N
NewEnglandPriest
Guest
The key word is assumed. An annulment does not dissolve a marriage bond, it recognizes that one never existed. Irregardless of proof, there’s an objective reality of either validity or invalidity.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
J
JimG
Guest
Up to three marriages, if I understand correctly, but never a fourth. I can well imagine the consternation if the Catholic Church changed its position from “no divorce” to “okay, up to two divorces, but after the third wife, that’s it–no more!”What about the Eastern Orthodox? They have an ancient tradition of allowing a limited number of divorces.
P
polki
Guest
Respectfully then, I can see why there are so many Catholics who file for divorce. Their own objective reality tells them they can justify that their marriage wasn’t valid to begin with, and the first step to proving that would be to file for a civil divorce.The key word is assumed. An annulment does not dissolve a marriage bond, it recognizes that one never existed. Irregardless of proof, there’s an objective reality of either validity or invalidity.
N
NewEnglandPriest
Guest
Of course, every “solution” opens up a new can of problems. However, I think a more main streamed annulment system is what Pope Francis had in mind when he brought up the comparison to the Eastern Orthodox. The main idea being that we are fallibly making these annulment decisions.Up to three marriages, if I understand correctly, but never a fourth. I can well imagine the consternation if the Catholic Church changed its position from “no divorce” to “okay, up to two divorces, but after the third wife, that’s it–no more!”
N
NewEnglandPriest
Guest
Well, you can’t apply for an annulment in the USA until there is a finalized civil divorce.Respectfully then, I can see why there are so many Catholics who file for divorce. Their own objective reality tells them they can justify that their marriage wasn’t valid to begin with, and the first step to proving that would be to file for a civil divorce.
E
Ender
Guest
There are only two possible ways this situation can be understood: either the second marriage is adulterous, in which case she is demonstrably unrepentant, or it is not adulterous, in which case where’s the sin? Is that what you are asserting: that her second marriage is simply valid, no confession is necessary, and she may receive?…because the fact that she continues to live and sleep with him shows that she is “unrepentant” and has “no contrition”.
Do you understand that mercy, like absolution, requires repentance? If her situation is sinful, and she does not intend to change it, then mercy is impossible. If her situation is not sinful then mercy is unnecessary.Is this truly merciful towards her?
To stop talking about doctrine only makes sense if we intend to ignore the doctrines involved, otherwise there is no basis for any action the church takes on the matter.It’s time for the bishops to stop talking about doctrine (we all know what the doctrine is), including the conservative ones, and start proposing some loving ways of dealing with this pastorally.
Compassion cannot go so far as to seem to either ignore or condone sin. It really seems that your position is that, in the situation you described, there is no sin in the second marriage.
Ender
D
dans0622
Guest
Hello,While I greatly respect Ed Peters, I think he’s doing here what all good lawyers do: splitting hairs. The context of the quotes leave very little guess work about what they’re saying. They’re simply not laying on the line for it. …
It seems to me that Card. Coccopalmiero was not talking about divorced/remarried/Communion in “grave and urgent” situations but using a different process to declare the first “marriage” invalid in “grave and urgent” circumstances. This link gives that context.
americamagazine.org/content/d…ulment-process
Dan
P
pnewton
Guest
I think before this synod is over, we will not only see hairs split, but half hairs sub-divided a dozen ways.While I greatly respect Ed Peters, I think he’s doing here what all good lawyers do: splitting hairs.
O
OraLabora
Guest
I’ve never suggested that someone who doesn’t intend to change their situation be admitted to the sacraments. Read the thread on gradualism.There are only two possible ways this situation can be understood: either the second marriage is adulterous, in which case she is demonstrably unrepentant, or it is not adulterous, in which case where’s the sin? Is that what you are asserting: that her second marriage is simply valid, no confession is necessary, and she may receive?
Do you understand that mercy, like absolution, requires repentance? If her situation is sinful, and she does not intend to change it, then mercy is impossible. If her situation is not sinful then mercy is unnecessary.
To stop talking about doctrine only makes sense if we intend to ignore the doctrines involved, otherwise there is no basis for any action the church takes on the matter.
Compassion cannot go so far as to seem to either ignore or condone sin. It really seems that your position is that, in the situation you described, there is no sin in the second marriage.
Ender
S
Seraphim73
Guest
Well if we are going to be accurate the Orthodox Church doesn’t really “allow” divorce anymore than the Catholic Church allows murder if you take my meaning. The Church simply recognizes that it’s a sin you can repent from. A second marriage is permitted with a penitential rite replacing the normal marriage rite and a third can be permitted under extreme circumstances. Never a fourth. Also sometimes the guilty party in a divorce can be denied permission to remarry and be excommunicated for a period of time. That is especially the case if one spouse left the other for another person.Up to three marriages, if I understand correctly, but never a fourth. I can well imagine the consternation if the Catholic Church changed its position from “no divorce” to “okay, up to two divorces, but after the third wife, that’s it–no more!”
J
JimG
Guest
Does it view the first marriage(s) as terminated by church action? Does it view the marriage bond as inherently or at least potentially dissoluble?Well if we are going to be accurate the Orthodox Church doesn’t really “allow” divorce anymore than the Catholic Church allows murder if you take my meaning. The Church simply recognizes that it’s a sin you can repent from. A second marriage is permitted with a penitential rite replacing the normal marriage rite and a third can be permitted under extreme circumstances. Never a fourth. Also sometimes the guilty party in a divorce can be denied permission to remarry and be excommunicated for a period of time. That is especially the case if one spouse left the other for another person.
N
NewEnglandPriest
Guest
The link doesn’t work for me. However, the example that Cardinal Coccopalmiero gives in the Allen article could be fixed under the current annulment process, so I’m not so sure he’s only referring to a simplified process…Hello,
It seems to me that Card. Coccopalmiero was not talking about divorced/remarried/Communion in “grave and urgent” situations but using a different process to declare the first “marriage” invalid in “grave and urgent” circumstances. This link gives that context.
americamagazine.org/content/d…ulment-process
Dan
N
NewEnglandPriest
Guest
LOL, agreed.I think before this synod is over, we will not only see hairs split, but half hairs sub-divided a dozen ways.
N
NewEnglandPriest
Guest
Yes. The Orthodox view the command of Christ “what God has joined together no man must separate” as the same as any other commandment. Commandments are given against things that are within our power to do but are immoral to do. A man can dissolve the marriage bond the same as a man can kill.Does it view the first marriage(s) as terminated by church action? Does it view the marriage bond as inherently or at least potentially dissoluble?
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
Why is that?Well, you can’t apply for an annulment in the USA until there is a finalized civil divorce.
J
JimG
Guest
Ah, I see. They view the bond as being breakable but it is a sin to break it. The Catholic Church seems to view the bond more as something that cannot be broken, rather like the permanent seal of baptism or confirmation or ordination, but not quite…Yes. The Orthodox view the command of Christ “what God has joined together no man must separate” as the same as any other commandment. Commandments are given against things that are within our power to do but are immoral to do. A man can dissolve the marriage bond the same as a man can kill.
S
Seraphim73
Guest
No it views that it is dissolved by the couple and that the bishops through the power to bind and loose have the authority from God to forgive the sin and reconcile them to the Church. There are differences between the Churches at to exactly how that is done. Some Churches have spiritual courts that hear cases in a manner somewhat similar to a Catholic annulment. In some Churches the bishops handle it directly and in others the bishop pretty much follows the recommendation of the local priest.Does it view the first marriage(s) as terminated by church action? Does it view the marriage bond as inherently or at least potentially dissoluble?
I will say for all of the criticism of the papacy in many ways an Orthodox bishop has more power in his diocese than the pope does.
P
ProVobis
Guest
For one thing, there can be no legal repercussions. Property, money, custody of kids, etc. all have to be settled before the annulment process can begin. There were other reasons given me, but this is the one I remembered most.Why is that?
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
It is interesting that the Church would tie an analysis of a sacrament (or possible sacrament) to anything a government says or does.For one thing, there can be no legal repercussions. Property, money, custody of kids, etc. all have to be settled before the annulment process can begin. There were other reasons given me, but this is the one I remembered most.
Was this also the case before no fault divorce?
Is this a US thing? Where is it written?
P
ProVobis
Guest
This won’t answer your questions but remember the state too has an annulment process, but as it can be only applied if a marriage hasn’t been consummated among other things, it is relatively easy. The two annulment processes (state and Church) shouldn’t be confused.It is interesting that the Church would tie an analysis of a sacrament (or possible sacrament) to anything a government says or does.
Was this also the case before no fault divorce?
Is this a US thing? Where is it written?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.