H
Hesychios
Guest
The local synod has always done this.
From the beginning it was that way in the west as well.
From antiquity, the earliest church communities budded off new communities, the older Apostolic ones more or less controlling the newer ones as missions. Over time new synods would be formed. Historically we know this was a process going on before any canons were composed, the first canons already appealed to a traditions to be maintained and made allowances for special circumstances.
This structure of older or stronger churches (Metropolitan Sees) leading the dioceses surrounding them was already recognized as the practice of the church by the very first Ecumenical Council in 325AD. In an attempt to standardize the structure of the church, some very significant decisions were agreed upon by the attendant bishops (these were men whom just a few short years before were often in hiding from the persecutions). A few interesting points they felt necessary to speak out on …
- “It is by all means proper that a bishop should be appointed by all the bishops in the province. But should this be difficult, either on account of urgent necessity or because of distance, three at least should meet together, and the suffrages of the absent bishops also being given and communicated in writing, then the ordination should take place. But in every province the ratification of what is done should be left to the Metropolitan.” (This is the first we read of Metropolitan bishops - although the Council is showing us the arrangement already existed in the underground church, and the oldest and grandest of these Metropolitans came to be known as patriarchs over time.) [Canon 4]
- "Such as have been excommunicated by certain bishops shall not be restored by others … " (This reflecting the sovereign association of one bishop to another, the desire was to all mutually agree to respect the judgments of the fellow bishops in matters such as excommunication, and not undercut their brothers decisions) [Canon 5]
- “Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis prevail: that the Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction in all these, since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome, likewise in Antioch and the other provinces. Let the Churches retain their privileges. And this is to be universally understood: that if any one be made bishop without the consent of the Metropolitan, the Great Synod has declared that such a man ought not to be a bishop. If, however, two or three bishops shall from natural love of contradiction, oppose the common suffrage of the rest, it being reasonable and in accordance with the ecclesiastical law, then let the choice of the majority prevail.” (Apparently there was a local challenge to the Metropolitan of Alexandria’s already traditional authority to oversee certain extensions of the church’s work in neighboring areas, the example of other Sees were cited to show the standing precedent for this arrangement in other areas. It was agreed by the assembled Council that Libya and Pentapolis were not ready or perhaps stable enough to govern themselves. -A second most interesting point the Fathers made was that within the Metropolitan Synod respect is due to the majority decision of the assembled bishops, not the solitary authority of the Metropolitan.) [Canon 6]
- “Since custom and ancient tradition have prevailed that the Bishop of Aelia Capitolina should be honored, let him (saving the due dignity to the Metropolis [Caesarea Maritima]) have the next place of honor.” (Here is another appeal to tradition. The Jerusalem church, once destroyed, is growing again, and the Council Fathers want to recognize it in some special way without separating it from the control of it’s own Metropolitan at Ceasarea) [Canon 7]
- “Neither bishop, nor presbyter, nor deacon shall be transferred from city to city. But they shall be sent back should they attempt to do so, to the Churches in which they were ordained.” [Canon 15]
Eventually the case came before an Ecumenical Council, just 100 years after Nicea in 431AD.
- " … therefore the Rulers of the holy churches in Cyprus shall enjoy, without dispute or injury, according to the Canons of the blessed Fathers and ancient custom, the right of performing for themselves the ordination of their excellent Bishops. The same rule shall be observed in the other dioceses and provinces everywhere, so that none of the God beloved Bishops shall assume control of any province which has not heretofore, from the very beginning, been under his own hand or that of his predecessors. " [Canon 8]
