Marriage in the Eastern Catholic Churches

[Luvs2Learn]

I have a question…I recently was reading that in the Eastern Orthodox churches the Sacrament of Marriage is** conferred upon the couple **by the Priest. Hence the reason why they use the Ecclisiastical Divorce model (meaning the sacrament has died and is no longer in place to seperate a married couple from the Holy bond that the sacrament creates.)
Now, In the The RC church the sacrament **is conferred ****by the couple **and the Priest is present as a witness and to offer the blessing etc…Therefore we as Catholics use the annulment process (which states the sacrament never actually took place do to something lacking at the time of the vows).

Both models appear to make sense, from the standpoint of if the Priest is conducting the sacrament then the Sacrament HAS taken place but if the sacrament is created through the couple then something at the time of the vows could be hindering the true sacrament from occuring.

Here is my question???
It is my understanding that the Eastern Catholic churches use the Annullment process just as we RC do however Eastern Catholics use the “Orthodox” wedding ceremony where the Priest conferrs the Sacrament.
Can someone explaine this to me. How can a sacrament performed by a Priest be declared null? or do Eastern Catholics use a different process for annuments?

 

[Luvs2Learn]

huummm, no responses??? I was originally going to post this in the Sacraments forum but I thought that I would get more Eastern Catholic responses in here… any one???

 

[mark_a]

huummm, no responses??? I was originally going to post this in the Sacraments forum but I thought that I would get more Eastern Catholic responses in here… any one???

Wow. That’s getting down to the nitty-gritty.

Bump.

 

[mark_a]

I have a question…I recently was reading that in the Eastern Orthodox churches the Sacrament of Marriage is** conferred upon the couple **by the Priest. Hence the reason why they use the Ecclisiastical Divorce model (meaning the sacrament has died and is no longer in place to seperate a married couple from the Holy bond that the sacrament creates.)
Now, In the The RC church the sacrament **is conferred ****by the couple **and the Priest is present as a witness and to offer the blessing etc…Therefore we as Catholics use the annulment process (which states the sacrament never actually took place do to something lacking at the time of the vows).

Both models appear to make sense, from the standpoint of if the Priest is conducting the sacrament then the Sacrament HAS taken place but if the sacrament is created through the couple then something at the time of the vows could be hindering the true sacrament from occuring.

Here is my question???
It is my understanding that the Eastern Catholic churches use the Annullment process just as we RC do however Eastern Catholics use the “Orthodox” wedding ceremony where the Priest conferrs the Sacrament.
Can someone explaine this to me. How can a sacrament performed by a Priest be declared null? or do Eastern Catholics use a different process for annuments?

Wow. That’s getting down to the nitty-gritty.

Bump.

 

[Deacon_Lance]

Eastern Catholic canon law demands that for validity, a priest must give the nuptial blessing. So yes Eastern Catholics hold to Eastern theology as regards the marriage,but yes we are also saddled with Latin annulment system that doesn’t fit well with our theology. Although in limited circumstances Eastern theology would recognize the idea of nulllity, for example one under monastic vows attempting marriage, one not of age attempting marriage, coersion are the few that come to mind.

Fr. Deacon Lance

 

[Hesychios]

I have a question…I recently was reading that in the Eastern Orthodox churches the Sacrament of Marriage is** conferred upon the couple **by the Priest.

Yes.

Here is my question???
It is my understanding that the Eastern Catholic churches use the Annullment process just as we RC do…

Yes.

…however Eastern Catholics use the “Orthodox” wedding ceremony where the Priest conferrs the Sacrament.

Yes.

Can someone explaine this to me. How can a sacrament performed by a Priest be declared null?

It is a paradox.

…or do Eastern Catholics use a different process for annuments?

No.

 

[Spirithound]

Can someone explaine this to me. How can a sacrament performed by a Priest be declared null?

Perhaps it is relevant to consider that if a person withholds a mortal sin in the sacrament of confession, even though the priest pronounces the words of absolution, and intends to absolve the sins, the confession is invalid.

Deacon Lance mentioned “in limited circumstances Eastern theology would recognize the idea of nulllity, for example one under monastic vows attempting marriage, one not of age attempting marriage, coersion are the few that come to mind.”

I would ask you all whether a certain degree of immaturity on the parts of the “to be marrieds” could also lead to an invalid marriage? If so, these are the grounds for a declaration of nullity in the Roman Church, so I’m not sure if there is truly a discrepancy.

 

[Aramis]

Deacon Lance mentioned “in limited circumstances Eastern theology would recognize the idea of nulllity, for example one under monastic vows attempting marriage, one not of age attempting marriage, coersion are the few that come to mind.”

I would ask you all whether a certain degree of immaturity on the parts of the “to be marrieds” could also lead to an invalid marriage? If so, these are the grounds for a declaration of nullity in the Roman Church, so I’m not sure if there is truly a discrepancy.

The level of immaturity would need to be such that forming the requisite consent is impossible for one or both.

If it can be established that one did not ever intend permanent bond, that could render the sacrament invalid; in such cases, however, the burden of proof is often high.

Another ground for annulment or dissolution is physical incapacity for coitus; in theory, this would only be discovered on the wedding night or shortly thereafter.

In the OCA rubrics, the grounds for disolution and/or nullification pretty much match the Catholic reasons for nullity, with the notable addition of marital infidelity.

 

[Deacon_Lance]

Since it is the priest who confers the sacrament and not the couple, defects of consent are not entertained. If a man and a woman eligible to married are blessed by a priest in marriage that is it, they are married. No going back and trying to figure out defects of consent. It is also important to note that traditional Eastern marriage rites do not have vows.

Fr. Deacon Lance

 

[StillWondering]

I have two questions:

Another ground for annulment or dissolution is physical incapacity for coitus; in theory, this would only be discovered on the wedding night or shortly thereafter.

I wanted to know if two people who had a full courtship and intended to raise a family together, marry, then one of the individuals have an accident, before consummation, that paralyzes the person from the waist down. In this case, they cannot have intimate marital relations, but during the wedding had full intention of raising a family. Would this qualify for the grounds for annulment as described above? And would the intention of annulment at this point be a breaking of vows to be together in sickness and in health?

Since it is the priest who confers the sacrament and not the couple, defects of consent are not entertained. If a man and a woman eligible to married are blessed by a priest in marriage that is it, they are married. No going back and trying to figure out defects of consent. It is also important to note that traditional Eastern marriage rites do not have vows.

If the marriage does not have vows, is it considered a covenant?

 

[Deacon_Lance]

If the marriage does not have vows, is it considered a covenant?

Yes.

A good summary of Orthodox marriage theology:
orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/liturgics/athenagoras_remarriage.htm

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Since it is the priest who confers the sacrament and not the couple, defects of consent are not entertained. If a man and a woman eligible to married are blessed by a priest in marriage that is it, they are married. No going back and trying to figure out defects of consent. It is also important to note that traditional Eastern marriage rites do not have vows.

Fr. Deacon Lance

If this is true then I do not see how the limited circumstances that you gave can stand.

 

[Deacon_Lance]

Br. David,

While not delving into Scholastic distinctions the Eastern Church recognizes there are some ineligible for marriage, like vowed monastics or those threatened by force or the unbaptized.

Fr. Deacon Lance

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Br. David,

While not delving into Scholastic distinctions the Eastern Church recognizes there are some ineligible for marriage, like vowed monastics or those threatened by force or the unbaptized.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Fr. Deacon Lance,
One of the reasons you listed was “one not of age”. I noticed that you did not mention it here.

Why would one not of age not be able to enter into marriage other than the fact that they can not consent? But if consent is not an issue then age should not matter.

There are psychological reasons why many people are unable to consent. If one can not consent due to age, and this is acceptable to Eastern Theology to say that they can not enter into marriage then I could see a valid argument to extend this to those who are determined as being unable to consent due to some other reason.

 

[Luvs2Learn]

While not delving into Scholastic distinctions the Eastern Church recognizes there are some ineligible for marriage, like vowed monastics or those threatened by force or the unbaptized.

Fr. Deacon Lance

inelligible are the un-baptized?

I thought with proper dispensation a Catholic may marry a non christian (disparity of cult)?
Or, does the eastern rite canon law forbid disparity of cult just as the “eastern Orthodox” do?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

inelligible are the un-baptized?

I thought with proper dispensation a Catholic may marry a non christian (disparity of cult)?
Or, does the eastern rite canon law forbid disparity of cult just as the “eastern Orthodox” do?

I believe that any marriage with an unbaptized person can not be sacramental, even in the Latin Catholic Church.

 

[Luvs2Learn]

I believe that any marriage with an unbaptized person can not be sacramental, even in the Latin Catholic Church.

you are correct. It is not “sacramental” but it is valid. But, to my understanding from Orthodox friends, The Orthodox church does not allow their priests to marry an Orthodox to an unbaptized person period. marriage to a non-babptized equals excumnication for the Orthodox person.
Is this the case in the Easter Catholic churches? (The Latin rite allows for validity , just not sacramental and does not cause excumminication of any sort as long as proper dispensation is saught properly)

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

you are correct. It is not “sacramental” but it is valid. But, to my understanding from Orthodox friends, The Orthodox church does not allow their priests to marry an Orthodox to an unbaptized person period. marriage to a non-babptized equals excumnication for the Orthodox person.
Is this the case in the Easter Catholic churches? (The Latin rite allows for validity , just not sacramental and does not cause excumminication of any sort as long as proper dispensation is saught properly)

Eastern Catholics are Catholics. The same “rules” apply to Eastern Catholics as Latin Catholics.

We may have different Codes of Canon Law but they are, in essence, the same.