Bishop files Appeal! June 29, 2010
Posted by pullichira in Uncategorized.Tags: Interdict, Kollam Bishop, Parish Priest, Suit
add a comment
The Bishop of Kollam and the Parish Priest of Pullichira has filed separate Appeal Suits before the Kollam District Court against the Order of Injunction passed by the Munsiff’s Court, Kollam. They have challenged the Order of the Lower Court on various grounds. The Appeal is admitted and transferred to the Additional District Court, Kollam for hearing. The Honourable Court has issued notices to the Office bearers of Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy. The Samithy has decided to engage Adv M.I.Alexander Panicker and Adv Boris Paul on their behalf. The Appeals are filed by Adv George Mathews on behalf of Kollam Bishop and Adv K.Reghu Varma on behalf of the Parish Priest.
Pamphlet mentioned in BRP Bhaskar’s Blog April 26, 2010
Posted by pullichira in Uncategorized.Tags: Interdict, Kollam Bishop, Kollam Diocese, Suit
4 comments
Our Pamphlet has received attention from important personalities in the field of human rights activities. Shri BRP Bhaskar has reproduced certain portions of our Pamphlet in his Blog. We are much thankful to him. The mainstream Newspapers like Malayala Manorama and Mathrubhoomi as well as Desabhimani refused to publish the news regarding the Court Order passed against the Bishop of Kollam and others.
Blog: വായന
Post: കൊല്ലം മെത്രാന്റെ സഭാവിലക്ക് ഉത്തരവിനെതിരെ കോടതിവിധി
Link: http://malayalamvaayana.blogspot.com/2010/04/blog-post_25.html
“INTERDICT” February 20, 2010
Posted by Boris Paul in Uncategorized.Tags: Interdict, Kollam Bishop
add a comment
In the Roman Catholic Church, the word interdict (pronounced /ˈɪntərdɪkt/, IN-tər-dikt) usually refers to an ecclesiastical penalty. Interdicts may be real, local or personal. A personal interdict pertains to one or more persons. A real or local interdict, which is no longer a part of canon law, suspends all public worship and withdraws the church’s sacraments in a territory or country.[1] A local interdict against a country was to it the equivalent of excommunication against an individual. It would cause all the churches to be closed, and almost all the sacraments not to be allowed (i.e. preventing marriage, confession, anointing of the sick, and the eucharist). Certain exceptions allow for baptism, anointing of the sick, and sacraments on Christian holidays.
Interdiction was used by the Pope during the Middle Ages as a way to influence rulers. For example, Pope Innocent III placed the kingdom of England under an interdict for five years between 1208 and 1213 after King John refused to accept the pope’s appointee Stephen Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury. Pope Gregory XI placed the city of Florence under interdict in March 1376 during the War of the Eight Saints, while Pope Paul V placed the Republic of Venice under interdict in 1606 after the civil authorities jailed two priests.[2] Rome itself was placed under interdict by Pope Adrian IV as a result of a rebellion led by Arnold of Brescia.
An interdict can also be a penalty against a specific individual or group. It is like excommunication in that the person is barred from receiving the sacraments and participating in public worship, but it does not bar the person from continuing to hold and exercise ecclesiastical office. For a lay member of the church, it is basically equivalent to excommunication, though with the implication that they remain Catholic.
Bishops in the Anglican Communion in theory may still possess the power of interdict, although apparently it has not been exercised since the English Reformation.
[Courtesy: WIKIPEDIA]
PULLICHIRA EDAVAKA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHY 