Dear brother Neil
ORDINARY POWER outside his own episcopal see is certainly a prerogative that goes beyond what EO are willing to admit (especially EO in this forum) for their patriarchs (though not OO patriarchs).
[quote=]Effectively affords the prerogatives a metropolitan historically exercises for such eparchies (provided they are within the historic bounds of the patriarchate) and are not situated within a metropolia. The prerogatives are very limited. They include a right of canonical visitation (a duty that a patriarch has in his own capacity) and a duty to report as to problems involving an eparch or jurisdiction.
I don’t see how this can be equated to the EO practice. The office of Metropolitan has all but disappeared, but for the title, in the EOC. And does not each See have an auxiliary or co-adjutor bishop? I think in the EOC, that bishop would take the reigns in a vacant see, not the EO patriarch. I could be wrong, but what I have stated seems more realistic judging from what our EO members have been stating about their ecclesiology than your own assessment that this Canon reflects the EO practice.
[quote=]Note that the sole actual authority accorded by the Canon is the right to appoint an economos, should a metropolitan fail to do so after being warned. This is a function required more by legal and practical necessity than a true exercise of any unique power.
Section 4 seems to stand on its own and does not apply to the other three sections.
[quote=]The 2nd subsection is the historical authority accorded a patriarch as to matters liturgical and spiritual life - and the 3rd to publish encyclicals as to matters concerning his Church and Rite. Notably, these are among the very few instances in which his authority extends beyond the historical bounds of the patriarchal jurisdiction and into the diaspora, over which he is otherwise bereft of authority.
As to the 1st subsection, he has authority to delineate specifics of law and its interpretation - within the scope of his competence. Read that to be limited by the historical bounds, unless the matter at issue is related to spirituality or liturgical praxis which, in truth, are the matters with which the canon is concerned, from a realistic point of view.
Nothing in Canon 82 aligns with what EO members have stated about their patriarchs, who have, unlike the EC/OC patriarchs of this canon, NO inherent rights except those given to him by his Synod. In contrast, this canon, on the four points it mentions, grants the EC/OC patriarch his own authority apart from the Synod, and the Synod only has advisory power.
***Canon 83 ***
[quote=]This is the most basic responsibility of any hierarch with respect to canonical jurisdictions within his omophor.
Except that this canon grants EC/OC patriarchs actual ordinary prerogatives during that visitation. Further, an EO patriarch does not have any right to cross the boundaries of his episcopal see without Synodal approval. This canon grants that right to the EC/OC patriarch for his pastoral visitation. In other visitations, the case is the same with the EO patriarch.
[quote=]provides that he may enthrone hierarchs - including those appointed by Rome
This canon provides more than that. Like the ancient canons, a practice/belief also present among the Oriental Orthodox, the EC/OC patriarch has in himself the prerogative to make a bishop a bishop through his confirmation. Judging from what our EO members have stated, this is not within the scope of the prerogatives of an EO bishop. To the EO, the confirmation of a Patriarch is an administrative formality, while the canonical provision for the bishop is given by the Synod.
[quote=]requires honor and obedience be rendered to him by the bishops of his Church.
I think pigs will fly before the EO would admitthat any bishop is to give obedience to any other bishop.
[quote=]affords him authority to act against a cleric whose behavior merits action - after conferring with the eparch and only if the eparch fails to act. It also allows him to confer a dignity on a cleric of any eparchy - provided that the eparch consents.
An authority which no EO patriarch possesses outside his immediate episcopal see.
[quote=]All in all, I see nothing to support your premise, which was that the authority and prerogatives of an EC patriarch were greater than that of an EO patriarch.
I believe a different conclusion is evident.