The existence of the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony is linked to the very act of creation, during which, according to the account in Genesis, woman was created from Adam’s rib as a helper 1, so that the two of them together, within the communion of love, might express in a physical way the fact of being made in the image of God throughout the whole of human nature. This fact is confirmed by the very words of the Lord Jesus Christ, Who characteristically says: ‘From the beginning of creation 2, God made them male and female 3.’ The man (ἄρρεν) and the woman (4), according to Origen, to whom the Lord Jesus Christ referred in His words to the Pharisees, do not signify a division of human nature, but rather the differentiation of the whole human being into the two sexes, male and female 5, in relation to God. On the contrary, through the terms ‘man’ (ἀνήρ) and ‘woman’ (γυνή 6), which denote the physical distinction of the human being (ἄνθρωπος), the nature of the man is revealed in relation to the woman. In this way, when a man unites not with the feminine in general, but with his wife, and [the two]7, they become one flesh, for man and woman 8 are one flesh, according to the words of our Saviour Jesus Christ 9, then the man and the woman become a single, unified human being, who reveals himself as being in the full image of God in his very way of life through the communion of love 10.
[It is clear from the above that] the institution of Marriage does not represent a mere moral union between two different beings or characters, but which are of the same essence 11; rather, it clearly points, according to Saint Paul the Apostle and in accordance with the Holy Fathers of the Church, to the ontological, creative bond between God and man, as well as to the recreating bond of the Lord Jesus Christ with the Church. This communion between God and man, which ontologically defines man, has no connection with the personalist view of the person’s fulfilment through communion with the other (Mitsein), but clearly points to the fundamental distinction (both literally and metaphorically) between the Uncreated and Uncaused God and the created and caused creation12 Therefore, the establishment of the Holy Sacrament of Marriage does not consist in the bond between people, but in the creation of humankind by God. In this way, the Holy Sacrament of Marriage clearly takes on an ecclesiological character and, through it, just as with the other Holy Sacraments, their true nature is recorded, which has an ontological character and signifies the communion of rational beings with the Triune God, revealed through the divine energies. Consequently, it cannot be ruled out that the purpose of Marriage is the fulfilment (Erfüllung) of13; for through the loving communion between God and man, of which Marriage is the image, the ontological fulfilment of the created being is realised both in relation to God, through participation in the uncreated divine energies (deification), and in relation to the conjugal bond, through the full communion of the spouses (one flesh).
The ecclesiological character of the Holy Sacraments, and in particular of Marriage, is better understood if one bears in mind that human beings themselves and the human way of life are expressions of this mystical bond between God and man, a bond within which the ecclesi14e way of life is lived out. This way of life is nothing other than the living out and experiencing of the Church’s dogmas, since dogma, as the theoretical expression of the authentic truth of the faith, is the formulation of the very history of the Church, that is, of divine Revelation through historical events 15. In this way, the Holy Sacraments express ‘the manner in which’ man perceives and experiences the revealed God. But it is also within the Church, as the place of communion between God and man, that the experience of the bond between the created and the Uncreated is attained, which is expressed in these Holy Sacraments themselves, since they represent the works of the members of the Body towards perfection through participation in the Head [of the Church], Who is the Son and the Word of God, Jesus Christ 16.
On the basis of this interpretation of the Holy Mysteries, the nature 17 of the Church is fully understood; it is not merely an institution on earth, an independent body standing between God and humankind, through which human salvation is secured 18, but, first and foremost, is communion; it is human life itself, which flows from the mystical life and communion with God. That is why Saint Nicholas Cabasilas will say: ‘And the Church is embodied in [the Most Holy] Mysteries 19, not as in symbols, but as the members are to the heart and the branches to the root of the plant, and, as the Lord said, as the branches are to the vine 20. For this is not merely a community of names or an analogy of resemblance, but an identity in fact. And because the Body and Blood of Christ are the [Most Holy] Mysteries, therefore, in the Church of Christ these are true food and drink21
The Holy Sacrament of Marriage, therefore, as a real and true union between man and woman, is the image of Christ’s union with the Church. In this way, the spiritual aspect is united with the physical aspect and becomes a mystery of the truth hidden within the image of the conjugal bond.
The Holy Sacrament of Marriage, therefore, as a real and true union between a man and a woman, is a reflection of the union between Christ and the Church. In this way, the spiritual aspect is united with the physical aspect and becomes a mystery of the truth hidden in the image of the marital bond 22. The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib—a fact which demonstrates the indestructible bond between them as ‘bone of [Adam’s] bones and flesh of [his] flesh’23—represents the image and icon of the bond between our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and the creation of the Church 24, Who becomes flesh and unites Himself with man 25, so that man may become, according to Saint Athanasius the Great, a god by grace 26.
The establishment of the Church by Christ is revealed, according to Saint John Chrysostom, first and foremost, at the moment when one of the soldiers pierced the side of Christ’s Body on the Cross and blood and water immediately flowed out of it. From this blood and this water the whole Church was established, since, according to St John Chrysostom, the blood signifies the Holy Spirit, and it is through water and the Spirit that the believer is reborn and enters the Kingdom of Heaven. In this way, therefore, the Church, to which man is united through Baptism (water) and in which he grows spiritually through the Sacrament of the Divine Eucharist (blood), is formed from the rib of Christ, just as Eve was created from Adam’s side 27. Thus, the believer becomes a member of the Body of Christ—that is, of the Church—and is flesh of the flesh of the Son and the Word of God made flesh, and bone of His bones, since it is from the blood and water of Christ that we are born 28 and are nourished. And just as woman was formed whilst Adam slept, so too was the Church established through the death of Christ on the Cross 29.
In this sense, the Holy Sacrament of Marriage does not merely represent Christ’s prior union with the Church of Israel—which refers to the adoption of the chosen people and the conclusion of the First Covenant 30— but is also extended to the subsequent Church of the Gentiles, which reveals the dynamic and attractive nature of this bond. This second union of Christ with the Church of the Gentiles is the result of the breaking of Christ’s first union with the Church of Israel 31, which corresponds to the situation where a marriage falters due to the wife’s lack of trust in her husband. The husband no longer serves as the point of reference for married life and the woman’s way of life, resulting in the breakdown of communion and a change in the woman’s way of life. This turn of events inevitably leads to the destruction of marriage, since the communion between husband and wife is severed and the unity of the couple is broken.
Therefore, according to the Holy Fathers and writers of the Church, the first wife of Christ the Bridegroom is the Synagogue, into which the Son of God comes to unite Himself with her in one body and lead her to salvation. But when He encounters the stubbornness of her heart 32 and the indifference of the Israelite people, which lead to the Bridegroom’s death on the cross, He then issues a certificate of separation (= divorce), in accordance with the Law of Moses, and casts her out from the marital home. Thus, divorce does not serve to heal a troubled marriage, but to dissolve the marriage. Its purpose is not to resolve problems, but to express the rejection of the mystical communion and the departure from the charismatic communion of the Church 33. For this reason, the certificate of divorce is not, of course, granted as a punishment for the unseemly behaviour of the woman—that is, of the Synagogue—but because something objectionable has been found in her 34, which means that infidelity is the cause of this behaviour, the spiritual debauchery of the people, who, already blinded by idolatry, have severed their communion with God and turned towards the earthly and defiled things of worldly life 35.
Similarly, in the case of marriage, divorce occurs when one of the spouses withdraws from the charismatic communion of love and breaks the unifying and healing nature of marriage. Divorce condemns a different way of thinking and living, just as happens even in the case of heresy, which expresses a different way of experiencing the Triune God within the church community, shatters the unity of the church body and denies the possibility of salvation 36. Consequently, divorce affords the partner an opportunity to escape the bondage of the heart, thereby enabling them to seek the fullness of love and conjugal fidelity in a second or third marriage 37. And this is because marriage is a reality that distances a person from the idolatry of the flesh and represents a salvific state in their life 38.
Idolatry, of course, as the root cause of man’s ‘divorce’ from God, does not concern merely the worship of idols, but persists even in the form of wealth, power, glory, or even an imaginary Christian god fashioned according to the desires and needs of contemporary man…
Idolatry, of course, as the root cause of man’s ‘divorce’ from God, does not concern merely the worship of idols, but persists even in the form of wealth, power, glory or even a Christian god fashioned according to the desires and needs of contemporary man. This form of idolatry is nothing other than the demonic domination of the imagination, the perception of non-being as being, as well as of falsehood and finitude as the real and true way of life 39. Such a form of knowledge, which creates a ‘reality’ of an ‘irrational’ soul, is not, of course, attributable to man’s formal irrationality 40, for this would imply that a natural dysfunction of reason is the cause of the imagination and, consequently, that man is exempt from responsibility for an idolatrous way of life. Idolatry is therefore a pathology 41 and is situated within the diseased reason, which subjects everything to man’s rational power and ends up idolising and worshipping either the irrational creation, to which it bears a resemblance 42, or its own self 43, that is to say, the very power of reason itself 44.
According to this interpretation, both idolatry and heresy, which relate to parts of the whole teaching [of the Church]45, represent a segment of the church community, a segment which attempts, unsuccessfully, to redefine and demarcate a way of life different from that which is grounded in the life of ecclesial communion, that is, in the dogmas of the Church. Consequently, through heresy or idolatry, the way of life of the church community is misinterpreted, leading to a deviation from the point of reference of church communion, which is Christ the Bridegroom, the Head of the Church46.
The result of this refusal to partake of the wedding feast—that is, to partake of the substantial and nourishing food of the divine mysteries—is spiritual death, which comes as a natural consequence of man’s self-isolation and lack of communion with God.
Thus, contemporary people, who are enslaved to a materialistic way of life characterised by the desire for greatness and wealth, are no different from those guests at the wedding in the Parable of the King’s Son’s Wedding, whom the king calls to attend his son’s wedding and who refuse, either using their daily, vital concerns as an excuse, or by disregarding and insulting the servants, whom they even killed 47. The result of this refusal to attend the wedding feast—that is, to partake of the substantial and nourishing food of the divine mysteries—is spiritual death, which comes as a natural consequence of man’s self-isolation and lack of communion with God 48.
God’s love, however, is so great that it is not limited by the reaction and rejection of a particular group of people. Indeed, many are called, but few are chosen 49. That is why it reaches out to the Gentiles, with the aim of filling the wedding feast. Thus it calls all people, both good and bad 50, to take part in the wedding of Christ and the Church. Entry to the wedding feast is shown to be open to all people, so that everyone may have the opportunity to enter the Kingdom of God. But, on the other hand, it is clear that the crafty and depraved, who prefer to live in impurity, shame and meanness 51, cannot remain in the joy of the wedding. It is fitting that those invited should be properly prepared, which means that they will have to change and put on the wedding garments appropriate to the occasion, that is, to become merciful and to be characterised by kindness, humility, gentleness and generosity of spirit 52.
However, this transformation of people—that is, of those invited to the wedding—is not achieved solely by their own efforts, but through Jesus Christ, Who, disregarding outward appearance, that is to say, attaching no importance to outward behaviour and, in many respects, to social status, focuses on the inner person, on the cultivation of the beauty of the soul, which [consists in] a state of gentleness, modesty and forbearance 53. He is not concerned with wealth or outward nobility, but with the nobility of the soul 54. That is why, then, the Bridegroom of the Church Himself, the Son and Word of God, leaves His Father’s throne and comes to His bride 55, whom He finds filthy, unclean, naked and bleeding 56, and by giving Himself up to death for her sake, He transformed her impurity, restored her, set her right, forgave her sins and transformed her into a beauty beyond compare 57. And just as the son is born of the union of father and mother, representing the fruit of their loving union 58, and the three already constitute one body, so too is it in the case of Christ and the Church, in which, through communion, man becomes one body with the Lord Jesus Christ 59. Man’s participation is realised through self-sacrificing love, which is the foundation of the transformation and union of woman and man, as well as of the Church transformed into the Body of Christ, so that the two may be one body 60.
The prerequisite, therefore, for this loving union between those who are married is, on the one hand, leaving one’s parents and the man’s union with his wife, as mentioned at the very beginning of the Book of Genesis 61, and, on the other hand, the woman’s submission to the man 62. The realisation of this bond, whilst the result of free choice, nevertheless constitutes a natural law, which was established after the creation of woman and was implanted in human nature 63.
…the bond between man and woman transcends the limits of social convention and takes on an ontological character, since this bond relates both to the creation of humankind itself and to the work of divine economy, that is, to the process of the Church’s rebirth and her union in one body with the incarnate Logos of God.
In this way, the bond between man and woman transcends the limits of social convention and takes on an ontological character, since this bond relates both to the creation of humankind itself and to the work of divine oikonomia, that is, to the process of the Church’s rebirth and her union in one body with the incarnate Logos of God for the salvation of the whole of creation, that is, of the visible nature 64. However, for this transformative love to lead to the true unity of man and woman, the woman too must revere the man 65. This means that a woman must not demand equality, but must recognise her husband as her head, thereby also expressing her love for him. And this is because the head is not separate from the body, but is an inseparable part of it, which the body cannot reject. Thus, according to Saint John Chrysostom, this bond of love and fear ensures peace 66.
God grants different gifts to each person, so as to highlight and emphasise the distinction between them—a distinction which ensures their functional coexistence and their bond, rather than the oppression of one by the other.
Therefore, the Holy Sacrament of Marriage is great, for it relates to the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Who left His Father and, uniting Himself with the Church, made her one spirit with Himself 67. However, this kenotic love, which Christ expresses towards the Church, there must be a fear of God 68, which guarantees the bond between God and man, preventing man’s egocentric self-isolation and his quest for autonomy—that is, contradiction, rebellion and the desire for supremacy 69. This is because contradiction leads to rebellion and the assertion of power, which means the severing and breaking of the bond between the subject and their master. However, man’s submission to God or a woman’s submission to a man does not mean the tyrannical domination of the master over the subject. It is precisely for this reason that God did not create man capable of everything, for the female gender would have been rendered insignificant and a power dynamic would have developed. The same applies to the creation of woman, which would have been a sign of great arrogance. But, caring for the common good and for peace, and maintaining the order proper to each, God gives different abilities to each, so as to highlight and emphasise the distinction between them, a distinction which ensures their functional coexistence and their bond, rather than the oppression of one by the other 70. Although different abilities are required of men and women, with the aim of ensuring the distinction between them, the same does not apply in the case of Christ and the Church. This is because the difference between Christ and the Church, God and man, stems from the ontological difference between the Uncreated and the created 71. But in the case of one and the same being and nature, as is the case with man, the distinction between the sexes is made on the basis of different aptitudes and not of natures.
Within this distinction between man and woman, the dimension of reverence, which a woman is bound to show towards a man, and the nature of the metamorphosis [of this fear] can be better understood if one considers the various forms of submission and the connection between them. According to Saint Gregory of Nyssa, submission is distinguished into four kinds: a) that of a servant towards a master; b) that of the irrational nature towards the rational; c) that of one of two adversaries towards the other, in a state of war; and d) that of all people towards the Only-Begotten Son and the Word of God, and through Him towards the Father 72. St John of Damascus distinguishes between two categories of obedience: a) natural obedience, which encompasses the bonds between a wife, children and parents, and b) obedience according to the law, which refers to the bond between a servant and a master 73. Based on the above distinctions regarding submission, it could be classified into two categories, which differ significantly. The first category is natural submission, referring to the different nature of created beings and to change for the better. This category includes the submission of irrational beings to rational ones, which differ by nature, as well as the submission of the entire material created reality to the incarnate Word of God, and through Him to the Father, a reality which is distinct in its essence. The second category refers to submission according to the law, which encompasses the submission of the vanquished to the victor in the context of a violent confrontation, as well as the submission of the servant to the master. Submission according to the law, as opposed to that according to nature, is characterised by the tyrannical domination of one over the other and, therefore, according to Saint Gregory of Nyssa, it does not remain stable, because within one and the same nature, such as human nature, that which is equal by nature and of the same kind possesses within itself the desire for the better and the striving towards that which dominates 74. However, in the case of submission by nature, the relationship between the subject and the ruler does not take the moral or legal form of the ‘obedience–reward, disobedience–punishment’ scheme, but rather that of a qualitative bond, involving the improvement and perfection of the inferior towards the better. In this way, the submission of irrational beings to rational ones, and of created nature to the Son and the incarnate Word of God—Who, by assuming human nature, gives Himself to the Father 75, reveals the dominant element in relation to the subject nature, which, through participation and not through abusive pressure, is led towards the preservation of life and perfection. But this relationship transcends the reward-punishment framework, which encompasses the bonds governed by the law – and whose existence depends on certain conditions within conventional social bonds – and transforms into the ontological framework of obedience-life, disobedience–death 76.
Thus, fear, in the moral sense of the word, as well as reward (μισθαρνία), belong, according to Saint Gregory the Theologian, to the two lower categories of Christians, namely those of servants and wage-earners, which are regarded as preliminary stages in the dynamic process towards the status of sonship 77, in which the love of free men 78 prevails. Only through the free bond of love between the son 79 and the Father, revealing man’s ontological bond with God, can the relationship of the lower stages of the servant and the wage-earner be correctly interpreted, which pertain to man’s moral life, relate to the moral precepts of the Law, and represent stages of initiation into man’s spiritual path and into salvation through faith 80. This is because the Law and morality, taken together, guard the truth of the spirit against the falsehood of idolatry, but do not ensure salvation, which is the result of reconciliation—that is, the abolition of both the Law and idolatry in the Person of the incarnate Word of God, which means in the Body of Christ, that is, in the Church 81. Therefore, Christ does not transform the Synagogue, but builds the Church; He does not become a Greek 82 or a Jew, but through Himself, and after He has melted both the one and the other as in a crucible, He has brought forth from within a marvellous thing, He Himself first becoming that thing 83.
Therefore, submission by nature, characterised by self-sacrificing love, is that which refers to the obedience and reverence of the woman towards the man and of the children towards their parents. And this is because fear, as Saint John Chrysostom characteristically notes, is different in the woman who is a servant from that in the free woman, who identifies with the hypostasis of the man and represents the projection of his body 84. Therefore, when the woman, who is in the image of the Church and represents the soul of man before Christ the Bridegroom, frees herself… from union with the irrational elements of the passions 85 and, through obedience, rejects all the various movements of nature, then she unites herself solely with that which ought to be loved and desired, and merges through loving movement and action, transforming herself into the nature of the One in whom she participates 86. On the contrary, the second bond—that is, submission to the law—is a social phenomenon which exists under certain conditions and has no fixed value.
Therefore, the first case, which concerns the bond between man and woman and relates to nature itself—that is, to the very mode of human existence—is of great importance for the interpretation of Christ’s bond with the Church, since the nature of this relationship clearly has an ontological dimension. This is because a woman’s submission to a man does not concern merely their physical bond and union, but above all their spiritual bond and inner unity. In the case of Christ and the Church, this demonstrates the Church’s spiritual and ontological dependence on Christ, Who, as her Head, represents her ontological beginning. In this way, therefore, submission to the husband—that is, to Christ—constitutes the fundamental premise of the unity and purification through love of the wife—that is, of the Church. Any separation of the body from the Head amounts to a denial of Christ’s healing love and the persistence of those invited to the Bridegroom’s wedding, according to the Parable of the Wedding of the King’s Son, to remain in the soiled and defiled garments of the soul—which reveals the soul’s movements and actions to be governed by the will of the flesh—ultimately leading outside marriage and, of course, into the outermost darkness 87.
Consequently, the Church’s submission to Christ—of which a woman’s submission to her husband is a reflection—means trust and faith in God. On the contrary, the claim to primacy leads to a betrayal on the part of the Church, which returns to an idolatrous way of life, which is identified with the imagination and is characterised, according to Saint John of Damascus, by falsehood and wickedness. This is because rebellion against God and the desire for primacy lead to the perception of non-being 88 and the distortion of reality, using non-being as being and failing to attribute to each thing what belongs to it 89. Therefore, the fundamental premise of purification and sanctification, of union with God through participation and love, is submission, which is expressed through faith 90 and the washing of water through the word, that is, through Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit 91. In this way, Christ passes from the Jewish Synagogue to the Church of the Gentiles, and man becomes, through Baptism, a member of the Body of Christ; and just as Christ loves the Church and cares for her, as an inseparable member of His spiritual Body, so too must a man, in imitation of Christ, love and care for his wife as a member of his own body and flesh of his flesh 92. Thus, the Church, viewed from an ontological perspective, is the re-creation of humankind; it derives its existence from Jesus Christ Himself, the Son and the Word of God, and is lived out in the sacramental life of humankind. This sacramental life is realised daily in the spiritual and physical union of man and woman through the Holy Sacrament of Marriage.
- 1
Genesis 2:18 and 21–24; see also ‘Γάμος’, in Λεξικό Βιβλικής Θεολογίας, ed. Biblical Centre ‘Artos Zois’, Athens, 1980, p. 194.
- 2
That is, of building or creation (translator’s note).
- 3
Mark 10:6 (‘But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female’).
- 4
The Greek terms cited in the biblical verse from Mark 10:6, ἄρρην/ἄρσην, -εν and θῆλυς, are adjectives meaning ‘masculine’ and ‘manly’ and ‘feminine’ and ‘womanly’, respectively. In the biblical text quoted, these terms are used as nouns (translator’s note).
- 5
As indicated by the two adjectives used as nouns mentioned above (translator’s note).
- 6
These Greek terms refer to the masculine and feminine nouns (translator’s note).
- 7
Both in the main text and in the notes, we have included, in square brackets and with the author’s consent—and in some cases, following direct consultation—additional explanations and clarifications regarding certain nuances, to facilitate a clearer and more accurate understanding of the material presented (translator’s note).
- 8
Origen, On the Gospel according to Matthew (Εἰς τὸ Κατὰ Ματθαῖον Εὐαγγέλιον) 14, in Patrologia Graeca (= PG) 13, 1228 BC (he is joined not to the breast but to his own wife, and they become one flesh, for a man and a woman become one flesh).
- 9
Mark 10:7–9: ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So that they are no longer two, but one flesh (Ἕνεκα τούτου καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα καὶ κολληθήσεται τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ, and the two shall become one flesh. So that they are no longer two, but one flesh). See also Matthew 19:4–6. It should be noted that the Greek text differs slightly from the established Romanian translation; for this reason, I have translated it whilst taking the original text into account, highlighting the differences in meaning in bold (translator’s note).
- 10
Origen, On the Gospel according to Matthew 14, in PG 13, 1228 B–1229 A; Saint Epiphanius, Against Heresies (Κατὰ αἱρέσεων) III, in Epiphanius, Ancoratus and Panarion (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 25, 31, 37), vols. 1–3, reprinted by K. Holl, ed. Hinrichs, Leipzig 1933, p. 92 ff.; see also G. Patronou, Theology and Experience of Marriage, Domos, Athens 2000, p. 319 ff.
- 11
In the sense that men and women are of the same human nature, the author using the Greek term ὁμοούσιος / consubstantial (translator’s note).
- 12
Fr. Courth, Die Sakramente. Ein Lehrbuch für Studium und Praxis der Theologie, Hreder, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1995, p. 322 ff.
- 13
Ibid., p. 326; H. Vorgrimler, Sakramententheologie, Patmos, Düsseldorf, 1987, p. 314.
- 14
Or ecclesiastical (translator’s note).
- 15
See I. Karmiris, Synopsis of the Dogmatic Teaching of the Orthodox Catholic Church, extract from the Scientific Yearbook of the School of Theology, University of Athens, Athens, 1957, p. 4 ff.; N. Xexakis, Orthodox Dogmatics, vol. I, published by Ennoia, Athens, 2006, p. 180 ff.; N. Matsouka, Genesis and Essence of Orthodox Doctrine (Vlatadon Miscellany 2), published by Patriarchal Institute of Patristic Studies, Thessaloniki, 1969, p. 31 ff.
- 16
Ibid., Dogmatic and Symbolic Theology, Vol. II. An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, ed. POURNARAS, Thessaloniki, 1985, p. 465.
- 17
Or nature (translator’s note).
- 18
See Miguel M. Garijo-Guembe, Gemeinschaft der Heiligen. Grund, Wesen und Struktur der Kirche, Patmos, Düsseldorf, 1988, p. 14.
- 19
That is to say, in the Body and Blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ (translator’s note).
- 20
See John XV, 4–5 (translator’s note).
- 21
Saint Nicholas Cabasilas, Exegesis of the Divine Liturgy XXXIX (Ἑρμηνεία τῆς θείας λειτουργίας ΛΘ'), Sch. 62, p. 230 (PG 150, 452 CD: The Church is signified in the sacraments, not as in symbols, but as the members are to the heart, and as the branches are to the root of a plant, and just as the Lord said, as the shoots are to the vine. For here there is not merely a communion of name, or an analogy of likeness, but an identity of substance. For the sacraments are indeed the body and blood of Christ, but for the Church of Christ these are true food and drink). See also Chrysostomos Savvatos (now Metropolitan of Messinia), ‘The Mysteries of the Church as the Foundation of Spiritual Life in Christ according to Nicholas Kabasilas’, extract from the Scientific Yearbook of the School of Theology of the University of Athens, Vol. I, Athens, 2005, p. 284 ff.; N. Matsouka, op. cit., pp. 352 ff., 467 ff.
- 22
Saint John of Damascus, On the Epistle to the Ephesians (spurious) [Εἰς ἐπιστολὴν πρὸς Ἐφεσίους (ἀμφ.)], in PG 95, 852 AB; Diodorus of Tarsus, On the Epistle to the Ephesians [Εἰς ἐπιστολὴν πρὸς Ἐφεσίους (in Catenis)], in Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt, edited by K. Staab, Ed. Aschendorff, Münster, 1933, p. 83. On image and truth, see N. Matsouka, Orthodoxy and Heresy in the Ecclesiastical Writers of the 4th, 5th and 6th Centuries, published by Pournaras, Thessaloniki, 1992, p. 70 ff.
- 23
Genesis 2:23 (ὀστοῦν ἐκ τῶν ὀστέων and σάρξ ἐκ τῆς σαρκός). The expression σάρξ ἐκ τῆς σαρκός can also be translated into Romanian as ‘flesh from the flesh’ (translator’s note).
- 24
Sevir, On the Epistle to the Ephesians [Εἰς ἐπιστολὴν πρὸς Ἐφεσίους (in Catenis)], in Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt…, p. 312. See also Χ. Ἀνδρούτσου, Dogmatics of the Orthodox Eastern Church, ed. ASTER, Athens, 19562, p. 396 ff.; X. Vantzou, Marriage and its Preparation from the Perspective of Orthodox Pastoral Theology. A Contribution to Pastoral Theology and Psychology, Athens, 1977, p. 19 ff.
- 25
See Origen, On the Gospel according to Matthew 14, in PG 13, 1232 A.
- 26
See John 1:14 and St Athanasius the Great, Against the Arians I (Κατὰ Ἀρειανῶν Α'), in PG 26, 92 C: but being God, he subsequently became man, so that… he might deify us (ἀλλὰ Θεὸς ὢν, ὕστερον γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, ἵνα… ἡμᾶς θεοποιήσῃ).
- 27
See Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians (Ἑρμηνεία τῆς πρὸς Ἐφεσίους Ἐπιστολῆς), in PG 82, 548 C.
- 28
That is to say, spiritually reborn into a new life in the Lord Jesus Christ (translator’s note).
- 29
St John Chrysostom, Eulogy on Maximus (Ἐγκώμιον εἰς Μάξιμον), in PG 51, 229 BC. On this basis, marriage expresses the ontological fulfilment of the human person in the world and represents the sphere in which the ecclesial way of life is lived out; in other words, it constitutes the realisation (Nachvollzug) of the bond between Christ and the Church, and not merely an encouragement towards a communion of life and love, which refers to the sanctifying bond of Christ (Heilsliebe Christi), see Fr. Courth, op. cit., p. 330 ff. Thus, in marriage, and in the awareness that married life represents the ecclesial-mystical way of life, the unity of family members in Christ is lived out and ‘one body’ is realised (Ephesians 2:16), ‘in one body’ (Ephesians 5:31), ‘in one Spirit’ (1 Corinthians 12:13).
- 30
Exodus 19:5–6; see also W. Zimmerli, Ἐπίτομη Θεολογία τῆς Παλαιᾶς Διαθήκης, trans. B. Stoyannos, published by Artos Zois, Athens, 20012, pp. 55 ff., 226 ff.
- 31
Fr. Courth, op. cit., p. 324. See also Saint Athanasius the Great, On Psalm 88 (Εἰς τοὺς Ψαλμούς ΠΗ΄), PG 27, 389D: ‘I will preserve them for ever—that is, the people—with My mercy and My Covenant’. On the one hand, He calls those who have believed through Him—that is, through Christ—‘the people’. On the other hand, by ‘mercy’ He means the forgiveness [of sins] through faith. And by ‘Covenant’ He means the new one, which is also trustworthy, that is to say, sure, certain and permanent. For the first Covenant has ceased, because it was weak and useless; since the Law did not lead anyone to perfection. See also Saint Cyril of Alexandria, On the Prophet Malachi 12 (Εἰς τὸν προφήτην Μαλαχίαν 12), PG 72, 297BC: For the Law was a foreshadowing and a foretaste of worship in Spirit and truth and ‘ordinances for the flesh’, as the wonderful Paul writes, ‘which were in force until the time of reformation’. And the time of renewal is, I believe, none other than the coming of our Saviour. Therefore, the first Covenant, being imperfect, is said to have been set aside; for it had become obsolete; its fulfilment was necessitated by the new and second [Covenant], which is beyond all error and sin.
- 32
In the case in question, the ‘stubbornness of the heart’ is interpreted as the Church of Israel’s rejection of Christ the Bridegroom, and does not refer to a man’s stubbornness towards a woman, in which case divorce is permitted, to avoid what might be even worse for the woman, since the man, if he could not free himself from a woman he did not like, would even try to kill her! See Σ. Agouridis, ‘Jesus and Women’, in Bulletin of Biblical Studies 10 (1981), p. 67. But even in such a case—in other words, if the possibility of divorce is granted because of the hardness of a man’s heart, so that the woman may be protected from humiliation and death (Leviticus XXII, 23)— the ecclesiological significance of this provision remains unchanged, since the Israelite people, who are characterised by hardness of heart due to male supremacy, deny the Son and the Word of God, Jesus Christ, thereby making their spiritual fornication manifest.
- 33
G. Patronou, op. cit., p. 297 ff.
- 34
Deuteronomy 24:1.
- 35
Exodus XXXIV, 15–18; Isaiah 1:21. See also Saint Cyril of Alexandria, On the Prophet Isaiah (Εἰς τὸν προφήτην Ἠσαΐαν), in PG 70, 1201 A–1204 A; Origen, On the Gospel according to Matthew 14, in PG 13, 1232 C–1237 A; Saint Maximus the Confessor, Various Questions and Selections from Various Unclear Chapters 31 (Ἐρωτήσεις διάφοροι καὶ ἐκλογαὶ διαφόρων κεφαλαίων ἀπορουμένων 31), in Corpus Christianorum (Series Graeca 10), edited by J. H. Declerck, Ed. Brepols, Turnhout, 1982; see also ‘Νυμφίος/Νύμφη’, in Λεξικό Βιβλικής Θεολογίας…, p. 707.
- 36
In this sense, divorce cannot be equated with heresy, which opposes the Trinitarian mystery of the unity of the divine Persons and Hypostases (G. Patronou, op. cit., p. 300), but could be interpreted as an act of ‘economy’ and ‘love for mankind’ on the part of the Church towards the ailing individual (ibid., p. 302), an act which corresponds to the condemnation of heresy, in order to ensure the unity of the Church and the salvation of mankind. And this is because heresy, as a failed interpretation or understanding of the content of the dogmatic teaching preached by the Church concerning the work of salvation in Christ, constitutes… more than is proper, an overreach to the detriment of dogmatic truth, in a way that undermines the coherence and organic balance of all the individual truths, truths which, taken as a whole, constitute the dogma of salvation in Christ… Heresy, according to these truths, is opposed to the content of Revelation in Christ, as transmitted to the Ecumenical Church, and a different interpretation of the content of salvation in Christ leads to separation from the body of the Ecumenical Church; heresy separates itself from the whole body and, consequently, breaks away from the communion of the faithful (N. Matsouka, Genesis and Essence of the Orthodox Dogma, published by Patriarchal Foundation for Patristic Studies, Thessaloniki, 1969, p. 94 ff.).
- 37
G. Patronou, op. cit., p. 302.
- 38
Ibid., p. 336 et seq.
- 39
Saint John of Damascus, Exposition of the Orthodox Faith (Ἔκδοσις τῆς ὀρθοδόξου πίστεως) 31, in Kotter I, p. 83.
- 40
The term ‘formal irrational’ refers to something that exists in parallel with reason, but is not reason or logic, though it merely appears to be so (translator’s note).
- 41
The term ‘pathology’ derives from the words ‘passion’ (πάθος) and ‘reason’ (λόγος), meaning ‘the passion of reason’ (translator’s note).
- 42
St John Chrysostom, On Genesis VII (Εἰς Γένεσιν Ζ'), in PG 53, 67 D–68 D.
- 43
Ibid., On the Epistle to the Romans (Εἰς τὴν πρὸς Ρωμαίων ἐπιστολήν), in PG 60, 408 A.
- 44
N. Matsouka, Theological Ktisiology and Ecclesiology according to St Athanasius the Great. Notes on Patristic and Ecumenical Theology, Thessaloniki, 2001, p. 128 ff.
- 45
As early as antiquity, heresy began to be distinguished from principles, that is to say, to be set apart from the philosophical teachings of a school, containing certain uncertain principles. In this regard, Diogenes Laertius observes, referring to the Sceptics and Pyrrhonists, the following: on the one hand, therefore, we call heresy that which follows, or appears to follow, an apparently true principle; in this sense, we would rightly call Scepticism a heresy; if, however, we regard as heresy those who confine themselves to canons that are consistent with the principles they set out, the Pyrrhonists would not have been called a heresy, because they have no principles [Diogenes Laertius, Introduction (Προοίμιον) 1, 20, in Diogenis Laertii vitae philosophorum, II, edited by H. S. Long, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1964]. According to Saint Ignatius of Antioch, heresy means any teaching alien to the Christian faith. Specifically, he says: ‘Therefore, I beg you—not I, but the love of Jesus Christ—to partake only of Christian nourishment, and to turn away from the foreign weed, which is heresy’ [Saint Ignatius of Antioch, To the Trallians VI, 1 (Πρὸς Τραλλιανοῖς ΣΤ΄, 1), in PG 5, 680 A].
- 46
See N. Matsouka, Genesis and Essence of Orthodox Doctrine…, p. 94 ff.; idem, Orthodoxy and Heresy in the Ecclesiastical Writers of the 4th, 5th and 6th Centuries…, p. 33 ff.
- 47
Matthew 22:1–14.
- 48
See Origen, On the Gospel according to Matthew 17, in PG 13, 1524 C–1525 C. Compare with Hebrews 5:13–14.
- 49
Matthew 22:14.
- 50
Matthew 22:10 (translator’s note).
- 51
St John Chrysostom, Epistle to the Ephesians XX (Εἰς Ἐφεσίους Κ'), in PG 62, 137 B.
- 52
Origen, On the Gospel according to Matthew 17, in PG 13, 1528 B.
- 53
St John Chrysostom, op. cit., in PG 62, 138 B.
- 54
Ibid., p. 138 C.
- 55
Ibid., In Praise of Maximus, in PG 51, 230 C.
- 56
Ibid., On Psalm 5 (Εἰς Ψαλμὸν Ε’), in PG 55, 63 C (ῥυπῶσαν, αὐχμῶσαν, γυμνὴν, πεφυρμένην αἵματι).
- 57
Ibid., Praise of Maximus, in PG 51, 228 AB (he transformed the abhorrence, reshaped it, readjusted it, and put aside the sins… into an indescribable beauty).
- 58
See Γ. Πατρώνου, Theology and Experience of Marriage…, p. 327.
- 59
St John Chrysostom, On the Epistle to the Ephesians XX, in PG 62, 139 D–140 A.
- 60
Matthew 10:7 (the two become one flesh).
- 61
Genesis 2:24.
- 62
Ephesians 5:22–24. A woman’s submission to her husband is not, of course, to be understood as a subjugating submission to male domination, as explained below, but within the broader framework of God’s economy, which is described in the preceding paragraph (Eph. 5:16–20) and complemented by the exhortation ‘Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ’ (Eph. 5:21). In this way, submission takes on the character of the woman’s existential point of reference in relation to the man as his wife, since the breaking of the bond and her withdrawal lead to the dissolution of the conjugal bond itself and to the annulment of the wife’s existential identity. Naturally, the man’s love for the woman is set against the woman’s obligation of submission; this love also possesses the same existential character of predetermining the man as husband and is based on the same premises that apply to the meaning of the woman’s submission to the man. Moreover, a woman’s submission constitutes a response to, rather than a prerequisite for, a man’s love; this love completely predetermines the ontological nature of the spouses; see Io. Karavidopoulou, Biblical Studies III, published by POURNARA, Thessaloniki, 2004, p. 97 ff.
- 63
Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians (Ἑρμηνεία τῆς πρὸς Ἐφεσίους Ἐπιστολῆς), in PG 82, 548 CD; see also St John Chrysostom, Praise of Maximus, in PG 51, 229 C–230 A.
- 64
Ibid., 229 D.
- 65
Ephesians 5:33. It should be noted at this point that Saint Paul the Apostle does not emphasise so much a woman’s submission to a man as a man’s love for a woman, even to the point of self-sacrifice. See Ioanna Karavidopoulou, op. cit., p. 105 ff.
- 66
St John Chrysostom, On the Epistle to the Ephesians XX, in PG 62, 141 A (οὐδὲ δημοκρατουμένης οἰκίας, οὐδὲ πάντων ἀρχόντων).
- 67
1 Corinthians 6:17.
- 68
St John Chrysostom, op. cit., in PG 62, 140 BC.
- 69
Ibid., p. 142 C.
- 70
Ibid., In Praise of Maximus, PG 51, 231BC.
- 71
Saint Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius I (Κατὰ Εὐνομίου Α'), 271, in Contra Eunomium Libri I-II, edited by W. Jaeger, Leiden, 1960 (Jaeger), p. 106 (PG 45, 33 BC); see also idem, Against Eunomius III, 6, 66, JAEGER II, p. 209, (PG 45, 793 C), as well as the same author, Explanation of the Song of Songs VI (Ἐξήγησις τοῦ Ἄισματος Ἀισμάτων ΣΤ’), JAEGER VI, p. 174.
- 72
Saint Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius I, 193, in Contra Eunomium Libri I–II, edited by W. Jaeger, Leiden, 1960 (Jaeger), p. 8 (PG 45, 309 A). Compare with ibid., 191–193, Jaeger I, p. 82 ff. (PG 45 308 D–309 D) and idem, ‘When all things are subject to Him (Εἰς τὸ ὅταν ὑποταγῇ αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα)…’, Jaeger III, p. 6 (PG 45, 1305 C, 1305 D–1308 A).
- 73
Saint John of Damascus, On the Epistle to the Ephesians [Εἰς ἐπιστολὴν πρὸς Ἐφεσίους (spurious)], in PG 95, 849 B.
- 74
Saint Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius I, 527, Jaeger I, p. 178 (PG 45, 413 B); ibid., 525, JAEGER I, p. 178 (PG 45, 413 A). For further details, see N. Xioni, The Essence and Energies of God according to St Gregory of Nyssa, ed. GRIGORIS, Athens, 1999, p. 109 ff.
- 75
Saint Gregory of Nyssa, A Polemical Treatise Against Eunomius’s Exposition 83 (Ἀντιρρητικὸς πρὸς τὴν Εὐνομιου Ἔκθεσιν 83), Jaeger II, p. 346 (PG 45, 504 AB).
- 76
The final form of submission—that is, that of created nature towards Jesus Christ and, through Him, towards the Father—does not pertain to the same ontological category, as is the case with irrational beings in relation to rational ones, but to two distinct ontological realms: that of created reality and that of the uncreated divine nature, in which the latter constitutes the existential point of reference for the former.
- 77
That is to say, a state of belonging, which any believer may find themselves in, whether they are a man or a woman (translator’s note).
- 78
Saint Gregory the Theologian, Homily XL (On Holy Baptism) [Λόγος Μ' (Εἰς τὸ ἅγιον βάπτισμα)], in PG 36, 373 C. See also Saint Basil the Great, Moral Discourses VII (On Sin) [᾽Ἠθικοὶ λόγοι Ζ' (Περὶ ἁμαρτίας)], in PG 32, 1212 D–1213 B.
- 79
Or his daughter’s. This also refers to the relationship (translator’s note).
- 80
St John Chrysostom, On the Second Epistle to the Corinthians VII (Εἰς Β' Κορινθίους Ζ'), in PG 61, 446 C; see also ibid., Homily on Repentance VI (Λόγος περὶ μετανοίας ΣΤ'), in PG 49, 320 D.
- 81
Saint Gregory of Nyssa, On the Birth of Christ (Εἰς τὴν γέννησιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ), in PG 46, 1144 A; Sevir, On the Epistle to the Ephesians [Εἰς ἐπιστολὴν πρὸς Ἐφεσίους (in Catenis)], in Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt…, p. 308 ff.
- 82
This term refers to the peoples who worshipped idols, that is, the pagans (translator’s note).
- 83
St John Chrysostom, On the Epistle to the Ephesians V, in PG 62, 40 B (but by assimilating both himself and the other, he brought forth a single marvellous being, having himself become this first).
- 84
St John Chrysostom, On the Epistle to the Ephesians XX, in PG 62, 142 B.
- 85
Saint Gregory of Nyssa, On the Soul and the Resurrection (Περὶ ψυχῆς καὶ ἀναστάσεως), in PG 46, 89 C (may it be set free… from its natural affinity with the irrational passions).
- 86
Ibid., p. 93 C.
- 87
Matthew 22:13. See St Gregory of Nyssa, op. cit., in PG 46, 88 AB. See also Origen, On the Gospel according to Matthew 14, PG 13, 1228A.
- 88
Saint John of Damascus, Against the Manichaeans 1 (Κατὰ Μανιχαίων 1), Kotter IV, p. 351.
- 89
Ibid. 60, KOTTER IV, p. 379.
- 90
Saint Gregory of Nyssa, On the Time When All Are Subject to Him (Εἰς τὸ ὅταν ὑποταγῇ αὑτῷ τὰ πάντα), Jaeger III, 2, p. 18 ff. (PG 44, 1317 A–D).
- 91
St John Chrysostom, On the Epistle to the Ephesians XX, in PG 62, 137 D; St John of Damascus, On the Epistle to the Ephesians (apocryphal), in PG 95, 849 BC.
- 92
Ibid., in PG 95, 852 A.