In the old days,the tradition was to virtually grab a simple monk from some retalively unkown monastry and put him into the papal limelight.This method was practiced inorder to ensure there arises no power struggle between the Bishops over the entitlement to the papacy.
I, think these old traditions were over-ridden back in the 1950's when the church introduced new bylaws,underlining that future Papal candidates should be known personalities to the public and should have impeccable credientials of their services to their parishners. On top of that, they should be well educated.So the idea of selecting 3 final candidates and then cast a ballot was brought into effect. That is how the late HH Pope Kyrillos and HH Pope Shenouda were selected.However, I heard, there are plans to change these bylaws as the system more or less favours diocean bishops and almost excludes non-bishops from becoming Popes.
first off, thanks for your feedback, it's really appreciated i however was just looking for documents that state the "rites" of the process secondly, i heard from many servants that diocean bishops are not entitled to become popes, only "general" bishops are. This is to ensure that their Diocese will not be left vacant, because apparently no other Bishop can replace another Bishop. Hence, Aswan is still under Anba Hedra even though he was returned back to his monastery and doesnt serve or manage the diocese anymore. I know for fact that there have been three bishops elected to the papal throne, all were in the 1900's. I also heard, as Hezekiel said, alot of rumors about the laws changing, I personally like the "old method" However to note, I heard that HH Pope Shenouda, upon election, asked for a ballot to see if the congregation agrees to him, which i think is much needed, unity under one person.
I do not recall any reference for His Holiness Pope Shenouda asking for any referendum on his papal election.
The system, at present, does not favor diocesan bishops because they, relative to recent precedence and ecclesiastical laws, have been eliminated from the process altogether. Only general bishops, without any physical diocesan sees, are allowed to be included. The nomination process is inclusive for the monastic system.
As a point, even the general bishops, if they wind-up assuming an official See (diocese), the precedence has been not to officially instal anyone to take their title eventhough their general post was not a diocese, e.g., Bishop Sourial in Australia (his first title was Bishop of Youth for the East Coast of the United States), Bishop Serapion in California (his first title was Bishop of Ecumenical and Social Services), His Holiness Pope Shenouda III (his first title was President of the Theological College), etc.
Although other bishops have been given parallel duties so that the ministry does not suffer, they have not been dispensed those titles.
well this might not be too helpful, but there is a lis of popes in St. Mark Catherdral in Alexandria, Egypt... i think.... im not too sure if it is Popes or priests that were buried there..... but this is so unhelpful(providing u probably don't live in Alexandria ), im sorry
Comments
http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php?topic=6464.0
pray for me
joe
I, think these old traditions were over-ridden back in the 1950's when the church introduced new bylaws,underlining that future Papal candidates should be known personalities to the public and should have impeccable credientials of their services to their parishners. On top of that, they should be well educated.So the idea of selecting 3 final candidates and then cast a ballot was brought into effect. That is how the late HH Pope Kyrillos and HH Pope Shenouda were selected.However, I heard, there are plans to change these bylaws as the system more or less favours diocean bishops and almost excludes non-bishops from becoming Popes.
secondly, i heard from many servants that diocean bishops are not entitled to become popes, only "general" bishops are. This is to ensure that their Diocese will not be left vacant, because apparently no other Bishop can replace another Bishop. Hence, Aswan is still under Anba Hedra even though he was returned back to his monastery and doesnt serve or manage the diocese anymore.
I know for fact that there have been three bishops elected to the papal throne, all were in the 1900's.
I also heard, as Hezekiel said, alot of rumors about the laws changing, I personally like the "old method"
However to note, I heard that HH Pope Shenouda, upon election, asked for a ballot to see if the congregation agrees to him, which i think is much needed, unity under one person.
The system, at present, does not favor diocesan bishops because they, relative to recent precedence and ecclesiastical laws, have been eliminated from the process altogether. Only general bishops, without any physical diocesan sees, are allowed to be included. The nomination process is inclusive for the monastic system.
As a point, even the general bishops, if they wind-up assuming an official See (diocese), the precedence has been not to officially instal anyone to take their title eventhough their general post was not a diocese, e.g., Bishop Sourial in Australia (his first title was Bishop of Youth for the East Coast of the United States), Bishop Serapion in California (his first title was Bishop of Ecumenical and Social Services), His Holiness Pope Shenouda III (his first title was President of the Theological College), etc.
Although other bishops have been given parallel duties so that the ministry does not suffer, they have not been dispensed those titles.
As for the whole bishop thing:
http://www.ahewar.org/del.asp?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eahewar%2Eorg%2Fdebat%2Fshow%2Eart%2Easp%3Ft%3D0%26userID%3D981%26aid%3D80855
its all about Canon 15
pray for me
joe
pray4me
copticdeacon