Divorce and Re-Marriage in the Western Orthodox Church

A Medieval Scene from a Manuscript of "L'Mort De Arthur"
Depicting the Marriage of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere

By Bp. Joseph (Ancient Church of the West)

Introduction

The sacramental view of marriage that is so familiar for most Western Christians, a major feature in the life and discipline of Roman Catholics, which focuses on it as a covenant between two people and God, finds little basis in the Eastern Orthodox theology of marriage. Instead, what one finds is that Eastern marriages have no vows, are believed to be valid because of the prayers said over them by an Orthodox priest, and that sexuality has nothing to do with the invocation of the covenant. Conversely, sexuality is often seen as a tolerated necessity for the purpose of having children, is not completely blameless or pure within a Christian marriage, and may indeed disqualify one from interaction with the Sacraments. Such differences play out in radical ways that must be understood and compensated for on the part of Western Orthodox Christians. 

Biblical Foundations of Marriage

The biblical understanding of marriage begins with the creation narrative in Genesis, where God declares, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make a helper suitable for him" (Genesis 2:18, NIV). The creation of Eve from Adam's rib signifies the intimate and equal partnership intended in marriage. God blesses their union, saying, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it" (Genesis 1:28, NIV). This blessing underscores the primary purpose of marriage as a fruitful union.

In the New Testament, Paul emphasizes the sanctity of marriage, saying, "Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, 'The two will become one flesh.' But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit" (1 Corinthians 6:16-17, NIV). This highlights the profound spiritual and physical unity of marriage, echoing Jesus' teaching: "Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate" (Mark 10:9, NIV).

Patristic Perspectives

The Church Fathers consistently emphasized the sanctity and indissolubility of marriage. St. John Chrysostom, in his homilies on marriage, speaks of it as a "mystery" and a reflection of Christ’s relationship with the Church (Ephesians 5:32). He extols the virtues of marital love and fidelity, advocating for mutual respect and self-giving within the marital relationship. St. Augustine also contributed significantly to the Christian understanding of marriage, viewing it as a sacrament. He argued that the goods of marriage include offspring, fidelity, and the sacramental bond, which mirrors Christ's unbreakable bond with the Church. Augustine's perspective underscores the lifelong commitment and sanctity of the marital covenant.

Theological Divergences

The differences in marriage theology between Eastern Orthodoxy and Western Christianity can be attributed to various theological and cultural developments over time, evolving from a stance cohesive with the Roman West into a bifurcated system of holy monastics, “untainted” by sexual necessity, and sinful laymen, who were not expected or canonically required to maintain the purity of the clerical class for practical reasons. The Eastern Orthodox Church places less emphasis on the contractual nature of marriage and more on the ecclesiastical blessing, which sanctifies the union, thus moving the locus of authority and sacramental activity from the consent and consummation of the man and wife, over the the auspices of the Church. This sacramental act of blessing is now seen as transformative, bringing divine grace into the marital relationship, where none otherwise would naturally exist. Because the Eastern Orthodox view on sexuality within marriage has also been influenced by Stoic and Neo-Platonic philosophy, which regards pleasure with suspicion, as if it is innately evil. This has led to the perception of marital sexuality as a necessary evil, primarily used for procreation, but also best avoided as possible. Connecting abstinence from marital activity to the activity of fasting, and to the calendar of feasts and fasts in the Church, thus restricted actual days of legitimate relations to less than 60 days a year. Such views have resulted in very restrictive practices concerning marital intimacy, such as abstinence before and after Communion, during fasting periods, and in times of mourning and prayer, and resulted in what the great Byzantine historian Ostragorsky said was “monastic depopulation,” perhaps directly contributing to the Fall of Constantinople.

Issues with the Eastern View

These attitudes present several theological and pastoral challenges:

1. Biblical Inconsistency: The view that sexuality within marriage is inherently polluting contradicts the biblical affirmation of marital intimacy. The Song of Solomon, for example, celebrates the joy and passion of marital love. Paul’s exhortation to married couples in 1 Corinthians 7:3-5 encourages regular sexual relations as a means to prevent temptation and foster mutual affection. Also, St. Paul places the choice of when and how to abstain directly with the couple themselves, and not with external ecclesiastical authority. 

2. Purity Laws Misinterpretation: The application of Old Testament purity laws to marital sexuality can be seen as a misunderstanding of their original context. They do not properly frame the purity laws of the Old Testament, which excluded semen and blood from being present in the Temple because of the laws of Sacrifice. Instead, Stoic ideas about pleasure confused these categories, allowing semen into the temple, disallowing women in their menses, and temporarily excommunicating Christian couples from Communion because of lawful sexual relations. These laws were concerned with ritual cleanliness for temple worship, not the inherent morality of sexual acts within marriage.

3. Stoic Influence: The influence of Stoic ideas about pleasure has led to an undue suspicion of marital sexuality. The Church’s teaching should distinguish between sinful indulgence and the legitimate, God-given pleasure found in the marital act.

4. Impact on Family and Demographics: The elevation of monasticism over marriage and the resulting suspicion of marital sexuality have contributed to demographic challenges within Orthodox communities. A balanced theology that honors both marriage and celibacy is essential for the health and growth of the Church.

Divorce and Remarriage

The issue of divorce and remarriage is a significant pastoral concern. While the Eastern Orthodox Church permits divorce and remarriage under certain conditions, it maintains that these are concessions to human weakness rather than ideal situations. Jesus’ teaching on divorce is clear: "Anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery" (Matthew 19:9, NIV). The Church Fathers echoed this stance, with St. Basil the Great and St. John Chrysostom condemning divorce and remarriage except in cases of adultery or abandonment. The eventual acceptance of laymen being able to divorce and remarry three times without excommunication was a mistake. Eastern Orthodox who attack Anglicanism based on the immorality of Henry VIII are therefore inconsistent, not remembering their own “Moechian Schism.” 

Pastoral Considerations

Despite the initially strict theological stance, the Eastern Orthodox Church now approaches divorce and remarriage pastorally. The Byzantine canonical tradition allows for remarriage after a period of symbolic penance (abstaining from the Holy Eucharist for a set amount of time), recognizing human frailty and the need for mercy, and also acknowledging the centrality of the Church as a civil institution that maintains social harmony and peace. This pastoral approach aims to balance the ideal of indissoluble marriage with compassion for those who have experienced marital failure, without addressing the covenantal or sacramental theological issues too specifically. 

Abuse and Marital Obligations

The handling of abuse within marriage requires careful pastoral discernment. While abuse was not traditionally categorized as grounds for divorce, it was met with ecclesiastical censure and civil penalties. The goal was to protect the victim and seek the abuser’s repentance and restoration, rather than allowing for divorce. If divorce becomes inevitable, the goal should be to remain in chaste celibacy, rather than to instigate the adultery of another relationship. 

Dealing with the Contradictions through Repentance

If we are theologically consistent and demand that our understanding of canon be theologically grounded in Scripture and the Early Church, one can start to see where many of these concepts became confused and led to dysfunction. In many ways, the Greek and Oriental Orthodox experience was much more true to the original context than what Northern Europeans were, being divorced from the biblical culture, and so the distinction between ritual uncleanness, sacrifice, holiness and the process of sanctification were reframed, first by Latin legal concepts, and then by Germanic tribal concepts of "Wirgilt" and death substitution rituals. This indirectly led to the mistaken concept of mandatory clerical celibacy. What we see in Hellenic Christianity is some of the same drift, once the pagans and stoics had been eradicated and people forgot the initial dichotomy that the Early Christians had held between their Hebraic/Biblical worldview and the Greek philosophical worldview. As these distinctions became blurred, some very good things happened, like the creative synthesis of the Cappadocians; but, also, some bad things happened - like all of Stoicism being accepted without question into Hellenic Christian sensibilities without much of a challenge or re-framing. Platonism had been challenged and re-framed by the Fathers, because of its obvious pagan connections, and it was later thoroughly rejected by European Christian philosophers as well, after the tragic cultural break of the Reformation. Stoicism was harder to do this with in the East because, for one, it was not a theoretical or philosophical system as much as it was a mass of cultural attitudes towards life, the self and family. This is something that we are still struggling with today, and hopefully, with a reintegration into the West, Orthodoxy will be challenged to re-asses and re-incorporate a more Hebraic and Biblical way of seeing sex and family life, to its own demographic benefit, and to the reduction of divorce and remarriage, which is currently tolerated well beyond its canonical limits. 

This is the constant process of "metanoia" in the Church, that never ends, and that always calls us back to God in new and remarkable ways. It is not "reformation," but the "spiraling" that we keep talking about in our Theosis, where God, gradually, by His good will for our salvation, calls us to a deeper commitment, a more profound grasp of His Truth, and a greater love for others. It can only happen if we are constantly realizing our short-fallings and our need for Him, and constantly returning to Him, seeking His will, His face, and His grace constantly. Then, as individuals, parishes and local Apostolic Churches, we will constantly be in a state of growth, reconciliation, and the rectification of past sins, oversights and blind spots. This is the hope we have in a process of sanctification that is not just a legal declaration or a magical prayer that makes growth and change irrelevant and unnecessary. It is what we are supposed to "do" as the Church Militant, struggling here on earth to follow Christ.

“God fashioned man and woman in such a way that one fulfilled what was lacking in the other. That which man had, the woman did not have and that which the woman had, the man did not have. A man has certain abilities and talents, and a woman has others. With their union, the one completes the other, and a human being is brought to perfection. A man and woman are like two half people who when they are joined, form a whole person; they are like two hemispheres which, when joined make a whole sphere. Man is more mind, and woman is more heart, and in that holy union of marriage they complement each other.” - Bishop Augustinos Kantiotes 

Conclusion

The sacramental view of marriage, rooted in Scripture and the teachings of the Church Fathers, affirms the sanctity and indissolubility of the marital union, and this should be the standard that the Western Orthodox uphold. While Eastern Orthodox theology has been influenced by Stoic attitudes towards pleasure, a return to a more biblical and patristic understanding can address these issues. We affirm that the Sacrament of Marriage is a profound covenant that reflects God’s love and commitment to His people, and it should be upheld with the dignity and respect it deserves. Monasticism and marriage are both paths to holiness, each with its unique calling and purpose. By fostering a balanced theology that honors both, the Church can promote the flourishing of families and the spiritual growth of all its members.