OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 01, 2014, 12:29:26 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Vatican re-issues Ratzinger defence of Magisterium on divorce  (Read 6355 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

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



« 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: 37,124



« 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: None
Posts: 4,306


« 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

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

Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. - Matt. 5:24
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: OCA (Old Calendar)
Posts: 6,789



« 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: 3,809


« 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: 3,809


« 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: 3,809


« 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: 6,236


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

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #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: 6,236


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

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #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: 6,236


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

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #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: 6,236


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

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #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: 6,236


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

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
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: 6,236


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

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
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: 37,124



« 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: 37,124



« 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: 6,307


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: 6,236


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

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
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
Posts: 10,015


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
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,742


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
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.208 seconds with 72 queries.