www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Annulments in the Eastern Rite

Dear Alex,

I was always under the impression that "crowning" at a second marriage for any reason, was an abuse. Fr. Joseph Raya said in his work, "Crowning: The Christian Marriage" said that no crowning occurs in remarriages after the death of a spouse. And since the remarriage of widows/widowers is a concession due to human weakness, this would seem fitting. Canon 2 of St. Basil imposed heavy penances on widows/widowers who remarried, and when such marriages occur, a different service is used than the first.

As for Matthew 22:30, I don't see how this removes the possibility of there being a special union between two souls (those united in sacramental marriage) in the afterlife. Of course, nonbody is "given or taken" in marriage, because the marriage is already done, and there is no need for new marriages due to pro-creation. The Orthodox Church just teaches that the union predures unto eternity. Moreover, Fr. John Meyendorff, in his book, "Marriage: An Orthodox Perspective" says that this verse is condemning a "denial of a na�ve and materialistic understanding of the Resurrection, and it does not give any positive meaning to marriage. . ." (Marriage, pp. 13-14).

Pax tecum,

Adam

P.S. I am aware of the practice in some Orthodox Churches of allowing the crowning if one of the partners in the re-marriage is being married for the first time. I would interpret this as having more a ceremonial value than granting the second marriage (of either partner) a sacramental nature. Holy Orthodoxy is clear that one sacramental marriage lasts forever, anymore would be true bigamy.

Pax tecum,

Adam

Annulments becoming "sneaky loopholes"
in many Roman Catholic dioceses
in the US is simply another
example of the post-conciliar abuses in
the Western Church. The "official rules"
governing annulments are actually quite
strict. It's just that they're not followed
any more, which Rome and the late JPII often
complained about............................

antonius

Sorry to drag up an age old thread...
Father Anthony notes that the Orthodox and Catholic hierarchies have agreed to recognize each other's norms regarding marriage and divorce.
That being the case, here's a variation on the scenario presented by Elizabeth Maria:

A married Protestant man becomes Catholic, is then divorced, and eventually receives an annulment; later he marries in the Byzantine Catholic church, and moving progressively eastward, wonders whether his first marriage is considered binding within Orthodoxy, thus rendering him unqualified for priesthood (either there or in the BCC).

Any takers?

There are ordained men in Catholic Holy Orders who have been divorced in their past.

I know of a Byzantine Rite Archpriest who died in the past year who had been married and divorced before ordination.

There are a lot of popular misconceptions of what Annulment is all about. I would recommend a book from Paulist Press (I think under USA$15).

Annulment: the Wedding That Was. How the Catholic Church can declare a marriage null.

By Michael Smith Foster. I am still reading it and have learnt a few things already. only 205 pages.

When a Protestant who is divorced and remarried seeks reception into the Byzantine Catholic Church, is that person required to receive an annulment from the first marriage and a convalidation of the second marriage prior to Chrismation? This is a common problem in the Latin rite, and, unfortunately, a stumbling block to sacramental reception into the Church.

Of course they could be living with someone who is not their wife/husband after all.

"There are ordained men in Catholic Holy Orders who have been divorced in their past.

I know of a Byzantine Rite Archpriest who died in the past year who had been married and divorced before ordination."

It is my understanding that the Patriarch of Moscow is divorced and that his wife remarried.

"However, with this logic we could also say that the priests who are granted the dispensation to marry after ordination are in mortal sin due to breaking canon 9 of Session 24 of the Council of Trent, which prohibits priests to marry after ordination."

Exactly! God does prohibits marriage after Ordination. It is even written in the scriptures.

I have never heard that said of the Moscow Patriarch.

In this senario. So what! what she does after does not affect his life. If she was religious and the supposed marriage was annuled she is free to marry. If she was not religious and married anyway it does not affect what her husband went on to do in life.

I have also never heard of anyone having permission once in Holy Orders. It is just not on. So I have no idea what you are trying to say. It is certain that neither Catholic or Orthodox could contract a valid marriage after being ordained.

"I have also never heard of anyone having permission once in Holy Orders. It is just not on. So I have no idea what you are trying to say. It is certain that neither Catholic or Orthodox could contract a valid marriage after being ordained."

I agree "that neither Catholic or Orthodox could contract a valid marriage after being ordained." However, Many, Many, Many, Many Post Vatican II Latin Priests have been "laicized." I don't understand the laicization process. However, I understand that it is common for these laicized Priests to receive a dispensation to get "married." The rest probably leave the Church altogether.

Here is an excerpt from http://www.newadvent.org/library/almanac_thisrock94.htm (about half way down the long page)

"I've heard that when a man leaves the priesthood, he undergoes a process called "laicization," which takes away his priestly powers, making him a regular layman. Is this correct?

It is only partly correct. Laicization is a process which takes from a priest or other cleric the licit use of his powers, rights, and authority. Laicization occurs automatically when a priest, deacon, or monk marries or joins the military without permission. Major clerics (priests and deacons) are directly laicized through their superiors by the penalty of degradation. The Holy See also has the privilege of laicizing major clerics.

Laicized clerics are forbidden to wear clerical dress or to perform ceremonies or to administer the sacraments ordinary to their former offices. Priests who are laicized are required to continue practicing celibacy, although dispensations from this discipline are frequently given. Otherwise, laicization renders a cleric for ecclesiastical purposes the equivalent of a layman.

The supernatural mark of holy orders and the powers connected with the sacrament (especially for the priest) remain even after laicization, although they cannot be used licitly. A laicized priest has the power to confect the Eucharist. Although to the world he may live as a laymn, in a sense "once a priest, always a priest."'

Apologies for the length of this.

http://jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2006/05/what_expriests_.html

May 09, 2006
What Ex-Priests Can & Can't Do

For a while I've been meaning to do a post on what former priests who have been laicized are and are not allowed to do, since questions come up about this periodically.

The place where the rules are spelled out, somewhat surprisingly, is not in the Code of Canon Law or any other universally-binding piece of law but in a document that is issued to each priest as he is laicized.

That document is known as a rescript of laicization, and one is issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for each priest who is laicized. What it says on that rescript is what that priest is allowed to do or not do.

This does not mean that they cut different deals with different priests. Instead, it seems that they base the rescripts on the same template (kind of like a form letter) and basically lay down the same rules for each priest who is laicized.

In the below-the-fold part of this post, I've reproduced what I'm given to understand is the standard rescript of laicization that was implemented in 1980 and that, with minor modifications, has been in use ever since.

(The minor modifications would concern things like the name of the current pontiff, the fact that the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is now called just the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and updating the numbers of a couple of canons that allow laicized priests to hear deathbed confessions, since the numbers are different in the 1983 Code than they were in the 1917 Code).

The main do's and don'ts that pertain to how the priest is to conduct himself on an ongoing basis are found in sections 4 and 5 of the rescript and can be summarized as follows:

1) He can't celebrate any of the sacraments except for hearing deathbed confessions. It is especially noted that he can't give homilies.

2) He can't serve as an extraordinary minister of holy Communion.

3) He can't serve any "directive office in the pastoral field" (e.g., serving as a parish administrator).

4) He can't do anything at all in a seminary.

5) He can't serve as a director or teacher in a Catholic university.

6) He can't teach theology or any closely related discipline (e.g., religious studies, history of theology) in a non-Catholic university.

7) He can't serve a director (e.g., school principal) in a parochial school.

8) He can't serve as a teacher in a parochial school unless he gets the bishop's permission.

9) He shouldn't live in or frequent places where his status as an ex-priest is generally known, unless he gets the bishop's permission.

By extension (though there are some doubtful cases), anything a laicized priest is not forbidden to do in his rescript is something he is permitted to do.

In doubtful cases the text of the rescript that was given to an individual priest should be consulted, and the interpretation of the local bishop followed regarding whether a particular action or office violates the instructions the rescript contains.

Rescript of Laicization

Prot. N. ___________________

Father __________________, a priest of the (Arch) Diocese of _____________________, has petitioned a dispensation from priestly celibacy.

His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, after having received a report on the case from the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on (date, month, year), has granted the request but with the following provisions:

1. The rescript has its effect from the moment of notification made to the petitioner by the competent ecclesiastical authority, and inseparably includes a dispensation from priestly celibacy and, at the same time, loss of the clerical state. The petitioner never has the right to separate those two elements, that is, to accept the first and refuse the second. If the petitioner is a religious, the rescript also contains a dispensation from the vows. Further, the said rescript carries with it, insofar as it is necessary, absolution from censures, not excepting the excommunication which may have been incurred because of a marriage attempted by the parties; it also includes legitimation of offspring.

2. Let notice of the grant of dispensation be recorded in the baptismal register of the petitioner�s parish.

3. With regard to the celebration of a canonical marriage, the norms set down in the Code of Canon Law must be applied. The Ordinary, however, should take care that the matter be discreetly handled without pomp or external display.

4. The ecclesiastical authority to whom it belongs to communicate the rescript to the petitioner should earnestly exhort him to take part in the life of the People of God in a manner consonant with his new mode of living, to give edification, and thus to show himself a most loving son of the Church. However, at the same time, he should be informed of the following points:

a) the dispensed priest automatically loses the rights proper to the clerical state as well as ecclesiastical dignities and offices; he is no longer bound by the other obligations connected with the clerical state;

b) he remains excluded from the exercise of the sacred ministry, with the exception of those functions mentioned in canons 882 and 892, �2, and, as a result, he may not give a homily. Moreover, he may not function as extraordinary minister in the distribution of Holy Communion nor may he discharge any directive office in the pastoral field;

c) similarly, he may not discharge any function in seminaries or equivalent institutions. In other institutions of higher studies which are in any way whatever dependent upon ecclesiastical authority, he may not exercise the functions of director, or office of teaching;

d) however, in those institutions of higher studies which are not dependent upon ecclesiastical authority, he may not teach any discipline which is properly theological or closely connected with the same;

e) on the other hand, in institutions of lower studies, which are dependent upon ecclesiastical authority, he may not exercise the function of director or the office of teaching unless the Ordinary, in keeping with his prudent judgment and provided that there is no scandal, shall have decided to decree otherwise as far as the office of teaching is concerned.

5. As a rule, the priest who has been dispensed from priestly celibacy, and, all the more so, a priest who has married, ought to stay away from places where his previous status is known. Nevertheless, the Ordinary of the place where the petitioner is staying, after he has listened, insofar as it may be necessary, to the Ordinary of incardination or the major religious superior, will be able to dispense from that clause attached to the rescript, if it is foreseen that the presence of the petitioner will not beget scandal.

6. Lastly, some work of piety or charity should be imposed on him. At an opportune time, however, a brief report should be made to the sacred Congregation on his performance, and, finally, if there should be any wonderment on the part of the faithful, let a prudent explanation be provided.

All things to the contrary notwithstanding.

From the offices of the S. C. for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the (date, month, year).

[Published in Canon Law Digest, vol. 9, pp. 99-101.]

I agree. In Heaven, marriage as we know it does not exist because (as Jesus said) we will be like angels. However, the love from marriage (and from other relationships) will remain and grow everlasting. We will be "beyond" marriage because Heaven is so greatly different and beyond this earthly life. But the love remains and grows.

-- John