Правило 12 Святых Апостолов

If anyone from the clergy, or a layman excommunicated from church communion, or unworthy of being accepted into the clergy, departs and is received in another city without a representative letter: let both the one who accepted and the one accepted be excommunicated. (Ap. 13, 32, 33; IV Om. 11, 13; Trul. 17; Antioch. 6, 7, 8, 11; Laod. 41, 42; Serdic. 9; Carth. 23, 106). This rule deals first of all with those who have been excommunicated in general, and then with those laity who are unworthy of clergy. We have already talked about those excommunicated in the interpretation of the 10th Ap. rules. Regarding the laity who wished to join the clergy, there was a prescription of divine right, namely: such were first to be strictly tested to what extent they would zealously teach the people (2 Tim. 2:24; Mark 4:34; John 15, John 16, John 17; Acts 1:3) and to delve into the teaching of the church (1 Tim. 4:16), as a result of which only those who from youth were wise in Christian science (2 Tim. 3:15; Titus 1:9). The severity of this rule, determined by the exaltation of the priestly service itself, often had the consequence that some could not be immediately awarded ordination, and this ordination was postponed until the subject bishops were completely satisfied with the full scientific preparation and quality of the persons wishing to join the clergy. Dissatisfied with this, many turned to the bishops of other dioceses and were accepted by them. This Apostolic Rule is directed against such disorder, prohibiting bishops from accepting both clergy who come to them without permission, and laypeople who wish to accept the priesthood. The rule commands in such cases to excommunicate from communion with the church not only those who come to other bishops without permission, but also those bishops who receive them. In order to avoid the strict consequences of this rule for the latter and to maintain fraternal reciprocity between them, “letters of representation” have been established, which must be issued by bishops to both clergy and laity going to another diocese, and without such a letter no one can be received anywhere. The rules mention three types of canonical letters, letters, or messages: representative letters (συστατικαί έπιστολαί, literae commendatiae, formatae, testimoniales, affidavits), dismissal letters (απολυτικαί έπιστολαί, literae dimissoriae, letter of release) and letters of peace (είρηνικαί έπιστολαί, literae pacificae, peace messages). We talk about the last two types of these canonical letters in the interpretation of 11 rules IV. Council and 17th Rule of the Council of Trullo; Here we are talking about the first type of representative letters. “Representative letters, as Vlastar says in his Syntagma, are letters issued by bishops to famous clergy, ordained by them when sent to other dioceses; In the same letters, bishops certify the identity of clergy, i.e. indicate their hierarchical degree, their confession of the true faith, or testify that although a complaint or slander was filed against the cleric, he turned out to be innocent. Exactly the same certificates are issued to laymen leaving for another diocese; those who have been excommunicated are given letters in which the bishop of the subject diocese is notified that they have already been released from all penance” 152. The issuance of such canonical charters or certificates is based on divine right. From the messages of St. We see from the Apostle Paul that he recommends to the communities to which he writes persons both certified by the letter itself and others, and from the second letter to the Corinthians (2 Cor. 3:1) it is clear that even then the communities demanded similar certificates from persons unknown to the faithful. On the basis of this apostolic practice, 12 Apostles was published. a rule that has strictly retained its force through all centuries 153. Representative letters were and are still issued personally by bishops. In the case, for example, if a cleric was excommunicated and then freed from excommunication, or if, for some other reason, he could arouse suspicion regarding his behavior, but wanted to move to another diocese, then the appropriate bishop gave him a certificate stating that he was no longer under excommunication and was free from any criticism. Further, if it happened that a cleric was accused of some crime, and if the investigation proved his innocence, then the bishop would issue him a special document certifying to the person to whom it was to be presented the innocence of the said cleric and explaining that he was put on trial as a result of a false accusation or enmity. Also, if a layman was accused of non-Orthodoxy, but then acquitted by a church court, then the bishop in whose jurisdiction he was, issued, at the request of such a layman, a certificate of Orthodoxy of his beliefs. All such certificates or certificates were called representative letters 154. The same name is given to the ordinary certificates issued by the bishop to each presbyter or deacon at his ordination, or by the patriarch when he appoints a new metropolitan, and by the latter when he appoints a new bishop. The same name is given to certificates issued upon elevation to any church rank 155. In Greece, a representative letter (συστατίκ o ν γράμμα) is often combined with a letter of dismissal (άπολυτικόν γράμμα), issued to the subject hieromonks or priests 156. A, 9 (Af. Synth., VI, 91). Wed. and Zonara's interpretation of this rule (Ath. Synth., II, 16). In Kormchay (Chapter 1) this representative document is called “stipulated writing.” In the West it is called epistola formata because, as Beveregius states, “quod signi episcopalis forma in eis (epistolis) impressa fuit” (Annot. in h. can., p. 22). Zonara's interpretation of this rule (Af. Synth., II, 16). You might be interested in: