www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Question: Marriage

I have a question everyone, and no it is not that I am thinking of getting married!

On another forum, Catholic-Pages, you can find it at http://www.catholic-pages.com/forum/ , there is a question by a woman who is planning a marriage.

This is a comment from that thread;


Now I know this is the Latin(Western) view of the sacrament.

What is the Byzantine(Eastern) view, I believe it is different, correct?

If it is different, why, how did this come to be?


Yours brother in Christ,
David

ps it would be nice if one or two of you joined us at Catholic-Pages as I am the only real Byzantine presence that has time to post there, and I need help sometimes.

[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: DavidB ]

Dear David,

An excellent question!

In the Latin Church, the priest is there as a witness and to bless the marriage while the actual sacrament of matrimony itself is given by the bride and groom to each other.

In the East, it is the priest or bishop who "does" the Mystery of Crowning directly, not the couple to be wed.

Under the Roman authority in which the early Church began to develop and grow, Christians had to, of course, be married in accordance to secular law.

Christians went to "city hall" to be married and then went to receive the blessing of the Church to their bishop (and "bishop" is based on a Latin word meaning "mayor" - an illustration of how much the Church borrowed from the Roman governmental terminology).

As this Sacrament/Mystery developed, East and West emphasized different aspects of this early experience.

The West emphasized the contractual basis of the sacrament of matrimony in its celebration, a reflection of the contractual basis of the secular, juridical relationship of former times. And so the man and woman are seen as partners of a contract who therefore "give" the sacrament to each other in a contractual manner.

The East emphasized the mystical aspect of the Church's original blessing and prayer for the couple.

Even the term "marriage" is not used by the East, since this reflects a contractual relationship between partners.

Instead, the Mystery of Crowning involves an actual coronation, as in the coronation of a Bishop or Patriarch or a King or Emperor.

In this way, the new couple is celebrated as true "Priests, Prophets and Kings," members of the Royal Priesthood and heads of a new Home Church, an integral part of the Church of Christ.

Alex

OC,

There are somethings I like about the Eastern Church, the Jesus prayer and it's richer or at least continual tradition of mysticism, but by the same token there are a number of things I really don't care for in the Eastern Church and am quite happy at being a dreaded Roman.

But this I really like. No, I really like this. The coronation of you and your bride, and more specificly your bride. Approaching marriage this way is not only more romantic, but it gives a better perspective of this act of marriage your under taking. It helps you place an honorific prestige on your bride, your marriage, and your vow. Indeed for you monarchists it would be a great and criminal act of betrayal to betray your Queen - no?

Dear Maximus,

Actually, the most beautiful ceremony of Crowning is in the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church and they even have beautiful, royal robes the bride and groom put on.

When we were crowned in marriage, we had crowns of myrtle placed on our heads.

That is the martyrs' crown, signifying that suffering is part of the life of marriage and this is also why the Great Martyr Procopius is invoked during the ceremony, along with the "Holy Crowned Ones" Sts. Constantine and Helen.

But for my 25th wedding anniversay, I'm going all out and get some of those nice, expensive, ornate Wedding Crowns that we see on the internet Orthodox market

We're going to have a ceremony of renewal of marital vows and, yep, we're going to be crowned properly this time.

My wife is practicing her "royal wave" already .

God bless,

Alex

I love the both the symbolism of crowning
and the beauty of the crowns themselves.

In comparing the sacrament of matrimony and the mystery of crowning I would include that the end result is the same: "...the two shall become one flesh." (Ephesians 5:31)

In the Latin liturgy the priest says that
marriage is the one gift not forfeited by
the Fall. I like to share this happy truth
with my bride.

Peace,

Paul

Alex,

Sounds wonderful. Wish well for you and your bride when you both repeat your wedding vows again.

See, under that tough intellectual skin, your really just a push-over romantic.

Dear Maximus,

I'm no intellectual, and my skin is rather sensitive . . .ouch . . . .

Let's leave the dry intellectualism to others, shall we?

Life and marriage are meant for us fun-loving types!

Alex

Dear David,

Regarding your postscript, the first time you mentioned the Catholic-Pages forum, I tried registering, but I couldn't do it...I tried reading posts, I couldn't do it. I tried a couple of days later, still couldn't do anything. Seems interesting enough to join, if I could only manage to register. If you've got any pointers on how to register successfully, send them my way...

As far as the priest being necessary (in the Latin rite) for validity, I'm not sure exactly how true that is. I've seen it written in books of theology (again, Latin) that, at least in theory, it is possible that a man and woman may recite some kind of vows in keeping with the vows used in the Latin rite, and by doing so, with the requisite proper intentions, they are truly and validly married, priest or no priest. The priest as required for a licit marriage? Yeah...but required for validity? I didn't think that the Latins strictly required a priest for validity.

Interestingly, though the Syrian rite calls for crowns as well as the other Eastern traditions, in India we don't use crowns or wreaths of flowers. Instead, bride and bridegroom get a gold chain, which is ceremoniously waved in a certain pattern around their heads, and some of the most beautiful Syriac chant I've ever heard is sung. For a description of the service*, you can read the short summary at http://sor.cua.edu/Liturgy/Matrimony/LiturgyInBrief.html

*We don't do that ululation stuff...must be an Arab thing.

I prefer the Byzantine tradition and theology regarding this Holy Mystery.

Dear Catholicos,

Interesting - cultures in which crowns were not used in crowning kings replaced them with gold chains, as obtained among the Celts.

The Emperor of India was formerly consecrated with honey, rather than with oil as well.

Would they do that to the bride? Or is she sweet enough?

Alex

No honey for the bride, Alex...we like our women spicy.

It's interesting to learn about the whole crown/chain thing. I did not know that the Celts did things that way. Come to think of it, I've never seen portraits of Indian kings with crowns, so there definitely seems to be a connection.

I looked up the sacrament of matrimony in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church and found this
said of the Latin tradition and the Eastern
traditions:

1623 According to the Latin tradition, the spouses as ministers of Christ's grace mutually confer upon each other the sacrament of Matrimony by expressing their consent before the Church. In the traditions of the Eastern Churches, the priests (bishops or presbyters) are witnesses to the mutual consent given by the spouses, but for the validity of the sacrament their blessing is also necessary.

Paul

The Mystery of Venchanie (Crowning) is bestowed upon the couple like any other Mystery (Sacrament). In this sense,the priest is not a witness but the steward of the Mystery and is responsible before God for giving this Mystery.

The Mystery of Marriage (to use the modern term)is no less subordinate (apart from Holy Communion) then Ordination, Baptism and Christmation etc..

The couple are crowned as martyrs as well as king and queen of their home-kingdom. Martyrdom is sharing the faith, supporting each other spiritually and dying to "I" and replacing it with "We". From the moment of crowning, the couple work together for each other's salvation.

As the marriage grows, with all the problems associated with married life !,the couple know that God has given them a mystery and has blessed their ascetic struggle towards the kingdom. Their home is no longer secular place to live but a small church, where they are encouraged to pray together, especially with their children. It is in the home that children learn about God and in Church they learn that they belong to a larger family.

I apologize if this sounds formal, but I am writing down my thoughts as I write.

What a wonderful gift from God! "Be thou exalted, O Bridegroom like unto Abraham...And thou, O Bride. Be thou exalted like unto Sarah.."

Yours in Christ,
Fr Serafim

How do people here feel about the very un-P.C. Epistle reading? In the weddings at which I am present (95% Byzantine/Other mix among the wedding couple) all people hear is, "Wives should be submissive to their husbands as if to the Lord because the husband is head of the wife...." Clearing of throats, grinding of teeth, exchanges of sharp elbow jabs among the congregation. The priest then feels the need to contextualize/apologize/justify the reading, and all sense of Sacrament is lost in this explanation/lecture/catechesis/justification. Some pastors don't wish to deal with the hassle, and let the couple choose another reading.
I know, it is not supposed to be a hassle.
Fact is, it is.

[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: durak ]

Durak, I guess they should listen to the full reading then, and the pastors should remind those present of the full passage:

"Brethren: Give thanks to God the Father always and for everything in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Defer to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives should be submissive to their husbands as if to the Lord because the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of His body the church, as well as its Savior. As the church submits to Christ, so wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church. He gave Himself up for her to make her holy, purifying her in the bath of water by the power of the word, to present Himself a glorious church, holy and immaculate, without stain or wrinkle or anything of that sort. Husbands should love their wives as they do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. Observe that no one ever hates his own flesh: no, he nourishes it and takes care of it as Christ cares for the church - for we are members of His body.

'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cling to his wife, and the two shal I be made into one.'

This is a great foreshadowing; I mean that it refers to Christ and the church. In any case, each one should love his wife as he loves himself, the wife for her part showing respect for her husband." Ephesians 5:20-33

I don't know anyone, who upon actually listening to (or reading) the entire passage continues to have problems with it. The love and service required is placed upon both within this Holy Mystery, not just one of the spouses.

Perhaps, I'm misreading your question?