www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship The Other Sacramental Mysteries Communion for the divorced and remarried?

Frankly I don't think the Catholic Church could cope with 300 million Orthodox Christians joining them and insisting on their rights to divorce and a second sacramental marriage as well as non-abortive contraception. Their system could go into meltdown as their own people begin to demand the same prerogatives.

The canons permitting divorce and a second sacramental marriage for Eastern Catholics were promulgated in the 6th century, simply putting on paper existing practice. The majority of Catholic bishops observed these canons – the majority of Catholics during this period were Eastern Catholics and not Western Catholics. In the West roughly 3 out of 10 were Catholics. In the East it was more like 7 out of 10. Christianisation of the Empire had proceeded more rapidly in the East.

We often forget that divorce and remarriage was allowed right up to the southern gates of Rome itself. Southern Italy was comprised of Byzantine provinces ruled from Constantinople and under the ecclesiastical authority of the Patriarch, until the Normans arrived and took the territory. There is no record of any Pope ever complaining about divorce and remarriage which was the majority practice in his Church and among his bishops for 600 plus years.

Once again, Father Ambrose, I remind you that the Rite of Remarriage is NOT sacramental. Orthodoxy believes in one sacramental marriage per lifetime. And, please, don't give me a line about what your bishop says. I can point to abuses going way back into Russian history. The norm is the norm, Or, to put it another way, go look at the text of the rite itself--it is NOT sacramental, on its face.

And try to remember that things which were not an issue in the first millennium cannot be made into an issue in the third.

But that is an outstandingly mischievous claim. A second marriage is certainly one of the Holy Mysteries. The Rite of a second marriage is most certainly a Holy Mystery. Have you actually read the Service?

As a priest I would rather die than perform a church blessing of fornication and sex outside a sacramental marriage.

Perhaps it is the case that Byzantine Catholics have adopted Roman theology in this area?

Pick up a service book. You will see that the Rite of Crowning is identical in both instances. The difference is not in the marriage ceremony but in the preceding Rite of Betrothal where the repetitive prayer of "Bless them, O Lord our God..." is omitted and replaced with two penitential prayers.

You may be right! During the first millennium the majority of Catholics "enjoyed" the right of divorce and a sacramental second marriage, under the authority of the successor of Saint Peter. The question emerges... why the prohibition in the third millennium?

I see that Vatican Insider is keeping alive the possibility that there could be changes ahead

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/e...zio-divorce-chiesa-iglesia-church-28418/

"Behind the scenes the Holy See is urging caution over the issue of communion for remarried divorcees as it is one of the subjects that is being addressed by the Pope’s Council of Cardinals - the “G8” -, ahead of the Synod of Bishops on pastoral care of the family and there could be surprises on the horizon."

I'm sorry, Father, but I am just flabbergasted that you could possibly be so ignorant of your own Tradition. I hope that ignorance continues, though, because I would not want you to die.

I invite you to seek enlightenment by contacting any Orthodox bishop and enquiring whether our second marriages are a Holy Mystery or not.
I do not understand what you want to say.

Here is Fr Ambrose (Alexey) Young correcting a young convert who, like you, was adamantly claiming that Orthodox second marriages are not sacramental....

"Fr. Seraphim [Rose] and my seminary studies taught me that a second marriage is fully sacramental. And this within the context of the ultra conservative Russian Church Abroad!

"Just because divorce and remarriage were discouraged by the Fathers--and by the way still are discouraged today--doesn't mean that they are always forbidden under every circumstance, or that the original marriage is indissoluble. Your conclusions are incorrect, as is your premise."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Irenikon/message/34076

Again, from Fr Ambrose (Alexey) Young.....

“What on earth? In my 30+ years as an Orthodox priest I have never heard of a second marriage that was considered non-sacramental. This idea is peculiar. --Fr. A”


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Irenikon/message/33317

^ Re: Father Ambrose: +1

That article is from October 8 and it is actually the Vatican pouring cold water on the idea (circulating after one of the Pope's interviews and expanded by a minor diocesan official in Freiburg) about for changes saying that there isn't one and wouldn't be any such big moves until after the synod meeting.

Vatican Insider than tries to keep alive the possibility, at the end for whatever reason, but the essay by Cardinal Mueller in today's L'Osservatore Romano will pour yet more cold water on the idea of any big change.

Dearest Father Ambrose,

Are you sure about this? I recall reading something a while back (I think it was from Fr. Meyendorff(?)) stating that the Church did not regularly grant divorces until the 10th century. There's probably sparse examples before that time, but it might be too extreme to claim that this was any kind of norm prior to the 10th century.

Humbly,
Marduk

The Church did not grant divorces or even perform remarriages before the 10th century, because it relied upon the civil authorities to address those aspects of marriage. But, when the Emperor Leo VI ("The Wise"!) abolished civil marriage (after his notorious "quadrogomy"), and made the Church responsible for all aspects of marriage, it became necessary to address the issue of broken marriages and remarriage.

Previously the Church simply allowed those who divorced or were widowed and who wished to remarry to avail themselves of a civil union, and then sought to reintegrate those people into the Body of Christ (for even remarriage after being widowed was considered adultery), through prayer, fasting, and abstention from the Eucharist (two years for a second marriage, five for a third, with fourth marriages prohibited--"this is a swinish life", according to Basil the Great).

Afterwards, in order to protect its believe in the indissoluability of marriage as a sacrament that perdures beyond the grave, the Church developed a non-sacramental Rite of Remarriage, which was nothing more than a civil union plus the penitential prayers that had previously been used to reconcile remarried couples with the Church.

The Church also had to issue bills of divorcement, since there was no other authority that could do so, and it limited the reasons for divorce to adultery, cruelty, abandonment, insanity and --interestingly--treason (by divorcing her husband, a woman could protect her dowry and her children's inheritance, otherwise forfeit to the state). All divorces had to be for cause; irreconcilable differences was not acceptable, and only the innocent party would be given permission to remarry. If a couple colluded to obtain a divorce, e.g., if a husband moved to another village so his wife could claim abandonment, then neither partner would be permitted to remarry.

From the OCA's Guidelines for Clergy:


As a matter of oikonomia, then, the OCA allows the use of the Rite of Crowning, i.e. the sacramental form, if only one party is divorced or widowed--presumably out of consideration for the other party. But if both parties are either divorced and/or widowed, then the non-sacramenta Rite of Second Marriage is employed.