OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 28, 2014, 09:41:05 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Vatican re-issues Ratzinger defence of Magisterium on divorce  (Read 6673 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« on: December 02, 2011, 11:34:46 AM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2011, 11:36:38 AM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
I think he has enough to worry about going on with his church instead of slinging mud. We could also throw mud at them about theological liberalism.

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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2011, 12:51:52 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
I think he has enough to worry about going on with his church instead of slinging mud. We could also throw mud at them about theological liberalism.

PP


Oh...so we don't worry about truth...We just aim at tit-for-tat...

kool

 Smiley
Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2011, 01:03:43 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
This text is an old text. The intended purpose is to address the world's increasingly unchristian approach to marriage. The fact that Eastern Orthodoxy is mentioned is not to bash the EO Church. In fact, if you read Ratizinger's other works, he has a great deal of respect for EOs. However, if he is going to address the fact that the world is turning away from the the truth about marriage, he cannot ignore the fact that Eastern Orthodox Church is doing so as well.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2011, 05:21:54 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
This text is an old text. The intended purpose is to address the world's increasingly unchristian approach to marriage. The fact that Eastern Orthodoxy is mentioned is not to bash the EO Church. In fact, if you read Ratizinger's other works, he has a great deal of respect for EOs. However, if he is going to address the fact that the world is turning away from the the truth about marriage, he cannot ignore the fact that Eastern Orthodox Church is doing so as well.
My opinion is that whether it is divorce or using some legalistic method of divorcing but not calling it divorce, its all the same.

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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2011, 10:26:06 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
I think he has enough to worry about going on with his church instead of slinging mud. We could also throw mud at them about theological liberalism.

PP


Oh...so we don't worry about truth...We just aim at tit-for-tat...

kool

 Smiley
Keep your corban to yourselves.
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
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2011, 11:18:36 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
I think he has enough to worry about going on with his church instead of slinging mud. We could also throw mud at them about theological liberalism.

PP


Oh...so we don't worry about truth...We just aim at tit-for-tat...

kool

 Smiley
Keep your corban to yourselves.
Can you explain what you mean when you use the term "corban?" I'm not familiar with the term because I have not heard it anywhere else except on this forum and only from you.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2011, 11:31:32 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
I think he has enough to worry about going on with his church instead of slinging mud. We could also throw mud at them about theological liberalism.

PP


Oh...so we don't worry about truth...We just aim at tit-for-tat...

kool

 Smiley
Keep your corban to yourselves.
Can you explain what you mean when you use the term "corban?" I'm not familiar with the term because I have not heard it anywhere else except on this forum and only from you.
never heard it?

"But you say: If a man shall say to his father or mother, Corban, (which is a gift,) whatsoever is from me, shall profit thee. "Mark 7:11

"But the chief priests having taken the pieces of silver, said: It is not lawful to put them into the corbona, because it is the price of blood." Mat. 27:6
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
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2011, 12:16:44 AM »

someone close to me has been waiting 5 years for their annulment. her husband beat her and mentally tortured her.  She has a fiance, he bought and remodeled a house for them.  Still she waits in the lurch, growing older day by day and not being able in the RCC's eye to marry her fiance. Is it fair that she should be kept from her new life because her "still husband in the eyes of the Vatican" beat her and made her life miserable?  You have to give her credit, she could easily go to the courthouse and get it over with, and leave the Catholic church whilst waiting for that annulment. 
I'd be on the phone with the Vatican daily saying, give me my annulment sheesh
Logged

William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2011, 12:27:26 AM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
This text is an old text. The intended purpose is to address the world's increasingly unchristian approach to marriage. The fact that Eastern Orthodoxy is mentioned is not to bash the EO Church. In fact, if you read Ratizinger's other works, he has a great deal of respect for EOs. However, if he is going to address the fact that the world is turning away from the the truth about marriage, he cannot ignore the fact that Eastern Orthodox Church is doing so as well.
"Is doing so"? That's odd, considering how the EOC hasn't changed its position on this since well before the Great Schism.
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Moderated
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,446


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #10 on: December 04, 2011, 12:38:25 AM »

And the Orthodox Church has always allowed for divorce in cases of adultery.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #11 on: December 04, 2011, 12:57:04 AM »

someone close to me has been waiting 5 years for their annulment. her husband beat her and mentally tortured her.  She has a fiance, he bought and remodeled a house for them.  Still she waits in the lurch, growing older day by day and not being able in the RCC's eye to marry her fiance. Is it fair that she should be kept from her new life because her "still husband in the eyes of the Vatican" beat her and made her life miserable?  You have to give her credit, she could easily go to the courthouse and get it over with, and leave the Catholic church whilst waiting for that annulment. 
I'd be on the phone with the Vatican daily saying, give me my annulment sheesh
I'm actually surprised that she is having as much difficulty as this. Cases I have heard where people have gone to a marriage tribunal usually end up getting their marriage declared null. I suppose it could vary by diocese.
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #12 on: December 04, 2011, 01:03:28 AM »

yeah, my 7th grade religion teacher's sister was a canon lawyer in Vatican City and that is what she did all day, process annulments. He said they were easy to get.  I don't know why it is taking so long, maybe she needs to press the issue.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 01:03:59 AM by username! » Logged

Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #13 on: December 04, 2011, 01:09:31 AM »

yeah, my 7th grade religion teacher's sister was a canon lawyer in Vatican City and that is what she did all day, process annulments. He said they were easy to get.  I don't know why it is taking so long, maybe she needs to press the issue.
It would also be good for her to consult her priest about what all she needs to put down in her information that she is writing up for the tribunal. The more detailed and honest you can be about your situation the better.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #14 on: December 04, 2011, 01:13:40 AM »

My opinion is that whether it is divorce or using some legalistic method of divorcing but not calling it divorce, its all the same.
The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II. Before Vatican II, marriage annulments were granted for only quite serious reasons, such as your wife had concealed from you that she was already married and you didn't know about it. In 1930 there were about 10 marriage annulments in the USA for that year, whereas recently it has gone as high as 60,000 per year in the USA. And since the reasons for granting the marriage annulments have been vastly expanded to include psychological grounds such as lack of due discretion:  "Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled on the basis of incapacity and immaturity. It is not all that difficult to prove that someone was immature at the time of the  marriage or did not fully understand all the obligations and developments involved in a lifelong marriage,"
AND
Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
according to:
http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
 And this site will do all the paperwork for filing the annulment for you within 24 hours for $149. http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
Newt Gingrich is on his third marriage, with a Catholic wife, as he has had his first two marriages annulled by the Catholic Church. The moderators at CAF have shut down any discussion on this, removing posts which question the wisdom of granting him two annulments.

« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 01:17:03 AM by stanley123 » Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2011, 01:28:30 AM »

My opinion is that whether it is divorce or using some legalistic method of divorcing but not calling it divorce, its all the same.
The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II. Before Vatican II, marriage annulments were granted for only quite serious reasons, such as your wife had concealed from you that she was already married and you didn't know about it. In 1930 there were about 10 marriage annulments in the USA for that year, whereas recently it has gone as high as 60,000 per year in the USA. And since the reasons for granting the marriage annulments have been vastly expanded to include psychological grounds such as lack of due discretion:  "Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled on the basis of incapacity and immaturity. It is not all that difficult to prove that someone was immature at the time of the  marriage or did not fully understand all the obligations and developments involved in a lifelong marriage,"
AND
Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
according to:
http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
 And this site will do all the paperwork for filing the annulment for you within 24 hours for $149. http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
Newt Gingrich is on his third marriage, with a Catholic wife, as he has had his first two marriages annulled by the Catholic Church. The moderators at CAF have shut down any discussion on this, removing posts which question the wisdom of granting him two annulments.
I believe the term for these types of annulments that you speak of is "defective consent." I am not sure how I feel about the whole situation. On the one hand, it is good that the Church allows people who are in bad situations a solution rather than just being stuck with two options: A. to stay in a bad relationship and remain in good standing with the Church, or B. to get a civil divorce, but still be considered married by the Church and either have to remain single the rest of your life or else get remarried (invalidly) and be cut off from the Holy Eucharist since your new marriage is considered adulterous. It's messy...but marriage is messy. Life is messy. Striving to follow Christ as a sinful and imperfect human in a fallen society is messy.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 01:29:18 AM by Wyatt » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #16 on: December 04, 2011, 01:34:56 AM »

My opinion is that whether it is divorce or using some legalistic method of divorcing but not calling it divorce, its all the same.
The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II. Before Vatican II, marriage annulments were granted for only quite serious reasons, such as your wife had concealed from you that she was already married and you didn't know about it. In 1930 there were about 10 marriage annulments in the USA for that year, whereas recently it has gone as high as 60,000 per year in the USA. And since the reasons for granting the marriage annulments have been vastly expanded to include psychological grounds such as lack of due discretion:  "Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled on the basis of incapacity and immaturity. It is not all that difficult to prove that someone was immature at the time of the  marriage or did not fully understand all the obligations and developments involved in a lifelong marriage,"
AND
Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
according to:
http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
 And this site will do all the paperwork for filing the annulment for you within 24 hours for $149. http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
Newt Gingrich is on his third marriage, with a Catholic wife, as he has had his first two marriages annulled by the Catholic Church. The moderators at CAF have shut down any discussion on this, removing posts which question the wisdom of granting him two annulments.
I believe the term for these types of annulments that you speak of is "defective consent." I am not sure how I feel about the whole situation. On the one hand, it is good that the Church allows people who are in bad situations a solution rather than just being stuck with two options: A. to stay in a bad relationship and remain in good standing with the Church, or B. to get a civil divorce, but still be considered married by the Church and either have to remain single the rest of your life or else get remarried (invalidly) and be cut off from the Holy Eucharist since your new marriage is considered adulterous. It's messy...but marriage is messy. Life is messy. Striving to follow Christ as a sinful and imperfect human in a fallen society is messy.
and hypocrisy cleans it up?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #17 on: December 04, 2011, 01:41:44 AM »

My opinion is that whether it is divorce or using some legalistic method of divorcing but not calling it divorce, its all the same.
The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II. Before Vatican II, marriage annulments were granted for only quite serious reasons, such as your wife had concealed from you that she was already married and you didn't know about it. In 1930 there were about 10 marriage annulments in the USA for that year, whereas recently it has gone as high as 60,000 per year in the USA. And since the reasons for granting the marriage annulments have been vastly expanded to include psychological grounds such as lack of due discretion:  "Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled on the basis of incapacity and immaturity. It is not all that difficult to prove that someone was immature at the time of the  marriage or did not fully understand all the obligations and developments involved in a lifelong marriage,"
AND
Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
according to:
http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
 And this site will do all the paperwork for filing the annulment for you within 24 hours for $149. http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
Newt Gingrich is on his third marriage, with a Catholic wife, as he has had his first two marriages annulled by the Catholic Church. The moderators at CAF have shut down any discussion on this, removing posts which question the wisdom of granting him two annulments.
I believe the term for these types of annulments that you speak of is "defective consent." I am not sure how I feel about the whole situation. On the one hand, it is good that the Church allows people who are in bad situations a solution rather than just being stuck with two options: A. to stay in a bad relationship and remain in good standing with the Church, or B. to get a civil divorce, but still be considered married by the Church and either have to remain single the rest of your life or else get remarried (invalidly) and be cut off from the Holy Eucharist since your new marriage is considered adulterous. It's messy...but marriage is messy. Life is messy. Striving to follow Christ as a sinful and imperfect human in a fallen society is messy.
But what I am wondering about here is whether or not the Orthodox system of simply granting a divorce is more honest than saying that there never was a marriage in the first place? I suppose it is unfair to single out Gingrich for this, but consider this: if a person had not been unfaithful to the marriage, the question of the validity of the marriage would never have arisen.
If these marriage annulments are so easy to get and just about anyone can get an annulment, then who out there in the Catholic world is really married?
In the Orthodox system, it is said that there was a marriage, but it failed and the couple divorces, which is a sin. But it can be forgiven, as other sins can be forgiven. And then a second marriage is allowed. However, in the Catholic world, it is not a sin to get a marriage annulment, is it? And anyway, the tribunal demands that the couple get a divorce before the annulment hearing, so how credible is it if the Pope says he is against divorce, when the Catholic tribunal demands that the couple seeking an annulment first get a civil divorce? 
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 01:50:21 AM by stanley123 » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2011, 02:41:53 AM »

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
CONCERNING THE RECEPTION OF HOLY COMMUNION
BY THE DIVORCED AND REMARRIED MEMBERS OF THE FAITHFUL



http://web.archive.org/web/20060614145554/http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_14091994_rec-holy-comm-by-divorced_en.html


During an audience granted to the Cardinal Prefect, the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II gave his approval to this letter, drawn up in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered its publication.

Given at Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 14 September 1994, Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2011, 02:43:27 AM »

Divorce and Remarriage: A Challenge to the Christian Tradition

http://replay.web.archive.org/20060827025433/http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/staffhome/yukoszarycz/ethics/divorce.htm

This is an article by a Catholic professor.  He is speaking about the acceptance of divorce and remarriage in the Eastern segment of the Catholic Church prior to the schism.  The Catholic bishops in the East seem to have been more tolerant than in the West and the Pope allowed both attitudes to co-exist in the pre-schism Church.

Click the "Impatient?" button on the bottom right to access the article.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2011, 12:46:42 PM »

My opinion is that whether it is divorce or using some legalistic method of divorcing but not calling it divorce, its all the same.
The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II. Before Vatican II, marriage annulments were granted for only quite serious reasons, such as your wife had concealed from you that she was already married and you didn't know about it. In 1930 there were about 10 marriage annulments in the USA for that year, whereas recently it has gone as high as 60,000 per year in the USA. And since the reasons for granting the marriage annulments have been vastly expanded to include psychological grounds such as lack of due discretion:  "Many people believe that virtually any failed marriage can be annulled on the basis of incapacity and immaturity. It is not all that difficult to prove that someone was immature at the time of the  marriage or did not fully understand all the obligations and developments involved in a lifelong marriage,"
AND
Fr. Doherty quotes a Tribunal official as saying:
"There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
according to:
http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
 And this site will do all the paperwork for filing the annulment for you within 24 hours for $149. http://www.divorcehelp.net/annulment.html
Newt Gingrich is on his third marriage, with a Catholic wife, as he has had his first two marriages annulled by the Catholic Church. The moderators at CAF have shut down any discussion on this, removing posts which question the wisdom of granting him two annulments.
I believe the term for these types of annulments that you speak of is "defective consent." I am not sure how I feel about the whole situation. On the one hand, it is good that the Church allows people who are in bad situations a solution rather than just being stuck with two options: A. to stay in a bad relationship and remain in good standing with the Church, or B. to get a civil divorce, but still be considered married by the Church and either have to remain single the rest of your life or else get remarried (invalidly) and be cut off from the Holy Eucharist since your new marriage is considered adulterous. It's messy...but marriage is messy. Life is messy. Striving to follow Christ as a sinful and imperfect human in a fallen society is messy.
But what I am wondering about here is whether or not the Orthodox system of simply granting a divorce is more honest than saying that there never was a marriage in the first place? I suppose it is unfair to single out Gingrich for this, but consider this: if a person had not been unfaithful to the marriage, the question of the validity of the marriage would never have arisen.
If these marriage annulments are so easy to get and just about anyone can get an annulment, then who out there in the Catholic world is really married?
In the Orthodox system, it is said that there was a marriage, but it failed and the couple divorces, which is a sin. But it can be forgiven, as other sins can be forgiven. And then a second marriage is allowed. However, in the Catholic world, it is not a sin to get a marriage annulment, is it? And anyway, the tribunal demands that the couple get a divorce before the annulment hearing, so how credible is it if the Pope says he is against divorce, when the Catholic tribunal demands that the couple seeking an annulment first get a civil divorce?  
I understand where you are coming from. I'm not sure there is an easy answer. What we have here is two different Churches who have developed different ways of handling an unfortunate problem: the failure of a marriage. Let's look at the other side though as well. In username!'s example above, is the Eastern Orthodox Church's stance on divorce really any better? If a wife is being severely abused by her husband, is an Eastern Orthodox Christian, applies for an ecclesiastical divorce, and is told by her Church that she has incurred sin because divorce is sinful (nevermind the fact that she was being abused), is that really fair? What was she supposed to do, remain in the abusive relationship and just grin and bear it for the sake of not committing a sin in the eyes of the Eastern Orthodox Church?
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 12:47:12 PM by Wyatt » Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2011, 01:56:22 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
I think he has enough to worry about going on with his church instead of slinging mud. We could also throw mud at them about theological liberalism.

PP


Oh...so we don't worry about truth...We just aim at tit-for-tat...

kool

 Smiley
Keep your corban to yourselves.
Can you explain what you mean when you use the term "corban?" I'm not familiar with the term because I have not heard it anywhere else except on this forum and only from you.
never heard it?

"But you say: If a man shall say to his father or mother, Corban, (which is a gift,) whatsoever is from me, shall profit thee. "Mark 7:11

"But the chief priests having taken the pieces of silver, said: It is not lawful to put them into the corbona, because it is the price of blood." Mat. 27:6

"Gift" is one meaning of the word "corban".  To say that it means *just* that doesn't do it service, especially given that in English, "gift" connotes something somewhat more, what?...benign or delightful?  It can also mean "sacrifice" or "burnt offering", or as in Matt. which you quote above, "blood offering". (In the Old Testament,  it usually refers to an animal sacrifice).  These are, I suppose, types of a gift.  I'm not correcting you, just expanding on what you provided.  In modern Hebrew, the word for gift is usually מתנה , transliterated "matanah".  Wink

(Apologies for the digression.)
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 01:58:10 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,451


fleem
WWW
« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2011, 02:00:03 PM »

Quote from: stanley123
If these marriage annulments are so easy to get and just about anyone can get an annulment, then who out there in the Catholic world is really married?

My parents. They've been married 42 years.

Come off it.
Logged

Charlie Rose: "If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?"

Fran Lebowitz: "Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisified."

spcasuncoast.org
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,451


fleem
WWW
« Reply #23 on: December 04, 2011, 02:04:34 PM »

Quote from: J Michael
"Gift" is one meaning of the word "corban".  To say that it means *just* that doesn't do it service, especially given that in English, "gift" connotes something somewhat more, what?...benign or delightful?  It can also mean "sacrifice" or "burnt offering", or as in Matt. which you quote above, "blood offering". (In the Old Testament,  it usually refers to an animal sacrifice).  These are, I suppose, types of a gift.  I'm not correcting you, just expanding on what you provided.  In modern Hebrew, the word for gift is usually מתנה , transliterated "matanah".  Wink

(Apologies for the digression.)

Isa just likes to use big words, to make the rest of us feel less smart, and to make sure nobody misses what a big cheese he really is.  Roll Eyes

I've always heard the term used in the context of "corban Pesach," the Passover offering, which in ancient times meant the animal sacrifice. I get that from reading stuff written by actual Jews.

Then again, it wouldn't be the first time certain people played with words like silly putty, to make them mean whatever they prefer.

Logged

Charlie Rose: "If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?"

Fran Lebowitz: "Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisified."

spcasuncoast.org
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #24 on: December 04, 2011, 02:21:53 PM »

Quote from: J Michael
"Gift" is one meaning of the word "corban".  To say that it means *just* that doesn't do it service, especially given that in English, "gift" connotes something somewhat more, what?...benign or delightful?  It can also mean "sacrifice" or "burnt offering", or as in Matt. which you quote above, "blood offering". (In the Old Testament,  it usually refers to an animal sacrifice).  These are, I suppose, types of a gift.  I'm not correcting you, just expanding on what you provided.  In modern Hebrew, the word for gift is usually מתנה , transliterated "matanah".  Wink

(Apologies for the digression.)

Isa just likes to use big words, to make the rest of us feel less smart, and to make sure nobody misses what a big cheese he really is.  Roll Eyes

I've always heard the term used in the context of "corban Pesach," the Passover offering, which in ancient times meant the animal sacrifice. I get that from reading stuff written by actual Jews.

Then again, it wouldn't be the first time certain people played with words like silly putty, to make them mean whatever they prefer.



I *am* a Jew.  And I speak Hebrew.   Wink Wink.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,451


fleem
WWW
« Reply #25 on: December 04, 2011, 02:26:00 PM »

Pardon me. I saw your faith and jurisdiction, and assumed something else. Sorry.  Embarrassed Undecided
Logged

Charlie Rose: "If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?"

Fran Lebowitz: "Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisified."

spcasuncoast.org
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #26 on: December 04, 2011, 02:38:31 PM »

Pardon me. I saw your faith and jurisdiction, and assumed something else. Sorry.  Embarrassed Undecided

*Nothing* at all for you to apologize about or for me to pardon you for, dear Biro  Wink Wink!!  Though my faith is Catholic, I am, and will always remain, a Jew.  Catholicism is, at least for me,  the fulfillment of Judaism.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 02:39:28 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,451


fleem
WWW
« Reply #27 on: December 04, 2011, 02:39:21 PM »

Okay, makes sense. Thanks.  Smiley
Logged

Charlie Rose: "If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?"

Fran Lebowitz: "Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisified."

spcasuncoast.org
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #28 on: December 04, 2011, 06:13:38 PM »


The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II.

Somewhere I read that in the last 10 years 1,200,000 Americans have been granted annulments.  But these Catholics have most certainly been united in one flesh.  They have been engaging is sexual coitus for 10 years, 20 years, 30 years - most certainly they are one flesh.  But the Catholic Church, deciding in its wisdom that there was some impediment on the day of the wedding decades earlier, declares they must cease from being one flesh.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #29 on: December 04, 2011, 07:35:48 PM »


The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II.

Somewhere I read that in the last 10 years 1,200,000 Americans have been granted annulments.  But these Catholics have most certainly been united in one flesh.  They have been engaging is sexual coitus for 10 years, 20 years, 30 years - most certainly they are one flesh.  But the Catholic Church, deciding in its wisdom that there was some impediment on the day of the wedding decades earlier, declares they must cease from being one flesh.
Yup.The annulment process has been abused. What is your point?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #30 on: December 04, 2011, 07:37:14 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
This text is an old text. The intended purpose is to address the world's increasingly unchristian approach to marriage. The fact that Eastern Orthodoxy is mentioned is not to bash the EO Church. In fact, if you read Ratizinger's other works, he has a great deal of respect for EOs. However, if he is going to address the fact that the world is turning away from the the truth about marriage, he cannot ignore the fact that Eastern Orthodox Church is doing so as well.
"Is doing so"? That's odd, considering how the EOC hasn't changed its position on this since well before the Great Schism.
Then the east has not been following the teachings of Christ since before the schism.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #31 on: December 04, 2011, 07:46:59 PM »

So why was your Pope in communion with them, then?
Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #32 on: December 04, 2011, 07:48:21 PM »

So why was your Pope in communion with them, then?
There are bad Catholics now that the Pope is communion with. What's your point?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #33 on: December 04, 2011, 07:49:16 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
This text is an old text. The intended purpose is to address the world's increasingly unchristian approach to marriage. The fact that Eastern Orthodoxy is mentioned is not to bash the EO Church. In fact, if you read Ratizinger's other works, he has a great deal of respect for EOs. However, if he is going to address the fact that the world is turning away from the the truth about marriage, he cannot ignore the fact that Eastern Orthodox Church is doing so as well.
"Is doing so"? That's odd, considering how the EOC hasn't changed its position on this since well before the Great Schism.
Then the east has not been following the teachings of Christ since before the schism.
Was Christ not following the teachings of Christ when He allowed for divorce in the case of adultery?
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #34 on: December 04, 2011, 07:52:03 PM »

Quote
L'Osservatore Romano has published a "little known text" written 13 years ago by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which the future Pope defends the Roman Magisterium's refusal to give communion to divorced and remarried Catholics as being "grounded in truth" and criticises the "more liberal praxis" of the Orthodox Churches as being at odds with the words of Christ.
....
The future pope, then head of the Vatican's doctrinal office, writes: "The teaching of the [Catholic] Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus." But he says the "increasingly liberal" practice of the Orthodox Churches to allow for divorce and remarriage was based on "several obscure patristic texts that were influenced by civil law". Their practice, he says, therefore became "more and more removed from the words of the Lord".
A shot across the bow?
This text is an old text. The intended purpose is to address the world's increasingly unchristian approach to marriage. The fact that Eastern Orthodoxy is mentioned is not to bash the EO Church. In fact, if you read Ratizinger's other works, he has a great deal of respect for EOs. However, if he is going to address the fact that the world is turning away from the the truth about marriage, he cannot ignore the fact that Eastern Orthodox Church is doing so as well.
"Is doing so"? That's odd, considering how the EOC hasn't changed its position on this since well before the Great Schism.
Then the east has not been following the teachings of Christ since before the schism.
Was Christ not following the teachings of Christ when He allowed for divorce in the case of adultery?
Can I nominate this ^ for this most ridiculous post of the month? First, the is debate over what the word that is translated as adultery actually means. From what I have been told it could mean an "unlawful marriage". But all of that aside, if Christ says that remarriage is adultery, and the Orthodox Church recognizes second and third marriages, then it recognizes and blesses adultery. Interesting isn't it.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #35 on: December 04, 2011, 08:24:37 PM »

Can I nominate this ^ for this most ridiculous post of the month?
Was that really necessary?

Quote
First, the is debate over what the word that is translated as adultery actually means. From what I have been told it could mean an "unlawful marriage".
Source, please. I'm not sure if making vague, unsubstantiated allegations of "mistranslation" is all that helpful. Even if it is convenient.

As far as I know, porneias doesn't mean "unlawful marriage."

Quote
But all of that aside, if Christ says that remarriage is adultery, and the Orthodox Church recognizes second and third marriages, then it recognizes and blesses adultery. Interesting isn't it.
But Christ said that it isn't always adultery.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 08:29:15 PM by William » Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #36 on: December 04, 2011, 08:50:56 PM »

Can I nominate this ^ for this most ridiculous post of the month?
Was that really necessary?

Quote
First, the is debate over what the word that is translated as adultery actually means. From what I have been told it could mean an "unlawful marriage".
Source, please. I'm not sure if making vague, unsubstantiated allegations of "mistranslation" is all that helpful. Even if it is convenient.

As far as I know, porneias doesn't mean "unlawful marriage."

Quote
But all of that aside, if Christ says that remarriage is adultery, and the Orthodox Church recognizes second and third marriages, then it recognizes and blesses adultery. Interesting isn't it.
But Christ said that it isn't always adultery.
I have been told that porneia here can mean "unlawful" because it may mean marriage to a close relative. I'll have to find a source. Anywho, so your church only allows divorce and remarriage in the case of adultery then?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,951



« Reply #37 on: December 04, 2011, 08:57:42 PM »

Both the Orthodox and the Latins have their own ways of trying to be compassionate and work with this very difficult teaching of the Lord.

The standard remains that it is best not to marry, but if one does marry than divorce is not permissible.

I think the Latins have a theoretically higher standard that I agree with more, but I think the concept of annulling a marriage seems patently ridiculous and is intellectually and morally dishonest.
Logged
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #38 on: December 04, 2011, 09:29:01 PM »

I have been told that porneia here can mean "unlawful" because it may mean marriage to a close relative. I'll have to find a source.
Then wouldn't the context mean that only marriages between close relatives can be annulled?

Quote
Anywho, so your church only allows divorce and remarriage in the case of adultery then?
I don't know. A Syrian Orthodox fellow I talked with a few weeks back said that in the Middle East you have to take your case directly to the Metropolitan and he'll only say yes if infidelity is involved, which is in contrast to the Muslims of the region who can get divorces for ridiculous reasons (like the wife being infertile). The North American bishops might be less rigid, but I don't know for sure.
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #39 on: December 04, 2011, 09:31:06 PM »

I have been told that porneia here can mean "unlawful" because it may mean marriage to a close relative. I'll have to find a source.
Then wouldn't the context mean that only marriages between close relatives can be annulled?

Quote
Anywho, so your church only allows divorce and remarriage in the case of adultery then?
I don't know. A Syrian Orthodox fellow I talked with a few weeks back said that in the Middle East you have to take your case directly to the Metropolitan and he'll only say yes if infidelity is involved, which is in contrast to the Muslims of the region who can get divorces for ridiculous reasons (like the wife being infertile). The North American bishops might be less rigid, but I don't know for sure.
So your church doesn't have an official stance?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,951



« Reply #40 on: December 04, 2011, 09:38:12 PM »

So your church doesn't have an official stance?

He's an inquirer.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #41 on: December 04, 2011, 09:39:40 PM »

So your church doesn't have an official stance?

He's an inquirer.
Oops. so does the EO Church have an official stance?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #42 on: December 04, 2011, 09:43:38 PM »


The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II.

Somewhere I read that in the last 10 years 1,200,000 Americans have been granted annulments.  But these Catholics have most certainly been united in one flesh.  They have been engaging is sexual coitus for 10 years, 20 years, 30 years - most certainly they are one flesh.  But the Catholic Church, deciding in its wisdom that there was some impediment on the day of the wedding decades earlier, declares they must cease from being one flesh.
Yup.The annulment process has been abused. What is your point?

Chris, it goes way beyond abuse of the annulment process.

For better or for worse, the annulment process has revealed that tens of thousands of Catholic marriages are not in fact marriages but simply an unlawful cohabitation between unmarried people.  The number of these cohabitating couples who went through the sham of a church wedding is known to be 120,000 a year in the States (60,000 annulments each year.)

Besides these tens of thousands of sham marriages which which are brought to light through the annulment process there must be further tens of thousands which continue in existence, sham marriages which are not scrutinised through the annulment process.

One wonders if your Church should not address this dire situation and set up a process whereby every marriage is scrutinised for legitimacy after, say, 10 years of married life?

Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #43 on: December 04, 2011, 09:44:26 PM »

Quote from: stanley123
If these marriage annulments are so easy to get and just about anyone can get an annulment, then who out there in the Catholic world is really married?

My parents. They've been married 42 years.

Come off it.
Your Vatican claims the power to annul a marriage of 42 years, or more.
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #44 on: December 04, 2011, 09:50:04 PM »


The number of marriage annulments granted by the RCC has increased quite drastically since Vatican II.

Somewhere I read that in the last 10 years 1,200,000 Americans have been granted annulments.  But these Catholics have most certainly been united in one flesh.  They have been engaging is sexual coitus for 10 years, 20 years, 30 years - most certainly they are one flesh.  But the Catholic Church, deciding in its wisdom that there was some impediment on the day of the wedding decades earlier, declares they must cease from being one flesh.
Yup.The annulment process has been abused. What is your point?

Chris, it goes way beyond abuse of the annulment process.

For better or for worse, the annulment process has revealed that tens of thousands of Catholic marriages are not in fact marriages but simply an unlawful cohabitation between unmarried people.  The number of these cohabitating couples who went through the sham of a church wedding is known to be 120,000 a year in the States (60,000 annulments each year.)

Besides these tens of thousands of sham marriages which which are brought to light through the annulment process there must be further tens of thousands which continue in existence, sham marriages which are not scrutinised through the annulment process.

One wonders if your Church should not address this dire situation and set up a process whereby every marriage is scrutinised for legitimacy after, say, 10 years of married life?


Fr. A, not that you are actually concerned with the state of Catholic marriages, but the Church believes that it should be assumed that every marriage is innocent until proven guilty. Thus, it should be assumed that every Catholic is in a valid marriage, until it is proven that they are not. This is problem with the current marriage tribunals. They fail to make this assumption.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.183 seconds with 73 queries.