18345Re: This document should be sent back to committee (the problem goes much deeper)
- Nov 3, 2006--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, gene703 <gene703@...> wrote:
> According to orthodox cannons a bishop that gains his appointement from civilJRS: Wrong.
>authorities is not really a bishop, right ?
A bishop who obtains his office by using secular authorities is subject to be deposed; but
even if he is actually guilty of this, he does not automatically cease to be a bishop.
The canons (and the anathemas) do not take on a life of their own: they are church laws,
to be applied by the hierarchy.
But this canon does not apply to situations where the secular authorities themselves
interfere with church life.
If it did, then all of the bishops of the Russian Church before the revolution would "not
have been bishops", because their appointment was always determined by the Tsar,
subject to his approval.
> Alexey Ridiger was appointed an MP Bishop of Tallinn in 1961 when communists wereJRS: The communists were not absolutely in charge of all MP clergy: but they did interfere
> fully in charge on MP personell, right ?
in everything they could.
> Is therefore current MP Patrairch Alexey II (Ridiger) a real orthodox clergyman or anJRS: He is a "real Orthodox clergyman".
>impostor according to orthodox cannon law ?
Fr. John R. Shaw
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>