Well, Rome has purposefully avoided making a dogmatic condemnation of the Greek practice. Hence Trent’s circumlocution of (paraphrasing) “If anyone says the Church has erred ... by saying that divorce is not permitted, let him be anathema.”
“Well, Rome has purposefully avoided making a dogmatic condemnation of the Greek practice. Hence Trent’s circumlocution of (paraphrasing) “If anyone says the Church has erred ... by saying that divorce is not permitted, let him be anathema.””
No need to be reticent on our account, H.
“That whoever does not confess with heart and mouth that he is a child of the
Eastern Church baptized in Orthodox style, and that the Holy Spirit proceeds
out of only the Father, essentially and hypostatically, as Christ says in the
Gospel, shall be outside of our Church and shall be anathematized.”
or
“That whoever does not follow the customs of the Church as the Seven Holy
Ecumenical Councils decreed, and Holy Pascha, and the Menologion with
which they did well in making it a law that we should follow it, and wishes to fol-
low the newly-invented Paschalion and the New Menologion of the atheist
astronomers of the Pope, and opposes all those things and wishes to overthrow
and destroy the dogmas and customs of the Church which have been handed
down by our fathers, let him suffer anathema and be put out of the Church of
Christ and out of the Congregation of the Faithful.”
From what I understand, there is no Greek Orthodox RULE about divorce, and that while you state that marriage is an indissoluble union, there is not firm rule against divorce. Is that correct? Using the term “practise” is quite correct as there is no clear formulation for or against. Or am I wrong?