Folia Canonica 11. (2008)
STUDIES - George D. Gallaro: Oikonomia and Marriage Dissolution in the Christian East
116 GEORGE D. GALLARO The termination of the sacramental character of marriage on account of adultery (and similar cases) was accepted by everyone in the East and held as an undisputed fact because such was the interpretation of the Gospel. As for allowing second marriages, at least for the “innocent party,” obviously the Church did everything possible to prevent from happening, but at the end she tolerated it and applied the principle of economy. The “guilty party” was not allowed for many years to receive Communion because of the act of adultery, even though he/she did not re-marry. The innocent party obviously remained in full communion provided he/she kept chaste. But if the partner asked the Church for a second marriage because of his/her incontinence, the Church tolerated the second marriage according to St. Paul’s words, “it is better to marry than to live in torture.” However, the Church applied even to the innocent party some ecclesiastical discipline, the so-called epitimia (= the penance given by a confessor during Holy Confession). This was not considered a strict punishment, since this party was presumed innocent, but as a spiritual medicine suitable to heal him/her from the base passions and to show that the practice was the application of a compassionate measure on account of the infirmity of the flesh. This tolerance of second marriages derived from the Christian desire to discourage fornication. In fact, fornication was considered by everyone a very serious sin regarding which no compromise was possible. It was likened to polygamy because it was not a committed relationship as well as because it was a relationship with various persons, and therefore destroying the mystery whose image marriage is. It should not be forgotten that Christianity in the East has always held conjugal relationship as willed by God to give witness to this mystery. St. Basil, writing to Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium, about the intolerant party which did not allow a second marriage to the widows, says that if such intolerance were to be applied after the age of sixty it could somehow be acceptable; but if the widow is young, we would be responsible for her sins of fornication by our intolerance.46 Therefore, the Church, confronted with the great number of people embracing Christian faith in the fourth century which still maintained not a few immoral disorders, accepted to apply economy within well defined limits and conditions. Instead of an indiscriminate fornication she preferred a one-to- one and stable sexual relationship in the case of partners who had put an end to their sacramental marriage, provided that the second bond was entered into within the Christian tradition and according to civil law. This is no longer a sacramental marriage but a sacred bond in the natural sense as man still carries in himself God’s image. The evil of the dissolution of marriage in itself consists not so much in the social aspect of the breaking of the marital bond but rather in man’s failure to keep his obligation, by his moral conduct within his mar46 Way, op. cit. St. Basil speaks only of widowers, but we can deduce what was the mentality that led the Church to certain applications that we can extend.
