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.”
With reference to the issue of giving communion to persons in a second union (because those who are divorced can receive communion, there is no problem, but when they are in a second union, they can’t…), I believe that we need to look at this within the larger context of the entire pastoral care of marriage.
It sure sounds like he is at least considering a change here, no?
Care to share the study and research that produced this conclusion?
I hope not. Has personal significance to me (even though I’m not married yet). I would be sad to see the change.
Most “codexes” are not bound at all.
Many do not even have ‘hard’ documents.
Your county’s official records system is termed a “codex,” and it consists of a number of “codexes” that are usually full of digital documents these days.
Codex mostly indicates an indexing system that permits easy access to specific pages or sets of pages.
>> “How so?” <<
.
Those that love him keep his commandments.
I was never a convert to Orthodoxy nor a member of an Orthodox parish but went to both the Orthodox and Catholic LIturgies every week for 10 years. (Due to the happy availability of the Catholic Saturday Vigil Mass!) Anyhow, the two divorces/remarriages I observed in the Orthodox Church were both illustrations of the saying,
"If you can't be a good example,
you'll just have to be a horrible warning."
Here's the story... (Nope, delete) I just erased a bunch of anecdote. Suffice it to say, I saw families ripped up and torn to pieces because of wives who wheedled their way into Orthodox-Church-approved divorces, described to me as "merciful" applications of "oeconomia."
In once case in particular, the wife finally fell back into reality, regretting what she'd done and wishing sorely that she had kept her old disappointing husband (who was actually a very decent guy) and her marriage intact.
The suffering she inflicted on her family through that "merciful" divorce was immeasurable.
I think she would not have done it, if her pastor had given her a flat "No."
“What is it with Catholics and radical leftist slurs like Bible thumper and snake-handler?”
I have a better question. Do you believe that Catholics are saved?
Since I don't believe in chrstian "salvation" at all, the question is a non-sequitur.
Be advised that I am going to click on the "abuse" button from now on every time I see the words "Bible-thumper" or "snake-handler." Such slurs belong to leftists, not anyone calling him/herself "conservative."
I’ve already provided a citation demonstrating that your definition of a Codex is incorrect. Take it up with Daniel Webster.
If ‘keeping his commandments’ were the requirement for salvation, we are all condemned. We are under Law, not Grace.
“christian “salvation” at all”
Why am I unsurprised that you reject Christian salvation?
“Such slurs belong to leftists, not anyone calling him/herself ‘conservative.’ “
The only one who has used these terms in this thread is yourself.
Interesting. Thank you for sharing Mrs. DonO. It is good to get the woman’s perspective on this - I have not often heard a woman preferring justice to mercy. Most would rather ‘keep their own options open’ than say what you have said here.
Did the ex ever get into why she found her old husband disappointing, or is that better left to a private message?
Yeah! Gather in His name and His name is His “teaching” and His “Church” not the not like the New Age Bible believers or for that matter any three who hold hands, dance around the sand at Easter and assemble with their local “Foursquare Church” pastor for Sunrise Services. All fine for low-information Christians as part of the leftover from the curse of the Reformation that has spawned some 35,000 Christian sects.
It’s ONE truth; ONE Church; ONE Peter; ONE flock; ONE Sacrifice; and Christ as ONE Shepherd.
The rest is all rubbish.
The Great Commission
(Mark 16:14-18)
“And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing them they adored: but some doubted. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”
Divorce may seem to resolve one problem but, like a stone dropped into a pond, the ripple effect impacts everyone. Couples need to consider their vows and take them seriously. When they stand in the presence of God and vow to take each other: "For better or worse, in sickness and health, for richer or poorer, until death they do part", is most serious. Just as the Ten Commandments are not suggestions or recommendations, those vows spoken before God, are equally as serious. It's always easy to find an "out clause" when problems surface; the greater challenge is to make the marriage work, from the beginning.
You appear to take issue with Yeshua’s words.
No, Christ is telling us what it means. “Go Teach” He appoints His teachers through His Church to teach ONE Truth.
Yeshua said that the place where he is is “wherever two or three of you are gathered in my name.”
He didn’t say “I will be in whatever huge demonic building you wish to teach that my word is not my word.”
“Demonic building”? That would be news to Michelangelo.
Your co-religionist Steelfish used the term "Bible-thumper" on this thread, as do your other co-religionists quite frequently.
"Bible-thumper" and "snake-handler" are leftist/atheist slurs and have no place on a conservative forum. I will report every instance of their use I see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.