Celibate Bishops

[Myrrh]

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/ea_refterm.aspx

from which:

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/schmem_canon.aspx

"No term is used—and misused—among the Orthodox people in America more often than the term canonical."

—Fr. Alexander Schmemann,

and

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/c ... ughts.aspx

Note in the second that Lebedeff includes the canons on marriage of clergy as "sacrosanct" putting them under the heading of dogma, this is his personal bias and currently the 'norm' within the Orthodox Churches, that doesn't make it correct. Remember the Holy Spirit is the guide to truth for the Church, not the canons...

"The Canons that express dogma are, of course, sacrosanct. Those that guide Church administration (trial of priests and bishops, diocesan prerogatives, marriage requirements for clergy, etc.) are still very much applicable in our time. Those that guide the behavior of clergy and the faithful are also applicable, with appropriate updating reflecting the realities of our time. Some are just anachronisms or historical artifacts."

In Christ's name may the Holy Spirit guide you

Myrrh

[AndyHolland]

I read with interest your initial link response. In its notes, it stated that the Church later had a large pool of monastics to draw from - so selecting Monastic Bishops made perfect sense. It also mentioned that in missionary situations and in America for example, this is not always the case.

In our "W.O." Antiochian Archdiocese in America, we had no large pool to draw from in our recent election of Bishops, however, it appears that at least a couple of whom I am familiar are very good Bishops so far.

Thank you for the comprehensive link.

andy holland
sinner

[尼古拉前执事]

Canons from the 5th & 6th Council:

Canon XII:Moreover, this also has come to our knowledge, that in Africa
and Libya, and in other places the most God-beloved bishops in those
parts do not refuse to live with their wives, even after consecration,
thereby giving scandal and offence to the people. Since, therefore, it
is our particular care that all things tend to the good of the flock
placed in our hands and committed to us - it has seemed good that
henceforth nothing of the kind shall in any way occur. And we say this,
not to abolish and overthrow what things were established of old by
Apostolic authority, but as caring for the health of the people and
their advance to better things, and lest the ecclesiastical state
should suffer any reproach...But if any shall have been observed to do
such a thing, let him be deposed.

Canon XLVII:The wife of him who is advanced to hierarchical dignity,
shall be seperated from her husband by their mutual consent, and after
his ordination and consecration to the episcopate she shall enter a
monastery situated at a distance from the abode of the bishop, and
there let her enjoy the bishop's provision. And if she is deemed worthy
she may be advanced to the dignity of a deaconess.

[Myrrh]

Dreadful, isn't it? It's the bishops who made celibacy a rule who are scandalous and offensive.

[Priest Siluan]

There's nothing stopping a married man becoming a bishop, but it's a subject avoided because the rule against this is contrary to Apostolic Tradition.

There's a potted history on the subject on this page:

http://www.apostle1.com/married_bishops ... 6-2004.htm

Myrrh

We return on the same topic.... this link is from an Ofiesh Group that supposedly try of defending its position of married bishops.

[AndyHolland]

The canon is completely consistent with what was written above and it was represented accurately.

1. A Bishop does not have to be a monastic.
2. A Bishop can be married but must be celibate.
3. A Bishop must care for his wife though separate.
4. Apostolic Authority allowed for married Bishops.

There is no indication Alexy II was not celibate or did not follow the canon.

St. John Kronstadt was married and celibate!(He was a Priest but not a Bishop).

andy holland
sinner

[Priest Siluan]

I read with interest your initial link response. In its notes, it stated that the Church later had a large pool of monastics to draw from - so selecting Monastic Bishops made perfect sense. It also mentioned that in missionary situations and in America for example, this is not always the case.

In our "W.O." Antiochian Archdiocese in America, we had no large pool to draw from in our recent election of Bishops, however, it appears that at least a couple of whom I am familiar are very good Bishops so far.

Thank you for the comprehensive link.

andy holland
sinner

Are you in Western Rite?