Skip to comments.Speaking of divorce, pope refers to practice of Orthodox churches
Posted on 08/08/2013 3:56:12 PM PDT by NYer
By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) — When Pope Francis spoke to journalists about the need for a stronger Catholic pastoral approach to marriage and to divorced people, he made a parenthetical reference to how the Orthodox churches handle the breakup of marriages differently.
“The Orthodox have a different practice,” he told reporters July 28 during his flight back to Rome from Rio de Janeiro. The Orthodox “follow the theology of ‘oikonomia’ (economy or stewardship), as they call it, and give a second possibility; they permit” a second marriage.
While the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Thyateira and Great Britain both use the English term “ecclesiastical divorce” when referring to the use of “oikonomia” to permit a second marriage, Orthodox scholars and the websites of both archdiocese make clear that the Orthodox practice differs from both a Catholic annulment and a civil divorce.
Unlike an annulment, which declares that a union was invalid from the beginning, the Orthodox decree does not question the initial validity of a sacramental marriage and unlike a civil divorce it does not dissolve a marriage. Rather, the Orthodox describe it as a recognition that a marriage has ended because of the failure or sin of one or both spouses.
As quoted on the British church’s website, Metropolitan Kallistos of Diokleia, an Orthodox scholar and retired professor at Britain’s Oxford University, wrote in his book, “The Orthodox Church,” that the Orthodox permit divorce and remarriage under certain circumstances because Jesus himself, in upholding the indissolubility of marriage in Matthew 19:9, makes room for an exception. In the translation he quoted, Jesus says: “If a man divorces his wife, for any cause other than unchastity, and marries another, he commits adultery.”
The revised New American Bible, used at Mass by U.S. Catholics, translates the sentence as: “Whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” However, most translations use “unfaithfulness,” “fornication” or something similar to “unchastity” for the exception.
Still, Metropolitan Kallistos wrote, “Orthodoxy regards the marriage bond as, in principle, lifelong and indissoluble, and it condemns the breakdown of marriage as a sin and an evil. But while condemning the sin, the church still desires to help the sinners and to allow them a second chance. When, therefore, a marriage has entirely ceased to be a reality, the Orthodox Church does not insist on the preservation of a legal fiction.”
“Divorce is seen as an exceptional but necessary concession to human sin,” he wrote. “It is an act of ‘oikonomia’ (‘economy’ or dispensation) and of ‘philanthropia’ (loving kindness). Yet although assisting men and women to rise again after a fall, the Orthodox Church knows that a second alliance can never be the same as the first; and so in the service for a second marriage several of the joyful ceremonies are omitted, and replaced by penitential prayers.”
Yes, the Roman Church has the better position. I have always been amazed at the FR Orthodox posters who talk about second and third marriages being penances. Marriage as a penance? What?
Not penance. Rather, the service is penitential unlike the service for a first marriage.
Okay, so what should be joyful is penitential? That still makes no sense.
I sense Pope Francis wants to see the Christian east ALL come back to Rome. When he was installed as Pope, he did invite leaders from the Orthodox Christian communities.
I have a friend from my parish who is going tomorrow to next door RI from CT, two hours for a funeral of a friend of hers going back to jr. high, who was Orthodox, that is Romanian Orthodox. Sadly she killed herself I was told, talk about disfunction.
....Plus the beautiful icons holy art!
“Best of luck; by the time we know The Truth we cant come back and change what weve done.”
Power of numbers, power of numbers sadly does not go in your favor because the boomers has the hugh numbers in regards to its size.
Yes, it’s the unfortunate truth. I hope we have Francis for a long time. The longer the better.
Then go with someone younger like Pope John Paul when he was elected. That would be perfect.
I consider the Osteens and Schullers to be far closer related to the catholics than any prostestants. Their doctrines share the catholic’s adversion to scriptural truth, and they build massive buildings that disgrace the Lord, just like the catholics.
How about priests molesting boys? Is that allowed?
“Are you correcting the Pope?”
Ho! Apparently I am now subject to an inquisition by the blessed ebb tide. I guess it’s all slipping away from you now, eh?
“Osteens and Schullers to be far closer related to the catholics than any prostestants.”
An odd statement from a protestant disavowing his fellow brothers in the faith.
These guys hate the scriptures.
You mean the folks that actually use all the books? Why would Catholics hate what they put together?
Catholics didn’t put any important scripture together. The gospels were in the northern limits of the british isles 250 years before Constantine created the Roman catholic church.
They were brought there by followers of “the way,” who were true worshipers of Yeshua, following Torah, keeping his sabbath, and feasts, just as the disciples did.
Scriptural truth? Not all what Christ did is written in Scripture and Scripture itself affirms this. There is the Catholic Church and the rest is “everyone unto himself” as being a Church - these are heretics, renegades, and your average “low-information” Christian.
I don't know. Why don't you ask Steelfish? He's the one who refers to Bible thumpers.
What is it with Catholics and radical leftist slurs like Bible thumper and snake-handler?
>> “Not all what Christ did is written in Scripture and Scripture itself affirms this” <<
Its not about what he did, but what he said, and everything he said is definitely in scripture.