Posted on 04/06/2016 2:56:43 PM PDT by NRx
That “pathetic state religion” suffered ten million or more Martyrs under the Communists. You can post all of the blasphemous pictures you want. Russia is a country whose soil is soaked in the blood of Martyrs.
It is not tolerated, not in conformity with scripture, nor accepted by God, you cherry-pickers:
Hebrews 13:4
Marriage honourable in all, and the bed undefiled. For fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
Matthew 19:6
Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.
Do you orthodox realize you became Protestants, long before Luther was even born?
;-)
That “pathetic state religion” is murdering Catholics, with Putin’s army behind them to this very day in Ukraine.
Where does St Paul say divorce is allowed here? He speaks of allowing separation, not divorce.
Since you are ignoring the clear language of scripture and arguing that the Ecumenical Councils erred I’d say that Rome is the original Protestant sect. Your heresy even goes so far as to unilaterally inserting heretical language into the Creed.
I notice you have a lot of hangups with modernism. Most of us would agree with that, though we would date the problem a little earlier than you Latins do. It didn’t start in the 19th century. It started in the 9th.
Modernism: Thy home is Rome.
The two were one in the same in those days. The legal distinction between separation and divorce is a modern construct.
Do Orthodox Christians require civil divorce proceedings from the state?
Freegards
No. Civil proceedings are not Church’s concern. However the Church does require that civil law be respected in all cases where it does not clearly contradict Church teaching (i.e. abortion etc.). Most of the local Orthodox Church’s have their own guidelines for handling divorce and remarriage.
I not only do not ignore Scripture, I quoted it in post #22.
You schismatics set the precedent for Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Henry VIII, et al. And you seem to be proud of it. You all recognize the mortal sin of adultery as acceptable and normal.
Since I also cited the Holy Canons of the Ecumenical Councils, I’d say your interpretation of Scripture is in error. Rome has been wallowing in heresy for so long that the Ecumenical Councils have no meaning to you.
Makes sense, since civil law changes so fast and is so variable between states. So in areas where the civil divorce or annulment law wouldn’t allow for divorces where the religious exceptions allow, what would happen in the case of religious remarriage?
FReegards
The priest would obviously not be able to sign a civil marriage certificate. It’s hard for me to imagine a situation where a priest would perform a marriage ceremony for anyone who was still married in the eyes of the state to another party. However some Orthodox priests are refusing to sign marriage certificates due to the gay marriage thing. They don’t want to be put in a position where they could be compelled as “agents of the state” to do something contrary to the clear teaching of the Church. I have heard through the grapevine that ROCOR has ceased signing marriage certificates altogether.
As a followup I would note that the Church’s tolerance for divorce is far more limited than any state laws in the United States.
It is you schismatics and protestants who take it upon themselves to "interpret" Scripture to suit your own lustful wants.
Neither of you scripture sources addresses, let alone allows,
“remarriage”.
And how did you schismatics come up with the maximum number of three marriages? Why not two, or four, or seven marriages?
“However some Orthodox priests are refusing to sign marriage certificates due to the gay marriage thing.”
Right I recall that story, very cool in my opinion. So it would have to work the other way, I reckon. If the state refused to marry someone, and the Orthodox understanding said they should be able to marry or remarry, logic would say they would have to do it. Which would be illegal to my understanding if they were still acting as agents of the state in other civil marriages where they agreed with the civil law.
Freegards
No doubt, but like I said civil law is only ever going to be whatever pols, judges, or the voting majority think it should be at any one time. It could be good or bad, but it’s probably not going to stay the same. Heck no one would have predicted something called ‘gay marriage’ being accepted 100 years ago, and polygamy still being out.
Freegards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.