As reported by the Greek publication Romfea.gr Synod of the Church of Constantinople, headed by Patriarch Bartholomew made the decision to allow verebrate for priests. Permission for a second marriage will be given to widowed priests and priests who abandoned their wives. This news has caused quite a heated discussion – and, indeed, her admittedly alarming.
Photo: Misha Maslennikov / Flickr
- No mother and no father
- Veropedia, celibacy, monasticism
- The Ecumenical Patriarch gave the priests permission for second marriage
- The priests of the Patriarchate of Constantinople was allowed to enter into a second marriage: what does it mean
- Verebrate for priests: an acute problem or a temptation
Whether it is necessary for this situation to change canons
Of course, we are talking about two completely different situations. Verebrate widowed Christians in plain text is allowed in Scripture, it is by no means something immoral, there is no injustice and resentment to anyone, so the conversation about this development implies a completely different context and a completely separate arguments.
Much more controversial is the permission of verebrate, if the wife left the priest. Of course, ideally we are talking about a situation where the priest is completely innocent – he can be reproached is that the carelessness with which he warmed the snake on his chest. For example, the girl jumped for the seminarian, having read anticlerical writings about countless priestly treasures, and finding out that a Church mouse – not the richest segment of the population ran to look for treasure somewhere else. Happen.
But whether it is necessary for this situation to change the canons? Hardly. There is the concept of oikonomia when specific non-standard situations allowed the indulgence to a particular human need.
The difference between oikonomia and alteration of canons can be illustrated by the following example. Let’s say your employee was caught stealing. You can do the right thing and send him to prison. But you can carefully examine the situation and decide that it is in General an honest man, which fell into despair due to the fact that his child is seriously ill and need expensive medicine shameless. You can understand his situation and find a way out. This oikonomia. However, if you find that the ban on stealing is cancelled due to the fact that he upsets a lot of nice people, broke many lives and generally out of place in our enlightened times – this is the revision of the canons.
Is it possible, via careful consideration, make exceptions, if the man is proven not guilty, and woman is the city of the serpent is an open question, and I’m inclined to think that it is possible.
But to review the Canon means to produce grave injustice in relation to women.
Because “wife left” can mean quite different situation from the case, indeed, warmed the snake up poor large woman unworthy husband were forced to flee – and such cases are very real. That is, formally it is she fled, and left – but in fact she is the victim.
Any permission will be perceived much wider
The norm, which opens the possibility of verebrate after the escape of his wife, is the temptation of that escape is to organize. A priest is faced with much greater temptations than the mother. Mother is not surrounded by attractive young men who admire her, expressing her deep affection and constantly reaching out to her. This priest is surrounded by a parishioner, which can easily cross not quite a clear distinction between sister, daughter and some romantic feelings. He inevitably works with people, some of whom are attractive women, and is constantly faced with the temptation to think that some of them could be a much better wife than the tired, bloated, and at times unhappy woman who is waiting for him at home.
And in this situation to convince him that actually it is possible to take a new wife if the old one for some reason run away, it means to create a temptation to impose an additional burden on human weakness.
Woman in any case more vulnerable to divorce, and the wife of a clergyman, especially vulnerable.
It is often large, does not have a worldly profession, and, unlike the priest, a wide circle of acquaintances of the opposite sex. When any formulating rules her interests, the more vulnerable parties, must be taken into account in the first place – and discuss the approach has on it.
Moreover, as is already evident, people interpretiruya the decision of the Synod as a permission just to leave their wives. Writes one commenter, “well, how can you get to live with the unloved person! It’s torture! It’s disgusting when people can’t continue their Ministry if you love another!”
Any permission, alas, will be perceived much broader than originally intended – such is the depravity of human nature.
We are renting not just some rules – we surrender the gospel itself
Another problem is the undermining of the witness of the Church to the world. The raison d’être of the Church and the priesthood especially in the proclamation of the testimony of Jesus Christ, crucified, Risen and coming packs. The Church proclaims that the deepest reality in the universe is sacrificial love – Christ dying on the Cross to redeem His bride – the Church.
Love to God, to woman, to the people of God, to people in General – inevitably implies a certain asceticism. Love itself forbids certain things because they hurt someone you love. Love inevitably means sacrifice for the other. And a happy marriage is worth the sacrifice that people love to serve each other. A man enters into marriage to serve his wife as Christ serves the Church. This path of devotion and obedience leads to eternal salvation. The path of service itself leads to temporal and eternal misery.
While Christians live in a world which is fundamentally antiskating does not want to hear about the victim. A world where the norm is the slogan of the icy lake Leucocytes, selfishness – “love is gone”. This slogan implies that my feelings and experiences are more important than other people – and if the poor woman is no longer worried about the blood, I just go in search of one that will thrill, because “you can’t live with the unloved”.
Here I’d like to quote Stephen Covey (he is not a preacher and not even a Christian; so, it’s high Holiness, it’s just a bit of common sense and decency):
“Stephen, I like what you say. But the situation is the situation different. For example, my family life. I am very concerned. My wife and I have not felt about each other feel the same. Probably, I just don’t love, and she me too. What can I do about it?
— So there’s no feelings left? — I asked.
— That’s it! — he picked up. — And we have three children, we care about their fate. What would you recommend for me?
— Love her! I replied.
— I told you, no feelings left!
— Love it!
— No, you do not understand! No love no more!
— Then love it! If the feeling is gone, then you have a good reason to love her!
But how can you love if not love?
— Listen, my friend, “love” is a verb that means action. Love-the feeling is the fruit of love is action. Love it! Serve it. Sacrifice yourself. Listen to her. Empathize her. Appreciate it. Maintain. Well, are you ready to love her?”
Alas, in the world often believed that “love” is the emotion which the man himself does not control, and if she left people “loved another”, then there’s nothing you can do, and to do, and the woman “fell out of love”… Well, she was lucky.
In this world any conversation about austerity and sacrifice are accepted in bayonets – well it is impossible to demand from poor me to for the sake of loyalty to God, or wife, or Church refused sweet piece! For the same and live to pluck the flowers of pleasure!
Even C. S. Lewis drew attention to the fact that the obvious ethical judgment of the world fail when it comes to sex. That is, if a person breaks a solemn promise, deceiving trust, causes grave suffering because of his need for money, then he’s a scoundrel, if your need for sex then well, what to do, sometimes the heart wants.
And permission, at the level of rules, verebrate alive when his first wife is a concession of this world, the assignment, which will inevitably be followed by others. The liberalization of sexual ethics, which is performed to the songs of “understanding” and even “love” means offset in the direction of the ice of selfishness.
Yielding to secular pressure in the marriage of ethics, we pass, not just some rules – we surrender the gospel itself. There are no marriage without sacrifice and service. And there is no Christianity.
It is impossible to build our drop in the canonical normal
Every Christian is a witness of the gospel, which radically changes people’s lives. But the priest especially. Christian marriage is the image of the relationship of Christ and the Church, God and creation, the way of the Kingdom of God. Assume that a priest is not necessary to show this image undermines the very meaning of his Ministry. The priest is the image of faithful, not the person rendering ritual services.
Sometimes people have truly strange argument that divorces happen everywhere, in priestly environment too, so let’s accept and legalize.
But why do we need a Church that does not even attempt to differ from the world?
To be a Christian means to be in Covenant with Christ the Covenant which involves the obligation to observe the commandments of Christ.
The Christian may miserably fail – but what he definitely cannot do is to admit your sin as the norm, something acceptable. The normalization of sin brings him outside of the Covenant. You cannot be a Christian and reject the commandments of God.
As at the level of the Church as a whole – we must proclaim the commandments of God and make every effort to follow them. What is the process of liberalization, revision of the high demands of the gospel to adapt to the world, we are already seeing in several Protestant communities.
The gospel offers us forgiveness, but not permission – falling, we should mourn for our transgressions, to seek God’s forgiveness and grace to lead our lives in order. What we cannot do is to build our drop in the canonical norm.