Orthodoxy on divorce and annulments

[Catholic_Dude]

The Orthodox Church recognizes Ecclesiatical divorce as a terrible tragedy. But if a separation is inevitable, the Orthodox Church, through the healing love, compassion, mercy, and forgiveness of Jesus Christ, ministers to the injured parties. They are permitted to re-marry through a service of love and repentance.

Is divorce a “terrible tragedy” or a SIN forbidden by Scripture and Tradition?

Any sin can said to be “inevitable” that doesnt mean it is to be allowed. Paul says ONE thing on separation being inevitable, he says the couple are to live apart physically but NOT divorce and remarry.

The RCC retroactively nullifies the marriage by claiming that it never existed. The parties are permitted to re-marry and the children are told that their parents were never “really” married to begin with.

Classical spin of the facts. I dont have the time or energy to keep correcting you.

In cases of moral failure, the Gospel requires that we respond to people with compassion and forgiveness, not judgment and condemnation.

With that mentality any life of sin can be justified because “compassion” will have to allow the sin anyway.

 

[roncriss]

So the Catholic Church can only grant annulments if the couple is blood related? I did not know this!

Mickey,

You must know,as is evoident to all, that you are evading these questions because you don’t want to admit the implications. Its not an honest form of debate. I see it. You see it. God sees it. You can’t bring yourself even to admit that the marriage of brother and sister would be considered null by the Orthodox Church because in principle you would be admitting that Catholic anullment is legitimate in principle. Even if your evasion amounts to the silent approval of incestouous marriage. I’ll ask you again. Would the Orthodox Church consider the marriage of brother and sister null or not?

Ron

 

[roncriss]

It is hypocritical to say that the parents were fornicators who were never married and then turn around and tell the kids “don’t worry you’re not illegitimate”. That’s called talking out of both sides of your mouth. Something you obiviously don’t have a problem doing.

And you clearly have no problem misrepresenting the facts, since I never called anyone fornicators. It is you orthodox who seem intent on labling innocent children, not me. Do the Orthodox also approve false witness in the name of “compassion” and economia?

Ron

 

[roncriss]

Up till now I have not commented on the orthodox practice eclesiastical divorce. I think that its tragic but at least the orthodox christian who gets a divorce recognizes his/her sin. They are excommunicated for a period and must do pennace. If they are are granted a second marriage, their previous sin of divorce is at least confessed and prayers of pennace are in the marriage ceremony itself.

The bishops of the orthodox church will have to answer to God for allowing the divorcee to remarry and they are well aware of it. Their answer will be:

“We were making an accomodation for human weakness. We told him/her that it was wrong, punished them, and commanded that they confess their sin and pray for forgiveness. We took measures so that this accomadation was not abused such as, not allowing it a 2nd time and denying this accomodation to the guilty party. Lord have mercy on us if this was wrong as we had mercy on the victim of adultery.”

It is up to God to judge the bishops for their action. But at least they are being honest

Mickey, Isa,prodromos, since I am a newcomer to Orthodoxy, please correct any inaccuracies I have stated.

But as for the catholics…

What the Orthodox apparently refuse to recognize is that they recognize the sin of divorce and adulterous re-marriage, but they do it anyway. Its not repentance if you just go on doing it. Adultery does not cease to be adultery just because you are sorry you ARE doing it. We Catholics have a rule. For sins to be absolved in confession one must have the firm resolve to reform and to cease the sinful behavior in the future. Otherwise those sins are not absolved. Apparently the Orthodox, in the name of “economy”, go right on doing the behavior and have the temerity to expect God to forgive them anyway! Catholics expect a reformed life - Orthodox simply bless the sinful behavior because they believe human beings are too weak to control the passions. Do you seriously believe God can be fooled by such sleight of hand?

Ron

 

[roncriss]

Yes, my brother in Christ.

Here is the simplest summary I can provide:

The Orthodox Church recogonizes Ecclesiatical divorce as a terrible tragedy. But if a separation is inevitable, the Orthodox Church, through the healing love, compassion, mercy, and forgiveness of Jesus Christ, ministers to the injured parties. They are permitted to re-marry through a service of love and repentance.

The RCC retroactively nullifies the marriage by claiming that it never existed. The parties are permitted to re-marry and the children are told that their parents were never “really” married to begin with.

In cases of moral failure, the Gospel requires that we respond to people with compassion and forgiveness, not judgment and condemnation.

Peace and blessings,
Mickey

Mickey,

Here is a more honest summary. Nothing is inevitable. The Orthodox Church recogonizes Ecclesiatical divorce as a terrible tragedy but approves of it. The Orthodox Church, asks for the healing love, compassion, mercy, and forgiveness of Jesus Christ while perpetuating the sinful behavior. They, contrary to Christ’s specific command, approve divorce and perform adulterous and bigamous marriages.

The Catholic Church, of all rites, not limited by national or ethnic exclusivism as are the Orthodox churches, recognizes, in accord with Christ’s words in the gospel of Matthew, that some marriages are not legitimate and, after due investigation, proclaims them such. They were indeed null from the start. The parties are not to re-marrying because there never was a valid marriage from the start. Unlike the Orthodox who apparently feel the need to tell children they are illegitimate (I know not why!) the Catholic Church does not do so.

There is your honest summary.

Ron

 

[roncriss]

Amazing, look at this double standard. You refuse to answer the magical number 3 question and spin it into a Catholic problem and accuse us of Corban. ANSWER the magical number 3 and stop the spamming of this thread. And an “answer” of “because Orthodox are merciful” DOESNT cut it.

What you think DOES NOT affect doctrine. If divorce is forbidden by Jesus it is forbidden. Any sin can be allowed with the “I think its tragic BUT” mentality.

Jesus said he who marries the divorced man or woman commits adultery, there is no “second marriage”.

You have GOT to be KIDDING ME. At that rate the Bishop can make an “accommodation” for any sin. Jesus never made accommodation for divorce, and that is precisely because it results in a state of perpetual adultery with the next spouse because the original bond cannot be severed.

You never ever build doctrine on “accommodating for human weakness”.

And whats this “not allowing it a SECOND time”? If it is wrong then it should be NOT allowed the FIRST TIME. That is being consistent in theology and logic.

That is not honesty, it is acting in direct violation of Scripture and Tradition.

At that rate you could allow abortion if the mother felt she didnt want the child and call that “accommodation to human weakness” as well.

LOL. You have said NOTHING but the “illegitimacy” side issue.

Dude,

Your reasoning is razor sharp. But don’t hold your breath waiting for them to answer a direct question. They can’t because it would result in an admission. I think we’ve reached an impasse. An impartial observer will see the duplicity of their evasions. But they can never bring themselves to admit their error because it would be a judgement of Orthodoxy and they know it.

Ron

 

[Isa_Almisry]

.
Marriage has NOT always been defined the same way. The fact polygamy existed in ancient OT times and still exists with pagan nations today means marriage has not always been defined the same way. If you went to an arab nation and checked the dictionary I would assure you marriage in that dictionary includes multiple wives at the same time.

Actually, no. The word for marriage in Arabic, zawaaj, actually means coupling, occuring in pairs.

The technical term in Islamic law, nikaaH (lit. sexual intercourse) revolves around the idea of making intercourse legal (this touches on concubines) and having legimate issue. Even then, as in the Quran, the one man one woman rule is the taken as the norm (discussions, for instance, that a man with two wives should not have intercourse with both at the same time), and the polygamy has to be explained away.

More importantly, you have avoided the main issue of this thread, divorce, and in attempt to derail the thread have introduced this illegitimacy thing. The fact is even if the Catholic Church said those children were illegitimate doesnt change anything regarding the divorce issue. The illegitimate child’s salvation is not affected.

No, he hasn’t avoided it, just taken it to the logical conclusion which seems to be uncomfortable with those promoting annullments. As the Germans say, Who says A, must say B.

The legitimacy debate is a side issue and does NOT change the fact the concept of an annulment still exists.

Sure the concept exists. A legal fiction is just that, a concept.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Yes, because if they were at fault means they deliberately attempted to get married knowing they were not allowed to and thus they were engaging in unlawful relations.

As I already said however, the illegitimacy thing is a side issue, even if the Catholic Church were to say all children were illegitimate doesnt mean anything in regards to their salvation. And it is not like children of divorced Orthodox parents are better off socially, so lets not go there.

Well, actually in one instance they are: they are seen as the issue of a union that once was made out of love, but has turned sour. At least they have that.

The children of an anullment see everyone around them denying that the union that produced them ever existed.

I haven’t seen much in the way of what children of anulled marriages think, but what I have seen basically says that it destroyed their idea of marriage being worth while. The children of divorce often say they will not repeat the parents mistakes. The children of anullments say why bother, as they saw their parents try, but are told that the parents were only fooling themselves into thinking they were married.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Sure because all Catholic marriages are assumed valid unless something arises later to call into question the validity.

Yes, I can’t see logically why: given the broad scope of anullible offenses, how does any marriage pass muster.

You know what happens when you assUme.

You cant introduce the terms “divorce” to the case of annulments because you are talking about different things. A divorce could only ever happen on the civil level, and that has no bearing in God’s eyes on the Sacramental nature of the marriage.

I haven’t introduced anything. No divorce, no anullment.

And your wrong on the “only civil”: your Petrine and Pauline “privleges” dissolve (i.e. divorce) valid marriages.

A person CAN want and seek to see if their marriage can be annulled (checked and found invalid) if something arises to question the validity. What they have no control over is the facts, if it is found valid then they are bound regardless of what they want.

Yes, this was like grounds for divorce. Now, in both divorce and anullments, perjury seems to be the ground of choice.

Im not sure about the third party thing, and that is questionable considering he has to judge the person’s heart subjectively. So given that I would say the most a third party could do is bring up the issue, but it would have to be one of the spouses that initiate the inquiry into an annulment.

The third party is more neutral than a self serving spouse wanting an anullment to marry the young secretary, or that beau fling.

As for the people falling in love later on, that doesnt change anything because the marriage was invalid to begin with.

Right. Most marriage begin with perfect intent and follow through on that.

If one spouse suspects problems they can have the Church look into it, that is fine, that however does not change the fact the spouse has no control over the facts.

That judging someone else’s heart thing.

That is a totally separate subject and just leading towards more confusion here. The Church is never ever bound by what secular authorities do, if secular authorities all of the sudden forbade civil divorce that does not mean the Church cant determine if a marriage was invalid or not.

Bet your anullments would dry up.

I dont know the answer, a tribunal might not even be necessary if they have the intention to stay together, in that case I would assume there would be a regularization process, similar to a conditional Baptism.

Maybe all marriages should be examed, a sort of Cana audit, every, say, seven years. To make sure they are all valid.

You are setting up a false characterization of putting the civil authorities one step above the Church and I dont have the time or energy to keep correcting you.

You’re not correcting, you’re evading.

Divorce equals deliberately severed marriage. And in Scripture and Tradition divorce equals grave sin.

Yes. And denial doesn’t make it go away.

I dont know what Rota is, but I would guess it is a higher authority in the Church. If I am right then the higher authority’s ruling takes precedence

.

It’s the highest appellate tribunal of your church. It doesn’t make precedent, but retries cases.

It would be very similar to an ordination that a bishop later claimed was invalid but then a Patriarch came in and looked over the issue and said was valid, in that case the Patriarch’s claim overturns the original Bishop’s claim.

which the pope of Rome (or the Rota) can reinstate and overturn the patriarch’s claim.

Further, I have yet to see convincing reasoning why the “innocent” party must undergo a penance for something they are not guilty of, that doesnt make sense.
(cont)

I take it you don’t believe in original sin then?

Even the innocent party is affected by the divorce, but then you believe that no one is affected by an anullment, so I don’t know how to explain it to you.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

The DONT “live as if it did” in the sense they share a bed, they are NOT allowed to share a bed. And as I already made it clear it does NOT sound like an enjoyable situation to be in, it would only be fore the financial and social welfare of the children.

You are being taught that it is OK and laudable to pretend you are married when you aren’t.

How privy are we to the sleeping arrangments of married couples? I tend not to go into these sorts of matters.

This is totally off topic and yet EO continue to bring up issues like these to create confusion and spam.

Ridiculous and spam. I wont put up with it. You and other EO in here have a bad habit of flooding threads with off topic information and spinning bogus issues to the point the thread is full of irrelevant information that people have to wade through.

Just bringing your arguements to their logical conclusion, which you will not face.

This is a typical one sided conversation where the Catholic is trying hard to stay calm and defend the Truth in a logical and fair manner and the other individuals want to avoid answering, introduce irrelevant topics, and respond by attacking the Catholic Church instead of addressing the question addressed to them.

I think VARC’s parable fully answered the question.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

What the Orthodox apparently refuse to recognize is that they recognize the sin of divorce and adulterous re-marriage, but they do it anyway. Its not repentance if you just go on doing it. Adultery does not cease to be adultery just because you are sorry you ARE doing it. We Catholics have a rule. For sins to be absolved in confession one must have the firm resolve to reform and to cease the sinful behavior in the future. Otherwise those sins are not absolved.

unless you anull the sin, and which case it is touted as virtue.

Apparently the Orthodox, in the name of “economy”, go right on doing the behavior and have the temerity to expect God to forgive them anyway! Catholics expect a reformed life - Orthodox simply bless the sinful behavior because they believe human beings are too weak to control the passions. Do you seriously believe God can be fooled by such sleight of hand?

No, I don’t believe the marriage tribunals are fooling Him one bit.

Ron

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Mickey,

Here is a more honest summary. Nothing is inevitable. The Orthodox Church recogonizes Ecclesiatical divorce as a terrible tragedy but approves of it. The Orthodox Church, asks for the healing love, compassion, mercy, and forgiveness of Jesus Christ while perpetuating the sinful behavior. They, contrary to Christ’s specific command, approve divorce and perform adulterous and bigamous marriages.

The Catholic Church, of all rites, not limited by national or ethnic exclusivism as are the Orthodox churches, recognizes, in accord with Christ’s words in the gospel of Matthew, that some marriages are not legitimate and, after due investigation, proclaims them such. They were indeed null from the start. The parties are not to re-marrying because there never was a valid marriage from the start. Unlike the Orthodox who apparently feel the need to tell children they are illegitimate (I know not why!) the Catholic Church does not do so.

There is your honest summary.

Corban.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Dude,

Your reasoning is razor sharp. But don’t hold your breath waiting for them to answer a direct question. They can’t because it would result in an admission. I think we’ve reached an impasse. An impartial observer will see the duplicity of their evasions. But they can never bring themselves to admit their error because it would be a judgement of Orthodoxy and they know it.

The marriage tribunals pull assunder what God has joined, but this not only troubles no one it seems, but is lauded as virtue.

There was a priest, they were in church, they made a covenant. Your church believes in ex opere operato except when it comes to marriage: then ex opere operantis (since you hold the couple to be ministers of the sacrament).

Btw, I’ve forgotten to post the Father of Latin Patrisitics, Tertullian refers to Christ as a defender of divorce when it comes to adultery, and St. Basil’s thoughts on the matter were adopted into canon at Ecumenical Council.

 

[Fuerza]

I would just like to pose the following (admittedly unlikely, yet possible) scenario, which I believe may have already been mentioned here, to the Orthodox posters.

An Orthodox man and woman, who grew up in different countries, meet in college and fall in love. After years of dating, they become engaged and get married. Later on in life, they find out that they were both adopted and begin doing research, during the course of which they discover that they share the same birth parents. Therefore, they are brother and sister. Does the Orthodox Church continue to recognize this marriage?

I’m not trying to bait anyone. I am sincerely interested in the answer.

 

[roncriss]

The marriage tribunals pull assunder what God has joined, but this not only troubles no one it seems, but is lauded as virtue.

So, until one of you has the courage to answer the direct question, we will assume that you Orthodox believe that all marriages are valid, that a marriage between a sister and brother is legitimate and cannot be annulled. We will assume that you believe God actually joins sister and brother in marriage, or that He joins a couple in a shotgun wedding or when a person marries who is already married (clearly that’s what you expect with your multiple divorces and re-marriages in church).

On the contrary Catholic tribunals do not tear assunder what God has joined. We Catholics believe that God will not join together, for example, brother and sister, so there is no marriage to be torn asunder. The anullment process merely recognizes the fact. Catholicism recognizes God’s autonomy. Apparently the Orthodox view marriage as some sort of magical ceremony that forces Him to join every couple that stands before an Orthodox priest. Until one of you Orthodox speaks up to contradict Isa’s statement this will be the accepted Orthodox position.

Ron

 

[Mickey]

Any sin can said to be “inevitable” that doesnt mean it is to be allowed.

Sin is not allowed? I do not understand? I know that sin is forgiven.

Classical spin of the facts. I dont have the time or energy to keep correcting you.

There is no spin. I am not trying to be tricky. You have offered nothing to indicate correction.

With that mentality any life of sin can be justified because “compassion” will have to allow the sin anyway.

That is a bizarre comment. Do you ever sin? When you do sin, do expect compassion? What is this business about being allowed to sin? You must attempt to shed the legalistic mindset.

 

[roncriss]

I would just like to pose the following (admittedly unlikely, yet possible) scenario, which I believe may have already been mentioned here, to the Orthodox posters.

An Orthodox man and woman, who grew up in different countries, meet in college and fall in love. After years of dating, they become engaged and get married. Later on in life, they find out that they were both adopted and begin doing research, during the course of which they discover that they share the same birth parents. Therefore, they are brother and sister. Does the Orthodox Church continue to recognize this marriage?

I’m not trying to bait anyone. I am sincerely interested in the answer.

They can’t admit that such a marriage would be illegitimate or they would have to admit that the Catholic annullment process is correct in principle.

But here’s another thing. If such marriages cannot be annulled, as the Orthodox here contend, they are admitting that they practice multiple marriages because the previous marriage, in their view, cannot be illegitimate. Even the Mormons have ceased to practice multiple marriage.

Ron

 

[Mickey]

Mickey,

You must know,as is evoident to all, that you are evading these questions because you don’t want to admit the implications. Its not an honest form of debate. I see it. You see it. God sees it. You can’t bring yourself even to admit that the marriage of brother and sister would be considered null by the Orthodox Church because in principle you would be admitting that Catholic anullment is legitimate in principle. Even if your evasion amounts to the silent approval of incestouous marriage. I’ll ask you again. Would the Orthodox Church consider the marriage of brother and sister null or not?

I understand why you are trying to change the focus here.

Holy Orthodoxy does not use such legalistic terms as nullity or annulment. I suppose the bishop would handle such a situation. But then we are not talking about such obvious violations–also against the civil law.

You avoid the question of annulments granted 20 years later for reasons such as: “I did not understand the marriage committment”. Can you explain such things? Can you explain the retroactive erasure of a sacrament. I think not. How do you explain to the children that they are legitimate even though their parents were never married?

 

[Mickey]

We Catholics have a rule.

Yes. Catholic have many rules.

Orthodox simply bless the sinful behavior because they believe human beings are too weak to control the passions. Do you seriously believe God can be fooled by such sleight of hand?

May God have mercy, compassion, and forgiveness on you for this calumnity against His holy Church.

 

[roncriss]

Sin is not allowed? I do not understand? I know that sin is forgiven.

There is no spin. I am not trying to be tricky. You have offered nothing to indicate correction.

That is a bizarre comment. Do you ever sin? When you do sin, do expect compassion? What is this business about being allowed to sin? You must attempt to shed the legalistic mindset.

Mickey,

Let’s take the example of the sin of murder by abortion. Suppose you are an abortionist. You don’t say, “Gee, I’m sorry for this sin God, but I’m going to go on killing unborn babies and I’m going to seek your compassion in spite of the fact because Orthodoxy recognizes my weakness and my committing murder is inevitable. So, in the name of economia, please forgive my sin, though I intend to keep doing it.”

No, God requires repentance before He forgives. Repentance requires metanoia, the intention to reform one’s behavior in the future. If one is committing adultery one doesn’t just keep on doing it and asking God to overlook it. One doesn’t have that adultery blessed in church before God’s altar. But this seems to be exactly the Orthodox practice, by your own admission and understanding.

Ron