| |
The STUDIA UNIVERSITATIS BABEŞ-BOLYAI issue article summary
The summary of the selected article appears at the bottom of the page. In order to get back to the contents of the issue this article belongs to you have to access the link from the title. In order to see all the articles of the archive which have as author/co-author one of the authors mentioned below, you have to access the link from the author's name. |
|
| |
Abstract:
The Ample Canonic Legislation of the 1st Provincial Synod (1872) and the Position of the Holy See Regarding the Acts of the Synod. The current paper aims to emphasize the role of the 1st Provincial Synod as a fundamental juridical apparatus for the particular law of our Church and as a fons iuris for Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium. We know that our ius particulare Ecclesiae sui iuris is in the process of being drawn up. This paper focuses on the rich canonic analysis of the 1st Provincial Synod (1872) and on the position of the Apostolic See regarding the acts of this synod which was the most important one amongst the other two Romanian provincial synods approved by the Holy See, because it was meant to renew the Romanian canonic legislation and to replace the famous collection Directorum Legis, also known as Pravila (1652), in use since before the Union and presented as a fons iuris even in the norms of the synods ulterior to the Union with Rome. An important role in our approach is given to the analysis of several aspects characteristic to the 1st Provincial Synod such as, for example, the Sacri canones as a fons iuris of a great importance for the 1st Provincial Synod, since it made the Romanian Church a unique one among the other Oriental Churches United with Rome through its fidelity towards the Oriental tradition and patrimony. For a better understanding of the Synod, we analyzed also the Ad decreta Synodalia animadversiones (cf. Mansi 42), which revealed the importance of the Romanian synod obvious even in a comparison with the synods of the other Catholic Oriental Churches from the same period in the Habsburg Empire, precisely because it was the intention of the Holy See of Rome to present the 1st Provincial Synod as a model for them. The foundation of the new ecclesiastic province of Alba Iulia and Făgăraş (Ecclesiam Christi Bulla of Pope Pius IX, from Nov. 26th 1853) was of a fundamental importance for the Romanian Church and for its legislation. It was a great need for the exact knowledge of the spirit of the clergy and of the faithful, of their state, of their customs and of all that could have referred to the preservation in this province of the purity of faith and of the holiness of the rites and discipline. All these aspects reflected in the concern of Rome were expressed initially by the Apostolic Nuncio from Vienna, who asked the metropolitan and his sufraganeous bishops for a complete informative report regarding various disciplinary aspects from their own bishoprics, information about the provincial and local synods, about the married clergy, the ecclesiastical courts, the Sacrament of Marriage, the diriment impediments etc., with the purpose of checking up if the customs of each bishopric were conform with the oriental canonic law and if any remaining stains from the time of the Schism could still be found in the rite and the discipline of this Church. One can notice that the Romanian Greek-Catholic Church had its own problems, among which the reports revealed, besides important aspects of sacramental law, the issue of synodality, the one of the rights of the archpriests, the issue of the organization of a new ecclesiastical province, the one referring to the communicatio in sacris, to the election of the metropolitan and of the bishops, the one concerning the role of the laity in the church. Several of these issues caused Rome true difficulties. A famous example is offered by the matrimonial practice preceding the Union, supported vividly by the Romanian metropolitan A.Ş. Şuluţiu, who allowed the archpriests to function as a first instance court. In the Romanian Greek-Catholic Church, the ius particulare has as its fundamental juridical apparatus especially the three Provincial Synods of 1872, 1882 and 1900. The knowledge of this legislation is fundamental to the canonic direction and drawing up of the ius particulare Ecclesiae sui iuris.
Keywords: canonic law; particular law; Greek-Catholic; juridical apparatus; 1st Provincial Synod (1872)
|
|
