www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Divorce in Orthodoxy

I suppose mythe Eastern Catholic Church. It is my understanding that in the Eastern Orthodox Church(EO), divorce is permitted and an individual may be married up to 3 times. In the Catholic Church divorce is not permitted and a marriage must have an annullment to be recognized by the Church. Please correct me if this is in error.

I assume Eastern Catholics may only remarry if they have had their marriage annulled as would those who are Roman Catholic.

I was curious as to what the EO base their tradition of divorce and remarriage on and why it differs from the belief of the Catholic Church. I have not been able to find anything that references this.

Thank you.

The best thing for you to do would be ordering John Meyendorff's Marriage--An Orthodox Perspective. It's only a hundred or so pages, but it gives a very complete answer to your question.

The book is available almost entirely here:
http://books.google.com.br/books?id...mp;resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

And here [holy-trinity.org] there is a concise explanation from the same Fr. Meyendorff:


But there is a position which says "porneia", "unchastity" in the original Greek, means in true ilicit unions. So Our Lord allows the dissolution of ilicit unions which in fact have never existed.

The problem of divorce is a very delicate question as it often touches on a painful human reality.

The tradition of the Church of the first centuries - which continues to have authority for the Orthodox Church - put the emphasis very strongly on two related points:

1. the “uniqueness” of the authentic Christian marriage,
2. the permanence of married conjugal life.

We may recall here the analogy that Paul makes between the unity of Christ and his Church and that of the bride and bridegroom. This analogy that is as it were at the root of the mystery assumes the real and continuing unity of the married couple, which therefore totally excludes a simultaneous polygamy and views one single marriage as the ideal.

Divorce does not heal the diseased marriage but kills it. It is not a positive action or intervention. It is about dissolving the “mini-Church” that has been formed through the marriage relationship. The Holy Scripture attributes divorce to the callousness of man. This is seen as a fall and sin. And yet the Orthodox Church can however permit divorce and remarriage on the grounds of interpretation of what the Lord says in Matt. 19, 9: “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.” According to Bishop Kallistos Ware divorce is an action of “economia” and “expression of compassion” of the Church toward sinful man. “Since Christ, according to the Matthaean account, allowed an exception to His general ruling about the indissolubility of marriage, the Orthodox Church also is willing to allow an exception”.

A question we can ask ourselves is whether Christ considered marriage as being indissoluble? We need to be very clear in this as when Christ teaches that marriage may not be dissolved that does not mean that He is stating that it cannot occur. The completeness of the marriage relationship can be tainted by erroneous behaviour. In other words, it is the offence that breaks the bond. The divorce is ultimately a result of this break. This is also the teaching of the Eastern Church fathers. A quotation from the testimony of Cyril of Alexandria will be sufficient to make our point here: “It is not the letters of divorce that dissolve the marriage in relation God but the errant behaviour”.

The violation of a marriage relationship is divided into two groups:

1. those resulting from adultery (unfaithfulness and immoral behaviour)
2. those proceeding from the absence of one of the partners (this absence must however have certain distinctives).

According to the spirit of Orthodoxy the unity of the married couple cannot be maintained through the virtue of juridical obligation alone; the formal unity must be consistent with an internal symphony. The problem arises when it is no longer possible to salvage anything of this symphony, for “then the bond that was originally considered indissoluble is already dissolved and the law can offer nothing to replace grace and can neither heal nor resurrect, nor say: ‘Stand up and go’”.

The Church recognizes that there are cases in which marriage life has no content or may even lead to loss of the soul. The Holy John Chrysostom says in this regard that: “better to break the covenant than to lose one’s soul”. Nevertheless, the Orthodox Church sees divorce as a tragedy due to human weakness and sin.

REMARRIAGE

Despite the fact that the Church condemns sin, she also desires to be an aid to those who suffer and for whom she may allow a second marriage. This is certainly the case when the marriage has ceased to be a reality. A possible second marriage is therefore only permitted because of “human weakness”. As the apostle Paul says concerning the unmarried and widows: “If they can not control themselves, they should marry” (1 Cor. 7, 9). It is permitted as a pastoral concession in the context of “economia,” to the human weakness and the corrupt world in which we live.

There is in other words a close relationship in every dimension between divorce and the possibility of remarriage. It is important here to explain a fundamental element of the Orthodox Church’s doctrine, namely that the dissolving of a marriage relationship does not ipso facto grant the right to enter into another marriage. As we look back to the time of the primitive Church, the Church of the first centuries, then we will have to agree that the Church did not have any juridical authority with regard to marriage, and did not therefore, make any statement concerning their validity. The Holy Basil the Great, for example, referred not to a rule but to usage, as far as this problem was concerned. Speaking concerning the man who had been cheated by his wife, he declares that the man is “pardonable” (to be excused) should he remarry. It is good to remember that the Orthodox Church has in general always had a sense of reluctance regarding second marriages. It would subsequently be completely wrong to assert that orthodox Christians may marry two or three times!

Orthodox canon law can permit a second and even a third marriage “in economia”, but strictly forbids a fourth. In theory divorce is only recognized in the case of adultery, but in practise is also recognised in light of other reasons. There is a list of causes of divorce acceptable to the Orthodox Church. In practise the bishops sometimes apply “economia” in a liberal way. By the way, divorce and remarriage are only permitted in the context of “economia”, that is, out of pastoral care, out of understanding for weakness. A second or third marriage will always be a deviation from the “ideal and unique marriage”, but often a fresh opportunity to correct a mistake”

Alexandr

Some information on marriage and divorce in the OCA:
http://www.oca.org/OCchapter.asp?SID=2&ID=56 (Sacrament of marriage)
http://www.oca.org/QA.asp?ID=139&SID=3 (Divorce and Remarriage)
http://www.oca.org/QA.asp?ID=140&SID=3 (Divorce and Remarriage)

Grounds for divorce in the Russian Church

adultery and a new marriage of one of the parties
a spouse's falling away from Orthodoxy,
perversion,
impotence which had set in before marriage or was self-inflicted,
contraction of leprosy or syphilis,
prolonged disappearance,
conviction with disfranchisement,
encroachment on the life or health of the spouse,
love affair with a daughter in law,
profiting from marriage,
profiting by the spouse's indecencies,
incurable mental disease,
malevolent abandonment of the spouse,
chronic alcoholism or drug-addiction,
abortion without the husband's consent.

See the 2000 Synodal document
"BASES OF THE SOCIAL CONCEPT
OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH"
http://3saints.com/ustav_mp_russ_english.html


Grounds for divorce in the Greek Orthodox Church in America

one or both parties is guilty of adultery.
one party is proven to be mad, insane or suffers from a social disease which was not disclosed to the spouse prior to the marriage.
one party has conspired against the life of the spouse.
one party is imprisoned for more than seven years.
one party abandons the other for more than three years without approval.
one partner should be absent from home without the other's approval, except in in stances when the latter is assured that such absence is due to psycho-neurotic illness.
one partner forces the other to engage in illicit affairs with others.
one partner does not fulfill the responsibilities of marriage, or when it is medically proven that one party is physically impotent or as the result of a social venereal disease.
one partner is an addict, thereby creating undue economic hardship.

http://www.saintdemetrios.com/OurFaith/Divorce.dsp

Btw, Alexandr, your message was a great and well written explanation. Thumbs up!

All of these are excellent answers, which I will just supplement briefly.

1. The Orthodox Church views marriage as a true sacrament that perdures in kairos, and therefore is indissoluable. The Orthodox Church recognizes just one sacramental marriage in a lifetime, because marriage is not dissolved by the death of a spouse, as in Western theology. The ideal, therefore, is a person who marries just once, and never remarries if the marriage ends, whether through divorce or widowhood.

2. The Orthodox Church recognizes, though, that not every person is given the gift of celibacy, and that for many people, the burden of living out the remainder of their lives alone is unsupportable. Therefore, non-sacramental "remarriage" is permitted by "oikonomia" in cases of widowhood, or for the limited number of reasons given above in cases of divorce. Note that permission to remarry is generally extended only to the innocent party in cases of divorce; the adulterer would not normally be allowed to remarry.

3. The number of remarriages is limited to two. Permission to remarry the first time is almost pro forma, but a second remarriage is more difficult to obtain. Fourth marriages are absolutely forbidden.

This notion that Orthodox second and third marriages are "non-sacramental" has become a canard on the Catholic internet over the last few years. I think it stems from Pope Benedict's address to the clergy of the Aosta diocese soon after he became Pope.

Let me assure people that second and third marriages are FULLY SACRAMENTAL.


With the advances in our understandings of the human psyche this is not maintained these days since it is often difficult to determine which party is guilty. While a formal tip of the hat is made to "only the innocent may remarry" in practice the bishops do not maintain it.

There is a great misunderstanding among Catholics about the Orthodox allowance of divorce and a second *sacramental* marriage. The confusion reaches even to the highest level as we see with these words of Pope Benedict in a colloquium which he conducted with the Aosta clergy in 2005.

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

"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. "

"...the Orthodox too recognize that the other marriages are not sacramental..." His Holiness was mistaken about this; possibly it had never been a major interest of his.. I would feel certain that he now realises this is not the Orthodox recognition and that we see second (and third) marriages as sacramental.

Really, Father. So the eminent Father John Meyendorff is incorrect when he says that the Rite of Second Marriage is not a sacrament?

It was my understanding that Fr. Meyendorff's thoughts on eternal marriage were somewhat of a theolougemon.

Also, it's my understanding of the Orthodox canons on marriage that the reason for penitential second and third marriages is not because of the permanence of the first marriage, but because of the concupiscence of the seeker of the second or third marriage. After all, isn't one enough?

I could dig out some references--I'm getting this from Fr. Patrick Viscuso's Orthodox canon law text book, which quotes canons and commentaries by Matthew Blastares and Theodore Balsamon. I just don't have it with me at the moment.

It would surprise me very much if the Orthodox Church in America is telling its members in a second marriage that they have not been married sacramentally. One wonders why the OCA bishops would withhold the sacramental grace of marriage from people when those entering marriage are obviously in great need of it? The two Churches of which I have first hand knowledge and in which I have officiated at second weddings, the Serbian and the Russian, would not agree with the OCA (assuming this is what the OCA is teaching its people.)

This list is taken from the Website of the Diocese of Eastern America and New York of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. There are many similarities and some differences from the contemporary "BASES OF THE SOCIAL CONCEPT OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH."

Reasons for Dissolution of Marriage

The Holy Council of the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917-18 recognized as being legitimate the following reasons for dissolution of a marriage sanctified by the Church:

- apostasy from Orthodoxy

- adultery and unnatural vices

- incapacity for marital cohabitation

- affliction by leprosy or syphilis

- unknown absence

- jail sentence with deprivation of rights

- infringement upon the life and health of spouse and children

- incest or prostitution of spouse

- entering into a new marriage

- serious, incurable mental illness

- intentional desertion

http://www.eadiocese.org/Court/en.reasonsdissolution.htm

John Erickson has an essay on Orthodox Perspectives on Divorce and Remarriage [books.google.com] in the book Divorce and Remarriage: Religious and Psychological Perspectives by William P. Roberts, available for the most part at Google Books.

His perspective is pretty close to that enunciated by Meyendorff. He perceives marriage as an eschatological action that transcends death. He cites Athenegoras (ca. 2nd century) who said, "He who rids himself of his first wife, even if she be dead, is an adulterer in disguise because he transgresses the hand of God, for in the beginning, God created but one man and one woman".

He notes that while the Church did not prohibit remarriage and that Paul encouraged young widows to remarry, remarriage was not held in high esteem, but was a concession to human weakness. He quotes Epiphanious, who wrote, "Second marriages are not to be condemned, but are held in less honor", and also Gregory Nanzianzen, who clearly establishes the norm: "A first marriage is in full conformity with the law; a second is tolerated by indulgence; the third is noxious. But he who exceeds this number is a swine".

Erickson reiterates what is widely known:


This then leads to a discussion of Emperor Leo IV and the Tome of Union, which legally established three as the maximum number of licit marriages.

Ericksson also deals with the issue of remarriage after divorce, going back again to Basil the Great, who in the canonical epistles stated that because of Matt 19:8-9, as well as various Old Testament texts (Jer 3:1; Prov 11:22), a man not only may but must divorce a woman guilty of porneia. He notes that Canon 8 of the Council of Neocaesaria says much the same thing with regard to clerics. When the Church was made responsible for all matrimonial issues, civil and religious, it attempted to limit the prevalence of divorce by establishing only narrow causes for which marriages could be dissolved.

Ericksson finally turns to the ritual and sacrament of marriage, noting that only gradually did the wedding service take on a religious significance--it was only in the eighth century that ecclesiastical blessing was legally acknowledged as one of the ways in which a marriage was established under law, so that by the 10th century such a blessing became a requirement for legal marriage (Leo VI, Novella 89, which effectively gave the Church a monopoly over the regulation of marriage).

He notes that once given exclusive responsibility for marital issues,

.
Ericksson addresses the issue of marriage and divorce today, noting that Byzantine marriage law "functioned reasonably smoothly and effectively. A sign of its strength and resilience may be the fact that it continued to operate without serious problems through most of the Orthodox world after the the fall of Byzantine Empire [indeed, it served as the basis for Greek Catholic marriage regulation down to 1917--SLK]. Only in our own century has the symphony ended. Intimate links between Church and State, Christianity and society, can no longer be taken for granted. The Church is left with the difficult task of both addressing problems unanticipated by the old nomocanonic system and modifying elements in it that have become dysfunctional".

He concludes by citing Mackin's study of Divorce and Remarriage, which observed that a chief concern of the early Fathers "was to get Christian spouses to see their marriages not as liaisons become marriages sanctioned by Roman law, but as relationships of respect and caring love designed by God", and that the task facing the Church today is precisely the same,

Many Orthodox would believe that although others again have a different interpretation of the Lord's words that there is no marriage in heaven. I am sure that a woman who has had three husbands will have a relationship with all three in eternity which will have a different "quality" to that with her children, her parents and her friends.

I did not see anything though in your message which indicates that the Orthodox Church in America teaches that second and third marriages are not sacramental.