The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
KARIM LEY, Arizona Byzantine, Irenaeus23, Al Masihi, Seavila777
5565 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 63 guests, and 364 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Russian Greek Catholic Global Congress
OL EuroEast II (2007) Group
Portable Icon Screen
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics34,608
Posts411,058
Members5,565
Most Online2,716
Jun 7th, 2012
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 12 of 12 1 2 10 11 12
Re: Ministers of Matrimony [Re: ajk] #414282
12/27/15 10:41 AM
12/27/15 10:41 AM
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 87
NY, US
R
RomCatholic Offline
Member
RomCatholic  Offline
Member
R

Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 87
NY, US
"You seem incapable of accepting something tha's true as true unless YOU say it. This complicates dialog."

Not true at all. You are simply misinterpreting what the canon in question states.

Re: Ministers of Matrimony [Re: RomCatholic] #414284
12/27/15 11:19 AM
12/27/15 11:19 AM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,924
MD
ajk Offline
Member
ajk  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,924
MD
Originally Posted by RomCatholic
You emphasize the part about the council of Trent, yet neglect the part which states: "are apt to convey the false impression that the priest is the minister of the Sacrament, are not primitive, at any rate in this form, and are only to be found in Rituals of comparatively recent date."

What the priest says is absolutely irrelevant.

""ego conjungo vos in matrimonium""

The rite of marriage no longer uses this phrase. Furthermore, it is not proof of anything.
But it did use the phrase!

This is not much of an answer as it just states emphatically and repeatedly ad nauseam, as ukaz, conclusions you parrot from selective sources. I certainly emphasized my point but I neglected nothing and made a point of stating it explicitly, thus:

Originally Posted by ajk
The first entry does have the comment:

Quote
The words of the priest, "Ego vos in matrimonium conjungo", which, though sanctioned by the Council of Trent, are apt to convey the false impression that the priest is the minister of the Sacrament, are not primitive, at any rate in this form, and are only to be found in Rituals of comparatively recent date.
[emphasis added]


See, you didn't even have to look it up for yourself. As I said,
Originally Posted by ajk
This is the are you going to believe me or your own eyes proof. "Ego vos in matrimonium conjungo." Not even the Byzantine ritual has such an explicit statement.

Re: Ministers of Matrimony [Re: RomCatholic] #414285
12/27/15 11:23 AM
12/27/15 11:23 AM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,924
MD
ajk Offline
Member
ajk  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,924
MD
Originally Posted by RomCatholic
I gave you two conditions which they can be saved.
I must have missed them. Please repeat or direct me to their location.

You mean "The only way for this to happen is through formal conversion, or through an unexpected miracle."

So I'd say presently no formal conversion and no miracle. So are they "saved"? Yes/No/Maybe?

Re: Ministers of Matrimony [Re: Filipe YTOL] #414288
12/27/15 11:57 AM
12/27/15 11:57 AM
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 87
NY, US
R
RomCatholic Offline
Member
RomCatholic  Offline
Member
R

Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 87
NY, US
I am done with this conversation. It's a waste of my time.

Re: Ministers of Matrimony [Re: Filipe YTOL] #414301
12/28/15 07:42 AM
12/28/15 07:42 AM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,924
MD
ajk Offline
Member
ajk  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,924
MD
Originally Posted by RomCatholic
I am done with this conversation. It's a waste of my time.

We, no doubt to the relief of some, perhaps many, have come to an end --- almost. I've learned a lot from the exchanges. I thought I'd summarize from my perspective and objective, and relate what may appear as off topic discussion to the subject of the thread.

1) OUR RESPONSIBILITY I believe Eastern Catholics have a unique perspective and duty to be both spiritually and intellectually Eastern and Catholic. We are living the reality of Church unity. One would think that the Latin West and non-Catholic East would flock to us for an explanation as to how that most desired unity is lived and understood. Now that we've stopped laughing, that of course doesn't happen. Are we truly living the reality of unity; do we have an explanation, a sound theology to explain it, a clear and strong voice even and especially under what can appear as hostile intentions? We must engage divergent positions in our Catholic communion, especially those that are strident in misconceptions and even to some degree repugnant. We should be prepared to explain our tradition and inform our own fellow Catholics of what we hold as proper. East and West, both within and without the Catholic Church, need to engage in more than their separate (or even combined) Kumbaya Moments of theological considerations.

2) ECCLESIOLOGY The question of the Minister of Marriage goes, through Sacramental theology to Ecclesiology, hence extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (without/outside the Church no salvation).
Originally Posted by RomCatholic
Since the topic of discussion isn't EENS, I'm not going to respond.
It does of course but the view he has argued of the spouses as *sole* ministers leads to the conundrum that those who (though he opted out rather than answering) can't be really admitted as "saved" are also dispensing the sacrament of marriage even in some cases of common law marriage. Here is where a healthy dose of Nemo dat quod non habet (No one can give what he does not have) is needed. Theology must explicitly have the Church present in some way where and when the sacraments are celebrated.

3)A THEOLOGY OF MARRIAGE is needed that unites East and West not just within a Catholic-Orthodox dialog (thought that's a reasonable start) but within the larger consideration of all the baptized. The Latin west has already gone there, to an inclusion of all who are baptized into Christ. But the Sacraments are dispensed by the Church and formed and informed by Natural Law, Positive Divine Law, and Church Law and this can provide a structure for a comprehensive approach, in particular to Marriage.

4) FINAL CONSIDERATION The Sacrament of Marriage -- or lack thereof -- touches most if not all of us, directly or through family friends etc.. The Church owes us a clear, unambiguous theological foundation for understanding the mind of the Church, uniting and reconciling East and West, and from which details and specifics are consistently formulated. I believe that theological foundation should be based on a theology of Person and the Church, Ecclesiology as the Body of Christ and His Spouse, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, and the mon-archē of the Bishop.


Page 12 of 12 1 2 10 11 12

The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2018. All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.2
(Release build 20180918)
Page Time: 0.020s Queries: 15 (0.007s) Memory: 1.9702 MB (Peak: 2.1246 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2018-12-14 05:27:10 UTC