Divorce and Remarriage

How does this work in the Anglican Church?

I ask, and I am ok with no remarriage, because I am divorced with a toddler. I still remember the conversation where my wife told me she was going to divorce me. I asked could we do counseling and she said no. As much as I hate to say this it was probably for the best for me. She assaulted me, destroyed my stuff, was verbally abusive, destroyed the house, and other such things. Of course I was not perfect either but never did that.

 

Do Anglicans have annulments then?

 

Mileage may vary according to province, perhaps even diocese, but annulments are a yes in my limited experience.

 

Yes, after all Henry VIII had annulments (not a divorce as people commonly say).

Of course in his case the annulments were because he married his brother's wife and had not consummated the marriage respectively.

There are other grounds for annulments but I do not know the details, from my understanding you should contact the diocese regarding the procedures, they would let you know what the grounds for an annulment are and then assuming you meet the criteria how you can go about it. I believe that even when annulments are granted there are a few extra steps to be allowed to remarry after that.

 

Out of curiosity how do they treat people who show up already remarried?

 

In my experience it would be treated very graciously... For one, it is not a frontal issue in the ACNA world, as there are so many other things to deal with... Let's remember that the Episcopal Church has systematically demolished all rules and Anglican precepts, so our bishops in ACNA now are cautiously building the house of the Lord back up and there are still no major canonical rules set in stone on remarriage (apart from the historic doctrine which I'm learning for the first time in this thread!)

I have heard (come to think of it) that at the formation of ACNA in 2008 when they needed to form the College of Bishops and rapidly consecrate a large number of bishops, there were some priests who (under TEC) had been divorced and remarried, and they were not allowed to be consecrated

 

This is all anecdotal and I am sure somebody will jump on me and say, "That's not true!" I was divorced from a woman who left me to live a lesbian lifestyle. Later, I met a new woman and we wished to marry. We were both trapped in the military at the time and ended up several states apart. She was in San Antonio, which was flush with ACNA parishes (all in CANA West, which has since departed that jurisdiction). We contacted a priest and he sent me a six page document from Bp. Felix to obtain an annulment. He waffled on our wedding date, since it fell in Lent. Eventually, he made himself too difficult to work with and we were married by another church. Now, I have Holy Orders so this has all been thoroughly investigated and found to be acceptable.

Then, my second wife committed suicide. So, canonically I am free to remarry once more but I think perhaps the celibate life is more proper to me going forward.

 

So sorry to hear all this, Shane.

 

Sorry about that. What was all needed for an annulment. My ex has severe mental issues and was physically and emotionally abusive.

 

I do not recall. I have long since lost the file. But when my postulancy moved forward, I was sent to Baltimore to interview with one of our jurisdictional psychologists and was thoroughly screened. The report he sent to the Diocesan was never fully shared with me, but here I am, a Priest.

 

http://www.anglicandoma.org/uploads/Marriage and Remarriage Policy.pdf

I found this and found it interesting

 

John Keble's work on this is quite good. Anglican doctrine used to be biblical and patristic on this and has since been watered down.

 

I am not theologian so take this for what it is worth but the EO church is kinda based like the link I shared. Are they not patristic and Biblical also?

 

I am in ACNA and they are doing great work restoring Anglican doctrine. I mean actual practice across in the Anglican Communion.

 

Oh ok I got you.

 

If you're asking about the Eastern Orthodox, they have little in common with patristic doctrine. Their doctrine generally goes back to the height of the Byzantine Empire of the 9th and 10th centuries, which is what they generally look back to as the height of their culture. This encompasses newcoming thinkers like John of Damascus and Gregory Palamas, and the 2nd Council of Nicea. I have looked into Eastern Orthodoxy, and less than half of what they believe can be traced back to St. Cyril or St. Gregory the Great.

 

Do you think there is a conflicting timeline for when the Patrisitic era ended? EO will tell you they are all about the Church Fathers.

 

Well sure they would. As would Rome. The Anabaptists would want to say they have a trail of blood, a noble lineage of martyrs for 2000 years. All people like to weave an attractive story.

 

Where do Anglicans draw the line and why?