```In 1439 the Council of Florencedefined marriage as a sacrament, solidifying the development of doctrine from the previous twelve centuries and described marriage as 'indisoluble' "since it signifies the indivisible union of Christ and the church." The passage follows, "Although the separation of bed is lawful on account of fornication, it is not lawful to contract another marriage since the bond of a legitimately contracted marriage is perpetual."```

whereas cathos only have it since 1439

From st augustine:

"Seeing that the compact of marriage is not done away by divorce intervening; so that they continue wedded persons one to another, even after separation; and commit adultery with those, with whom they shall be joined, even after their own divorce, either the woman with a man, or the man with a woman"

You have some nerve saying "only have it since 1439"

It is similar to those who believe some things were only believed since they were added to the Creed

Or those who say that Constantine made up Christianit

you have some nerve being unable to point out when the orthodox fell into heresy here

Again, I don't have to keep track of when other gorups start their heresies, why should I? What is supposed to be your argument?

Neither do we

But he answered you

I state something very simple: marriage can't be disolved, and this is supported by scripture, and said by the Fathers who talk about it. So the starting point for this position can be tracked back to them

lmao

third roman dab tag team continues

deviations from tradition and fathers are easy to see and point out

whereas you require me to prove that its always been that way

Wut?

I have pointed out what is the position of the Fathers

That is what I care about

Now your answer was "well, but who was the first who deviated?"

It was you who started that nonsensical discussion, I don't even know what the point is

the point is you got dabbed on son

What are you even talking about?

Are you high or something?

high on life

Good way to disengage

<:alex:557395954848759828>

remarriage was common practice in middle ages prior to the schism.
which means the Fathers would be discouraging, but not outlawing it.
but its tedious for me to prove the first point

whereas it would be trivial to prove the point at which the EO deviate

Matthew 5:32

right, so divorce is permissable in case of adultery

1 Corinthians 7:10-11

**1 Corinthians 7:10-11 - Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)**

```Dust


<10> But to them that are married, not I but the Lord commandeth, that the wife depart not from her husband. <11> And if she depart, that she remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband. And let not the husband put away his wife. ```

1 Corinthians 7:10-11

**1-е Коринфянам 7:10-11 - Russian Synodal Version (RUSV)**

```Dust


<10> А вступившим в брак не я повелеваю, а Господь: жене не разводиться с мужем, --<11> если же разведется, то должна оставаться безбрачною, или примириться с мужем своим, --и мужу не оставлять жены <своей>. ```

@Mozalbete ⳩ you should use the Spanish one

Lmao

1 Timothy 2:12

**1-е Тимофею 2:12 - Russian Synodal Version (RUSV)**

```Dust


<12> а учить жене не позволяю, ни властвовать над мужем, но быть в безмолвии. ```

:^)