Eastern Catholic marriages and annulments

[Advenedizo]

Hi

Not Eastern Catholic but here my two cents.

The issue is not complicated at all. For a Sacrament to be valid BOTH the “Performer” and the “Receptor/s” must want the Sacrament to be performed, right state of mind…

So even if the ministrant of the Sacrament (The Priest in Eastern Catholic) did everything correct, one of/both the receptors might have not, hence the possibility of annulment.

It is the same case of a Baptisim, both the “baptizer” and the “baptized” must be doing things properly. If one of them is not willing to perform the Sacrament, the Sacrament is not valid.

 

[josephdaniel29]

Joe sometimes the elephant in the room are the motives behind the questions and who asks them. So maybe questioning the Orthodox beliefs on this issues are just as valid as questioning the Eastern Catholic and Western Catholic practices.

Of course questioning any belief is valid but typically that is reserved for a new thread on the correct forum.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[josephdaniel29]

Hi

Not Eastern Catholic but here my two cents.

The issue is not complicated at all. For a Sacrament to be valid BOTH the “Performer” and the “Receptor/s” must want the Sacrament to be performed, right state of mind…

So even if the ministrant of the Sacrament (The Priest in Eastern Catholic) did everything correct, one of/both the receptors might have not, hence the possibility of annulment.

It is the same case of a Baptisim, both the “baptizer” and the “baptized” must be doing things properly. If one of them is not willing to perform the Sacrament, the Sacrament is not valid.

I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut. I still would like to know if that’s what Byzantine Catholics believe.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[Advenedizo]

Of course, it was vague speculation. But I suposed Eastern Churches (Catholic or Orthodox) held the same vision of Sacraments (Everyone involved wants the Sacrament to be performed)

 

[josephdaniel29]

Of course, it was vague speculation. But I suposed Eastern Churches (Catholic or Orthodox) held the same vision of Sacraments (Everyone involved wants the Sacrament to be performed)

I think that assumption is based on Latin legal and theological constructs that don’t necessarily exist in Byzantine theology. I’ve never heard the terms valid or invalid, licit or illicit or defect of intent in Orthodox thought. Byzantine Catholics may or may not use them, I don’t know. I just assumed (with good reason) that Byzantine Catholics approach these things the same way we do.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[twf]

If the Orthodox believe that the free consent of the couple is irrelevant and that intent matters not in the administration of the sacraments, I have a hard time discerning such an approach to the sacraments from magic. I hope an Orthodox or Eastern Catholic can explain. If intent doesn’t factor in, logically, one need not even be sorry for one’s sins to receive absolution!

 

[twf]

I would really appreciate a response from an Easter brother or sister to my question in the previous post!

 

[Aramis]

From an EC perspective: The consent is given well before the service; in the byzantine tradition, often in the homes of the bride and groom.

In the US, the consent must be public in many states; where such, the consent is asked in the nave before the sacrament of crowning.

 

[twf]

Thanks Aramis, but I thought Joseph was implying that consent doesn’t impact the ‘validity’ of the sacrament - that intent is purely a Latin construct.

 

[Aramis]

Thanks Aramis, but I thought Joseph was implying that consent doesn’t impact the ‘validity’ of the sacrament - that intent is purely a Latin construct.

The lack of willingness would result in not going for the sacrament.

The CCEO does require consent be given, as well.

 

[josephdaniel29]

The lack of willingness would result in not going for the sacrament.

The CCEO does require consent be given, as well.

No one is questioning whether or not consent has to be given. You can’t force someone to marry against their will. If both partners stand up in front of the priest and the congregation and agree to marry then they are married.

No one is capable of perfect intent 100% of the time. What if a priest has a momentary lack of faith during the consecration of the Eucharist, would the bread and water not become the Body and Blood of Christ because of his “intent”? What if one of the bishops during the consecration of a new bishop has a slight defect in intent, would that person then not be a bishop and would all of the subsequent ordinations he performed not be ordinations at all?

Doesn’t it sound like this approach introduces a lot of unnecessary doubt and confusion?

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[twf]

Aramis- what if an Eastern man went to receive the sacrament and had given consent (externally) but in his heart never had any intention of being faithful to the woman and was in fact deliberately deceiving and using her? Eastern theology doesn’t allow for the possibility of the sacrament simply not taking place even though to all it appears it has? This is the foundation of Latin annulments. Again, without intent, I don’t see how the sacraments could be distinguised from magic. I want to understand the Eastern perspective.

 

[josephdaniel29]

Aramis- what if an Eastern man went to receive the sacrament and had given consent (externally) but in his heart never had any intention of being faithful to the woman and was in fact deliberately deceiving and using her? Eastern theology doesn’t allow for the possibility of the sacrament simply not taking place even though to all it appears it has? This is the foundation of Latin annulments. Again, without intent, I don’t see how the sacraments could be distinguised from magic. I want to understand the Eastern perspective.

I don’t accept your premise. If a person is lying and intending to have sexual relations with someone other than their spouse then they were never willing and never gave consent. You can’t use the example of someone intentionally lying to illustrate your point because it’s not about intent, it’s about deception.

Lets deal with reality. Annulments are granted because people didn’t believe the correct doctrine about marriage and divorce, or because the woman was pregnant, or had money problems and it put pressure on one of both partners, or because their parents wanted them to do it.

Human imperfection doesn’t nullify the operation of the Holy Spirit. If a sinful priest doesn’t make the Mass invalid how can you say imperfect partners invalidate a marriage?

Yours in Christ
Joe