www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West "Divorced" orthodox married again converting?

Stephanos,
How is this possible? If apostolic succession does not exist outside of the catholic church, then where is the grace necessary to effect or confer the sacrament? The Catholic church recognizes the "union" but distinguishes this from the "sacrament".

Sbdn Jon

Subdeacon Jon:

In Catholic theology, the couple confers the sacrament on each other in the presence of the priest or deacon--or someone else with faculties obtained from Rome. So, in Catholic theology, Protestants have retained two sacraments--Baptism and Marriage--both of which can be conferred by laymen.

So, like the priestless Old Believers, they have retained two channels of grace that do not strictly need a priest to mediate.

BOB

I did not claim it was a sacrament but a valid marriage. Marriage is not just a Christian institution. Even pagans have marriage. I was speaking of the marriage being valid.
Stephanos I
PS Also note the point by Bob non catholic marriages are sacraments whether they recognize them as sacraments or not.

Thank you Stephanos and Bob. Point well taken. I can appreciate the "validity" of the union. I believe we Orthodox share that understanding. As for "sacramental", in Catholic theology doesn't the Church still need to "witness" the valid marriage to make it sacramental? That's why folks married elsewhere still have their marriage "blessed"?

sbdn Jon

That make absolutely not sense: one of the reasons given for annullments is not recognizing in dissolubility. If the couple don't believe it is indissoluble (and Muslims, Jews, etc. along with many "Christians" don't) it is ipso facto not a sacramental marriage.

Well, after union, it will no longer be a question of conversion but simply moving from one ritual Church to another.

Here are Pope Benedict's words and how he views an Orthodox second marriage after divorce...

"We know the problem, not only of the Protestant Communities but also of the Orthodox Churches, which are often presented as a model for the possibility of remarriage.

"But only the first marriage is sacramental: the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental, they are reduced and redimensioned marriages and in a penitential situation; in a certain sense, the couple can go to Communion but in the awareness that this is a concession "by economy", as they say, through mercy which, nevertheless, does not remove the fact that their marriage is not a Sacrament.

"The other point is that in the Eastern Churches for these marriages they have conceded the possibility of divorce too lightly, and that the principle of indissolubility, the true sacramental character of the marriage, is therefore seriously injured."

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/b...n-xvi_spe_20050725_diocesi-aosta_en.html

By the way, there is a very good book on the subject of divorce and remarriage in the NT by David Instone-Brewer, called Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible .

http://www.amazon.com/Divorce-Remar...mp;s=books&qid=1236354228&sr=1-7

Personally, I think his arguments are persuasive. I just note this book here for reference. I suppose if we were to discuss it, we'd need to move over the book section.

Joe

John,
The law of having marriages witnessed to in the Church applies only to Catholic, they are bound by the laws of the Church.
So their marriages if they take place outside the Church are invalid and have to be regularized in the Church.
Stephanos I
PS The law of course does not apply to Non Catholics, Orthodox, or Non Christians (Muslims, Jews and Pagans.)

Christ is in our midst!! He is and always will be!!

I think that the answer lies in Vatican II's definition of how one is related to the Church. If Rome can give faculties to a layman to stand as the witness to a marriage in certain circumstances, and the person is a layman without orders, why can a baptized Christian not witness a marriage in an ecclesial community that does not possess Apostolic Orders?

The Protestant minister, possessing Baptism, is the extraordinary witness of the Church.

BOB

Good point Bob. Well said.

sbdn Jon

Stephanus, if you are talking to me, lets turn the argument on its head. What if we change the facts a bit; lets assume a RCC couple divorces, one gets an annulment, and remarries in the RCC. What happens if the the newly married couple converts to Orthodoxy? Depending on which jurisdiction they join, they will probably be required to be remarried in the EOC. The Spiritual Court of a particular EOC diocese might even review the RCC union before blessing the marriage. Alternatively, some courts will say the illicit nature of the RCC marriage (from their perspective) is eliminated the moment the couple is chrismated. It becomes, a sacrament and legal because of the infusion of the Holy Spirit at the time of chrismation.



I also want to state the obvious. As stated above, in RCC theology, the couple marries each other and the priest is the witness. IN the EOC, the marriage is performed by the priest and he is not considered a witness. I have no idea how the eastern rites of the RCC deal with the issue (Russian and Greek rites in particular). Since their services share the same heritage as ours, I suspect they take the same position as the EOC. Please enlighten me and clarify the issue.

That I will leave to the Orthodox Church to decide,that is not my concern. If they have the anullment then as far as the Latin Code of Canon Law is concerned they are free to enter into marriage. Not a second marriage, but a marriage for the first time since there was not one before. No matter where it takes place, either Christian or Non Christian where none of the parties is Catholic it is indissoluble and cannont be annunled by any earthly power, spritiual or civil.
Stephanos I

Where Rome grants annulments Constantinople grants ecclesiastical divorces. Stephanus, I guess the issue is not up for honest discussion at least in your eyes.

I understand that the Cathoic Church views ALL marriages between two baptized Christians as sacramental. Methodist to Methodist, Presbyterian to Baptist.... etc.

But I have a question.... is this a post-Vatican II emphasis or has it always been the teaching?