Some points of Orthodox doctrine, please...

MariaRegina · Mar 20, 2008

vanshan said:
Wow. Taken to it's logical conclusion, that's absurd.

Has the RCC stated that planning to use birth control makes a marriage null and void, because from other articles I've read about American Roman Catholics is that most of them use birth control in defiance of the Church's position on it.

Basil

Exactly, if a man or woman has no intention of having children and plans to use birth control to prevent births, then that would be a Catholic impediment which would make the marriage invalid from its inception.

Remember, the couple serves as a minister for the sacrament of matrimony in Roman Catholicism. So any defect in their intentions would make the sacrament null and void.

Note: Almost all my Roman Catholic Confessors, when I was a Roman Catholic, were serving on the Marriage Tribunal. They often had talks which they invited me to attend.

Bessie · Mar 20, 2008

It's all the explanations that ultimately drove me from the RCC. It's "God in a box"... fitting Him into nice theological and philosophical structures and putting Him in our image rather than the other way around...

Your comment just reminded me of this ..."a theological explanation to cover such cases so that no-one needs to worry." It's all so legal. What happened to working out our salvation with fear and trembling?

Bessie

vanshan · Mar 20, 2008

MariaRegina said:
Exactly, if a man or woman has no intention of having children and plans to use birth control to prevent births, then that would be a Catholic impediment which would make the marriage invalid from its inception.

Remember, the couple serves as a minister for the sacrament of matrimony in Roman Catholicism. So any defect in their intentions would make the sacrament null and void.

If that is so, then I wonder how many Roman Catholics are married, by their church's definition.

Basil

MariaRegina · Mar 20, 2008

vanshan said:
If that is so, then I wonder how many Roman Catholics are married, by their church's definition.

Basil

This is why so many Roman Catholic marriages are being declared defective through the immaturity of the spouses, dishonesty in withholding secret intentions not to have children, dishonesty in failing to reveal prior conditions such as the inability to have coitus or hidden homosexual attractions, etc.

Sometimes these secrets are not revealed until after the couple has raised their family and the children have left the nest.

zhilan · Mar 20, 2008

vanshan said:
Wow. Taken to it's logical conclusion, that's absurd.

Has the RCC stated that planning to use birth control makes a marriage null and void, because from other articles I've read about American Roman Catholics is that most of them use birth control in defiance of the Church's position on it.

Basil

Yes, because if the couple plans to use birth control they are lying about being "open to life." And thus, it would be ground for annulment. My mom (who's Catholic) used to work with the Church for annulments. She said that "pretty much any marriage that false will qualify." At least in practice if not in theory.

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.

I would like to ask in OBOB, but I'd get reported. I get reported pretty much every time I post in OBOB. Even if it's just asking a question.

But why aren't priests being shown to have "never had the sacrament" more often if that's the case?

Also, since there are so many Catholics that use birth control, why isn't the Church going to them to let them know that their sacrament never actually happened and their not really married? Why is it only when they get divorced that this is discovered? And what does it say about God and the Catholic Church if such a high percentage of the time the sacrament isn't really happening? Could this be happening with the Eucharist too? Is it only sometimes the Body and Blood of Christ?

ExOrienteLux · Mar 20, 2008

Watching this thread reminds me why when I grew dissatisfied with Methodism, I looked at Orthodoxy and not Roman Catholicism...

IC XC NIKA,
Philip.

rusmeister · Mar 20, 2008

Matrona said:
Now, if the counseling fails, with both spouses really trying to make it work, and the priest agrees that the salvation of each of the spouses would be best served if they dissolved the marriage, that's when a divorce would be possible.

My 2 cents - I have a REALLY hard time imagining this scenario - it would be less than one out of 10 million marriages, particularly if you have two Orthodox Christians committed to obedience and pleasing God - the incidence in that case would fall to zero.

The only case where it is really conceivable is deliberate evil or intent of harm on the part of one of the spouses. In most other cases - mental or physical disability, etc, it would be seen as a cross to bear, not something to cut loose. Bearing the cross would be towards our salvation, not running from it.

That said, in those extremely rare instances I would agree that there are situations beyond the pale and that a Bishop could be right to grant a divorce - but it is far too easy to see everyone looking for an easy way out to paint themself as the exception that deserves the granting of divorce.

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.

GKC, "What's Wrong With the World

Surely it is plain enough that if you ask for dreadful exceptions, you will get them--too many of them. Let me take once again a rough parable. Suppose I advertised in the papers that I had a place for any one who was too stupid to be a clerk. Probably I should receive no replies; possibly one. Possibly also (nay, probably) it would be from the one man who was not stupid at all. But suppose I had advertised that I had a place for any one who was too clever to be a clerk. My office would be instantly besieged by all the most hopeless fools in the four kingdoms. To advertise for exceptions is simply to advertise for egoists. To advertise for egoists is to advertise for idiots.

GKC, "Divorce vs Democracy"

All of that said, I believe that the Orthodox Church is right to acknowledge that there are exceptions to general rules. It's just that we should be very careful about seeking them out.

MariaRegina · Mar 20, 2008

zhilan said:
But why aren't priests being shown to have "never had the sacrament" more often if that's the case?

Good question. I bet many priests are not really valid catholic priests. They must have the proper intention, but with their poor seminary training which did not focus on the spiritual side, how can they have the proper intention?

Also, since there are so many Catholics that use birth control, why isn't the Church going to them to let them know that their sacrament never actually happened and their not really married? Why is it only when they get divorced that this is discovered? And what does it say about God and the Catholic Church if such a high percentage of the time the sacrament isn't really happening? Could this be happening with the Eucharist too? Is it only sometimes the Body and Blood of Christ?

When I was a Catholic, yes, there was the concern that many masses were indeed invalid. That is one reason why I became Orthodox.

There were many children I met who were devout Catholics and who would not attend the Masses of certain Catholic priests. They said that the words of institution were being changed and that they feared it was not real and that communion was only bread because the priest was deliberately changing the words and did not have the proper intention. Hence, his masses were invalid. These children felt it was wrong to receive communion at those masses.

When I was an inquirer into Orthodoxy, I asked both a Byzantine Catholic Priest and an Orthodox Priest, and they both agreed that it would be a sin of idolatry to receive communion at those masses. Furthermore, the Byzantine Catholic priest told me that if a Roman Catholic priest used bread (made of ingredients other than bread and water), then the sacrament would also be void. Note that many Roman Catholic masses use eggs and honey in their altar bread.

vanshan · Mar 20, 2008

ramz711 said:
Watching this thread reminds me why when I grew dissatisfied with Methodism, I looked at Orthodoxy and not Roman Catholicism...

IC XC NIKA,
Philip.

I looked into the RCC first, but I sensed a strange legalism, which repelled me, but I couldn't really articulate that at the time. I just felt a lack of love and openess. When I began inquiring into Orthodox it was completely different. No subject was off the table. The hard questions were faced head on by my forbearing priest, may the Lord bless him.

Basil

Xpycoctomos · Mar 20, 2008

zhilan said:
I also still don't get how it is that a sacrament could someone sometimes "not happen." It seems like it would make God more like a magician who must follow a certain formula or His hands are tied. And do other sacraments sometimes "not happen" and then when you're married should you always worry that maybe your sacrament "didn't happen" and you are actually just living in sin?

Well, personally I do see some good here. They are actually saying the opposite. God does not act as a magician and it isn't just hte form that makes it valid, but also the intent of both people. So, in this way the RCC DOESN'T just treat it as a potion but as something that must be sincere and done in the right mind.

I'm not saying I don't have a problem with with the concept of anulments and I am not really trying to defend it, I'm only pointing out one thing that, personally, I think is good.

Xpycoctomos · Mar 20, 2008

fuerein said:
Personally it has made me wonder if in Catholic eyes any of the other Sacraments could be deemed as never having occured because there was something 'wrong'. What? Thought you were baptized eh? Sorry, ruling just came down, you're no longer baptized. An actually we've also decided you never really were baptized at all.

And if not, what makes the sacrament of marriage inherently different from all the rest.

It is interesting from this point of view that in using this kind of "revisionsit thinking" (ie "since we can look at the fruits, we can determine that this never actually happened despite what we thought) holds interesting similarities to predestinationist thinking. In reality I don't think it actually COMES FROM the same fundamental misunderstanding of soteriology, but it leads to a similar problem.

I don't know.. it is intriguing.

Xpycoctomos · Mar 20, 2008

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.

thank you... that would be interesting.

Xpy

MariaRegina · Mar 20, 2008

Xpycoctomos said:
Well, personally I do see some good here. They are actually saying the opposite. God does not act as a magician and it isn't just hte form that makes it valid, but also the intent of both people. So, in this way the RCC DOESN'T just treat it as a potion but as something that must be sincere and done in the right mind.

I'm not saying I don't have a problem with with the concept of anulments and I am not really trying to defend it, I'm only pointing out one thing that, personally, I think is good.

I agree, accountability before God is important.

Many people, including Orthodox, take the sacraments for granted.

That is why the Antiochian and OCA Bishops on the West Coast are asking people to go to confession at least once a month. And this policy is bearing fruit.

Xpycoctomos · Mar 20, 2008

MariaRegina said:
In Catholicism, the couple serves as the minister of the sacrament when they say their vows to each other. Therefore, the intention of the couple is important, not the intention or disposition of the priest.

In Eastern Catholicism and in Orthodoxy, the Priest serves as the minister and God joins the couple together. There are no shared vows as in Catholicism, and neither do the couples make a commitment "until death do us part."

In Orthodoxy, the marriage bond is eternal. Incidentally, that does not imply that couples will be having sex in heaven. Sex in heaven is an islamic idea.

Great post.

Gwendolyn · Mar 20, 2008

MariaRegina said:
Note that many Roman Catholic masses use eggs and honey in their altar bread.

No, not true. It is invalid if the bread is made of anything other than wheat and flour and water. We have strict guidelines regarding that in the Roman rite.

But I agree, if a priest decides he's going to start changing the words of the Consecratory prayers, he is invalidating the Mass.

Gwendolyn · Mar 20, 2008

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.

MariaRegina · Mar 20, 2008

Veritas_et_Puritas said:
No, not true. It is invalid if the bread is made of anything other than wheat and flour and water. We have strict guidelines regarding that in the Roman rite.

But I agree, if a priest decides he's going to start changing the words of the Consecratory prayers, he is invalidating the Mass.

I agree that it is invalid for the Roman Rite to use anything but wheat flour and water when preparing the Eucharistic bread.

However, some priests in California have been using honey bread with yeast. There were some recipes with eggs too. And then there was the Irish soda bread.

When I asked the editor of a prominent magazine, Catholic World Reports, about this in 1996, he said that the Catholic Church allowed this in his diocese back east too. Hopefully this deviation from approved practices has been stopped.

MariaRegina · Mar 20, 2008

Gwendolyn · Mar 20, 2008

MariaRegina said:
Some priests in California have been using honey bread with yeast. There were some recipes with eggs too. And then there was the Irish soda bread.

When I asked the editor of a prominent magazine, Catholic World Reports, about this in 1996, he said that the Catholic Church allowed this in his diocese back east too.

I highly doubt that it would be permitted. That sounds odd... and it makes me sad if it is true. A priest in this diocese just got reprimanded for deciding to have members of the congregation make different altar breads for Mass. He is now using the proper recipe that nuns make for him.

vanshan · Mar 20, 2008

MariaRegina said:
That is why the Antiochian and OCA Bishops on the West Coast are asking people to go to confession at least once a month. And this policy is bearing fruit.

That's great to hear. In my previous parish, frequent confession almost felt like in impostion on the priest, but in my current OCA parish the parishoners are aksed to confess at least monthly, and are encouraged to do it more frequently if needed.

Basil

Some points of Orthodox doctrine, please...

Well-Known Member

Orthodox Christian

A Sinner

Well-Known Member

zhilan

Guest

The thread killer

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian

Well-Known Member

A Sinner

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

back in black

back in black

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

back in black

A Sinner

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency