OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 23, 2014, 07:30:50 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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Orthodox/ Catholic issue of divorce  (Read 7044 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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: 37,372



« Reply #45 on: October 10, 2010, 11:06:57 PM »

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PVS.HTM

This is simple nonsense: what Church Father ever interpreted "porneia" as incest? And like Humanae Vitae, where is any patristics on the gloss that it means "In the case of fornication, that is, of adultery, the wife may be put away: but even then the husband cannot marry another as long as the wife is living."

A more important problem is that the Catholic Church holds that she marries the couple, while the Vatican holds that the couple marries themselves. For us, then, the "intention" of the couple isn't at issue.

Seriously, you've got to stop changing names for your own whims. No one knows what or who  you're talking about when you do that.

Ialmisry Translation Guide:

the Vatican = the Catholic Church

the Catholic Church = Byzantines

blahblahblah snarky stuff blahblah = this is why I feel I am superior to you and never hesitate to point out that fact

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
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #46 on: October 10, 2010, 11:08:14 PM »

It's too big (sts). Kills the punchline.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Paisius
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Multi-Jurisdictional
Posts: 816


Reframed


« Reply #47 on: October 10, 2010, 11:10:20 PM »

It has little to do with the Church's power to bind and loose, at least in the way you are using it.  What is a sin remains a sin.  A second marriage is perpetual adultery, and the Church cannot change that.  What the Church can do is, through Economy, consider that sin to be the lesser of two evils and allow one to remain in the Church under that condition.  The unfortunate effect of the over use of Economy is that it deadens the people to gravity of the sin.


So every single Orthodox Christian in a second marriage is in a perpetual state of sin? Is that really what the Church teaches? If so the Catholic position seems much more kind and compassionate.

« Last Edit: October 10, 2010, 11:20:31 PM by Paisius » Logged

"Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest?" - Milton Friedman
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #48 on: October 11, 2010, 10:52:14 AM »

It has little to do with the Church's power to bind and loose, at least in the way you are using it.  What is a sin remains a sin.  A second marriage is perpetual adultery, and the Church cannot change that.  What the Church can do is, through Economy, consider that sin to be the lesser of two evils and allow one to remain in the Church under that condition.  The unfortunate effect of the over use of Economy is that it deadens the people to gravity of the sin.

So every single Orthodox Christian in a second marriage is in a perpetual state of sin? Is that really what the Church teaches? If so the Catholic position seems much more kind and compassionate.


There is nothing kind or compassionate about refusing to call a sin a sin, to the destruction of many souls.  Yes, a person in a second (or third or whatever) marriage is in a perpetual state of sin.  Sin is imperfection, and a second marriage is not a state of perfection, nor is it what God intended.  Even a cursory reading of the New Testament would point this out.  It is also quite difficult to “repent” of a second marriage since repentance means to turn around and go the other way, and that cannot be done when you continue to live in the sin.

I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #49 on: October 11, 2010, 01:52:24 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
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: 37,372



« Reply #50 on: October 11, 2010, 02:37:07 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.
Why not? The Vatican has blessed incest, both for Henry VIII to marry his brother's widow (Pope Julius II issuing the papal bull with the dispensation that troubled Pope Clement VII, Pope Leo X inbetween rewarding the incestuous monarch with the title "Defender of the Faith") and for Hitler's father to marry his niece, Hitler's mother. In the case it is interesting that Henry had a case: he was forced into the marriage by his father and betrothed without his consent (he had been planing on a ecclesiastical, and hence at least officially celibate, career). Does dispensations automatically preclude annullments?

What does the Vatican do about all those committing fornication for decades, before the way back machine, fueled by corban, makes nothing happen at all?

If any one has seen the series "the Tudors," recall or see the episode where King Henry tries to figure out an impediment to his marriage to Anne of Cleaves: he rewards some official (of the "old faith" if I remember correctly) for digging up an obscure clause of some forgetten treaty as an impediment, and beheads the Protestant who failed to uncover the desired escape clause.  The marriage tribunal would be envious.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #51 on: October 11, 2010, 04:12:22 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.
Why not? The Vatican has blessed incest, both for Henry VIII to marry his brother's widow (Pope Julius II issuing the papal bull with the dispensation that troubled Pope Clement VII, Pope Leo X inbetween rewarding the incestuous monarch with the title "Defender of the Faith") and for Hitler's father to marry his niece, Hitler's mother. In the case it is interesting that Henry had a case: he was forced into the marriage by his father and betrothed without his consent (he had been planing on a ecclesiastical, and hence at least officially celibate, career). Does dispensations automatically preclude annullments?

What does the Vatican do about all those committing fornication for decades, before the way back machine, fueled by corban, makes nothing happen at all?

If any one has seen the series "the Tudors," recall or see the episode where King Henry tries to figure out an impediment to his marriage to Anne of Cleaves: he rewards some official (of the "old faith" if I remember correctly) for digging up an obscure clause of some forgetten treaty as an impediment, and beheads the Protestant who failed to uncover the desired escape clause.  The marriage tribunal would be envious.
You didn't answer my question.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #52 on: October 11, 2010, 04:33:28 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.

Often it is the nature of the imperfection (sin).  Which other sins did you have in mind?  Murder?  Theft?  Bestiality?  Child molestation?  Most sins can be stopped without causing further damage.  The desire of a man to be with a woman is a natural desire, and some have even said that a man is not complete without the bond.  It is one thing to “bless” (if that is really what it is – I consider it more of a toleration) a natural condition tainted by sin than to bless something that is not natural or beneficial in any manner.     
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
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: 37,372



« Reply #53 on: October 11, 2010, 05:23:57 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.
Why not? The Vatican has blessed incest, both for Henry VIII to marry his brother's widow (Pope Julius II issuing the papal bull with the dispensation that troubled Pope Clement VII, Pope Leo X inbetween rewarding the incestuous monarch with the title "Defender of the Faith") and for Hitler's father to marry his niece, Hitler's mother. In the case it is interesting that Henry had a case: he was forced into the marriage by his father and betrothed without his consent (he had been planing on a ecclesiastical, and hence at least officially celibate, career). Does dispensations automatically preclude annullments?

What does the Vatican do about all those committing fornication for decades, before the way back machine, fueled by corban, makes nothing happen at all?

If any one has seen the series "the Tudors," recall or see the episode where King Henry tries to figure out an impediment to his marriage to Anne of Cleaves: he rewards some official (of the "old faith" if I remember correctly) for digging up an obscure clause of some forgetten treaty as an impediment, and beheads the Protestant who failed to uncover the desired escape clause.  The marriage tribunal would be envious.
You didn't answer my question.
Sure I did:
Why not? The Vatican has blessed incest,
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: 37,372



« Reply #54 on: October 11, 2010, 07:29:30 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.

Often it is the nature of the imperfection (sin).  Which other sins did you have in mind?  Murder?  Theft?  Bestiality?  Child molestation?  Most sins can be stopped without causing further damage.  The desire of a man to be with a woman is a natural desire, and some have even said that a man is not complete without the bond.  It is one thing to “bless” (if that is really what it is – I consider it more of a toleration) a natural condition tainted by sin than to bless something that is not natural or beneficial in any manner.     

Just so I know that we are on the same page (or not) you are refering to second marriages, or marriage in general?
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
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #55 on: October 11, 2010, 08:47:46 PM »

I think Godwin's Law should be expanded to include Henry VIII in discussions like this.  Wink
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #56 on: October 11, 2010, 09:25:47 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.

Often it is the nature of the imperfection (sin).  Which other sins did you have in mind?  Murder?  Theft?  Bestiality?  Child molestation?  Most sins can be stopped without causing further damage.  The desire of a man to be with a woman is a natural desire, and some have even said that a man is not complete without the bond.  It is one thing to “bless” (if that is really what it is – I consider it more of a toleration) a natural condition tainted by sin than to bless something that is not natural or beneficial in any manner.     

Just so I know that we are on the same page (or not) you are referring to second marriages, or marriage in general?

Sorry for that, brother.  I was referring to second and third marriage.  The first is a Sacrament of the Church and is indeed blessed in all respects, needing no apology. 
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
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: 37,372



« Reply #57 on: October 11, 2010, 10:40:33 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.

Often it is the nature of the imperfection (sin).  Which other sins did you have in mind?  Murder?  Theft?  Bestiality?  Child molestation?  Most sins can be stopped without causing further damage.  The desire of a man to be with a woman is a natural desire, and some have even said that a man is not complete without the bond.  It is one thing to “bless” (if that is really what it is – I consider it more of a toleration) a natural condition tainted by sin than to bless something that is not natural or beneficial in any manner.     

Just so I know that we are on the same page (or not) you are referring to second marriages, or marriage in general?

Sorry for that, brother.  I was referring to second and third marriage.  The first is a Sacrament of the Church and is indeed blessed in all respects, needing no apology. 
Thanks.  I thought so.
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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #58 on: October 12, 2010, 12:59:23 AM »

Sure I did:
Why not? The Vatican has blessed incest,

Sure you did not.  Incest is not a sin. 
Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #59 on: October 12, 2010, 05:55:40 AM »


In the Orthodox Church, normally both parties are excommuicate for a year after the action.


Is this an Egyptian or Arab custom?  I do not know of it in the Serbian and Russian Churches.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #60 on: October 12, 2010, 06:01:12 AM »

Quote

It has little to do with the Church's power to bind and loose, at least in the way you are using it.  What is a sin remains a sin.  A second marriage is perpetual adultery, and the Church cannot change that.


My dear brothers.  This is nonsense!   It hurts to read it!    Can we really imagine that the Church confers the Holy Mystery of Marriage and calls the Holy Spirit to bless PERPETUAL  ADULTERY !!?

I apologise to any Orthodox here who are in a second marriage.  Please be assured that you are NOT in a state of perpetual adultery.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #61 on: October 12, 2010, 06:35:44 AM »


There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first. 



Brother Punch,  forgive me if I correct you but this is also a piece of common disinformation which needs a correction.

I can only assume that the Rite of a Second Crowning is used so rarely among the Orthodox that people are not familiar with it.  In its own way that is a good indication of the stability of Orthodox first marriages.


The Service of Second Crowning contains two penitential prayers at its commencement (actually at the ending of the Betrothal) but these then give way to the normal nuptial joy as the wedding transitions out of the penitential prayers and into the familiar Rite of Crowning, picking it up at the prayer "O holy God, who didst create man out of the dust and didst fashion his wife out of his rib..."  The wedding takes on and finishes with the same joy as the first wedding.  It contains all the joyful elements ~ the Crowning, the Dance of Isaiah, the Common Cup, etc. 

If you have a Trebnik (Book of Needs) you can check this out for yourself.
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: 37,372



« Reply #62 on: October 12, 2010, 07:16:24 AM »


In the Orthodox Church, normally both parties are excommuicate for a year after the action.


Is this an Egyptian or Arab custom?  I do not know of it in the Serbian and Russian Churches.

I don't know directly from the Patriarchal Parishes nor ROCOR, but the OCA I know that from at least one divorce I know.  I can't imagine they didn't get it from the Russians. Across the jurisdictions in the US, it seems to be common knowledge, such that no one I recall thinks anything about it.  Personally, it was made exceptional in my case in that the priest told me to come to confession and communion the week end after, given the egregious behavior of my ex and the fact that although I "had all the grounds for divorce," I fought it rather than than pursued 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
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: 37,372



« Reply #63 on: October 12, 2010, 07:24:01 AM »

Sure I did:
Why not? The Vatican has blessed incest,

Sure you did not.  Incest is not a sin. 

Quote
Its specific malice is contracted by such unlawful commerce between those related within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity, as computed by canonists. The guilt is incurred not only by those sinful acts which are, as theologians say, fully consummated, but also by incomplete acts.

The particular deformity of incest comes not merely from the violation of the virtue of chastity, but also from the offence against the mingled affection and reverence with which parents and, proportionately, other relatives should be regarded.

It is certain that this crime has its distinctive enormity from the prohibition of the natural law, where there is question of the first degree in the direct line, for instance, between parents and children. For the other degrees it is probable that recourse must be had to the ecclesiastical law which invalidates marriage within those limits.

It is commonly held, with regard to those related by consanguinity or affinity, that with the exception of the first degree in the direct line all forms of incest are, morally speaking, of the same species, and therefore for the integrity of confession there is no necessity to distinguish between them. It must be noted, however, that carnal sins between those who are spiritually or legally related within the degrees that would render their marriage invalid, are separate species of incest.

A decree of the Holy Office, 25 June, 1885, declares that in applications for matrimonial dispensations it is no longer necessary to make mention of the circumstance of incest relations between the petitioners.

I wonder what that last part is about.

Quote
Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. June 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07717a.htm

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
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #64 on: October 12, 2010, 08:01:36 AM »


There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first. 



Brother Punch,  forgive me if I correct you but this is also a piece of common disinformation which needs a correction.

I can only assume that the Rite of a Second Crowning is used so rarely among the Orthodox that people are not familiar with it.  In its own way that is a good indication of the stability of Orthodox first marriages.


The Service of Second Crowning contains two penitential prayers at its commencement (actually at the ending of the Betrothal) but these then give way to the normal nuptial joy as the wedding transitions out of the penitential prayers and into the familiar Rite of Crowning, picking it up at the prayer "O holy God, who didst create man out of the dust and didst fashion his wife out of his rib..."  The wedding takes on and finishes with the same joy as the first wedding.  It contains all the joyful elements ~ the Crowning, the Dance of Isaiah, the Common Cup, etc. 

If you have a Trebnik (Book of Needs) you can check this out for yourself.

It is the first, penitential portion, that I refer to.  If the second marriage is as blessed as the first, why is there need for repentance?  Is not the penitential portion of the service a recognition that what comes next should not have been?  When I was married, I did not have to repent for not being celibate.  It is reasonable that after the penitential prayers that the service revert to a normal wedding.  It does not change the fact that the second wedding is imperfect, but is shows that the Church can cover that imperfection with God's Grace (perhaps a term I carried over from my Protestant past?) just as His Grace covers all of our imperfections.

My view of this matter did not come of my own, but the penitential nature of the second marriage was impressed upon me by both an Antiochian priest and one from the ROCOR.  I guess that I adopted the view with such vigor since it is so rare that ROCOR and Antioch agree on anything  Smiley
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
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: 37,372



« Reply #65 on: October 12, 2010, 08:09:05 AM »


There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first. 



Brother Punch,  forgive me if I correct you but this is also a piece of common disinformation which needs a correction.

I can only assume that the Rite of a Second Crowning is used so rarely among the Orthodox that people are not familiar with it.  In its own way that is a good indication of the stability of Orthodox first marriages.


The Service of Second Crowning contains two penitential prayers at its commencement (actually at the ending of the Betrothal) but these then give way to the normal nuptial joy as the wedding transitions out of the penitential prayers and into the familiar Rite of Crowning, picking it up at the prayer "O holy God, who didst create man out of the dust and didst fashion his wife out of his rib..."  The wedding takes on and finishes with the same joy as the first wedding.  It contains all the joyful elements ~ the Crowning, the Dance of Isaiah, the Common Cup, etc. 

If you have a Trebnik (Book of Needs) you can check this out for yourself.

It is the first, penitential portion, that I refer to.  If the second marriage is as blessed as the first, why is there need for repentance?  Is not the penitential portion of the service a recognition that what comes next should not have been?  When I was married, I did not have to repent for not being celibate.  It is reasonable that after the penitential prayers that the service revert to a normal wedding.  It does not change the fact that the second wedding is imperfect, but is shows that the Church can cover that imperfection with God's Grace (perhaps a term I carried over from my Protestant past?) just as His Grace covers all of our imperfections.

My view of this matter did not come of my own, but the penitential nature of the second marriage was impressed upon me by both an Antiochian priest and one from the ROCOR.  I guess that I adopted the view with such vigor since it is so rare that ROCOR and Antioch agree on anything  Smiley
I know the OCA also agrees: it is admitted that it is a somewhat an innovation to have a crowning if either partner is entering marriage for the first time.  If it is the second time for both, no crowns.
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
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #66 on: October 12, 2010, 08:12:25 AM »

Quote

It has little to do with the Church's power to bind and loose, at least in the way you are using it.  What is a sin remains a sin.  A second marriage is perpetual adultery, and the Church cannot change that.


My dear brothers.  This is nonsense!   It hurts to read it!    Can we really imagine that the Church confers the Holy Mystery of Marriage and calls the Holy Spirit to bless PERPETUAL  ADULTERY !!?

I apologise to any Orthodox here who are in a second marriage.  Please be assured that you are NOT in a state of perpetual adultery.

I would come to the same conclusion as you, if the only thing that I wrote was what you quoted.  However, you seemed to miss the discussion of the binding and loosing.  If the Church, through the office of the keys, looses the couple to be married, the sin is covered by the Grace of the Holy Spirit.  How many of us are Baptized, yet are still imperfect and continue to sin?  How many of you are ordained, yet remain imperfect and continue to sin.  If the Holy Spirit did not bless sinners, none of us would be blessed.  My statements on second marriage are not intended to downgrade those who have entered into such, for their sin is certainly no worse in the eyes of God than sins I commit daily.  Christ says that when I look at another woman with lust in my heart, I have committed adultery with her.  They were intended to argue against those to take the matter lightly with annulments after many years and other such farces just to make excuses for sin.  It is only when we acknowledge the sin that we can truly repent thereof.  Looking at another woman when married is adultery in God's eye, but marrying one after being married to another is not?  I cannot come to terms with that.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
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: 37,372



« Reply #67 on: October 12, 2010, 08:26:00 AM »

Quote

It has little to do with the Church's power to bind and loose, at least in the way you are using it.  What is a sin remains a sin.  A second marriage is perpetual adultery, and the Church cannot change that.


My dear brothers.  This is nonsense!   It hurts to read it!    Can we really imagine that the Church confers the Holy Mystery of Marriage and calls the Holy Spirit to bless PERPETUAL  ADULTERY !!?

I apologise to any Orthodox here who are in a second marriage.  Please be assured that you are NOT in a state of perpetual adultery.

I would come to the same conclusion as you, if the only thing that I wrote was what you quoted.  However, you seemed to miss the discussion of the binding and loosing.  If the Church, through the office of the keys, looses the couple to be married, the sin is covered by the Grace of the Holy Spirit.  How many of us are Baptized, yet are still imperfect and continue to sin?  How many of you are ordained, yet remain imperfect and continue to sin.  If the Holy Spirit did not bless sinners, none of us would be blessed.  My statements on second marriage are not intended to downgrade those who have entered into such, for their sin is certainly no worse in the eyes of God than sins I commit daily.  Christ says that when I look at another woman with lust in my heart, I have committed adultery with her.  They were intended to argue against those to take the matter lightly with annulments after many years and other such farces just to make excuses for sin.  It is only when we acknowledge the sin that we can truly repent thereof.  Looking at another woman when married is adultery in God's eye, but marrying one after being married to another is not?  I cannot come to terms with that.

That is the most troubling aspect of marital corban a/k/a annullments: no repentance.  I'd like to see the numbers of how many second marriages entered via annullments end up annulled.
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #68 on: October 12, 2010, 09:03:33 AM »

Dear Brother Punch,

The answer to all your rationalising and surmising and misrepresentations and removal of joy from an Orthodox second wedding can be easily given.   

Take in your hand the Service Book and read the Rite of Second Crowning.

It is all there - all the theology clearly expressed.

For the record, all that I know of much of Orthodoxy proceeds from my time as a monk and priest (in parish work) in the holy Serbian Church.

Hieromonk Ambrose


Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #69 on: October 12, 2010, 09:10:31 AM »


There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.

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

My view of this matter did not come of my own, but the penitential nature of the second marriage was impressed upon me by both an Antiochian priest and one from the ROCOR. 


Then they are simply wrong and I can only assume they have no familiarity with the Rite of Second Crowning.

There are two penitential prayers at the conclusion of the Betrothal.  They would take about 2 minutes in a ceremony of 1 and 1/2 hours.   They do not impress a penitential nature on the ceremony nor do they remove the joy of the service.
Logged
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #70 on: October 12, 2010, 09:26:31 AM »

There are two penitential prayers at the conclusion of the Betrothal.

Are they anywhere online? When were they written (which century)? Are they the only alterations to the rite or are there any more (e.g., a different - more sorrowful, less joyful - tune)? Are they simply added or placed instead of something (the OrthodoxWiki says that: "in the service for a second marriage, some of the joyful ceremonies are omitted and replaced by penitential prayers")? I will be grateful for answers to any of these questions. Smiley
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 09:30:32 AM by Michał » Logged
LBK
Moderated
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,489


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #71 on: October 12, 2010, 10:01:31 AM »

Here are the relevant prayers in bold for the second marriage service. They are said after the exchange of the rings at the betrothal. Other than that, the service is exactly the same as that for a first marriage:

Quote

Deacon: Let us pray to the Lord.

Singers: Lord, have mercy.

The Priest says this Prayer:

Master, Lord our God, who spares all and foresees all, who knows the secrets of men and has knowledge of all, be merciful to our sins and pardon the offences of Your suppliants, calling them to repentance, granting them pardon of faults, mercy for sins, forgiveness of offences, voluntary and involuntary. You, our Fashioner and Creator, who knows the weakness of human nature; who pardoned Rahab the harlot and accepted the Publican’s repentance, do not remember our sins of ignorance since our youth. If You, Lord, should mark iniquities: O Lord, who will stand? What flesh will be justified in Your presence? For You alone are just, without sin, holy, great in mercy, great in compassion and repent over the sins of humankind. Do You, Master, who have made Your servants, N. and M, Your own, unite them to each other with love. Give them the repentance of the Publican, the tears of the Harlot, the confession of the Thief, so that, through repentance from their whole heart, practising Your commandments in harmony and peace, they may be found worthy of Your heavenly kingdom.

For it is You who disposes all things, and to You we give glory, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages.

Singers: Amen.

Priest: Peace to all.

Singers: And to your spirit.

Deacon: Bow your heads to the Lord.

Singers: To You, O Lord.

The Priest prays:

Lord Jesus Christ, who were lifted up on the precious and life-giving Cross, tore up the record against us and delivered us from the dominion of the devil, be merciful to the iniquities of Your servants, because they, unable to bear the heat and burden of the day and the burning fever of the flesh, are now entering together the communion of a second marriage, as You made it lawful through the Apostle Paul, Your vessel of election, saying for the sake of us in our lowliness, ‘It is better to marry in the Lord, than to burn’. As You are good and love mankind, have mercy, pardon, show pity, remit, forgive our debts, for You took our sicknesses on Your own shoulders, for no one is sinless or without stain, not even were their life but one day, but You alone, who wore flesh without sin and granted us eternal dispassion.

For You are God, God of those who repent, and to You we give glory, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages.

Singers: Amen.

Deacon: Let us pray to the Lord.

Singers: Lord, have mercy.

And the Priest says the prayer: Holy God, who fashioned man from the dust…

Then the Crowning follows and the rest of the service for a first marriage.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 10:05:38 AM by LBK » Logged
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #72 on: October 12, 2010, 10:44:41 AM »

Thank you, LBK. Do you happen to know which century (or at least: millennium) are these prayers from?
Logged
Paisius
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Multi-Jurisdictional
Posts: 816


Reframed


« Reply #73 on: October 12, 2010, 12:05:16 PM »

It is only when we acknowledge the sin that we can truly repent thereof.  Looking at another woman when married is adultery in God's eye, but marrying one after being married to another is not?  I cannot come to terms with that.


No one is saying it's not a sin. What I object to is the idea that a second marriage is perpetual adultery. I can't imagine that the Church would bless a situation like that. Can you provide any proof that is the Church's teaching other than your personal interpretation of the second marriage rite?
Logged

"Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest?" - Milton Friedman
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #74 on: October 12, 2010, 12:16:26 PM »



I believe that the Orthodox position is clearly more loving than the Catholic, or the offshoots of the Catholics.  The Orthodox recognize the imperfection of the situation, and by the binding and loosing granted by Christ to His body, the Church, allow the second marriage as a concession to our weakness, and to keep us from falling into even greater sin.  There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.  This is also shown by the Church when it will not allow a man who has been married twice to enter the Priesthood, except in the rare extreme (and even that will cause a scandal).  I believe that God looks far more kindly upon us when in humility we recognize that we are fallen and not perfect and realize that we are in sin than when we have been lulled into a false belief that everything is OK. That is NOT love or compassion. 

So why not extend this same "kindness" to every every sin, and have the Church bless those sins as well.
Why not? The Vatican has blessed incest, both for Henry VIII to marry his brother's widow (Pope Julius II issuing the papal bull with the dispensation that troubled Pope Clement VII, Pope Leo X inbetween rewarding the incestuous monarch with the title "Defender of the Faith") and for Hitler's father to marry his niece, Hitler's mother. In the case it is interesting that Henry had a case: he was forced into the marriage by his father and betrothed without his consent (he had been planing on a ecclesiastical, and hence at least officially celibate, career). Does dispensations automatically preclude annullments?

What does the Vatican do about all those committing fornication for decades, before the way back machine, fueled by corban, makes nothing happen at all?

If any one has seen the series "the Tudors," recall or see the episode where King Henry tries to figure out an impediment to his marriage to Anne of Cleaves: he rewards some official (of the "old faith" if I remember correctly) for digging up an obscure clause of some forgetten treaty as an impediment, and beheads the Protestant who failed to uncover the desired escape clause.  The marriage tribunal would be envious.
You didn't answer my question.
Sure I did:
Why not? The Vatican has blessed incest,
It's amazing the way you avoid a question that you don't want to answer.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #75 on: October 12, 2010, 12:18:50 PM »


There is no joy in the ceremony for a second marriage, and the Church does not recognize the second marriage with the same joy as the first.

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

My view of this matter did not come of my own, but the penitential nature of the second marriage was impressed upon me by both an Antiochian priest and one from the ROCOR. 


Then they are simply wrong and I can only assume they have no familiarity with the Rite of Second Crowning.

There are two penitential prayers at the conclusion of the Betrothal.  They would take about 2 minutes in a ceremony of 1 and 1/2 hours.   They do not impress a penitential nature on the ceremony nor do they remove the joy of the service.

That would be a false assumption.  One sat on the Ecclesiastical Court that has to oversee the painful and ugly process of Orthodox Christian Divorce.  The other, at the time, was still reeling from the scandal in the Anticohian Church where a priest was allowed to remain a priest after a second marriage, and this to a woman that he was providing council during her divorce.  Both men were priests long enough to be quite aware of the order of service for a second marriage.  They were also aware that the penitential prayers would not be necessary if there was nothing to repent.  Both were married men of good character who were quite upset at the current state of marriage, even in the Orthodox Church.  Perhaps if there was a fault in their thinking, it would be that both were converts from denominations that take marriage VERY seriously.  I know that even as a Missouri Synod Lutheran, my father was very hesitant to perform a second marriage with all the pomp of a first, and preferred it to be a private affair.  In the Wisconsin Synod, where I sat on what was equivalent to an Ecclesiastical Court, if one was not the aggrieved party in a case of adultery, allowing a second marriage in the Church was not likely.  Perhaps you take your view because you have only seen second marriages allowed for canonical and Biblical reasons.  Here in the United States, everything is watered down unless one is very vigilant.  Perhaps this leads to over reaction on the part of some of us.  I will ask my Serbian Priest what he thinks of the matter.   
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #76 on: October 12, 2010, 12:39:50 PM »

It is only when we acknowledge the sin that we can truly repent thereof.  Looking at another woman when married is adultery in God's eye, but marrying one after being married to another is not?  I cannot come to terms with that.


No one is saying it's not a sin. What I object to is the idea that a second marriage is perpetual adultery. I can't imagine that the Church would bless a situation like that. Can you provide any proof that is the Church's teaching other than your personal interpretation of the second marriage rite?

 I did.  And in English even.  The word of two priests from different Orthodox jurisdictions, and confirmed by a post from ialmisry commenting on his experience in your own jurisdiction.  Someone else pointed to an article in the Orthodox Wiki which would also confirm "my" interpretation, which is hardly only my own personal interpretation.  However, if you want even more, read the interpretation of Canon VII of the regional Council held in Neocaesarea in 315.  You will find it on page 512 of the English translation of the Rudder.  You may also want to read the interpretation of Canon LXXX of St. Basil, page 836 of the same reference.  I have run across more in my years of reading, but these were easy for me to find.  You may find the commentary on these interpretations interesting, but the commentator is known to be so conservative that even "my" interpretation would be considered grossly liberal, so you can skip it.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Paisius
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Multi-Jurisdictional
Posts: 816


Reframed


« Reply #77 on: October 12, 2010, 12:47:17 PM »

I did.  And in English even.  The word of two priests from different Orthodox jurisdictions, and confirmed by a post from ialmisry commenting on his experience in your own jurisdiction.  Someone else pointed to an article in the Orthodox Wiki which would also confirm "my" interpretation, which is hardly only my own personal interpretation.  However, if you want even more, read the interpretation of Canon VII of the regional Council held in Neocaesarea in 315.  You will find it on page 512 of the English translation of the Rudder.  You may also want to read the interpretation of Canon LXXX of St. Basil, page 836 of the same reference.  I have run across more in my years of reading, but these were easy for me to find.  You may find the commentary on these interpretations interesting, but the commentator is known to be so conservative that even "my" interpretation would be considered grossly liberal, so you can skip it.



You did? Where? I don't see anything on this thread or any of the links substantiating your position that a second marriage is perpetual adultery. Also, I don't have my copy of the canons of Neocaesarea handy right now so perhaps you could provide me with a source?
Logged

"Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest?" - Milton Friedman
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 29,493



« Reply #78 on: October 12, 2010, 12:59:40 PM »

I made a mistake
So just ignore this here post
That will be all, thanks
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 01:00:47 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

Lt. Ray Makonnen: "You know, Captain, every year of my life I grow more and more convinced that the wisest and the best is to fix our attention on the good and the beautiful. If you just take the time to look at it."

Capt. Frank Chapman: "You're some guy, Makonnen."
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: 37,372



« Reply #79 on: October 12, 2010, 01:11:11 PM »

It is only when we acknowledge the sin that we can truly repent thereof.  Looking at another woman when married is adultery in God's eye, but marrying one after being married to another is not?  I cannot come to terms with that.


No one is saying it's not a sin. What I object to is the idea that a second marriage is perpetual adultery. I can't imagine that the Church would bless a situation like that. Can you provide any proof that is the Church's teaching other than your personal interpretation of the second marriage rite?

 I did.  And in English even.  The word of two priests from different Orthodox jurisdictions, and confirmed by a post from ialmisry commenting on his experience in your own jurisdiction.  Someone else pointed to an article in the Orthodox Wiki which would also confirm "my" interpretation, which is hardly only my own personal interpretation.  However, if you want even more, read the interpretation of Canon VII of the regional Council held in Neocaesarea in 315.  You will find it on page 512 of the English translation of the Rudder.  You may also want to read the interpretation of Canon LXXX of St. Basil, page 836 of the same reference.  I have run across more in my years of reading, but these were easy for me to find.  You may find the commentary on these interpretations interesting, but the commentator is known to be so conservative that even "my" interpretation would be considered grossly liberal, so you can skip it.
1. Unless you are on Mt. Athos, stay away from the Rudder (not you personally, just general admonition).
2.
Quote
7. No Presbyter is permitted to dine at the wedding of persons marrying a second time. For, if the plight of a digamist is one demanding repentance, what will be that of a presbyter who is lending his consent to the wedding by attending it!


Interpretation.

The present Canon decrees that no presbyter shall sit down and eat dinner at the wedding of a digamist, since the digamist is burdened with sin and under the penalty of a sentence. If, therefore, the priest should sit down and eat, he thereby shows that he is offering his good will and congratulations himself to the one who is burdened with sin and condemnation on account of that wedding. For the first marriage, according to St. Gregory the Theologian, serves as the law. For there is but one conjugation, both of the wife to the husband and of the husband to the wife, laid down as legislation through the divine utterance and presence at the wedding held in Cana. That is why the parties to a first marriage, being uncondemned, are nuptially crowned and partake of the divine Mysteries (and see the Footnote to c. XIII of the 6th). But the second marriage is a concession. For use of it is allowed only as a matter of concession and accomodation. Because even though St. Paul did say concerning widows, "but if they cannot remain continent, let them marry" (1 Cor. 7:9), St. Chrysostom, in interpreting this passage, declares that St. Paul said this by way of permission, and not by way of command (cf. 1 Cor. 7:6) — in the same manner, that is to say, in which he permitted persons married for the first time in their life to indulge in frequent intercourse on account of their incontinence). But if he did say it by way of permission, it is manifest that such a marriage is neither reasonable nor free from condemnation, but that it is under condemnation and is in the nature of a sin. Hence according to c. IV of St. Basil the parties to such a marriage are barred from the divine Mysteries for a year or two, while, according to c. II of Nicephorus, they are not even entitled to a nuptial coronation. That is why God-bearing Ignatius said in his epistle to the Antiochenes: "One woman to any one man, not many women to any one man, was given in creation." Clement of Alexandria (otherwise known as Clement Stromateus) says: "One who marries a second time is not sinning according to the covenant (or testament), but he is not fulfilling the demands of evangelical perfection. It does him heavenly glory if he keeps the marriage tie sundered by death untainted by gladly obeying the economy."
http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/councils_local_rudder.htm#_Toc72635080
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
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #80 on: October 12, 2010, 03:19:34 PM »


1. Unless you are on Mt. Athos, stay away from the Rudder (not you personally, just general admonition).


I have only been told that by Antiochians.  I was even told by them that reading the Fathers is dangerous.  The Russians and Serbs have just told me to use caution and keep in mind that the Bishop is the final interpreter of the Canons.  I agree that the Rudder should not be the only text in an Orthodox Christian's library, nor is it the first one that should be read.  But it makes a nice reference when used along with other writings.  I like your on-line version.  The book version that I have has a lot of extra stuff that could possibly cause confusion in those who take the commentary too seriously.  Is that what you were referring to, or just the reading of the canons in general.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #81 on: October 12, 2010, 03:55:23 PM »

It is only when we acknowledge the sin that we can truly repent thereof.  Looking at another woman when married is adultery in God's eye, but marrying one after being married to another is not?  I cannot come to terms with that.


No one is saying it's not a sin. What I object to is the idea that a second marriage is perpetual adultery. I can't imagine that the Church would bless a situation like that. Can you provide any proof that is the Church's teaching other than your personal interpretation of the second marriage rite?

 I did.  And in English even.  The word of two priests from different Orthodox jurisdictions,

So what we have are two quite contradictory teachings in Orthodoxy on second marriages, at least from the priests.

1.  There are priests who tell parishioners that they are entering a state of perpetual adultery and sin, but that the Church is willing to perform a marriage ceremony and bless adultery.  These priests also say that the two penitential prayers read at the end of the Betrothal Service set the tone for the entire second wedding ceremony and there is no joy in the service.

2. There are priests who tell their parishioners that the Rite of Second Crowing is a beautiful sacrament by which God blesses the couple to enter a second marriage.   The two penitential prayers are seen by these priests as a necessary preliminary statement of penitence for the failure of the first marriage.  However apart from them, the Rite of Second Crowning has the customary joy and the joyful elements of a first wedding.

I have problem with (1) because I would not be sure I could advise people to remain in a Church which blesses adultery.  I also have problems with (1) because the insistence there is no joy in the second marriage ceremony indicates that the priests who say this are speaking out of ignorance of the Rite of Second Crowning, as the experience of the ceremony would show them.

Hieromonk Ambrose

Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #82 on: October 12, 2010, 04:12:52 PM »

Dear Brother Punch,

This was discussed with the venerable schemamonk Ambrose on a public list run by Mary.  Most of us know him as the priest and author Fr Alexey Young, a disciple of Fr Seraphim Rose.  The archives of the list are accessible if anyone wishes to check the quotes.

"What on earth?  In my 30+ years as an Orthodox priest I have never heard of a second marriage that was considered non-sacramental.  This idea is peculiar.  --Fr. A"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Irenikon/message/33317

"I was only saying that the rite for a second marriage itself is not seen as penitential, and that a penance will have been imposed on the divorced and remarrying parties before the marriage ceremony.  But the second rite of marriage will be joyful and festive, with the Church wishing the couple well and praying for a successful married state for both.  The rite itself is sober, but so is the rite for a first marriage."
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Irenikon/message/33679

Logged
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,260



« Reply #83 on: October 12, 2010, 06:33:29 PM »

Dear Brother Punch,

This was discussed with the venerable schemamonk Ambrose on a public list run by Mary.  Most of us know him as the priest and author Fr Alexey Young, a disciple of Fr Seraphim Rose.  The archives of the list are accessible if anyone wishes to check the quotes.

"What on earth?  In my 30+ years as an Orthodox priest I have never heard of a second marriage that was considered non-sacramental.  This idea is peculiar.  --Fr. A"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Irenikon/message/33317

"I was only saying that the rite for a second marriage itself is not seen as penitential, and that a penance will have been imposed on the divorced and remarrying parties before the marriage ceremony.  But the second rite of marriage will be joyful and festive, with the Church wishing the couple well and praying for a successful married state for both.  The rite itself is sober, but so is the rite for a first marriage."
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Irenikon/message/33679


Dear Father,

I never said the rite was not a Sacrament, nor did any Priest that I spoke with.  As you know, we don't call them Sacraments, but Mysteries.  They are called such because they transcend what we as humans can understand.

The second statement makes sense, and I may have fixated more on the first part than the second at the time.  Fr. Ambrose was well known by the Priest in question, and spent time in the Monastery with my Godfather.

Father, while we sometimes disagree, please be assured that nothing that you say is dismissed by me.  I was home from work today and spent most of the day pondering on this.  I read much from the writings of St. John Chrysostom, as well as from St. Ambrose, both of whom I know wrote extensively on the subject.  I am left with the same impression, or overall feeling about second marriage as I had before as none of what I read treats it as anything other than a concession to our weakness, and an attempt to keep us from falling further into sin.  The idea of perpetual adultery is, perhaps, harsh.  However one cannot undo what has been done.  One can certainly be forgiven for what has been done, and I believe this happens after the penitential prayers.  The first wife simply does not disappear.  St. Ambrose goes as far as to say that the first marriage is not even erased by Baptism, and that a priest cannot remarry even if his first marriage was prior to his Baptism and the second after.  He writes this in his epistle to the Christians in Vercellae in 396 AD and spends quite a few words discussing the matter.

Reading your reply regarding the time spent on the penitential prayers vs the rest of the service certainly cleared up your point of view for me.  I can see where you are coming from.  I never thought in those terms, and would not have given this any credence at all were it not you who wrote it.  The thought of time spent did not occur to me since I tend to view all services by content rather than by length.  The coming of the Holy Spirit to change the bread and wine to Christ's Holy Body and Blood is a very small part of the Divine Liturgy, but yet it is the most important - the whole reason for having the Liturgy in the first place.  Then when we consider the time spent in the Vigil to prepare, and the Hours and the Pre-Communion prayers, the amount of time spent outside of Communion far exceeds that spent Communing.  Yet, is the partaking of the Mysteries less because it takes less time than the other?  Yes, Father, that is a rhetorical question and you do not have to answer as I know that you would consider that idea absurd, as do I!  To me, the insertion of the penitential prayers into the marriage ceremony was huge, and it does indeed change the "color" of the ceremony for me.  But, I also realize that my understanding of the whole ceremony may be clouded by a very high view of marriage, and a very harsh view of divorce.  I have always held the view that one always remains married.  The two become one flesh and that cannot be undone.  What God has joined, let no man rend asunder.  The Fathers are clear that the purest form of marriage is that between a virgin man and a virgin woman, and all other than this is imperfection - regardless of the ceremony.  The joining of man and woman in marriage by God predates all the rituals written later.  However, this being said, I do understand your position and will ask the God to soften my heart on this matter if I have incorrectly understood the issue.  Pray for me.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #84 on: October 12, 2010, 07:38:38 PM »

Dear Brother Punch,

I invite you to discern the voice of the faithful.  Perhaps when you are at trapeza after Liturgy you can approach those who have divorced and remarried and explain to them that they are living in adultery.  See if this is also their belief.  This will be a useful hands-on study which will enable you to ascertain the beliefs of the faithful in this area.  Caution: you may need your personal telohranitelj standing behind you.  :-)

Is it the teaching of your Serbian parish priest and bishop?  And are they happy to perform a holy Mystery over an adulterous couple?  This was NEVER my understanding during almost 20 years working as a Serbian priest.

Btw, Saint Ambrose of Milan forbids second marriage:  "No one is permitted to know a woman other than his wife. The marital right is given you for this reason: lest you fall into the snare and sin with a strange woman. If you are bound to a wife do not seek a divorce; for you are not permitted, while your wife lives, to marry another."

About baptism and marriage he says:  Baptism erases all sins but not marriage" and he means of course that the person getting baptized still remains married to his non-believing spouse and is not freed by Baptism to look for another believing wife.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 07:50:29 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #85 on: October 12, 2010, 07:57:50 PM »

Btw, Saint Ambrose of Milan forbids second marriage:  "No one is permitted to know a woman other than his wife. The marital right is given you for this reason: lest you fall into the snare and sin with a strange woman. If you are bound to a wife do not seek a divorce; for you are not permitted, while your wife lives, to marry another.".
Should Christians follow the teaching of St. Ambrose of Milan or not?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #86 on: October 12, 2010, 08:05:58 PM »

Btw, Saint Ambrose of Milan forbids second marriage:  "No one is permitted to know a woman other than his wife. The marital right is given you for this reason: lest you fall into the snare and sin with a strange woman. If you are bound to a wife do not seek a divorce; for you are not permitted, while your wife lives, to marry another.".
Should Christians follow the teaching of St. Ambrose of Milan or not?

Christians, i.e., Orthodox Christians, do not follow the teaching of Saint Ambrose about this, nor that of other very early teachers such as Saint Clement of Alexandria and Saint Jerome who taught as Ambrose did.    By the time we reach the 4th century the teachings of the early Fathers are being "softened" by such as Saint Basil and it is their teachings which the Church has accepted and practised over the last 1,600 years.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #87 on: October 12, 2010, 08:21:50 PM »

Btw, Saint Ambrose of Milan forbids second marriage:  "No one is permitted to know a woman other than his wife. The marital right is given you for this reason: lest you fall into the snare and sin with a strange woman. If you are bound to a wife do not seek a divorce; for you are not permitted, while your wife lives, to marry another.".
Should Christians follow the teaching of St. Ambrose of Milan or not?

Christians, i.e., Orthodox Christians, do not follow the teaching of Saint Ambrose about this, nor that of other very early teachers such as Saint Clement of Alexandria and Saint Jerome who taught as Ambrose did.    By the time we reach the 4th century the teachings of the early Fathers are being "softened" by such as Saint Basil and it is their teachings which the Church has accepted and practised over the last 1,600 years.

So why does the Eastern Orthodox Church ignore certain Fathers in favor of others? Why did later Fathers ignore the teachings of the earlier ones?
Logged
Paisius
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Multi-Jurisdictional
Posts: 816


Reframed


« Reply #88 on: October 12, 2010, 08:24:01 PM »


So why does the Eastern Orthodox Church ignore certain Fathers in favor of others?

For the same reason the Catholic Church does I suppose.

Logged

"Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest?" - Milton Friedman
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #89 on: October 12, 2010, 08:29:10 PM »


So why does the Eastern Orthodox Church ignore certain Fathers in favor of others?

For the same reason the Catholic Church does I suppose.

Well I get how it works in our Church since we have the Magisterium to guide us as to which teachings are authentic truths of the Church. I've heard Father Ambrose say there is no Magisterium in the Eastern Orthodox Church so I was just wondering how it works then. Would it not be possible, for example, for the Russian Orthodox Church to have a different take on a subject such as divorce than the Greek Orthodox Church? Are there any doctrinal differences between the various Eastern Orthodox Churches or is there total doctrinal uniformity?
Logged
Tags: marriage  annulment divorce 
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  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 0.193 seconds with 72 queries.