In the Roman Catholic Church, the sources of the church. law, - except for Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition, as well as customary law or church. The canons (with the above-mentioned exceptions) accepted by the Eastern Church before the separation of the Western Church from it are recognized. They are joined by the decrees of others who were in the West (and one in the East (In Constantinople, 869, on the occasion of the strife between Pat. Photius and the Popes). Councils, of which up to 14 Councils are recognized as Roman Catholic. Churches for the Ecumenical: Constantinople (above); 4 Lateran (1123, 1139, 1179, 1215); 2 Lyons (1245 and 1274); Vienna (1311); Konstance (1414); Basel (1431); Florence (1438); Fifth Lateran (1512); Trent (1545); Vatican (1869). Moreover, all the numerous decrees of the Roman high priests, under various names, as heads of the Church, are recognized in it as one of the main sources of law for the whole Church. The collection of ecclesiastical canons (made at first, in the form of a system of ecclesiastical law, by the monk Gratian in the twelfth century and then continued, by order of the Popes (Gregory IX (XIII century), Boniface VIII (XIII century), Clement V (XIV century)), by the addition of subsequent papal decrees) is called Corpus juris canonici and is recognized as a generally binding guide of church law. The state laws of the country Roman Catholic. Ecclesiastical law attaches importance to the extent that they are recognized as binding by the Church. Power. In view of the preservation of peaceful relations between the Church and the state, in some countries the governments concluded agreements or treaties (concordats) with the Pope, which determined the relationship of the Church to the state and the participation of state power in the Church. Affairs. Such agreements also belong to the foundations of local church law. Protestant communities provide states. authorities of the country to establish ecclesiastical legal norms on the basis of those principles that are indicated in the novozav. Priest. Thus, in addition to the Holy Scriptures (the explanation of which is not limited by ecclesiastical authority) and these symbolic books, the main source of ecclesiastical law among Protestants is, in general, the state laws of the country, - In particular, the statutes on the Protestant Church given by the secular government. Rem. The statutes of the churches of foreign confessions are placed in the eleventh volume of the Code of Laws.

Governance in the Ancient Universal Church

In the Roman Catholic Church, the sources of the church. law, - except for Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition, as well as customary law or church. The canons (with the above-mentioned exceptions) accepted by the Eastern Church before the separation of the Western Church from it are recognized. They are joined by the decrees of others who were in the West (and one in the East (In Constantinople, 869, on the occasion of the strife between Pat. Photius and the Popes). Councils, of which up to 14 Councils are recognized as Roman Catholic. Churches for the Ecumenical: Constantinople (above); 4 Lateran (1123, 1139, 1179, 1215); 2 Lyons (1245 and 1274); Vienna (1311); Konstance (1414); Basel (1431); Florence (1438); Fifth Lateran (1512); Trent (1545); Vatican (1869). Moreover, all the numerous decrees of the Roman high priests, under various names, as heads of the Church, are recognized in it as one of the main sources of law for the whole Church. The collection of ecclesiastical canons (made at first, in the form of a system of ecclesiastical law, by the monk Gratian in the twelfth century and then continued, by order of the Popes (Gregory IX (XIII century), Boniface VIII (XIII century), Clement V (XIV century)), by the addition of subsequent papal decrees) is called Corpus juris canonici and is recognized as a generally binding guide of church law. The state laws of the country Roman Catholic. Ecclesiastical law attaches importance to the extent that they are recognized as binding by the Church. Power. In view of the preservation of peaceful relations between the Church and the state, in some countries the governments concluded agreements or treaties (concordats) with the Pope, which determined the relationship of the Church to the state and the participation of state power in the Church. Affairs. Such agreements also belong to the foundations of local church law. Protestant communities provide states. authorities of the country to establish ecclesiastical legal norms on the basis of those principles that are indicated in the novozav. Priest. Thus, in addition to the Holy Scriptures (the explanation of which is not limited by ecclesiastical authority) and these symbolic books, the main source of ecclesiastical law among Protestants is, in general, the state laws of the country, - In particular, the statutes on the Protestant Church given by the secular government. Rem. The statutes of the churches of foreign confessions are placed in the eleventh volume of the Code of Laws.

Church hierarchy, clergy

The Orthodox Church in its administration is divided into larger or smaller parts (particular Churches), which all together constitute one universal Church. Let us consider the historical origin of these parts of the one Church and their administration, as well as the entire universal Church. The Founder and Head of the Church gave all spiritual authority in the Church to His Apostles (John 20:21), who were its first rulers. When it began to expand, the Apostles established to help their ministry, first deacons (δίάκονος - minister), then presbyters (πρεσβύτερος - elder). The former were entrusted with the service of the material needs of the Christian community - the management of its charitable fund and the distribution of benefits to the poor; He was also entrusted with serving in the performance of the sacraments. The latter received pastoral spiritual authority – they had to take care of the satisfaction of the spiritual needs of Christians with teaching, moral guidance and sacred actions. But since the Church, according to Christ's promise, must remain until the end of time, the fullness of governmental authority granted by Christ to the Apostles was not to end with their death, but to remain in the Church forever. Therefore, the Apostles transferred their powers to their chosen successors so that they would continue in the Church in succession and unchangeable. To these persons, who received the name of bishops (επίσκοπος - overseer), the Apostles entrusted the supreme supervision and administration (archpastorship) in the founded Christian communities - something that the Apostles could not always reserve for themselves personally, being obliged to spread Christianity throughout the world. In apostolic times, the titles of bishop and presbyter were not strictly distinguished, and presbyters, as they were obliged to supervise the Christian community, were sometimes called bishops (Acts 20:17-28). Thus the hierarchy (hierarchy) was formed in the first Church. The persons called to it constituted a special category of members of the Church, later called clergy (κληρος - lot, lot or lot. We find the name of church service by lot in the Holy Scriptures (Acts 1:17-25). Other members of the Church were called brethren, then laymen (λαίκοι - belonging to the people). privernikov, etc.), they were also numbered among the clergy and constituted its lowest category. Thus, the highest governmental authority in the Church in the proper sense is entrusted by the Apostles to the bishops - their successors; other ranks of the hierarchy are appointed only assistants to the bishop in church administration; and the other members of the clergy were appointed officials.

The bishop and his district

Each Christian community that had its own bishop was a special private Church. It usually consisted of a city with villages belonging to it, which received Christianity from it. However, some Christian communities were formed in the villages, independently of their cities, and had their own bishops, or chorbishops. Initially, each bishop was independent in the administration of his particular Church (The rights and authority of the bishop will be spoken of when considering the current law, since this office in the Church is permanent), but later, in order to unite the rural Churches with the urban ones, in accordance with the dependence of the villages on the cities in the administrative respect, the Church. The laws abolished the independence of chorbishops, subordinating them to the bishops of the district cities, and, finally, completely abolished the bishops in the villages, replacing them with authorized presbyters of the city bishops. And not only in the villages, but also in small towns, the canons of the Church forbade the appointment of individual bishops, so that the title of bishop would not be humiliated by the insignificance of the district governed by him (Sard. 6). Episcopal districts later received the name of dioceses (Apostolic 34). This name is borrowed from the administrative division of the Roman Empire (from Constantine the Great). Having the highest spiritual authority in his diocese, the bishop did not have the right to dispose of church affairs in a region that did not belong to him without the permission of its own bishop, or without a special commission from the highest ecclesiastical authority; otherwise, his orders were considered invalid (Apostolic 35; I ecumenical. 15, etc.). Just as the bishop, who represented the unity of the Church and the fullness of ecclesiastical authority, was one for each particular Church, so the clergy who were attached to him was at first common to the entire diocese of the bishop. But later, with the increase in the number of Christians, smaller parts or communities began to form in the dioceses, which received from their bishop, from the clergy who were attached to him, their presbyters and other lower ranks of clergy (church clergy). Such parts of the diocese were called parishes; Administratively, this name referred to parts of the diocese (uyezds).

The Metropolitan and His Entourage

Through its bishop, each particular Church maintained unity with the other parts of the one universal Church and entered into communion with them. Following the example of the Apostolic Council, the bishops of several neighboring dioceses gathered for mutual advice and drew up general decisions on church affairs. Through such assemblies, special large parts of the Church, as it were, districts, were formed from several episcopal regions. The centers of these districts and the places of the Councils were the main cities in various parts of the empire, which not only politically, but also ecclesiastically, were of greater importance, as mothers for other cities in the spread of Christianity, or metropolises. The bishops of these cities-metropolises enjoyed great respect over the rest of the bishops of the less important cities of the same district, were the first among them, or archbishops, and presided over the Councils. From the fourth century in the Eastern Churches they were given the title of metropolitans. In some countries, bishops who had the significance of metropolitans were called primates. To the authority enjoyed by the metropolitans in terms of the importance of their cities, the Church added power in order to strengthen the union of individual Churches and strengthen the unity of church administration. Thus, the metropolitans were granted the right not only to convene regional councils and preside over them, but also to supervise the ecclesiastical affairs of their districts; diocesan bishops had to consider their metropolitan as their head and had no right to undertake anything important without him that exceeded their authority. (Apostolic 34; Ant. 9). He took care of filling the vacant episcopal seats (IV Ecumenical 25); confirmed the election of bishops (I Ecumenical 4; Laod. 12) and appointed them to office with the bishops of his district (IV Ecumenical 28); a bishop without the permission of the metropolitan was not to remain a bishop (I Ecumenical 6). With his permission and with his letter, the bishop could go on a journey outside the boundaries of the metropolis (Carth. 32). The metropolitan accepted appeals against the bishop's court from his clergy (Carth. 37 and 139) and accusations against him (Carth. 28). District bishops were obliged to commemorate the name of their metropolitan during the services, as a sign of their communion with him (Dvukr. 14). But the power of the metropolitan was limited by the local Council of his district (Apostolic 34; Ant 9). Before the establishment of the patriarchate, the metropolitan was appointed by the Council of Bishops of the district (Sard. 6) and could be judged by the same Council together with the neighboring metropolitans (III Ecumenical 1). Some bishops were sometimes given the title of metropolitan without authority. Enjoying the right of honor, they had to submit in the order of church administration to the metropolitan to whose district their dioceses belonged; for example, the bishop of Jerusalem, before his elevation to the patriarchal dignity, was dependent on the metropolitan of Caesarea (I Ecumenical 7).

The Patriarch and His Entourage

Already in the first three centuries, some of the metropolitans possessed great authority and influence in the Church, in accordance with the importance of their cities; such were the metropolitans of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch of Syria. These cities were politically the main ones in the empire. From the point of view of the spread of Christianity, their Churches were mother to numerous Churches in the East, South, and West; the districts of their metropolitans were more extensive than the others. Moreover, these cities were primarily apostolic sees, since the Apostles dwelt in them for a particularly long time and labored for the establishment of Christianity. After the founding of Constantinople, the new capital of the empire, or the new Rome, its bishop was given not only the authority of a metropolitan, but was also granted at the Second Ecumenical Council (Prov. 3) the privilege of honor and seniority over the bishop of Rome. For these first metropolitans, or, as they were sometimes called, exarchs (heads) of the great regions, church laws established the supreme authority over the metropolitans of several districts; from the fifth century (from the time of the Council of Chalcedon) they were given the honorary title of patriarchs (chiefs of the fathers). The Roman patriarchs were more often called by the name of the pope (father), assigned to them by popular custom. To them was added, with the same name and authority, the Metropolitan of Jerusalem, taking into account the honor that this holy city, the mother of all the Churches in the world, had in the eyes of Christians. Thus, in terms of its administration, the Church was divided into five parts or patriarchates, which partly corresponded to the dioceses of the Roman Empire. According to the decree of the Council of Trullo (par. 36), the order of the patriarchal sees, in terms of seniority, was as follows: the first place belonged to the Roman cathedra, the second, equal to the Roman cathedra of Constantinople, the third to Alexandria, the fourth to Antioch, and finally, the fifth to Jerusalem. Some of the metropolitans, in this division into patriarchates, retained an independent (autocephalous) position from the patriarchs; In subsequent times, parts of the Church that had previously been part of one or another patriarchate received autocephaly; e.g., the Russian, Serbian, Hellenic Churches, etc. According to the rules of the Church, the patriarchs are placed in the same position in relation to the metropolitans of their patriarchate as the latter were in relation to the bishops subordinate to them. They convened Councils from representatives of all the particular Churches of their district and their metropolitans; these Councils had, of course, a higher significance than the Councils of the metropolitan districts. The patriarchs are granted the right to appoint metropolitans of their district (IV Ecumenical 28), to receive appeals against them (IV Ecumenical 9; Sard. 3, 4, 5) and to judge them at their Council. In general, the patriarch had the right of supreme supervision in the ecclesiastical affairs of his patriarchate and represented the highest judicial instance. Metropolitans subordinate to the patriarch were obliged to commemorate his name during the rites (Dvukr. 15). The patriarch himself was confirmed in his office both by the emperor and by the other patriarchs, and, as the highest spiritual judge, could be judged only by the Council of his district with the participation of other patriarchs, but in his administration he was independent of them (see Carth. 37). By virtue of various historical circumstances, the patriarchs of Rome and Constantinople acquired greater importance in the Church than others, and their patriarchates were incomparably more extensive. In the sixth century, the patriarch of Constantinople, as the capital of the universe, was given the name of ecumenical, that is, supreme to the other patriarchs, standing at their head. This title was at first vehemently opposed by the Roman patriarchs, especially by Gregory the Great; he, in contrast to the universal name, called himself a slave of God's servants (servus servorum Dei); But later the popes began to appropriate to themselves the title of ecumenical bishop. With the establishment of the patriarchate, church unity and ties between the local Churches were to be strengthened even more.

Cathedral administration

Although church administration was united by the establishment of the authority first of the metropolitans, and then of the patriarchs, this not only did not weaken the influence of the original supreme ecclesiastical-governmental authority, but, on the contrary, strengthened it and promoted it. Such supreme authority in the Church, both for its individual parts and for it as a whole, consisted in the union of the authoritative functions of all the bishops, in their joint and harmonious activity in the Church, in other words, in a single episcopacy, in which each of the bishops fully participates (in the words of St. Cyprian). This union of bishops in the administration of the Church from its first times was maintained through constant relations on ecclesiastical affairs between the bishops of private Churches. The fullest and most tangible expression of the union and joint activity of bishops in the administration of the Church were the local and ecumenical Councils.

Local Councils