Can a remarried person become Eastern Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bayoubutterfly
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bayoubutterfly

Guest
I know Orthodox sees marriage/remarriage differnently
 
I’ve been told yes by a member of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA). Specifically I was told that the Orthodox Church follows I Cor. 7. “In whatsoever state a person is called, therein remain.”

I think it might vary in the different Eastern Orthodox churches.
 
bayoubutterfly said:
I know Orthodox sees marriage/remarriage differnently
Click to expand...
Considering that they allow second marriages (through the concept of oikonomia) I would say yes they could become Orthodox.

And just a clarification. Orthodox do not consider divorce/remarriage to be good or acceptable. But they do allow remarriage out of mercy for those involved. They apply the principle of oikonomia which basically means they apply the laws of the Church less strictly.
 
Dear brother Jimmy,
jimmy said:
I am not sure but I think they limit it to adultery. You would have to ask an Orthodox Christian though(I am not Orthodox but Maronite Catholic).
Click to expand...
Did you get a chance to read my response? The Eastern Orthodox currently have a great number of reasons for permitting divorce and remarriage (the ROC has even MORE reasons than the EP’s jurisdiction!). These include long-term imprisonment of the spouse, mental instablity, etc., etc.

Many of the conditions that Eastern Orthodox grant for divorce/remarriage are the same reasons that the Catholic Church grants for annulments/remarriage. The difference is that in an annulment, these conditions must have ALREADY existed before the marriage for an annulment to occur, whereas in the EO practice/belief, the conditions can exist after marriage to provide a rationale for divorce/remarriage.

For example, take mental instablility.
Among the EO, if your spouse becomes mentally unstable later in the marriage, you can divorce and remarry.

In contrast, an annulment can only occur if the mental instability of the individual ALREADY EXISTED before the marriage began, for that would affect the question of whether or not the spouse had or was even able to give full and proper consent to the marriage.

One can see from this example how vastly different the concepts of divorce and annulment are.

Another example is adultery.
Among EO (and OO), if a spouse becomes an adulterer, then the other spouse can divorce and remarry.

In contrast, an annulment can only occur if it can be shown that the spouse was ALREADY an adulterer before the marriage occurred (for adultery invalidates the betrothal, as mentioned in the Scripture that Protestants and Orthodox often use to justify divorce/remarriage after marriage), and that the other spouse had no knowledge of this.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
ok, what about other Eastern traditions, how do they view remarriage? It’s all very confusing when I think about it.

also, what about in cases where the spouse became atheist after marriage?
 
bayoubutterfly said:
ok, what about other Eastern traditions, how do they view remarriage? It’s all very confusing when I think about it.
Click to expand...
ALL Eastern and Orientals who practice divorce/remarriage have the SAME rationale for practicing it. The only differences are the REASONS given permitting divorce/remarriage. The EO are more lax. The OO are more strict. The Catholic Church does not permit divorce/remarriage except in two cases. These are 1) an application of the Pauline privilege; and 2) an application of the Petrine privilege, which is simply a special case of the Pauline privilege.
also, what about in cases where the spouse became atheist after marriage?
Click to expand...
This is apostasy. All Orthodox Churches (EO and OO) permit divorce/remarriage in this case. The Catholic Church will only permit divorce/remarriage if the spouse was ALREADY an athiest at the time of marriage - this is an application of the biblical principle of the Pauline privilege.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
bayoubutterfly said:
ok, what about other Eastern traditions, how do they view remarriage? It’s all very confusing when I think about it.

also, what about in cases where the spouse became atheist after marriage?
Click to expand...
Are you asking if a person who was divorced and is now remarried can convert to Orthodoxy?

If so, I don’t think that person would need to provide reasons for that divorce and remarriage in order to convert.

In other words, at least in the OCA, you are accepted as you are at the time you convert. I’m feel pretty confident that a person would address this at some point in the conversion process (through confession?)

I’m not Orthodox, but am drawn to Orthodox teaching. My husband was married and divorced before he married me, so this situation is one I inquired about.

Please correct me if I am wrong. I’m just sharing what was shared with me (from a reliable source).
 
For the merely curious, internet boards will suffice. But for questions about Holy Orthodoxy the best place to ask is an Orthodox board.

For serious and sincere inquiries, of course, the best place to ask is at a rectory.
 
Hesychios said:
For the merely curious, internet boards will suffice. But for questions about Holy Orthodoxy the best place to ask is an Orthodox board.

For serious and sincere inquiries, of course, the best place to ask is at a rectory.
Click to expand...
Yes. Good advice 🙂
 
thanks, I’m just curious as to what the differences are. I am RC and divorced, but not remarried and have not applied for annulment yet. It’s hard to understand why different faith traditions think so differently about the remarriage issue. The RC is the most confusing of all to me, as there are so many canonical “reasons” that an annulment may be given.
 
sorry I guess I got confused, I meant Eastern Catholics not Greek Orthodox…I think anyway lol
 
Dear sister Bayoubuttefly,
bayoubutterfly said:
thanks, I’m just curious as to what the differences are. I am RC and divorced, but not remarried and have not applied for annulment yet. It’s hard to understand why different faith traditions think so differently about the remarriage issue. The RC is the most confusing of all to me, as there are so many canonical “reasons” that an annulment may be given.
Click to expand...
BTW, annulment is only necessary if you plan to remarry. If you are civilly divorced, and just that, you are still a Catholic in good standing in the Church and can avail yourself of the Sacraments of immortality.

The differences came about because of caeseropapism. The Eastern Church was more united to the secular government during the early Middle Ages than the Latin Church was. The Emperors often controlled the Church, and eventually the civil (secular) laws of divorce and remarriage became incorporated into Eastern Church belief and practice. This is reflected in the more numerous canonical reasons the EO have for granting divorce/remarriage than the Oriental Orthodox, who were not under the yolk of the Byzantine emperor. Many of the extra reasons the EO have for granting divorce/remarriage are directly obtained from the civil law in whatever particular ecclesiastical jurisdiction may be at issue.

The Latin Church, on the other hand, was always conscious about preserving its ecclesiastical authority apart from and over the civil power (to the point that during the later Middle Ages,papocaesarism.was the norm in Western Europe) So, I daresay, the Latin Church’s belief/practice on the matter was not infected by the secular law. Admittedly, there were certain times when caeseropapism ruled the Latin Church, and in one or two instances,because of the pressure of the secular power, divorce/remarriage was granted (there is also ONE other instance when a Pope permitted divorce/remarriage, but I think it was an application of the Petrine privilege). But in general, when the Latin Church was free to rule herself, she maintained the pure biblical teaching handed down from the Apostles - i.e. ,the indissolubility of marriage.

With regards to annulments, the canonical reasons given by the Catholic Church are no less than what were given by the early Church (i.e., consanguinity, religious vows, age requirements, etc.). There are others apart from these patristic norms, but they all fall under one general principle - namely, whether or not the circumstance could have inhibited a free and willful consent during marriage. In that light, it is rather simple.

Hope that helps.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top