The Second Marriage Service in the Orthodox Church

Andrea Palmieri

During the last decades, some people in Cath- which had various stages. The study of the olic circles have been looking towards the East Orthodox service’s historical development will in an attempt to fi nd a solution to the pastoral help clarify and understand the proper value of issue of divorced, remarried individuals who the service itself. desire to be fully united with the Church and to receive Eucharistic communion within their second (more successful) marriage.1 This interest has 1. Historical Overview the Practice lead to a deeper understanding and knowledge of Second Marriages of the practice of the Orthodox Churches. This practice, in particular circumstances, offers for In the early period, which dates from the second the possibility of a new marriage after divorce. half of the eighth century – when the Barberini However, concerns of a pastoral nature and Gr. 336 manuscript in which the marriage service purely Catholic issues have often conditioned the appeared for the fi rst time was drafted – to the answers to questions raised by the rite or service end of tenth century, no known examples of sec- used by the Orthodox Church for the blessing ond marriage services exist. To the contrary, of second marriages. The interpretations concern- many raised their voices, for example Theodoros ing the signifi cance of this service as well as of Studites,2 Nikeforos the Confessor,3 Photios4 and its sacramental nature vary according to whether patriarch Sisinnios II,5 against any intervention one wishes to affi rm or to deny the legitimacy of by the priest to allow successive marriages and the entire practice. This question is, of course, more particularly against the crowning of the not of secondary importance. It is precisely spouses, which from the sixth century onward through the service that it is possible to under- became one of the most signifi cant liturgical rites stand how the discipline of second marriage is of the marriage service. It is nevertheless impor- perceived in the ecclesial experience and the tant to notice that during this period the religious theological refl ection of the Orthodox Church. service was not yet considered as the sole legiti- In order to grasp the full meaning of the mate form of contracting a marriage.6 Marriage Orthodox Churches’ practice, it is appropriate could also be contracted according to the pre- to leave aside the pastoral concerns and to begin scriptions of civil law, while reserving the blessing an analysis of the second marriage service pres- by the priest and the nuptial crowning to those ently in force, – its story and its key elements cases where the Christian spouses were consid- – in order to study, in a second phase, the theo- ered worthy by the leading community members. logical meaning of the service in the light of the One should note that the prohibition of a reli- historical and liturgical research results. gious service for successive marriages does not The present form of the second marriage serv- express a blunt condemnation tout court of a sec- ice is the fi nal result of a centuries-old evolution ond or even a third marriage. To the Christian

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117070 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0716:55:07 A. Palmieri

faithful who wanted to remarry, it was not for- provides examples of the Church’s resolute bidden to contract a successive marriage, but they defence of her indisputable principles; such was had to make use of the modalities foreseen by 7 civil law. Such modalities, however, did not 1 This article is a synthesis of the major conclusions of allow the intervention of a priest. Indeed, those the author’s research, A. Palmieri: Il rito per le seconde individuals who wished to unite in second mar- nozze nella Chiesa greco-ortodossa, Bari: Ecumenica, 2007. A detailed review of the attempts to look at the riage by means of the above modalities became Eastern approach to the issue of divorced remarried subject to canonical sanctions consisting in tem- people can be found in B. Petrà: Il matrimonio può porary exclusion from the Divine Mysteries.8 morire? Studi sulla pastorale dei divorziati risposati, Bolo- gna: Dehoniane, 1996, 74-80. During this fi rst period we defi nitely encounter 2 Cf. G. Fatouros: Theodori Studitae Epistulae, Pars Prior: in the Christian community a vivid awareness of Prolegomena et textum epp. 1-70 continens, Berlin - a value difference between the fi rst marriage – New York: De Gruyter, 1992, 57-62. 84-88. 145-151; G. Fatouros: Theodori Studitae Epistulae, Pars Altera: which alone corresponds fully to the ideal of Textum epp. 71-564 et indices continens, Berlin - New monogamy – and successive marriages. This value York: De Gruyter, 1992, 783-784. 807-808. difference is preserved by reserving or limiting 3 Cf. J.B. Pita: Iuris ecclesiastici Graecorum historia et the religious service exclusively to the fi rst mar- monumenta, II, Rome: Typis Collegi Urbani, 1868, 328. 4 Cf. B. Laourdas/L.G. Westernik: Photii Patriarchae riage. This fact notwithstanding, second and even Constantinopolitani Epistulae et Amphilochia, III, Leipzig: third marriages were blessed during this period. Teubner, 1981-1988, 155-157. The evidence presently available refers always to 5 Cf. A. Pavlov: “Sinodalnoe postanovlenie patriarcha Sisinnia o nevencianii vtorobracnich”, in: Vizantiskij marriages at the imperial court, fi rstly because Vremmenik 2 (1895), 156-159. the interest of the historians of those days was 6 Cf. K. Ritzer: Le mariage dans les Eglises chrétiennes du overwhelmingly oriented in this direction and Ier au XIe siècle, Paris: Cerf, 1970 (Münster, 1962), 94-97, 134-135; P. Dacquino: Storia del matrimonio cristiano secondly because of likely pressures from the alla luce della Bibbia, I: La celebrazione del matrimonio, imperial family in favour of successive marriages Leumann: Elledici, 1984, 181-188. 237-244. which churchmen could not resist. 7 See for example, what is established by canon 149 of Nikephoros the Confessor. Cf. J.B. Pitra: Iuris ecclesi- At the end of the eighth century, Emperor astici, II, 328. The canon offers a typical example of a Constantine VI had his second marriage blessed gamos agrafos form, such as is provided by the Ecloga by a priest called Joseph of the Agia Sofi a Church. legum of the Emperors Leo III and Constantine V. Cf. J. Zepos/P. Zepos: Jus Graecoromanum, II: Leges Imper- Patriarch Tarasios, who refused to celebrate the atorum Isaurorum et Macedonum, Athens: Georgiou marriage, did not however take any disciplinary Fexe, 1931, 18. action against the priest, stirring much protest 8 The canonical penitential discipline with regard to those from Theodoros Studites.9 It is interesting to contracting a second or third marriage is very old. Cf. P.P. Joannou: Fonti, IX: Discipline générale antique notice that in this case we are dealing with a (IV e – IXe s.) I,2: Les canons des Sinodes Particuliers, Grot- second marriage while the fi rst legitimate wife taferrata: Tipografi a Italo-Orientale S.Nilo, 1962, 78, was still living. Despite the strong polemical 130; Y. Courtonne: Saint Basile: Lettres, II, Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1961, 125. Moreover, second marriage con- stand of the unbending studite monk against the stituted an impediment for the reception of sacred blessing of the second marriage, Theodoros never orders. A man married two times or a man married to used this argument (i.e. a second marriage with a widow or with a separated wife could not be elected for the diaconate or the priesthood. Cf. M. Metzeger: the fi rst wife still living). At the beginning of the Les Constitutions Apostoliques, III, Livres VII et VIII, tenth century, even the fourth marriage of Paris: Cerf, 1987, 278-279. Emperor Leo VI the Wise was blessed.10 At last, 9 Cf. C. De Boor: Theophanis Chronographia, I, Leipzig: Teubner, 1883, 469-470; G. Fatouros: Theodori Studi- it seems very likely that also in 963 the second tae Epistulae, Pars Prior, 57-62. marriage of Emperor Nikeforos II was blessed.11 10 Cf. I. Bekker: Theophanes Continuatus, Ioannes Came- It would, nevertheless, be erroneous to assume niata, Symeon Magister, Georgius Monachus, Bonn: Weber, 1838, 370. that the Church changed her practice due to 11 Cf. I. Bekker: Georgii Cedreni Historiarum Compen- pressures from the imperial court, when history dium, II, Bonn: Weber. 1839, 351-352.

171

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117171 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0716:55:07 INTAMS review 14 (2008)

the case concerning the fourth marriage of perhaps in this original stage no crowning Leo VI. Patriarch Nicholas I the Mystikos refused occurred.17 The prayer invokes the divine blessing indeed to bless this marriage and for this reason upon spouses who unite for the second time in was deposed and exiled, leading to a long period full accord with the divine will expressed by Paul’s of confl ict within the Church between support- teaching in 1 Cor 7,9.39, which is explicitly quoted: ers of pastoral indulgence (oikonomia) and “better than burning of the body is the marriage defenders of norm rigour (akribeia). Only many in the Lord” (kreisson einai tes somatiks puroseos en years later, in 920, did the confl ict end with the Kurio gamon). The tone is defi nitely positive and synod of Constantinople. Under the guidance of there does not seem to be any doubt that this Nicholas the Mystikos a decree was issued known prayer constitutes a prayer of nuptial blessing. as Tomus unionis by which a fourth marriage was Other evidence of a second marriage service is also absolutely prohibited while allowing a third mar- present in a manuscript copied between 1121 and riage in certain cases and under special condi- 1122 in southern Italy, the so-called Oxford Bod- tions.12 leian Auct. E.5.13 manuscript (“eis eulogian diga- Between the beginning of the eleventh and mias”).18 This manuscript deals with a more com- twelfth centuries, certain specifi c services for the plex service. While replacing the usual marriage blessing of second marriages distinct from the service, the second marriage service preserves some usual marriage services appeared in the liturgical of its rituals, in particular the crowning of the manuscripts. The existence of second marriage spouses. This softening of the practice seems to be services is probably linked to the convergence of due to a widespread laxity in Constantinople, once two main factors. A fi rst factor is the outcome of again for marriages at the imperial court.19 The a process – precisely at the beginning of the new result was a contamination of the practice of millennium – whereby the religious service became neighbouring churches, as is confi rmed by Met- the general indispensable condition for contracting ropolitan Niketas of Herakleia’s witness20 at the a legitimate marriage.13 Once a religious service end of the eleventh century and by Metropolitan was mandatory for contracting a legitimate mar- Elias of Crete21 at the beginning of the twelfth riage, the Church was compelled to bless even century. It is no wonder, therefore, that in this those marriages which she considered as not being general climate of slackened discipline the south- completely in accord with the ideal. In order to ern Italian service inserted the crowning of the bypass the ban on blessing second marriages, a spouses. This second marriage service remains nev- proper service was conceived for individuals mar- ertheless clearly distinguished from the usual mar- rying a second time, though this service remained riage service because of the absence of the Eucha- distinct from the fi rst marriage service.14 The sec- ristic cup, replaced by a cup of common wine, and ond factor constitutes the gradual acceptance by by the use of different prayers. Among the prayers all ecclesiastical circles, including the most intran- proper to the second marriage service, the most sigent ones, of the dispositions of the Tomus interesting is the fi rst, because it is the only prayer unionis regulating successive marriages.15 The ear- which refers explicitly to second marriages. This liest evidence of a service for the blessing of second prayer is identical to another found in the oriental marriages is the prayer for those who marry for Sinai Gr. 973 manuscript (“akolouthia epi diga- the second time, contained in the Paris Coislin 213 mounton”),22 copied between 1152 and 1153, which manuscript copied in Constantinople in 1027 suggests that its origins are oriental, despite the (“euche epi digamon”).16 This prayer, which imme- fact that the Italian-Greek manuscript is older. In diately follows the service for fi rst marriages, is not this prayer divine blessing is invoked upon the accompanied by rubrics and contains no other spouses who are united in marriage for the second additions. It is therefore not possible to know with time for reasons of human weakness, according to certainty how the service took place, except that Paul’s teaching in 1 Cor 7,9, which is explicitly

172

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117272 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08 A. Palmieri

quoted: “we do not succeed in restraining our- spouses were crowned. Interestingly, in this case selves in this way” (ouk egkrateuometha tou einai the same patriarch presided over the liturgical emas outos). Both prayers for the blessing of second celebration. In the fi fteenth century Simeon, marriages, i.e. the prayer of Constinopolitan origin Archbishop of Thessaloniki, learned scholar of and the one of oriental origin, are largely present in the manuscript tradition; this being a sign of 12 Cf. L.G. Westernik: Nicholas I Patriarch of Constanti- nople: Miscellaneous Writings, Washington, DC: The their large diffusion. It is noteworthy that the great Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies, 1981, canon law commentators of the twelfth century, 56-85. Theodoros Balsamon and Aristenos,23 do not make 13 The religious form for the end of a marriage became compulsory from the end of the ninth century through further mention of the prohibition of a religious the Novella 89 of Emperor Leo VI. Cf. P. Noailles/ service for second marriages. That the awareness A. Dain: Les Novelles de Léon VI le sage, Paris: Les Belles of a value difference between fi rst marriages and Lettres, 1944, 294-297. The legislation of Leo VI was taken over by Emperor Alexis I, who in the years between successive marriages was still very much alive dur- 1084 and 1095 extended the obligation of religious cel- ing this period remains visible, in practice, by the ebration of marriages also to slaves. Cf. J. Zepos/ establishment of a proper service for the blessing P. Zepos: Jus Graecoromanum, I: Novellae et Aureae Bul- of second and third marriages that differs from the lae Imperatorum post Iustinianum, Athens: Georgiou Fexe, 1931, 305-309, 311-312, 341-346. usual one. At the same time, the gradual introduc- 14 Cf. P. L’Huillier: “Novella 89 of Leo the Wise on Mar- tion of the crowning of spouses in second marriage riage: An Insight into its Theoretical and Practical services seems to indicate that although a distinc- Impact”, in: The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 32 (1987), 160. tion between the different marriages existed, a 15 Cf. S. Parenti: “Matrimonio, A - In Oriente”, in: A.J. certain value – albeit limited and partial – could Chupungco (ed.): Scientia Liturgica: Manuale di litur- also be attributed to successive marriages. gia, IV: Sacramenti e sacramentali, Casale Monferrato: Piemme, 1998, 282. Beginning in the thirteenth century, the use 16 Cf. M. Arranz: L’eucologio costantinopolitano agli inizi of a religious service for the blessing of second del secolo XI: Hagiasmatarion e Archieratikon (Rituale e marriages, frequently including the crowning of Pontifi cale): Con l’aggiunta del Leiturgikon (Messale), Rome: Editrice Pontifi cia Università Gregoriana, 1996, spouses, gradually became fi xed. A document of 323. the late fourteenth century confi rms that second 17 Cf. E. Herman: “Euchè epì digàmon”, in: Orientalia and third marriages were contracted using a reli- Christiana Periodica 1 (1935), 475-477. 18 Cf. A. Jacob: “Un eucologe du Saint - Sauveur «in gious service just as for the fi rst marriage. We Lingua Phari» de Messine: Le Bodleianus Auct. E.5.13”, fi nd this in a list of marriages celebrated from in: Bulletin de l’Institut historique Belge de Rome 50 August 1399 to January 1400 in the Church of (1980), 321-322. Constantinople during the reign of patriarch 19 Cf. I. Bekker: Georgii Cedreni II, 484-485, 505, 542, 738; I. Thurn: Ioannis Scylitzae Synopsis Historiarum, Berlin Matthew I. After each date, the number of pre- – New York: De Gruyter, 1973, 374. 423; E. Renauld: vious marriages is registered along with the name Michaelis Pselli Chronographia, I, Paris: Les Belles Letres, of the bishop or the priest who celebrated the 1927, 31, 127; P. Gautier: Nicephori Bryennii Historiarum Libri Quattuor, Brussels: Byzantion, 1975, 253-254. service and the name of the spouses. No differ- 20 Cf. A. Pavlov: “Kanoniceskie otveti Nikity, mitropolita ence is mentioned between the fi rst marriage and Iraklijskago (XI – XII veka)”, in: Vizantiskij Vremmenik the second or third one, except for registering 2 (1895), 167. 24 21 Cf. PG 199, 992. the number of previous marriages. In 1427, 22 Cf. A. Dmitrievkij: Opisanie liturgiceskich rukopisej Emperor John VII Paleologos married Maria hranjascihsja v bibliotekach pravoslavnogo vostoka, II: Comnena of Trebizond in his third marriage. The Euchologia, Kiev: G.T. Korcak – Novickogo, 1901, 126. 23 Cf. PG 137, 1213, 1216. historian Ducas reports that it was patriarch 24 Cf. F. Miklosich/J. Müller: Acta et Diplomata Graeca Joseph II who personally united both spouses Medii Aevi Sacra et Profana, II: Acta Patriarchatus “using the conventional liturgical rites”.25 It is Constantinopolitani MCCCXV - MCCCCII, Wien: Gerold, 1862, 297-299. impossible to know precisely which kind of serv- 25 I. Bekker: Ducae Michaeli Ducae nepotis Historia ice was used, but everything suggests that the Byzantina, Bonn: Weber, 1834, 102.

173

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117373 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08 INTAMS review 14 (2008)

the liturgical traditions of his Church, composed Confessor, patriarch of Constantinople, recalls a treatise on marriage. At the time that the Arch- the older discipline forbidding crowning under bishop described the matrimonial service, he did measures of penance. On the other hand, the not seem to be aware of any other difference than canonical response of Niketas, metropolitan of the prohibition of those who unite in a second Herakleia, to bishop Constantine, certifi es the marriage to receive the Divine Mysteries. The use of crowns during second and third marriages. individual who marries for the second time can, The reference to third marriages is a modern indeed, only have access to the common cup as insertion in the text of Niketas and appears only a sign of “partial blessing”.26 The liturgical sources in some later editions of liturgical books, in order also certify the gradual confi rmation of the exist- to justify not only the use of crowns during third ence of a second marriage service. Indeed, such marriages but probably also to the use of the a service appears in an increasing number of same second marriage service for the blessing of manuscripts, copied between the thirteenth and third marriages33. The presence of these provi- seventeenth centuries. The Sinai Gr. 977 manu- sions shows the evolution of the liturgical and script of 1516 is unique in the entire Byzantine canonical discipline towards a greater indulgence liturgical tradition, as it reproduces a prayer in favour of those who marry for the second or intended for the blessing of a third marriage.27 third time; at the same time it witnesses a close The few voices originating from very conservative connection between the liturgical dimension and circles and insisting on a rigorous observance of the canonical penitential dimension. the older discipline do in fact confi rm the exist- The structure of the second marriage service ence of a new practice in this period.28 The sec- is fundamentally consistent with the liturgical ond marriage service becomes established once structure of the fi rst marriage service, because the and for all with the publication of the fi rst litur- two services which form the traditional matri- gical books beginning in the sixteenth century.29 monial ceremony, i.e., the betrothal service The service described in these fi rst liturgical (“akolouthia epi mnestrois”) and the crowning books rapidly ousted all other rites and has been service (“akolouthia tou stefanomatos”) are joined taken over, without major changes, in more together. The second marriage service, however, recent editions.30 During this period, one might distinguishes itself from the conventional service say that the historical development of the service by a more sober and less festive tone. comes to a close, leading to its present form. The solemn entrances foreseen at the beginning of the service during the celebration of the fi rst marriage are absent in the second. The sec- 2. The Current Liturgical Practice ond marriage service does not open with the in the Greek Orthodox Church acclamation “Blessed is the Kingdom of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”, In the liturgical books presently used in the which in a certain sense links the fi rst marriage Greek Orthodox Church, the second marriage service to the Divine Liturgy, but begins with the service, named “akolouthia eis digamon”, imme- acclamation “Blessed is our God, always”. The diately follows the conventional matrimonial diaconal litany is more sober and lacks the other services.31 The service is not contained in the petitions since they do not seem to be in har- bishop’s books of ceremonies, which means that mony with the celebration of a successive mar- a bishop should normally never preside over such riage. This is followed by two priestly prayers of a celebration. blessing, which are the same as in the betrothal Some canonical dispositions concerning the service. Immediately after, the priest takes the second marriage precede the real and proper rings and hands them over to the spouses pro- service as such.32 The canon 8 of Nikeforos the nouncing the same formula used in the betrothal

174

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117474 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08 A. Palmieri

service. The fi nal prayer of the betrothal service, involuntary transgressions) and biblical images by which the divine blessing is invoked over the (the forgiveness of Rahab, the Publican’s repent- nuptial rings, is replaced by two prayers that are ance, the Harlot’s tears, the Thief’s confession) only present in the celebration of the second that are typical of the Byzantine penitential marriage service. Although the fi rst two prayers prayers.35 The petition addressed to God – to of the crowning service are suppressed, the serv- draw near the spouses in order to unite them in ice maintains the third; i.e. the prayer immedi- mutual love – seems a more recent insertion ately preceding the crowning of the spouses. The intended to adapt the penitential prayer to the crowning unfolds in the same manner as for nuptial context. those who marry for the fi rst time. The crowning The second prayer, though replete with peti- formula pronounced by the priest is also the tions for forgiveness, contains more references same. The liturgy of the Word, the litanies of the relevant to second marriages. At the beginning deacon, the Our Father, the blessing of the com- is a petition addressed to the Lord Jesus to grant mon cup, the liturgical procession around the mercy for the transgressions committed by those Gospel and the singing of the troparia, the taking for whom the prayer is offered. A new proposi- up of the crowns, the fi nal blessing and the dis- tion explains that those are the spouses “who missal of the congregation are exactly the same together are now entering a second marriage as in the crowning service. 26 PG 155, 513. 27 Cf. A. Dmitrievkij: Opisanie, II: Euchologia, 717. 28 This is the case of a rubric of the benediction service 3. Theological Issues at Stake: Penitential for second marriages in the Athos Laura 21 manuscript, Character, Crowning, and Sacramentality copied in 1536 and establishing that the crowning does not take place when both spouses contract a second marriage. Cf. A. Dmitrievkij: Opisanie, II: Euchologia, After this brief overview of the second marriage 764. It is probably a traditional element which survived service, two interesting aspects emerge. On one in a strong conservative milieu. See E. Herman: “Euchè”, 489. hand, the two prayers – absent from conven- 29 Cf. Euchologion, Venice, 1571; Euchologion, Venice, tional marriage services but proper to the second 1578. marriage service – represent the fundamental 30 Cf. J. Goar: Euchologion sive Rituale Graecorum, Paris: Piaget, 1647, 401; Euchologion to Mega, Venice, 1749; novelty of the service. On the other hand, the Euchologion to Mega, Venice, 1862; Euchologion to Mega, crowning together with many prayers and litur- Athens, 1927. gical rites are in conformity with the fi rst mar- 31 Mikron Euchologion e Agiasmatarion, Athens: Apostolike riage service. Diakonia, 2004, 127-144. 32 Mikron Euchologion, 126. The two prayers proper to the second mar- 33 The original text of Niketas of Herakleia can be com- riage service are of relatively recent origin, being pared to the text edited by Euchologion to Mega, Venice, certifi ed for the fi rst time by codex Athos 16 of 1749, 204 or the text edited by Euchologion to Mega, Venice, 1776, 204. the fourteenth century, although they do not 34 A. Dmitrievkij: Opisanie, II: Euchologia, 499. form part of a structured service.34 Once these 35 See for example the prayers referred to by M. Arranz: prayers had been designated in the published “Les prières pénitentielles de la tradition byzantine: Les sacrements de la restauration de l’ancien eucologe liturgical books as the singular prayers proper to constantinopolitain. II- 2 (1ère partie)”, in: Orientalia the second marriage service, they ultimately Christiana Periodica 57 (1991), 87-143; M. Arranz: “Les replaced the older prayers. prières pénitentielles de la tradition byzantine. Les sacrements de la restauration de l’ancien eucologe In the fi rst prayer, no single explicit reference constantinopolitain. II- 2 (2e partie)”, in: Orientalia is made to second marriages. The prayer is essen- Christiana Periodica 57 (1991), 309-329; M. Arranz: tially composed of requests for forgiveness, “Les prières pénitentielles de la tradition byzantine. Les sacrements de la restauration de l’ancien eucologe expressed through language (remission of offences, constantinopolitain. II- 2 (3e partie)”, in: Orientalia mercy for sins and forgiveness of voluntary and Christiana Periodica 58 (1992), 23-82.

175

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117575 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08 INTAMS review 14 (2008)

communion” (“eis gamou deuteran koinonian the prayers used before confession during the sunerchontai” ). The conjunction oti connecting sacrament of penance.36 These prayers, however, both propositions has a declarative value. A causal are not reconciliation prayers similar to those for interpretation of the conjunction does not seem other categories of sinners.37 Text analysis shows appropriate; for if that were the case, the act of that they do not contain a petition for forgive- entering a second communion would express the ness, since the context is that of a second mar- ratio for the petition for forgiveness, assuming riage. The penitential expressions of both prayers by this that a second marriage is a sinful act in intend to build the awareness that the whole of need of forgiveness. Such an interpretation can- human existence is marked by sin and that the not be reconciled with the course of the prayer, conclusion of a second marriage does not escape where it is said that the possibility to unite in a this reality. Moreover, an important role of the second marriage corresponds to what Jesus has prayers’ dynamics seems to be set forth by the enacted through the words of Paul (“kathos explicit reference to 1 Cor 7. By means of this enomothetesas dia tou Paulou tou apostolou”). The reference, the prayers express Paul’s attitude, second marriage cannot be considered evil as which is perceived as normative, towards second such, for the reason that Jesus, acting through marriages. An evaluation of the prayers and, con- Paul, would never have conceded to a wicked sequently of the entire service, presupposes a cor- act. The petition for forgiveness seems more rect interpretation of 1 Cor 7,8-9.39-40.38 Accord- likely to be linked to the human condition of sin ing to Paul, the individual who ponders entering and weakness: “not having the strength to sustain a second marriage has three moral options: i.e., the scorching heat and burden of the day and the fi rst, which is the best course or the one that the burning fever of the fl esh” (“ton kausona kai is simply considered the most profitable for to baros tes emeras, kai tes sarkos ten purosin me Christians, is to remain unmarried or not to ischuontes bastazein” ). The choice to remarry is remarry; the second concerns the sinful act of not bad in itself, but remains nevertheless a sign committing fornication, which is to be avoided of weakness for which pardon should be asked. absolutely; between opting for the best action The reality in which the human being is immersed and avoiding evil lies the third option which is provides the context for which the prayer refers the non-sinful action – it does not realise what to Paul’s teachings about second marriages. It is is best, but it does realise what is good, which is, very interesting to notice how current-day prayers to marry. The option to marry is not presented for second marriages – like the earlier ones – refer by Paul as a minor evil, because to marry is, as to the explicit Pauline text in 1 Cor 7;9.39: “it is such, neither an evil nor a tolerated ill, but is better to remarry in the Lord than to burn” (“kre- considered a minor good or a simple good, which isson en Kurio gamein e purousthai” ). Lastly, the the apostle commands presuming the unavoid- prayer continues with new petitions for forgive- ability of sin in pursuit of the better option. The ness addressed to the Lord Jesus, who is presented single individual, though conscious of his/her as the One who takes care of the lost wounded weakness and of the presence of sin in life, is not by sin. The Church praying for those who unite condemned to opt for a minor evil. Despite per- in a second marriage continues the merciful sonal weakness, particularly present in the emo- action of Jesus. Even more so, it is precisely Jesus tional sphere which renders the person incapable himself who continues to exercise mercy through of attaining the ideal summit to which one is the liturgical action of His Church. called, he/she ought to search for the possible The two specifi c prayers of the second mar- good that a second marriage may provide.39 riage service are striking in their penitential tone. Both prayers of the second marriage service They express none of the joyful tone of the fi rst certainly confer a penitential character onto the marriage service’s prayers, but seem to echo more entire rite,40 even if a reductive interpretation of

176

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117676 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08 A. Palmieri

the akolouthia eis digamon as an exclusively pen- unique.47 Because a second union does not itential service is barred because the spouses are entirely correspond to the ideal,48 it does not crowned during the liturgical action.41 The litur- seem to refl ect adequately the union between gical symbol of the crowns has great signifi cance in Orthodox marriage liturgy, so much so that the marriage service is also called the “crowning 36 Cf. A. Nelidow: “Caractère pénitentiel du rite des deuxièmes noces”, in: A. Triacca/A. M. Pistoia (eds.): service”. The crowning of spouses was already Liturgie et rémission des péchés: Conférences Saint-Serge: known in ancient times, both in the pagan world XXe Semaine d’études liturgiques, Paris, 2-5 juillet 1973, as well as the Jewish. Christianity had adopted Rome: Centro Liturgico Vincenziano, 1975, 176. 37 Cf. P. Dacquino: Storia del matrimonio cristiano alla this custom, albeit with some resistance, and luce della Bibbia, II, Leumann: Elledici, 1988, 175, 189. only after John Chrysostom attributed to the 38 Cf. C.K. Barret: La prima lettera ai Corinti: Testo e crowns a sense of reward for premarital absti- commento, Bologna: Dehoniane, 1979 (London, 1971), 42 205, 233; G. Barbaglio: La prima lettera ai Corinzi: nence. Once integrated into the marriage cer- Introduzione, versione, commento, Bologna: Dehoniane, emony through many references in liturgical 1995, 339, 364. prayers, the crowning has assumed other mean- 39 Cf. B. Petrà: Il matrimonio, 218, 220-221. ings. Wedding crowns became the symbol of the 40 Cf. P. L’Huillier: “L’attitude de l’Église Orthodoxe 43 vis-à-vis du remariage des divorcés”, in: Revue de droit gift of the Holy Spirit granted to the spouses, canonique 29 (1979), 47; J. Meyendorff: “Christian a sign referring also to martyrdom and the Marriage in Byzantium: The Canonical and Liturgical cross,44 a kind of anticipation of the eschato- Tradition”, in: Dumbarton Oaks Papers 44 (1990), 106. 41 Cf. N. Nagorny: “The Scope of Faith: A Bibliographic logical reward that faithful spouses will one day Essay”, in: J.J. Allen (ed.): Vested in Grace: Priesthood receive directly from God.45 Given the profound and Marriage in the Christian East, Brookline, MA: Holy liturgical meaning of the nuptial crowns, one Cross Orthodox Press, 2001, 312. 42 Cf. PG 62, 546 understands better why the Church, in the fi rst 43 Cf. D.M. Petras: “The liturgical theology of marriage”, period, wanted to reserve their use exclusively in: Diakonia 16 (1981), 232-233; D. Gelsi: “Punti di for the fi rst marriage and prohibited crowning rifl essione sull’uffi cio bizantino per la «incoronazione» degli sposi”, in: G. Farnedi (ed.): La celebrazione cris- during the second marriage. The introduction tiana del matrimonio: Simboli e testi; Atti del II congresso of the crowning ritual in the second marriage internazionale di liturgia, Roma, 27-31 maggio 1985, service probably came about by imitating Rome: Studia Anselmiana, 1986, 293. 44 Cf. K. Ware: “The Sacrament of Love: The Orthodox what occurred during the fi rst marriage service. Understanding of Marriage and its Breakdown”, in: Whatever the case may be, this could not have Downside Review 109 (1991), 84-85. happened without the Church recognising the 45 Cf. A. Schmemann: For the Life of the World: Sacraments second marriage as real, though partial and and Orthodoxy, Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1973, 91. imperfect, and to which is attributed a value as 46 According to the famous Orthodox theologian J. Mey- similar to that of the fi rst marriage.46 endorff: “Second marriage is admitted only as long as Given what has emerged from this analysis of the ideal norm of an eternal union in the name of Christ and according to the laws of the future Kingdom is second marriage services, it is possible to answer maintained. The fact that the Church eventually the question concerning their sacramental value. included crowning in the service for second marriages Marriage is a natural reality; however, in Christ indicates that they too can realize this ideal, whatever the formal irregularities” (J. Meyendorff: Marriage: it becomes a reality of salvation, a sign of the an Orthodox Perspective, Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s eschatological times, a visible refl ection of the Seminary Press, 1984, 46). Church, an anticipation of the joy of the King- 47 Cf. C. Moreschini: Grégoire de Nazianze: Discours 32-37, Paris: Cerf, 1985, 286. dom of God, the image and sacrament of the 48 Cf. R. Joly: Hermas le pasteur, Paris: Cerf, 1968, 162; spousal union between Christ and His Church. O. Stählin/L. Früchtel: Clemens Alexandrinus, II, As a sacrament, Christian marriage refl ects the Stromata. Buch I-VI, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1960, 233-234; H. Crouzel/F. Fournier/P. Périchon: union between Christ and the Church, between Origène: Homélies sur S. Luc: Texte latin et fragments God and Israel and, as such, should therefore be grecs, Paris: Cerf, 1962, 260-262.

177

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117777 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08 INTAMS review 14 (2008)

Christ and His Church.49 In this sense, it can be opportunity to those who, after terminating their reckoned that second marriages lack the fullness fi rst marriage for reasons of death of or separation of sacramental value. To deny this fullness of sec- from a spouse, are not able to remain faithful to ond marriages, however, does not mean that they the ideal of monogamy and who, because of the have no sacramental value. Second marriages do, human condition burdened by sin, are exposed indeed, participate to a certain extent in the full- to the risk of fornication. The second marriage ness of sacramental value, as unique and stable service is not the outcome of a condescending unions they are considered preferable to fornica- lack of rigorous application of the norm against tion. In a unique and stable relationship that takes evil (oikonomia – akribeia)52, nor of an option place after the previous marriage is terminated, for a minor evil as the result of careful delibera- not every aspect of the supernatural mystery of tion.53 The divine indulgence does not manifest which the matrimonial bond is an image is absent. itself by tolerating evil, but rather by not requir- For this reason, it is clear that second marriages ing all people to realise the ideal. Thus, it allows may not be considered equivalent to the sin of the person wounded by sin to attain the possible fornication. Second marriages preserve the unity good, while otherwise such a claim would further and stability that are the minimum required ele- worsen even more the burden of human exist- ments for the Church to recognise the matrimo- ence. The possibility of a second marriage does nial bond as a true Christian marriage for indi- not express the option for a minor evil, though viduals who are incapable of remaining single. such an option should be justifi ed by the par- Given that they do not retain the symbolical force ticularity of a concrete situation. For individuals of fi rst marriages, second marriages may not con- incapable of remaining single, second marriage stitute a real sacrament in the full and proper is a good. It allows the establishment of a unique sense. However, they refl ect a small – even though and stable relationship and, as such, constitutes distant – image of the union between Christ and the closest possible realisation of the required the Church and may constitute, though in an ideal. One may, however, not contract a new imperfect manner, a sacrament.50 Sacramental marriage without having acknowledged the role imperfection and incompleteness inevitably gen- of sin in this option. In order to understand the erates other problems, given that a sacrament full meaning of the second marriage service, one should be a sign of reality and of full and effective needs to take into account the specifi c attitude grace. For the Orthodox the issue does not present towards human existence that characterises the itself as such. Their concept of sacramentality entire service, which fi nally takes it inspiration manifests more or less fully according to the gen- from Paul’s attitude. The solution proposed by eral context of the ceremony and of its place in the Orthodox Church to the serious issue of an life. The Orthodox position seems to presuppose individual, whose previous union ended by the the existence of “diverse levels of marriage sacra- death of or the separation from the spouse and mentality”51, but no Orthodox author has ever who is unable to remain single without exposing developed such an affi rmation. Even if diffi cult him/herself to the risk of committing fornication, to understand and seemingly contradictory, this does not consist in the defence of an abstract appears to be the Orthodox point of view on the ideal which fails to take the human condition sacramentality of second marriages. into account nor in the unconditional surrender to this condition. The Orthodox Church does not relinquish its search to transform reality 4. Conclusion according to the fullness of the ideal. She does not accomplish this transformation by an abso- In this perspective, one can affi rm that the sec- lute imposition of the ideal to the reality, but ond marriage service intends to offer a new rather by assisting and accompanying the slow

178

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117878 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08 A. Palmieri

journey of reality towards its ideal by employing perfect symbolism. Cf. C.E. Curran: “Divorce: Cath- 54 all available means. Conceding a new possibil- olic Theory and Practice in the United States”, in: The ity of engaging in a second marriage, the Ortho- American Ecclesiastical Review 168 (1974), 87-88. dox Church does not intend to lower the ideal 50 Among the authors who give a positive answer to the question of the sacramentality of second marriages in to the level of weaker persons, but wishes to offer the Orthodox tradition, see T. Stylianopoulos: individuals an opportunity to continue pursuing “Toward a Theology of Marriage in the Orthodox the ideal, even if they have proven to be irrevers- Church”, in: The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 22 (1977), 280; G. Larentzakis: “Ehe, Ehescheidung und ibly unable to reach this ideal because of their Wiederverheiratung in der orthodoxen Kirche”, in: own failures. The Church is indeed conscious Theologisch-praktische Quartalschrift 125 (1977), 260; that marriage, like every Christian experience, is A.M. Wittig: “Die Einsegnung einer zweiten Ehe”, in: Ostkirchliche Studien 32 (1983), 47; J. Garvey: “Second a balance between what already exists and what Marriages in Orthodox Tradition”, in: Doctrine and Life does not yet exist, between the ideal and the real, 50 (2000), 465; N. NAGORNY: The Scope of Faith, 312. between the new life given in Christ and the 51 K. Reinhardt: “Sacramentalità e indissolubilità del matrimonio dal punto di vista dogmatico”, in: H. sinful condition inherited by Adam. For the Jedin/K. Reinhardt (eds.): Il matrimonio: Una ricerca faithful Christian, who already participates in storica e teologica, Brescia: Morcelliana, 1981, 173. this new life by virtue of Jesus Christ’s resurrec- 52 Cf. B. Häring: Pastorale dei divorziati: Una via senza uscita?, Bologna: Dehoniane, 1990. tion, marriage should be one and unique. Yet in 53 Cf. S. Privitera: “L’indissolubilità del matrimonio nella the present time distant from eschatological full- chiesa ortodossa-orientale”, in: Nicolaus 11 (1983), ness failures and breakdowns are possible.55 77-114. 54 Cf. B. Petrà: Tra cielo e terra: Introduzione alla teologia morale ortodossa contemporanea, Bologna: Dehoniane, 1991, 261. 49 In order that a sign can really be such, it has to be in 55 Cf. A. Schmemann: “The Indissolubility of Marriage: accordance with what it aims to express, otherwise it The Theological Tradition of the East”, in: W. Basset becomes an enigma. However, when a terrestrial reality (ed.): The Bond of Marriage: An Ecumenical and Inter- is called upon to signify a supernatural mystery, as in disciplinary Study, Notre Dame, IN-London: The Uni- the case of Christian marriage, it is impossible to have versity of Notre Dame Press, 1968, 103-104.

Born in 1970, Fr. Andrea Palmieri is a diocesan priest of the Archdiocese of Bari, Italy. Following his ordination in 1995, Fr. Palmieri studied moral theology at the Pontiﬁ cal Gregorian University in Rome and completed his doctoral research in 2006 at the Istituto San Nicola (Bari). He is presently pursuing his studies at the Theological Faculty of the Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece, and is also visiting professor at the Theological Fac- ulty of Apulia (Bari).

179

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 117979 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08 INTAMS review 14 (2008)

• Summary The Second Marriage Service in the Orthodox Church

In order to grasp the full mean- affi rm that a second marriage – conceding the possibility of ing of the Orthodox Churches’ after the end of the fi rst marriage engaging in a second marriage, practice concerning the possibil- caused by the death of or the the Orthodox Church wishes to ity of a new marriage after separation from a spouse – is not offer an opportunity to continue divorce, the author researches the considered an evil by the Ortho- pursuing the ideal. The value dif- second marriage service currently dox Church, though the choice ference between the fi rst marriage in use in the Greek Orthodox to remarry remains a sign of – which is the only one that cor- Church. First, he analyses the weakness for which pardon responds fully to the ideal – and service, its history and qualifying should be asked. For the indi- successive marriages is preserved elements, as for example, the vidual incapable of remaining by the establishment of a proper prayers of blessing for those who single without exposing himself/ service for the blessing of second marry for the second time and herself to the risk of committing and third marriages that differs wedding crowning. Second, he fornication, second marriage is from the fi rst marriage service. reflects on a number of theo- preferable. It allows the establish- Therefore, although a distinction logical issues that emerge, such ment of a unique and stable rela- exists between the different mar- as the sacramentality of the serv- tionship and constitutes the clos- riages, a limited and partial value ice and its ethical signifi cance. est possible realisation of the can be attributed to successive The conclusions lead one to Christian matrimonial ideal. In marriages.

180

11807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd807-08_Intams_08-2_03.indd 118080 225-02-20095-02-2009 16:55:0816:55:08