S
Seraphim73
Guest
Why would you even ask that question?
- Status
O
One_point
Guest
Not true. St Paul understood Christs words to apply to institute a new order under the New covenant and not to apply to people outside of it. that must be the only interpretation because your interpretation that he was contradicting Christ makes scriptures false and is insulting to the holy apostle.Then St Paul advocated people entering into grave sin.
What you do is repent of the sin just like any other and then you are readmitted to Communion. Simple.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Can you just answer: are second marriages, (after the death of the first spouse) sinful for the Orthodox laity as well as for priests?Why would you even ask that question?
J
JimG
Guest
I don’t see that there is even the slightest possibility that the Church will accept the Eastern Orthodox view on marriage. The EO views the marriage vows as inherently dissoluble, the Catholic Church views them as inherently binding for life.
My understanding is that the EO view adultery, for example, as having already dissolved the marriage bond, so it no longer exists. Consequently the person may remarry, but after a period of penance. Even a second or third marriage will be treated similarly, but not a fourth. I can’t imagine that this view will be accepted by the synod fathers. But we live in strange times.
The Catholic view has always been that if a valid marriage bond exists in a sacramental and consummated marriage, it can not be dissolved by man. Sins can always be forgiven but man does not have the power to break apart what God has joined.
My understanding is that the EO view adultery, for example, as having already dissolved the marriage bond, so it no longer exists. Consequently the person may remarry, but after a period of penance. Even a second or third marriage will be treated similarly, but not a fourth. I can’t imagine that this view will be accepted by the synod fathers. But we live in strange times.
The Catholic view has always been that if a valid marriage bond exists in a sacramental and consummated marriage, it can not be dissolved by man. Sins can always be forgiven but man does not have the power to break apart what God has joined.
S
Seraphim73
Guest
But that’s St Paul’s understanding. Christ Himself made no such distinction. That’s the point I’m trying to make. St Paul made and exception Christ did not so the Church can make an exception too.
S
Seraphim73
Guest
I’m not going to dignify such a ridiculous question.
P
PRmerger
Guest
I take it the answer is yes? Orthodox laity can marry again.
So you can see the degree of my cognitive dissonance.
And your distancing yourself from the direction this dialogue is taking limns quite clearly that you have this cognitive dissonance, too.
You have no reason to offer for the hope that is in you, as St. Peter proclaims.
You seem to understand that great dissonance in Orthodoxy that sees second marriages as “sinful”
for priests but not for laity…with NO POSSIBLE EXPLANATION for such.Seed planted.
S
Seraphim73
Guest
There is not a tiny bit of dissonance. Clerics are held to a higher standard. That has always been the case. It is laid out in Holy Scripture. That you seem to not understand that is what’s confusing. Clerics are often defrocked for serious sins at least in Orthodoxy. Is that not the case in the Catholic Church?I take it the answer is yes? Orthodox laity can marry again.
So you can see the degree of my cognitive dissonance.
And your distancing yourself from the direction this dialogue is taking limns quite clearly that you have this cognitive dissonance, too.
You have no reason to offer for the hope that is in you, as St. Peter proclaims.
You seem to understand that great dissonance in Orthodoxy that sees second marriages as “sinful”
Seed planted.
E
Ender
Guest
These seem like the relevant points:“If the prior marriage of two divorced and remarried members of the faithful was valid, under no circumstances can their new union be considered lawful and therefore reception of the sacraments is intrinsically impossible. The conscience of the individual is bound to this norm without exception.” A norm, the indissolubility of marriage, that is of “divine law” and “over which the Church has no discretionary authority.”
For those concerned that the doctrines will be changed that prohibit the reception of communion for those divorced from a valid marriage and remarried: it won’t happen. It is “intrinsically impossible.”* “However, the Church has the authority to clarify those conditions which must be fulfilled for a marriage to be considered indissoluble according to the sense of Jesus’ teaching.”
*This is the only area where change - clarification - can occur: in the determination of the conditions necessary for a marriage to be considered valid. The church has always distinguished between valid and invalid marriages, so no doctrinal changes are involved in re-evaluating the conditions to be applied in making that determination.
Ender
S
Seraphim73
Guest
Following your reasoning since some priests were defrocked for molesting children then molestation isn’t sinful for the laity because the laity can confess and be reconciled. Do you see how ridiculous your questioning and line of reasoning is? How would you respond if I asked you that question?I take it the answer is yes? Orthodox laity can marry again.
So you can see the degree of my cognitive dissonance.
And your distancing yourself from the direction this dialogue is taking limns quite clearly that you have this cognitive dissonance, too.
You have no reason to offer for the hope that is in you, as St. Peter proclaims.
You seem to understand that great dissonance in Orthodoxy that sees second marriages as “sinful”
Seed planted.
E
Ender
Guest
What sin are they repenting of? Part of repentance includes the intent not to repeat the sin; without that intent there is no contrition, and without contrition absolution cannot be given. And without absolution from grave sin one may not licitly receive communion. Again, the sin is not the marriage ceremony, it is sexual union, so unless the couple intends to refrain the sin cannot be absolved. One can hardly be said to repent of a sin one intends to repeat.
Ender
L
LongingSoul
Guest
Cardinal Kasper reiterates that as well…
"the Church “cannot propose a solution that is different from or contrary to the words of Jesus. The indissolubility of sacramental marriage and the impossibility of a new marriage during the lifetime of the other partner is part of the tradition of the Church’s binding faith that cannot be abandoned or undone by appealing to a superficial understanding of cheapened mercy.”
But the critics here are saying that even discussing what *can *be reviewed is in fact changing the doctrine. That is why they hate Cardinal Kasper with a passion and think the synod is a sham.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Let’s just try to dissect the Orthodox position a bit to see if it stands up to scrutiny.
Orthodoxy professes: Second marriages are sinful, but laity are permitted this sin because they don’t have to be as pure as priests.
Is this a correct explication of the Orthodox position?
S
Seraphim73
Guest
Good grief.
Catholics professes: Murder is sinful, but laity are permitted this sin because they don’t have to be as pure a priests.
Is that a correct explication of the Catholic position?
E
Ender
Guest
Whatever is being discussed at the synod, it is clear the public view is that the discussion is about readmitting to communion those who have been divorced and remarried. Just look at the thread title. To the extent that Cardinal Kasper is responsible for that misperception he is justifiably resented.
Ender
P
PRmerger
Guest
Let’s apply your parallel correctly here, Seraphim.
If we follow the Orthodox paradigm where it’s sinful for a priest but not for the laity, we would have to say that the Catholic Church says molesting children is sinful for a priest but not for the laity.
Can you offer some sort of documentation from the Church that says this?
No?
Well, then the parallel doesn’t apply. The Catholic Church, unlike Orthodoxy, apparently, sees things as sinful no matter who does it. It’s sinful to molest children if you’re a priest. It’s sinful to molest children if you’re part of the laity.
The Orthodox position is: it’s sinful for priests to re-marry but not for the laity.
P
PRmerger
Guest
No, it is not.Good grief.
Catholics professes: Murder is sinful, but laity are permitted this sin because they don’t have to be as pure a priests.
Is that a correct explication of the Catholic position?
So you seem to be saying that I have not correctly asserted the Orthodox position.
Could you please then explain what the correct teaching is for Orthodoxy re: second marriages?
I have incorrectly asserted it and would like to be corrected. Thanks.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
When people are silly enough to react to headlines instead of searching out the words spoken and the context they were spoken in, you are handing an awful lot of power to the media and surrendering your God given capacity to reason and discern with facts.
If people read the original article they would see…
"Individual cases of divorced and remarried Catholics, he said, could be examined “by a bishop or a group of bishops” in order to find a “positive solution.”
Obviously no suggestion there of changing the doctrine or even examining a general rule of thumb. Nothing different there to the thoughts of Pope Benedict.
The media has suddenly become the darling of the ultra conservatives.
S
Seraphim73
Guest
A second marriage is always sinful for everyone everywhere. That’s why lay persons who divorce are often excommunicated, especially the guilty party. And just like with murder and many other serious sins a person who has committed them cannot be ordained and if they are ordained they are defrocked.
B
Brendan
Guest
But I AM surprised that you are not advocating that such just be left to the priest’s bishop, who, after all, has intimate knowledge of the priest’s situation
- Status