Are they Bishops or not?

[Kosmas]

I am new here and wish to pose a serious question. Please forgive me if I make errors as I am honestly searching for real answers.

If Bishops freely break Holy Canons in which they are to defend do they remain Bishops or do they lose the Episcopal Charism in which was endowed upon them by the Holy Spirit?

[As it is known, every Bishop during his ordination makes an arch priestly oath which in part runs: "I promise to observe the Canons of the Holy Apostles and of the Seven General Councils, and of the pious Local Councils, which have been legitimized for the preservation of rightful behests, and all Canons and Holy Statute inasmuch as they have been made up at various times by those who truly uphold the Holy Eastern Orthodox faith, and to firmly preserve all of these inviolate to the end of my life and with this my promise I give witness that all things that they have accepted I also accept and whatsoever things they have rejected I also reject. ... If I should transgress any of my promises given here, or to break any of the Divine regulations ... Then let me be immediately deprived of my office and of my authority, even without being denounced or accused, and let me be devoid of the heavenly gift, which was granted me by the Holy Spirit during ordination through the laying on of hands."]

It seems that an offending Bishop is automatically deprived of his office, authority, and heavenly gift (charism), without the need of public accusation. If that is the case and they refuse to repent, what of the status of his ordained priests indeed the flock in general?
Peace.
[/img]

[drewmeister2]

No, they are no longer bishops once they preach heresy and are deposed by a Synod. This is from OrthodoxInfo:
"This last criterion is interesting, if simply because it finally favors traditional Orthodoxy. In the Orthodox Church, Apostolic Succession is not merely historical. It is not enough for Bishops to show that they go back to the Apostles. (After all, Rome certainly can claim this, and yet all of the Orthodox Synods since the Great Schism have flatly condemned Rome as heretical, schismatic, and devoid of Apostolic Succession.) In fact, Apostolic Succession is meaningful only when spiritual succession, as Father Florovsky terms it, is also present. There must be an adherence to Holy Tradition, the Church as it has developed historically under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (since it has blossomed and matured, such that so-called "primitive" Christianity is not authentic for us today), and the Canons of the Orthodox Church (which depose a clergyman for even praying with those who violate this definition of Orthodoxy)." http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/u ... agedy.aspx

I would say that the priests who follow such bishops may have some "leeway" time in which they would need to eventually find out what their bishop is now teaching and seperate from him. These things do not happen overnight (for that matter, even deposition of heretical bishops doesn't happen overnight, they are given time to repent usually). Laity have even more room for leeway, as many cannot immediately tell what is going on and may take some time for them to realize the error and leave their bishop. God has Mercy on us as He knows that these things take time. However, after a while, those who continue to follow this bishop in his heresy and support his heresy can likewise be equally condemned with the bishop.

[Kosmas]

Thank you drewmeister2 for the response and let us go further as God wills it.

So then if Bishops persist in heresy for decades and in that time have ordained priests and celebrated the Mysteries of the Faith are they not true Priests and are those Mysteries not truly celebrated?

I say this because I am afraid there are now only a few Bishops and for that matter few Priests left since the calamity of 1920. How can a miserable sinner like myself recognize who is truly a Bishop, truly a Priest?