Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [orthodox-synod] Wrong Understanding of Schismatics

Expand Messages
  • VladMoss@aol.com
    In a message dated 26/06/03 19:43:23 GMT Daylight Time, ... Those are not the rules, and your remarks are totally irrelevant, mixing up times and events in a
    Message 1 of 15 , Jun 26, 2003
      In a message dated 26/06/03 19:43:23 GMT Daylight Time,
      lebedeff@... writes:


      > 2) The Council of Bishops banning five bishops from serving "without any
      > trial or investigation"
      >
      > How about the fact that the consecrations of three of the bishops were
      > uncanonical since the other bishops of the Synod had not been polled, and
      > this was also done without the knowledge of the First Hierarch and the
      > members of the Synod of Bishops?
      >
      > How about the fact that bishops who usurp their authority and form an
      > independent ecclesiastical structure and consecrate their own bishops are
      > subject to canonical penalties--which, of course, fall both on the bishops
      > who unlawfully consecrated new bishops and on those who were unlawfully
      > consecrated?
      >
      > How about the fact that the Regulations of the Russian Church specifically
      > give to the Synod the authority to place under ban any cleric, including
      > bishops, **prior to investigation and trial** if they have been found to
      > have committed a serious infraction?
      >
      > So--the justiifications given by Vladimir in his post are completely
      > flawed, and the Synod of Bishops had every right to place these bishops
      > under ban.
      >
      > And, if they dared to serve under ban--they could be and were, deposed of
      > office, for that undisputed fact alone.
      >
      > Those are the rules.
      >

      Those are not the rules, and your remarks are totally irrelevant, mixing up
      times and events in a manner designed to mislead.

      You systematically and wilfully mix up events BEFORE the Lesna Sobor and
      events AFTER the Lesna Sobor. I could say a lot in justification of the
      consecration of the three bishops, but the fact is that it took place BEFORE the Lesna
      Sobor and was discussed and regulated at the Lesna Sobor.

      Of course, if the Russian bishops had then consecrated another three bishops
      AFTER the Lesna Sobor this might (or might not) have been a canonical
      transgression. In which case it would have been necessary to convene a trial and
      summon the consecrating bishops to the trial.

      But nothing of the sort happened. In fact, the Russian bishops had very
      little time to do anything after the Lesna Sobor because within weeks (literally)
      of that Sobor, and only shortly after they had returned to Russia, they had
      been kicked out of the ROCOR!

      One of the fastest about-turns, I would say, in Church history.

      Vladimir Moss


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.