A
Aramis
Guest
The tribunal was in error. Tribunals are not infallible. That’s why both sides have the option to appeal the Tribunal findings to the Roman Rota.
- Status
D
ddarko
Guest
Don’t know why you keep bringing this up. Many here have addressed this point already including the above post by Aramis.
God Bless
S
sidbrown
Guest
Does this then indicate that the Catholic marriage annulment process is flawed? Suppose for example that Sheila Kennedy did not appeal the tribunal decision. Then the marriage annulment would have stood as valid. No one would have known whether the tribunal was in error or not. How many people have not appealed the tribunal decision and yet the tribunal has made a wrong decision? There is no way to tell, is there?
D
ddarko
Guest
I think you are misunderstanding the point we are debating. What you are saying has to do with the fallen nature of man. The religious, the non-religious all do sin.
Now if I pointed out the fact that many Catholics engage in pre-marital sex, does that mean the Catholic Church’s position is Pro-premarital sex? Obviously not.
So in the case of the annulments, I believe that there must be hundreds which were granted due to invalid reasons. The Pope him-self asked the Roman court to respect Justice when delivering annulments and not give in to emotions. Our God is Just as well as he is loving. Unfortunately due to the pro-divorce culture we have today in the West, most courts tend to be sympathetic to giving annulments. But this just shows how deep of a problem this divorce mentality our culture has caused. It does not show any theological issue with the church’s teachings.
In short, what all this means to say is that the Catholic teaching is Correct. It has defined the case in which an annulment can be given and that is theologically Correct. What you are pointing out is the fact that some times the people who are in charge have been not entirely honest in granting annulments. That might very well be the case but it is not the point of debate here.
What I am debating is with respect to the teachings of the two churches. The Catholic church teaches a Scripturally and Traditionally consistent NO DIVORCE and REMARRIAGE position. The Orthodox church teaches a 3 times DIVORCE and REMARRIAGE position which I charge is logically inconsistent as well Scripturally and Traditionally inconsistent with the teachings of our church fathers and Christ him-self.
So it is the teachings we are debating here and NOT the competency of tribunals.
God Bless
T
Triciacat
Guest
So when Scripture says that adultery is grounds for “putting away one’s wife” why would the Catholic church insist the couple remain together? How does the Catholic church interpret Matthew 5:32?
G
Ghosty
Guest
The Orthodox Churches allow divorce and remarriage far beyond cases of adultery. How do you justify this?
The Catholic Church does apply stricter rules on some things, but then so does the Orthodox Church when it comes to fasting (and neither of these things may be realistic or compassionate). The real question is how does the Church allow something that is explicitely forbidden by Christ?
Peace and God bless!
D
ddarko
Guest
Hi,
I made a post #422 addressed to you in case you missed it.
About the adultery, that is an incorrect interpretation of that Scriptural passage to begin with. The word used by Jesus in that case only applies to being unfaithful between official marriage ceremony and consummation. Since this can never happen in the modern day and age, I highly doubt anyone qualifies for this. More importantly, this interpretation of Jesus’s words do not contradict his words on indissolubility of marriage. That should clearly indicate to you which interpretation is correct.
It should be clear that your interpretation must have something wrong in it because Jesus says in two other Gospels that he Divorce is not allowed in any circumstances. As Orthodox also holds, scripture may not contradict it-self.
Also, the charge made by Ghosty also holds true. The Orthodox church DOES grant Divorce and Remarriage for cases other than adultery. So how do you reconcile that with what Christ said?
God Bless
P
prodromos
Guest
That is a false representation of Orthodox teaching.
The Church will normally permit someone to remarry after one divorce but it is highly unlikely the Church would permit remarriage after a second divorce. A third marriage would likely only be permitted after becoming widowed, and even then it is not a given. It would be interesting to find statistics on how many second and third marriages actually occur in the Orthodox Church. I highly suspect that third marriages would be few and far inbetween.
G
Ghosty
Guest
On what basis is the permission to remarry granted after one divorce? Does the Orthodox Church only permit remarriage after adultery?
If it allows remarriage even after divorce without adultery, how is it justified? The number of times is irrelevant; the question is whether or not it’s permitted at all. If it happens because of abuse, that’s one thing; if it happens because of permissiveness and design, that’s another.
Peace and God bless!
P
prodromos
Guest
I don’t personally know anyone in my church who is in a second marriage, so I have no examples to answer from. You would probably need to talk to a priest or a bishop to get an answer. I’m sure Fr Ambrose would have been happy to oblige.
D
ddarko
Guest
The problem is that in either case, the basis is not that the former marriage was Null. So as long as that is not the case, then it is impossible and immoral to grant a remarriage.
The problem with the orthodox position is that it thinks the church is capable of granting a Divorce in the actual sense of the word. That it self is the problem. Once you accept that Divorce can be granted, remarriage is obviously a possibility.
So once again, the problem must be seen together. How can the Orthodox allow Divorce or Remarriage in ANY SITUATION when Christ had already spoken AGAINST IT!!! This is something even the early church held.
I hope this Fr. Ambrose is quiet obliged to answer that question, and you can let me know his reply
God Bless
T
Triciacat
Guest
Glory To Jesus Christ!
Thanks for the comment Ghosty, but it doesn’t answer my question in the least!
T
Triciacat
Guest
Sorry, but I am having trouble with the multiple quote funtion and so will have to respond with one post to the above comments.Hi,
I made a post #422 addressed to you in case you missed it.
About the adultery, that is an incorrect interpretation of that Scriptural passage to begin with. The word used by Jesus in that case only applies to being unfaithful between official marriage ceremony and consummation. Since this can never happen in the modern day and age, I highly doubt anyone qualifies for this. More importantly, this interpretation of Jesus’s words do not contradict his words on indissolubility of marriage. That should clearly indicate to you which interpretation is correct.
It should be clear that your interpretation must have something wrong in it because Jesus says in two other Gospels that he Divorce is not allowed in any circumstances. As Orthodox also holds, scripture may not contradict it-self.
Also, the charge made by Ghosty also holds true. The Orthodox church DOES grant Divorce and Remarriage for cases other than adultery. So how do you reconcile that with what Christ said?
God Bless
Please explain how and why Jesus only meant that adultery means being unfaithful between the marriage ceremony and consummation. I have never heard this explanation of the term before. From what scripture does the church draw this conclusion? Secondly, the term “adultery” can have a variety of interpretations in it’s meaning, and not the strictly black-and-white one of the Catholic church.
Clearly, ddarko, the only clear thing is that our churches have different interpretations of scripture… :bible1: No surprise.
T
Triciacat
Guest
As I posted earlier, the Orthodox church believes it is the offence and errant behavior that ends the marriage. Laws cannot replace grace.
T
Triciacat
Guest
The term “adultery” can be interpreted in different ways. The Orthodox church also does not advocate staying in a relationship where harm can come to an individual, whether physical, mental, or spiritual.
D
dvdjs
Guest
I had previously given a link to a good thread on ByzCath that features much commentary by the priest in question.
byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/333262/1
He dispels the notions, popular in threads here, that remarriage in the Orthodox church is penitential, natural vs sacramental, difficult to obtain, etc. It’s all greatly changed since the time of the Fathers, but he discredits Patristic theologians who say so.
D
dvdjs
Guest
T
Triciacat
Guest
Thanks for the link. There’s some good discussion there. I haven’t ever heard that remarriage isn’t sacramental. Marriage is a sacrament in the Orthodox church, but the tone of the service isn’t the same, hence the penetential reference.
T
Triciacat
Guest
To clarify, in the remarriage service, some of the celebratory sections are omitted, and are replaced by prayers of penance.
D
dvdjs
Guest
Father doesn’t agree. Do you have a reference to a contemporary service text?
- Status