend in hand and wants the divorce, all kinds of weird and trivial excuses are brought up as to why there was never any marriage in the first place. But this question would never have arisen if the wife had been faithful to the husband.  So it really is a divorce, but under a name which pretends that it is not a divorce.
Logged
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #30 on: November 30, 2007, 05:10:06 AM »

In Orthodoxy, marriage is viewed as the yoking together under God, for the purpose of fulfilling the Will of God. For where two or three are gathered in his name, there is Christ. Thus a single person living in a secular society and outside the life of monasticm has a more difficult time filfilling the calling of Theosis. For in christian marriage the Two come together in Christ and beget the third (offspring).

In greek spouse is commonly refered to as "suziyo" basically this is a word refering to the yoke put on two horses in parallel which will pull the horse buggy. Thus the spouses are yoked together and the one controlling them is Christ. The couple must do the Will of God in unison as the yoked horses must turn right or left as this is the Will of the driver who directs them and yoked them together to act in unison. So yes, marriage is sacramental. And when one spouse refuses to follow the Will of God (or both spouses for that matter) there is disasterous consequences.

The Church grants divorce under certain circumstances only. As scripture says , "whatever you bound on earth it will be like you have bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth it will be as if you loosed in heaven."

The latin teaching of annullment is quite problematic. An annulled couple makes their offspring illegitimate bastards and a product of fornication.       
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 05:14:09 AM by buzuxi » Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #31 on: November 30, 2007, 05:54:08 AM »

The latin teaching of annullment is quite problematic. An annulled couple makes their offspring illegitimate bastards and a product of fornication.       
Correct. And not only that, but there seems to be a certain element of dissimulation involved. I mean, no question of an invalid marriage until the wife say, gets herself hooked up with someone else.
Logged
The Iambic Pen
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic - Church of Old Rome
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite
Posts: 123



« Reply #32 on: November 30, 2007, 06:05:12 AM »

So, it has been said that death does not end an Orthodox marriage.  Does that just mean the death of one party, or are the people still considered married after they both have gone to Heaven?  This seems to contradict Jesus' conversation with the Sadducees.
Logged
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #33 on: November 30, 2007, 06:45:13 AM »

So, it has been said that death does not end an Orthodox marriage.  Does that just mean the death of one party, or are the people still considered married after they both have gone to Heaven?  This seems to contradict Jesus' conversation with the Sadducees.

Iambic i had a bit of a problem with that statement. Theres no marriage in heaven.  Just that the second marriage ceremony is more somber, doesnt have the pomp of the original ceremony. I dont know the exact differences within the rite, what is omitted or abridged, a priest can fill us in. But the original more festive marriage ceremony is sometimes used if one is marrying for the first time to someone whose been divorced or widowed.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #34 on: November 30, 2007, 07:58:34 AM »

So, it has been said that death does not end an Orthodox marriage.  Does that just mean the death of one party, or are the people still considered married after they both have gone to Heaven?  This seems to contradict Jesus' conversation with the Sadducees.

Not entirely, as (hopefully), only one member is in heaven: the other is witnessing that the other is "alive in Christ" and witnessing to the hope of the Resurrection, part of the marriage vocation to witness to Christ's covenant to the Church.  When the other partner falls asleep, such witness to the Resurrection is not possible nor necessary.

There's more, but I got to ready to leave for school.  Just briefly for one, all our relationships-father, mother, friend, Greek, Arab, etc. are transfigured in heaven.  We don't have our memory erased and are entirely new people.  This would include marriage.

I'm hoping that its transfigured, because at present all eternity with my ex wife  Shocked isn't my definition of paradise (and I do hope she makes it).
Logged

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
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #35 on: November 30, 2007, 08:32:27 AM »

LOL.  You won't be saying that at your wedding, will you?

I suspect my fiancee would kill me shortly thereafter if I tried to pull something like that. Cheesy
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #36 on: November 30, 2007, 09:19:47 AM »

Quote from: cleveland
Since the Orthodox don't view marriage as being contractual (we don't ask the consent question in our service for this reason), but rather the marriage is only the joining of the two parties by God who then bestows on them the blessings of married life, only God (working through His Earthly workers) can end a marriage.  Civil divorce is as meaningless as civil marriage: one needs to get them in order to proceed with the Church functions, but they have no bearing on the church's decision.

So what ends the marriage?  Well, for starters, death does not (the church prefers that widows/widowers remain single, and if they marry again they are to do so in the penitential second marriage service).  Only God's Earthly workers can release a person from their marriage - which is why in the Orthodox church one must get an ecclesiastical divorce before getting a second marriage (I think this point goes directly to answering your question).

In order to ascertain whether a divorce is to be given, the Church (through the "spiritual court of first instance") operates with the guidelines that Christ set forth in the Gospel, and an expansion of those guidelines (on a case-by-case basis).

May I ask a related, but different question that occurred to me while reading Cleveland's post?  Please let me know if I should start a separate thread.

My question is in regard to the portion of the post that I italicized (sort of).  How do the Orthodox view non-Orthodox marriages?  For instance those between non-Christians or non-Orthodox Christians?  Are they presumed to be valid under the Orthodox view?  Or would a couple who were married outside the Orthodox church and converted need to be "re-married" in the Orthodox church in order for their marriage to be viewed as "valid" or "licit" (or whatever term would be used by the Orthodox)?
Logged

Carole
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #37 on: November 30, 2007, 09:32:51 AM »

Hello,

So do you think that God's covenants throughout salvation history are merely legal contracts? Is that the Orthodox definition?

Logical fallacy:  red herring.

That is not the issue here; the question, which you raised earlier, is whether the Orthodox view or the Latin one is merely contractual.  You keep claiming that the Orthodox one is because it involves no vows, yet won't address the fact that the language used in establishing a Latin marriage is legal (covenants, vows, and promises) and the method of Latin divorce is also legal in nature (declaring that the marriage was void at its inception).  If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, why are you trying to tell me it's a moose?
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #38 on: November 30, 2007, 09:45:02 AM »

Correct. And not only that, but there seems to be a certain element of dissimulation involved. I mean, no question of an invalid marriage until the wife say, gets herself hooked up with someone else.

That is a gross generalization and likely offensive to those who got declarations of nullity for much more legitimate reasons.

And it does not make them "bastards" in the eyes of the Church. You don't seem very informed about this. Read up on it.

And the American "policy" is not "official." These are decisions of tribunals...they make case-by-case decisions. Some American tribunals are better than others. Most of the cases appealed to Rome are overturned. With more orthodox bishops, fewer annulments will be granted.

It's a gross abuse, as I mentioned before. It is not Catholic teaching.
Logged
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #39 on: November 30, 2007, 09:49:08 AM »

That is a gross generalization and likely offensive to those who got declarations of nullity for much more legitimate reasons.

And it does not make them "bastards" in the eyes of the Church. You don't seem very informed about this. Read up on it.

And the American "policy" is not "official." These are decisions of tribunals...they make case-by-case decisions. Some American tribunals are better than others. Most of the cases appealed to Rome are overturned. With more orthodox bishops, fewer annulments will be granted.

It's a gross abuse, as I mentioned before. It is not Catholic teaching.

That raises another question.  Just how widespread does an abuse have to be before it becomes the de facto teaching?  As it is, it seems that it already is the teaching and everyone is simply pretending that it isn't.
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #40 on: November 30, 2007, 09:49:52 AM »

My question is in regard to the portion of the post that I italicized (sort of).  How do the Orthodox view non-Orthodox marriages?  For instance those between non-Christians or non-Orthodox Christians?  Are they presumed to be valid under the Orthodox view?  Or would a couple who were married outside the Orthodox church and converted need to be "re-married" in the Orthodox church in order for their marriage to be viewed as "valid" or "licit" (or whatever term would be used by the Orthodox)?
Orthdoxy doesn't have concepts of "valid" for things outside of herself. A marriage not granted or blessed by the Orthodox Church is simply not considered as being "valid" for the Orthodox Church. Similarly, under Australian Law, a marriage which takes place outside of Australian Law is not automatically reconised by Australia (let that be a warning to you all- marrying an Australian does not guarentee the entry of a citizen of another country into Australia if the marriage did not take place in Australia! Cheesy) The Australian government doesn't say that marriages outside of Australia are not "valid", it simply says they are not automatically "valid for Australia".
Your Church says that Orthodox sacraments are "valid", but to us, that makes no sense, since in our understanding, it would mean that our Sacraments of Initiation (Baptism, Chrisimation, Holy Communion) make us members of the Roman Catholic Church. A Baptism in the Presbyterian Church does not admit anyone to the Orthodox Church, but we don't say it's "invalid", we simply say that it's no concern of ours since it isn't part of our Church. We just don't comment either way.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #41 on: November 30, 2007, 09:55:17 AM »

That raises another question.  Just how widespread does an abuse have to be before it becomes the de facto teaching?  As it is, it seems that it already is the teaching and everyone is simply pretending that it isn't.

The American Church is not an autocephalous church. Remember, we are not EO. A cabal of liberal American bishops cannot change Catholic teaching, they can only ignore it. (I'm not implying a concerted conspiracy here---it may just be a case of the tribunals being filled by Americans plucked out of the me-me-me culture).

The American Church is in crisis. And Rome has a billion other Catholics to worry about. It will take time, but this abuse will be corrected.
Logged
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #42 on: November 30, 2007, 09:57:27 AM »

The latin teaching of annullment is quite problematic. An annulled couple makes their offspring illegitimate bastards and a product of fornication.       

With respect, buzuxi.  It would be better if you were certain of your "facts" before you run off misrepresenting the practices and teachings of the Catholic Church.  Your short statement above is riddled with inaccuracies.

#1 - It is not a "teaching of annullment [sic]."  The Church recognizes that there can be a defect in the process of conferring a Sacrament.  Which means that the Sacrament is invalid.  A Declaration of Nullity does nothing to affect the sacramental status of a marriage, it undoes, renders asunder, nullifies or dissolves nothing.

#2 - The process of granting a Declaration of Nullity (that is the proper and correct term) is a long process in which the circumstances of the marriage at the time of the marriage is carefully examined to be certain that both parties were able to confect a valid sacrament with no impediment.  If a valid and legal (under Canon Law) impediment to a valid sacramental marriage is found then the tribunal can issue a Declaration of Nullity.  Which is nothing more (and nothing less) than a statement that there existed at the time of the marriage, an impediment to a valid sacrament. 

#3 - The "legitimacy" of the children is not a matter of Canon Law but a matter of civil law.  Therefore, a Declaration of Nullity does not render the children of the marriage "illegitimate."  That is a statement used by many in ignorance or malice.

#4 - All marriages are presumed to be legal, licit and valid by the Catholic Church.  Unless, in the course of a petition for a Declaration of Nullity, it is found that a sufficient impediment existed.  Since all parties assume the marriage to be valid, even after the Declaration of Nullity is granted the sexual relations are not viewed as "fornication" and thus a sin.  Why?  Because everyone was acting in good faith that the marriage was valid, licit and legal.

Your single short sentence shows both a glaring lack of understanding of the Catholic Church's teaching and practices as regard marriage and an apparent hostility exemplified by your willingness to issue such damning statements with little understanding and even less proof.  It is insulting to Catholics and intellectually dishonest.
Logged

Carole
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #43 on: November 30, 2007, 10:02:29 AM »

So, it has been said that death does not end an Orthodox marriage.  Does that just mean the death of one party, or are the people still considered married after they both have gone to Heaven?  This seems to contradict Jesus' conversation with the Sadducees.

We ask the saints for their intercessions, right?  So after they have fallen asleep, are they still alive?  If not, why would we ask them to pray?  It's the same idea with a spouse who has passed away.  Death is not the end of life, thanks to Christ.  So if death doesn't hold any power over us then how could it hold any power over a marriage which, as previously stated, only God can put asunder?  It doesn't.  

As far as Jesus' conversation with the Sadducees, I don't believe He's contradicted Himself here:

Quote
Matthew 22:29-32
 
Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."

People will neither marry nor be given in marriage... but it doesn't say they are not married.  I'll have to break out my Greek New Testament and check the verb, but to me this means that there are no wedding ceremonies in heaven.  It doesn't say there are no marriages there.  

Quote
Just briefly for one, all our relationships-father, mother, friend, Greek, Arab, etc. are transfigured in heaven.  We don't have our memory erased and are entirely new people.  This would include marriage.

I agree with ialmistry here:  Relationships are transfigured, not erased or remade.  As I understand it, after death we are no longer subject to sin or the devil or even death itself.  This makes us able to see past ourselves and to truly live selflessly.  
Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #44 on: November 30, 2007, 10:04:06 AM »

Orthdoxy doesn't have concepts of "valid" for things outside of herself. A marriage not granted or blessed by the Orthodox Church is simply not considered as being "valid" for the Orthodox Church. Similarly, under Australian Law, a marriage which takes place outside of Australian Law is not automatically reconised by Australia (let that be a warning to you all- marrying an Australian does not guarentee the entry of a citizen of another country into Australia if the marriage did not take place in Australia! Cheesy) The Australian government doesn't say that marriages outside of Australia are not "valid", it simply says they are not automatically "valid for Australia".
Your Church says that Orthodox sacraments are "valid", but to us, that makes no sense, since in our understanding, it would mean that our Sacraments of Initiation (Baptism, Chrisimation, Holy Communion) make us members of the Roman Catholic Church. A Baptism in the Presbyterian Church does not admit anyone to the Orthodox Church, but we don't say it's "invalid", we simply say that it's no concern of ours since it isn't part of our Church. We just don't comment either way.

OK.  I think I understand what you're saying.  Though I admit to feeling a bit "lost" in the wording.

The Catholic Church (in charity I assume) assumes that all marriages are "valid" (meeting Canon Law regrading marriage) unless cause is shown and proven to the contrary.  It isn't even a statement on the "validity" of the Sacraments of the Orthodox (or any other group) as the same assumption is made for all marriages that take place outside of the Church.  Provided, of course, that neither of the parties are Catholic and subject to Catholic Canons regarding marriage.

What I seem to understand you to be saying is that the Orthodox make no such automatic assumption.  Is that correct?  So would a married couple converting to Orthodoxy then have to have their marriage reviewed/examined to see if it is acceptable under the Orthodox law/rules that the couple is submitting to?  Or would the couple be remarried in the Orthodox jurisdiction that they are being received into?
Logged

Carole
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #45 on: November 30, 2007, 10:04:58 AM »

Great explanation Carole.


------------

So, George, does Orthodoxy have a concept of "natural" marriage between those who are not baptized or not Orthodox? In other words, did marriage exist before Jesus Christ?

In Catholic terms, a natural marriage is between unbaptized persons or between a baptized and unbaptized person. In other words, marriage is part of the natural law.

Then Christ came along---Christ and his bride, the Church. A sacramental marriage (marriage as a sacrament) is a marriage between two baptized persons (even if not Catholic).
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #46 on: November 30, 2007, 10:11:03 AM »

We ask the saints for their intercessions, right?  So after they have fallen asleep, are they still alive?  If not, why would we ask them to pray?  It's the same idea with a spouse who has passed away.  Death is not the end of life, thanks to Christ.  So if death doesn't hold any power over us then how could it hold any power over a marriage which, as previously stated, only God can put asunder?  It doesn't.

We hold that they end because the parties can no longer share themselves fully---spiritually and physically. They are separated from their bodies.

Also, since marriage is a glimmer of the great light of the beatific vision, sort of a little bit of heaven on Earth, when you get to heaven, that little light is swallowed by the big one.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #47 on: November 30, 2007, 10:12:59 AM »

The Catholic Church (in charity I assume) assumes that all marriages are "valid" (meeting Canon Law regrading marriage) unless cause is shown and proven to the contrary.  It isn't even a statement on the "validity" of the Sacraments of the Orthodox (or any other group) as the same assumption is made for all marriages that take place outside of the Church.  Provided, of course, that neither of the parties are Catholic and subject to Catholic Canons regarding marriage.
I just want to check that I understood you. Are you saying that Roman Catholics have the option of simply having a Civil marriage not blessed by the Church, and this is just as "valid" for the Catholic Church as the Sacrament of Matrimony?


So would a married couple converting to Orthodoxy then have to have their marriage reviewed/examined to see if it is acceptable under the Orthodox law/rules that the couple is submitting to?  Or would the couple be remarried in the Orthodox jurisdiction that they are being received into?
Just as reception by Profession of Faith or Chrisimation completes what is lacking in a convert's baptism which took place outside the Church, the Church can sanctify marriages without having to remarry a couple.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #48 on: November 30, 2007, 10:16:51 AM »

I just want to check that I understood you. Are you saying that Roman Catholics have the option of simply having a Civil marriage not blessed by the Church, and this is just as "valid" for the Catholic Church as the Sacrament of Matrimony?

Nope, it would be null and void. Catholics must be married in the Church unless they get dispensation.
Logged
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #49 on: November 30, 2007, 10:18:27 AM »

I just want to check that I understood you. Are you saying that Roman Catholics have the option of simply having a Civil marriage not blessed by the Church, and this is just as "valid" for the Catholic Church as the Sacrament of Matrimony?

No.  I may have been unclear.  Please pardon me if that is the case.  The Catholic Church assumes that all marriages between non-Catholic persons to be valid.  For instance my husband and I were married by a notary pubic in a civil ceremony.  Neither of us were Catholic at the time.  Thus we were not subject to the Canons as regard marriage.  So our marriage is assumed to be valid.

If, for the sake of discussion, I had been Catholic before our marriage and we still married in a civil ceremony the marriage would not be granted the charitable assumption of validity.  In order to normalize our marriage we would have to have it convalidated by the Church.

This is why the last sentence in the quoted paragraph reads:  "Provided, of course, that neither of the parties are Catholic and subject to Catholic Canons regarding marriage."

I am sorry for any misunderstanding my poorly worded paragraph provided. 

Logged

Carole
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #50 on: November 30, 2007, 11:17:46 AM »

We hold that they end because the parties can no longer share themselves fully---spiritually and physically. They are separated from their bodies.

Also, since marriage is a glimmer of the great light of the beatific vision, sort of a little bit of heaven on Earth, when you get to heaven, that little light is swallowed by the big one.

I would think that a married couple would share themselves better not being confined to the body, if that is the case.  Forgive me, I'm not well read on the Orthodox position of life after death, but I'm not sure I agree with you here. 
Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #51 on: November 30, 2007, 11:46:36 AM »

I would think that a married couple would share themselves better not being confined to the body, if that is the case.  Forgive me, I'm not well read on the Orthodox position of life after death, but I'm not sure I agree with you here. 

Well, I'm not Orthodox.  Smiley I was giving a Catholic view to illustrate why marriage ends in death for us. Marriage is a divinely instituted earthly institution created for both reproduction and the self-giving love to another that is an image of Christ and his Church. For us, when these two purposes are superseded when we are in heaven, marriage is no longer necessary. Our relationships with God and others are on a whole other plane.

Blessings.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #52 on: November 30, 2007, 12:11:55 PM »

I suspect my fiancee would kill me shortly thereafter if I tried to pull something like that. Cheesy

Yes, I thought by the pile of marriage books she was reading as I left the parish would indicate that.  One wedding and a funeral. LOL
Logged

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
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #53 on: November 30, 2007, 12:13:28 PM »

From what I remember of our wedding this spring, the only thing we did in the narthex was exchange rings.  At some point our priest asked us if we were promised to another, but I can't remember if that was in the narthex or not.  Needless to say, I was a bit excited and nervous at the time so my memory isn't so good.  But no, there were no vows, no "til death do us part."  As I've reminded Mr. Y, he can't get rid of me that easily.     Cheesy

You are correct. The Rite of Betrothal, in which rings are exchanged as a sign of commitment and devotion to one another and no vows are exchanged.
My bad.  Roll Eyes
Logged
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #54 on: November 30, 2007, 12:26:55 PM »

Our relationships with God and others are on a whole other plane.

Blessings.

Agreed.  Smiley  And blessings to you as well!
Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #55 on: November 30, 2007, 03:28:40 PM »

Hello,

The Catholic Church doesn't view it as contractual either (on the contrary, it is a covenant), but we view the ministers of the Sacrament as the two people being wed. The reason an annulment can be recognized (that is stating that the Sacrament never occurred - and I do think that it is granted far more readily than should be in America) is because one of the ministers, through various reasons, did not have the proper intention for the Sacrament (a key component of any Sacrament's validity).

A couple of things to consider.  What you are speaking of is only relevant to the Latin Church.  If I am incorrect, hopefully Deacon Lance will correct it, but in the Eastern Catholic Churches only a priest (i.e NOT a deacon) may marry a couple as their theological understanding of marriage is the same as the Orthodox understanding. 
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #56 on: November 30, 2007, 03:43:52 PM »

You are correct. The Rite of Betrothal, in which rings are exchanged as a sign of commitment and devotion to one another and no vows are exchanged.
My bad.  Roll Eyes 

It's O.K.  There can be a bit of confusion because sometimes (depending on state law) Orthodox clergy are forced to ask a consent question before beginning the betrothal service.  This is not part of the service.

If someone wants a fairly clear and comprehensive look at Orthodox perspective on Marriage (as a sacrament), they should read:

"Marriage: An Orthodox Perspective" by Fr. John Meyendorff

Not only does it address all the questions raised here about the Orthodox views on these various Marriage questions, but it also happens to be the only book on marriage within arm's reach, so it's easy for me to refer to it!
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #57 on: November 30, 2007, 04:47:51 PM »

It's O.K.  There can be a bit of confusion because sometimes (depending on state law) Orthodox clergy are forced to ask a consent question before beginning the betrothal service.  This is not part of the service.

If someone wants a fairly clear and comprehensive look at Orthodox perspective on Marriage (as a sacrament), they should read:

"Marriage: An Orthodox Perspective" by Fr. John Meyendorff

Not only does it address all the questions raised here about the Orthodox views on these various Marriage questions, but it also happens to be the only book on marriage within arm's reach, so it's easy for me to refer to it!

I'll just add "The Sacrament of Love," by Paul Evdikinov.
Logged

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
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #58 on: November 30, 2007, 05:32:09 PM »

If someone wants a fairly clear and comprehensive look at Orthodox perspective on Marriage (as a sacrament), they should read:
"Marriage: An Orthodox Perspective" by Fr. John Meyendorff

I second that and add Preserve Them, O Lord by Fr. John Mack.  This book is sort of a workbook for married or nearly married couples, but there are several excellent articles in the supplemental reading section, all reprints from AGAIN magazine. 

Has anyone read St. John Chrysostom's On Marriage and Family Life?  If so, what are your thoughts on this? 
Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #59 on: November 30, 2007, 05:34:17 PM »

Has anyone read St. John Chrysostom's On Marriage and Family Life?  If so, what are your thoughts on this? 

Very good.  It's a compilation of sermons of his, some from his commentaries on Epistles, some which were only about marriage.  But it was very helpful for my fiancee and I before we got engaged.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #60 on: November 30, 2007, 05:49:01 PM »

Very good.  It's a compilation of sermons of his, some from his commentaries on Epistles, some which were only about marriage.  But it was very helpful for my fiancee and I before we got engaged.

Oh good.  (Haven't been disappointed by St. John yet.   Smiley)  I've had my eye on this book for a while but haven't been able to find it locally.  I'll have to order it from St. Isaac's, I think.
Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #61 on: November 30, 2007, 11:46:02 PM »

Hello,

As far as Jesus' conversation with the Sadducees, I don't believe He's contradicted Himself here:

People will neither marry nor be given in marriage... but it doesn't say they are not married.  I'll have to break out my Greek New Testament and check the verb, but to me this means that there are no wedding ceremonies in heaven.  It doesn't say there are no marriages there. 
But that was exactly the question the Sadduccees asked. They asked if she would be married and Heaven (sort of sarcastically since they denied the resurrection of the dead) and if so who's wife would she be. Not if she could wed another, but which one of her many marriages would be recognized in Heaven. Jesus, by his answer, indicates that we do not keep marriage through death.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #62 on: November 30, 2007, 11:50:47 PM »

Hello,

Logical fallacy:  red herring.

That is not the issue here; the question, which you raised earlier, is whether the Orthodox view or the Latin one is merely contractual.  You keep claiming that the Orthodox one is because it involves no vows, yet won't address the fact that the language used in establishing a Latin marriage is legal (covenants, vows, and promises) and the method of Latin divorce is also legal in nature (declaring that the marriage was void at its inception).  If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, why are you trying to tell me it's a moose?
No, not a logical fallacy ... just merely tangentially off-topic. That is easily remedied. I have started a new thread on this topic: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13672.0.html
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #63 on: November 30, 2007, 11:50:47 PM »

Hello,
But that was exactly the question the Sadduccees asked. They asked if she would be married and Heaven (sort of sarcastically since they denied the resurrection of the dead) and if so who's wife would she be. Not if she could wed another, but which one of her many marriages would be recognized in Heaven. Jesus, by his answer, indicates that we do not keep marriage through death.

Then marriage is truly an odd sacrament, the only one that doesn't leave its mark in the Kingdom.
Logged

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
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #64 on: November 30, 2007, 11:53:55 PM »

Hello,

Then marriage is truly an odd sacrament, the only one that doesn't leave its mark in the Kingdom.

Could do with the fact that it is a Sacrament of Vocation. Could be maybe be said of the Priesthood - the Sacrament of Holy Orders does leave a permanent and indelible mark on the soul, but will there be a need for the ministerial priesthood in Heaven? I'm actually asking, but it might be best to start a new thread on it.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #65 on: December 01, 2007, 12:03:39 AM »

Hello,
But that was exactly the question the Sadduccees asked. They asked if she would be married and Heaven (sort of sarcastically since they denied the resurrection of the dead) and if so who's wife would she be. Not if she could wed another, but which one of her many marriages would be recognized in Heaven. Jesus, by his answer, indicates that we do not keep marriage through death. 

Actually, a few of the Orthodox authors I've read have come to a different conclusion (which I agree with). The essence of the Sadduccees question was not "marriage" but rather "cohabitation."  In their desire to trip up Jesus, they were asking which brother gets to "sleep" with her, since "they've all had her."  That's the context to which he replies that they are like "angels in heaven."  If there was no marriage in heaven, then we'd have no problem with widows and widowers marrying after the death of their spouse; on the contrary, since only God makes the union, only God (and not death) can break it - they are still married (forever), however marriage manifests itself differently in the kingdom than what we're used to here.

This is especially true considering that the bond of love that we form with our spouses is unique on earth, but in Heaven the greater Love of Christ will envelope us all.  We don't lose our memory of earthly life, nor do we lose our character (the saints are proof of this).  But our interactions with one another will be different - permeated by the omnipresent Love of Christ.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #66 on: December 01, 2007, 12:07:08 AM »

Hello,

Actually, a few of the Orthodox authors I've read have come to a different conclusion (which I agree with). The essence of the Sadduccees question was not "marriage" but rather "cohabitation."  In their desire to trip up Jesus, they were asking which brother gets to "sleep" with her, since "they've all had her."  That's the context to which he replies that they are like "angels in heaven."

That's interesting. Doesn't it say right before or after in the Scriptures that what they were trying to trip Jesus up with their denial of the resurrection of the body?
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #67 on: December 01, 2007, 12:12:53 AM »

Hello,

That's interesting. Doesn't it say right before or after in the Scriptures that what they were trying to trip Jesus up with their denial of the resurrection of the body?

Uh-huh.  Marriage has nothing to do with the body; but cohabitation does Wink
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
The Iambic Pen
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic - Church of Old Rome
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite
Posts: 123



« Reply #68 on: December 01, 2007, 04:10:36 PM »

I'm still a little confused.  Do the Orthodox believe that when a man and a woman marry each other, they are married for eternity (like the Mormons, for example)?  Do they believe that Jesus' words about no marrying or giving in marriage in Heaven to simply mean that no one will be having sexual intercourse or entering into new marriages?  If someone gets divorced on Earth, will he or she still be eternally married to his or her first spouse in Heaven?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #69 on: December 01, 2007, 04:43:23 PM »

Uh-huh.  Marriage has nothing to do with the body; but cohabitation does Wink

Marriage DOES have to do with the body (otherwise, why not same sex marriage?).  The difference is that cohabitation ONLY has to do with the body (secular research backs this up: cohabitators are far more likely to divorce).

Another thing on the verse in question: the pretense for the marriage is the Levirite marriage, marrying a dead brother's widow to produce children (otherwise such a marriage with a sister in law is forbidden, Leviticus 18,16; 10,21).  In such a case there is no unitive aspect, it is totally procreative, and then not for the couple (hence Onan's problem with it).

I'm still a little confused.  Do the Orthodox believe that when a man and a woman marry each other, they are married for eternity (like the Mormons, for example)?  Do they believe that Jesus' words about no marrying or giving in marriage in Heaven to simply mean that no one will be having sexual intercourse or entering into new marriages?  If someone gets divorced on Earth, will he or she still be eternally married to his or her first spouse in Heaven?

 Sad This is not an academic question for me.

Btw they don't marry each other.  The Church marries them.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2007, 04:46:19 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #70 on: December 01, 2007, 04:45:03 PM »

(secular research backs this up: cohabitators are far more likely to divorce).
Hmm. The research I've done says that 0% of people who never married are divorced. Grin
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #71 on: December 01, 2007, 04:50:43 PM »

Hmm. The research I've done says that 0% of people who never married are divorced. Grin

A large number of them end up marrying, and their marriages end in the divorce (the "we'll first see how it works out then we'll marry" deception.  It doesn't work).

If you look at those who cohabitate, and never marry, the stats are even worse.

A study on children of cohabitators found they have exactly the same problems, and at the same levels of occurance, as those of children of the divorced.  This even when the cohabitition was continuing over years and said parents were still together.
Logged

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
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #72 on: December 01, 2007, 05:13:22 PM »

Right. Another example of a self-fulfilled prophecy. Many times the reason for cohabitation is fear that the couple will end up splitting up and that there will be a messy divorce. It's no wonder that many times that is exactly what happens.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #73 on: December 01, 2007, 05:33:39 PM »

Right. Another example of a self-fulfilled prophecy. Many times the reason for cohabitation is fear that the couple will end up splitting up and that there will be a messy divorce. It's no wonder that many times that is exactly what happens.
Right. this is what I was thinking in reference to the Catholic situation in the USA of easy annulments. We see reports that the rate of cohabitation with no marriage among Catholic couples has increased recently. And  the number of marriage annulments granted in the USA  have skyrocketed since Vatican II.  Could it be that a Catholic couple might be asking themselves, what is the use of going through the bother and expense of getting married, when down the line there is always the possibility that a Church tribunal may declare that there never really was any marriage in the first place?
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #74 on: December 01, 2007, 07:29:39 PM »

Well, the tribunals can be overruled on appeal. Most American declarations of nullity appealed to Rome are overturned.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #75 on: December 01, 2007, 10:02:28 PM »

Well, the tribunals can be overruled on appeal. Most American declarations of nullity appealed to Rome are overturned.
If you are speaking here about appeal to the Roman Rota, first of all, appeals take anywhere from 11 to 27 years. Secondly, the actual number involved is extremely small. For example, ten cases (USA) were decided favorably in 1986, and ten in 1987. This contrasts with more than 40,000 annulments granted in the USA for each of those years.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #76 on: December 01, 2007, 10:10:54 PM »

If you are speaking here about appeal to the Roman Rota, first of all, appeals take anywhere from 11 to 27 years. Secondly, the actual number involved is extremely small. For example, ten cases (USA) were decided favorably in 1986, and ten in 1987. This contrasts with more than 40,000 annulments granted in the USA for each of those years.

Indeed, appeals are rare because usually both parties desire a declaration of nullity (or one does not care).
Logged
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #77 on: December 02, 2007, 10:46:40 AM »

I'm still a little confused.  Do the Orthodox believe that when a man and a woman marry each other, they are married for eternity (like the Mormons, for example)?  Do they believe that Jesus' words about no marrying or giving in marriage in Heaven to simply mean that no one will be having sexual intercourse or entering into new marriages?  If someone gets divorced on Earth, will he or she still be eternally married to his or her first spouse in Heaven?

Marriage is only binding in this life. It does not exist in the next life. This is the Orthodox teaching.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #78 on: December 02, 2007, 11:02:30 AM »

Marriage is only binding in this life. It does not exist in the next life. This is the Orthodox teaching.
Evidence?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #79 on: December 02, 2007, 11:07:13 AM »

Well, the tribunals can be overruled on appeal. Most American declarations of nullity appealed to Rome are overturned.

And how many have the energy and resources to do that?

In Illinois, most custody decisions are overturned or modified on appeal.  But after years in the court system, who has the stomach for more?
Logged

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
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #80 on: December 02, 2007, 11:45:29 AM »

Evidence?

Are you being serious OZ? Well just in case you are and to further expand on my answer for the other poster:

But those who are counted worthy to attain that age and the ressurection of the dead , neither marry or are given into marriage . Nor can they die anymore for they are equal to the angels and are sond of God, being sons of the ressurection". Lk 20.35-36

Blessed Theophylact comments on the above verse- "Marriage is for the help of the mortal and for the replenishing of what is lacking. But where nothing is lacking , what need is there for replenishing?"


"For in the ressurection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels of God in heaven" Matt 22.30

St. John Chrysostom comments on the above verse-"After Adam was created there was no reason for marriage. It had not yet appeared.. As long as they were unconquererd by the devil and respected their own Master, virginity also continued. But when they became captives and took off this garment and sustained the dissolution deriving from death, the curse, the pain and toilsome existence, then together with these enters marriage..Do you see when marriage had its beginning? From the disobedience, from the curse, from death. For where there is death, there also is marriage.  Whereas when the first does not exist, then neither does the second follow."
Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #81 on: December 02, 2007, 12:39:25 PM »

But those who are counted worthy to attain that age and the ressurection of the dead , neither marry or are given into marriage . Nor can they die anymore for they are equal to the angels and are sond of God, being sons of the ressurection". Lk 20.35-36

"For in the ressurection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels of God in heaven" Matt 22.30
*yawn* I think we've covered before that these marriages are not dissolved, only that new ones are not created.

I'm tired of this subject.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2007, 04:52:25 PM by ytterbiumanalyst » Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #82 on: December 02, 2007, 12:46:20 PM »

Is this not a settled question in EO? This and the sinless Mary debate, I am surprised to see such disagreement.
Logged
The Iambic Pen
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic - Church of Old Rome
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite
Posts: 123



« Reply #83 on: December 02, 2007, 02:36:15 PM »

Is this not a settled question in EO? This and the sinless Mary debate, I am surprised to see such disagreement.
Me too. Huh
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #84 on: December 02, 2007, 04:30:29 PM »

*yawn* I think we've covered before that these marriages are dissolved, only that new ones are not created.

I'm tired of this subject.
Yep and Yep.
To summarize:
Marriage in the Orthodox Church is a Sacrament administered by the Church.
Marriage in the non-Orthodox Churches is a Sacrament administered by the married couple themselves.
Marriage in the Orthodox Church is not a contract or covenant. No vows are exchanged.
Marriage in the non-Orthodox Churches is a contract which ends when one or both of the parties dies.
Second marriages of widows and widowers in the Orthodox Church use the penitential rite of matrimony since they are a concession to human sin.
Non-Orthodox Churches do not have a penetential rite of matrimony.

Is this not a settled question in EO? This and the sinless Mary debate, I am surprised to see such disagreement.
Ignorance doesn't mean the question is not settled. It just means someone is ignorant.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #85 on: December 02, 2007, 05:03:11 PM »

Quote from:  ytterbiumanalyst
*yawn* I think we've covered before that these marriages are not dissolved, only that new ones are not created. I'm tired of this subject.
Quote from:  ozgeorge
Yep and yep.

Yup.  Thanks for the succinct outline, ozgeorge.  Smiley



[Edited for clarification and spelling.]
« Last Edit: December 02, 2007, 05:08:41 PM by EofK » Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #86 on: December 03, 2007, 02:28:20 AM »

*yawn* I think we've covered before that these marriages are not dissolved, only that new ones are not created.

I'm tired of this subject.

I'm a newbie here, sorry if you written on this subject and I havent caught it.  I just want some clarification as to what you mean that marriages in the next life are not dissolved. Are you saying that the marital union continues uninterrupted in the next life? And also clarification on this subject about those who have remarried. thanx
Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #87 on: December 03, 2007, 12:54:55 PM »

The subject has been hashed out several times, among them this thread, started in 2003:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,1444.0.html
This may be a good place to start, and many of your questions may be answered by what has already been posted.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,520


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #88 on: December 03, 2007, 02:31:44 PM »

So what ends the marriage?  Well, for starters, death does not (the church prefers that widows/widowers remain single, and if they marry again they are to do so in the penitential second marriage service). 

I dont understand this one. I lost my wife not too long ago. I was faithful and loving and patient to the end. I cant remarry with the full blessing of the Church.
But the guy whose marrige broke up because he was a bum, can.

Doesnt seem right.   
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #89 on: December 03, 2007, 02:39:49 PM »

I dont understand this one. I lost my wife not too long ago. I was faithful and loving and patient to the end. I cant remarry with the full blessing of the Church.
But the guy whose marrige broke up because he was a bum, can.

Doesnt seem right.   

That's not what I or anyone else sad.  If you were married in the church, the Church prefers that your marriage remain the only one.  If your wife dies, then the preference is to remain a widower.  But you can remarry.  If your wife leaves you, then the preference is to not re-marry.  But you can remarry.  If you leave your wife, then the preference is to not remarry.  But you can remarry.

The guy who is a bum whose marriage breaks up will probably be required to reconcile himself with the Church before even receiving communion, let alone getting remarried.  You wouldn't have to do any such thing in order to be remarried.  So your hypothetical situation doesn't even apply.

Even if you do get remarried, and the priest uses the penitential second marriage, it is still the Church blessing the union.  Chances are, if it's the woman's first marriage, that the full Marriage service will be used instead of the penitential one.  Even if she is a widow, and you use the second service, it is still not an analogous situation to the "bum" who gets divorced, has to go to confession and be reconciled, and then have the penitential service for his second marriage.

The only things that absolutely prevent remarriage (outside of certain deformities that are often not considered impediments anymore) are those conditions or actions that separate oneself from the Church - if you're out of communion, you can't do any sacrament other than Confession (assuming you were already baptized/chrismated) - or that bind you even more closely to the potential spouse (within 6 degrees of relationship). 
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #90 on: December 03, 2007, 02:40:26 PM »

I dont understand this one. I lost my wife not too long ago. I was faithful and loving and patient to the end. I cant remarry with the full blessing of the Church.
But the guy whose marrige broke up because he was a bum, can.

Doesnt seem right.   

I don't think that's correct.  If I understand correctly, all second marriages are supposed to be with the penitential rite, not just those in case of a death.
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #91 on: December 03, 2007, 02:51:11 PM »

I dont understand this one. I lost my wife not too long ago. I was faithful and loving and patient to the end. I cant remarry with the full blessing of the Church.
But the guy whose marrige broke up because he was a bum, can.

Doesnt seem right.   

Marc, I am sorry to hear of the loss of your wife.  May her memory be eternal!

The bum whose marriage broke up wouldn't receive the full blessing of the church, though.  In either case, if the person decided to remarry it would be considered a concession and the service used would be shorter and more focused on repentence.  St. Paul mentions why:

Quote from:  1 Corinthians 7:8-0
But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

Ytterbiumanalyst's link above also contains some good posts on the subject.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2007, 06:23:27 PM by EofK » Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,520


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #92 on: December 04, 2007, 09:59:20 PM »

That's not what I or anyone else sad.  If you were married in the church, the Church prefers that your marriage remain the only one.  If your wife dies, then the preference is to remain a widower.  But you can remarry.  If your wife leaves you, then the preference is to not re-marry.  But you can remarry.  If you leave your wife, then the preference is to not remarry.  But you can remarry.

I don't think that is the rule. I think someone who divorces can remarry ( even if he was a bum) but widowers are expected to remain alone. I think it has something to do with who your wife is in the afterlife... It's a flawed theory IMHO.

>>The guy who is a bum whose marriage breaks up will probably be required to reconcile himself with the Church before even receiving communion, let alone getting remarried.  You wouldn't have to do any such thing in order to be remarried.  So your hypothetical situation doesn't even apply.<<

Sure it does... I am expected to remain single and he is not.

>>Even if you do get remarried, and the priest uses the penitential second marriage, it is still the Church blessing the union.  Chances are, if it's the woman's first marriage, that the full Marriage service will be used instead of the penitential one.  Even if she is a widow, and you use the second service, it is still not an analogous situation to the "bum" who gets divorced, has to go to confession and be reconciled, and then have the penitential service for his second marriage.<<<

Once again.. A divorced man is not asked to remain single , a widower is.
They will cave in on any count and allow a second marriage but that is beside the point. A divorced man is not expected to remain single but a widower is.

Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #93 on: December 05, 2007, 05:13:46 AM »

Once again.. A divorced man is not asked to remain single , a widower is.
They will cave in on any count and allow a second marriage but that is beside the point. A divorced man is not expected to remain single but a widower is.
I have a question. In the Orthodox Church, is a widow asked to remain single also? Or is it OK for her  to remarry?
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #94 on: December 05, 2007, 07:00:20 AM »

In the Orthodox Church, is a widow asked to remain single also? Or is it OK for her  to remarry?
Both.
It is "OK" as a concession but not remarrying is preferrable. The same rules apply to both genders- there is no crowning of a second marriage.
The only difference occurs in the case of clergy. Widowed clergy are completely forbidden a second marriage.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #95 on: December 05, 2007, 10:27:25 AM »

I don't think that is the rule. I think someone who divorces can remarry ( even if he was a bum) but widowers are expected to remain alone. I think it has something to do with who your wife is in the afterlife... It's a flawed theory IMHO.

>>The guy who is a bum whose marriage breaks up will probably be required to reconcile himself with the Church before even receiving communion, let alone getting remarried.  You wouldn't have to do any such thing in order to be remarried.  So your hypothetical situation doesn't even apply.<<

Sure it does... I am expected to remain single and he is not.

>>Even if you do get remarried, and the priest uses the penitential second marriage, it is still the Church blessing the union.  Chances are, if it's the woman's first marriage, that the full Marriage service will be used instead of the penitential one.  Even if she is a widow, and you use the second service, it is still not an analogous situation to the "bum" who gets divorced, has to go to confession and be reconciled, and then have the penitential service for his second marriage.<<<

Once again.. A divorced man is not asked to remain single , a widower is.
They will cave in on any count and allow a second marriage but that is beside the point. A divorced man is not expected to remain single but a widower is.

Marc,

You have been given the Orthodox teaching on this (by more than one poster) yet you persist in stating that which is untrue.  In the course of discerning conversion to Orthodoxy marriage/death/divorce/remarriage has been an issue that I have done some research into (as it differs from the teachings of the Catholic Church and as it applies personally).

I have found no evidence whatever, to support your assertion that only those whose spouses die are "expected to remain single."

In cases where a marriage "ends" either by civil divorce or death it is "expected" that no remarriage will occur.  However, as a concession to human nature it is recognized in Orthodoxy that remarriages are going to happen.  As such it "allows" (perhaps tolerates is a better word) these marriages.  Both those of one who is divorced and one who is widowed who remarry are married using the same service.

You are fighting against shadows based on a flawed understanding.

Cleveland and the others who have pointed this out to you are correct.

No one is 'expected' to remarry.  It is preferable that those who divorce refrain from remarrying.  It is, likewise, preferable that those who are widows/widowers refrain from remarrying.

There is no double standard at play.
Logged

Carole
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #96 on: December 05, 2007, 11:04:23 AM »

Once again.. A divorced man is not asked to remain single , a widower is.
They will cave in on any count and allow a second marriage but that is beside the point. A divorced man is not expected to remain single but a widower is. 

Yes, the divorcee is asked to remain single.  It is a concession to allow him/her to marry again.  Yes, the widow/er is asked to remain single.  It is a concession to allow him/her to marry again.

The ideal for any Christian is either no marriage or one marriage.  Once someone enters into one marriage, then it is best for them not to enter into another, regardless of how the first one is disposed.

I know this is a touchy subject for you.  But you should understand that the "bum" of your example is at least held to the same standard as you are - and, in reality, held to a higher one, since s/he must repent before a second marriage, unlike you, who would not be required to do so if you decided to get married again.

No one is saying you cannot get married again - any widow or widower can get married again.  The only point where marriage is forbidden is if one has already been married 3 times; then the 4th+ are forbidden.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
The Iambic Pen
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic - Church of Old Rome
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite
Posts: 123



« Reply #97 on: December 05, 2007, 04:08:55 PM »

If I could briefly revisit the issue of "eternal marriage..."  I am still trying to determine if it is truly Orthodox teaching that people are eternally married, or if it is merely a popular opinion.  I must confess I was extremely shocked to hear of this.

Let's say an Orthodox woman is married to a man, and he dies, and then she remarries, and then her next husband dies, and then she dies.  In Heaven, whose wife will she be of the two, since both of them were married to her?  Personally, I thought Christ pretty well stated that there is no marriage in Heaven, but since the Orthodox Church appears to disagree with my admittedly fallible interpretation of Scripture, whose wife will she be of the two?
Logged
Sophie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #98 on: December 05, 2007, 04:17:57 PM »

If I could briefly revisit the issue of "eternal marriage..."  I am still trying to determine if it is truly Orthodox teaching that people are eternally married, or if it is merely a popular opinion.  I must confess I was extremely shocked to hear of this.

Let's say an Orthodox woman is married to a man, and he dies, and then she remarries, and then her next husband dies, and then she dies.  In Heaven, whose wife will she be of the two, since both of them were married to her?  Personally, I thought Christ pretty well stated that there is no marriage in Heaven, but since the Orthodox Church appears to disagree with my admittedly fallible interpretation of Scripture, whose wife will she be of the two?

That sounds so much like the question Jesus was asked about the wife of the seven brothers who each died leaving his widow for the next to marry. Is that your point, I guess?
Logged

"Thoughts are like airplanes flying in the air. If you ignore them, there is no problem. If you pay attention to them, you create an airport inside your head and permit them to land!" (Priestmonk Christodoulos Aggeloglou, Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain Mount Athos, Greece, 1998,pp. 29-30, 48)
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #99 on: December 05, 2007, 04:20:39 PM »

Let's say an Orthodox woman is married to a man, and he dies, and then she remarries, and then her next husband dies, and then she dies.  In Heaven, whose wife will she be of the two, since both of them were married to her?  Personally, I thought Christ pretty well stated that there is no marriage in Heaven, but since the Orthodox Church appears to disagree with my admittedly fallible interpretation of Scripture, whose wife will she be of the two? 

It doesn't matter whose wife she will be - all relationships, while not destroyed or forgotten, will be transformed by the heavenly experience.  Christ's words were against the understanding that relationships in heaven are the same as they are on Earth - the Sadduccees, who don't believe in bodily resurrection, were essentially asking Jesus "who will this woman sleep with in the resurrection?"  His response is that she's not going to sleep with anybody, a clear indication that the relationship will be different.

If one takes the two major principles of marriage that are found in the NT: 1) They're not supposed to be terminated except for adultery, and 2) even if one spouse dies the other is to avoid remarriage, then one can see a tendency towards a principle of eternal marriage - one which is physical and emotional on Earth, but is transformed and transfigured in Heaven. 
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,520


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #100 on: December 05, 2007, 04:20:56 PM »

>>>Marc,

You have been given the Orthodox teaching on this (by more than one poster) <<<

I am sorry if you are offended by a difference of opinion....



Quote
yet you persist in stating that which is untrue.  In the course of discerning conversion to Orthodoxy marriage/death/divorce/remarriage has been an issue that I have done some research into (as it differs from the teachings of the Catholic Church and as it applies personally).

I have found no evidence whatever, to support your assertion that only those whose spouses die are "expected to remain single." <<

Look again... Widowers are expected to remain single. I am quite sure of this since I am a widower and have been counseled on this.. Plus, you need to reread the prior posts. I believe they said this too but with the modifier that the Church will cave in to human weakness and often allow you to break the rule as a concession..

Which part of that do you contend in not accurate?

Quote
>>In cases where a marriage "ends" either by civil divorce or death it is "expected" that no remarriage will occur.  However, as a concession to human nature it is recognized in Orthodoxy that remarriages are going to happen.  As such it "allows" (perhaps tolerates is a better word) these marriages.  Both those of one who is divorced and one who is widowed who remarry are married using the same service.<<


There is a stricter standard for those widowed and an even stricter standard for clergy..... You seem to want to pass over that fact and jump right into how the Church will cave into additional marriages as a concession to weakness.... You seem to miss my point.

Church will cave in as a concession

Quote
You are fighting against shadows based on a flawed understanding.

Cleveland and the others who have pointed this out to you are correct.<<

snip<<

Please watch your tone. No one likes to be "Told" or condescended to...  Thanks a million

I went through and adjusted the quote tags in order to separate your responses from Carole's original post. ~Veniamin
« Last Edit: December 05, 2007, 04:29:16 PM by Veniamin » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,346


metron ariston


« Reply #101 on: December 05, 2007, 04:26:40 PM »

If I could briefly revisit the issue of "eternal marriage..."  I am still trying to determine if it is truly Orthodox teaching that people are eternally married, or if it is merely a popular opinion.

It is a popular opinion in many circles, but you will not find it expressed in the teachings or canons of any of the major Synods. In fact, at least two canonists have pointed out its lack of consistency with the canonical tradition.

Don't worry too much about it. We only know what God reveals to us, and He hasn't revealed that much about the details of our existence after death. We know we will be alive in Christ. That's the important part. We also know that the Sacraments of the Church, including marriage, have a particularly powerful impact on our eternal life, and that the Scriptures say that God Himself unites the two into one. That's ultimately why this teaching became popular. It takes this fundamental proclamation very seriously and infuses it with sacramental piety.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #102 on: December 05, 2007, 05:15:11 PM »

Both.
It is "OK" as a concession but not remarrying is preferrable. The same rules apply to both genders- there is no crowning of a second marriage.
The only difference occurs in the case of clergy. Widowed clergy are completely forbidden a second marriage.
OK. Here's another question concerning the Orthodox teaching. Suppose a Catholic couple marries in the RC Church. And then the wife dies. The widower then decides to convert to Orthodoxy and remarry a single, never married Orthodox lady, in the Orthodox Church. Will there be a crowning or not ?
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #103 on: December 05, 2007, 05:25:05 PM »

OK. Here's another question concerning the Orthodox teaching. Suppose a Catholic couple marries in the RC Church. And then the wife dies. The widower then decides to convert to Orthodoxy and remarry a single, never married Orthodox lady, in the Orthodox Church. Will there be a crowning or not ? 

Conjecture:

There will probably be a crowning - most bishops in this country will approve a normal wedding service if one in the couple has never been married before (excepting extreme circumstances).
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #104 on: December 05, 2007, 05:26:26 PM »

Hello,

No one is saying you cannot get married again - any widow or widower can get married again.  The only point where marriage is forbidden is if one has already been married 3 times; then the 4th+ are forbidden.
Why?
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #105 on: December 05, 2007, 05:30:34 PM »

Hello,
Why? 

Because the canons say so.  If a second marriage is a concession, then a third marriage is an extreme concession.  They decided to stop the madness there.  They only expanded it that far under pressure from an Emperor.  Otherwise, a second marriage would be extremely difficult, and a third impossible.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #106 on: December 05, 2007, 05:35:26 PM »

Also, I should say that it is for the good of the individual that we forbid a fourth marriage. My grandmother, who has lost three husbands to various illnesses, says that she will not remarry because she doesn't want to have to bury another (She's Protestant and could remarry if she wanted to; her denomination places no restrictions on the number of times one can marry).
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #107 on: December 05, 2007, 05:47:10 PM »

Hello,

Because the canons say so.
What canons?
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #108 on: December 05, 2007, 06:55:07 PM »

Conjecture:

There will probably be a crowning - most bishops in this country will approve a normal wedding service if one in the couple has never been married before (excepting extreme circumstances).
OK
This is the remaining question I had.
Does the Orthodox Church recognise a marriage which took place between two Catholics in a RC Church?
Basically, this was the question. The idea was that the Catholic marriage between two Catholics had taken place in a Catholic Church, but then the wife dies. Then the previously Catholic widower converts to Orthodoxy and wants to marry a single Orthodox lady. Then according to what you say, there will probably be a crowning. So, this would indicate to me, that the Orthodox Church did not recognise the marriage which had taken place in a RC Church between two RC's, because now there will be a crowning??
Thank you.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #109 on: December 05, 2007, 07:02:01 PM »

OK
This is the remaining question I had.
Does the Orthodox Church recognise a marriage which took place between two Catholics in a RC Church?
Basically, this was the question. The idea was that the Catholic marriage between two Catholics had taken place in a Catholic Church, but then the wife dies. Then the previously Catholic widower converts to Orthodoxy and wants to marry a single Orthodox lady. Then according to what you say, there will probably be a crowning. So, this would indicate to me, that the Orthodox Church did not recognise the marriage which had taken place in a RC Church between two RC's, because now there will be a crowning??

The crowning will largely be because the woman has not had a marriage previously.  I've known of situations where an Orthodox man who is a divorcee in the Church marries a single Orthodox woman who was never married and they had a crowning, because the woman was never previously married.

However, in addressing your other question, the marriage of two RC's in the RC Church has no bearing on the Orthodox Church.  If the man becomes Orthodox after he becomes a widower, I do not believe that his previous marriage will have any bearing on his upcoming one.  Now, if the girl were a divorcee, then it may be a different situation.  From a theoretical standpoint (I say this because I'm not a bishop and have never had to seriously consider this question) the previous marriage should have no bearing since he was not Orthodox and was never married in the Church.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2007, 07:02:16 PM by cleveland » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #110 on: December 05, 2007, 07:14:15 PM »

The crowning will largely be because the woman has not had a marriage previously. 
So there is a distinction made on the basis of gender, as to whether or not there shall be a crowning?
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #111 on: December 05, 2007, 07:16:35 PM »

So there is a distinction made on the basis of gender, as to whether or not there shall be a crowning?

No, there is no distinction made on gender - in your example (and in mine, coincidentally) the woman had no previous marriage.  If you had switched the genders in your example, then I would have switched the genders in my statement.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #112 on: December 05, 2007, 07:24:19 PM »

No, there is no distinction made on gender - in your example (and in mine, coincidentally) the woman had no previous marriage.  If you had switched the genders in your example, then I would have switched the genders in my statement.
OK.
Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions on crowning. I like this ritual of crowning. And not crowning in the case of a marriage between two people who have been divorced makes sense.  It adds a dimension not present in the Western Church, with the theory of annulments being pushed.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #113 on: December 05, 2007, 07:46:44 PM »

It adds a dimension not present in the Western Church, with the theory of annulments being pushed. 

Well, the theory of annulments works in the western view of marriage - if terms of the covenant were falsified or broken, then the covenant is broken.  It wouldn't work with the EO, since there is no covenant/contract involved.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #114 on: December 05, 2007, 07:53:33 PM »

Hello,

Well, the theory of annulments works in the western view of marriage - if terms of the covenant were falsified or broken, then the covenant is broken.  It wouldn't work with the EO, since there is no covenant/contract involved.

It doesn't mean that something became broken, but that it never actually happened in the first place. We should continue this discussion of covenants in the thread I started.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,520


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #115 on: December 05, 2007, 08:49:43 PM »

Okay, how would this work:

Man and woman married in a Jewish wedding. Man converts to Orthodoxy. Woman does not ............Woman dies. Sad

Man wants to get remarried to a Protesatant Woman who is divorced...

Whew.................. !!!     Please advise

Thanks
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #116 on: December 05, 2007, 09:17:38 PM »

Okay, how would this work:

Man and woman married in a Jewish wedding. Man converts to Orthodoxy. Woman does not ............Woman dies. Sad

Man wants to get remarried to a Protesatant Woman who is divorced...

Whew.................. !!!     Please advise

Thanks
Ok. I see you are making fun of my question.
True, it was overly scholastic in perspective.
Oh, well.
I hope you will forgive my curiosity in this matter.
Thank you kindly.
Blessings.
Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #117 on: December 05, 2007, 09:35:56 PM »

Hello,

You may want to check out John Paul II's Theology of the Body since it goes into the subject of marriage, its unity and indissolubility, etc.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,520


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #118 on: December 05, 2007, 10:01:29 PM »

Ok. I see you are making fun of my question.
True, it was overly scholastic in perspective.
Oh, well.
I hope you will forgive my curiosity in this matter.
Thank you kindly.
Blessings.

No no no  !!!!!!  LOL

This is my exact situation...... yes, my life is so bizarre you can mistake it for a joke... Have mercy  Smiley
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #119 on: December 05, 2007, 10:06:43 PM »

No no no  !!!!!!  LOL

This is my exact situation...... yes, my life is so bizarre you can mistake it for a joke... Have mercy  Smiley
So. you were married in a Jewish wedding? And you want to get married to a divorced Protestant in a Greek Orthodox Church?
Yes, this is another one of those interesting situations that proves that life is stranger than fiction.
From a Catholic point of view, they allow divorce and remarriage for a Jew who converts to Catholicism. Of course, the Protestant wife to be would have to get an annulment from her previous marriage. I think it is referred to as the Pauline privilege. But I don't know how it works in the Orthodox Church.
At first, i thought it was not a real situation.
Logged
Sarah
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 111


« Reply #120 on: December 05, 2007, 10:43:31 PM »

Hello,

It doesn't mean that something became broken, but that it never actually happened in the first place. We should continue this discussion of covenants in the thread I started.

This is what I don't understand.  Couples who have been married for 10/20/30+ years and who have children are told their marriage never took place?!?
Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #121 on: December 05, 2007, 10:50:31 PM »

Hello,

This is what I don't understand.  Couples who have been married for 10/20/30+ years and who have children are told their marriage never took place?!?
Yes, if there was something that barred a Sacrament from taking place. In most cases it is declared a defect in intent. For every Sacrament the minister must have the proper intent - that is to do what the Church does when administering the Sacrament. In the Sacrament of Matrimony, the ministers are the couple. So, if one of the couple did not have the proper intent (i.e., was mentally incompetent, too immature to understand the nature of marriage, was under duress, etc.) then no Sacrament took place.

The other side of the coin is whether annulments are granted way too readily today. But that doesn't affect what an annulment is.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #122 on: December 05, 2007, 11:12:16 PM »

Dear Athansios,

This is a hard pill to swallow. If what your saying is accurate, i think Rome should drop their tradition and take up the Orthodox tradition. The implication is that there are times under certain circumstances that the sacraments can be null and void. This implication would not be limited to matrimony, but to the Eucharist as well. A psycho priest who is eventually defrocked could very well fall under the category of "anullment". That his consecration of the Eucharist was null and void, that the change of the Gifts never took place. It would also brings into question the 'validity' of his ordination as well, suggesting he was nothing more than a layman in a cassock.

Likewise if the marriage is considered as if it never took place, it suggests the couple were soley fornicators who have birthed bastard children!   
Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #123 on: December 05, 2007, 11:19:28 PM »

Hello,

This is a hard pill to swallow.
But isn't so much of the Faith hard to swallow - some things more than others (especially in today's world). Wink


A psycho priest who is eventually defrocked could very well fall under the category of "anullment". That his consecration of the Eucharist was null and void, that the change of the Gifts never took place.
That is true, if the Priest is out of his mind, then he wasn't properly confecting the Eucharist. It could happen but it would be rare. Candidates are screened before admittance to the seminary and the Bishop would probably notice the Priests weird behavior or heard about it from one of the parishoners. If the Priest is mad enough to be incapable of have the proper intent, he almost certainly will show other highly visible signs of madness.


It would also brings into question the 'validity' of his ordination as well, suggesting he was nothing more than a layman in a cassock.
No, because the Bishop is the minister of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, not the candidate for ordination.


Likewise if the marriage is considered as if it never took place, it suggests the couple were soley fornicators who have birthed bastard children!
The Catholic Church uses in this case what the Orthodox would term 'economy' for those involved.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,520


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #124 on: December 05, 2007, 11:24:10 PM »

So. you were married in a Jewish wedding? And you want to get married to a divorced Protestant in a Greek Orthodox Church?
Yes, this is another one of those interesting situations that proves that life is stranger than fiction.
From a Catholic point of view, they allow divorce and remarriage for a Jew who converts to Catholicism. Of course, the Protestant wife to be would have to get an annulment from her previous marriage. I think it is referred to as the Pauline privilege. But I don't know how it works in the Orthodox Church.

She may well convert to Orthooxy as well..........

>> first, i thought it was not a real situation.
<<

Yeah....well         Go figure
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #125 on: December 06, 2007, 01:19:29 AM »

I am a bastard. Does it have any import or significance? None whatsoever. None at all.

Now, back in the Middle Ages, there might have been some restrictions for me (it was generally frowned upon for bastards to enter Holy Orders, though there were many exceptions). But at that time, my Catholic father would not have been able to civilly "divorce" his first wife and "marry" my Catholic mother in a Methodist church either.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #126 on: December 06, 2007, 03:20:53 AM »

She may well convert to Orthooxy as well..........
Hey Marc:
    Congratulations and best wishes on your upcoming marriage. Many years and every success.
Take care.
Stan
Logged
Paradosis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #127 on: December 07, 2007, 12:01:02 AM »

That is true, if the Priest is out of his mind, then he wasn't properly confecting the Eucharist. It could happen but it would be rare. Candidates are screened before admittance to the seminary and the Bishop would probably notice the Priests weird behavior or heard about it from one of the parishoners. If the Priest is mad enough to be incapable of have the proper intent, he almost certainly will show other highly visible signs of madness.

According to Latin teaching, the priest could also lack proper intent by believing that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a symbolic meal and not a true sacrifice offered to God for the four ends of adoration, supplication, propitiation and thanksgiving.  Furthermore, a bishop would invalidly ordain a candidate to the priesthood if he would intend not to confect the true sacrament of Holy Orders.  As you can see, the same rationale that is used to support the system of annulments could just as easily be applied to any other Roman Catholic sacrament.  I hope that we don’t eventually see a trend of Latin priests who begin proclaiming that they never really celebrated true Masses because they never believed that the Mass was a sacrifice, and bishops who proudly proclaim that they never confected the sacrament of holy orders because they believed that Catholic priests were equal to Protestant ministers.  Such widespread admission would make the annulment crises look conservative and the disturbing thing is that the Roman Catholic belief system has the possibility of this occurring written into its intentional (as opposed to canonical) understanding of the validity of the sacraments. 

God bless,

Adam
Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #128 on: December 07, 2007, 12:07:32 AM »

Hello,

According to Latin teaching, the priest could also lack proper intent by believing that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a symbolic meal and not a true sacrifice offered to God for the four ends of adoration, supplication, propitiation and thanksgiving.  Furthermore, a bishop would invalidly ordain a candidate to the priesthood if he would intend not to confect the true sacrament of Holy Orders.  As you can see, the same rationale that is used to support the system of annulments could just as easily be applied to any other Roman Catholic sacrament.  I hope that we don’t eventually see a trend of Latin priests who begin proclaiming that they never really celebrated true Masses because they never believed that the Mass was a sacrifice, and bishops who proudly proclaim that they never confected the sacrament of holy orders because they believed that Catholic priests were equal to Protestant ministers.  Such widespread admission would make the annulment crises look conservative and the disturbing thing is that the Roman Catholic belief system has the possibility of this occurring written into its intentional (as opposed to canonical) understanding of the validity of the sacraments. 

God bless,

Adam
I doubt that would happen. That's like saying, what if an asteroid hit the earth and wiped out civilization. Yeah, it could happen - and yeah, small stuff hits the earth - but a E.L.E. happening in our lifetimes - don't bet the paycheck on it.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #129 on: December 07, 2007, 12:14:32 AM »

According to Latin teaching, the priest could also lack proper intent by believing that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a symbolic meal and not a true sacrifice offered to God for the four ends of adoration, supplication, propitiation and thanksgiving.  Furthermore, a bishop would invalidly ordain a candidate to the priesthood if he would intend not to confect the true sacrament of Holy Orders.  As you can see, the same rationale that is used to support the system of annulments could just as easily be applied to any other Roman Catholic sacrament.  I hope that we don’t eventually see a trend of Latin priests who begin proclaiming that they never really celebrated true Masses because they never believed that the Mass was a sacrifice, and bishops who proudly proclaim that they never confected the sacrament of holy orders because they believed that Catholic priests were equal to Protestant ministers.  Such widespread admission would make the annulment crises look conservative and the disturbing thing is that the Roman Catholic belief system has the possibility of this occurring written into its intentional (as opposed to canonical) understanding of the validity of the sacraments. 

God bless,

Adam
This annulment business is something that is disturbing. Not only is it disturbing, but it really strains credibility. I can see where a marriage would not be valid if one of the partners was already married and this was hidden from the other person. So far this is OK. but it probably doesn't happen too often this way, as the statistics before Vatican II, show that there were very few marriage annulments granted. For example, in the USA, in 1930, there were 9 annulments granted for that year. This contrasts rather sharply, with the number being granted today, something like 50,000 or 60,000 per year, and they are granted on very flimsy grounds, like my spouse has been spending too much time in the gym, so this indicates that he did not have the proper intention for marriage. So after raising a family, and living together for ten or twenty years, the wife finds herself a new boyfriend and wants a divorce because her husband has been spending too much time in the gym. And then the Church declares that there never was any marriage in the first place because of this or some other ridiculous reason that never would have been brought up in the first place, except that the wife now wants a divorce. We are supposed to beleive that 60,000 Catholic couples per year in th eUSA didn;t really know what they were doing when they got married? Why did they go through all of the bother to have a wedding party and send out all those invitations. Oh, I get it. It was just a charade?!?!
Logged
Paradosis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #130 on: December 07, 2007, 12:23:51 AM »

I doubt that would happen. That's like saying, what if an asteroid hit the earth and wiped out civilization. Yeah, it could happen - and yeah, small stuff hits the earth - but a E.L.E. happening in our lifetimes - don't bet the paycheck on it.

Actually, this isn't as hypothetical as you may wish to think.  The majority of Latin priests in the West have been trained to downplay and even ignore the sacrificial nature of the Liturgy.  And in Western Europe, lay concelebration is the norm, thus revealing that these priests don't believe in the true nature of the Liturgy and their American priestly counterparts are often indifferent to such practices.  Additionally, the misguided ecumenism in the Latin Church runs the risk of causing already liberal bishops to equate Catholic priests and Protestant ministers as essentially the same, thus invalidating their consecration according to Latin teaching.  

However, let us go onto another issue.  One of the questions that have always intrigued me is the state of marriages in the medieval ages in light of the teaching on annulments.  If a marriage can be revealed to have never occurred due to the intention of one of the spouses to not choose to be married, wouldn't this cause all marriages that were arranged in the medieval and even pre-modern world to be invalid?  

God bless,

Adam
« Last Edit: December 07, 2007, 12:25:18 AM by Paradosis » Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #131 on: December 07, 2007, 12:35:20 AM »

Hello,

This annulment business is something that is disturbing. Not only is it disturbing, but it really strains credibility. I can see where a marriage would not be valid if one of the partners was already married and this was hidden from the other person. So far this is OK. but it probably doesn't happen too often this way, as the statistics before Vatican II, show that there were very few marriage annulments granted. For example, in the USA, in 1930, there were 9 annulments granted for that year. This contrasts rather sharply, with the number being granted today, something like 50,000 or 60,000 per year, and they are granted on very flimsy grounds, like my spouse has been spending too much time in the gym, so this indicates that he did not have the proper intention for marriage. So after raising a family, and living together for ten or twenty years, the wife finds herself a new boyfriend and wants a divorce because her husband has been spending too much time in the gym. And then the Church declares that there never was any marriage in the first place because of this or some other ridiculous reason that never would have been brought up in the first place, except that the wife now wants a divorce. We are supposed to beleive that 60,000 Catholic couples per year in th eUSA didn;t really know what they were doing when they got married? Why did they go through all of the bother to have a wedding party and send out all those invitations. Oh, I get it. It was just a charade?!?!

Like I said earlier, there are two elements. What an annulment is itself.

And the imprudent dispensing of them in the Catholic Church today, which is the element that disturbs you (it upsets me too).
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #132 on: December 07, 2007, 12:38:28 AM »

they are granted on very flimsy grounds, like my spouse has been spending too much time in the gym, so this indicates that he did not have the proper intention for marriage. So after raising a family, and living together for ten or twenty years, the wife finds herself a new boyfriend and wants a divorce because her husband has been spending too much time in the gym.

Evidence for this, please?
Logged
Paradosis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #133 on: December 07, 2007, 12:39:04 AM »

We are supposed to beleive that 60,000 Catholic couples per year in th eUSA didn;t really know what they were doing when they got married? Why did they go through all of the bother to have a wedding party and send out all those invitations. Oh, I get it. It was just a charade?!?!

To be fair, the Roman Catholic teaching is that the couple must intend to have a sacramental marriage (with its adjacent intention of marital faithfulness), not simply a secular union.  An interesting historical tidbit regarding this is that President John F. Kennedy and Jackie didn't have a sacramental marriage according to Latin teaching, as was revealed by what President Kennedy was recorded as saying to his brother, Ted, upon his wedding.  President Kennedy was overheard to say, "You don't have to be faithful, you know."  Given that we have record of this statement and it was certainly borne out in the President's personal life, we can reasonably conclude that the first Catholic presidential couple was never sacramentally married due to President Kennedy's defective intention of not remaining faithful.  Shocked

God bless,

Adam  
« Last Edit: December 07, 2007, 12:41:23 AM by Paradosis » Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #134 on: December 07, 2007, 12:39:50 AM »

Hello,

Actually, this isn't as hypothetical as you may wish to think.  The majority of Latin priests in the West have been trained to downplay and even ignore the sacrificial nature of the Liturgy.  And in Western Europe, lay concelebration is the norm, thus revealing that these priests don't believe in the true nature of the Liturgy and their American priestly counterparts are often indifferent to such practices.  Additionally, the misguided ecumenism in the Latin Church runs the risk of causing already liberal bishops to equate Catholic priests and Protestant ministers as essentially the same, thus invalidating their consecration according to Latin teaching.

Every Priest I know (and I know a lot of Priests, well!) absolutely believes in the sacramental reality of the Eucharist.




However, let us go onto another issue.  One of the questions that have always intrigued me is the state of marriages in the medieval ages in light of the teaching on annulments.  If a marriage can be revealed to have never occurred due to the intention of one of the spouses to not choose to be married, wouldn't this cause all marriages that were arranged in the medieval and even pre-modern world to be invalid?

I don't see an arranged marriage in the cultural context of the past as the same as a shotgun wedding today (no matter what the ultra-feminists say).
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #135 on: December 07, 2007, 12:43:19 AM »

To be fair, the Roman Catholic teaching is that the couple must intend to have a sacramental marriage (with its adjacent intention of marital faithfulness), not simply a secular union.  An interesting historical tidbit regarding this is that President John F. Kennedy and Jackie didn't have a sacramental marriage according to Latin teaching, as was revealed by what President Kennedy was recorded as saying to his brother, Ted, upon his wedding.  President Kennedy was overheard to say, "You don't have to be faithful, you know."  Given that we have record of this statement and it was certainly borne out in the President's personal life, we can reasonably conclude that the first Catholic presidential couple was never sacramentally married due to President Kennedy's defective intention of not remaining faithful.  Shocked

Wow, Adam, I didn't know this.

May God give us a real Catholic president. And no, that isn't Rudy!
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #136 on: December 07, 2007, 12:51:28 AM »

Hello,

Like I said earlier, there are two elements. What an annulment is itself.

And the imprudent dispensing of them in the Catholic Church today, which is the element that disturbs you (it upsets me too).
However, Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
If just about any marriage can be annulled, then what Catholic couple out there is actually married?
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #137 on: December 07, 2007, 12:55:14 AM »

Tribunals are not infallible. Catholic couples will have their consciences to deal with. Divorce and re-marriage are NOT God's plan.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #138 on: December 07, 2007, 12:55:41 AM »

 If a marriage can be revealed to have never occurred due to the intention of one of the spouses to not choose to be married, wouldn't this cause all marriages that were arranged in the medieval and even pre-modern world to be invalid?  

I think it is yes. Actually, it is really worse than that because Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
Logged
Paradosis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #139 on: December 07, 2007, 12:59:44 AM »

I don't see an arranged marriage in the cultural context of the past as the same as a shotgun wedding today (no matter what the ultra-feminists say).

Certainly, the arranged marriage was better than some think.  However, the fact remains that the essential element of free choice taught by Catholicism was lacking in these marriages and every one of them could be given an annulment by even the conservative Roman Rota of today.  This is powerful testimony that the Latin teaching on annulments wasn't a doctrine of the ancient Church, or the arranged marriage couldn't have been accepted because of the danger that this would cause to the validity of the marriage bond.  The medieval and counter-reformation Church just carried on this cultural practice, despite its intrinsic incompatibility with the Latin teaching on annulments.   

God bless,

Adam
Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #140 on: December 07, 2007, 01:05:53 AM »

Hello,

However, Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
If just about any marriage can be annulled, then what Catholic couple out there is actually married?

Who is Fr. Doherty?
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #141 on: December 07, 2007, 01:06:47 AM »

Evidence for this, please?
Yes. Please see the book Judging Invalidity, bu Father Lawrence G. Wrenn.  Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn, a canonist with the Hartford, Connecticut, diocesan tribunal, is considered the leading expert today among diocesan tribunalists on how to apply the teachings of Vatican II to the annulment process.  His books are published by the Canon Law Society of America.  And the books, including this one, by Father Wrenn are used as textbooks in university canon law courses.
If you would go to:
http://www.marysadvocates.org/wrennreasons.html
Scroll down a bit and you will see the following:
Reasons for annulment listed in Judging Invalidity ©2002,  By Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn
Working out a couple of hours a day in the gym.
Being described as arrogant and selfish with an "I don't need anyone else" attitude.
Saving one's salary in a personal account.
Seeming to be obsessed with one's body (personal appearance).
Ignoring one's parents on one occasion when they came for a visit.
Seeing the world as his apple.  (Psychiatric expert's term)
Never being satisfied with a gift given by one's spouse.
Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship.
Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage.
Suffering abandonment issues over a father who died.  
Protecting herself by putting a hard shell around herself.
Suffering from low self-esteem, self-absorption, and a need for attention.
Lacking emphathy and fearing intimacy.
Comparing oneself to others and always finding them happier.  
About a month before the wedding he drove his mother to a family reunion, leaving her all alone to make preparations for the wedding.  
The psychiatric expert described the respondent as porcupinish.  He didn't want people near him; surprises he liked even less.  It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman.  
The petitioner's mother always resented her.  The mother was unreasonably strict and hypercritical.  

These are the most flimsy and ridiculous reasons imaginable for declaring a marriage never happened in the first place. It is truly incredible as to how Catholics can just go along with this total turnabout and reversal of the teaching of the Church as it was before Vatican II on the indissolubility of marriage.
Just take a look at the statistics for the USA annulments:
9 annulments per year in 1930. (USA)
61,419 annulmenst per year in 1989. (USA)



Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #142 on: December 07, 2007, 01:07:24 AM »

Hello,

Certainly, the arranged marriage was better than some think.  However, the fact remains that the essential element of free choice taught by Catholicism was lacking in these marriages and every one of them could be given an annulment by even the conservative Roman Rota of today.  This is powerful testimony that the Latin teaching on annulments wasn't a doctrine of the ancient Church, or the arranged marriage couldn't have been accepted because of the danger that this would cause to the validity of the marriage bond.  The medieval and counter-reformation Church just carried on this cultural practice, despite its intrinsic incompatibility with the Latin teaching on annulments.   

God bless,

Adam
You have to look at arranged marriages in the eyes and context of that culture and time, not ours.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #143 on: December 07, 2007, 01:11:48 AM »

Hello,
You have to look at arranged marriages in the eyes and context of that culture and time, not ours.

And remember, in canon law, all marriages are assumed to be valid unless declared otherwise.
Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #144 on: December 07, 2007, 01:14:08 AM »

Hello,

And remember, in canon law, all marriages are assumed to be valid unless declared otherwise.

That same with every other Sacrament the Church administers.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #145 on: December 07, 2007, 01:19:30 AM »

Hello,

Who is Fr. Doherty?
See page 101 of the book:
Divorce & remarriage : resolving a Catholic dilemma
by Dennis Doherty
Publisher: St. Meinrad, Ind. : Abbey Press, 1974.
ISBN: 0870290363 : 9780870290367
OCLC: 1130212
Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #146 on: December 07, 2007, 01:23:07 AM »

Hello,

See page 101 of the book:
Divorce & remarriage : resolving a Catholic dilemma
by Dennis Doherty
Publisher: St. Meinrad, Ind. : Abbey Press, 1974.
ISBN: 0870290363 : 9780870290367
OCLC: 1130212

I don't have access to the book. I'm definitely getting a certain feel about him though.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #147 on: December 07, 2007, 01:23:30 AM »

Yes. Please see the book Judging Invalidity, bu Father Lawrence G. Wrenn.  Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn, a canonist with the Hartford, Connecticut, diocesan tribunal, is considered the leading expert today among diocesan tribunalists on how to apply the teachings of Vatican II to the annulment process.  His books are published by the Canon Law Society of America.  And the books, including this one, by Father Wrenn are used as textbooks in university canon law courses.
If you would go to:
http://www.marysadvocates.org/wrennreasons.html
Scroll down a bit and you will see the following:
Reasons for annulment listed in Judging Invalidity ©2002,  By Fr. Lawrence G. Wrenn
Working out a couple of hours a day in the gym.
Being described as arrogant and selfish with an "I don't need anyone else" attitude.
Saving one's salary in a personal account.
Seeming to be obsessed with one's body (personal appearance).
Ignoring one's parents on one occasion when they came for a visit.
Seeing the world as his apple.  (Psychiatric expert's term)
Never being satisfied with a gift given by one's spouse.
Feeling chronically disenfranchised in one's (spousal) relationship.
Not achieving the desired companionship and intimacy one wants in marriage.
Suffering abandonment issues over a father who died.  
Protecting herself by putting a hard shell around herself.
Suffering from low self-esteem, self-absorption, and a need for attention.
Lacking emphathy and fearing intimacy.
Comparing oneself to others and always finding them happier.  
About a month before the wedding he drove his mother to a family reunion, leaving her all alone to make preparations for the wedding.  
The psychiatric expert described the respondent as porcupinish.  He didn't want people near him; surprises he liked even less.  It was noted in the proceedings, however, that he was in love with another woman.  
The petitioner's mother always resented her.  The mother was unreasonably strict and hypercritical.  

These are the most flimsy and ridiculous reasons imaginable for declaring a marriage never happened in the first place. It is truly incredible as to how Catholics can just go along with this total turnabout and reversal of the teaching of the Church as it was before Vatican II on the indissolubility of marriage.
Just take a look at the statistics for the USA annulments:
9 annulments per year in 1930. (USA)
61,419 annulmenst per year in 1989. (USA)

Indeed. It's human nature. Marriage gone bad, liberals in the dioceses (who dissent from Church teaching about divorce and remarriage) offer an escape hatch, and people take it, thinking the "Church" is behind them.

It's terrible what has been going on in this country. This abuse is up with simony and the sale of indulgences.

Annulment statistics for 2002

(the most recent year figures are available)

-- Annulment hearings, worldwide: 56,246

-- Annulments granted, worldwide: 46,092

Annulments by continent:

-Africa: 343

-Oceania: 676

-Asia: 1,562

-Europe: 8,855

-North America: 30,968

-South and Central America: 5,688

http://www.osv.com/OSV4MeNav/MyCatholicFaithOnlineResources/WhattheChurchTeaches/WhattheChurchTeachesTheDignityofMarriage/tabid/387/Default.aspx

Well, one somewhat positive thing---the number in the US has dropped by half since 1989.

Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #148 on: December 07, 2007, 01:26:38 AM »

Hello,

I don't have access to the book. I'm definitely getting a certain feel about him though.
Take a look at this article published in the Catholic journal, Homiletic and Pastoral Review:
http://www.marysadvocates.org/HomileticJan05.html
This concerns the books by Father Wrenn which are used in university courses on canon law.

Logged
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #149 on: December 07, 2007, 01:27:19 AM »

Hello,

Take a look at this article published in the Catholic journal, Homiletic and Pastoral Review:
http://www.marysadvocates.org/HomileticJan05.html
This concerns the books by Father Wrenn which are used in university courses on canon law.

I'll give it a read and get back to you.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #150 on: December 07, 2007, 01:37:02 AM »

Well, one somewhat positive thing---the number in the US has dropped by half since 1989.
Well, did you take a look at what has been happening to the number of Catholic marriages since 1989.
Catholic couples aren't getting married in the numbers like they used to. They are choosing to NOT marry
and live together without the benefit of marriage. Well, why should anyone spend all that time and energy
and money, on a wedding celebration,  when the marriage has a good chance of being officially declared
completely null and void in the end anyway? You go through the entire wedding ceremony in Church,
you do your best to educate your children and raise a family and then after fifteen years, your wife
finds herself another boyfriend and has the Church declare that there never was any marriage
in the first place?!?! Why not be honest about it and just say the marriage didn't work out and
you want a divorce. Why go through all this phony pretense about there never having been any
marriage?
Logged
Carole
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (ish)
Posts: 271


« Reply #151 on: December 07, 2007, 10:10:23 AM »

However, Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
If just about any marriage can be annulled, then what Catholic couple out there is actually married?


That is one person's opinion.  That doesn't make it fact.

Though the priest that heard my petition for a Declaration of Nullity did have some very clear ideas on the reason for the increased numbers of approved petitions.  He feels it isn't so much a matter of too many Declarations being granted as too few people with proper catechesis and marriage preparation.  There are simply too many people (Catholic and otherwise) who are influenced wrongly by our rather hedonistic society and are not properly educated about what marriage really is.

Maybe the fault of marriages that end and are declared to be sacramentally null is at least partially the fault of the people getting married and the priests who are marrying them even without proper preparation and not solely that of the tribunals themselves who are, one would hope, simply looking at circumstances that were beyond their control.
Logged

Carole
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #152 on: December 07, 2007, 08:43:39 PM »

Point well taken, Carole.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #153 on: December 09, 2007, 11:23:44 PM »

This annulment business is something that is disturbing. Not only is it disturbing, but it really strains credibility. I can see where a marriage would not be valid if one of the partners was already married and this was hidden from the other person. So far this is OK. but it probably doesn't happen too often this way, as the statistics before Vatican II, show that there were very few marriage annulments granted. For example, in the USA, in 1930, there were 9 annulments granted for that year. This contrasts rather sharply, with the number being granted today, something like 50,000 or 60,000 per year, and they are granted on very flimsy grounds, like my spouse has been spending too much time in the gym, so this indicates that he did not have the proper intention for marriage. So after raising a family, and living together for ten or twenty years, the wife finds herself a new boyfriend and wants a divorce because her husband has been spending too much time in the gym. And then the Church declares that there never was any marriage in the first place because of this or some other ridiculous reason that never would have been brought up in the first place, except that the wife now wants a divorce. We are supposed to beleive that 60,000 Catholic couples per year in th eUSA didn;t really know what they were doing when they got married? Why did they go through all of the bother to have a wedding party and send out all those invitations. Oh, I get it. It was just a charade?!?!

When I was growing up, the woman next store was having an affair with a married man, who wouldn't leave his wife because he was "Catholic."  So that went on as long as I remember (about 15 years), and I know it was going on before I came aware of what was going on.


Worse yet, if I remember correctly, he went to daily mass.

Not that I'm advocating that he leave his wife.  According to the canons, he couldn't marry the adultress (our Archdiocese issued a directive reenforcing that).  Just it makes a mockery of what a "Catholic marriage" he had.
Logged

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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #154 on: December 09, 2007, 11:29:38 PM »

Yes, the divorcee is asked to remain single.  It is a concession to allow him/her to marry again.  Yes, the widow/er is asked to remain single.  It is a concession to allow him/her to marry again.

The ideal for any Christian is either no marriage or one marriage.  Once someone enters into one marriage, then it is best for them not to enter into another, regardless of how the first one is disposed.

I know this is a touchy subject for you.  But you should understand that the "bum" of your example is at least held to the same standard as you are - and, in reality, held to a higher one, since s/he must repent before a second marriage, unlike you, who would not be required to do so if you decided to get married again.

No one is saying you cannot get married again - any widow or widower can get married again.  The only point where marriage is forbidden is if one has already been married 3 times; then the 4th+ are forbidden.

Emperor Leo VI did so.  When the EP refused to bless the fourth marriage, he sought the pope of Rome, who blessed it.  Henry VIII, eat your heart out.
Logged

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
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #155 on: December 10, 2007, 01:36:30 AM »

Emperor Leo VI did so.  When the EP refused to bless the fourth marriage, he sought the pope of Rome, who blessed it.  Henry VIII, eat your heart out.
Wait. The situation of Henry VIII is not comparable to the situation of Leo VI, because the three previous wives of Leo VI were all dead. I thought that in the Roman Catholic Church, if your wife is dead, you are free to remarry. This was not the case for Henry VIII.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2007, 01:43:00 AM by stanley123 » Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #156 on: December 10, 2007, 09:39:45 AM »

Interesting fact. I would have thought Leo would have canned the EP when he refused.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #157 on: December 10, 2007, 11:01:02 AM »

Emperor Leo VI did so.  When the EP refused to bless the fourth marriage, he sought the pope of Rome, who blessed it.  Henry VIII, eat your heart out.

And it's still forbidden!  No 3rd divorce, no 4th marriage.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Nyssa The Hobbit
Used to be OrthodoxFairyQueen
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian as of 1/10/09
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 396



WWW
« Reply #158 on: December 13, 2007, 05:59:05 PM »

Take a look at this article published in the Catholic journal, Homiletic and Pastoral Review:
http://www.marysadvocates.org/HomileticJan05.html
This concerns the books by Father Wrenn which are used in university courses on canon law.

I just finished reading through this article.  There were times when I agreed with it, such as the Error of Quality section.  The wife has a great marriage yet thinks it's somehow okay to divorce a husband who can't have children?  Why not adopt, and hope that one day a miracle might happen?  I don't think the Tribunal should have granted an annulment for such a reason.  It ripped apart a loving couple by their souls, rather than counseling them to adopt.  In Imposed Error, Daniel should have been counseled to forgive his wife, not divorce her for something that happened before they even got married.  Was he even dating Joanne when she slept with his friend Eugene?  That part isn't clear.

However, there were also times when I found the article very judgmental, lacking compassion.  The Lack of Due Discretion example involved adultery and emotional abuse.  No woman should be expected to stand for that.  The Condition example showed a guy who was trying to force his wife to do things a certain way.  It's okay to want your wife to stay home with the children, but you can't expect or force it.  The husband's role is servant leader, not dictator.  It's no wonder he was deemed "controlling" and "domineering."  I've been in an emotionally abusive relationship; it's at least as bad as physical abuse, because it's more subtle and rips you apart psychologically, yet many people will tell you you're not really being abused because you have no black eyes or broken arms.  I've always been glad that I didn't have to stay in that relationship.

In the Intention Against Sacramentality example, you have a woman who does not even believe in Catholicism, being forced to marry in the church because her parents consider her to be "living in sin" even though she's legally married--and nearly everyone else in society would consider her to be legitimately married.  Forcing a nonbeliever to be married in the church like that seems like sacrilege, not what the marriage sacrament is supposed to be about at all.  A similar example is in Intention Against Perpetuity.  I've seen the results of people being legally married but considered "living in sin" by the Catholic church.  The wife was Catholic, the husband Lutheran.  Their child was considered illegitimate, even though legally he was conceived and born inside marriage.  All it did was push them away.  More than 35 years later, the wife and child are now Pagan.  I don't know what the husband is.

I also disagree with the comments about second marriages rarely being better than first.  I've seen a few examples just in my own circle of second marriages being far better than the first.  The divorces were not over trivial matters, and the second marriages were entered into with more care.

I don't think annulments should be granted easily; they must be examined based on the words of Christ and the "Pauline privilege."  But we can't forget compassion and the realities of how relationships can break down.  Some things can be fixed; some can't.
Logged

Author of "Tojet" (fantasy) and "The Lighthouse" (Gothic), info available at my website URL.
Navigator
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Discerning
Posts: 43


« Reply #159 on: December 13, 2007, 09:02:40 PM »

Well, one somewhat positive thing---the number in the US has dropped by half since 1989.

But I wonder if thats due to an overall tightening of the rules and a more substantial process or if it can just be chalked up to people not even bothering with the annulment.

This is entirely anecdotal but I know two couples who have divorced recently and there are no plans whatsoever to seek an annulment.  They just don't care.

Stephen
Logged

"From silly devotions and sour faced saints, deliver us O Lord!" - Teresa of Avila
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #160 on: December 13, 2007, 10:57:08 PM »

Wow, Adam, I didn't know this.

May God give us a real Catholic president. And no, that isn't Rudy!

With Brownbeck gone, is there another one in the race?
Logged

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
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #161 on: December 13, 2007, 11:11:02 PM »

With Brownbeck gone, is there another one in the race?
Alan Keyes ?
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,027



« Reply #162 on: December 14, 2007, 01:53:30 AM »

But I wonder if thats due to an overall tightening of the rules and a more substantial process or if it can just be chalked up to people not even bothering with the annulment.

This is entirely anecdotal but I know two couples who have divorced recently and there are no plans whatsoever to seek an annulment.  They just don't care.

Stephen

I'm wondering if it is because more people aren't choosing to get married, or if they are getting married, maybe outside the church?  It could be what you said as well.  I asked a friend of the family who is engaged when they are getting married (they are Catholic), he said in august 2009.  I said why wait, you love each other right?  He said, sure, but we want to get some debt paid down first.  I'd say that would be a reason maybe if you were 18, but not 27.  Why wait so long to be married?  To be able to have that loved bonded by the sacrament of Marriage.....  if they got married sooner, and they've been dating for several years, they'd be able to spend more of their earthly time together in holy sacramental marriage. 
I think another point we have seen in this post is the whole issue of what marriage is.
I don't know how well CCD/Sunday school teaches the sacrament of marriage.  I went to a Catholic High School where we had an entire year of religion class about marriage, love and relationships between friends family and our spouse.  My point being that maybe we need to stress more education about marriage and so forth to our young people.
Marriage isn't merely being able to file joint income taxes and getting better financing.  It isn't about having two people come together so the money pot can be bigger to purchase more expensive material items. 
Logged

stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #163 on: December 14, 2007, 02:24:48 AM »

I'm wondering if it is because more people aren't choosing to get married, or if they are getting married, maybe outside the church?  It could be what you said as well.  I asked a friend of the family who is engaged when they are getting married (they are Catholic), he said in august 2009.  I said why wait, you love each other right?  He said, sure, but we want to get some debt paid down first.  I'd say that would be a reason maybe if you were 18, but not 27.  Why wait so long to be married?  To be able to have that loved bonded by the sacrament of Marriage.....  if they got married sooner, and they've been dating for several years, they'd be able to spend more of their earthly time together in holy sacramental marriage. 
I think another point we have seen in this post is the whole issue of what marriage is.
I don't know how well CCD/Sunday school teaches the sacrament of marriage.  I went to a Catholic High School where we had an entire year of religion class about marriage, love and relationships between friends family and our spouse.  My point being that maybe we need to stress more education about marriage and so forth to our young people.
Marriage isn't merely being able to file joint income taxes and getting better financing.  It isn't about having two people come together so the money pot can be bigger to purchase more expensive material items. 

This whole business of easy marriage annulments doesn't make any sense to me at all. And further, it looks to me like the official sanctioning of easy to get annulments is having the unintended consequence of more and more Catholic couples either holding off on their marriages or not getting married at all? Why go through the bother and expense of getting married in the first place, when in the end, down the line fifteen or twenty years from now, the Church will officially declare that there never was any marriage in the first place? As Father Doherty quotes a tribunal official as saying: "There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
Logged
Tags: marriage  remarriage divorce 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.437 seconds with 192 queries.