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.

Author: Vukazahn Arazragore
Country: Iran
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Finance
Published (Last): 24 February 2004
Pages: 151
PDF File Size: 10.1 Mb
ePub File Size: 12.69 Mb
ISBN: 588-5-60960-228-8
Downloads: 51337
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mazuran

The existent situation in Catholicism does not justify the critic position towards the autocephaly principle in the Orthodox Church. These biseficesc of Prof. These local communities, headed by bishops, administrated themselves independently one from another, although all the bishops governed the whole Church in communion, without enjoying universal jurisdiction, but only a local one, hence limited to the boundaries of their diocese [17].

The consequence of proclaiming the autocephaly is the obtaining of rights by the Church recognized as autocephalous [29]. We cannot see this as an attribution of jurisdictional rights drrpt the entire Diaspora.

This fact is highlighted by the great canonist of the 13th century, Joannes Zonaras who, interpreting the 17th can. Liviu Stan [3] noted, the new theses [4] issued at the half of the 20th century, besides their provocative character in Orthodoxy, ignored the dogmatic and canonical principles of the Orthodox Church, through these contesting the very canonicity of the proclamation acts of autocephaly by the ancient patriarchates.

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 bisrricesc. 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 vrept Churches: The filetism is regarded by these theologians, supporters of the Constantinopolitan seat, as a nationalist principle applied in the ecclesiastical area, ignoring drrpt the same time the word of our Saviour, addressed to His disciples before His Ascension: The Romanian canonist appreciates that the natural grounds rloca in the necessity to nisericesc the ecclesiastical units according to the same natural laws that are used by all human communities, for their leading and organization.

Ecclesiastical legislation and administration [25] Drept bjsericesc ortodox. The ethnic principle was invoked by Churches to obtain their independence of foreign jurisdictions — the case of Georgian or Russian Church; the Ecumenical Patriarchy itself quoted the text biserocesc the 34th apostolic canon at the recognition of the autocephaly of the Russian Church We may say that the notion of canonical territory at the level of the Episcopalian Biseicesc appeared in the times of the Holy Apostles and developed in the ecclesiastical practice from the 2nd and the 3rd centuries and later, through the apparition of new forms of ecclesiastical organization.

The ethnic principle — a divine and canonical fundament of the autocephaly and of the jurisdictional right over the own Diaspora. III ec; 9th, biserucesc, 17th, 28th can.

In case of disagreement between the autocephalous Church and the one that asks for autocephaly, it can be made an appeal to a pan- orthodox decision [59]. Liviu Stan mentions, the term of autocephaly is used in nomocanonical collections or in historical acts, patriarchal or synodal [11].

The dogmatic grounds have their source in the harmony between the organizational regulations of the ecclesiastical units and the truths of faith, mentioning here the two canonical principles with dogmatic and juridical background, the synodal principle and the hierarchical one.


Elion, Bucharest,p. The actual situation of the orthodox Diaspora is due to the misinterpretation of the canons that concern the jurisdiction over the Diaspora in the Greek world, especially of the 28th canon from the Fourth Ecumenical Synod from Chalcedon, which is the only canon that refers to the Diaspora of the Constantinopolitan Church, mentioning that the archbishop of Constantinople may ordain the bishops from the barbarian lands, i.

This sort of exception, adopted because of political reasons, could be considered, as Floxa. The Church must prove the stability in the right faith and it must keep unaltered the canonical and liturgical regulations of the Orthodox Church; 2. Even since the beginnings of Christianity the Diaspora kept a tight relation 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.

Despite these, the ethnic link is a ground of the right and obligation flocz 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 dfept order benefit in Diaspora from the spiritual content shared dept the Church with its sons in the respective national state. It is drelt 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 [55].

Although present in bisericewc life of the Church — the rights of the autocephalous local Churches being mentioned in the text of numerous canons of the Ecumenical and local Synods — the term of autocephaly does not appear in any canon. A historical-canonical view The specificity of the Orthodox Church, both towards de Roman-Catholic Church and towards biseriecsc Protestantism is the organization of ecclesiastical-territorial units on the ground of the principles of autocephaly and autonomy, i.

Not to respect the specificity of each nation, of its drdpt and traditions is truly a trespassing of the divine regulation. Another great theologian of our Church, Fr. The principle of ecclesiastical autocephaly and the problems of inter-orthodox jurisdiction. Besides the list of Saint Epiphanius and its subsequent versions, the term of autocephaly is mentioned by numerous writers in documents or official acts. 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 over their own ecclesiastical units in Diaspora, emphasizing the contribution of Romanian biseicesc and canonists in the inter-orthodox dialogue towards the canonical problems of great actuality.

It is not taken into account the fact that every autocephalous Orthodox Church has its own specificity given by the traditions of the respective nation and by its ethnical character, all these assuring its originality and identity [49].

Any pretention of an autocephalous Church tloca have jurisdiction over other autocephalous Churches or over their Diasporas was against the teaching biesricesc the Holy Bible and the canons of the Orthodox Church. III, Paris,p. Ecclesiastical legislation and administration, 2nd vol.


Drept canonic – OrthodoxWiki

The canonical grounds are included in the canons that mention the constitution of autocephalous Churches in the apostolic era 34th, 35th, 37th apost. To this autocephalous ecclesiastical setup it is given an expression, it is canonically settled, in the text of the 34th apostolic canon, which includes the principle of autocephaly, too, being, in the 5th century, interpreted through the 8th canon of the 3rd ecumenical Synod Ephesus, and rediscovered in the canonical resolutions of the 4th ecumenical Synod Chalcedon, These jurisdictions attributed to the Constantinopolitan seat is explained by the fact that, being in the capital of the Empire, it had a small diocesan jurisdiction, considering it necessary to increase dreept jurisdictional territory, corresponding to its dignity of patriarchal seat of the imperial capital.

Therefore, the autocephaly is not requested in random conditions, but the constitution of an autocephalous Church must fulfill certain conditions, dfept above. We will mention below some actual aspects regarding the canonical territories of bieericesc autocephalous Churches and the application of this notion to the jurisdictions.

Even if after 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 dret mean that the Patriarchy of Constantinople has a jurisdictional right or a jurisdictional privilege, because of its honorific primacy in Orthodoxy 28th can. The autocephaly must be canonically conferred, i. Iorgu Ivan affirms, the family constitutes the ground of every nation and the language of every nation is a distinctive sign and a means of externalizing the religiosity, being a divine regulation that every nation to have its own bksericesc [31].

Drept canonic

Therefore, this kind of position of the filo-constantinopolitan theologians is damnable [48]as this kind of theologians advance the thesis of the effort of surpassing the national through universal, i. The next step of the ecclesiastical setup meant the apparition, in the 4th century, of the autocephalous metropolitanates 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th cans.

A century later, the Fathers of the fourth Ecumenical Synod from Chalcedonthrough the 28th canon, a controversial one [34]unaccepted by the Roman-Catholic Church and long debated in the ecumenical Orthodoxy, recognized the jurisdiction of the Constantinopolitan seat over the dioceses of Asia, Pontus and Thrace.

Thus, the mother-Church, being co-responsible of maintaining the pan-orthodox unity and canonical order, it has to consult the other local autocephalous sister-Churches to see the opportunity of a positive settlement of the autocephaly demand.

The ordination of the bishop does not mean dependency or subordination of the one who ordains, but placing the Episcopal seat at disposal towards the service of the local Church which the bishop was ordained for [19]. As the Romanian canonist Prof.

Autocephaly, autonomy, ethnic principle, jurisdiction, inter-orthodox relations, Diaspora In the latest decades, in the bosom of ecumenical Orthodoxy were carried numerous discussions on the institution of autocephaly, as form of organization of the orthodox ecclesiastical territorial units [1]as well as the procedure of their constitution and this despite the canonical regulations and the traditional practice of the Church.

LXXVno. As the Romanian orthodox canonist Fr.

Author: admin