To give a thorough answer to this question, it is important to know the baptismal status of each party, e.g., Catholic baptism, Orthodox baptism, Protestant baptism, or unbaptized.
Your use of the word “maintained” suggest that you think that the Orthodox have somehow changed their theology of marriage since the Great Schism. However, it is important to realize that the Orthodox theology and practices relating to divorce and remarriage date back to the early Church, well before the Great Schism.
Why? Baptism in any of those Churches is recognized as valid by Rome. Unbaptized status does make a difference, though, you’re right. Offhand, the only baptism I can think of that Rome does not accept is that of the LDS church as their belief in the nature of God is completely contrary to all Catholic and Protestant Scripture.
I actually missed an important distinction - for parties of Catholic baptism, it is important to know whether the person was in the Latin Rite or in an Eastern Rite at the time of the wedding.
You’re right again. It’s also true that “Orthodox” does not usually refer to one of the Rites of the Roman Catholic Church–whether the Latin Rite, which is usually what people in the USA mean when they say Catholic, or one of the Eastern Rites such as Byzanntine, Maronite, Syrian, etc. The Greek Orthodox Church is not in full communion with Rome and as such is not an Eastern Rite, or"Catholic", as Americans use the term. But then, neither are Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, etc. and there are successful mixed marriages with persons of those as well as many other faith traditions.
Hi Tim,
According to the Catholic Church. I believe that the Orthodox would consider both marriages to be valid.
Not under the current canon law. The first husband must obtain an annulment based on the conditions at the time of the first wedding. The wife’s subsequent wedding in the Orthodox church would have not any bearing on the annulment. And there would be no way for the first husband to remarry in the Catholic Church without an annulment (as long as the wife is still alive).
In some circles, I believe it is a point of contention for how canon law should be changed. But it isn’t really relevant to the first husband’s situation until the Vatican decides to make any such changes to the canon law of marriage in light of how the Orthodox church does things.
I don’t think a “disparity of cult” dispensation would be required if both parties were baptized. I think expressed permission from the Bishop would be required, however.
gee … now there’s another twist … how can the husband from the first marriage find out if permission from the Bishop has indeed happened ?? or, even if a “disparity of cult” was granted ?? would this circumvent any need to initiate an annulment ?? This may confuse him.
Thanks. You are correct. “Disparity of cult” is needed between a baptised person and a non-baptised person. A mixed marriage (difference of confession; both baptised) requires the express permission of ecclesial authority for liceity.
If a couple is married in the Catholic Church it is preassumed to be valid until ecclesial authority states otherwise. That’s the purpose of the annulment process.