Catholics marry validly before an Orthodox priest - how?

[GKMotley]

The wife of an Anglican who worked for me at one point. He was a militant Freemason and took great pride in boasting how he got his wife away from Catholicism and into Anglicanism. She was confirmed as part of her reception into Anglicanism. (They are both deceased now, and I did not get to hire my own employees — they were hired for me.)

Never heard the like. Anglicans do not try to repeat validly confected sacraments like that. OTOH, attempting to generalize about Anglicans like that is generally a mistake.

Motley be the crew.

 

[babochka]

I would be very interested to know what justification was given for this by the East (both pre- and post-schism), and why Rome and the East had different practices in this regard.

Books could be written about this topic. In fact, they have been. For a better understanding, I recommned Marriage: An Orthodox Perspective by Fr. John Meyendorf.

The Orthodox perspective maintains that any marriage after the first is inconsistent with the Christian norm and is tolerated only by condescension to human weakness. (This is supported by St. Paul.) The practice of blessing (eventually) second marriages goes back at least to St. Basil the Great in the 4th century. His canon 4 defines that those who enter a second marriage after either widowhood or divorce must undergo penance for one or two years. A third marriage brings about a penance of three, four or even five years. St. Basil wrote, "We do not consider such a marriage as marriage, but polygamy, or rather adultery, which requires a definite penance.

At the time of St. Basil, Christian marriage was performed through the Eucharist and recognized through the couple’s reception of Holy Communion together. The penance performed was exclusion from the Eucharist. After the penance was completed, the couple would be readmitted to the Eucharist; through their reception of the Eucharist, their marriage was recognized as a Christian marriage.

Fr. Meyendorff goes much more in depth, but the important thing is that this was already the established practice in the East at the time of St. Basil the Great and continued, with various disciplinary changes through out the centuries, to this present time.

I have found no history to indicate that this difference in approach to marriage was a point of contention between East and West until relatively recently. I’ve always found it is interesting that that the East and West peacefully developed different approaches and nobody seemed to think it was a big deal. It wasn’t an issue at the Union of Brest or any other Union.

I don’t know if primary source documents exist in English regarding the practice of Greek Catholic churches until the early 20th century, but I have heard it from a number of highly educated and trusted Eastern Catholic sources, including one priest and a layman with an education that far exceeds that of most priests. It is my understanding that marriage after divorce was tolerated until the 1917 code of canon law was issued.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The Orthodox perspective maintains that any marriage after the first is inconsistent with the Christian norm and is tolerated only by condescension to human weakness. (This is supported by St. Paul.) The practice of blessing (eventually) second marriages goes back at least to St. Basil the Great in the 4th century. His canon 4 defines that those who enter a second marriage after either widowhood or divorce must undergo penance for one or two years. A third marriage brings about a penance of three, four or even five years. St. Basil wrote, "We do not consider such a marriage as marriage, but polygamy, or rather adultery, which requires a definite penance.

I believe I read some of Fr Meyendorff in college, though that has been over 30 years ago, and memories fade. I know I did read The Russian Religious Mind by Georgy Fedotov (both volumes); maybe I’m conflating the two.

From this, it almost sounds like the Orthodox believe in eternal marriage, i.e., that one is still married to their spouse even after that spouse dies. If that is the case, the only way it could not be “eternal” is if the marriage is considered to exist as long as the widowed spouse lives, but once both are reposed, their marriage ends. Either scenario is very bizarre if seen through Western Catholic eyes.

It is my understanding that marriage after divorce was tolerated until the 1917 code of canon law was issued.

Are you referring to Greek Catholics, or to all Catholics, both Roman and Greek?

And if you are referring only to Greek Catholics, could the Roman Church look to this past practice, and perhaps adopt it as its own? Many tears have been shed, and many dry martyrdoms have taken place, over the issue of annulments and the inability of some people to obtain them. If there were some way to look to Eastern practice, and say that use of economia (or whatever justification is given) is a legitimate way to resolve irregular and invalid second (and beyond) marriages, this would open up a whole new world for Roman Rite tribunals. Just throwing that out there.

 

[1ke]

I think the Orthodox would be a little amused, and probably some other things too besides “amused”, to know that the Roman Church is making judgments as to whether their sacraments are valid or invalid.

The Catholic Church isn’t making any judgments on the Orthodox sacraments.

The Church makes the rules regarding how CATHOLICS may marry, and what valid and invalid form is for a Catholic.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I think the Orthodox would be a little amused, and probably some other things too besides “amused”, to know that the Roman Church is making judgments as to whether their sacraments are valid or invalid.

Well, the way I read the situation, the Catholic Church is “making a judgment” on whether a sacrament, i.e., a particular marriage between a Roman Catholic and an Orthodox Christian, is objectively valid. The Orthodox Church believes herself to be the One True Church, and if anything, is more assertive and more absolutist about this, than the Catholic Church is. They have always come across to me, as viewing other non-Orthodox Christians with a sort of deigning condescension, to the effect of “the Holy Spirit may be in your Church and in your sacraments, but we really can’t say, because we can only say where grace is, not where it is not, and all we know for a fact, is that grace exists in the one true Orthodox Church.” It comes across sounding kind of like “bless your hearts, you just don’t realize that you have to become Orthodox”, or sort of how we view Anglican sacraments — superficially, the right words are there, the right ceremonies, but at the end of the day, they’re just invalid.

 

[babochka]

Are you referring to Greek Catholics, or to all Catholics, both Roman and Greek?

And if you are referring only to Greek Catholics, could the Roman Church look to this past practice, and perhaps adopt it as its own? Many tears have been shed, and many dry martyrdoms have taken place, over the issue of annulments and the inability of some people to obtain them. If there were some way to look to Eastern practice, and say that use of economia (or whatever justification is given) is a legitimate way to resolve irregular and invalid second (and beyond) marriages, this would open up a whole new world for Roman Rite tribunals. Just throwing that out there.

I am referring to just Greek Catholic practice. As far as I know, the West has never tolerated remarriage without the death of the spouse or an annulment.

I don’t know about your second idea. I have often wondered and I have heard of some in positions of authority speculate that the Church could look to the East in dealing with such situations, but that is way about my pay grade.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

The celebration of marriage, however, does not need the sacrament of the order.

In the RCC, yes, but in the Eastern Catholic Churches the blessing of the priest is necessary for the validity of the marriage.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

From this, it almost sounds like the Orthodox believe in eternal marriage, i.e., that one is still married to their spouse even after that spouse dies.

This is what Tertullian advocated in his treatise on marriage. Pope St. Victor I, following St. Paul, said that a spouse can remarry after the death of their spouse. Fortunately, he prevailed, for which countless widows and widowers will thank him in heaven.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The celebration of marriage, however, does not need the sacrament of the order.

This gets back to what I was saying earlier about having the same sacrament — matrimony — conferred two different ways: (a) by the spouses themselves, conferring it upon each other, in the West and (b) by the priest, when he crowns the spouses, in the East. Theoretically, two Western Catholics could confer the sacrament upon each other in the presence of two lay witnesses, without a priest present, if no priest were available for an extended period of time. From what you are saying, this could never happen among Eastern Catholics, for the priest is needed to confer the sacrament.

I am not challenging the truth value of this, if indeed that is the way matters are, but it just strikes me as a little odd that Our Lord, through His Church, would prevent Eastern Catholics from validly marrying in circumstances where Western Catholics could do so validly. At the end of the day, are we not all just Catholics?

I could be overthinking this. The only thing I know about Eastern Christian wedding liturgies is what I saw in The Deer Hunter The wedding reception in that movie was very similar to my own (Polish Catholic).

 

[babochka]

Theoretically, two Western Catholics could confer the sacrament upon each other in the presence of two lay witnesses, without a priest present, if no priest were available for an extended period of time. From what you are saying, this could never happen among Eastern Catholics, for the priest is needed to confer the sacrament.

I am not challenging the truth value of this, if indeed that is the way matters are, but it just strikes me as a little odd that Our Lord, through His Church, would prevent Eastern Catholics from validly marrying in circumstances where Western Catholics could do so validly

The CCEO does have a provision for allowing to Eastern Catholics who do not have access to a priest for an extended period of time to enter into marriage without a priest. The Eastern code contains a provision that a blessing of the priest must be sought as soon as possible. This provision does not appear in the code of canon law . Many have interpreted this to mean that Eastern Catholics don’t really believe that marriage is conferred upon the couple by the priest. I disagree with this interpretation, but acknowledged that there is a considerable amount of ambiguity between and the code and what is theologically correct. This is an unfortunate reality in many places in the Eastern code, which was imposed upon the Eastern churches by Rome.

I thought that you might be interested in reading this article:

(DOC) Marriage in East and West. | John D . Faris - Academia.edu

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The CCEO does have a provision for allowing to Eastern Catholics who do not have access to a priest for an extended period of time to enter into marriage without a priest. The Eastern code contains a provision that a blessing of the priest must be sought as soon as possible.

Thanks, this makes sense.

I thought that you might be interested in reading this article:

I have downloaded this paper, and will look over it when I get a chance. Thanks.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

My boss is Polish Catholic too! He came to my mom’s viewing at our church. It was the first time he was ever in a Ukrainian Greek Catholic church.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

My boss is Polish Catholic too! He came to my mom’s viewing at our church. It was the first time he was ever in a Ukrainian Greek Catholic church.

I am not ethnic Polish and was not raised in the culture. My "ex-"wife (no annulment) is native born and raised Polish, and our son is a dual citizen. I studied two years of Polish at college level and have a basic working knowledge of it, though I struggle with verbs and cases. And I cannot cook without sour cream and buttermilk! I have been to Poland many times, though not recently.