Fate of Eastern Catholic Churches if Orthodox are Reconciled

[sidbrown]

Marriages are presumed to be valid until show to be otherwise, so one is never completely certain that it could not be anulled …]

So according to Catholicism, Catholics are never really sure if they are married or not?
That seems to be a huge difference between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy and as well, many other religions.
So if you are Catholic, you might be sleeping with someone who really is not your wife, but you only find out about it 20 years or so after the Catholic marriage ceremony and after you have had several children and grandchildren? That doesn;t seem right.

 

[Vico]

So according to Catholicism, Catholics are never really sure if they are married or not?
That seems to be a huge difference between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy and as well, many other religions.
So if you are Catholic, you might be sleeping with someone who really is not your wife, but you only find out about it 20 years or so after the Catholic marriage ceremony and after you have had several children and grandchildren? That doesn;t seem right.

No, you do know that you are married legally and through the Church, but not that it is a sacrament. Only a non-sacramental marriage can be dissolved. How can you know for certain that your spouse gave proper consent? You can’t, we are always vulnerable when getting married. (There could also be other issues like being a prohibitively close relative, unknown to you.)

If you are Catholic or Orthodox, you might be sleeping with someone who really is not in a sacramental marriage, but is truly your spouse, and can find that out later in life. Similarly the Orthodox recognize the possibility that the mystery of crowning was not originally received properly for it to be effective.

The marriage is presumed to be valid if the couple give valid consent and celebrated with the approval of the Catholic Church. One cannot assume they are frauds or liars, but it can verified if they have psychological problems or misunderstandings and that everything else is in order.

 

[JohnVIII]

Orthodox remarriage after divorce is tolerated based on the possibility that the sacrament was not originally received properly for it to be effective, so remarriage can be tolerated. This is equivalent to the Catholic practice of declaring a marriage null, because if it was not contracted correctly, then it was not sacramental. You can see here the idea of the Catholic Church to make things specific and codified (a.k.a. legalism) yet the other element, Divine law, is in the dogmas of the faith.

Not so. Orthodox remarriage is based on the idea that a you should have a second chance. Those who are remarried are married twice, it has nothing to do with considering the first marriage invalid. Take a look at canon 8 of the 1st Ecumenical Council. It says that schismatics must agree to communion with those twice married to enter into Catholic unity!

No, you do know that you are married legally and through the Church, but not that it is a sacrament. Only a non-sacramental marriage can be dissolved. How can you know for certain that your spouse gave proper consent? You can’t, we are always vulnerable when getting married. (There could also be other issues like being a prohibitively close relative, unknown to you.)

If you are Catholic or Orthodox, you might be sleeping with someone who really is not in a sacramental marriage, but is truly your spouse, and can find that out later in life. Similarly the Orthodox recognize the possibility that the mystery of crowning was not originally received properly for it to be effective.

Absolutely not so! I guess I can’t say I know for sure with regards to the way RC view this matter, but I can tell you for sure that the Orthodox do not think this way at all! The Sacrament of Marriage has to be done by a priest in the Orthodox Church. Once the Sacrament is done you then DO KNOW that God has made you one flesh. How could it even be call a “Sacrament” if it didn’t provide this assurance?! Do you go to communion with no assurance that your baptism is valid? This is crazy talk! Even after a ‘Church Divorce’ the marriage is said to have been Sacramental in the OC. The vary idea of getting a marriage annulment in the OC is very, very, very rare indeed!

The practice of the OC in regards to remarriage was the original practice in the Catholic Church from the very earliest days. The practice of doing annulments in order to not have to call it a ‘remarriage’ started mainly at Trent.

 

[5Loaves]

The marriage is presumed to be valid if the couple give valid consent **and celebrated with the approval of the Catholic Church. **

When we studied canon law we were told that every marriage is presumed valid. Period. The Church makes no effort to seek out invalid marriages (you are not suggesting it does Vico but other posts seem to be implying this). If the spouses want to have the marriage decreed invalid then one of them must go to the considerable effort of making the request to the tribunal for a finding that the marriage is not valid. I don’t believe anyone other than the spouses is able to make this application.

The validity depends on the state of the persons at the time the vows of marriage were exchanged, not 5 hours, 5 days, 5 weeks, 5 months, 5 years…after the wedding when s/he has an affair or becomes a compulsive gambler or realizes they don’t/didn’t ever love each other…etc.

The requirement for marriage in the Latin Church of a minimum of 6 months between the application to marry and the wedding, and requirement for appropriate “pre-Cana” very specific marriage preparation sessions is aimed in part at making as sure as possible that the partners know what the Church teaches about marriage and that they know one another at a level where they are prepared to rightly make the vows on that wedding day.

I don’t know how differently Eparchies with tribunals may handle an application but regardless it would still be the case that every marriage is presumed valid. If someone discloses that they are in a marriage that includes at least one Catholic and they were not married in the Church and failed to get the proper permissions to be married outside the Church, or if someone discloses that they are in a “second” marriage without the first marriage found null or the first spouse deceased, etc. we then can know from their disclosure that they’re not in a valid marriage but we would assume until they present that information that they are in a valid marriage. And in the eyes of the Church until the tribunal has a finding otherwise the marriage is considered valid. From partners in a marriage which is invalid for lack of form, the simplest kind of marriage to know is not valid, they are not free to marry someone else because that marriage is presumed valid until that marriage has had the proper paperwork done.

Off topic: This New commentary on the Code of Canon Law By John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green is the commentary we used in my class. I don’t pretend to be a canon lawyer. I think trying to understand canon law is interesting but fraught with problems for we who are not canon lawyers. The commentary at least helps give some understanding of what’s intended in the individual canons.

 

[riing]

Good article! I want my blog to get better, willing to share your blog. Thank you for sharing this - so insightful! I like your article, thank you. To thank you for your article, I like it. Thank you for sharing, I like your article. Done well, like your job, keep it coming. China Electronic Products

chi flat irons
chi hair tools
chi hair straighteners

 

[riing]

Good article! I want my blog to get better, willing to share your blog. Thank you for sharing this - so insightful! I like your article, thank you. To thank you for your article, I like it. Thank you for sharing, I like your article. Done well, like your job, keep it coming. China Electronic Products

chi flat irons
chi hair tools
chi hair straighteners

 

[Vico]

Originally Posted by Vico forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
Orthodox remarriage after divorce is tolerated based on the possibility that the sacrament was not originally received properly for it to be effective, so remarriage can be tolerated. This is equivalent to the Catholic practice of declaring a marriage null, because if it was not contracted correctly, then it was not sacramental. You can see here the idea of the Catholic Church to make things specific and codified (a.k.a. legalism) yet the other element, Divine law, is in the dogmas of the faith.

Not so. Orthodox remarriage is based on the idea that a you should have a second chance. Those who are remarried are married twice, it has nothing to do with considering the first marriage invalid. Take a look at canon 8 of the 1st Ecumenical Council. It says that schismatics must agree to communion with those twice married to enter into Catholic unity!

Absolutely not so! I guess I can’t say I know for sure with regards to the way RC view this matter, but I can tell you for sure that the Orthodox do not think this way at all! The Sacrament of Marriage has to be done by a priest in the Orthodox Church. Once the Sacrament is done you then DO KNOW that God has made you one flesh. How could it even be call a “Sacrament” if it didn’t provide this assurance?! Do you go to communion with no assurance that your baptism is valid? This is crazy talk! Even after a ‘Church Divorce’ the marriage is said to have been Sacramental in the OC. The vary idea of getting a marriage annulment in the OC is very, very, very rare indeed!

The practice of the OC in regards to remarriage was the original practice in the Catholic Church from the very earliest days. The practice of doing annulments in order to not have to call it a ‘remarriage’ started mainly at Trent.

With a firm belief, and humility, we receive the mysteries. Yet conditional baptism is given when there is doubt. The mystery is called a sacrament because that is what it is in it’s perfection. Because there can be both external and internal results from the mysteries there can be a flaw in either.

What I wrote there about the spiritual effects is based upon Bishop Callistos Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 12-16.

The Orthodox do indeed have re-marriage, and this is not the same as an Orthodox annulment (which you also mention) through a tribunal. So the Catholic and Orthodox are different in belief on re-marriage (as it is not allowed in the Catholic Church). See this statement by the OCA on re-marriage:

oca.org/DOCencyclical.asp?SID=12&ID=4

“The perfect marriage can only be one, single and unique. The prototype of marriage, the unity between Christ and His Church, excludes multiple marriages: Christ has only one Church; the Church has no other Christ. Even death cannot break the bond of perfect love. Therefore, the Church does not advocate second or third marriages, even for widows or widowers; rather, they are tolerated as condescension to human frailty and weakness, while fourth marriages are totally forbidden.”

 

[steve_b]

You did, you claimed them as a point of authority against Orthodox. You most certainly misrepresented the sites, and mis-characterized Orthodoxy.

Except that’s not entirely true either, and seems to contradict your entire argument here, which is that All Orthodox believe in Toll Houses as dogma because orthodoxinfo says so.

• Did I say dogma? No. Did I say teaching? Yes
• Did orthodoxinfo say dogma? No. Did they referr to teaching and liturgy re: toll houses? Yes

Here’s my previous post quoting 2 of my posts to you covering this issue. What part of what I said do you not understand?

I made no claims about the sites I quoted. As you noted, I didn’t misquote, misrepresent, misdirect, misuse, mischarachterize any quote from any site I used. And I posted the site so you didn’t have to hunt for the source.

Re: the importance of ANY EO site, How many times did I say "no ONE speaks for EO"?

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6936402&postcount=290
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6929780&postcount=275

Do I need to put what’s highlighted, in blinking lights for you? I further asked you in #290 "Whose opinion is correct, since no ONE speaks for EO?"

I let those sites I quoted, speak for themselves.

I asked you several times to present sources that DO speak for all EO. DEAD silence on that.

By saying what I said, any reasonably minded person could see I didn’t claim any source that spoke for all EO. Understand? The observation I DID make was, as I understand it, the RO make up the majority of EO. They apparantly teach toll houses since most of the resources I quoted appear to have a RO footprint. Then by numbers, it’s fair to say, most EO believe in toll houses…

But since no ONE or no document like the CCC is available in EO to speak for all EO, I’m guessing that’s why you didn’t answer the following question

"Whose opinion is correct, since no ONE speaks for EO?"

 

[sidbrown]

The fact is that many Catholics nowadays are refusing to get married and why is that? I would suppose that one of the reasons is that according to the post-Vatican II marriage annulment process in effect in the USA, there is a good chance that twenty or thirty years down the line, the Roman Catholic Church will declare that you were never married anyway as far as the Sacrament of Matrimony is concerned. Perhaps the Catholic couple is thinking - why should we go through all this expense and bother of a marriage ceremony in the Roman Catholic Church when there is a good chance that the Church will officially declare this marriage ceremony to be invalid and null and void? In the USA in the year 1930, there were fewer than 50 marriage annulments, whereas now in the USA it has run as high as 50,000 marriage annulments per year.
If you don;t beleive me that more and more couples are deciding that they do not want the Church marriage ceremony, because they are afraid that their marriage will be officially declared null and void several years down the line, please see:
eagletribune.com/local/x1316176842/Catholic-Church-sees-steep-decline-in-weddings

 

[Vico]

When we studied canon law we were told that every marriage is presumed valid. Period. …
Off topic: This New commentary on the Code of Canon Law By John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green is the commentary we used in my class. I don’t pretend to be a canon lawyer. I think trying to understand canon law is interesting but fraught with problems for we who are not canon lawyers. The commentary at least helps give some understanding of what’s intended in the individual canons.

Thank you for explaining. Here are the canons for both the Latin and Eastern Churches, CIC Canon 1060 and CCEO 779, which are almost identical, and very precise, stating that the validity is upheld when in* doubt*.

CIC 1060
Marriage enjoys the favor of the law; consequently, when a doubt exists the validity of marriage is to be upheld until the contrary is proven.
CCEO 779
Marriage enjoys the favor of the law; consequently, in doubt, the validity of a marriage is to be upheld until the contrary is proven.

Of course, the individual spouses may have no doubt about it so they can know the truth, for example, in the case of a civil marriage, even if the Church does not.

 

[sidbrown]

When we studied canon law we were told that every marriage is presumed valid. .

You might presume that you are married validly, but twenty or thirty years down the line the Church tribunal can declare that you were wrong all along. In other words, all this time when you thought that you were married Sacramentally, you really were not and you were sleeping with someone who was not your wife Sacramentally. A very large percentage of those couples who apply for annulment in the USA, are successful in getting it officially approved.

 

[Vico]

…Perhaps the Catholic couple is thinking - why should we go through all this expense and bother of a marriage ceremony in the Roman Catholic Church when there is a good chance that the Church will officially declare this marriage ceremony to be invalid and null and void?..

It could be, and if so, there is an answer to the question “why?”: to receive the Holy Spirit.

What has happened is that many, fallen away from the faith, begin with a sinful sexual relationship. They need the power of the Holy Spirit for success.

To that end the couple should both be true to the faith, marry with Church approval, taking time to know each others character, making the greatest effort that they both actually have proper consent, before marriage takes place.

 

[steve_b]

since you find it unfair to have non-Catholic definitions placed on Catholicism, you are guilty of having double standards.

There’s no double standard here. Do Eastern Catholics here agree with your corruption of that article? No and they told you so.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6943341&postcount=301
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6943687&postcount=310
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6950277&postcount=349
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6950341&postcount=350

The problem is with you my friend.
NT:

you claimed them as a point of authority against Orthodox. You most certainly misrepresented the sites, and mis-characterized Orthodoxy.

Did I claim that? No
NT:

First off, in order for that to be a valid argument you’d have to find a source that speaks for all “RO” (MP is the proper abbreviation).

I asked YOU for sources. The silence is deafening.
NT:

Second you’re creating a strawman, no one has ever claimed it isn’t a teaching in the church. What is denied is that it has official standing.

Where’s the official source accepted by ALL EO, that says toll houses aren’t an official teaching?
NT:

And this is why I have so little faith in reunion, you look at us as though we want to be built on your model. The communion does not want it.

Apparantly Antioch is close to full communion with Rome.
NT:

the only quote I gave was exactly what it says. My claim was a paraphrase, but when asked to present a quote I presented an exact quote.

I disagreed with you, and Eastern Catholics who you directed your comments towards, disagreed with you. The last sentence of the article which you apparantly didn’t read, contradicted your paraphrase.
NT:

I made that argument fully admitting I was being dishonest, using your logic.

the record shows otherwise.

Look at the links above.

Add to those links these also

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6942389&postcount=299

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6943376&postcount=302

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6943575&postcount=305

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6943580&postcount=306

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6944704&postcount=312

Look at post #299. I anticipated you using “paraphrase” as an argument. It didn’t fly because not only did the quote not exist it was contrary to the context of the article. All the other links here you were still arguing that you were accurate in your quote/paraphrase. You didn’t own up to being dishonest. You insisted you were quoting accurately. So Don’t pretend now you were doing something otherwise, and don’t drag me into your dishonesty. I never misquoted or misrepresented any site or article I quoted.

This is 100% on you
.
NT:

So if you want an apology for openly using your logic, I suggest you think about what you’re asking for and act accordingly.

Anyway, this conversation can go no further, you refuse to argue honestly and will not suffer correction.

That’s rich . You corrupt a Catholic article. Everyone can see you corrupted the text. You won’t admit wrong after you’re caught. And somehow I’m to blame.

Out of my 19 posts on this thread, My approach on this has primarily been one of questioning.
forums.catholic-questions.org/search.php?searchid=6943755

 

[5Loaves]

You might presume that you are married validly, but twenty or thirty years down the line the Church tribunal can declare that you were wrong all along. In other words, all this time when you thought that you were married Sacramentally, you really were not and you were sleeping with someone who was not your wife Sacramentally. A very large percentage of those couples who apply for annulment in the USA, are successful in getting it officially approved.

The Church presumes the marriage is valid.

An application for the Decree of Nullity cannot be begun until a civil divorce has been grated and the two people involved have be civilly divorced for some period of months or years before their case comes to the tribunal. I assume no one is “sleeping with” someone they have been civilly divorced from. If they are continuing to engage in the marital act with someone they’re divorced from then they probably should be seeking help from their priest or spiritual father.

I’m not aware that “a very large percentage” of cases receive a Decree of Nullity where one party disputes the application. Both sides have representation in the tribunal.

I have heard a number of stories of people who after years in an invalid “second” marriage decided to proceed with seeking an Decree of Nullity for their “first” marriage so they could have their marriage convalidated and who were surprised to find that the tribunal process was extremely healing for them and they were so grateful to have gone through it.

 

[5Loaves]

The Church presumes the marriage is valid.

An application for the Decree of Nullity cannot be begun until a civil divorce has been grated and the two people involved have be civilly divorced for some period of months or years before their case comes to the tribunal. I assume no one is “sleeping with” someone they have been civilly divorced from. If they are continuing to engage in the marital act with someone they’re divorced from then they probably should be seeking help from their priest or spiritual father.

I’m not aware that “a very large percentage” of cases receive a Decree of Nullity where one party disputes the application. Both sides have representation in the tribunal. The tribunal assumes the marriage is valid and the burden is on the petitioner, the husband or wife to provide the compelling evidence that the marriage had a defect at the time the vows were exchanged.

I have heard a number of stories of people who after years in an invalid “second” marriage decided to proceed with seeking an Decree of Nullity for their “first” marriage so they could have their marriage convalidated and who were surprised to find that the tribunal process was extremely healing for them and they were so grateful to have gone through it.

 

[sidbrown]

To that end the couple should both be true to the faith, marry with Church approval, taking time to know each others character, making the greatest effort that they both actually have proper consent, before marriage takes place.

I heard that if a couple plans to use artificial birth control somewhere down the line in the marriage, then this would be an issue as far as proper consent is concerned. Now, how many Catholic couples today in the USA are using some form of ABC. Is it just about the same percentage as in the general population? So, the couple could be thinking that there really is no way that we can give proper consent, since we might be using ABC at some point in our marriage. So, why go through the bother of getting married, only to have a Church tribunal declare later on that we were not married Sacramentally in the first place anyway? I am not making this up about the decline in Catholic weddings. Please see the following link for verification. Thank you.
eagletribune.com/local/x1316176842/Catholic-Church-sees-steep-decline-in-weddings

 

[sidbrown]

The Church presumes the marriage is valid.

An application for the Decree of Nullity cannot be begun until a civil divorce has been grated and the two people involved have be civilly divorced for some period of months or years before their case comes to the tribunal. I assume no one is “sleeping with” someone they have been civilly divorced from. If they are continuing to engage in the marital act with someone they’re divorced from then they probably should be seeking help from their priest or spiritual father.

I’m not aware that “a very large percentage” of cases receive a Decree of Nullity where one party disputes the application. Both sides have representation in the tribunal.

I have heard a number of stories of people who after years in an invalid “second” marriage decided to proceed with seeking an Decree of Nullity for their “first” marriage so they could have their marriage convalidated and who were surprised to find that the tribunal process was extremely healing for them and they were so grateful to have gone through it.

The assumption that the msrriage was valid could be wrong. And according to the Catholic journal, US Catholic, April 1997, p. 7, in the diocese of St. Paul Minnesota, 97 percent of all those who apply for the annulment are given it by the tribunal. So all along, their marriage has been Sacramentally invalid, which they are just finding out now. There are about 550 cases per year in that diocese.

 

[Vico]

I heard that if a couple plans to use artificial birth control somewhere down the line in the marriage, then this would be an issue as far as proper consent is concerned. Now, how many Catholic couples today in the USA are using some form of ABC. Is it just about the same percentage as in the general population? So, the couple could be thinking that there really is no way that we can give proper consent, since we might be using ABC at some point in our marriage. So, why go through the bother of getting married, only to have a Church tribunal declare later on that we were not married Sacramentally in the first place anyway? I am not making this up about the decline in Catholic weddings. Please see the following link for verification. Thank you.
eagletribune.com/local/x1316176842/Catholic-Church-sees-steep-decline-in-weddings

That is interesting article. In that, the priests said there are numerous reasons for the decline including:

higher numbers of unwed couples living together
fewer practicing Catholics
younger generation isn’t producing churchgoers
church scandals
popularity of “destination weddings”

The first four shown above are actually falling away from the faith.

Use of birth control “somewhere down the line” does not invalidate consent. The actual public celebration of marriage includes the intent to create a marriage of which children are the natural result, so there would have to be some hard evidence (testimony, documents) to prove that there was invalid intention.

Consent includes the essentials, exclusivity and indissolubility, plus the grant of the natural conjugal act apt to generation of children, and to raise children that result in the church.

Some couples are justified in perpetually using NPF (there are four “indications”) or of complete abstinance (with severe health risk of pregnancy).

 

[5Loaves]

The assumption that the msrriage was valid could be wrong. And according to the Catholic journal, US Catholic, April 1997, p. 7, in the diocese of St. Paul Minnesota, 97 percent of all those who apply for the annulment are given it by the tribunal. So all along, their marriage has been Sacramentally invalid, which they are just finding out now. There are about 550 cases per year in that diocese.

I still don’t follow where you’re going. To me you are mixing apples, with oranges with…Fate of Eastern Catholic Churches.

I don’t know whose assumption you are insisting on. Who is the “they” who are “just finding out”? The divorced husband and divorced the wife who initiated the proceedings and can’t wait to have a Decree of Nullity so they can normalize their current marriages? The divorced husband or the wife whose spouse, from whom they have been divorced for some time often years, initiated the proceedings and who they want nothing more to do with? The husband or wife whose spouse, from whom they have been divorced for some time often years, initiated the proceedings and who has provided a strong defense against the claim?

I am stating a fact. The Church always presumes that every marriage is valid. It is valid until one of the parties, the husband or the wife, petitions for a Decree of Nullity. They must already have been legally divorced before the Tribunal can be approached in any way. Both husband and wife are represented in the tribunal. The materials are provided by the husband and wife-- the tribunal doesn’t go out sleuthing, they take the materials that are provided to them-- with that material the (ex) husband and the (ex) wife have provided a finding is made.

Once the tribunal that was competent to hear the case makes a finding if the finding is that there was a defect then automatically case goes to a court of second instance for additional review. If the finding is ratified by a court of second instance then the marriage is finally given a Decree of Nullity.

The Church presumes the marriage is valid. It is the petitioners, the husband or the wife, who are engaged in trying to persuade the Church otherwise.

Of this 97 percent that sometime prior to this April 1997 reporting were granted a Decree of Nullity in the St Paul MN tribunal how many were contested by the husband or the wife?

To me this tread has gone quite off topic- Fate of Eastern Catholic Churches if Orthodox are Reconciled - so I’m done posting on this sub topic.

 

[Vico]

I still don’t follow where you’re going. To me you are mixing apples, with oranges with…Fate of Eastern Catholic Churches.
…
To me this tread has gone quite off topic- Fate of Eastern Catholic Churches if Orthodox are Reconciled - so I’m done posting on this sub topic.

5Loves, it started with this:

So according to Catholicism, Catholics are never really sure if they are married or not?
That seems to be a huge difference between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy and as well, many other religions.
…

But as I posted, there are annulments given by the Orthodox tribunal and they are acceptable to the Catholic Church. (However the re-marriages are not.)

I think it has to be understood that marriage in both Catholicism and Orthodoxy are sacraments that require the proper preparation to receive the Holy Spirit, and depending upon that receptivity, the sacrament has its sanctifying effect. Those that end in annulments were not truly sacramental.

So if reconcilled, a issue will likely be the Orthodox economy of allowing re-marriage.