the introduction
You will discuss the topic of marriage and family:
In the early sixties, university students in the West were discussing the then-current topic of marriage and family with some irony in their meetings. They were imagining and repeating ideas that were difficult for the average person to believe or contemplate, for example: cohabitation, idealists or traditionalists, homosexuality, freedom of divorce… The signs were accumulating every day of the deterioration of the family as if it were a creature on the verge of extinction.
However, many institutions were in a much weaker position than the family. For example, the father would go to work in the morning, where he had begun his working life and hoped to end it. The mother would stay at home and take care of the many and varied household chores without any complaint or protest. If the boy worked hard at school and succeeded, he would undoubtedly get a seat at university, followed by a prestigious position in society. After a while, and after the young man began to feel secure and the future began to look promising, he would start thinking about marriage and starting a family.
The family atmosphere was rather calm. But slowly city life began to change. The family was the center and purpose of the community structure. The situation was not perfect, but it was acceptable.
After the Vietnam War and the return of thousands of soldiers from the war, drugs spread to the streets of the cities after they were only spread in the streets and poor areas. The depression that follows soldiers after the end of their service became the norm among most young people. Almost every young man carried anti-depressant medication, and preached new principles about sex. These people revolted against the traditions and principles of the age. Some of these protests were necessary, but most of them were destructive. After the idea of “sex on demand” spread, a man published a book called “COMFORT” that soon became the main reference for these movements. It explained how to have group sex, swap wives and enjoy physical pleasures in general. Adultery and homosexuality became acceptable as an expression of personal freedom. AIDS and other sexual diseases appeared. The book helped birth control companies, which had previously begun to close their doors due to the personal freedom that young people were experiencing, to revive their sales. At the same time, we notice that marriage and the family continued to descend into the abyss.
Amidst the turmoil, there were occasional signs of reason. Bishop Jean Spong wrote in his famous book, Living in Sin: “Sodomy, divorce, adultery, and adultery are acceptable, even moral, acts for our time.” The Presbyterian Church, on the other hand, voted against the law on “sex outside marriage.” If marriage and the family have reached the state they have, it is not because the Church has abdicated its responsibility to defend biblical teaching and marital fidelity. The reason is that some influential Christians have made decisions that reject the teachings of the Bible in the name of other principles that are more sublime to them: “personal autonomy,” “do what you will,” and so on.
It is easy to dismiss these ideas as passing. But when we consider that the divorce rate is fifty percent, and that less than twenty-five percent of families live in a family in the traditional sense (husband, wife, and natural or adopted children), we can be sure that the “institution” of marriage is facing a major dilemma. A dilemma that we Orthodox must face and deal with, for the future of our spirituality and the witness to which we are called and which we are asked to carry to a troubled and confused society. Why do Orthodox reject the principle of “do as you please and as you please”? How can we explain to our children and neighbors why the Church emphasizes sex only in marriage and marriage only once, in a service blessed by the Church? If technology enables us to have children without sex and sex without children, what is the logic of determining sex only in marriage?
The answer to these questions is found, as in the various moral questions, in the liturgy and other church services. In the letter to the Ephesians (5:20-33), we find the clearest answer: “Give thanks to God the Father at all times… Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ… The husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church, which is his body, and he is its Savior… Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church…” In this letter, the Apostle Paul explains to us that marriage is an eternal “covenant relationship” in which the unity of “the body in a mysterious way with the body of Christ, which is the church” is realized.
These passages have been misinterpreted by various groups, both in bad faith and in good faith. Most interpreters have considered the words of the Apostle to be a “patriarchal” or sexual system or the absolute submission of women to men. But the interpretation of these passages should be viewed from the perspective of the “light of the cross.” The secret of Christ’s relationship with his Church is one of humility and self-giving, “cleansing her from every stain and wrinkle.” This was accomplished through the mother, whom he nourished and cared for as his own and his body. Through the death and resurrection of the one who remains eternally “crucified” (Matt. 28:5), God fulfilled the promise of the Old Testament. In the new Israel, the promise of God was fulfilled, and the traditional family became possible according to the teaching of the New Testament, which Chrysostom calls the “little church.” In this ecclesiastical microcosm, man and woman become “one flesh,” committing their lives in an eternal commitment to each other and at the same time willingly accepting to participate in the work of creation. The ancients said: Marriage achieves two goals: first, it establishes a bond of love between a couple, and second, it brings a new life into the world.
The Apostle Paul adds in (1 Corinthians 7:16) that there is another purpose. In addition to love and creation, the spouses work together for their own salvation and the salvation of their children. This is the most important and highest purpose of marriage.
Why don’t we indulge in what is cynically known as “free sex”? Why do we choose the hard way to have an honorable and undefiled marriage? What is the value in denying ourselves the pleasure of “natural” sex when we want and with whomever we want? And if sex is a sacred sacrament according to the Bible, why do we work so hard to maintain purity in a world known for its perversion?
The answer to these questions will not be found in ethics lessons, “Don’t do it because…” but in the promise of the covenant, and the marital experience where the fullest fulfillment and greatest joy are founded on faithfulness and faith. St. John Chrysostom says: “Our life on earth is short and fleeting. But if we do the will of God, and exchange this life for the life to come, (husband and wife) will always be with Christ and with each other.
This hope is what sustains the Church on her difficult journey towards the Kingdom. It also sustains marriage, and in due time it produces what it should be: an icon of divine love and a cross where love is continually renewed. Amen.
The development of marriage in the Byzantine era
In this study, I have relied on the Syntagma references of the legal historian Plastarius in the fourteenth century, i.e. before the fall of the Byzantine Empire. I will examine the relationship of marriage to the liturgy and other sacraments of the Church. The Syntagma is the encyclopedia of the secular laws adopted by the Church at that time. The encyclopedia primarily examines marriage. It has greatly influenced Orthodox theological and legal thinking, and until the twelfth century remained the only reliable reference for all marriage laws.
The writer collected the ecclesiastical laws, and the empire and its secular institutions helped the church implement the laws by all means available to it.
The Encyclopedia includes twenty-four chapters: Chapters 1-13 discuss marriage and its laws. Plastarius says: “Church marriage was founded first on the giving of the ‘blessing’, then the ‘coronation’, then the ‘contract’.”
The blessing means engagement, and engagement cannot legally take place until after the age of twelve for males and the end of fourteen for females. The same applies to marriage. As for the dissolution of engagement, it is done in the same way as the dissolution of marriage, and therefore it must be based on specific and legal foundations.
According to the legislation of Emperor Alexius Camenus (1018-1118), the engagement was performed with a blessing, that is, with a special and specific prayer. The purpose of the prayer was to invoke the grace of the Holy Spirit to bring about the engagement and make it indissoluble. With this prayer, the engagement was considered as a marriage, because marriage is accomplished and fulfilled by the completion of the engagement. The engagement did not include all the marital duties, that is, it did not unite the spouses into one.
The word “crowning” means the basic prayer of marriage. The engagement prayer and the crowning prayer are the two steps to complete the union.
There are different theories regarding the third part, i.e. “the contract” and its relation to marriage. The most acceptable theory is that: 1. Since the engagement and marriage were accomplished by the bestowal of blessing, it can be said that the “contract” applies to the marriage of heretics who were not allowed to marry in church. 2. Since the marriage and engagement are performed by an ordained priest, the contract is performed by a person on behalf of the state. Its completion is as follows:
Before the service, the couple and their parents would come and sign what was known as the “cruciform contract.” Because the signature was made with a pen in the shape of a cross, the agreement meant that the two parties had agreed to be united and that their parents had expressed their consent by touching the tip of the pen with which they signed. The two parties could then give gifts and transfer land to the other spouse. After the state representative had approved what had happened, everyone would go to church for the service.
Marriage, Liturgy and Blessing
“Balsamoun” the most important and well-known legal reference says: “Marriage is completed with blessing and communion.”
The manuscripts of the fourteenth century confirm the same thing. From the above we can understand the relationship between Communion and marriage after comparing them with the subject of “excommunication.” The Syntagma Encyclopedia mentions two types of excommunication from Communion: the first occurs as a result of “the sin of the communicant.” The excommunication here is temporary and is remedied by repentance. As for the second type, it is permanent and results in the total separation of the excommunicated person from the membership of the Church.
The Church considers the marriage of two people to be sacred. Their participation in communion expresses the fulfillment of their marriage and their entitlement to what they have received (i.e. marriage in the Church). Communion also means that the Church has approved and blessed the marriage and that the unity is complete through the redemptive work of Christ.
Plastaros considered the liturgy to be the fulfillment of the symbolic role of the united and their worthiness for marriage. It is worth noting that participation in the liturgy was not a prerequisite for marriage. The prayer that calls upon the Holy Spirit to descend upon the spouses and unite them is the basic substance of the “blessing,” that is, the service of engagement and then the “crowning.” Historians have described the “blessing” as the granting of spiritual and sacred grace. As for the priest, he acted as a mediator between humanity and divinity, and he is the vessel to which the Holy Spirit bestowed the grace of sanctification. That grace that comes out of the vessel to descend upon the married couple and sanctify them. Thus, unity between the spouses is achieved.
Balsamon says: “The blessing that the priest gives to the married is the same and an extension of that grace that the Lord bestowed on the bride and groom of Cana of Galilee.”
The words “bless,” “crown,” and “contract” describe three steps in marriage, each of which carries within it a part of the marriage, and all of which together constitute a complete marriage. “Bless” means that a formal engagement has taken place, and this engagement imposes a negative responsibility on the marriage, namely, the responsibility of absolute fidelity and commitment on the part of the two spouses who will become husband and wife in the future. “Crowning” is the service that completes the union laid down in the engagement and shows the positive side of the couple. “Contract” is the announcement of a written agreement with a secular meaning that may include the transfer of provisions, money, and other things after the parents have given their consent to the marriage. The first two steps are done in the church and by the church. The third step is a matter of civil law and the church has no involvement in it.
Plastaros considered the liturgy to be the perfection of the marriage service and to show the importance of the event.
Metropolitan Paul Saliba
2006 September 26
About the Archdiocese of Australia and New Zealand
