Author Topic: On marrying a second wife  (Read 29570 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lepanto

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 334
  • Faith: Roman Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Munich and Freising
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #360 on: June 17, 2017, 07:54:54 AM »
If Catholic teaching can't change, and we've been assured by individuals here that it cannot, then what is now happening is that people who are in an objective state of mortal sin (having sexual relations outside of a sacramental marriage) are being allowed, if not outright encouraged, to commune which, when done in a state of mortal sin, is itself a mortal sin.  And to die in mortal sin sends one to Hell.

The number of assumptions here is staggering and not conducive to furthering honest discussion in my opinion.

Quote
It seems to me that if the preceding is still true, ... the growing number of hierarchs permitting [communion to divorced] is actually doing great harm to them and their souls.

They are their souls and their souls are them. So, for the third or fourth time, I'd ask you what productive results you expect to abound from the Catholic position?

Quote
Again, if Catholicism is true and these people want to remain Catholic, they do have a choice - don't remarry or if you do remain continent.

That's not a choice so much as a taunt. However, there may be those for whom a life of chastity and obedience might be fruitful. Regardless, you're ignoring the "other" choice -- to by dint of influence or money or unearthly patience or whatever alchemy is required gain an annulment that pretends their lives, loves, and struggles never happened.

Quote
Personally, I'd invite these people to consider Orthodoxy, that's also a choice...

Is this mordant humor? "If Catholicism is true" then people should do what's moral in your mind, if Orthodoxy is true, they needn't bother? Fortunately for mankind in need of salvation and blessing, in this life and the next, truth is not a matter of gotchas or gambling. Only the Word is true.
@PJ26: Strange how they attack you (as a recent convert!) for the only reason of asking a few good questions. This is telling and gives me pause.
una cum famulo tuo Papa nostro et Antistite nostro et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicæ et apostolicæ fidei cultoribus

Offline Lepanto

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 334
  • Faith: Roman Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Munich and Freising
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #361 on: June 17, 2017, 08:15:09 AM »
Interesting thread. The various quotes that user Wandile provided are pretty convincing. In the end, this is also a question of credibility and witnessing.

You've probably read the first one of these already, but I would encourage you to read both:

Divorce & Remarriage in the Latin West: A Forgotten History: https://shamelessorthodoxy.com/2016/09/17/divorce-remarriage-in-the-latin-west-a-forgotten-history/

Divorce & Remarriage in the Latin West: An Addendum: https://shamelessorthodoxy.com/2017/05/09/divorce-remarriage-in-the-latin-west-an-addendum/

I've posted passages from these elsewhere, but here they are all conveniently gathered and collated.


I have printed out the contents of the first link to your blog.
For starters:
About the Council of Arles (I did not check whether the quote is correct):
You build up your argumentation around the sentence
“[…]placuit ut, quantum possit, consilium eius detur ne alias uxores, viventibus etiam uxoribus suis licet adulteris, accipiant.”
and you claim that the proper translation would be :
“it has been decided, as long as he is able, even if their adulterous wife is living, he is to be given counsel not to marry another woman.”
I say this is a plain wrong translation.
The Catholic blog got it better with so far as may be.  I would simply translate with as far as possible (you even keep a reference to the verb posse this way).
It is just grammar:  The whole sentence is addressing men in the plural (depraehendunt, eis, accipiant) . Interpreting “possit” as third person masculine singular does not make any sense in this context, there is no mention of a single man. It is a third person singular neutrum, just like  “placuit”
Also, other trusted sources support this: “quantum possit” means “as fast as possible” or “as far as possible” . For example cf. Cicero, “De finibus bonorum et malorum”, 1.30.

Your whole argumentation for Arles crumbles there. I will look at the rest, if I find the time.

Thanks for this. You're correct that it is better translated as "as far/much as possible." But no, "as far as may be" is not a permissible translation. There is no reason to insert an "esse" in there. And the difference between the two translations is very dramatic. Now that you've drawn my attention to it, I'd also like to make some further tweeks to my translation. "eis" is dative plural, so it should not be singular "he" but "they" as in "counsel should be given to them." Again, thanks for drawing this to my attention. I'm certain I have other translation errors. I always find them whenever I go back over things months later, even if I've proofread it so many times before.

I don't see how that causes my argument to fail, however. The meaning remains the same. There is not much of a difference between "as far as possible" and "as he is able" in this context here. And you haven't provided a positive argument for why "so far as may be" is preferable. I'm not seeing how this is a plausible translation. I've never seen it this way. So again, on what basis do you think the Arles argument falls apart?

Again, thank you so much for the correction here.
"So far as may be" has a similar meaning in English as "as far as possible" - at least to me (not a native speaker). "as long as he is able", on the other hand, is a completely different story. Honestly, I do not see at all how this quote is supposed to support your position at all. Quite to the contrary, it recommends to counsel the men not to marry again. If anything, this supports the Catholic point of view. It is hard to tell exactly what scenario could be meant by the "quantum possit". I could imagine simply that it could indicate that the men in question could not be available for talk or might not listen. Who knows? It's a kind of modifier without clear implications.
una cum famulo tuo Papa nostro et Antistite nostro et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicæ et apostolicæ fidei cultoribus

Offline PJ26

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 179
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Russian - is there another one? ;)
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #362 on: June 17, 2017, 08:22:28 AM »
Yeah. It's OK.  I know people's responses are often colored by their own life experiences.  I don't know where they're coming from any more than they know where I'm coming from. I try to assume good will and that no one is intentionally being dismissive or provocative.  I also realize that they don't represent Orthodoxy in any official capacity.  It's just a chat forum.  This is still a good place to come, I think, to work out one's thoughts especially if one is seriously considering a conversion to Orthodoxy.  It certainly helped me in that regard.   :)

Offline WPM

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,533
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #363 on: June 17, 2017, 09:56:06 AM »
If you believe in the Orthodox teaching of the Holy Trinity of Father,Son,and Holy Spirit.
Learn meditation.

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,049
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #364 on: June 17, 2017, 10:33:46 AM »
Interesting thread. The various quotes that user Wandile provided are pretty convincing. In the end, this is also a question of credibility and witnessing.

You've probably read the first one of these already, but I would encourage you to read both:

Divorce & Remarriage in the Latin West: A Forgotten History: https://shamelessorthodoxy.com/2016/09/17/divorce-remarriage-in-the-latin-west-a-forgotten-history/

Divorce & Remarriage in the Latin West: An Addendum: https://shamelessorthodoxy.com/2017/05/09/divorce-remarriage-in-the-latin-west-an-addendum/

I've posted passages from these elsewhere, but here they are all conveniently gathered and collated.


I have printed out the contents of the first link to your blog.
For starters:
About the Council of Arles (I did not check whether the quote is correct):
You build up your argumentation around the sentence
“[…]placuit ut, quantum possit, consilium eius detur ne alias uxores, viventibus etiam uxoribus suis licet adulteris, accipiant.”
and you claim that the proper translation would be :
“it has been decided, as long as he is able, even if their adulterous wife is living, he is to be given counsel not to marry another woman.”
I say this is a plain wrong translation.
The Catholic blog got it better with so far as may be.  I would simply translate with as far as possible (you even keep a reference to the verb posse this way).
It is just grammar:  The whole sentence is addressing men in the plural (depraehendunt, eis, accipiant) . Interpreting “possit” as third person masculine singular does not make any sense in this context, there is no mention of a single man. It is a third person singular neutrum, just like  “placuit”
Also, other trusted sources support this: “quantum possit” means “as fast as possible” or “as far as possible” . For example cf. Cicero, “De finibus bonorum et malorum”, 1.30.

Your whole argumentation for Arles crumbles there. I will look at the rest, if I find the time.

Thanks for this. You're correct that it is better translated as "as far/much as possible." But no, "as far as may be" is not a permissible translation. There is no reason to insert an "esse" in there. And the difference between the two translations is very dramatic. Now that you've drawn my attention to it, I'd also like to make some further tweeks to my translation. "eis" is dative plural, so it should not be singular "he" but "they" as in "counsel should be given to them." Again, thanks for drawing this to my attention. I'm certain I have other translation errors. I always find them whenever I go back over things months later, even if I've proofread it so many times before.

I don't see how that causes my argument to fail, however. The meaning remains the same. There is not much of a difference between "as far as possible" and "as he is able" in this context here. And you haven't provided a positive argument for why "so far as may be" is preferable. I'm not seeing how this is a plausible translation. I've never seen it this way. So again, on what basis do you think the Arles argument falls apart?

Again, thank you so much for the correction here.
"So far as may be" has a similar meaning in English as "as far as possible" - at least to me (not a native speaker). "as long as he is able", on the other hand, is a completely different story. Honestly, I do not see at all how this quote is supposed to support your position at all. Quite to the contrary, it recommends to counsel the men not to marry again. If anything, this supports the Catholic point of view. It is hard to tell exactly what scenario could be meant by the "quantum possit". I could imagine simply that it could indicate that the men in question could not be available for talk or might not listen. Who knows? It's a kind of modifier without clear implications.

Scholarship has generally interpreted it that means that if he is unable to abstain, then he should be able to marry as an act of condescension. This interpretation becomes clear given that the canon emphasizes the youth of the men, and that it only says that they are to be given counsel not to marry. It does not outright forbid it. The modifier seems pretty clear to me.
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,049
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #365 on: June 17, 2017, 10:36:52 AM »
Yeah. It's OK.  I know people's responses are often colored by their own life experiences.  I don't know where they're coming from any more than they know where I'm coming from. I try to assume good will and that no one is intentionally being dismissive or provocative.  I also realize that they don't represent Orthodoxy in any official capacity.  It's just a chat forum.  This is still a good place to come, I think, to work out one's thoughts especially if one is seriously considering a conversion to Orthodoxy.  It certainly helped me in that regard.   :)

Have you considered reading some history on the matter of divorce and remarriage? You seem interested in the subject enough to where you'd be willing to read more than just some blog post or web forum on the matter. I can suggest some materials if you are interested.
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,049
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #366 on: June 17, 2017, 11:23:42 AM »
If Catholic teaching can't change, and we've been assured by individuals here that it cannot, then what is now happening is that people who are in an objective state of mortal sin (having sexual relations outside of a sacramental marriage) are being allowed, if not outright encouraged, to commune which, when done in a state of mortal sin, is itself a mortal sin.  And to die in mortal sin sends one to Hell.

The number of assumptions here is staggering and not conducive to furthering honest discussion in my opinion.

Quote
It seems to me that if the preceding is still true, ... the growing number of hierarchs permitting [communion to divorced] is actually doing great harm to them and their souls.

They are their souls and their souls are them. So, for the third or fourth time, I'd ask you what productive results you expect to abound from the Catholic position?

Quote
Again, if Catholicism is true and these people want to remain Catholic, they do have a choice - don't remarry or if you do remain continent.

That's not a choice so much as a taunt. However, there may be those for whom a life of chastity and obedience might be fruitful. Regardless, you're ignoring the "other" choice -- to by dint of influence or money or unearthly patience or whatever alchemy is required gain an annulment that pretends their lives, loves, and struggles never happened.

Quote
Personally, I'd invite these people to consider Orthodoxy, that's also a choice...

Is this mordant humor? "If Catholicism is true" then people should do what's moral in your mind, if Orthodoxy is true, they needn't bother? Fortunately for mankind in need of salvation and blessing, in this life and the next, truth is not a matter of gotchas or gambling. Only the Word is true.
@PJ26: Strange how they attack you (as a recent convert!) for the only reason of asking a few good questions. This is telling and gives me pause.

That's just PD.
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline PJ26

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 179
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Russian - is there another one? ;)
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #367 on: June 17, 2017, 11:30:28 AM »
Thanks Rohzek.  I'm OK for the moment, though it's certainly an interesting topic.  But there's probably a bunch of people here, both lurkers and registered users, who would be interested.  I converted to Orthodoxy in spite of my agreement with Catholicism's pre-Amoris teaching on marriage and the divorce and remarriage issue doesn't impact me directly.  However, that's not the case for many and so I think you should post your information anyway for the potential benefit of everyone, particularly Catholics who might be considering converting.

Offline ZealousZeal

  • Cosmic Knowledge Fish
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,980
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #368 on: June 17, 2017, 11:44:31 AM »
Again, if Catholicism is true and these people want to remain Catholic, they do have a choice - don't remarry or if you do remain continent.

That's not a choice so much as a taunt. However, there may be those for whom a life of chastity and obedience might be fruitful. Regardless, you're ignoring the "other" choice -- to by dint of influence or money or unearthly patience or whatever alchemy is required gain an annulment that pretends their lives, loves, and struggles never happened.

Right. Catholics definitely have a high regard for the indissolubility of marriage. That's why it's so rare to get an annulment! So if you're one of the, what is it, 10%? maybe? for whom the kabuki theater of the annulment system doesn't go favorably, then you have to live with your current spouse "as brother and sister" if you don't want to go to hell.

Every time I think of this madness, I think of Matthew 23:2 -“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger."

But hey... maybe it's a better pastoral practice and instruction for the souls of men to wave a magic wand do legalistic contortions to say your failed marriage wasn't a marriage in the first place rather than having to actually acknowledge and deal with your shortcomings and issues.
You want your belt to buckle, not your chair.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,278
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #369 on: June 17, 2017, 11:46:57 AM »
Interesting fact: if you have a non-Orthodox-but-still-Christian wedding and later convert to Orthodoxy via the GOA, you will have to have an Orthodox wedding.  If you convert to Orthodoxy in a jurisdiction which would accept your non-Orthodox wedding without the need for an Orthodox ceremony (e.g., OCA) and later become a member of a GOA parish, they will still require an Orthodox wedding despite another Orthodox jurisdiction waiving it.  Happened to people known to me.

Never heard of this and I'm GOAA and surrounded by converts.

Maybe that's part of the problem.

Quote
The second half of the claim sounds like ecclesiological treachery.

I don't make the rules, I just watch others implement them.
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,278
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #370 on: June 17, 2017, 11:53:18 AM »
"No, it should not, given that it predates your Orthodox reception-unless you go for ordination."

I hope you're right, because Mor's post did say "If you convert to Orthodoxy in a jurisdiction which would accept your non-Orthodox wedding without the need for an Orthodox ceremony (e.g., OCA) and later become a member of a GOA parish, they will still require an Orthodox wedding despite another Orthodox jurisdiction waiving it."

I guess I'll find out...

You'll have to talk to the priest there and find out, though I suspect ialmisry would know better.  Economy may be applied in a situation like yours, but as a general principle the Greeks tend to take sacramental issues related to marriage more strictly than others in my experience.   
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,278
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #371 on: June 17, 2017, 11:55:05 AM »
Yeah. It's OK.  I know people's responses are often colored by their own life experiences.  I don't know where they're coming from any more than they know where I'm coming from. I try to assume good will and that no one is intentionally being dismissive or provocative.  I also realize that they don't represent Orthodoxy in any official capacity.  It's just a chat forum.  This is still a good place to come, I think, to work out one's thoughts especially if one is seriously considering a conversion to Orthodoxy.  It certainly helped me in that regard.   :)

Blessed are you, blessed are you, blessed are you...
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,278
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #372 on: June 17, 2017, 12:07:04 PM »
While Canon Law does not specifically limit the number of annulments a person can be granted, if during the annulment process it becomes clear that one or both of the spouses have mental health or other issues that led to the annulment a monitum will be issued forbidding them another marriage until they get it taken care of. 

Interesting.  Are there any statistics on how often that happens? 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #373 on: June 17, 2017, 12:13:48 PM »
rather than having to actually acknowledge and deal with your shortcomings and issues.

You don't leave people because of their weaknesses as long as they are trying no matter how long they take unless it is a real biblical issue. One day they may improve as long as they are trying rather than women being scornful they have to stop comparing their husbands to others and to make them happy. Stop worshipping perfect people. Some people want their husband to be like God in the eyes of people and His equal. Like herods false wife

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,278
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #374 on: June 17, 2017, 12:17:18 PM »
I get why RCs prefer the concept of annulment to divorce, but it's just an ecclesiastical divorce unless your Church also makes an effort to limit annulments to just a single declaration per individual.  S/he may have been impeded from contracting a valid marriage the first time around, but how can you be impeded a second time?  Shouldn't you know what you're getting into by then? 
And this is actually a good line of thought, imho. Marriage preparation would be so very important.
We have to ask ourselves why we allow so many young couples to marry without even the most basic information about the nature of the sacrament.

I guess the problem I have with this is that, according to your theology, the spouses themselves are the ministers of this sacrament to one another.  If "so many young couples marry without even the most basic information about the nature of the sacrament", what is your Church doing? 

The annulment statistics are what they are, but I doubt that only those who procured an annulment had deficient preparation for marriage.  There's a good probability that many people who went through the same process, got married, and stayed married had equally deficient preparation.  Are they actually blissfully ignorant of their marriages' invalidity in the eyes of God until such a time that sufficient marital strife reveals the truth? 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline PJ26

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 179
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Russian - is there another one? ;)
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #375 on: June 17, 2017, 12:31:58 PM »
"Are they actually blissfully ignorant of their marriages' invalidity in the eyes of God until such a time that sufficient marital strife reveals the truth?"

According to the Pope - yes.

From last year:

Pope Francis said Thursday that many sacramental marriages today are not valid, because couples do not enter into them with a proper understanding of permanence and commitment.

While he initially said in unscripted comments that “the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null,” he later approved a revision of these remarks.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/most-marriages-today-are-invalid-pope-francis-suggests-51752/

Offline WPM

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,533
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #376 on: June 17, 2017, 01:12:20 PM »
I just realized that is how they produce false information and useless text.
Learn meditation.

Offline ZealousZeal

  • Cosmic Knowledge Fish
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,980
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #377 on: June 17, 2017, 02:35:30 PM »
rather than having to actually acknowledge and deal with your shortcomings and issues.

You don't leave people because of their weaknesses as long as they are trying no matter how long they take unless it is a real biblical issue. One day they may improve as long as they are trying rather than women being scornful they have to stop comparing their husbands to others and to make them happy. Stop worshipping perfect people. Some people want their husband to be like God in the eyes of people and His equal. Like herods false wife

You have completely misunderstood my point.

If you have a failed marriage, and then are told that it wasn't a marriage in the first place, how easy would it be to ascribe its failure to the "defects" that existed from the start, or that it was never a sacramental marriage to begin with so you never got the grace you needed? What is the lesson to be learned there? How do you grow?

Or

If you have a failed marriage, and it's called a failed marriage and you have to deal with that, then your issues and your shortcomings and failures and sins need to be looked at and repented of.

A winking "None of this ever happened" isn't an act of pastoral love. It's an exercise in having your cake and eating it, too. You get to pretend you're faithfully sticking to the teachings of Christ while you're actually screwing up just like everybody else. At least have the honesty to admit it.
You want your belt to buckle, not your chair.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,813
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #378 on: June 17, 2017, 02:46:38 PM »
Interesting fact: if you have a non-Orthodox-but-still-Christian wedding and later convert to Orthodoxy via the GOA, you will have to have an Orthodox wedding.  If you convert to Orthodoxy in a jurisdiction which would accept your non-Orthodox wedding without the need for an Orthodox ceremony (e.g., OCA) and later become a member of a GOA parish, they will still require an Orthodox wedding despite another Orthodox jurisdiction waiving it.  Happened to people known to me.

Never heard of this and I'm GOAA and surrounded by converts.

Maybe that's part of the problem.

But what you're talking about  would be specific to converts.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,278
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #379 on: June 17, 2017, 02:51:19 PM »
Interesting fact: if you have a non-Orthodox-but-still-Christian wedding and later convert to Orthodoxy via the GOA, you will have to have an Orthodox wedding.  If you convert to Orthodoxy in a jurisdiction which would accept your non-Orthodox wedding without the need for an Orthodox ceremony (e.g., OCA) and later become a member of a GOA parish, they will still require an Orthodox wedding despite another Orthodox jurisdiction waiving it.  Happened to people known to me.

Never heard of this and I'm GOAA and surrounded by converts.

Maybe that's part of the problem.

But what you're talking about  would be specific to converts.

Yes, but if your population of converts is large or has some other relevant factor, it's not impossible for economy to be applied in the particular cases you are surrounded by without establishing a new official practice.  That's how economy works. 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,813
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #380 on: June 17, 2017, 02:56:52 PM »
Interesting fact: if you have a non-Orthodox-but-still-Christian wedding and later convert to Orthodoxy via the GOA, you will have to have an Orthodox wedding.  If you convert to Orthodoxy in a jurisdiction which would accept your non-Orthodox wedding without the need for an Orthodox ceremony (e.g., OCA) and later become a member of a GOA parish, they will still require an Orthodox wedding despite another Orthodox jurisdiction waiving it.  Happened to people known to me.

Never heard of this and I'm GOAA and surrounded by converts.

Maybe that's part of the problem.

But what you're talking about  would be specific to converts.

Yes, but if your population of converts is large or has some other relevant factor, it's not impossible for economy to be applied in the particular cases you are surrounded by without establishing a new official practice.  That's how economy works.

Possible. Altho I didn't take from your post that you know it to be official archdiocesan policy, but that you know those to whom it has happened. Either way, I very much disapprove and think it would be disrespectful of our fellow jurisdictions, among other issues.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,278
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #381 on: June 17, 2017, 03:10:33 PM »
Interesting fact: if you have a non-Orthodox-but-still-Christian wedding and later convert to Orthodoxy via the GOA, you will have to have an Orthodox wedding.  If you convert to Orthodoxy in a jurisdiction which would accept your non-Orthodox wedding without the need for an Orthodox ceremony (e.g., OCA) and later become a member of a GOA parish, they will still require an Orthodox wedding despite another Orthodox jurisdiction waiving it.  Happened to people known to me.

Never heard of this and I'm GOAA and surrounded by converts.

Maybe that's part of the problem.

But what you're talking about  would be specific to converts.

Yes, but if your population of converts is large or has some other relevant factor, it's not impossible for economy to be applied in the particular cases you are surrounded by without establishing a new official practice.  That's how economy works.

Possible. Altho I didn't take from your post that you know it to be official archdiocesan policy, but that you know those to whom it has happened. Either way, I very much disapprove and think it would be disrespectful of our fellow jurisdictions, among other issues.

The priest(s) in question is not likely to have gone rogue in the name of "anti-ecumenism" or whatever, so I presume he was following SOP for the (arch)diocese.
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 36,336
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #382 on: June 17, 2017, 03:33:50 PM »
Some on Mount Athos seem ok going rogue, baptizing people who have been faithful Orthodox for years. Obviously these are two different types of situations, but I find them equally confusing as it relates to the implications about the life/status of people prior to the (correcting? completing? perfecting?) newly-participated-in sacrament.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,813
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #383 on: June 17, 2017, 03:52:07 PM »
Some on Mount Athos seem ok going rogue, baptizing people who have been faithful Orthodox for years. Obviously these are two different types of situations, but I find them equally confusing as it relates to the implications about the life/status of people prior to the (correcting? completing? perfecting?) newly-participated-in sacrament.

Yeah I don't like it. The zeal for the sacraments seems to be undermining understanding of them. I don't say this from liberalism but from concern for genuine understanding of sacred tradition and harmony among true brethren.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 03:52:42 PM by Porter ODoran »
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline WPM

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,533
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #384 on: June 17, 2017, 04:25:58 PM »
Doesn't sound like the Catechism of the Catholic Church for Vatican I and II.
Learn meditation.

Offline Lepanto

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 334
  • Faith: Roman Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Munich and Freising
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #385 on: June 17, 2017, 06:17:38 PM »
If Catholic teaching can't change, and we've been assured by individuals here that it cannot, then what is now happening is that people who are in an objective state of mortal sin (having sexual relations outside of a sacramental marriage) are being allowed, if not outright encouraged, to commune which, when done in a state of mortal sin, is itself a mortal sin.  And to die in mortal sin sends one to Hell.

The number of assumptions here is staggering and not conducive to furthering honest discussion in my opinion.

Quote
It seems to me that if the preceding is still true, ... the growing number of hierarchs permitting [communion to divorced] is actually doing great harm to them and their souls.

They are their souls and their souls are them. So, for the third or fourth time, I'd ask you what productive results you expect to abound from the Catholic position?

Quote
Again, if Catholicism is true and these people want to remain Catholic, they do have a choice - don't remarry or if you do remain continent.

That's not a choice so much as a taunt. However, there may be those for whom a life of chastity and obedience might be fruitful. Regardless, you're ignoring the "other" choice -- to by dint of influence or money or unearthly patience or whatever alchemy is required gain an annulment that pretends their lives, loves, and struggles never happened.

Quote
Personally, I'd invite these people to consider Orthodoxy, that's also a choice...

Is this mordant humor? "If Catholicism is true" then people should do what's moral in your mind, if Orthodoxy is true, they needn't bother? Fortunately for mankind in need of salvation and blessing, in this life and the next, truth is not a matter of gotchas or gambling. Only the Word is true.
@PJ26: Strange how they attack you (as a recent convert!) for the only reason of asking a few good questions. This is telling and gives me pause.

That's just PD.
Sorry, but what does "PD" mean? I really don't know.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 06:18:22 PM by Lepanto »
una cum famulo tuo Papa nostro et Antistite nostro et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicæ et apostolicæ fidei cultoribus

Offline Ainnir

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,352
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #386 on: June 17, 2017, 06:22:17 PM »
Sorry, but what does "PD" mean? I really don't know.
He's referring to Porter. 
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 06:22:42 PM by Ainnir »
Is any of the above Orthodox?  I have no clue, so there's that.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,813
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #387 on: June 17, 2017, 06:27:14 PM »
Sorry, but what does "PD" mean? I really don't know.
He's referring to Porter.

You'll have to excuse Rohzek's allergy to the "O" -- may be due to latent prejudice against Irish Catholics.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #388 on: June 18, 2017, 03:51:54 AM »
rather than having to actually acknowledge and deal with your shortcomings and issues.

You don't leave people because of their weaknesses as long as they are trying no matter how long they take unless it is a real biblical issue. One day they may improve as long as they are trying rather than women being scornful they have to stop comparing their husbands to others and to make them happy. Stop worshipping perfect people. Some people want their husband to be like God in the eyes of people and His equal. Like herods false wife

You have completely misunderstood my point.

If you have a failed marriage, and then are told that it wasn't a marriage in the first place, how easy would it be to ascribe its failure to the "defects" that existed from the start, or that it was never a sacramental marriage to begin with so you never got the grace you needed? What is the lesson to be learned there? How do you grow?

Or

If you have a failed marriage, and it's called a failed marriage and you have to deal with that, then your issues and your shortcomings and failures and sins need to be looked at and repented of.

A winking "None of this ever happened" isn't an act of pastoral love. It's an exercise in having your cake and eating it, too. You get to pretend you're faithfully sticking to the teachings of Christ while you're actually screwing up just like everybody else. At least have the honesty to admit it.

Thanks for clarifying. Pity the person who ends up with me if I still have the bad habits of porn. That is why I have to marry someone I find attractive to me. But I think sin can also happen then too. For Adam still sinned in paradise. But as long as one is not looking at porn without any remorse and is truly struggling and he is happy in his marriage not really wanting someone else I don't think it is cheating but sins of the flesh. It is cheating or adultery in God eyes or toward God but not to break a marriage. It is not fair to my spouse to have such sins but I think they should endure me or refuse to have sex with me until I get help or if that is the cause of it because of not being close to have sex
Unless God purified our hearts to see the evil practices of abuse in porn we will want it in marriage
The ungodly think God can not purify us but I think He can

« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 04:02:02 AM by mikeforjesus »

Offline Ainnir

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,352
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #389 on: June 18, 2017, 08:49:03 AM »
mike, you might want to discuss that with your priest, before you start looking for a wife.
Is any of the above Orthodox?  I have no clue, so there's that.

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #390 on: June 18, 2017, 09:02:26 AM »
I already did confess what more can I do with a priest ?
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 09:03:09 AM by mikeforjesus »

Offline Ainnir

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,352
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #391 on: June 18, 2017, 09:57:32 AM »
I already did confess what more can I do with a priest ?
Receive extended counsel, maybe?  If he (hopefully) has the time.  This really isn't something to discuss openly on a public forum, or with random laypeople.
Is any of the above Orthodox?  I have no clue, so there's that.

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #392 on: June 18, 2017, 11:14:49 AM »
Because you should not remind people of your sins. I shouldn't if I care for people view of me I am not responsible for people stumbling because of me. They tried to stop blind bartimeas from getting help and people looked down on the leper
Confessing generally is ok. Paul said confess to one another and pray for one another to be healed. But you don't need to update people about your progress
Knowing people have problems shouldn't stumble you or cause you to think less and no one who is not convinced I am really seeking and going to continue seeking God and freedom has to marry me
Jesus was not ashamed to eat with tax collectors and sinners
Sorry if I gave the impression I am comfortable to reveal this problem but I thought I would make people aware I am not perfect and need to obtain help so when they hear me judge others I judge myself so I know I can't be biased
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 11:19:20 AM by mikeforjesus »

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #393 on: June 18, 2017, 12:05:38 PM »
It is better I do not reveal if I felt I could get it under control but I don't feel I can. I think maybe I still stumble people the same if I don't actually change even though I hide all my sins. But I decided I may not change if I hide my sins but maybe I am wrong. Changing will atleast cause some to benefit because the change won't be from me but from God
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 12:11:14 PM by mikeforjesus »

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #394 on: June 18, 2017, 12:40:24 PM »
I know I must try or get it under control before I seek a wife but God is the one who knows me and will convince a girl.  Because how can she know I changed ? I am getting old now. How many years of purity convinces people with occasional slips assuming they do so also ? Do they want to marry an old man. If I marry someone my age when I am old I prefer so but I hope she can have a child. If I could have had more I might have but I am okay with 1 or 2. I prefer one boy and one girl if that is what me and my wife want
I don't know why I want a boy I just thought I would relate more or he will relate more to me
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 12:46:24 PM by mikeforjesus »

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #395 on: June 18, 2017, 01:01:39 PM »
It's not about convincing others just to get married but convincing others it will continue into marriage. The other point I wanted to make is not everyone who is sinning wants to be in sin Paul said if I do what I will not to do it is no longer I who do it but sin that dwells in me. It is a result of not knowing the grace of God. It is not so much a choice to sin which one deserves less sympathy for but a result of thinking he already knows God's will and does not need to renew his mind
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 01:14:34 PM by mikeforjesus »

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,049
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #396 on: June 18, 2017, 02:34:04 PM »
Thanks Rohzek.  I'm OK for the moment, though it's certainly an interesting topic.  But there's probably a bunch of people here, both lurkers and registered users, who would be interested.  I converted to Orthodoxy in spite of my agreement with Catholicism's pre-Amoris teaching on marriage and the divorce and remarriage issue doesn't impact me directly.  However, that's not the case for many and so I think you should post your information anyway for the potential benefit of everyone, particularly Catholics who might be considering converting.

Sure.

Bishop Peter L’Huillier, “The Indissolubility of Marriage in Orthodox Law and Practice,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 32 (1988): 199-221.

Jo-Ann McNamara and Suzanne F. Wemple, “Marriage and Divorce in the Frankish Kingdom,” in Women in Medieval Society, edited by Susan Mosher Stuard (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1976), 95-124.

Philip Lyndon Reynolds, Marriage in the Western Church: The Christianization of Marriage During the Patristic and Early Medieval Periods (New York: E. J. Brill, 1994).

George Hayward Joyce, Christian Marriage: An Historical and Doctrinal Study (London & New York: Sheed and Ward, 1933).

Henri Crouzel, L'Église primitive face au divorce du premier au cinquième siècle (Paris: Beauchesne, 1970).

Henri Crouzel, "Divorce et remariage dans l'Église primitive. Quelques réflexions de méthodologie historique," Nouvelle revue théologique 98 (1976): 891-917.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 02:34:30 PM by Rohzek »
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline Lepanto

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 334
  • Faith: Roman Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Munich and Freising
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #397 on: June 18, 2017, 03:35:01 PM »
Scholarship has generally interpreted it that means that if he is unable to abstain, then he should be able to marry as an act of condescension.
Can you actually provide a reference for this claim? Who is “scholarship”?
This interpretation becomes clear given that the canon emphasizes the youth of the men, and that it only says that they are to be given counsel not to marry.
Exactly. It explicitly states that those men are to be counseled not to marry. From that you want to derive a statement to the contrary, i.e. they can marry given their youth. As much as you want to see that there, the words just say something different. It is simply not there. Keep to the text and do not make up stuff out of nothing.
The quotes from the Council of Vannes and Soissons are actually not going beyond what Matthew 19:9 says, so no more information here. The quotes Council of Compiègne and Verberie just deal with some rare scenarios without wider applicability, though they are interesting.

As far as Jerome is concerned:
Jerome (Letters 55:3 [A.D. 396]) "So long as a husband lives, be he adulterer, be he sodomite, be he addicted to every kind of vice, if she left him on account of his crimes, he is her husband still and she may not take another";
This is pretty explicit and very clear.

Your Pseudo-Ecgberht is interesting, but not really that relevant here, compared to scripture, church fathers and councils.

When you are trying to use Western fathers for your purposes, I will turn the tables.
I guess you will accept John Chrysostom?
For HE said not, that HE made one man and one woman only, but that HE also gave this command that the one man should be joined to the one woman. But if it had been HIS will that he should put this one away, and bring in another, when HE had made one man, HE would have formed many women. But now both by the manner of the creation, and by the manner of lawgiving, HE showed that one man must dwell with one woman continually, and never break off from her.” De libello repudii.
No ifs and buts for St. John here.

For a good & quick overview:
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/did-jesus-say-adultery-is-grounds-for-divorce
This explains how the whole pro-divorce argumentation is only based on a wrong interpretation of Matthew 19:9
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 03:38:32 PM by Lepanto »
una cum famulo tuo Papa nostro et Antistite nostro et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicæ et apostolicæ fidei cultoribus

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,049
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #398 on: June 18, 2017, 05:38:26 PM »
Scholarship has generally interpreted it that means that if he is unable to abstain, then he should be able to marry as an act of condescension.
Can you actually provide a reference for this claim? Who is “scholarship”?

Yes:

Philip Lyndon Reynolds, Marriage in the Western Church: The Christianization of Marriage During the Patristic and Early Medieval Periods (New York: E. J. Brill, 1994), 181-182.

Jo-Ann McNamara and Suzanne F. Wemple, “Marriage and Divorce in the Frankish Kingdom,” in Women in Medieval Society, edited by Susan Mosher Stuard (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1976), 97.

Henri Crouzel, L'Église primitive face au divorce du premier au cinquième siècle (Paris: Beauchesne, 1970), 121-123.

This interpretation becomes clear given that the canon emphasizes the youth of the men, and that it only says that they are to be given counsel not to marry.
Exactly. It explicitly states that those men are to be counseled not to marry. From that you want to derive a statement to the contrary, i.e. they can marry given their youth. As much as you want to see that there, the words just say something different. It is simply not there. Keep to the text and do not make up stuff out of nothing.

Being given counsel not to marry again is not the same as being forbidden from marrying again. That's a clear distinction that scholarship has spilled ink on. If the canon wanted to forbid remarriage outright it would have been explicit.

The quotes from the Council of Vannes and Soissons are actually not going beyond what Matthew 19:9 says, so no more information here.

Except Vannes is specifically speaking about men who have divorce and remarried without providing evidence that the crime of adultery was committed:

Quote
Eos quoque, qui relictis uxoribus suis, sicut in evangelio dicitur excepta causa fornicationis, sine adulterii probatione alias duxerint, statuimus a communion similiter arcendos, ne per indulgentiam nostrum praetermissa peccata alios ad licentiam erroris invitent.

Also, those who have abandoned their wives, just as it is said in the gospel, except for the cause of fornication, who have married another without proof of adultery, we likewise forbid from communion, in order that not through our indulgence they invite more permitted sins to the license of error.

The ban only applies to men who can't prove their case. Those who can, are allowed to remarry.

As for Soissons, that's a fair view. Scholarship is split on its interpretation. Wemple, for example, thinks it clearly permits divorce and remarriage in cases where adultery is found. Meanwhile, Reynolds believes that it is at best ambiguous. I'm more in Wemple's camp on this one, if only because of the following:

Quote
Now some might object to the above canon as supporting remarriage on the grounds that it excludes remarriage on the grounds that the spouse is still living. They then might further contend that the divorce is in fact only a separation in the case of adultery. This interpretation is simply not possible. The “quia” or “because” indicates that a husband ought not to divorce his wife and marry another at all while his wife lives, except in cases of adultery. The “because” must necessarily apply to the whole sense of the sentence. Furthermore, “because” or “quia” implies a determining reason. The circumstances of the canon here is speaking about divorces that have already occurred. Therefore, it would make no sense to give the exception clause for the fact of separation, which they are not concerned about. What they are clearly concerned about is that people are marrying after a divorce, and they are clarifying that unless the divorce was situated on certain grounds, celibacy is demanded.

The quotes Council of Compiègne and Verberie just deal with some rare scenarios without wider applicability, though they are interesting.

So now you admit that divorce and remarriage was allowed?

As far as Jerome is concerned:
Jerome (Letters 55:3 [A.D. 396]) "So long as a husband lives, be he adulterer, be he sodomite, be he addicted to every kind of vice, if she left him on account of his crimes, he is her husband still and she may not take another";
This is pretty explicit and very clear.

I believe I've already stated that the evidence indicates that Jerome changed his position.

Your Pseudo-Ecgberht is interesting, but not really that relevant here, compared to scripture, church fathers and councils.

It is relevant when concerning common practice in the Latin West. Whether you agree with them theologically or not is a separate matter. Furthermore, the idea that penitentials should not be taken seriously in a theological manner is a 9th century invention.

When you are trying to use Western fathers for your purposes, I will turn the tables.
I guess you will accept John Chrysostom?
For HE said not, that HE made one man and one woman only, but that HE also gave this command that the one man should be joined to the one woman. But if it had been HIS will that he should put this one away, and bring in another, when HE had made one man, HE would have formed many women. But now both by the manner of the creation, and by the manner of lawgiving, HE showed that one man must dwell with one woman continually, and never break off from her.” De libello repudii.
No ifs and buts for St. John here.

Present the Greek text so we can have the Greek readers here see if it is in hortatory or not. That would make a big difference. Saying someone "must never" is quite different from "can never."

For a good & quick overview:
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/did-jesus-say-adultery-is-grounds-for-divorce
This explains how the whole pro-divorce argumentation is only based on a wrong interpretation of Matthew 19:9

Hardly. Especially concerning divorces based on other reasons other than adultery. The ecclesiastical officials did not consider those attempts as cases of adultery, as Aiken suggests in favor of his position that the "pro-divorce" argument is ridiculously self-contradictory. That argument doesn't hold. As for matters specific to the Greek text of Matthew, I'll simply abstain. There are more qualified Orthodox theologians and other historians who can argue that point with the appropriate language skills.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 05:47:17 PM by Rohzek »
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,049
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #399 on: June 18, 2017, 05:57:53 PM »
Scholarship has generally interpreted it that means that if he is unable to abstain, then he should be able to marry as an act of condescension.
Can you actually provide a reference for this claim? Who is “scholarship”?

Yes:

Philip Lyndon Reynolds, Marriage in the Western Church: The Christianization of Marriage During the Patristic and Early Medieval Periods (New York: E. J. Brill, 1994), 181-182.

Jo-Ann McNamara and Suzanne F. Wemple, “Marriage and Divorce in the Frankish Kingdom,” in Women in Medieval Society, edited by Susan Mosher Stuard (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1976), 97.

Henri Crouzel, L'Église primitive face au divorce du premier au cinquième siècle (Paris: Beauchesne, 1970), 121-123.

I actually might be wrong in my reference to Crouzel. I think I might have confused it with something else. So if you find that I am, correct me. As for the other two, I'm fairly certain.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 06:01:10 PM by Rohzek »
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,049
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #400 on: June 18, 2017, 06:24:30 PM »
Scholarship has generally interpreted it that means that if he is unable to abstain, then he should be able to marry as an act of condescension.
Can you actually provide a reference for this claim? Who is “scholarship”?

Yes:

Philip Lyndon Reynolds, Marriage in the Western Church: The Christianization of Marriage During the Patristic and Early Medieval Periods (New York: E. J. Brill, 1994), 181-182.

Jo-Ann McNamara and Suzanne F. Wemple, “Marriage and Divorce in the Frankish Kingdom,” in Women in Medieval Society, edited by Susan Mosher Stuard (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1976), 97.

Henri Crouzel, L'Église primitive face au divorce du premier au cinquième siècle (Paris: Beauchesne, 1970), 121-123.

I actually might be wrong in my reference to Crouzel. I think I might have confused it with something else. So if you find that I am, correct me. As for the other two, I'm fairly certain.

Sorry to keep posting like this. I found the actual citation I was looking for:

Bishop Peter L’Huillier, “The Indissolubility of Marriage in Orthodox Law and Practice,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 32 (1988): 204.
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #401 on: June 19, 2017, 08:56:53 AM »
I only mean if someone fell in sin accidentally but I don't think it's possible to fall in sin with another unless you don't love your spouse. I suppose if you have been a very evil spouse who treated your spouse bad and made them feel you hate them for a long time but later you realise you love them and want them back after they cheated but even then I am not being edaft

Apparently people actually use this as an excuse. From a website on why people cheat 

"I used to be madly in love with my husband … but after years of his criticism, sarcasm and put-downs, it was nice to be respected by another man. If my husband had been careful with my love, I wouldn't have had the wounds for someone else to soothe."

It appears I justified a little this reason but I did not because not everyone who criticises does not love their spouse. I was talking about those who really act like they hate them and don't care if they cheat.
But if you know you are being too critical you should try to stop and hopefully you will know
« Last Edit: June 19, 2017, 08:59:12 AM by mikeforjesus »

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #402 on: June 19, 2017, 11:21:36 AM »
I think the correct response is to always forgive and try to reconcile a relationship but if they want to leave let them leave. Especially if you still love that person in a special way. We must always love that is why I said special way. I just hope people wouldn't abuse it and find the relationship can not be restored because of the reality of the sinners feelings and not a persons paranoia. Also that people don't abuse it and find repentance difficult or find their time on earth to repent may be shortened or die sudden in a bad state which may be a risk for those who had many chances to turn from evil deeds and from commiting a evil deed. Adultery can be dangerous as God said to David you have made opportunity for the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme and the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you
Ideally a person will still love their spouse in a special way if they think the relationship can be restored but God made an exception from this perfection if one can not love that person in a special way though that person really could be restored but he should know he is putting her away non ideally unless God made the exception to allow divorce only if the spouse who sinned does not love you in a special way
« Last Edit: June 19, 2017, 11:28:50 AM by mikeforjesus »

Offline mikeforjesus

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #403 on: June 19, 2017, 11:38:09 AM »
But that is her weakness not to love you in a special way for one day you may meet her expectations but she does not like people currently with certain weaknesses.
So I mean God permitted you to divorce a person who does not want to reconcile with you and marry another or as I said earlier if you can not love in a special way though it is not ideal
« Last Edit: June 19, 2017, 11:38:42 AM by mikeforjesus »

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,737
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: On marrying a second wife
« Reply #404 on: June 19, 2017, 07:46:52 PM »
While Canon Law does not specifically limit the number of annulments a person can be granted, if during the annulment process it becomes clear that one or both of the spouses have mental health or other issues that led to the annulment a monitum will be issued forbidding them another marriage until they get it taken care of. 

Interesting.  Are there any statistics on how often that happens?
No, but from my own knowledge it is not rare. And it is often at this point people say forget it and get married by a magistrate or in a Protestant Church or by a rent-a-priest.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2017, 07:48:49 PM by Deacon Lance »
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.