www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Divorce and Remarriage In Orthodoxy

In my examination of Orthodoxy and Catholcism I've discovered the hardest doctrine to discuss is not the Papacy. The most difficult one is divorce and remarriage and probably top of the list.

In my opinion and that of the Vatican, the Orthodox have the stronger historical argument when it comes to governance of the first millennium. The Catholic argument is a coherent one, but lacking any historical evidence whatsoever. Despite these real tensions and difficulties I do see union on the papacy being a lot easier to achieve than Divorce and remarriage.

With Divorce and remarriage, the Catholics have a far more coherent argument drawn from Scripture and patristics. The Orthodox really do suffer an awful death when it comes to trying to defend their practice scripturally and patristically.

It is on this issue that I see the most difficulty in ecumenical talks. Because Canon 7 of the Council of Trent and later canon law make it clear that not even the church can dissolve the sacramental bond, I'm not sure how it would work.

I think the only reasonable workaround would be to revisit the indirect language of Canon 7, accept that it left some room for the Greek practice but not much at all, and that the Orthodox would have to sacrifice the practice or reword it to fit the Council of Trent.

I think ultimately in the case of reunion, Catholics would have to revisit Trent, and put an offer on the table that would allow for second unions only if it's agreed the first marital bond has not been broken, the second marriage is not considered a true marriage but a penitential union in which they must live as brother and sister.

Other than both sides making some sort of sacrifice I don't see any union on that ever taking place. I mean, for the Orthodox it's possible for them to hold a Pan Orthodox council and revisit this practice and do away with it or at least change the understanding of the union to reflect the above. I think it's an awful practice that encourages divorce and is probably why the Divorce rates in countries like Greece and Russia are through the roof.

I'd really like your thoughts on this issue.

Divorce and remarriage was the practice of the Church, period. As far as I know even Rome practiced it up until they invented annulment theology (which itself is deeply problematic and introduces it's own difficulties). Orthodoxy will not need to change to adopt Trent, when Trent itself is compromised and has built itself upon forgeries which Rome has long since admitted. Rome is the one that needs to change and restore itself to the Orthodoxy it departed from. This is where Byzantine Catholics are uniquely situated. We need to stop latinizing our parishes, our theology and spirituality. We need to faithfully reclaim and live Holy Orthodoxy "inside" the Catholic communion of Churches and by our dialogue and lived example, bring Rome back to Orthodoxy and thus heal the millennia long schism.

CaliforniaByzantin,

If I can add a point or two, I am not sure how charitable this is to our Western brethren, or to the living authority of the Church.
This division in opinion over divorce seems to go back to the Old Covenant, with the rabbinical schools of Hillel and Shammai. There are certainly (especially unequivocally, in the East) traditions of divorce and remarriage, but equally so, the tradition adopted at Trent can be drawn all the way back to St. Augustine (and contended for in interpreting earlier works). The Blessed Bishop has this to say:
I agree that there is a question as to whether the decision of the Tridentine Council to decisively rule in favour of one tradition over another was a good idea; but it's ultimately still rooted in an authoritative tradition, and I don't think berating this teaching as a product of forgery is helpful for the Church here. Ultimately, assuming we're in the Catholic Church, this is just as much part of the history of the Church's canons as is any other teaching, and so we have to at least accept its legitimate existence.

I also wonder how this can be balanced with the variety of interpretations of divorce & remarriage in the Eastern Churches. Certainly, the principle in some way was understood, and there was no discussion of annulment theology in the words used today; but I believe the Coptic Church has always been incredibly strict on the exception for adultery only, while the Byzantine Churches have greatly expanded what falls under legitimate grounds for divorce, something other claimants to 'Holy Orthodoxy', like Old Believers, are happy to point out as polemic against the mainline EO Churches. In Russia, I believe, divorce is in practice very easily accessible. So there are problems in both lungs of the Church here, and would likely require much more... let's say, ecumenical conciliarity... than one side succumbing to the other's will.
Forgive me for any mischaracterisation or errors, but I hope these comments can benefit the discussion.

turaŭski