Why I'm Orthodox . . . and why others may want to be too.

[Peaceful Dove]

the comment about the biscuits all being gone was a joke (although it's true.) the apology wasn't, i wasn't meaning to tempt anyone to break their commitment to fasting.

Folks who are fasting expect temptation. Don't worry about it.

It is funny because I rarely eat sugar, I am no longer addicted to it as I once was and am not tempted in the least by cookies.
ONLY BIG FAT JUICY STEAKS.

 

[GraceInHim]

the comment about the biscuits all being gone was a joke (although it's true.) the apology wasn't, i wasn't meaning to tempt anyone to break their commitment to fasting.

who is fasting? You think my brain will be nourished or delusional from it... I cannot do it... tried once and saw things that were not there

 

[lmnop9876]

who is fasting? You think my brain will be nourished or delusional from it... I cannot do it... tried once and saw things that were not there

Orthodox Christians are fasting during the Advent season, it's not a total fast, but abstinence from sugar, oil, meat, wine, and dairy, and maybe a few other things.

 

[GraceInHim]

Orthodox Christians are fasting during the Advent season, it's not a total fast, but abstinence from sugar, oil, meat, wine, and dairy, and maybe a few other things.

oh, I thought fasting meant when you do not eat nothing at all...

 

[lmnop9876]

oh, I thought fasting meant when you do not eat nothing at all...

nup, fasting is just abstinence from something you normally enjoy

 

[Akathist]

the comment about the biscuits all being gone was a joke (although it's true.) the apology wasn't, i wasn't meaning to tempt anyone to break their commitment to fasting.

I was joking...

besides, store brand "oreos" are fast friendly... though I don't have any.....(sugar is allowed by the way... all meat, all dairy are out... and most days so is wine (and liguer), fish and olive oil. (but my Priest is fine with vegetable oil for cooking in moderation)

*xenia happily munches on her banana chips.... yummm*

 

[GraceInHim]

repost

 

[vanshan]

Well.... my wife is done baking. She wants cuddling !! I gotta go. .

Does anyone know if Jim and his lady are still upstairs?? That was a wild eggnog and cookie party last night!

Basil

 

[vanshan]

. . . The Orthodox Church is beautiful, full of deep beauty and spirituality. I love the Orthodox Church.

This is a nice endorsement, finally. Thanks, Therese, for some kind words.

Basil

 

[prodromos]

But this is one of the most fallacious arguments I have ever seen you present. This is the same as saying that the One Church was Arian, or anything thing else that is an eror simply because a segment of the Church got caught up in it.

And the issue I presented regarding the East before the Great Schism was at the express dissaporoval of the Pope and the West. . . so there was no agreement there John . . .

Therese, the greater part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic church allowed divorce and remarriage for 500 years prior to the schism and I don't recall any of the popes over that period expressing any disapproval, and as far as I can recall the issue was never even mentioned at the various 'reunion' councils. If we are in such error over this then surely someone would have said something, yet it was never even discussed as an obstacle to reunion after the schism.

And? I don't understand what you are attempting to assert here . . . how does it apply to what we are talking about?

Just because some of the canons were a restatmetn of canons received from earlier councils, how does htis make the issue of remarriage being subject to the law of the Emperor rather than Chuch Teaching valid?

The canons tell us that some in the church were not on their first marriage and that they were not necessarily widows/widowers either.

Presenting the quote stripped of what context is available, and as though it proves in some way that the West had similara views (for that is the purpose of your posting this) when you can't prove what the context of the response actually is in support of such use of it here, is extremely WEAK evidence for your case and cannot legitimately be used as evidence to support your position if you cannot prove that it is referring to what should happen when such circumstances arise between spouses who participate in a sacramentally valid marriage between two baptized believers.

Since you can't provide such evidence, use of this of this quote in this manner is highly fallacious.

If you read the whole letter, you see that Pope Gregory II is anwering "matters dealing with ecclesiastical discipline" so I believe it is safe to assume that the people in question are in the church.

Also, St boniface is a bishop at this time and is quite well versed in the teaching of the church according to Pope Gregory II. If this were a simple matter of a non-catholic couple or of a catholic man with a non-catholic wife then the canons are clear and St Boniface would have no need to trouble the Pope over such an issue.

John

 

[prodromos]

And we have seen that the EO thinks man is so animalistic he has to have sex so he has to be married (so he can have sex) even when it is a sin to do so.

Not all men. Like the Apostle Paul the church recognises that some are weaker than others and does not require them to be tested beyond their strength. Not everyone who has been divorced is allowed to remarry. For example if a person has not made any progress in correcting their own personal issues which resulted in the failure of their first marriage they are not likely to be allowed to remarry. Nor is every widow or widower given the blessing to remarry, and although the church allows up to three marriages, in practice a third is rarely granted. If a man or woman who is weak in the flesh as per 1 Cor. 7:9-10 would be liable to burn if they did not marry, are they any less likely to burn after their first marriage had ended in failure?

John

 

[vanshan]

He can and does forgive the sin but what dissolves marriage as it is taught to us in scripture? Not repentance but DEATH. The vow we take says until DEATH do us part.

Our marriage service is not quite as much like legal proceedings as the Roman Catholic service. We do not take oaths or vows, although the expectation of marriage is clear. It is holy and should not be entered into lightly. I think our divorce rates are very low overall, so to say that the lack of legal vows in marriage has any negative affect would be fallacious.

Marriage in the Christian tradition has always been viewed as martyrdom, in the sense that you must die to yourself in marriage, if you want it to work and be efficacious for your salvation. Yes, a nagging wife can be helpful. Marriage, not only gives a holy place to have sex, but it also gives us a place to die to our selfish desires. I think the Orthodox view of marriage is, like many other things we do, focused on the salvation of ones soul, leading us toward the goal of returning to our natural god-like state of holiness.

Basil

 

[prodromos]

The idea that forgivenss dissolves a covenant is very bizarre . ..

The idea that a COVENANT needs forgiving like sin needs forgiving, or that a sacrament needs forgiving like sin needs forgiving is even more bizarre.

We've never said it does. Forgiveness is for the breaking of the covenant. The Orthodox church only issues a divorce when it recognises that the covenant of marriage has been so badly damaged that in reality it no longer exists.

You have often quoted the scripture "What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.", but you wrongly interpret it as saying than man cannot separate what God has joined. Throughout the Old Testament the Jews repeatedly broke the covenant God had made with them and suffered the consequences. Clearly covenants can be broken and that is the sin which is recognised by the church when a marriage fails.

BTW, in the Latin rite of the Catholic church I believe that the couple marry each other with the priest as witness (a deacon can be sufficient as a witness). In the Orthodox church and indeed the eastern rites of the Catholic church it is the priest who marries the couple. So it seems we have different views and perhaps different underlying theology on how marriage occurs from the outset.

John

 

[Benedicta00]

Our marriage service is not quite as much like legal proceedings as the Roman Catholic service. We do not take oaths or vows, although the expectation of marriage is clear. It is holy and should not be entered into lightly. I think our divorce rates are very low overall, so to say that the lack of legal vows in marriage has any negative affect would be fallacious.

Marriage in the Christian tradition has always been viewed as martyrdom, in the sense that you must die to yourself in marriage, if you want it to work and be efficacious for your salvation. Yes, a nagging wife can be helpful. Marriage, not only gives a holy place to have sex, but it also gives us a place to die to our selfish desires. I think the Orthodox view of marriage is, like many other things we do, focused on the salvation of ones soul, leading us toward the goal of returning to our natural god-like state of holiness.

Basil

So you don’t take vows???? You do not vow (stand before God and say) that you will love, honor and obey until death due you part? You leave it open ended???

 

[Benedicta00]

Not all men. Like the Apostle Paul the church recognises that some are weaker than others and does not require them to be tested beyond their strength. Not everyone who has been divorced is allowed to remarry. For example if a person has not made any progress in correcting their own personal issues which resulted in the failure of their first marriage they are not likely to be allowed to remarry. Nor is every widow or widower given the blessing to remarry, and although the church allows up to three marriages, in practice a third is rarely granted. If a man or woman who is weak in the flesh as per 1 Cor. 7:9-10 would be liable to burn if they did not marry, are they any less likely to burn after their first marriage had ended in failure?

John

Well with all due respect John, I think that’s ridiculous. The EO have no power to take a marriage and dissolve with penance and remarry because some men and/or women can’t abstain.

I thought y’all were pretty much on the same page as us with understanding that when we are born again we are to become what Christ redeemed us to be by putting off the old (flesh) man and putting on the new man (Jesus Christ) and that would mean no longer allowing the flesh to rule us, that we gain control over our disordered passions (And that is what there are ya know… disorderedpassion) by denying the flesh and living in the spirit and God is the one who will afford us the grace to do so, he said his grace is sufficient and he gives us no cross to heavy we can not carry.

In all honestly John I do not know what to make of this, that the EO bends to the disordered passions of man and the fallen flesh of man instead of transforming the imperfect and becoming the children of God that Jesus redeemed us to be.

How do y'all think perfection is reached if you give into your passions?

 

[Benedicta00]

We've never said it does. Forgiveness is for the breaking of the covenant. The Orthodox church only issues a divorce when it recognises that the covenant of marriage has been so badly damaged that in reality it no longer exists.

You have often quoted the scripture "What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.", but you wrongly interpret it as saying than man cannot separate what God has joined. Throughout the Old Testament the Jews repeatedly broke the covenant God had made with them and suffered the consequences. Clearly covenants can be broken and that is the sin which is recognised by the church when a marriage fails.

BTW, in the Latin rite of the Catholic church I believe that the couple marry each other with the priest as witness (a deacon can be sufficient as a witness). In the Orthodox church and indeed the eastern rites of the Catholic church it is the priest who marries the couple. So it seems we have different views and perhaps different underlying theology on how marriage occurs from the outset.

John

One of the reasons Jesus came John was to restore the new and everlasting covenant. Marriage and all sacraments are a share in that one covenant we make with god, which is we are now In Christ.

In Christ there can be no broken covenants- Jesus came to fulfill the law and fix all the problems we suffer from and one of them was the Jews not being able to keep covenants. He came, diagnosed the problem and fixed it. We do not have to be a slave to sin anymore- we are freed.

 

[CaDan]

Hey, it is Advent... no cookies until Christmas!

We have a cookie economy. No problem.

 

[Benedicta00]

Iollian, this is the Pauline Priviledge we talked about earlier . . .

What I said earlier is just as true right now . .

What Paul is speaking of is the ending of a NON sacramental marriage. . a marriage that was not brought before God to join together . . it was done when they were heathens . . . they were joined by man, not God.

Divorce in such a situation leaves the believing spouse free to marry . . .

The reason this is not a contradiction to Jesus' command is that Jesus said what GOD has joined together, let no man put assunder.


The operative word there is "God"


The marriage Paul is speaking of was not put together by God, but by man.

What man puts together, man can put assunder . . . Marriages among the heathans were not convenants, but legal contracts . . put together by man apart from God.


So no . . this prepresnts no exception to Jesus' words and command and warning to us.



Peace to all

And when Jesus said we can put away a spouse for fornication he was meaning non sacramental marriages can be dissolved.

 

[Benedicta00]

Well it is right in the Bible, for fornication, or if an unbeliever leaves are the two main ones that anyone can see in the Bible.

But one really should read things in the context they were being written in. Fornication is sex between two unmarried ppl, how can we put away a spouse for that? Jesus was refering to non valid, non sacramental unions.

 

[eoe]

And when Jesus said we can put away a spouse for fornication he was meaning non sacramental marriages can be dissolved.

NO TRUE SCOTSMAN

If one fornicates then they were never really married right? No True Sacramental marriage could ever have adultery in it!

Fallacy.