Some points of Orthodox doctrine, please...

Veritas_et_Puritas said:

I'm still having issues about how a marriage can be considered eternal if stuff happens and there's a divorce.

I don't like either position - Orthodox or Catholic. I just wish people were able to really search themselves and strip themselves bare of all of these other factors that make them choose the wrong person. I am really afraid that I will end up married to someone whom I love dearly, but he won't love me. If a divorce happened to me, I wouldn't remarry. I just can't get past the notion that the marriage sacrament is eternal/life-long.

Click to expand...

There is a difference between liking a position and considering whether it is true or not.

We have Christ's saying that in the Kingdom, they are neither married nor given in marriage.

Yet, if the marriage sacrament does not represent an eternal bond, then the prohibitions against fornication cease to make sense, really - it is precisely the concept of an eternal bond which makes perfect sense out of all of the injunctions on the sex act.

In St Theodora's account of the Toll Houses, there is a description of the spiritual result of fornication that is, well, disgusting; to wit, that we experience an eternal bond with everyone we've ever slept with (the image is of becoming one flesh with all of them). I don't like it at all. But it certainly is a logical conclusion of the Scriptural attititude to fornication.

As to choosing the wrong person.... in some ways, you could say that I did that. So what? We are still more-or-less happily married 17 years and 3 kids later. Love is something that you do, not what you feel. The feeling is a bonus that comes and goes. If you are unfortunate enough to marry a person who does not sincerely share your faith and a determination to submit in obedience to it and learn to love you as Christ does the Church, then that would be a cross to bear, just as it is for a man who has a wife who refuses to submit.
This one deserves a reposting:

If Americans can be divorced for "incompatibility of temper" I cannot conceive why they are not all divorced. I have known many happy marriages, but never a compatible one. The whole aim of marriage is to fight through and survive the instant when incompatibility becomes unquestionable. For a man and a woman, as such, are incompatible.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, if your love for your husband translates into concrete acts on a daily basis (as opposed to being a nebulous and useless feeling), it is really really hard to dislike a person who is loving you - this is the seed from which true love grows when the state of being 'in love', the explosion which starts the motor, fades away. In short, it is incredibly likely that you would find an answer in love by loving. (Does that make sense to you?)

rusmeister said:

On the other hand, if your love for your husband translates into concrete acts on a daily basis (as opposed to being a nebulous and useless feeling), it is really really hard to dislike a person who is loving you - this is the seed from which true love grows when the state of being 'in love', the explosion which starts the motor, fades away. In short, it is incredibly likely that you would find an answer in love by loving. (Does that make sense to you?)

Click to expand...

That is really beautiful.

We have Christ's saying that in the Kingdom, they are neither married nor given in marriage.

Click to expand...

Perhaps the original is different (and that would matter) but the versions I have always read of Matthew 22: 30 said "neither MARRY nor are given into marriage". Please let me know if this is just poor translation and if what you wrote is more correct.

However, if I am correct, than this is an important difference.
I know you weren't using this way (or it didn't seem like it) but many people use this as a way to show why the concept of eternal marriage is wrong (from their POV). But is it only me who doesn't see the connection at all? Since I am already married, it would seem illogical that I could ever in heaven "marry" or "be given into marriage". I always took that to mean that no new marriages will occur in heaven. I can't understand how that can apply to those already married. That is, UNLESS your paraphrasing above is a more correct or even equally valid translation.

Any light anyone can shed on this (or articles)?

Xpy

IMO it would mean that in heaven there is no marriage the way we understand it here on earth... I heard (i am not sure who was the father...) on the greek ecclesia radio that in heaven we will recognize our loved ones but we will love everyone the same... Like we will live in spiritualized bodies (something that we cannot comprehend yet...*straches head*) and we will live in a state of bliss. So relationships will not exist the same way they do here.... I am guessing there will be no need to live "as husband and wife" since we will be one in communion with God that would mean so much...

my two cents.

Philothei

Hi, Veritas!

Veritas_et_Puritas said:

I prefer it here. You give honest answers... there's never a lot of confusion or accusation going on.

But what happens to the Sacrament itself? If a person is married in the Orthodox Church, and then divorces and remarries... the sacrament of marriage stays valid for both marriages? I'm having a difficulty with this because of the Catholic view. I need to think in your understanding here.

Click to expand...

That's a very interesting question. I'll try to answer it, and first, I apologize if the answer gets to long - I tend to be verbose sometimes.

Anyway, for the Orthodox, following the Fall, God established marriage for humanity in order to restore the life of harmony and communion and the thirst for perfect love between man and woman - the distinctive characteristic of this love can be seen in the fact that it enables every married person to overcome his or her individualism and devote him/herself to one another, thus seeing the image of God in the other person.

Thus, Christian marriage is not just some social obligation or something accomplished by a material union. Rather, it is (because it is a Sacrament) divine grace lived by two believers in Christ who are walking together the fullness of love.

Now, we must understand how Orthodoxy see the relation between men and God's Divine Energies (also known as "Divine Grace). This relation is always synergic, that is,

If man is to achieve full fellowship with God, he cannot do so without God’s help, yet he must also play his own part: man as well as God must make his contribution to the common work, although what God does is of immeasurably greater importance than what man does. ‘The incorporation of man into Christ and his union with God require the cooperation of two unequal, but equally necessary forces: divine grace and human will (A Monk of the Eastern Church, Orthodox Spirituality, p. 23). The supreme example of synergy is the Mother of God. - Bishop Kallistos Ware

And in a marriage, this synerge happens between husband and wife and between both of them and God.

Thus, in Orthodox theology, a marriage loses its Sacramental character when this perfect love ceases to exist between a husband and a wife.

In other words, marriage is a Sacrament because it allows a man and a woman to achieve fellowship and perfect communion of God (theosis) by sharing a communion of love between husband and wife. If this communion is broken, the Christian marriage loses its purpose and "ceases" (for a lack of a better term) to be a Sacrament.

I hope this helps. If you have more questions, let us know.

In XC,

Rick

Xpycoctomos said:

Perhaps the original is different (and that would matter) but the versions I have always read of Matthew 22: 30 said "neither MARRY nor are given into marriage". Please let me know if this is just poor translation and if what you wrote is more correct.

However, if I am correct, than this is an important difference.
I know you weren't using this way (or it didn't seem like it) but many people use this as a way to show why the concept of eternal marriage is wrong (from their POV). But is it only me who doesn't see the connection at all? Since I am already married, it would seem illogical that I could ever in heaven "marry" or "be given into marriage". I always took that to mean that no new marriages will occur in heaven. I can't understand how that can apply to those already married. That is, UNLESS your paraphrasing above is a more correct or even equally valid translation.

Any light anyone can shed on this (or articles)?

Xpy

Click to expand...

No, you're right - I was just going from memory (Let that teach me...) - it does say "marry" (active verb, non-participle.

Still, gotta turn to what the Church teaches and what the Church fathers say on this, or we'll just be another bunch o' Sola Scripura Protestants making up our own interpretations.

Rick of Wessex said:

Thus, in Orthodox theology, a marriage loses its Sacramental character when this perfect love ceases to exist between a husband and a wife.

Click to expand...

I think this part needs to be reworded altogether. None of us have perfect love, we muddle what love means (see the 4 Greek words) and then everybody gets divorced because 'he/she doesn't love me anymore'.

But the injunction about infidelity as the one exception does point to a breaking. But even then, it can be forgiven through love and the erring spouse given a second chance. Said spouse might even become Orthodox and start posting on internet forums...

I think it needs to always be stressed that divorce is truly a last resort to be limited to these extreme situations - people always seem to want to push it up the list of resorts, and will jump on anything that lets them do that.

Globalnomad said:

Actually, it CAN happen to any Sacrament - (not so easily to Baptism, since that can be administered by anyone with the right intention, even a non-Christian!) - but we have a theological explanation to cover such cases, so that no-one needs ot worry. Why don't you go ask on OBOB? There are people who know this far better than me.

Click to expand...

What specifically did you want to ask on OBOB?

Knowledge3 said:

What specifically did you want to ask on OBOB?

Click to expand...

That comment was directed toward me. I had inquired as to whether or not any sacrament could be deemed as having never occured if the conditions were deemed "improper". I.e. someone was never sacramentally baptised even though they underwent a baptism service. I never did take up the offer to ask on OBOB because it was only due to this specific thread that I inquired otherwise I'm not really interested enough to start a new thread in OBOB just to ask that.

fuerein said:

That comment was directed toward me. I had inquired as to whether or not any sacrament could be deemed as having never occured if the conditions were deemed "improper". I.e. someone was never sacramentally baptised even though they underwent a baptism service. I never did take up the offer to ask on OBOB because it was only due to this specific thread that I inquired otherwise I'm not really interested enough to start a new thread in OBOB just to ask that.

Click to expand...

Ok, I'll answer this specific issue with a short & concise explanation.

The "validity" of any sacrament or a sacrament being "valid" is strictly a legalistic,rationalistic,scholastic, and juridical approach to the 'sacrament(s)' of any church.

. .