www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Eternal Marriage

I agree.


They are.

I don't think it's saying adultery is OK. I think it's saying "This is not adultery becasue God understands your plight and your weakness". I think we always need to be careful not to turn God into an draconian deity who has rules that are always black and white and, if broken, is then tacked on as a sin. That kind of logic has lead people in the past to suggest that babies born in China who die without being baptized go to hell becuase they didn't play the game right.

Life on earth is rarely ideal. Things happen to us and we are all weak. God recognizes this. We are not all called to be celibate. My guess is that if I were to become a widow early on, sooner or later I would need to find a wife (such a thought is horrifying and brings sadness to my heart as I typed this). What does this mean about eternal marriage for me? I don't know and I confess that the idea horrifies me becuase I would never want to feel I was betraying my wife in any way, especially after she would be gone. But, I think for my own good, I would need to work through this spiritually and find another wife and I would have to beleive that anything the Church allows and even encourages me to do (lest I be burned by the fires of passion as Paul says) is not a sin (like adultery) but a truer understanding of ekonomia and the love God has for man that surpasses all understanding. While it may break the ideal, it does not break from God's ultimate plan that I do my best to become more Godlike (theosis) every day. The path of "remain celebate" may be a path that is impossible for me to follow. So, the conclusion is the same as those who oppose the idea of eternal marriage, it is just reached on a different level. For neither party, though, is it a question of committing adultery if the Church approves.

Xpy

Chrisostomos,

You are frustrating me by putting words into my mouth.


I NEVER said that! Infact, I believe that, but I also believe that Christ will be the center of all our attention.

Please read all my posts carefully, and you will see that you are speaking PAST me and that you are putting words into my mouth.

You will also see that I am not disagreeing with you...but asking that all be careful with the delicate wording of profound theological thoughts because many will, and infact, already have, (by private message) misconstrued them...

This is similar to the way that many American born cradle Orthodox believe that 'eternal memory' means remembering this person on earth. The concept of 'eternal' in Orthodox theology is so profound that it can be easily misunderstood.

Therefore, I will not entertain your arguments any longer, and if need be, will bring this thread to the attention of the Administrators.

Alice, MODERATOR

In the Latin Church remarriage is NEVER allowed. What is allowed after very careful investigation, is that a certian presumed marriage was in effect actually no marriage at all, thus the party/parties are free not to enter into a remarriage, but a marriage. The first being recognized as never having existed, for one canonical reason or another.
If you like we could discuss these reasons in another thread.
Maybe we could entitle it: "Canonical Reasons Marriages were not valid>"

Stephanos I

Alice, I wasn't putting words into your mouth and I don't think that an administrator would see me as doing such (i could be wrong). I asked you an honest question becuase your post was confusing. In MOST of it you seemed to be agreeing with and expounding on the issue. Through most of it I was nodding my head. Then at the end, I kind of dropped a bombshell that did not seem to match with the rest of your post:


And that's where I disagree. And that's fine IF you and I disagree. I am sorry if you are getting frustrated. But I do believe that, if all things go according to the ideal (and then maybe even if they don't?) my wife will be my wife eternally (and that does NOT imply a normal earthly relationship, as you also had pointed out... but that doesn't make her not my wife... the eternal sacramental bond does).

Xpy

I actually got that off of an Orthodox church website about Orthodox marriage, and they were citing Jesus Christ's words.


I appreciate how much you love your wife, and trust me that I love my husband just as much-- if not more so perhaps-- because of being married for 27 years (I had just graduated college) and going through MUCH together: children, in-laws, happiness, sorrow, deaths, troubles, etc., but I think that maybe you should concentrate more on the here and now...and quoting from my very orthodox Orthodox priest--remember that marriage on earth is a form of martyrdom (thus the crowns of martyrdom) and that it is for our salvation.

Yes, I do find comfort in knowing that if I fight the good fight, and if he does too, that we will be together in Heaven (honestly I think that is something most Christian faiths believe..think about how many times you have heard Catholic and Protestants say exactly the same thing)--but in the meantime we have much salvation to work out, both individually and together in the holy mystery of matrimony.

Alice

'
Explain to me how that verse suggest that no one will contiue to be married in heaven. The only thing I understand from that verse is that no one will get married in heaven. I'm already married and I don't PLAN on ever getting married again (neither here on earth- God-willing - and certainly not in heaven).

I'm not saying you are definitely wrong (that we won't continue to be married in heaven). I mean, I disagree with you, but I recognize that I could be wrong. But I really don't think that verse has much to do with what we are talking about here.

Alice,

One more thing. Please understand that just because I disagree with you doesn't mean that I don't respect your integrity or intelligence. Also, if it seems that I am putting words in your mouth, jsut give me the benefit of the doubt that perhaps I just misunderstood you or that perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly enough.

Understand also that this is the belief I have always been taught by my priest and through reading (Actually by three priests from two different jurisdictions) and I don't say that to convince you but rather to point out that just as you have never in your time as an Orthodox come across the belief that it was eternal (ie that the person is not your spouse in heaven) I have only come across what you are explaining in my western readings. That doesn't make you wrong, but perhaps you can see why I am not just going to flippantly decide to change my view on this over night. I don't expect this of you, in fact, I care very little if you agree with me on this. Perhaps I will come to realize that my understanding is wrong, but I need more than a day and the experience of a few Orthodox and Byzantine Cahtolics on line to convince me of otherwise. I would like to read articles and talk to other priests and... sleep on it for some time.

It is true that we agree on the most important things, and that's nice... but not important either.

You're my sister in Christ and we both believe that marriage is a precious gift from God given to us in order to lead us on the path of theosis. So, you're right, we do agree on most things.

God bless,

Xpy

I am hoping and praying that I will be allowed through those pearly gates with my husband, son and daughter-in-law.

The canonical talk about marriage bothers me.

What God has joined together let no man put asunder.

So the Catholics say that a marriage can be declared null and never to have existed even though a man and woman lived together for 25 years and bore five children.

Yet, the Orthodox say that a marriage can be destroyed if a spouse commits adultery through fornication, drugs, or other unfaithful practices.

Who is right? Who is wrong?

Ultimately Christ is going to look at our hearts, and He will point out the errors of our ways and the economia administered by His Church. Lord have mercy on us.

Is marriage eternal?

Love is eternal.

That says it all. Love is a verb. If we stop loving, then we are not of God because love is patient, love is kind ... love endures forever.

AMEN!

Thank you for intervening with your wisdom...

In Christ's love,
Alice

The questions raised in this thread are unanswerable since the
Lord has not revealed the answers to us.His response to the Sadusees was, after all, an answer to mocking unbelievers. Speculation is fruitless. As for Heaven, "eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, not hath it entered into the mind of man..". - be content with that.

Edmac

Actually, what I allowed this thread to turn into brought about useless speculation (on my part too).

My intent was never to defend or refute either POV.

I THINK my OP asks simply for the personal experiences of the people here from various backgrounds regarding this concept (ie have they heard of it or not) AND any articles from respected writers or Church Fathers on the issue (if there are any). I have offered one book on this and I beleive some others have quoted the GOArch website. Is there anything beyond that.

What this thread turned into was not the original intent and is my fault.

Xpycoctomos makes some interesting points. I also attempt to make a positive case that relationships like marital bonds can continue after the resurrection in this website (it comes from a protestant perspective) - http://rezfamilies.googlepages.com

A Catholic perspective, also making this positive case, can be found on this website - http://www.ewtn.org/library/Marriage/zmarrheavn.htm

Whether you find these arguments convincing is ultimately up to you.

Christ is Risen for those on the Gregorian Calendar
and a Blessd Week of the Bridegroom to those on the Julian Calendar!

I think that once again the east-west convergence language of John Paul II's theology of the body can be helpful here. So often the east and west arrive at the same point but come at it in complimentary ways:

In the theology of the body it says that Heaven will be "Perpetual Virginity." Sacramental marrige on earth is simply a foretaste of this. Celibacy is a more immediate sign of this. By "Perpetual Virginity" we mean "intactness," "oneness"--complete openness and union with God, which as you notice, is part of the deep ecstatic thurst of marital intercourse--the two struggle to become as one yet without loosing their indiviuality in the process. This is why human sexuality, in pariticular the one flesh union of husband and wife, is an icon of the interior life of the Trinity!

I think the key distinction here is "exclusive" versus "inclusive." The East says that a married couple is united in Christ and therefore their marriage is eternal--true BUT, not in an EXclusive sense such as on earth. The West says there is no marriage in Heaven--true but this means not in the EXclusive sense as on earth. There is marrige in Heaven but in an "INclusive" way. A married couple remains united but not just with each other, rather with EVERYONE in an INclusive "marriage." I think that this convergence between the east and west interpretation of marriage in the next life is best understood in the Eucharist:

In the Eucharist which is our participation in the Wedding Feast of the Lamb, the Bridegrooom Christ with His Bride, we all become "married" to each other--"virginal"--united as one body with Christ and with one another. The Eucharist is the closest experience of the eschaton that we can have on this earth and it is an experience of "INclusive "marriage." So, both East and West are correct. They arrive at the eschaton but in their own respetive ways.

--Fr. Thomas J. Loya,
"A Body of Truth" (catholicradiointernational.com)
"Light of the East Radio (bzantinecatholic.com)
Tabor Life Institue