OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 23, 2014, 06:24:52 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   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 6058 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,080


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: 5,840


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
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: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« 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: 2,393


« 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
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: 35,629



« 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: 4,748



« 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
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,171

Work hard, pray hard.


« 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

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 9,116


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: 2,393


« 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: 4,748



« 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: 2,393


« 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: 3,730


« 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: 2,393


« 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
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: 35,629



« 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: 3,730


« 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: 2,393


« 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: 9,949


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
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 11,936


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

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 satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 11,936


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

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 satisfied.

http://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: 9,949


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
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 11,936


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

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 satisfied.

http://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: 9,949


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
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 11,936


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

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 satisfied.

http://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: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« 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: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

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

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,171

Work hard, pray hard.


« 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

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

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

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,171

Work hard, pray hard.


« 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

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian
Posts: 6,674



« 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
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,171

Work hard, pray hard.


« 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

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian
Posts: 6,674



« 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: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
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
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: 35,629



« 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: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« 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

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #45 on: December 04, 2011, 09:52:37 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.
never heard of a two syllable word being described as a "big word" before.  Especially one that the Gospel explains (and condemns) how it is played with like silly putty, to make them mean what the casuitrists want, then or now.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #46 on: December 04, 2011, 09:54:38 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.
Can I nominate this ^ for this most ridiculous post of the month?
Go right ahead.

Don't recall any "marriage tribunal" showing up until medieval Western law and custom influenced the Vatican's canon law, i.e. well after 1054.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 09:56:48 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,171

Work hard, pray hard.


« Reply #47 on: December 04, 2011, 09:55:56 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.
Can I nominate this ^ for this most ridiculous post of the month?
Go right ahead.
Sad

I'm sorry. What did I say that was wrong?

Edit: Oh wait. I see what you did there.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 09:56:44 PM by William » Logged

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #48 on: December 04, 2011, 10:01:05 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.

There's been quite a bit of good come out of the fact that there are so many marriages that failed to pass the test of time as sacramental marriages.

Many dioceses and pastors have initiated much more thorough marriage preparation and also have initiated better marriage counseling and retreats.  Many pastors will not marry a young man and woman who are cohabiting and sexually active.  Some make them live apart for six months prior to their wedding.  The single highest predictor of divorce is cohabitation.

So regardless of what is said in detraction, there are good things to come out of the horrid divorce rate of the past 60 years.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 10:02:34 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian
Posts: 6,674



« Reply #49 on: December 04, 2011, 10:40:18 PM »

Oops. so does the EO Church have an official stance?

One what about divorce specifically?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #50 on: December 04, 2011, 10:47:17 PM »


Fr. A, not that you are actually concerned with the state of Catholic marriages...


You might be surprised how many conversations with Catholic visitors to our parish begin with "Father, we have a problem with our marriage...."  Simply because I have a care for these Catholics whom our Lord has brought into my life, I have a concern for the state of Catholic marriage.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #51 on: December 04, 2011, 10:50:18 PM »


Fr. A, not that you are actually concerned with the state of Catholic marriages...


You might be surprised how many conversations with Catholic visitors to our parish begin with "Father, we have a problem with our marriage...."  Simply because I have a care for these Catholics whom our Lord has brought into my life, I have a concern for the state of Catholic marriage.

Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #52 on: December 04, 2011, 10:58:41 PM »

And of course the question comes to mind....

If 35% of your marriages end in annulment, what is your total divorce rate?   How many more Catholics get divorced and do not bother to have recourse to the annulment process?  
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 11:16:40 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #53 on: December 04, 2011, 11:08:49 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,730


« Reply #54 on: December 05, 2011, 12:56:18 AM »

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.
I know of a couple who were married for 25 years and had several children in a seemingly happy marriage. Then the husband found himself a new girlfriend and wanted out of his first marriage. He applied for a got a Catholic marriage annulment.
Now, suppose that the same husband had been faithful to his marriage. And remained married. Then what. Would the marriage have been objectively valid or not? If it is so easy to get a Catholic marriage annulment, doesn't that mean that most Catholic marriages are invalid to begin with? If not, then why are they so easy to annul?
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,730


« Reply #55 on: December 05, 2011, 01:08:03 AM »

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.
But such an assumption is objectively right or wrong. Take for example the case of a couple where the husband concealed to the wife that he was already married to someone else. He does not reveal this to anyone. Well, this second marriage on his part is objectively invalid, regardless of whether the RC Church believes that is should be assumed that the marriage is valid until proven otherwise. It really doesn't matter what the assumption is on this second attempted marriage, the fact in reality is that the marriage is invalid because the husband had concealed his first marriage. So the assumption of the RC Church that the (second) marriage is valid is wrong in this case.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,730


« Reply #56 on: December 05, 2011, 01:43:04 AM »

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.
This is what I see as a serious problem. A couple is married for 20, 30 or even 40 years and there is no question about the validity of the marriage until the wife (say) decides to leave the marriage for another partner. She simply says that at the time of the wedding vows her consent was defective. She applies for the marriage annulment, and it is granted. So the marriage was invalid from the start.  But wait - suppose that she had remained faithful to the marriage. Then what about the defective consent? Is the marriage objectively valid or objectively invalid? You might assume that the marriage was OK, but until a marriage tribunal decides one way or the other,  you never really know do you? If you are in a Catholic marriage, you might just be living with someone who is not your wife (or husband as the case may be)?
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #57 on: December 05, 2011, 12:11:50 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
Logged

primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #58 on: December 05, 2011, 12:28:49 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #59 on: December 05, 2011, 12:37:11 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.

Saying that annulments are "legalistic nonsense" does not make it so at all.  You are smart enough to know that.  And Orthodoxy with her myriad canons should never talk to us about legalisms...oh...yes, I know.  The canons are only guidelines.  Like the Ten Suggestions.... Wink
Logged

primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #60 on: December 05, 2011, 12:47:54 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.

Saying that annulments are "legalistic nonsense" does not make it so at all.  You are smart enough to know that.  And Orthodoxy with her myriad canons should never talk to us about legalisms...oh...yes, I know.  The canons are only guidelines.  Like the Ten Suggestions.... Wink
As I stated before, I hate divorce and I really dont agree with the Church allowing them. Period. As for annullment I find that it is simply a legalistic way or squirming out of a marriage without calling it a divorce. I've read the postings here and the definition of Annullment and it did nothing more reinforce my opinion.
Whether you make an oath and intend to go thorugh it or not, you made an oath and are responsible for it. Marriage is not a contract like Im getting a loan or buying land, it is a promise to the Lord God.

I think that Christians should take a very hard stance against any marriage ending. Although Im not anyone of importance or great authority, I do think that whatever shirt you want to put on it (Separation, divorce, annullment, whatever) we've been far too lax on it. Of course, there are times marriages dont work out (my first one for instance, which was not of my doing) but there should be serious and substantial repercussions because of it, not trying to find legal ways out of it, calling it something else, or just simply say, "Well, better luck next time."

PP
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #61 on: December 05, 2011, 12:59:53 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.

Saying that annulments are "legalistic nonsense" does not make it so at all.  You are smart enough to know that.  And Orthodoxy with her myriad canons should never talk to us about legalisms...oh...yes, I know.  The canons are only guidelines.  Like the Ten Suggestions.... Wink
As I stated before, I hate divorce and I really dont agree with the Church allowing them. Period. As for annullment I find that it is simply a legalistic way or squirming out of a marriage without calling it a divorce. I've read the postings here and the definition of Annullment and it did nothing more reinforce my opinion.
Whether you make an oath and intend to go thorugh it or not, you made an oath and are responsible for it. Marriage is not a contract like Im getting a loan or buying land, it is a promise to the Lord God.

I think that Christians should take a very hard stance against any marriage ending. Although Im not anyone of importance or great authority, I do think that whatever shirt you want to put on it (Separation, divorce, annullment, whatever) we've been far too lax on it. Of course, there are times marriages dont work out (my first one for instance, which was not of my doing) but there should be serious and substantial repercussions because of it, not trying to find legal ways out of it, calling it something else, or just simply say, "Well, better luck next time."

PP

We are in more than a little agreement here at the level of the moral obligation imposed by sacramental marriage.

I accept the annulment process but do not think it should be used as a revolving door so that one can be free to go and make the very same mistake again, which very often does happen.

I won't comment again on divorce.  As you note, when the process is abused then it is bad news no matter what you call it or the process by which it occurs.  I would prefer the annulment process to divorce, unless there is some parity with the involvement of the Church in the process.  From what I understand that varies widely from see to see and Church to Church in Orthodoxy.  That to me is no better than lax processes for the granting of annulments.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2011, 01:00:37 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #62 on: December 05, 2011, 01:06:00 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.

Saying that annulments are "legalistic nonsense" does not make it so at all.  You are smart enough to know that.  And Orthodoxy with her myriad canons should never talk to us about legalisms...oh...yes, I know.  The canons are only guidelines.  Like the Ten Suggestions.... Wink
As I stated before, I hate divorce and I really dont agree with the Church allowing them. Period. As for annullment I find that it is simply a legalistic way or squirming out of a marriage without calling it a divorce. I've read the postings here and the definition of Annullment and it did nothing more reinforce my opinion.
Whether you make an oath and intend to go thorugh it or not, you made an oath and are responsible for it. Marriage is not a contract like Im getting a loan or buying land, it is a promise to the Lord God.

I think that Christians should take a very hard stance against any marriage ending. Although Im not anyone of importance or great authority, I do think that whatever shirt you want to put on it (Separation, divorce, annullment, whatever) we've been far too lax on it. Of course, there are times marriages dont work out (my first one for instance, which was not of my doing) but there should be serious and substantial repercussions because of it, not trying to find legal ways out of it, calling it something else, or just simply say, "Well, better luck next time."

PP

We are in more than a little agreement here at the level of the moral obligation imposed by sacramental marriage.

I accept the annulment process but do not think it should be used as a revolving door so that one can be free to go and make the very same mistake again, which very often does happen.

I won't comment again on divorce.  As you note, when the process is abused then it is bad news no matter what you call it or the process by which it occurs.  I would prefer the annulment process to divorce, unless there is some parity with the involvement of the Church in the process.  From what I understand that varies widely from see to see and Church to Church in Orthodoxy.  That to me is no better than lax processes for the granting of annulments.
I can agree with that..

PP
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #63 on: December 05, 2011, 01:09:25 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.

Saying that annulments are "legalistic nonsense" does not make it so at all.  You are smart enough to know that.  And Orthodoxy with her myriad canons should never talk to us about legalisms...oh...yes, I know.  The canons are only guidelines.  Like the Ten Suggestions.... Wink
As I stated before, I hate divorce and I really dont agree with the Church allowing them. Period. As for annullment I find that it is simply a legalistic way or squirming out of a marriage without calling it a divorce. I've read the postings here and the definition of Annullment and it did nothing more reinforce my opinion.
Whether you make an oath and intend to go thorugh it or not, you made an oath and are responsible for it. Marriage is not a contract like Im getting a loan or buying land, it is a promise to the Lord God.

I think that Christians should take a very hard stance against any marriage ending. Although Im not anyone of importance or great authority, I do think that whatever shirt you want to put on it (Separation, divorce, annullment, whatever) we've been far too lax on it. Of course, there are times marriages dont work out (my first one for instance, which was not of my doing) but there should be serious and substantial repercussions because of it, not trying to find legal ways out of it, calling it something else, or just simply say, "Well, better luck next time."

PP

We are in more than a little agreement here at the level of the moral obligation imposed by sacramental marriage.

I accept the annulment process but do not think it should be used as a revolving door so that one can be free to go and make the very same mistake again, which very often does happen.

I won't comment again on divorce.  As you note, when the process is abused then it is bad news no matter what you call it or the process by which it occurs.  I would prefer the annulment process to divorce, unless there is some parity with the involvement of the Church in the process.  From what I understand that varies widely from see to see and Church to Church in Orthodoxy.  That to me is no better than lax processes for the granting of annulments.
I can agree with that..

PP

That's good news... Smiley

I am very sorry that you had to suffer a divorce.  I pray God heals all over time.
Logged

primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #64 on: December 05, 2011, 01:37:38 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.

Saying that annulments are "legalistic nonsense" does not make it so at all.  You are smart enough to know that.  And Orthodoxy with her myriad canons should never talk to us about legalisms...oh...yes, I know.  The canons are only guidelines.  Like the Ten Suggestions.... Wink
As I stated before, I hate divorce and I really dont agree with the Church allowing them. Period. As for annullment I find that it is simply a legalistic way or squirming out of a marriage without calling it a divorce. I've read the postings here and the definition of Annullment and it did nothing more reinforce my opinion.
Whether you make an oath and intend to go thorugh it or not, you made an oath and are responsible for it. Marriage is not a contract like Im getting a loan or buying land, it is a promise to the Lord God.

I think that Christians should take a very hard stance against any marriage ending. Although Im not anyone of importance or great authority, I do think that whatever shirt you want to put on it (Separation, divorce, annullment, whatever) we've been far too lax on it. Of course, there are times marriages dont work out (my first one for instance, which was not of my doing) but there should be serious and substantial repercussions because of it, not trying to find legal ways out of it, calling it something else, or just simply say, "Well, better luck next time."

PP

We are in more than a little agreement here at the level of the moral obligation imposed by sacramental marriage.

I accept the annulment process but do not think it should be used as a revolving door so that one can be free to go and make the very same mistake again, which very often does happen.

I won't comment again on divorce.  As you note, when the process is abused then it is bad news no matter what you call it or the process by which it occurs.  I would prefer the annulment process to divorce, unless there is some parity with the involvement of the Church in the process.  From what I understand that varies widely from see to see and Church to Church in Orthodoxy.  That to me is no better than lax processes for the granting of annulments.
I can agree with that..

PP

That's good news... Smiley

I am very sorry that you had to suffer a divorce.  I pray God heals all over time.
Hey, what man made for evil God made it for good. He gave me a godly woman that I love dearly. Been married for almost 3 years now. Things are way better Smiley

PP
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #65 on: December 05, 2011, 02:21:02 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.

Saying that annulments are "legalistic nonsense" does not make it so at all.  You are smart enough to know that.  And Orthodoxy with her myriad canons should never talk to us about legalisms...oh...yes, I know.  The canons are only guidelines.  Like the Ten Suggestions.... Wink
As I stated before, I hate divorce and I really dont agree with the Church allowing them. Period. As for annullment I find that it is simply a legalistic way or squirming out of a marriage without calling it a divorce. I've read the postings here and the definition of Annullment and it did nothing more reinforce my opinion.
Whether you make an oath and intend to go thorugh it or not, you made an oath and are responsible for it. Marriage is not a contract like Im getting a loan or buying land, it is a promise to the Lord God.

I think that Christians should take a very hard stance against any marriage ending. Although Im not anyone of importance or great authority, I do think that whatever shirt you want to put on it (Separation, divorce, annullment, whatever) we've been far too lax on it. Of course, there are times marriages dont work out (my first one for instance, which was not of my doing) but there should be serious and substantial repercussions because of it, not trying to find legal ways out of it, calling it something else, or just simply say, "Well, better luck next time."

PP

We are in more than a little agreement here at the level of the moral obligation imposed by sacramental marriage.

I accept the annulment process but do not think it should be used as a revolving door so that one can be free to go and make the very same mistake again, which very often does happen.

I won't comment again on divorce.  As you note, when the process is abused then it is bad news no matter what you call it or the process by which it occurs.  I would prefer the annulment process to divorce, unless there is some parity with the involvement of the Church in the process.  From what I understand that varies widely from see to see and Church to Church in Orthodoxy.  That to me is no better than lax processes for the granting of annulments.
I can agree with that..

PP

That's good news... Smiley

I am very sorry that you had to suffer a divorce.  I pray God heals all over time.
Hey, what man made for evil God made it for good. He gave me a godly woman that I love dearly. Been married for almost 3 years now. Things are way better Smiley

PP

 Smiley  Good news.  Then I will have to direct my prayers for the one who left you, since you seem to be in recovery quite nicely.
Logged

primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #66 on: December 05, 2011, 02:45:10 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.
I dont agree with Divorce in one way or another. This is coming from a man who has been divorced before. I just think that using some legalistic nonsense to side-step the actual name, "divorce" is laughable at best.

Saying that annulments are "legalistic nonsense" does not make it so at all.  You are smart enough to know that.  And Orthodoxy with her myriad canons should never talk to us about legalisms...oh...yes, I know.  The canons are only guidelines.  Like the Ten Suggestions.... Wink
As I stated before, I hate divorce and I really dont agree with the Church allowing them. Period. As for annullment I find that it is simply a legalistic way or squirming out of a marriage without calling it a divorce. I've read the postings here and the definition of Annullment and it did nothing more reinforce my opinion.
Whether you make an oath and intend to go thorugh it or not, you made an oath and are responsible for it. Marriage is not a contract like Im getting a loan or buying land, it is a promise to the Lord God.

I think that Christians should take a very hard stance against any marriage ending. Although Im not anyone of importance or great authority, I do think that whatever shirt you want to put on it (Separation, divorce, annullment, whatever) we've been far too lax on it. Of course, there are times marriages dont work out (my first one for instance, which was not of my doing) but there should be serious and substantial repercussions because of it, not trying to find legal ways out of it, calling it something else, or just simply say, "Well, better luck next time."

PP

We are in more than a little agreement here at the level of the moral obligation imposed by sacramental marriage.

I accept the annulment process but do not think it should be used as a revolving door so that one can be free to go and make the very same mistake again, which very often does happen.

I won't comment again on divorce.  As you note, when the process is abused then it is bad news no matter what you call it or the process by which it occurs.  I would prefer the annulment process to divorce, unless there is some parity with the involvement of the Church in the process.  From what I understand that varies widely from see to see and Church to Church in Orthodoxy.  That to me is no better than lax processes for the granting of annulments.
I can agree with that..

PP

That's good news... Smiley

I am very sorry that you had to suffer a divorce.  I pray God heals all over time.
Hey, what man made for evil God made it for good. He gave me a godly woman that I love dearly. Been married for almost 3 years now. Things are way better Smiley

PP

 Smiley  Good news.  Then I will have to direct my prayers for the one who left you, since you seem to be in recovery quite nicely.
Yeah, the sky's pretty sunny now Smiley
PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
Vadim
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate)
Posts: 48


Bishop Atanasije Jevtic on the photograph


« Reply #67 on: December 05, 2011, 03:18:01 PM »

Quote
The future pope ... 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".
Is this testimony of St Epiphanius "obscure"?

    He who cannot keep continence after the death of his wife or who has separated from his wife for a valid motive, such as fornication, adultery, or some other misdeed, if he takes another wife or if the wife takes another husband, the divine word does not condemn or exclude him from the Church or Life, but rather tolerates this on account of his weakness. Not that this man can keep two wives in his home, the first one still hanging around him. But if he is actually separated from his first wife, he may take another according to the law if this be his desire. 12

    12 Panarion, heresy 59, PG 41, col 1025.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2011, 03:20:02 PM by Vadim » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #68 on: December 05, 2011, 03:32:47 PM »

Quote
The future pope ... 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".
Is this testimony of St Epiphanius "obscure"?

    He who cannot keep continence after the death of his wife or who has separated from his wife for a valid motive, such as fornication, adultery, or some other misdeed, if he takes another wife or if the wife takes another husband, the divine word does not condemn or exclude him from the Church or Life, but rather tolerates this on account of his weakness. Not that this man can keep two wives in his home, the first one still hanging around him. But if he is actually separated from his first wife, he may take another according to the law if this be his desire. 12

    12 Panarion, heresy 59, PG 41, col 1025.
Well,one must paint a target before throwing something...

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #69 on: December 05, 2011, 03:42:24 PM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.

I have conducted 250 weddings.

Seven have ended in divorce.

That is a divorce rate of 2.8% **

"Easy divorce"? 

And compare that with your annulment rate of 35% of marriages.

Add in the divorced Catholics who never applied for an annulment and we can be pretty sure the failure rate of Catholic marriage in the States is  over 50%.

_____________
The Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages notifies the marriage celebrant when a divorce becomes final.
Logged
Vadim
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate)
Posts: 48


Bishop Atanasije Jevtic on the photograph


« Reply #70 on: December 05, 2011, 03:54:08 PM »

Well,one must paint a target before throwing something...
I found much information about divorces in "Orthodox canon law" by bishop Nikodim Milash, but I cannot find this book online in English. He says that canons concerning divorce and remarriage which are now in the Orthdox Church were accepted before the Fifth Ecumenical Council. That's impossible if these canons were wrong but the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Ecumenical Councils could pass by this.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2011, 03:58:06 PM by Vadim » Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #71 on: December 05, 2011, 04:18:01 PM »

Well,one must paint a target before throwing something...
I found much information about divorces in "Orthodox canon law" by bishop Nikodim Milash, but I cannot find this book online in English. He says that canons concerning divorce and remarriage which are now in the Orthdox Church were accepted before the Fifth Ecumenical Council. That's impossible if these canons were wrong but the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Ecumenical Councils could pass by this.

Are you telling me that in the first seven councils EVERY wrong canon or praxis was either corrected or "passed"...really?
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #72 on: December 06, 2011, 12:47:41 AM »

Well,one must paint a target before throwing something...
I found much information about divorces in "Orthodox canon law" by bishop Nikodim Milash, but I cannot find this book online in English. He says that canons concerning divorce and remarriage which are now in the Orthdox Church were accepted before the Fifth Ecumenical Council. That's impossible if these canons were wrong but the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Ecumenical Councils could pass by this.
Are the works of Bp. Milash available online in Serbian and/or German (the usual language of his Church, Bucovina, at the time)?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #73 on: December 06, 2011, 12:48:35 AM »

Well,one must paint a target before throwing something...
I found much information about divorces in "Orthodox canon law" by bishop Nikodim Milash, but I cannot find this book online in English. He says that canons concerning divorce and remarriage which are now in the Orthdox Church were accepted before the Fifth Ecumenical Council. That's impossible if these canons were wrong but the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Ecumenical Councils could pass by this.

Are you telling me that in the first seven councils EVERY wrong canon or praxis was either corrected or "passed"...really?
Yes, really.  If one reads the canons, they can see that.
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
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #74 on: December 06, 2011, 02:17:10 AM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.

I have conducted 250 weddings.

Seven have ended in divorce.

That is a divorce rate of 2.8% **

"Easy divorce"? 

And compare that with your annulment rate of 35% of marriages.

Add in the divorced Catholics who never applied for an annulment and we can be pretty sure the failure rate of Catholic marriage in the States is  over 50%.

_____________
The Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages notifies the marriage celebrant when a divorce becomes final.
Father,

Is that with the Church or with the government? I'm just curious if that's ecclesiastical divorces or civil divorces. Obviously, there is a possibility that someone might get a civil divorce without informing the Church (at least with the Catholic Church in the United States). I'm just wondering if it's the same in NZ.



As a general aside, at the local Greek parish, two of the last four priests' marriages ended in divorce. Obviously, Holy Orders is an impediment to marriage, but can a priest get an ecclesiastical divorce even though he may not remarry?
« Last Edit: December 06, 2011, 02:18:59 AM by WetCatechumen » Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #75 on: December 06, 2011, 02:37:56 AM »


Then why not speak with that pastoral voice rather than mocking the Catholic Church as you do so often?...by point to only its failures?

If we mock you it is because we find the outworking of your teachings on marriage and annulment/divorce (as well as on contraception) to be hypocritical.  And the hypocrisy is compounded, in our eyes, because you take a supercilious attitude to the ways in with the Orthodox deal with these matters.   Angry

Then we're pretty even here.  I think Orthodoxy's easy divorce is objectively sinful.

I have conducted 250 weddings.

Seven have ended in divorce.

That is a divorce rate of 2.8% **

"Easy divorce"? 

And compare that with your annulment rate of 35% of marriages.

Add in the divorced Catholics who never applied for an annulment and we can be pretty sure the failure rate of Catholic marriage in the States is  over 50%.

_____________
The Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages notifies the marriage celebrant when a divorce becomes final.
Father,

Is that with the Church or with the government? I'm just curious if that's ecclesiastical divorces or civil divorces. Obviously, there is a possibility that someone might get a civil divorce without informing the Church (at least with the Catholic Church in the United States). I'm just wondering if it's the same in NZ.

These are civil divorces.

A marriage celebrant must comply with Government requirements to notify the Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages of every wedding he or she performs.

The Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages informs a marriage celebrant whenever a marriage he has performed is ended by a civil divorce.
Quote


As a general aside, at the local Greek parish, two of the last four priests' marriages ended in divorce. Obviously, Holy Orders is an impediment to marriage, but can a priest get an ecclesiastical divorce even though he may not remarry?

I do not know.

Logged
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,080


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #76 on: December 06, 2011, 09:31:18 AM »

Quote
Last November 30, Benedict XVI returned to the issue in indirect form: with the republication in "L'Osservatore Romano" of a "little-known" essay of his from 1998, supplemented with a footnote presenting his remark on this issue to the clergy of the diocese of Aosta on July 25, 2005.

An important footnote, because it concerns precisely one of the points on which Benedict XVI maintains that an exception could be opened in the general ban on communion.
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.
Vadim
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate)
Posts: 48


Bishop Atanasije Jevtic on the photograph


« Reply #77 on: December 06, 2011, 11:22:50 AM »

Are you telling me that in the first seven councils EVERY wrong canon or praxis was either corrected or "passed"...really?
Yes. All canons and praxis were analyzed and confirmed by the Sixth Ecumenical Council. Although the Pope rejects the canons of the Sixth Council, the Seventh Ecumenical Council explicitly approved all 102 canons. You can read this, in particular, in the treatise against the iconoclast council, composed by the Seventh Ecumenical Council. This treatise was read during Sixth Session of this Council. As you can see, one of those canons, 82, was very important proof for iconolatry. Acts of the Seventh Ecumenical Council:
    ... This was especially the case with the sixth holy Œcumenic Council; for, after its decision had been pronounced against those who maintained the one will in Christ our God, and, indeed, after that Constantine, then Emperor, by whose order, under the good providence of God, the Council had been assembled had departed this life, and his son Justinian had assumed the government, that the same fathers who had been assembled therein, met together again under the divine approbation after a lapse of four or five years, and then they issued forth one hundred and two canons for the better regulation of the affairs of the Church; in which canons we find the following regulation about holy images in the eighty-second." //Here follow the words of the canon at length; but, as this is the fourth time it has been brought forward, it may be sufficient to refer the reader to other places where it is to be found. It was recited in the second Session, in Adrian's "Letter to Tarasius;" in the third, in the "Synodals of Tarasius;" in the fourth, among the testimonies in favour of image-worship; and a portion of it may also be found in Gregory's "Letter to Germanus."// "Whence we may all see and understand that, both before these holy Councils and after these holy Councils, the delineating of images has been handed down to the Church equally with the publication of the Gospels.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2011, 11:23:46 AM by Vadim » Logged
Vadim
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate)
Posts: 48


Bishop Atanasije Jevtic on the photograph


« Reply #78 on: December 06, 2011, 11:41:44 AM »

Are the works of Bp. Milash available online in Serbian and/or German (the usual language of his Church, Bucovina, at the time)?
I don't know, I found Russian translation online.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #79 on: December 06, 2011, 02:30:34 PM »

Well,one must paint a target before throwing something...
I found much information about divorces in "Orthodox canon law" by bishop Nikodim Milash, but I cannot find this book online in English. He says that canons concerning divorce and remarriage which are now in the Orthdox Church were accepted before the Fifth Ecumenical Council. That's impossible if these canons were wrong but the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Ecumenical Councils could pass by this.

Are you telling me that in the first seven councils EVERY wrong canon or praxis was either corrected or "passed"...really?
Yes, really.  If one reads the canons, they can see that.

All wrong canons and praxis was resolved by the seventh council, so says al Misry.

 Grin...except for a few things.
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #80 on: December 06, 2011, 05:54:24 PM »

MEETING WITH DIOCESAN CLERGY OF AOSTA

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI

Parish Church at Introd (Aosta Valley)
Monday, 25 July 2005



We all know that this [exclusion from communion of the divorced and remarried]  is a particularly painful problem for people who live in situations in which they are excluded from Eucharistic Communion, and naturally for the priests who desire to help these people love the Church and love Christ. This is a problem.

None of us has a ready-made formula, also because situations always differ. I would say that those who were married in the Church for the sake of tradition but were not truly believers, and who later find themselves in a new and invalid marriage and subsequently convert, discover faith and feel excluded from the Sacrament, are in a particularly painful situation. This really is a cause of great suffering and when I was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I invited various Bishops' Conferences and experts to study this problem: a sacrament celebrated without faith. Whether, in fact, a moment of invalidity could be discovered here because the Sacrament was found to be lacking a fundamental dimension, I do not dare to say. I personally thought so, but from the discussions we had I realized that it is a highly-complex problem and ought to be studied further. But given these people's painful plight, it must be studied further.

I shall not attempt to give an answer now, but in any case two aspects are very important. The first: even if these people cannot go to sacramental Communion, they are not excluded from the love of the Church or from the love of Christ. A Eucharist without immediate sacramental Communion is not of course complete; it lacks an essential dimension. Nonetheless, it is also true that taking part in the Eucharist without Eucharistic Communion is not the same as nothing; it still means being involved in the mystery of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ. It is still participating in the great Sacrament in its spiritual and pneumatic dimensions, and also in its ecclesial dimension, although this is not strictly sacramental.

[snip]

We know the problem, not only of the Protestant Communities but also of the Orthodox Churches, which are often presented as a model for the possibility of remarriage. But only the first marriage is sacramental: the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental, they are reduced and redimensioned marriages and in a penitential situation; in a certain sense, the couple can go to Communion but in the awareness that this is a concession "by economy", as they say, through mercy which, nevertheless, does not remove the fact that their marriage is not a Sacrament. The other point is that in the Eastern Churches for these marriages they have conceded the possibility of divorce too lightly, and that the principle of indissolubility, the true sacramental character of the marriage, is therefore seriously injured.


http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050725_diocesi-aosta_en.html

Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #81 on: December 06, 2011, 05:59:13 PM »

I still fail to see how anullment is nothing more than a legalistic way to grant a divorce without calling it one.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #82 on: December 06, 2011, 06:13:41 PM »


We know the problem, not only of the Protestant Communities but also of the Orthodox Churches, which are often presented as a model for the possibility of remarriage. But only the first marriage is sacramental: the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental, they are reduced and redimensioned marriages and in a penitential situation; in a certain sense, the couple can go to Communion but in the awareness that this is a concession "by economy", as they say, through mercy which, nevertheless, does not remove the fact that their marriage is not a Sacrament. The other point is that in the Eastern Churches for these marriages they have conceded the possibility of divorce too lightly, and that the principle of indissolubility, the true sacramental character of the marriage, is therefore seriously injured
.


http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050725_diocesi-aosta_en.html



Several things stand out here....

1. The possibility, more than hinted at by Pope Benedict, that new ways of thinking may provide solutions to enable divorced and remarried Catholics to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church and receive the eucharist. 

2. The very regrettable error that the Orthodox regard their second marriages as non-sacramental.  He is wrong.

3. The Orthodox allowance of divorce seriously injures the sacramental nature of marriage.  Again, the Pope is in error.

     Taken altogether the Orthodox approach to marriage and divorce sees a very very low rate of divorce.  By way of contrast the Catholic Church sees a 35% annual termination of marriages through the annulment process.  One would expect, when the civil divorces without ecclesiastical annulment are taken into account, that more than 50% of Catholic marriages are terminated.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #83 on: December 06, 2011, 06:18:23 PM »


We know the problem, not only of the Protestant Communities but also of the Orthodox Churches, which are often presented as a model for the possibility of remarriage. But only the first marriage is sacramental: the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental, they are reduced and redimensioned marriages and in a penitential situation; in a certain sense, the couple can go to Communion but in the awareness that this is a concession "by economy", as they say, through mercy which, nevertheless, does not remove the fact that their marriage is not a Sacrament. The other point is that in the Eastern Churches for these marriages they have conceded the possibility of divorce too lightly, and that the principle of indissolubility, the true sacramental character of the marriage, is therefore seriously injured
.


http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050725_diocesi-aosta_en.html



Several things stand out here....

1. The possibility, more than hinted at by Pope Benedict, that new ways of thinking may provide solutions to enable divorced and remarried Catholics to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church and receive the eucharist. 

2. The very regrettable error that the Orthodox regard their second marriages as non-sacramental.  He is wrong.

3. The Orthodox allowance of divorce seriously injures the sacramental nature of marriage.  Again, the Pope is in error.

     Taken altogether the Orthodox approach to marriage and divorce sees a very very low rate of divorce.  By way of contrast the Catholic Church sees a 35% annual termination of marriages through the annulment process.  One would expect, when the civil divorces without ecclesiastical annulment are taken into account, that more than 50% of Catholic marriages are terminated.

Shall we look for the data that says that both Catholic and Orthodox divorce rates in the United States match the national divorce rate and that there are not a disproportionate number of Catholics divorced as compared to Orthodox couples who are divorced?   I know it's out there.  Are you willing to go look for it?
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #84 on: December 06, 2011, 06:23:18 PM »


We know the problem, not only of the Protestant Communities but also of the Orthodox Churches, which are often presented as a model for the possibility of remarriage. But only the first marriage is sacramental: the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental, they are reduced and redimensioned marriages and in a penitential situation; in a certain sense, the couple can go to Communion but in the awareness that this is a concession "by economy", as they say, through mercy which, nevertheless, does not remove the fact that their marriage is not a Sacrament. The other point is that in the Eastern Churches for these marriages they have conceded the possibility of divorce too lightly, and that the principle of indissolubility, the true sacramental character of the marriage, is therefore seriously injured
.


http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050725_diocesi-aosta_en.html



Several things stand out here....

1. The possibility, more than hinted at by Pope Benedict, that new ways of thinking may provide solutions to enable divorced and remarried Catholics to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church and receive the eucharist. 

2. The very regrettable error that the Orthodox regard their second marriages as non-sacramental.  He is wrong.

3. The Orthodox allowance of divorce seriously injures the sacramental nature of marriage.  Again, the Pope is in error.

     Taken altogether the Orthodox approach to marriage and divorce sees a very very low rate of divorce.  By way of contrast the Catholic Church sees a 35% annual termination of marriages through the annulment process.  One would expect, when the civil divorces without ecclesiastical annulment are taken into account, that more than 50% of Catholic marriages are terminated.

Shall we look for the data that says that both Catholic and Orthodox divorce rates in the United States match the national divorce rate and that there are not a disproportionate number of Catholics divorced as compared to Orthodox couples who are divorced?   I know it's out there.  Are you willing to go look for it?

I wonder if he was comparing Catholic divorce and annulment rates with Orthodox civil divorce rates or Orthodox ecclesiastical divorce rates or both?
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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #85 on: December 06, 2011, 06:37:47 PM »


We know the problem, not only of the Protestant Communities but also of the Orthodox Churches, which are often presented as a model for the possibility of remarriage. But only the first marriage is sacramental: the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental, they are reduced and redimensioned marriages and in a penitential situation; in a certain sense, the couple can go to Communion but in the awareness that this is a concession "by economy", as they say, through mercy which, nevertheless, does not remove the fact that their marriage is not a Sacrament. The other point is that in the Eastern Churches for these marriages they have conceded the possibility of divorce too lightly, and that the principle of indissolubility, the true sacramental character of the marriage, is therefore seriously injured
.


http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050725_diocesi-aosta_en.html



Several things stand out here....

1. The possibility, more than hinted at by Pope Benedict, that new ways of thinking may provide solutions to enable divorced and remarried Catholics to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church and receive the eucharist. 

2. The very regrettable error that the Orthodox regard their second marriages as non-sacramental.  He is wrong.

3. The Orthodox allowance of divorce seriously injures the sacramental nature of marriage.  Again, the Pope is in error.

     Taken altogether the Orthodox approach to marriage and divorce sees a very very low rate of divorce.  By way of contrast the Catholic Church sees a 35% annual termination of marriages through the annulment process.  One would expect, when the civil divorces without ecclesiastical annulment are taken into account, that more than 50% of Catholic marriages are terminated.

Shall we look for the data that says that both Catholic and Orthodox divorce rates in the United States match the national divorce rate and that there are not a disproportionate number of Catholics divorced as compared to Orthodox couples who are divorced?   I know it's out there.  Are you willing to go look for it?

I wonder if he was comparing Catholic divorce and annulment rates with Orthodox civil divorce rates or Orthodox ecclesiastical divorce rates or both?

Well that question throws a wrench in it.  Not all Orthodox jurisdictions review for a "Church divorce"...

Nevertheless there are demographic data that indicate that proportionally Orthodox are as likely to divorce civilly as much as Catholics do.  That is United States data.  Someone published it on a Forum some time ago and I picked it up and shared it around, but I don't know if I can find it again.
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #86 on: December 06, 2011, 07:51:25 PM »

Much more importantly than the statistical data, let us look at what Pope Benedict has said - that ways may be found around the hitherto watertight prohibition on communing divorced and remarried Catholics.  That's a watershed statement.

Has there been any follow up?
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #87 on: December 06, 2011, 08:55:47 PM »

Much more importantly than the statistical data, let us look at what Pope Benedict has said - that ways may be found around the hitherto watertight prohibition on communing divorced and remarried Catholics.  That's a watershed statement.

Has there been any follow up?

That has always been pretty much left to the bishops and pastors in any given see. Some are much more strict than others.  I think that the re-release is a gentle reminder, and perhaps also designed to enlighten the faithful to the possibilities.

There are many traditional Catholics [not "traditionalists"] who do divorce and live out a life of single and prayerful penitence.  I would certainly hope that they not be derided much less forgotten.

M.
Logged

biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 11,936


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #88 on: December 06, 2011, 10:54:50 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  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 satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #89 on: December 06, 2011, 11:46:53 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.


It is a precondition of being granted an annulment that a civil divorce must have been obtained.   Since the Catholic authorities require a divorce, why would they require Confession?  The divorce is, after all, obtained at the demand of the Church and can the Church demand something sinful, matter for Confession?
« Last Edit: December 06, 2011, 11:47:37 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #90 on: December 06, 2011, 11:59:27 PM »


We know the problem, not only of the Protestant Communities but also of the Orthodox Churches, which are often presented as a model for the possibility of remarriage. But only the first marriage is sacramental: the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental, they are reduced and redimensioned marriages and in a penitential situation; in a certain sense, the couple can go to Communion but in the awareness that this is a concession "by economy", as they say, through mercy which, nevertheless, does not remove the fact that their marriage is not a Sacrament. The other point is that in the Eastern Churches for these marriages they have conceded the possibility of divorce too lightly, and that the principle of indissolubility, the true sacramental character of the marriage, is therefore seriously injured
.


http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050725_diocesi-aosta_en.html



Several things stand out here....

1. The possibility, more than hinted at by Pope Benedict, that new ways of thinking may provide solutions to enable divorced and remarried Catholics to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church and receive the eucharist. 

2. The very regrettable error that the Orthodox regard their second marriages as non-sacramental.  He is wrong.

3. The Orthodox allowance of divorce seriously injures the sacramental nature of marriage.  Again, the Pope is in error.

     Taken altogether the Orthodox approach to marriage and divorce sees a very very low rate of divorce.  By way of contrast the Catholic Church sees a 35% annual termination of marriages through the annulment process.  One would expect, when the civil divorces without ecclesiastical annulment are taken into account, that more than 50% of Catholic marriages are terminated.

Shall we look for the data that says that both Catholic and Orthodox divorce rates in the United States match the national divorce rate and that there are not a disproportionate number of Catholics divorced as compared to Orthodox couples who are divorced?   I know it's out there.  Are you willing to go look for it?
The first SUNY survey of religion (early 90's) found that the Orthodox had the lowest incidence of divorce of all religious groups (6%) in the US.  (The survey was on self reporting religious affiliation, so, for instance, someone baptized by the Vatican but having since joined the Protestants or embraced Orthodoxy would be included in the latter groups if they identified as such).
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #91 on: December 07, 2011, 12:45:46 AM »

Much more importantly than the statistical data, let us look at what Pope Benedict has said - that ways may be found around the hitherto watertight prohibition on communing divorced and remarried Catholics.  That's a watershed statement.

Has there been any follow up?

That has always been pretty much left to the bishops and pastors in any given see. Some are much more strict than others. 

The reality of that statement, seemingly so bland, actually tears at the religious lives of divorced/remarried Catholics.

In the 1950s my parents divorced and my Catholic father married again, a Catholic woman, but of course in a civil wedding only.

Both had been devout Catholics. he was a Sunday Mass-goer, she would go many weekday mornings.   But come their marriage and their Church scorned them.  Both were denied Communion.  Neither was ever admitted to Confession again.

When they wanted to baptize their children, four of them, the Catholic parishes of this diocese refused under instructions from the Cardinal.  They also refused to enrol the children in Catholic schools.

My stepmother beseeched the Virgin Mary for assistance.  She helped.  Their plight came to the ears of a priest in another diocese.  He secretly baptized the 4 children.

When my mother died, 30 years after the civil wedding of my father and my stepmother, they presented themselves within a month of her death for a Catholic wedding.  It took place.

But the damage is inestimable.  My stepmother is content to go on saying the rosary at home.  The children, now grown up, do not have a kind word for the Catholic Church.

And the irony of this anecdote.  None of it would have happened if they had purchased a house 100 miles up the road in a diocese which would have communed them. Angry Sad
Logged
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #92 on: December 07, 2011, 01:02:06 AM »

Grace and Peace,

I am simply 'shocked' that with the Western Church in the state that it is in, that Patriarch Benedict XVI would cast such a stone.
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #93 on: December 07, 2011, 01:48:05 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.

M.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #94 on: December 07, 2011, 01:51:53 PM »

We are aware that many of your attitudes toward the Catholic Church are very deeply personal.  That does not make you always accurate in your estimations.  I don't say that as a recrimination.  But it is clear to me over the years that you have very particular bones to pick and I am sorry for that.  Truly sorry. 


Much more importantly than the statistical data, let us look at what Pope Benedict has said - that ways may be found around the hitherto watertight prohibition on communing divorced and remarried Catholics.  That's a watershed statement.

Has there been any follow up?

That has always been pretty much left to the bishops and pastors in any given see. Some are much more strict than others. 

The reality of that statement, seemingly so bland, actually tears at the religious lives of divorced/remarried Catholics.

In the 1950s my parents divorced and my Catholic father married again, a Catholic woman, but of course in a civil wedding only.

Both had been devout Catholics. he was a Sunday Mass-goer, she would go many weekday mornings.   But come their marriage and their Church scorned them.  Both were denied Communion.  Neither was ever admitted to Confession again.

When they wanted to baptize their children, four of them, the Catholic parishes of this diocese refused under instructions from the Cardinal.  They also refused to enrol the children in Catholic schools.

My stepmother beseeched the Virgin Mary for assistance.  She helped.  Their plight came to the ears of a priest in another diocese.  He secretly baptized the 4 children.

When my mother died, 30 years after the civil wedding of my father and my stepmother, they presented themselves within a month of her death for a Catholic wedding.  It took place.

But the damage is inestimable.  My stepmother is content to go on saying the rosary at home.  The children, now grown up, do not have a kind word for the Catholic Church.

And the irony of this anecdote.  None of it would have happened if they had purchased a house 100 miles up the road in a diocese which would have communed them. Angry Sad
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #95 on: December 07, 2011, 02:28:28 PM »

Knowing all too well the effects that divorce can have on all concerned, I share your sentiments here.

I also know, too, that it can sometimes be very difficult to separate our emotions about that from events later in life, especially as they are connected to institutions such as the Church, that may have played a role.

The Church and her ministers should be there to help any and all of us who turn to her for help to heal the wounds created by divorce insofar as they relate to our lives in Christ.  And, for that matter, what doesn't in some way or another relate to our lives in Christ?

May Christ heal the wounds of all who have suffered divorce, either as children of divorcing parents  or as the divorcing parents themselves!  If we let Him....

We are aware that many of your attitudes toward the Catholic Church are very deeply personal.  That does not make you always accurate in your estimations.  I don't say that as a recrimination.  But it is clear to me over the years that you have very particular bones to pick and I am sorry for that.  Truly sorry.  


Much more importantly than the statistical data, let us look at what Pope Benedict has said - that ways may be found around the hitherto watertight prohibition on communing divorced and remarried Catholics.  That's a watershed statement.

Has there been any follow up?

That has always been pretty much left to the bishops and pastors in any given see. Some are much more strict than others.  

The reality of that statement, seemingly so bland, actually tears at the religious lives of divorced/remarried Catholics.

In the 1950s my parents divorced and my Catholic father married again, a Catholic woman, but of course in a civil wedding only.

Both had been devout Catholics. he was a Sunday Mass-goer, she would go many weekday mornings.   But come their marriage and their Church scorned them.  Both were denied Communion.  Neither was ever admitted to Confession again.

When they wanted to baptize their children, four of them, the Catholic parishes of this diocese refused under instructions from the Cardinal.  They also refused to enrol the children in Catholic schools.

My stepmother beseeched the Virgin Mary for assistance.  She helped.  Their plight came to the ears of a priest in another diocese.  He secretly baptized the 4 children.

When my mother died, 30 years after the civil wedding of my father and my stepmother, they presented themselves within a month of her death for a Catholic wedding.  It took place.

But the damage is inestimable.  My stepmother is content to go on saying the rosary at home.  The children, now grown up, do not have a kind word for the Catholic Church.

And the irony of this anecdote.  None of it would have happened if they had purchased a house 100 miles up the road in a diocese which would have communed them. Angry Sad
« Last Edit: December 07, 2011, 02:31:56 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
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 11,936


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #96 on: December 07, 2011, 03:55:21 PM »

Quote from: J Michael
The Church and her ministers should be there to help any and all of us who turn to her for help to heal the wounds created by divorce insofar as they relate to our lives in Christ.  And, for that matter, what doesn't in some way or another relate to our lives in Christ?

May Christ heal the wounds of all who have suffered divorce, either as children of divorcing parents  or as the divorcing parents themselves!  If we let Him....

Amen.
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 satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #97 on: December 07, 2011, 03:57:54 PM »

We are aware that many of your attitudes toward the Catholic Church are very deeply personal.  That does not make you always accurate in your estimations.  I don't say that as a recrimination.  But it is clear to me over the years that you have very particular bones to pick and I am sorry for that.  Truly sorry. 

Please don't be silly.  You have no idea at all of the ins and outs.  

Do you really think that a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents?


Much more importantly than the statistical data, let us look at what Pope Benedict has said - that ways may be found around the hitherto watertight prohibition on communing divorced and remarried Catholics.  That's a watershed statement.

Has there been any follow up?

That has always been pretty much left to the bishops and pastors in any given see. Some are much more strict than others. 

The reality of that statement, seemingly so bland, actually tears at the religious lives of divorced/remarried Catholics.

In the 1950s my parents divorced and my Catholic father married again, a Catholic woman, but of course in a civil wedding only.

Both had been devout Catholics. he was a Sunday Mass-goer, she would go many weekday mornings.   But come their marriage and their Church scorned them.  Both were denied Communion.  Neither was ever admitted to Confession again.

When they wanted to baptize their children, four of them, the Catholic parishes of this diocese refused under instructions from the Cardinal.  They also refused to enrol the children in Catholic schools.

My stepmother beseeched the Virgin Mary for assistance.  She helped.  Their plight came to the ears of a priest in another diocese.  He secretly baptized the 4 children.

When my mother died, 30 years after the civil wedding of my father and my stepmother, they presented themselves within a month of her death for a Catholic wedding.  It took place.

But the damage is inestimable.  My stepmother is content to go on saying the rosary at home.  The children, now grown up, do not have a kind word for the Catholic Church.

And the irony of this anecdote.  None of it would have happened if they had purchased a house 100 miles up the road in a diocese which would have communed them. Angry Sad
[/quote]
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #98 on: December 07, 2011, 04:20:18 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.
No, not always.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #99 on: December 07, 2011, 04:30:32 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.
No, not always.

Best I can say to that is that a one-sided marriage is no marriage in any event.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #100 on: December 07, 2011, 04:31:14 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

There's quite a difference between "intelligent attitudes" and biased (for lack of a better word at the moment) attitudes.  

We are aware that many of your attitudes toward the Catholic Church are very deeply personal.  That does not make you always accurate in your estimations.  I don't say that as a recrimination.  But it is clear to me over the years that you have very particular bones to pick and I am sorry for that.  Truly sorry. 

Please don't be silly.  You have no idea at all of the ins and outs.  

Do you really think that a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents?


Much more importantly than the statistical data, let us look at what Pope Benedict has said - that ways may be found around the hitherto watertight prohibition on communing divorced and remarried Catholics.  That's a watershed statement.

Has there been any follow up?

That has always been pretty much left to the bishops and pastors in any given see. Some are much more strict than others. 

The reality of that statement, seemingly so bland, actually tears at the religious lives of divorced/remarried Catholics.

In the 1950s my parents divorced and my Catholic father married again, a Catholic woman, but of course in a civil wedding only.

Both had been devout Catholics. he was a Sunday Mass-goer, she would go many weekday mornings.   But come their marriage and their Church scorned them.  Both were denied Communion.  Neither was ever admitted to Confession again.

When they wanted to baptize their children, four of them, the Catholic parishes of this diocese refused under instructions from the Cardinal.  They also refused to enrol the children in Catholic schools.

My stepmother beseeched the Virgin Mary for assistance.  She helped.  Their plight came to the ears of a priest in another diocese.  He secretly baptized the 4 children.

When my mother died, 30 years after the civil wedding of my father and my stepmother, they presented themselves within a month of her death for a Catholic wedding.  It took place.

But the damage is inestimable.  My stepmother is content to go on saying the rosary at home.  The children, now grown up, do not have a kind word for the Catholic Church.

And the irony of this anecdote.  None of it would have happened if they had purchased a house 100 miles up the road in a diocese which would have communed them. Angry Sad
[/quote]
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
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #101 on: December 07, 2011, 04:40:48 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.
No, not always.

Yeah...*always*.  Especially if 2 people or more are involved.  Now, sometimes one "side" chooses not to recognize the existence of the other, but that doesn't mean the other side does not, in reality, exist.
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #102 on: December 07, 2011, 05:01:44 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes. 

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #103 on: December 07, 2011, 05:10:45 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes. 

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)? 
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #104 on: December 07, 2011, 06:02:15 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocriritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-avis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2011, 06:08:59 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #105 on: December 07, 2011, 06:30:38 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocriritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-avis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.

I'm delighted that you have no unresolved anger or resentment towards the Catholic Church.  That's wonderful!

As for me...well...we weren't talking about me.  I will say though that I love the Orthodox Church, have no childhood history with it at all, and consider it to be, *along with the Catholic Church*, part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  The details of how I arrived at that position are complicated and personal,  and I will not discuss it here any more than I already have.
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #106 on: December 07, 2011, 07:42:36 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #107 on: December 08, 2011, 12:06:46 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2011, 12:15:26 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
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #108 on: December 08, 2011, 04:24:37 PM »


These are civil divorces.

A marriage celebrant must comply with Government requirements to notify the Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages of every wedding he or she performs.

The Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages informs a marriage celebrant whenever a marriage he has performed is ended by a civil divorce.
Quote


As a general aside, at the local Greek parish, two of the last four priests' marriages ended in divorce. Obviously, Holy Orders is an impediment to marriage, but can a priest get an ecclesiastical divorce even though he may not remarry?

I do not know.



Father,

Wow, I must say that I am quite impressed. Thanks be to God that the vast majority of those whom you have been privileged to join together in Christ have not gone asunder!
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #109 on: December 08, 2011, 05:08:04 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes. 

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.
How is this love for the Catholic Church expressed? Is there anything about the Catholic Church that you think is positive, because I can't recall you identifying anything like this.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #110 on: December 08, 2011, 05:46:48 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #111 on: December 08, 2011, 05:51:07 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an inteliigent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes. 

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.
How is this love for the Catholic Church expressed? Is there anything about the Catholic Church that you think is positive, because I can't recall you identifying anything like this.

Among many things, the love and veneration of the Mother of God.

Btw, Merton thought that it would be through her that the two Churches will find a way to unity.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #112 on: December 08, 2011, 05:55:09 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !

But there you go, offering advice!  Grin

Who are these "Wise" you speak of, anyway?  From what I've been able to discern, they're few and far between (especially around here!), and I surely ain't one of 'em.

Wrong assumptions?  Wrong conclusions??  Wrong advice???  On an internet discussion board???  Surely you jest! 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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #113 on: December 08, 2011, 05:59:03 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.
No, not always.

Yeah...*always*.  Especially if 2 people or more are involved.  Now, sometimes one "side" chooses not to recognize the existence of the other, but that doesn't mean the other side does not, in reality, exist.
No, not always. That is what no fault divorce is all about:one side unilaterally ending the marraige, often (most often?) the side whose fault causes the divorce.
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
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #114 on: December 08, 2011, 06:03:58 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.
No, not always.

Yeah...*always*.  Especially if 2 people or more are involved.  Now, sometimes one "side" chooses not to recognize the existence of the other, but that doesn't mean the other side does not, in reality, exist.
No, not always. That is what no fault divorce is all about:one side unilaterally ending the marraige, often (most often?) the side whose fault causes the divorce.

The only relationship that I can think of where only one side is "at fault" for something going wrong is the one one has with oneself.  Otherwise, except in a goofy legal sense (like the misnamed "no-fault" divorce you mention), it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #115 on: December 08, 2011, 06:24:44 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.
No, not always.

Yeah...*always*.  Especially if 2 people or more are involved.  Now, sometimes one "side" chooses not to recognize the existence of the other, but that doesn't mean the other side does not, in reality, exist.
No, not always. That is what no fault divorce is all about:one side unilaterally ending the marraige, often (most often?) the side whose fault causes the divorce.

The only relationship that I can think of where only one side is "at fault" for something going wrong is the one one has with oneself.  Otherwise, except in a goofy legal sense (like the misnamed "no-fault" divorce you mention), it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
you speak it seems, again, about things you do not know or understand.  It takes two to make a marriage. It takes only one to make a divorce.

Let's just take one example:Ronald Reagan and Jane Wyman.  She had at least one husband before him, and two after him, but adding up the total time she was married to other men (including the two marriages to the same man) does not equal the near decade she was married to Ronald.  Ronald later married Nancy, for over 52 years until his death.  How much fault do you think Ronald had to his divorce?

How much fault did Katherine have for her divorce from Henry VIII?

"No fault" is (usually) misnamed, but "divorce on demand" seems to be too spot on for the powers that be (such that judges REFUSE to hear fault, and some states the statutes bar consideration of fault).
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #116 on: December 08, 2011, 06:27:51 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !

But there you go, offering advice!  Grin

Who are these "Wise" you speak of, anyway?  From what I've been able to discern, they're few and far between (especially around here!), and I surely ain't one of 'em.

Wrong assumptions?  Wrong conclusions??  Wrong advice???  On an internet discussion board???  Surely you jest! Wink Wink



Well, it seemed a jest to me that following one short post on my father's life and difficulty with the Catholic Church, several Catholics were willing to jump to unwarranted conclusions about my religious psyche!   laugh
« Last Edit: December 08, 2011, 06:38:31 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #117 on: December 08, 2011, 06:34:01 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.
No, not always.

Yeah...*always*.  Especially if 2 people or more are involved.  Now, sometimes one "side" chooses not to recognize the existence of the other, but that doesn't mean the other side does not, in reality, exist.
No, not always. That is what no fault divorce is all about:one side unilaterally ending the marraige, often (most often?) the side whose fault causes the divorce.

The only relationship that I can think of where only one side is "at fault" for something going wrong is the one one has with oneself.  Otherwise, except in a goofy legal sense (like the misnamed "no-fault" divorce you mention), it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
you speak it seems, again, about things you do not know or understand.  It takes two to make a marriage. It takes only one to make a divorce.

Let's just take one example:Ronald Reagan and Jane Wyman.  She had at least one husband before him, and two after him, but adding up the total time she was married to other men (including the two marriages to the same man) does not equal the near decade she was married to Ronald.  Ronald later married Nancy, for over 52 years until his death.  How much fault do you think Ronald had to his divorce?

How much fault did Katherine have for her divorce from Henry VIII?

"No fault" is (usually) misnamed, but "divorce on demand" seems to be too spot on for the powers that be (such that judges REFUSE to hear fault, and some states the statutes bar consideration of fault).

Ohh, Sir Knight, I am mightily humbled at the feet of a great master intellect, in comparison to which, I know nothing.  Nothing, I tell you.  Yes, of course, you are right, as you always are and always must be, Sir Knight.

Okay, I'll stop with the sarcasm, but I think you might get my point. 

What I am ***trying*** to say is that in **any** relationship between 2 people, inane legalities aside, both are responsible to greater or lesser degree for anything that happens within that relationship.  If you cannot see that, then we have nothing to discuss.  We probably have nothing to discuss, anyway.  Time for me to sign off and find my peace again  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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #118 on: December 08, 2011, 08:32:13 PM »

I had thought a divorced person could be readmitted to Communion if he or she had also received Confession. If I'm wrong, sorry.  Undecided

A divorced person reconciles with the Church by confessing any part that they might have played in the falling apart of the marriage.  No-fault divorce is a civil matter, not a moral one... Smiley  And there are always two sides.
No, not always.

Yeah...*always*.  Especially if 2 people or more are involved.  Now, sometimes one "side" chooses not to recognize the existence of the other, but that doesn't mean the other side does not, in reality, exist.
No, not always. That is what no fault divorce is all about:one side unilaterally ending the marraige, often (most often?) the side whose fault causes the divorce.

The only relationship that I can think of where only one side is "at fault" for something going wrong is the one one has with oneself.  Otherwise, except in a goofy legal sense (like the misnamed "no-fault" divorce you mention), it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
you speak it seems, again, about things you do not know or understand.  It takes two to make a marriage. It takes only one to make a divorce.

Let's just take one example:Ronald Reagan and Jane Wyman.  She had at least one husband before him, and two after him, but adding up the total time she was married to other men (including the two marriages to the same man) does not equal the near decade she was married to Ronald.  Ronald later married Nancy, for over 52 years until his death.  How much fault do you think Ronald had to his divorce?

How much fault did Katherine have for her divorce from Henry VIII?

"No fault" is (usually) misnamed, but "divorce on demand" seems to be too spot on for the powers that be (such that judges REFUSE to hear fault, and some states the statutes bar consideration of fault).

Ohh, Sir Knight, I am mightily humbled at the feet of a great master intellect, in comparison to which, I know nothing.  Nothing, I tell you.  Yes, of course, you are right, as you always are and always must be, Sir Knight.

Okay, I'll stop with the sarcasm, but I think you might get my point. 

What I am ***trying*** to say is that in **any** relationship between 2 people, inane legalities aside, both are responsible to greater or lesser degree for anything that happens within that relationship.  If you cannot see that, then we have nothing to discuss.  We probably have nothing to discuss, anyway.  Time for me to sign off and find my peace again  Wink.
Henry could have used you.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #119 on: December 08, 2011, 08:32:53 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !

But there you go, offering advice!  Grin

Who are these "Wise" you speak of, anyway?  From what I've been able to discern, they're few and far between (especially around here!), and I surely ain't one of 'em.

Wrong assumptions?  Wrong conclusions??  Wrong advice???  On an internet discussion board???  Surely you jest! Wink Wink



Well, it seemed a jest to me that following one short post on my father's life and difficulty with the Catholic Church, several Catholics were willing to jump to unwarranted conclusions about my religious psyche!   laugh
because it soothes theirs.
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: 3,730


« Reply #120 on: December 09, 2011, 02:09:53 AM »

And there are always two sides.
I don't think so. I think that there can be situations in which one person is at fault.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,730


« Reply #121 on: December 09, 2011, 02:15:28 AM »

....it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
It may take two to tango, but it is possible for one spouse to destroy a marriage. 
« Last Edit: December 09, 2011, 02:18:18 AM by stanley123 » Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


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


« Reply #122 on: December 09, 2011, 11:02:42 AM »

....it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
It may take two to tango, but it is possible for one spouse to destroy a marriage. 


I give up.  I don't agree, but I give up.  Time to move on.  As it happens, contrary to what others may say or think, I do know very well of what I speak--unfortunately I'm just not communicating it effectively here, and enough is enough.  Ego redono.  satis.
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
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #123 on: December 09, 2011, 02:02:48 PM »

....it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
It may take two to tango, but it is possible for one spouse to destroy a marriage. 


I give up.  I don't agree, but I give up.  Time to move on.  As it happens, contrary to what others may say or think, I do know very well of what I speak--unfortunately I'm just not communicating it effectively here, and enough is enough.  Ego redono.  satis.

Actually, it can take 1 spouse to destroy the marriage. I know my wife at the time told my sister-in-law she was leaving me because I became a "religious @**hole" because I started taking my spiritual life more serious.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #124 on: December 09, 2011, 03:25:20 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !

But there you go, offering advice!  Grin

Who are these "Wise" you speak of, anyway?  From what I've been able to discern, they're few and far between (especially around here!), and I surely ain't one of 'em.

Wrong assumptions?  Wrong conclusions??  Wrong advice???  On an internet discussion board???  Surely you jest! Wink Wink



Well, it seemed a jest to me that following one short post on my father's life and difficulty with the Catholic Church, several Catholics were willing to jump to unwarranted conclusions about my religious psyche!   laugh
The conclusions are not unwarrented. You spend so much time taking shots at the Catholic Church, that it would be difficult for anyone not to conclude that you had some negative history with the Church.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #125 on: December 09, 2011, 03:36:36 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !

But there you go, offering advice!  Grin

Who are these "Wise" you speak of, anyway?  From what I've been able to discern, they're few and far between (especially around here!), and I surely ain't one of 'em.

Wrong assumptions?  Wrong conclusions??  Wrong advice???  On an internet discussion board???  Surely you jest! Wink Wink



Well, it seemed a jest to me that following one short post on my father's life and difficulty with the Catholic Church, several Catholics were willing to jump to unwarranted conclusions about my religious psyche!   laugh
The conclusions are not unwarrented. You spend so much time taking shots at the Catholic Church, that it would be difficult for anyone not to conclude that you had some negative history with the Church.
because of COURSE the Vatican has NO negative history, so it has to be a personal thing.
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
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #126 on: December 09, 2011, 03:38:27 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !

But there you go, offering advice!  Grin

Who are these "Wise" you speak of, anyway?  From what I've been able to discern, they're few and far between (especially around here!), and I surely ain't one of 'em.

Wrong assumptions?  Wrong conclusions??  Wrong advice???  On an internet discussion board???  Surely you jest! Wink Wink



Well, it seemed a jest to me that following one short post on my father's life and difficulty with the Catholic Church, several Catholics were willing to jump to unwarranted conclusions about my religious psyche!   laugh
The conclusions are not unwarrented. You spend so much time taking shots at the Catholic Church, that it would be difficult for anyone not to conclude that you had some negative history with the Church.
because of COURSE the Vatican has NO negative history, so it has to be a personal thing.
Perish the thought

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,963


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #127 on: December 09, 2011, 04:45:47 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !

But there you go, offering advice!  Grin

Who are these "Wise" you speak of, anyway?  From what I've been able to discern, they're few and far between (especially around here!), and I surely ain't one of 'em.

Wrong assumptions?  Wrong conclusions??  Wrong advice???  On an internet discussion board???  Surely you jest! Wink Wink



Well, it seemed a jest to me that following one short post on my father's life and difficulty with the Catholic Church, several Catholics were willing to jump to unwarranted conclusions about my religious psyche!   laugh
The conclusions are not unwarrented. You spend so much time taking shots at the Catholic Church, that it would be difficult for anyone not to conclude that you had some negative history with the Church.
because of COURSE the Vatican has NO negative history, so it has to be a personal thing.
You are always so pleasant honey bunny. kiss kiss
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #128 on: December 09, 2011, 05:31:59 PM »

You're absolutely right, Mary doesn't have any idea at all of the ins and outs!  How could she?  Nor, do I think, does she pretend to.  But....she also didn't say that "a man cannot formulate an intelligent attitudes towards divorce in the Catholic Church because there has been a difficult marital situation with one of his parents".  In fact, she said something entirely different.

Can you, with total and unreserved honesty and candor, tell us that your experiences did not, in any way at all, color your attitudes towards the Catholic Church?

Yes.  

Without going into the religious history of my youth and young manhood I can say Yes! very affirmatively.

No, I withdraw that..... the truth is that the experiences of my youth and young manhood gave me an enormous love of the Catholic Church.

*Totally* devoid of any negativity, unresolved anger or resentment towards the Church (Catholic Church)?  


This interrogation is getting quite silly!  I have no anger, resolved or unresolved, towards the Catholic Church.  I have no resentment.

Negativity?   I find the outworking of the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception to be hypocritical and, for many people, sees your Church acting as a vehicle of damnation instead of a vehicle of salvation.

I believe that the postion of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy is as outlined by Metropolitan Anthony Bloom of London. See message 109
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41126.msg675922.html#msg675922

How about you?  Any negativity about the Orthodox claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Any negativity about our position on divorce or contraception?  Deaconesses?  Rejection of papal infallibility?

No, not silly, Father.  Just trying to understand if and how your attitudes towards the Catholic Church may have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the youthful experiences you chose to share with us here.
.

They had no personal impact.  I was not aware of them until I was about 45 and had been Orthodox for 27 years already.

I wish you and Mary would go and analyse someone for whom you know the facts.   laugh

Just goin' on the facts provided by your own good self  laugh.  Apologies if I got it wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something--nor the last, I'm afraid.

A word to the Wise...I have always declined to offer Internet counselling because I know how it is almost impossible to gain a complete and accurate picture via e-mail messages.  Since one never has complete and accurate information (such as is normally easily gained by face to face discussion) the danger of making wrong assumptions, drawing wrong conclusions and offering wrong advice is quite high.  Verbum Ambrosii !

But there you go, offering advice!  Grin

Who are these "Wise" you speak of, anyway?  From what I've been able to discern, they're few and far between (especially around here!), and I surely ain't one of 'em.

Wrong assumptions?  Wrong conclusions??  Wrong advice???  On an internet discussion board???  Surely you jest! Wink Wink



Well, it seemed a jest to me that following one short post on my father's life and difficulty with the Catholic Church, several Catholics were willing to jump to unwarranted conclusions about my religious psyche!   laugh
The conclusions are not unwarrented. You spend so much time taking shots at the Catholic Church, that it would be difficult for anyone not to conclude that you had some negative history with the Church.


Amusing....people are still playing amateur psychologist with me!  laugh  I have no negative history with the Catholic Church.  In fact I am enormously grateful for its influence in my life and for the pre-Vatican II religious education it gave me.   

If I have one personal criticism  ---- as my brother and I watched a TV clip of a man who had been abused at school by his Catholic priests (yes, he was abused by several) my brother lamented:  'Why were we passed over? I wish we had been abused!'   The Courts had awarded the man enough money to buy a luxurious house and several hundred thousand left over.   
Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,474



« Reply #129 on: December 09, 2011, 05:35:04 PM »

Let's be honest. One can believe that somebody or some organization is wrong, write absolutely vicious polemics about it, but have no personal problems with the person or organization which is believed to be in error. Certainly, I doubt Athanasius had personal issues with Arius (other than the fact that he was saying that our Lord is created, of course!), or that St. Maximus the Confessor had any personal animosity towards the non-Chalcedonians.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #130 on: December 10, 2011, 12:27:23 AM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 12:33:32 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,731


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #131 on: December 10, 2011, 01:25:44 AM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #132 on: December 10, 2011, 02:09:06 AM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #133 on: December 10, 2011, 02:11:43 AM »

....it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
It may take two to tango, but it is possible for one spouse to destroy a marriage. 


I give up.  I don't agree, but I give up.  Time to move on.  As it happens, contrary to what others may say or think, I do know very well of what I speak--unfortunately I'm just not communicating it effectively here, and enough is enough.  Ego redono.  satis.

Actually, it can take 1 spouse to destroy the marriage. I know my wife at the time told my sister-in-law she was leaving me because I became a "religious @**hole" because I started taking my spiritual life more serious.

PP

This is not a blame game.  The whole question arose because of the idea that BOTH spouses or EITHER spouse should confess after a divorce.

The idea of blamelessness in hardly a question of sinlessness: PARTICULARLY with a Church that begs forgiveness for sins committed in knowledge and in ignorance...right?

So a good confession harms no one and fixes no blame except that which the sinner is willing to take upon themselves and for which they ask and receive forgiveness.

These latest responses to that idea are embarrassing: or should be.
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #134 on: December 10, 2011, 02:25:33 AM »

....it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
It may take two to tango, but it is possible for one spouse to destroy a marriage.  


I give up.  I don't agree, but I give up.  Time to move on.  As it happens, contrary to what others may say or think, I do know very well of what I speak--unfortunately I'm just not communicating it effectively here, and enough is enough.  Ego redono.  satis.

Actually, it can take 1 spouse to destroy the marriage. I know my wife at the time told my sister-in-law she was leaving me because I became a "religious @**hole" because I started taking my spiritual life more serious.

PP

This is not a blame game.  The whole question arose because of the idea that BOTH spouses or EITHER spouse should confess after a divorce.

The idea of blamelessness in hardly a question of sinlessness: PARTICULARLY with a Church that begs forgiveness for sins committed in knowledge and in ignorance...right?

So a good confession harms no one and fixes no blame except that which the sinner is willing to take upon themselves and for which they ask and receive forgiveness.

These latest responses to that idea are embarrassing: or should be.

A priest would not proceed with a confession and give absolution to a person who spoke of her 'blamefulness' but had no actual sins to confess. If he is a good priest he should try to help her discern the roots of her feeling of blamefulness and ascertain if there has been any sin.

I have to confess that your message puzzles me.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 02:26:01 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,731


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #135 on: December 10, 2011, 12:29:08 PM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



I am not disputing they spent time at Holy Myrrhbearers, I am saying Mother Theodora (Sister Celeste) was a monastic for many years and she and Sister Julie have been living at the monastery since April 2009.   You make it sound like they walked off the street, spent three months at Holy Myrrhbearers and presto, Eastern Catholic nuns.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #136 on: December 10, 2011, 03:34:45 PM »

....it *always* takes two to tango, as it were!  And if this is news to you, I can't help but wonder which planet you've been living on  Wink.
It may take two to tango, but it is possible for one spouse to destroy a marriage.  


I give up.  I don't agree, but I give up.  Time to move on.  As it happens, contrary to what others may say or think, I do know very well of what I speak--unfortunately I'm just not communicating it effectively here, and enough is enough.  Ego redono.  satis.

Actually, it can take 1 spouse to destroy the marriage. I know my wife at the time told my sister-in-law she was leaving me because I became a "religious @**hole" because I started taking my spiritual life more serious.

PP

This is not a blame game.  The whole question arose because of the idea that BOTH spouses or EITHER spouse should confess after a divorce.

The idea of blamelessness in hardly a question of sinlessness: PARTICULARLY with a Church that begs forgiveness for sins committed in knowledge and in ignorance...right?

So a good confession harms no one and fixes no blame except that which the sinner is willing to take upon themselves and for which they ask and receive forgiveness.

These latest responses to that idea are embarrassing: or should be.

A priest would not proceed with a confession and give absolution to a person who spoke of her 'blamefulness' but had no actual sins to confess. If he is a good priest he should try to help her discern the roots of her feeling of blamefulness and ascertain if there has been any sin.

I have to confess that your message puzzles me.

Could you point to where I suggest that one confesses "blamefulness"?

Perhaps you mistook this that I DID say: The idea of blamelessness in hardly a question of sinlessness...

That means that one can claim to be blameless but it does not mean at all that they are not sinless.

And that means that I think both parties of a divorce should speak to a priest in confession about their behavior in a marriage rather than announcing that they are "blameless."

I am surprised you missed that.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #137 on: December 10, 2011, 03:34:45 PM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



I am not disputing they spent time at Holy Myrrhbearers, I am saying Mother Theodora (Sister Celeste) was a monastic for many years and she and Sister Julie have been living at the monastery since April 2009.   You make it sound like they walked off the street, spent three months at Holy Myrrhbearers and presto, Eastern Catholic nuns.

Rather than arguing any points on this one we should celebrate the fact that these women, who are essentially outside of communion with one another, do not allow that sad fact to stop them from sharing common beliefs, common prayer, common praxis, and common life in the spirit.

I love the community at Ortega and know that the women of both communities benefited from the interaction in the grace of love, if in no other way.

God bless and provide for them all!!...

This is how we will be able to resume communion one day in a holy and seamless manner.
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #138 on: December 10, 2011, 04:02:06 PM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



I am not disputing they spent time at Holy Myrrhbearers, I am saying Mother Theodora (Sister Celeste) was a monastic for many years and she and Sister Julie have been living at the monastery since April 2009.   You make it sound like they walked off the street, spent three months at Holy Myrrhbearers and presto, Eastern Catholic nuns.

I have been told that the 'feel' of Orthodox monasticism in the home monastery of the superior of the new Christ the Bridegroom is very 'thin' (whatever that means.)  Hence the reason she and the other two nuns spent a time of formation in the Orthodox Ortega monastery. "......the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community... who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."

Of course my point in posting the information was not to argue the toss but to celebrate what has taken place.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 04:06:40 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #139 on: December 10, 2011, 04:03:51 PM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



I am not disputing they spent time at Holy Myrrhbearers, I am saying Mother Theodora (Sister Celeste) was a monastic for many years and she and Sister Julie have been living at the monastery since April 2009.   You make it sound like they walked off the street, spent three months at Holy Myrrhbearers and presto, Eastern Catholic nuns.

Rather than arguing any points on this one we should celebrate the fact that these women, who are essentially outside of communion with one another, do not allow that sad fact to stop them from sharing common beliefs, common prayer, common praxis, and common life in the spirit.
provide for them all!!...


Yes. Precisely why I posted the information.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #140 on: December 10, 2011, 04:59:34 PM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



I am not disputing they spent time at Holy Myrrhbearers, I am saying Mother Theodora (Sister Celeste) was a monastic for many years and she and Sister Julie have been living at the monastery since April 2009.   You make it sound like they walked off the street, spent three months at Holy Myrrhbearers and presto, Eastern Catholic nuns.

Rather than arguing any points on this one we should celebrate the fact that these women, who are essentially outside of communion with one another, do not allow that sad fact to stop them from sharing common beliefs, common prayer, common praxis, and common life in the spirit.
provide for them all!!...


Yes. Precisely why I posted the information.

And thank you for making the relationship more widely known!!
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,730


« Reply #141 on: December 10, 2011, 05:03:05 PM »

A priest would not proceed with a confession and give absolution to a person who spoke of her 'blamefulness' but had no actual sins to confess.
I think that is right. As I understand it, an essential element of confession is the confession of sins. If one of the partners in the marriage has not committed any sin in a divorce situation, then he would not have anything to confess in this area. One person can destroy a marriage, much to the chagrin of the other, who might be working hard to keep the marriage intact, in spite of the extramarital affairs of his spouse.
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 4,748



« Reply #142 on: December 11, 2011, 07:26:06 AM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



I am not disputing they spent time at Holy Myrrhbearers, I am saying Mother Theodora (Sister Celeste) was a monastic for many years and she and Sister Julie have been living at the monastery since April 2009.   You make it sound like they walked off the street, spent three months at Holy Myrrhbearers and presto, Eastern Catholic nuns.

Rather than arguing any points on this one we should celebrate the fact that these women, who are essentially outside of communion with one another, do not allow that sad fact to stop them from sharing common beliefs, common prayer, common praxis, and common life in the spirit.

I love the community at Ortega and know that the women of both communities benefited from the interaction in the grace of love, if in no other way.

God bless and provide for them all!!...

This is how we will be able to resume communion one day in a holy and seamless manner.

I think that is a pipe dream.  I see any coming together of Eastern Orthodoxii and RC people as the RC joining the EO church.  The RC has strayed way too far away from the orignial church beliefs that at this point the word reunion is just a false word.
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,393


« Reply #143 on: December 11, 2011, 01:07:48 PM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



I am not disputing they spent time at Holy Myrrhbearers, I am saying Mother Theodora (Sister Celeste) was a monastic for many years and she and Sister Julie have been living at the monastery since April 2009.   You make it sound like they walked off the street, spent three months at Holy Myrrhbearers and presto, Eastern Catholic nuns.

Rather than arguing any points on this one we should celebrate the fact that these women, who are essentially outside of communion with one another, do not allow that sad fact to stop them from sharing common beliefs, common prayer, common praxis, and common life in the spirit.

I love the community at Ortega and know that the women of both communities benefited from the interaction in the grace of love, if in no other way.

God bless and provide for them all!!...

This is how we will be able to resume communion one day in a holy and seamless manner.

I think that is a pipe dream.  I see any coming together of Eastern Orthodoxii and RC people as the RC joining the EO church.  The RC has strayed way too far away from the orignial church beliefs that at this point the word reunion is just a false word.
Well of course you think that. You're Eastern Orthodox. What else are you going to think? I tend to be less optimistic than Elijahmaria about resumption of communion. I think it is far off (at best) and may even never happen.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #144 on: December 12, 2011, 10:47:09 PM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



I am not disputing they spent time at Holy Myrrhbearers, I am saying Mother Theodora (Sister Celeste) was a monastic for many years and she and Sister Julie have been living at the monastery since April 2009.   You make it sound like they walked off the street, spent three months at Holy Myrrhbearers and presto, Eastern Catholic nuns.

Rather than arguing any points on this one we should celebrate the fact that these women, who are essentially outside of communion with one another, do not allow that sad fact to stop them from sharing common beliefs, common prayer, common praxis, and common life in the spirit.

I love the community at Ortega and know that the women of both communities benefited from the interaction in the grace of love, if in no other way.

God bless and provide for them all!!...

This is how we will be able to resume communion one day in a holy and seamless manner.

I think that is a pipe dream.  I see any coming together of Eastern Orthodoxii and RC people as the RC joining the EO church.  The RC has strayed way too far away from the orignial church beliefs that at this point the word reunion is just a false word.

The continuing dialogue is a bit of a mess, with the Catholics trying to
propagate multiple misconceptions in their understanding of Orthodoxy.

We have Pope Benedict in Rome, who ought to know better, mischievously
insisting that the Orthodox do not regard a second marriage as sacrament.

We have Mary Lanser making out that the Orthodox are OK with abortion.

We have Cardinal Kasper trying to pretend that we have always had a teaching
of universal primacy.

It just gets worse. Please, Catholics, stop misrepresenting Orthodoxy!
You're really harming the dialogue.
Logged
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,171

Work hard, pray hard.


« Reply #145 on: December 12, 2011, 11:30:20 PM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



Father, bless,

Is it not problematic that these nuns were apparently given the impression by Monastery of the Myrrhbearers that divisions in communion and faith are unimportant so long as praxis is similar?
Logged

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #146 on: December 13, 2011, 01:34:47 AM »

Let’s not overdo the negative stress...  For example, Mary’s Church, Ruthenian Catholic, has just completed the formation period of its three founding nuns of Christ the Bridegroom Monastery.  Where were these Catholic nuns sent for their time of formation?  – to the Orthodox Monastery of the Myrrh-bearers, Ortega, New York.

Mother Theodora was A Basilian nun at Mt. St. Macrina before founding Christ the Bridegroom, the others received their formation her.

"The cover group shot [on the Ortega Orthodox monastery calendar] shows our community with the three sisters of the newly begun Christ the Bridegroom Community, the Roman Catholic Reuthenian Eparchy of Parma, who spent three joyful months with us learning the ways of Orthodox monasticism."


http://www.holymyrrhbearers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30&products_id=174



Father, bless,

Is it not problematic that these nuns were apparently given the impression by Monastery of the Myrrhbearers that divisions in communion and faith are unimportant so long as praxis is similar?

I really do not know what impressions the Orthodox sisters gave to the Eastern Catholics and we do not know what fruit will come about in the future.  The similarity of praxis is a bonus inasmuch as it makes conversion easier. 

When I was a whippersnapper there was an exchange scheme between the Anglicans and the Serbs.  Five Orthodox nuns went to England to experience life in an Anglican convent and five Anglican nuns went to a Serbian monastery.  The serendipity result was the conversion to Orthodoxy of Mother Maria (Rule) who went on to translate the Okhrid Prologue into English (and many other items) and to rebuild Gradac monastery from the ground up.

Logged
Jack Bauer
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite
Posts: 35



« Reply #147 on: December 13, 2011, 02:40:20 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.
It could be that a declaration of nullity was not founded with the evidence presented.
Logged

“I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #148 on: December 13, 2011, 01:32:56 PM »


We have Mary Lanser making out that the Orthodox are OK with abortion.


Mary Lanser is reflecting conversations with ORTHODOX clergy and monastics and laity who seem to be more than a little distressed that their bishops have said so little about abortion over time, and also that some of their bishops have expressed the idea that exceptions can be made for conceptions that are a result of rape or incest.

So you may foozle all you want to about it.  I calls as I sees it.

Actually I do not judge it.  I know it should be different, in those cases where a bishop makes allowances, and that much most of us agree upon.
Logged

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

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,171

Work hard, pray hard.


« Reply #149 on: December 13, 2011, 03:23:20 PM »

When I was a whippersnapper there was an exchange scheme between the Anglicans and the Serbs.  Five Orthodox nuns went to England to experience life in an Anglican convent and five Anglican nuns went to a Serbian monastery.  The serendipity result was the conversion to Orthodoxy of Mother Maria (Rule) who went on to translate the Okhrid Prologue into English (and many other items) and to rebuild Gradac monastery from the ground up.


Glory to God!
Logged

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #150 on: December 13, 2011, 03:38:10 PM »


We have Mary Lanser making out that the Orthodox are OK with abortion.


Mary Lanser is reflecting conversations with ORTHODOX clergy and monastics and laity who seem to be more than a little distressed that their bishops have said so little about abortion over time, and also that some of their bishops have expressed the idea that exceptions can be made for conceptions that are a result of rape or incest.


You may be right.  Catholics in this country who run the anti-abortion movement complain that the Catholic bishops do very little in the fight against abortion.  They are accused of having no desire to upset prevailing politics and politicians.  Some think they want to safeguard the maintenance of the Catholic school system and the flow of state money (fully funded by the state.).  One also hears rumours that, out of the public ear, some of the bishops are soft on abortion.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #151 on: December 13, 2011, 04:08:19 PM »


We have Mary Lanser making out that the Orthodox are OK with abortion.


Mary Lanser is reflecting conversations with ORTHODOX clergy and monastics and laity who seem to be more than a little distressed that their bishops have said so little about abortion over time, and also that some of their bishops have expressed the idea that exceptions can be made for conceptions that are a result of rape or incest.


You may be right.  Catholics in this country who run the anti-abortion movement complain that the Catholic bishops do very little in the fight against abortion.  They are accused of having no desire to upset prevailing politics and politicians.  Some think they want to safeguard the maintenance of the Catholic school system and the flow of state money (fully funded by the state.).  One also hears rumours that, out of the public ear, some of the bishops are soft on abortion.
An accusation not without merit on some cases. I just think that all should just say, its murder and leave it at that and stay strong. Unfortunately, it will never be that cut and dry Sad

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,629



« Reply #152 on: December 28, 2011, 12:37:35 PM »

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.
It could be that a declaration of nullity was not founded with the evidence presented.
With Newt being in the news, I am making the assUmption that he had gotten an anullment to make his marriage to Callista (responsible for his conversion to the Vatican, I understand) OK.  Now we get a little of the details:
Quote
"He (Gingrich) said, 'You know and I know that she's not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president,' " Carter, who now lives in South Carolina, told CNN recently, relating the conversation he had with Gingrich the day Gingrich revealed he was filing for divorce. Carter served as treasurer of Gingrich's first congressional campaigns.
 
Carter, who was a fellow history professor when Gingrich taught at West Georgia College in Carrollton, said he broke off his friendship with Newt Gingrich because of the congressman's treatment of his wife during the divorce.

When Gingrich filed for divorce, he was already seeing a 28-year-old congressional aide, whom he married six months after his divorce was final in 1981. The second wife, Marianne Ginther Gingrich, told Esquire magazine last year that Gingrich even introduced her to his parents in the summer of 1980, the same time he filed for divorce.
 
"They were thrilled because they hadn't wanted Newt to marry (Jackie Battley)," she told Esquire.
 
Gingrich divorced Marianne Gingrich 19 years later, after an affair with a younger congressional aide whom he married soon after his divorce. The third wife, Callista Bisek Gingrich, is now a major figure in his presidential campaign.

"When asked, Gingrich has admitted he has not led a perfect life and has at times had to go to God for forgiveness," Hammond said. "Over 30 years later, the family has long put these matters behind them."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/26/politics/gingrich-divorce-file/index.html
That final note is all fine and good, and Christian. It is, however, insufficient for the Vatican to allow a remarriage.

So, I'm curious, according to their supreme pontiff, are Newt and Callista A O.K., with nothing to repent of in regard to their marriage?  
« Last Edit: December 28, 2011, 12:40:22 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #153 on: December 28, 2011, 12:39:36 PM »

Im sure "arrangements" were made.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,730


« Reply #154 on: December 29, 2011, 05:59:56 PM »

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.
It could be that a declaration of nullity was not founded with the evidence presented.
With Newt being in the news, I am making the assUmption that he had gotten an anullment to make his marriage to Callista (responsible for his conversion to the Vatican, I understand) OK.  Now we get a little of the details:
Quote
"He (Gingrich) said, 'You know and I know that she's not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president,' " Carter, who now lives in South Carolina, told CNN recently, relating the conversation he had with Gingrich the day Gingrich revealed he was filing for divorce. Carter served as treasurer of Gingrich's first congressional campaigns.
 
Carter, who was a fellow history professor when Gingrich taught at West Georgia College in Carrollton, said he broke off his friendship with Newt Gingrich because of the congressman's treatment of his wife during the divorce.

When Gingrich filed for divorce, he was already seeing a 28-year-old congressional aide, whom he married six months after his divorce was final in 1981. The second wife, Marianne Ginther Gingrich, told Esquire magazine last year that Gingrich even introduced her to his parents in the summer of 1980, the same time he filed for divorce.
 
"They were thrilled because they hadn't wanted Newt to marry (Jackie Battley)," she told Esquire.
 
Gingrich divorced Marianne Gingrich 19 years later, after an affair with a younger congressional aide whom he married soon after his divorce. The third wife, Callista Bisek Gingrich, is now a major figure in his presidential campaign.

"When asked, Gingrich has admitted he has not led a perfect life and has at times had to go to God for forgiveness," Hammond said. "Over 30 years later, the family has long put these matters behind them."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/26/politics/gingrich-divorce-file/index.html
That final note is all fine and good, and Christian. It is, however, insufficient for the Vatican to allow a remarriage.

So, I'm curious, according to their supreme pontiff, are Newt and Callista A O.K., with nothing to repent of in regard to their marriage?  
There seems to be something terribly amiss in this theory of marriage annulments. In cases such as mentioned above, the marriage is valid and OK until one of the partners is unfaithful. When that point is reached, questions are brought up about the validity of the Sacrament.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,393


« Reply #155 on: January 04, 2012, 03:38:56 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.
It could be that a declaration of nullity was not founded with the evidence presented.
With Newt being in the news, I am making the assUmption that he had gotten an anullment to make his marriage to Callista (responsible for his conversion to the Vatican, I understand) OK.  Now we get a little of the details:
Quote
"He (Gingrich) said, 'You know and I know that she's not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president,' " Carter, who now lives in South Carolina, told CNN recently, relating the conversation he had with Gingrich the day Gingrich revealed he was filing for divorce. Carter served as treasurer of Gingrich's first congressional campaigns.
 
Carter, who was a fellow history professor when Gingrich taught at West Georgia College in Carrollton, said he broke off his friendship with Newt Gingrich because of the congressman's treatment of his wife during the divorce.

When Gingrich filed for divorce, he was already seeing a 28-year-old congressional aide, whom he married six months after his divorce was final in 1981. The second wife, Marianne Ginther Gingrich, told Esquire magazine last year that Gingrich even introduced her to his parents in the summer of 1980, the same time he filed for divorce.
 
"They were thrilled because they hadn't wanted Newt to marry (Jackie Battley)," she told Esquire.
 
Gingrich divorced Marianne Gingrich 19 years later, after an affair with a younger congressional aide whom he married soon after his divorce. The third wife, Callista Bisek Gingrich, is now a major figure in his presidential campaign.

"When asked, Gingrich has admitted he has not led a perfect life and has at times had to go to God for forgiveness," Hammond said. "Over 30 years later, the family has long put these matters behind them."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/26/politics/gingrich-divorce-file/index.html
That final note is all fine and good, and Christian. It is, however, insufficient for the Vatican to allow a remarriage.

So, I'm curious, according to their supreme pontiff, are Newt and Callista A O.K., with nothing to repent of in regard to their marriage?  
There seems to be something terribly amiss in this theory of marriage annulments. In cases such as mentioned above, the marriage is valid and OK until one of the partners is unfaithful. When that point is reached, questions are brought up about the validity of the Sacrament.
The way I have heard it explained is like this. The proof that a marriage is valid (meaning that a Sacrament has occurred) is that the couple will stay together and their marriage works out. To me, that reasoning makes sense because, if the marriage is crumbling, it would indicate that Sacramental grace may not have been present in the relationship. I'm sure that Catholics and Orthodox would agree that the ultimate thing that makes a marriage last and truly work is the presence of God's grace. Because of this, I don't think it is that farfetched that serious issues within a marriage (such as infidelity) indicates that the Sacrament of Matrimony may not have taken place.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,730


« Reply #156 on: June 02, 2013, 08:34:23 PM »

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.
It could be that a declaration of nullity was not founded with the evidence presented.
With Newt being in the news, I am making the assUmption that he had gotten an anullment to make his marriage to Callista (responsible for his conversion to the Vatican, I understand) OK.  Now we get a little of the details:
Quote
"He (Gingrich) said, 'You know and I know that she's not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president,' " Carter, who now lives in South Carolina, told CNN recently, relating the conversation he had with Gingrich the day Gingrich revealed he was filing for divorce. Carter served as treasurer of Gingrich's first congressional campaigns.
 
Carter, who was a fellow history professor when Gingrich taught at West Georgia College in Carrollton, said he broke off his friendship with Newt Gingrich because of the congressman's treatment of his wife during the divorce.

When Gingrich filed for divorce, he was already seeing a 28-year-old congressional aide, whom he married six months after his divorce was final in 1981. The second wife, Marianne Ginther Gingrich, told Esquire magazine last year that Gingrich even introduced her to his parents in the summer of 1980, the same time he filed for divorce.
 
"They were thrilled because they hadn't wanted Newt to marry (Jackie Battley)," she told Esquire.
 
Gingrich divorced Marianne Gingrich 19 years later, after an affair with a younger congressional aide whom he married soon after his divorce. The third wife, Callista Bisek Gingrich, is now a major figure in his presidential campaign.

"When asked, Gingrich has admitted he has not led a perfect life and has at times had to go to God for forgiveness," Hammond said. "Over 30 years later, the family has long put these matters behind them."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/26/politics/gingrich-divorce-file/index.html
That final note is all fine and good, and Christian. It is, however, insufficient for the Vatican to allow a remarriage.

So, I'm curious, according to their supreme pontiff, are Newt and Callista A O.K., with nothing to repent of in regard to their marriage?  
There seems to be something terribly amiss in this theory of marriage annulments. In cases such as mentioned above, the marriage is valid and OK until one of the partners is unfaithful. When that point is reached, questions are brought up about the validity of the Sacrament.
The way I have heard it explained is like this. The proof that a marriage is valid (meaning that a Sacrament has occurred) is that the couple will stay together and their marriage works out. To me, that reasoning makes sense because, if the marriage is crumbling, it would indicate that Sacramental grace may not have been present in the relationship. I'm sure that Catholics and Orthodox would agree that the ultimate thing that makes a marriage last and truly work is the presence of God's grace. Because of this, I don't think it is that farfetched that serious issues within a marriage (such as infidelity) indicates that the Sacrament of Matrimony may not have taken place.
Was that the Roman Catholic teaching in 1930 when the marriage annulments in the USA were running at about 10 or so per year? Or is that an essential change in Catholic teaching which came into effect after 1970, when marriage annulments in the USA were as high as 60,000 per year?
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 5,840


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #157 on: June 03, 2013, 08:27:38 AM »

Newt Gingrich.....first class scumbag.

Quote
Because of this, I don't think it is that farfetched that serious issues within a marriage (such as infidelity) indicates that the Sacrament of Matrimony may not have taken place
Or that they're just sinners who screwed up, and there's nothing wrong with the sacrament.

PP
« Last Edit: June 03, 2013, 08:27:54 AM by primuspilus » Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 11,384



WWW