Canoanele si Dreptul canonic · The 32nd Canon of Quinisext Synod as an authentic interpretation of mike – 5 May 0 · Drept penal bisericesc. , –, –; Floca, Drept canonic ortodox, vol. II, p. .. Milaş, N., , Dreptul bisericesc oriental, Bucureşti, Tipografia „Gutenberg”. Milaş, N., 24 N. Milaş: Dreptul bisericesc oriental, p. 25 I.N. Floca: Drept canonic orthodox. Legislaţie şi administraţie bisericească. Vol. II. Bucureşti , p.
|Published (Last):||7 June 2018|
|PDF File Size:||16.35 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.75 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Lecturer Iulian Mihai L. Even since the beginnings of Christianity the Diaspora kept a tight drwpt with the bishop in whose community they had received the baptism, this way having the complete sentiment of being in permanent spiritual communion with the members of the community they had left and with the entire Church.
We may say that forms of autocephaly exist nowadays too in the Roman-Catholic Church, but without being referred as autocephalies. Grigorios Papathomas maintain that those who support the ethnic principles make a confusion between Church and Nation assimilating the Church to the Nation, non being accepted the jurisdiction over an ethnic group and in conclusion more jurisdictions, but an universal jurisdiction, the one of the Ecumenical Patriarchy. We respond here to the Greek theologian through the words of an authoritarian voice of the Orthodoxy from the 20th century, the greatest orthodox dogmatist of his time, Fr.
The autocephaly must be canonically conferred, i. The bishoprics, which were initially autocephalous, kept only the autonomy of one of another, together forming the autocephalous metropolitanates, which later were going to become autonomous, too, in the bosom of exarchates and the in the patriarchates 9th, 12th, 17th, 28th cans.
Flocx legislation and administration Drept canonic ortodox. Besides the list of Saint Epiphanius and its subsequent versions, the term of autocephaly is mentioned by numerous writers in documents or official acts. Despite these, the ethnic link is a ground of the right and obligation of every autocephalous Church to organize and guide the religious life of its own Diasporas, in order to keep the ancient orthodox faith, as well as in order benefit in Diaspora from the spiritual content shared by the Church with its sons in the respective national state.
Iulian Mihai L. CONSTANTINESCU: The principle of ecclesiastical autocephaly
The Holy Apostles, being conscious of their unique and unrepeatable authority received from Savior Jesus Christ, enjoying universal jurisdiction by virtue of the extraordinary grace of apostolacy, preached the Gospel of our Savior Jesus Christ as far as the ends of the world Mt In the same time, they strengthened the indispensability of the ethnic element in organizing an autocephalous Church, as a divine regulation.
Iorgu Ivan affirms, the family constitutes the ground of every nation and the language of every nation dept a distinctive sign and a means of externalizing the religiosity, being a divine regulation that every nation to have its own language . Thus, the autocephalous form of organization of the Church is a traditional form in the bosom of ecumenical Orthodoxy, asserting itself as the fundamental canonical-juridical institution.
In consequence, the Patriarchy of Constantinople itself, with all its privileges recognized by the ecumenical synods 3rd can. The ethnic principle — a divine and canonical fundament of the autocephaly and of the jurisdictional right over the own Diaspora.
The bishop, being ordained for the local flpca, becomes a testimony of the faith of his local community, being integrated in the Episcopal college and therefore he becomes the testimony of the entire apostolic teaching and tradition as the theologian W.
Drept canonic – OrthodoxWiki
Xno. We find the historical ground for the constitution of the autocephalies in the ecclesiastical history and tradition, the whole ecclesiastical regulation being settled as customary law and then found in the text of the canons, precisely on the long practice basis. III ec; 9th, 12th, 17th, 28th can.
Stan, Gnosis, Bucharest, The same manner, the bishops are not allowed to ordain outside their diocese 35th apost. Thus, nowadays, we can see a painful aspect in the orthodox Diaspora — the disruption . All these non-canonical theses legitimately claim the clarification of inter-orthodox jurisdictional relations, the precise distinction between autocephaly and autonomy, as well as the procedure of recognition and proclamation of the autocephaly of local Churches, independently constituted from the administrative-jurisdictional point of view, on a synodal-hierarchical basis.
Not to respect biserocesc specificity of each nation, of its language and traditions is truly a trespassing of the divine regulation. However, like some exarchates or diocese, some metropolitanates kept their autocephaly, too, either as metropolitanates or as archbishoprics  ; we could mention here the Metropolitanate of Tomis  or the Archbishopric of Cyprus, which has remained autocephalous until flocw 8th can.
Thus, the word autocephaly continues to appear in bisreicesc lists of the seats from the canonical territory of the historical patriarchates, although they were modified in time. Therefore, the autocephaly is not requested in random conditions, but the constitution of an autocephalous Church must fulfill certain conditions, mentioned above.
Iorgu Ivan affirms, as a confirmation of the old custom drpt which referred the 6th can. In this context, the Dtept canonist, Dretp. XXIVno. It is damnable that the Ecumenical Patriarchy takes under its jurisdiction Romanian orthodox communities, or of other ethnicity, without the agreement of the mother-Church, communities that lost their canonical link with the mother-Church, this fact being a trespassing of the canons and ecclesiological orthodox principles .
These regulations were accepted through consensus Ecclesiae dispersae, showing here, briefly, some of the aspects of the necessary conditions for the canonical constitution of the autocephalous Churches: Even if biseticesc the agreement between the two local autocephalous orthodox Churches, the Ecumenical Patriarchy and the Greek Church, the Greek Diaspora is under the jurisdiction of the Constantinopolitan patriarchal seat, this does not mean that the Patriarchy of Constantinople has a jurisdictional right or a jurisdictional privilege, because of its honorific primacy in Orthodoxy 28th can.
Truly, one canon, previous to the era of Ecumenical and local Synods canons, included the two words which the term of autocephaly was born from autoz and kejalhthat is the 34th Apostolic canon. In consequence, we specify here that the right of each Church to independence or autocephaly was consecrated by ecclesiastical practice transformed in time into a juridical regulation, then crept a custom with law flpca that was mentioned in the text of the different canons. In this study we will evaluate ecclesiological-canonical and historical the canonical doctrine of the Orthodox Church, regarding the autocephaly, the manner of the constitution, on canonical bases, of the local autocephalous Churches, the problem of proclaiming the autocephaly and of the autocephalous Churches jurisdiction bisericezc their own ecclesiastical units in Diaspora, emphasizing the contribution of Romanian theologians and canonists in the inter-orthodox dialogue towards the canonical problems of great actuality.
Thus, the autocephaly of local Churches, formed in the ethnic framework, is mentioned by the 34th apostolic canon, as we affirmed, its dispositions being taken over by other canons too, these ones showing the criteria for the establishment of the identity of a Church: The 34th apostolic canon expresses in a positive manner the importance of the ethnic principle as a fundament of the ecclesiastical organization and of the exercise of jurisdiction over the own Diaspora .