OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 28, 2014, 09:45:14 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 5 6  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Vatican Synod on Family releases strange report  (Read 4408 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Inquirer
Antihyperaphthartodocetist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: filthy Uniate Papolatrist
Jurisdiction: Ruthenian
Posts: 326


« Reply #225 on: October 30, 2014, 01:59:48 PM »

YOU are the only person that says their family life was invalid.

Maybe you should learn about what a RCC annulment *actually is* instead of going by the biased interpretations you hear in secular media.



Pretending that you're in wonderland and that up is down and black is white doesn't change reality. And unless you've applied for an annulment I have more experience with Catholic annulments than you do.  Wink

I'm not sure what is wonderland about saying that objectively, the sacrament did not occur. That is not the same thing as saying that a person's family life never happened. Don't conflate the issues.

But it's not exactly easy for imperfect, fallen individuals to ensure their emotional response matches the intellectual side. I can believe that all I want, but to really internalize that something (i.e. my previous marriage) that was part of my life for a number of years was invalid is much more difficult. I think that is what some of the other Orthodox posters are trying to get at. For myself, I was baptized & married as a Lutheran, became Orthodox, then my wife left and divorced me. I've now met a wonderful Catholic woman I intend to marry. I can try to be positive and understand annulment and invalidity - even grasping the theological basis for it - but it is not nearly so easy to deal with the idea that 7 years of my life was invalid and never happened.

Then take heart, the Catholic Church will not rule that 7 years of your life were invalid or never happened.

I'm aware matching emotions to the intellect is not easy, or even at times possible. Still though, no excuse for those who purport factual untruths as being truth because they disagree with the notion.
Logged

"[The Sacred Congregation of Rites'] decisions are made by a crowd of dirty little Monsignori at Rome in utter ignorance of the meaning or reason of anything. To the historian their decisions are simply disgusting nonsense, that people of my kind want simply to ignore." -- Fr. Adrian Fortescue
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,440


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #226 on: October 30, 2014, 02:00:21 PM »

but it is not nearly so easy to deal with the idea that 7 years of my life was invalid and never happened.

The annulment doesn't mean that 7 years of your life were invalid, nor that those seven years never happened. It just means that there was not a sacramental marriage. Geesh people.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Isaac14
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4


« Reply #227 on: October 30, 2014, 02:03:17 PM »

but it is not nearly so easy to deal with the idea that 7 years of my life was invalid and never happened.

The annulment doesn't mean that 7 years of your life were invalid, nor that those seven years never happened. It just means that there was not a sacramental marriage. Geesh people.

And I said I can understand that intellectually/theologically even though I'm Orthodox. Squaring that with my human/emotional side is still a big challenge. That's not easy for me, and I'm suspecting not for a lot of other people as well.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,829


"The grace of God has appeared..."


WWW
« Reply #228 on: October 30, 2014, 02:03:50 PM »

IMO, this is not the appropriate place for this particular debate.  Hint.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
Inquirer
Antihyperaphthartodocetist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: filthy Uniate Papolatrist
Jurisdiction: Ruthenian
Posts: 326


« Reply #229 on: October 30, 2014, 02:04:48 PM »

No, it does not. It says the marriage was invalid, not that it never happened.

Now we're getting to the core of the issue.

What's the difference between an invalid and a nonexistent marriage?

Nonexistent - it never happened.
Invalid - it occurred but because of some technicality the couple did not receive the spiritual benefits of natural or sacramental marriage.

Quote
You clearly think God frowns upon bastards. I think not.

What makes you think that?

I don't think God "frowns upon" people for circumstances they had no control over.
Logged

"[The Sacred Congregation of Rites'] decisions are made by a crowd of dirty little Monsignori at Rome in utter ignorance of the meaning or reason of anything. To the historian their decisions are simply disgusting nonsense, that people of my kind want simply to ignore." -- Fr. Adrian Fortescue
Inquirer
Antihyperaphthartodocetist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: filthy Uniate Papolatrist
Jurisdiction: Ruthenian
Posts: 326


« Reply #230 on: October 30, 2014, 02:09:35 PM »

IMO, this is not the appropriate place for this particular debate.  Hint.

I would just like to say that I did not feel like I was debating EO vs RC views of marriage, I was clearing up some fatalistic misconceptions of what exactly the RC view are.

However I will obey and stop posting in this thread about this subject.
Logged

"[The Sacred Congregation of Rites'] decisions are made by a crowd of dirty little Monsignori at Rome in utter ignorance of the meaning or reason of anything. To the historian their decisions are simply disgusting nonsense, that people of my kind want simply to ignore." -- Fr. Adrian Fortescue
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,829


"The grace of God has appeared..."


WWW
« Reply #231 on: October 30, 2014, 02:31:45 PM »

IMO, this is not the appropriate place for this particular debate.  Hint.

I would just like to say that I did not feel like I was debating EO vs RC views of marriage, I was clearing up some fatalistic misconceptions of what exactly the RC view are.

However I will obey and stop posting in this thread about this subject.

No worries.  Mine was an unofficial observation and was not directed toward anyone in particular.  Smiley
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
Paisius
Ditry Pope-loving ecumenist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Wherever the wind blows......
Posts: 1,241


Scheherazade


« Reply #232 on: October 30, 2014, 03:06:34 PM »

But the children are still bastards, right?

No they are not. Illegitimacy is only relevant to civil law. Annulments don't mean the parents were not validly married by civil law.

YOU are the only person that says their family life was invalid.

Maybe you should learn about what a RCC annulment *actually is* instead of going by the biased interpretations you hear in secular media.



Pretending that you're in wonderland and that up is down and black is white doesn't change reality. And unless you've applied for an annulment I have more experience with Catholic annulments than you do.  Wink

I'm not sure what is wonderland about saying that objectively, the sacrament did not occur. That is not the same thing as saying that a person's family life never happened. Don't conflate the issues.



No conflation. The Church says the couple never really was married even though everybody thought they were. So the children were not the product of a true Christian marriage. You can muddy the waters all you want but that is the reality.

EO divorce: the Church says that the couple did not have the grace of sacramental marriage, so for all practical purposes it was not a true Christian marriage and the children are spiritual bastards. You can muddy the waters all you want but that is the reality.

Anybody can make equally stupid and offensive contortions as you are doing to Roman Catholics.



But the Church never says they didn't have the grace of sacramental marriage. The Church says the sacramental marriage failed due to our falleness. Hence why the Orthodox practice is honest where the Catholic one is not.
Logged
Inquirer
Antihyperaphthartodocetist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: filthy Uniate Papolatrist
Jurisdiction: Ruthenian
Posts: 326


« Reply #233 on: October 30, 2014, 03:09:59 PM »

But the children are still bastards, right?

No they are not. Illegitimacy is only relevant to civil law. Annulments don't mean the parents were not validly married by civil law.

YOU are the only person that says their family life was invalid.

Maybe you should learn about what a RCC annulment *actually is* instead of going by the biased interpretations you hear in secular media.



Pretending that you're in wonderland and that up is down and black is white doesn't change reality. And unless you've applied for an annulment I have more experience with Catholic annulments than you do.  Wink

I'm not sure what is wonderland about saying that objectively, the sacrament did not occur. That is not the same thing as saying that a person's family life never happened. Don't conflate the issues.



No conflation. The Church says the couple never really was married even though everybody thought they were. So the children were not the product of a true Christian marriage. You can muddy the waters all you want but that is the reality.

EO divorce: the Church says that the couple did not have the grace of sacramental marriage, so for all practical purposes it was not a true Christian marriage and the children are spiritual bastards. You can muddy the waters all you want but that is the reality.

Anybody can make equally stupid and offensive contortions as you are doing to Roman Catholics.



But the Church never says they didn't have the grace of sacramental marriage. The Church says the sacramental marriage failed due to our falleness. Hence why the Orthodox practice is honest where the Catholic one is not.

Please show me exactly what is dishonest about the Catholic practice--that is, the part where somebody is required to lie.
Logged

"[The Sacred Congregation of Rites'] decisions are made by a crowd of dirty little Monsignori at Rome in utter ignorance of the meaning or reason of anything. To the historian their decisions are simply disgusting nonsense, that people of my kind want simply to ignore." -- Fr. Adrian Fortescue
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,977


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #234 on: October 30, 2014, 04:29:40 PM »

But the children are still bastards, right?

Born out of wedlock, yes. I don't know why we have to use the term "bastards," since it has such a pejorative connotation.

Except that you all are parsing a legal fiction..be it one rising out of secular law or canon law. A legal presumption provides (rebuttable in both cases) that the children born during a viable marriage are legitimate and that children born of an annulled marriage are likewise legitimate. The theory being that children are not guilty of their parents sins or wrongdoings... But, the presumption is rebuttable as to whom the father might be if the presumed father can prove legal proof sufficient that he could not have been the father.
Logged
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,431


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #235 on: October 30, 2014, 09:32:12 PM »

Mor is right.

Folks, we are in Christian News.  Discussion only is permitted here, not debate.  Since this has definitely devolved into a debate, I'm probably going to move the topic.  In the meantime, I'm locking the thread to see who, if anyone, has crossed the line.

Yurysprudentsiya
« Last Edit: October 30, 2014, 09:32:21 PM by Yurysprudentsiya » Logged
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,431


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #236 on: October 30, 2014, 09:50:19 PM »

Thread unlocked.  Warnings issued.  Please take note and don't do that again.  Inquirer, please note this for future, as you are new here.  Your comments were far too argumentative for Christian News. 

Yurysprudentsiya
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,440


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #237 on: October 31, 2014, 10:54:05 AM »



What makes you think that?


The fact that God loves all people, regardless of whether or not they were or were not born to a married couple.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Inquirer
Antihyperaphthartodocetist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: filthy Uniate Papolatrist
Jurisdiction: Ruthenian
Posts: 326


« Reply #238 on: October 31, 2014, 11:16:49 AM »

Thread unlocked.  Warnings issued.  Please take note and don't do that again.  Inquirer, please note this for future, as you are new here.  Your comments were far too argumentative for Christian News. 

Yurysprudentsiya


Affirmative.

But the children are still bastards, right?

Born out of wedlock, yes. I don't know why we have to use the term "bastards," since it has such a pejorative connotation.

Except that you all are parsing a legal fiction..be it one rising out of secular law or canon law. A legal presumption provides (rebuttable in both cases) that the children born during a viable marriage are legitimate and that children born of an annulled marriage are likewise legitimate. The theory being that children are not guilty of their parents sins or wrongdoings... But, the presumption is rebuttable as to whom the father might be if the presumed father can prove legal proof sufficient that he could not have been the father.

I don't understand what the legal fiction is. Legitimacy is only a concern to civil law. Annulments do not make any proclamations about the validity of marriage under civil law.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2014, 11:18:09 AM by Inquirer » Logged

"[The Sacred Congregation of Rites'] decisions are made by a crowd of dirty little Monsignori at Rome in utter ignorance of the meaning or reason of anything. To the historian their decisions are simply disgusting nonsense, that people of my kind want simply to ignore." -- Fr. Adrian Fortescue
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,977


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #239 on: October 31, 2014, 01:46:17 PM »

Thread unlocked.  Warnings issued.  Please take note and don't do that again.  Inquirer, please note this for future, as you are new here.  Your comments were far too argumentative for Christian News.  

Yurysprudentsiya


Affirmative.

But the children are still bastards, right?

Born out of wedlock, yes. I don't know why we have to use the term "bastards," since it has such a pejorative connotation.

Except that you all are parsing a legal fiction..be it one rising out of secular law or canon law. A legal presumption provides (rebuttable in both cases) that the children born during a viable marriage are legitimate and that children born of an annulled marriage are likewise legitimate. The theory being that children are not guilty of their parents sins or wrongdoings... But, the presumption is rebuttable as to whom the father might be if the presumed father can prove legal proof sufficient that he could not have been the father.

I don't understand what the legal fiction is. Legitimacy is only a concern to civil law. Annulments do not make any proclamations about the validity of marriage under civil law.

In order to do justice, the law will permit or create a legal fiction. A legal fiction is an assumption that something occurred or someone or something exists which, in fact, is not the case, but that is made in the law to enable a court to equitably resolve a matter before it.

The most common example is the treatment of corporation under the law as a person.

For purposes of this discussion, and applicable to civil and Canon law, consider that:

A.) Issue born of a marriage (i.e. children) are presumed to be legitimate.

B.) Children born out-of-wedlock are illegitimate (formerly called "bastards.")

C.) An annulment ls a judicial statement that there was never a marriage.

D.) Absent legal provisions, either judge-made or by code, the lack of a marriage precludes granting g legitimate status to children born to the parties. The children were made, by operation of law and through no fault of their own, children not born in wedlock or illegitimate (bastards).

E.) Treating children this way is unfair and inequitable. This status cries out for justice. Equity will.demand a solution.

F.) A "legal fiction" is thereby created granting legal legitimacy to children born to parents whose marriage is annulled.

G.) Equity provides justice.

Applying the facts to the definition, one can see that the status of such children is a legal fiction intended to treat them equitably. It is neither judgmental nor pejorative. It's just a term of art.

The status of children resulting after Church annulment as to hereditary rights and inheritance would have been an issue Prior to modern civil laws which have pretty much abolished discrimination against out of wedlock children for support, maintenance and inheritance their status would have been an issue.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2014, 01:53:43 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
Inquirer
Antihyperaphthartodocetist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: filthy Uniate Papolatrist
Jurisdiction: Ruthenian
Posts: 326


« Reply #240 on: October 31, 2014, 01:51:16 PM »

Thread unlocked.  Warnings issued.  Please take note and don't do that again.  Inquirer, please note this for future, as you are new here.  Your comments were far too argumentative for Christian News.  

Yurysprudentsiya


Affirmative.

But the children are still bastards, right?

Born out of wedlock, yes. I don't know why we have to use the term "bastards," since it has such a pejorative connotation.

Except that you all are parsing a legal fiction..be it one rising out of secular law or canon law. A legal presumption provides (rebuttable in both cases) that the children born during a viable marriage are legitimate and that children born of an annulled marriage are likewise legitimate. The theory being that children are not guilty of their parents sins or wrongdoings... But, the presumption is rebuttable as to whom the father might be if the presumed father can prove legal proof sufficient that he could not have been the father.

I don't understand what the legal fiction is. Legitimacy is only a concern to civil law. Annulments do not make any proclamations about the validity of marriage under civil law.

In order to do justice, the law will permit or create a legal fiction. A legal fiction is an assumption that something occurred or someone or something exists which, in fact, is not the case, but that is made in the law to enable a court to equitably resolve a matter before it.

The most common example is the treatment of corporation under the law as a person.

For purposes of this discussion, and applicable to civil and Canon law, consider that:

A.) Issue born of a marriage (i.e. children) are presumed to be legitimate.

B.) Children born out-of-wedlock are illegitimate (formerly called "bastards.")

C.) An annulment ls a judicial statement that there was never a marriage.

D.) Absent legal provisions, either judge-made or by code, the lack of a marriage precludes granting g legitimate status to children born to the parties. The children were made, by operation of law and through no fault of their own, children not born in wedlock or illegitimate (bastards).

E.) Treating children this way is unfair and inequitable. This status cries out for justice. Equity will.demand a solution.

F.) A "legal fiction" is thereby created granting legal legitimacy to children born to parents whose marriage is annulled.

G.) Equity provides justice.

Applying the facts to the definition, one can see that the status of such children is a legal fiction intended to treat them equitably. It is neither judgmental nor pejorative. It's just a term of art.

You are mistaken. An annulment does not say there never was a marriage. It says the marriage was invalid. There is a difference.
Logged

"[The Sacred Congregation of Rites'] decisions are made by a crowd of dirty little Monsignori at Rome in utter ignorance of the meaning or reason of anything. To the historian their decisions are simply disgusting nonsense, that people of my kind want simply to ignore." -- Fr. Adrian Fortescue
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,977


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #241 on: October 31, 2014, 02:09:43 PM »

Inquirer stated : "You are mistaken. An annulment does not say there never was a marriage. It says the marriage was invalid. There is a difference."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states that there never was a marriage.

"For this reason (or for other reasons that render the marriage null and void) the Church, after an examination of the situation by the competent ecclesiastical tribunal, can declare the nullity of a marriage, i.e., that the marriage never existed. In this case the contracting parties are free to marry, the natural obligations of a previous union are discharged. - Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1629)"  http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c3a7.htm

And every lawyer, civil or canon, is taught a basic maxim of statutory construction. Statutes and regulations mean what say if the language is clear and not subject to differing meaning. The meaning derives from the plain words used.

At least the Eastern Orthodox position is rational.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2014, 02:22:24 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 13,015


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #242 on: October 31, 2014, 02:18:58 PM »

The point is it seems to me why beat around the bush?  For all practical purposes, a divorce and an annulment have no differences.  Two have been joined together, and now two are getting separated, but with different theological or canonical terminologies.  The issue is making both these "annulled" persons as "adulterers" and their children as those out of wedlock.

The worry is for the Catholic Church to arguably continue to beat around the bush with other issues when they should just admit the practicality of calling a spade a spade, that is divorce.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,977


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #243 on: October 31, 2014, 02:21:06 PM »

The point is it seems to me why beat around the bush?  For all practical purposes, a divorce and an annulment have no differences.  Two have been joined together, and now two are getting separated, but with different theological or canonical terminologies.  The issue is making both these "annulled" persons as "adulterers" and their children as those out of wedlock.

The worry is for the Catholic Church to arguably continue to beat around the bush with other issues when they should just admit the practicality of calling a spade a spade, that is divorce.

That's the way I see it.
Logged
Inquirer
Antihyperaphthartodocetist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: filthy Uniate Papolatrist
Jurisdiction: Ruthenian
Posts: 326


« Reply #244 on: October 31, 2014, 02:21:51 PM »

Inquirer stated : "You are mistaken. An annulment does not say there never was a marriage. It says the marriage was invalid. There is a difference."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states that there never was a marriage.

"For this reason (or for other reasons that render the marriage null and void) the Church, after an examination of the situation by the competent ecclesiastical tribunal, can declare the nullity of a marriage, i.e., that the marriage never existed.[/u] In this case the contracting parties are free to marry,  police the natural obligations of a previous union are discharged. - Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1629)"  http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c3a7.htm

And every lawyer, civil or canon, is taught a basic maxim of statutory construction. Statutes and regulations mean what say if the language is clear and not subject to differing meaning. The meaning derives from the plain words used.

At least the Eastern Orthodox position is rational.

Your selective bolding almost eliminates the context. But we see in the parentheticals that this particular paragraph (as well as the one immediately preceding) is talking about if the marriage is found null and void due to lack of consent, not merely invalid. In that case even the EO usually admit that there actually was no marriage.

Most annulments merely declare invalidity, not a total absence of any qualities of matrimony whatsoever.
Logged

"[The Sacred Congregation of Rites'] decisions are made by a crowd of dirty little Monsignori at Rome in utter ignorance of the meaning or reason of anything. To the historian their decisions are simply disgusting nonsense, that people of my kind want simply to ignore." -- Fr. Adrian Fortescue
Inquirer
Antihyperaphthartodocetist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: filthy Uniate Papolatrist
Jurisdiction: Ruthenian
Posts: 326


« Reply #245 on: October 31, 2014, 02:24:17 PM »

The point is it seems to me why beat around the bush?  For all practical purposes, a divorce and an annulment have no differences.  Two have been joined together, and now two are getting separated, but with different theological or canonical terminologies.  The issue is making both these "annulled" persons as "adulterers" and their children as those out of wedlock.

The worry is for the Catholic Church to arguably continue to beat around the bush with other issues when they should just admit the practicality of calling a spade a spade, that is divorce.

You're right, but that's an issue that's only emerged around the 1960s, when annulments started to be granted for frivolous reasons like emotional immaturity. I am equally critical of this practice.

Prior to the 1960s, annulments were very rare and only given for considerably serious reasons like lack of consent or incest. If one believes marriage is indissoluble, this is obviously the preferred practice.
Logged

"[The Sacred Congregation of Rites'] decisions are made by a crowd of dirty little Monsignori at Rome in utter ignorance of the meaning or reason of anything. To the historian their decisions are simply disgusting nonsense, that people of my kind want simply to ignore." -- Fr. Adrian Fortescue
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #246 on: October 31, 2014, 02:30:23 PM »

Quote
If one believes marriage is indissoluble, this is obviously the preferred practice
If you're a lawyer.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,977


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #247 on: October 31, 2014, 02:38:03 PM »

I will concede the point that pre 1970's Catholic annulments were rare and granted almost exclusively as stated by Inquirer. However, the dramatic expansion of the practice in the past half century has, as I've been arguing, diluted the definitions in the Code to the point that the application of the Code to many annulment applications resulting in annulment may rightly be viewed as legal sophistry designed to reach a preferred goal. A rose, after all is still a rose regardless of what you call it.

If the Catholic Church stood its historic ground on marriage, we wouldn't be having this argument. But, I would still argue in support of the Eastern Orthodox approach however. It's the watering down of the annulment process that has led to where the Catholic church finds itself today.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2014, 02:38:37 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
Paisius
Ditry Pope-loving ecumenist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Wherever the wind blows......
Posts: 1,241


Scheherazade


« Reply #248 on: October 31, 2014, 02:51:37 PM »

I will concede the point that pre 1970's Catholic annulments were rare and granted almost exclusively as stated by Inquirer. However, the dramatic expansion of the practice in the past half century has, as I've been arguing, diluted the definitions in the Code to the point that the application of the Code to many annulment applications resulting in annulment may rightly be viewed as legal sophistry designed to reach a preferred goal. A rose, after all is still a rose regardless of what you call it.

If the Catholic Church stood its historic ground on marriage, we wouldn't be having this argument. But, I would still argue in support of the Eastern Orthodox approach however. It's the watering down of the annulment process that has led to where the Catholic church finds itself today.




Well honestly EO divorce practice was much more strict also. I think both Churches have made concessions to modern society.
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 13,015


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #249 on: October 31, 2014, 02:53:39 PM »

I will concede the point that pre 1970's Catholic annulments were rare and granted almost exclusively as stated by Inquirer. However, the dramatic expansion of the practice in the past half century has, as I've been arguing, diluted the definitions in the Code to the point that the application of the Code to many annulment applications resulting in annulment may rightly be viewed as legal sophistry designed to reach a preferred goal. A rose, after all is still a rose regardless of what you call it.

If the Catholic Church stood its historic ground on marriage, we wouldn't be having this argument. But, I would still argue in support of the Eastern Orthodox approach however. It's the watering down of the annulment process that has led to where the Catholic church finds itself today.




Well honestly EO divorce practice was much more strict also. I think both Churches have made concessions to modern society.

That's a fair point to make I think.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,977


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #250 on: October 31, 2014, 02:58:37 PM »

I will concede the point that pre 1970's Catholic annulments were rare and granted almost exclusively as stated by Inquirer. However, the dramatic expansion of the practice in the past half century has, as I've been arguing, diluted the definitions in the Code to the point that the application of the Code to many annulment applications resulting in annulment may rightly be viewed as legal sophistry designed to reach a preferred goal. A rose, after all is still a rose regardless of what you call it.

If the Catholic Church stood its historic ground on marriage, we wouldn't be having this argument. But, I would still argue in support of the Eastern Orthodox approach however. It's the watering down of the annulment process that has led to where the Catholic church finds itself today.




Well honestly EO divorce practice was much more strict also. I think both Churches have made concessions to modern society.

That's a fair point to make I think.

Agreed.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 5,014



« Reply #251 on: October 31, 2014, 05:47:45 PM »

I think it's time for Orthodox Churches to start to ready themselves to receive another wave of new inquirers from Catholicism.

If we had leaders with guts, they would release a statement after this synod is concluded that affirms that we (Orthodox) are staying the same, and will welcome anyone who wants to remain faithful to Christianity.
Logged
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,420


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #252 on: November 03, 2014, 06:14:34 AM »

But the children are still bastards, right?

Born out of wedlock, yes. I don't know why we have to use the term "bastards," since it has such a pejorative connotation.
The decree of nullity simply means that the marriage was not sacramental. Nevertheless, a natural (and civil) marriage still existed, and so the children born of the union would not be illegitimate.
Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 3,542


Future belongs to God only.


WWW
« Reply #253 on: November 03, 2014, 12:11:40 PM »

I think the institution of economic divorce and anullment can coexist.

A lot of people "marry" these days because they see it as just a party to celebrate their relationship. Many "divorces" happen mainly because there never was a a real marriage between the two, they are just boyfriend-girlfriend relationships that lasted more than it should. They were still in the "sex-friends-giving-it-a-try-at-living-together" attitude or maybe they got married just to try to save their relationship. In that case, these all should be anullments, IMO. The prevention for this is more "NOs" said to frivolous weddings or for couples clearly unprepared or being forced by peer pressure.

And there are people who really intended to get married, who were wholeheartdly into it and yet something goes wrong. One of the persons reveals himself to be an abuser, one of the parts changes attitude and wants to get the person out of the faith, or becomes dangerously irresponsible... people change and if most changes have to be dealt with, a few are outright lethal either for the physical or for the spiritual life. And in that case economic divorce is the solution.


« Last Edit: November 03, 2014, 12:12:56 PM by Fabio Leite » Logged

Multiple Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6  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 0.13 seconds with 57 queries.