Orthodox Doctrines

[Genesis315]

I think you mean the Pauline privilege by which a converting Christian could divorce their pagan spouse (it is supposedly derived from a teaching of St. Paul’s). I could be wrong, but I don’t think there is an issue of a sacramental marriage in that case.

 

[mardukm]

Dear sister StMarina,

It may be a sin in your eyes, but that person would get be granted an Annulment by the Catholic Church.

I think you have a caricature of the annulment process. There is a lot more involved in the annulment process than merely the circumstances AT the ceremony. If the person had a bad cold and drank a lot of cold medicine so he could make it to the wedding, the adjudicator would take into account the fact that he took the cold medicine IN ORDER TO MAKE IT TO THE WEDDING IN THE FIRST PLACE. That would be a sure sign of his intention to marry, even if at the moment that he said “I do,” he was a bit woozy. Besides, IIRC, an annulment is given only if the other party agrees.

There was a much advertised annulment several years ago in the United States (I forget the exact names of the parties) which was eventually overturned by the Curia. I believe the reason publicly given was that the American tribunal was “too hasty.” I think the deeper reason was that the other party did not agree to the annulment, which is a prerequisite. The lack of agreement was evident by the stink the other party made in the media.

Sister, you seem to be a holy woman, judging from your many posts. I urge you to apply the Lord’s teaching of judging with right judgment. Do more study on the process of annulment before publicly criticizing it. From what I’ve read, your understanding of annulment does not go beyond the common anti-Catholic objections and caricatures. Please be cognizant of the Lord’s exhortations regarding our duty to judge with right judgment.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[StMarina303ad]

Dear sister StMarina,
an annulment is given only if the other party agrees.

That’s not true at all. There have been plenty of cases where the other party involved has not agreed and a couple where the other party was unable to be located and an annulment was still granted.

Do more study on the process of annulment before publicly criticizing it.

I work at a Catholic Bookstore (not Anti-Catholic at all) and read books from there. The owners, who are daily Mass goers/weekly Confession goers/frequent Adorers of the B.S./etc, are very careful to only sell those books which have an (I’m going to spell it wrong) Imfrimater in them (other than a few of the Seaton Catholic Home Schooling Books which the kids have to read for Literature - which may or may not even be Catholic - but have been carefully screened by that Catholic Home Schooling Company). Those authentically Catholic books are the only sources I have read on the issue of Annulments as it would be silly to attempt to get information about something from a biased (Anti-whateveryourresearching) source. I stand by my earlier statement and reiterate that about 100% of Catholic marriages are eligible for an Annulment through the Catholic Church.

 

[mardukm]

Dear sister StMarina,

That’s not true at all. There have been plenty of cases where the other party involved has not agreed and a couple where the other party was unable to be located and an annulment was still granted.

I agree with you. There are other elements involved, of course. If one party refuses to agree to the annulment merely out of spite, even though all circumstances positively indicate that the couple has lost all relations, then the annulment would be granted (given other basic conditions, that is, such as lack of free and uncoerced volition at the marriage, among other things). And there is a time limit for responses to inquiries. If the other party does not respond, it is regarded as an approval, and the documents sent to that other party will specifically state that - so the other party has full knowledge of the effects of not responding to the inquiry. If it is a matter of actually not being able to locate the other party, the same time limit applies (maybe longer). Every opportunity must be taken to get the approval of the other party, within reason, of course (I’'m sure you would agree). I don’t know if the books you’ve read have been anecdotal, but I suggest you read the actual Code of canons on the matter. Perhaps even get a copy of the old Code of Canon laws (before 1917, IIRC).

The annulment process is really very fair. I don’t doubt it may have been (and still is) abused. However, if you read the Canons on the matter, you will find them to be very fair and strict.

Judge with right judgment, sister.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Peter_J]

It may be a sin in your eyes, but that person would get be granted an Annulment by the Catholic Church.

It would be a sin, and they could obtain an annulment later on (assuming they request one later on). They would be deliberately living together unmarried, and also deliberately deceiving others into thinking them married.

But on the other hand, a couple who honestly believe themselves married, are not committing sin by living as man and wife (even if it later turns out that the marriage is invalid).

 

[StMarina303ad]

It would be a sin, and they could obtain an annulment later on (assuming they request one later on). They would be deliberately living together unmarried, and also deliberately deceiving others into thinking them married.

But on the other hand, a couple who honestly believe themselves married, are not committing sin by living as man and wife (even if it later turns out that the marriage is invalid).

Again, at least the Orthodox Christians know when they are actually married or not. No room for any doubt. No one can later on down the road pull the rug out from under their feet and declare that although they’d thought they were married for how ever many years that they were actually never married.

I wasn’t made to be a Catholic - too much instability in the basics: if your actually married or not, how many Natures Christ has, whether or not you were born guilty of someone else’s sin, should the Eucharist be from leavened or unleaved bread, and would have suffered for all eternity had you not been baptized and died as an infant, etc. too much instability for me. I don’t know how Catholics can live like that. Perhaps God gives you bonus points in your favor for putting up with all the instability of faith and family?

 

[StMarina303ad]

I don’t know if the books you’ve read have been anecdotal, but I suggest you read the actual Code of canons on the matter. Perhaps even get a copy of the old Code of Canon laws (before 1917, IIRC).

I can go on the Vatican’s website and look up the Canon you are refering to - which #?

• BTW, when the Roman Catholic Church publishes new Codes of Canon Law, all Catholics are only bound to the current copy. No sense in looking it up in an outdated Code of Canon Law, unless you are looking for discrepencies in a Catholic used to be held accountable to and what he/she is now held accoutable to - personally, I wouldn’t bother with all that.

 

[mardukm]

Dear sister StMarina,

Again, at least the Orthodox Christians know when they are actually married or not. No room for any doubt. No one can later on down the road pull the rug out from under their feet and declare that although they’d thought they were married for how ever many years that they were actually never married.

I wasn’t made to be a Catholic - too much instability in the basics: if your actually married or not, how many Natures Christ has, whether or not you were born guilty of someone else’s sin, should the Eucharist be from leavened or unleaved bread, and would have suffered for all eternity had you not been baptized and died as an infant, etc. too much instability for me. I don’t know how Catholics can live like that. Perhaps God gives you bonus points in your favor for putting up with all the instability of faith and family?

I can’t imagine Catholics worry about these things you have stated. I certainly don’t. Would you like to do a poll? IMHO, these matters you have pointed out are examples of non-Catholic polemicists making mountains out of molehills or extrapolating legitimate Catholic teachings to create some fanciful circumstance for people to worry about. For example, the Catholic Church is not the one who has made a big deal about leavened or unleavened bread, but the Eastern Orthodox(!). So don’t blame that one on the Catholic Church, please! I certainly don’t worry about the validity of my marriage, and neither does ANY Catholic who is married. The question only comes up if annulment becomes an issue, and I assure you that when people get married, they don’t have annulment or divorce in mind. The natures of Christ? I’ve never heard of that being an issue. That’s another one that non-Catholic controversialists have created out of thin air. Ditto with the issue of having someone else’s sin imputed on you.

The only legitimate argument you MIGHT have is the one about limbo and infants. Even then, I believe every single person who has had an unbaptized infant die believes that child is in heaven with God, or will be in heaven after the Last Judgment, or does not cease to pray for the soul of their child with a Faith in a God Who will take care of their child. I don’t know what the objection is.

The only ones creating roadblocks to the faith of Catholics are non-Catholic polemicists who like to stretch their imaginations. I’m not saying you are one of those. However, I would caution, with brotherly love, that you stop reading the polemical works.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

I can go on the Vatican’s website and look up the Canon you are refering to - which #?

• BTW, when the Roman Catholic Church publishes new Codes of Canon Law, all Catholics are only bound to the current copy. No sense in looking it up in an outdated Code of Canon Law, unless you are looking for discrepencies in a Catholic used to be held accountable to and what he/she is now held accoutable to - personally, I wouldn’t bother with all that.

To be honest, I meant the official COMMENTARY on the Code of Canons. The Commentary on the old Code includes examples that concretely explain what the Canons mean. I’m not sure if the New Commentary is as informative as the Commentary for the old Code. If you’re still interested, I’ll take the time to look up the Canons (but it will happen some time next week).

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Peter_J]

Again, at least the Orthodox Christians know when they are actually married or not. No room for any doubt. No one can later on down the road pull the rug out from under their feet and declare that although they’d thought they were married for how ever many years that they were actually never married.

In all honesty, don’t you think there have been exceptions? Like a case where the groom is already married, but just flat-out lies to the bride and everyone else (without even going through divorce proceeding)?

I wasn’t made to be a Catholic - too much instability in the basics: if your actually married or not, how many Natures Christ has,

Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics are both “Chalcedonian Christians”. It seems to me you’re trying to create a disagreement where none exists.

whether or not you were born guilty of someone else’s sin, should the Eucharist be from leavened or unleaved bread, and would have suffered for all eternity had you not been baptized and died as an infant, etc.

Well now you’re just being silly. Or don’t you think there were disagreements on those issues in the Undivided Church of the first millennium?

 

[StMarina303ad]

Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics are both “Chalcedonian Christians”. It seems to me you’re trying to create a disagreement where none exists.

The Catholic Church is not just the Roman Rite only - there are 12 different rites - one of which is Coptic Catholic - they still teach and believe in 1 Nature of Christ - they are not “Chalcedonian Christians” but they are Catholic in union with the Pope.

Well now you’re just being silly. Or don’t you think there were disagreements on those issues in the Undivided Church of the first millennium?

When there were disagreements, a Council was called by the Empirer and the matter was settled by the Holy Spirit…someone/some group always ended up being a heretic. There is Orthodoxy (Right Belief) and there is Heresy (Wrong Belief).

 

[Formosus]

I think the conflict here may come from a different theology of Marriage. In the Byzantine theology, marriage is performed by the Priest saying the prayers over the couple and crowning them. In the Latin theology though, marriage is contracted by the two parties involved and the priest(or deacon) is a mere witness to the event. That doesn’t really solve anything but it at least gives some background to the debate.

This is something I am curious about, because I know that Eastern Emperors were granted divorces by the Patriarch before the Schism ( I beleive the specific case I am thinking of was during the Macedonian dynasty). Does anyone know the earliest reference to an annulment in the west?

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Formosus,

I think the conflict here may come from a different theology of Marriage. In the Byzantine theology, marriage is performed by the Priest saying the prayers over the couple and crowning them. In the Latin theology though, marriage is contracted by the two parties involved and the priest(or deacon) is a mere witness to the event. That doesn’t really solve anything but it at least gives some background to the debate.

You are correct that the issue of the minister of marriage does not settle the issue. The Oriental Orthodox, who also have an identical view on the minister of Marriage as the Eastern Orthodox, generally take into account, like the Latins, the freedom of the spouses in assenting to the Sacrament. If that freedom is restricted, it is not considered a valid marriage, and a decree of annulment (if required) would be set forth. I’m not sure what the teaching of the EOC’s is on the matter of freedom in the marriage act. It seems rather cruel to claim a marriage is valid if one or both spouses were somehow deprived of their free will in whatever way upon entering the marriage.

This is something I am curious about, because I know that Eastern Emperors were granted divorces by the Patriarch before the Schism ( I beleive the specific case I am thinking of was during the Macedonian dynasty). Does anyone know the earliest reference to an annulment in the west?

I don’t know about the West specficially, but several canons from the Ecumenical Councils address the issue of annulment, and not just with regards to the Sacrament of Marriage, but with other Sacraments as well, as I noted in a previous post to sister StMarina in this thread. Here are some specific ones from St. Basil:

“She that gives herself up to the will of a man without the consent of her master, commits fornication: for pacts of those who are under the power of another are null.” St. Basil, Canon 40.

“She that marries a man who was deserted by his wife, but afterward dismissed upon the return of the man’s former wife, commits fornication, but ignorantly; she shall not be prohibited marriage, but it is better that she do not marry.” St. Basil, Canon 46.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Just_Lurking]

Pope Celestine III (1191-1198) authorized the dissolution of consummated, sacramental marriages under certain circumstances (i.e., if one of the parties lapses into heresy). This was based on the adultery clause in Matthew 5:32, together with a view that apostasy was akin to spiritual adultery.

Thus, the indissolubility of a consummated, sacramental marriage as a matter of dogma in the Catholic Church must therefore date to after 1198, which is well after the Great Eastern Schism.

 

[Peter_J]

The Catholic Church …

Not to get off on a tangent, but I find it a bit puzzling that you admit that the RCC is the Catholic Church, and yet you choose to remain outside of her.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Not to get off on a tangent, but I find it a bit puzzling that you admit that the RCC is the Catholic Church, and yet you choose to remain outside of her.

Of course, I call the Catholic Church by the name it calls themselves…in the same manner, I also call Ladder-day Saints by the names they call themselves LDS & sometime Mormons. Doesn’t mean I really think that they are actually Saints.

There is only one: One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and that is the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church is the ONLY Christian Church that maintains Christianity in full with nothing added since Christ and the Holy Spirit established her nearly 2,000 years ago.

You know of the Orthodox Churches existence and yet you remain out of it. I don’t know if it is this out of ignorance of Church History and Theology or if it is out stubborness or because “living Orthodoxy is too hard” as compared to being Cathoilc or maybe the Catholic Church is like a security blanket - you’ve always had it and you’re not ready to let go yet and grow to maturity in the Christian Faith? This question is not intended to be harsh, I just am an “inquiring mind” and I’d really like to know. I truly don’t get it

 

[Peter_J]

You know of the Orthodox Church’s existence and yet you remain out of it. I don’t know if it is this out of ignorance of Church History and Theology or if it is out stubborness or because “living Orthodoxy is too hard” as compared to being Cathoilc or maybe the Catholic Church is like a security blanket - you’ve always had it and you’re not ready to let go yet and grow to maturity in the Christian Faith?

Funnily enough, I often the see the same statements, just in reverse, posted here by a lot of the Catholic posters.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Funnily enough, I often the see the same statements, just in reverse, posted here by a lot of the Catholic posters.

I wouldn’t expect anything less.

But seriously: pray - truly pray - learn the Prayer of the Heart which is so much deeper than the Rosary, study - really read and study Church History from both Catholic *and Orthodox *sources and God will without a doubt led you to the Orthodox Church.

There was one man, don’t remember his name at the moment, who got up one morning and decided to write a book about the theological differences between Catholisim and the Orthodox Church and he did his research and studied and wrote, all the while practicing his Catholic Faith, around the time his book hit the printing presses, he became Orthodox.

 

[theistgal]

I wouldn’t expect anything less.

But seriously: pray - truly pray - learn the Prayer of the Heart which is so much deeper than the Rosary, study - really read and study Church History from both Catholic *and Orthodox *sources and God will without a doubt led you to the Orthodox Church.

When it comes to private devotions, we are free to choose. Some prefer the Rosary and some prefer the Prayer of the Heart. (Some devout souls even choose both!) Just because you don’t like the Rosary doesn’t mean others don’t find it valuable for them. I know both Western and Eastern Christians who pray it daily and find their way to the Heart of Christ through this simple way of meditation.