|
0 members (),
1,087
guests, and
72
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,506
Posts417,454
Members6,150
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 83
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 83 |
Today is the feast of the Holy Royal Martyrs and Passion Bearers of Russia. In reading the sermon of St. John of San Francisco which I will copy below, it occurs to me that there remains in Orthodox Christianity more than a little support for sacramental monarchy as the most Christian form of government. Yet we live in a world where, especially in the West, that concept is treated as almost comical. Even so Orthodoxy still counts the anointing of the Sovereign as a Holy Mystery. In at least two Orthodox countries (Serbia & Russia) there is not inconsiderable public support for the restoration of the monarchy (at least on a constitutional basis). The Roman Catholic Church seems to have embraced at least the political ideals of the French Revolution in fact if perhaps not in theory. But what about the Eastern Rite Catholics? Even in Orthodoxy this is certainly not a burning issue. Most Orthodox have come to accept modern (Western) democratic concepts of government. So I will put the question to this forum. Is there any support left in the churches for Christian Monarchy as a divinely instituted and sanctioned form of government? ICXC John The Sin Of Regicide
After the death of Saul, who had fallen on his sword during a battle with the Philistines, an Amalekite ran to inform David, who at that time was being persecuted by Saul.
Supposing that David would be very glad at the news he brought, the messenger decided to pose as Saul�s killer, in order to increase the anticipated reward.
However, when David had heard the story made up by the Amalekite about how he, at the request of the wounded Saul, had slain him, he took hold of his garments and rent them, as did also all the people who were with him. They mourned and wept and fasted till evening. And David said to the young man that told him, Whence art thou? And he answered, I am the son of a stranger, an Amalekite. And David said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy the Lord�s anointed? And David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died. And David said unto him, Thy blood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath testified against thee, saying, I have slain the Lord�s anointed (II Kings [II Samuel in the Authorized Version] 1:1-16).
Thus the foreigner who posed as Saul�s killer was executed. He was subjected to a cruel punishment, even though Saul was the persecutor of the innocent David and had done much evil, for which the Lord had departed from him.
From David�s words it is evident that he doubted the veracity of the Amalekite�s story and was not convinced that the man was indeed Saul�s murderer; nevertheless, he gave him over to death, considering that even calling oneself a regicide and boasting of such a deed was worthy of death.
How many times more grave and sinful was the murder of the Orthodox monarch anointed by God; how many times greater must the punishment be for the murderers of Tsar Nicholas II and his family?!
In contrast to Saul, who had turned away from God and because of this had been abandoned by Him, Tsar Nicholas II was an exemplar of piety and complete devotion to God�s will.
Having received not the Old Testament pouring of oil on the head, but the grace-filled �Seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit� in the Mystery of Chrismation, Emperor Nicholas II was faithful to his high calling till the end of his life and was conscious of his responsibility before God.
In his every action, Emperor Nicholas II took his conscience into account; he always �walked before the Lord God.� He was �Most Pious� during the days of his earthly well-being, not only in name, but in actual fact. In his time of trial, he displayed patience like that of righteous Job.
Against such a Tsar did criminals raise their hands, and at a time when he had already been purified, like gold in the furnace, by the trials he had endured, so that he was an innocent sufferer in the full sense of the word.
The crime against Tsar Nicholas II is all the more terrible and sinful in that his whole family was killed together with him, including the children, who were not guilty of anything!
Such crimes do not remain unpunished. They cry out to Heaven and bring God�s wrath down upon the earth.
If the foreigner � the supposed murderer of Saul � underwent death, now the whole Russian nation is suffering for the murder of the defenseless Tsar-Sufferer and his family, because it allowed such a terrible misdeed to take place and remained silent when the Tsar was subjected to humiliation and deprived of his freedom.
God�s justice requires of us a profound realization of the sinfulness of what was done, together with repentance before the Tsar-Martyr and his memory.
The memory of the innocent holy princes Boris and Gleb aroused the conscience of the Russian people during the disturbances which upset the appanage principalities, and it shamed the princes who had initiated the strife. The blood of the holy Great Prince Igor brought about a spiritual change in the souls of the Kievans and united Kiev and Chernigov in venerating the slain holy prince. Saint Andrew Bogoliubsky sanctified with his blood the monarchy of Rus�, which was confirmed only considerably later, after his death as a martyr. The veneration of Saint Michael of Tver throughout Russia healed the wounds caused by the struggle between Moscow and Tver. The glorification of the holy Tsarevich Dimitri cleared the consciousness of the Russian people, inspired moral strength and led, after severe shocks, to the rebirth of Russia.
The Tsar-Martyr Nicholas II and his much-suffering family have now entered into the choir of these Passion-bearers.
This greatest of crimes, committed with respect to him, must be expiated by fervent veneration of him and by the glorification of his struggle.
Rus� must bow down before its humiliated, slandered and martyred Tsar, just as the Kievans once bowed down before the venerable Prince Igor whom they martyred, and just as the people
of Vladimir and Suzdal bowed down before the slain Great Prince Andrew Bogoliubsky!
Then the Tsar-Passion-bearer will acquire boldness before God, and his prayer will deliver the Russian land from the calamities it is enduring.
Then the Tsar-Martyr and his fellow sufferers will become new heavenly defenders of Holy Rus�.
The innocent blood that was shed will regenerate Russia and make it radiant with new glory! -From a sermon of St. John (Maximovitch) of San Francisco.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 512 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 512 Likes: 1 |
Sort of a weird premise, but I'll offer a few thoughts.
I don't think that the RCC has adopted "the position of the French Revolution", in the sense that it advocates a universal, centralized republic which keeps a very strong control over the education of the people, as well as the Church, which has universalist pretensions. That said, the Catholic Church does not appear to have an objection to republics per se, and has made accommodations with many kinds of states, if only because it doesn't have much of a choice.
As for Eastern Catholics, I doubt that there's strong support for any sort of monarchy, except in maybe Ukraine. The return of the Eastern Roman Emperor, and his control over Anatolia, Lebanon, Syria, the Holy Land and Egypt might be interesting, but I don't think advocating for such an event would be very good for your average Melkite in the Middle East........
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 384
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 384 |
"Christian" kings have, very often indeed, been the worst enemies the Church has had. Think of the unspeakable Louis XIV and the atrocious Joseph II. Give thanks to God that we are rid of them. As for the Romanovs, where would Lenin have been without
them?
Edmac
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
Dear Edmac,
I trust that you are not seriously suggesting that Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler were an improvement over Blessed Charles of Austria?
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 384
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 384 |
Dear Father Serge;
Why would you think so? Yet monarchs like Bl. Charles were
few and far between. One can also think of certain "Christian"
monarchs who were little better than the three monsters you
name: Edward I and Henry VIII of England for example. Then there
is our old friend Louis XIV whose endless wars against other
Catholic princes in pursuit of territory and gloire inflicted misery
and death on so many and for so long, not to
mention his cruel persecutions of the Huguenots and attempts
to usurp the authority of the Pope in France.
Perhaps we might include Richelieu, who was de facto
king of France (which appears to have been much more
truly his god than God). How many of the horrors of the
Thirty Years' War are attributable to his support of the
Protestant princes in their struggle against the Catholic
Empire, whose power the Cardinal sought to destroy?
It was he who brought in Gustavus,thereby saving the day for them and
greatly lengthening the war.
[Would it be cheating to mention another de facto
monarch, the Lord Protector Oliver?]
As most of us here are Catholics or Orthodox, we would do
well to recall that in many cases it was "Christian" monarchs
who imposed Protestantism on their countries.
If our present systems of government in the West often produce
leaders who are fools, scoundrels or mediocrities, so did
the monarchial system, and probably in about the same
proportions.
But, how would you desire a restored monarchial system
to work? What powers would you give to King Juan Carlos or
(putting aside my Jacobite sentiments) Queen Elizabeth I & II
that they do not now have (and neither has much to speak of)?
How would you reform the electoral and parliamentary systems?
Would you favor succession by primogeniture or election?
What safeguards would you erect to prevent a monarch with real
power from becoming a tyrant?
If we are seriously to discuss this subject,those and many other
questions need reasonable answers.
Edmac
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
Dear Edmac,
Don't know much about Edward I; Henry VIII is indefensible so I won't try - besides he inherited the throne from Henry VII, who had no right to it. The only Tudor worth discussing is Mary, who didn't do that well either but was still decidedly better than Henry VII, Henry VIII, Edward VI (and the people who acted in the boy's name) Jane (the nine-days wonder) and, of course, her putative half-sister Elizabether (the daughter of Anne Boleyn).
Louis XIV looks positively pious by comparison! His intercession on behalf of St. Oliver Plunkett speaks well for him (and Charles II's refusal is a permanent blotch on the Merry Monarch's escutcheon, to put it mildly).
If you're looking for a French King who tried to usurp Papal authority in France, there are even more obvious candidates.
Richelieu was no prize package - but he was not royal in any legitimate sense, so we can't blame the monarchists for him. Incidentally, I believe that there is only one recorded occasion when Richelieu celebrated Mass.
Cromwell was neither royal nor a monarchist, so yes, to blame the monarchists for him is cheating - even as blaming the monarchists for Hitler would be cheating.
What additional powers would I give King Juan Carlos? He's doing fine as it is - and I suggest remembering that when the Fascists tried to stage a coup early in his reign, the politicians ducked and ran for cover, but the King faced down the Fascists and saved democracy in Spain.
What would I give Ms. Elizabeth Battenberg? The royal order of the boot! No doubt she has many merits, but I've never been able to find them. Bring back the Stuarts, thank you.
Always remembering human frailties, which afflict even the members of genuine Royal Houses, it is not impossible to have a Constitution (there's something England could use) with built-in safeguards against someone like Henry VIII. At the same time, remember Emperor Francis Joseph's self-definition: "the most important part of my job is to protect my people from the politicians!" The record of the politicians makes the Habsburgs look like a far better bargain.
But my lunch is summoning me.
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776 Likes: 24
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776 Likes: 24 |
My lunch, too. Mark Twain puts it succinctly. When informed that America is a Christian nation he replied, "So is Hell". The Psalmist says it pretty well too. As we hear nearly every Sunday, "Put not your trust in princes..."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217 Likes: 2 |
What is it with this fixation with living in a monarchy ? Don't you realise that for every Godly king or queen you get, you'll have numerous tyrannical pleasure loving degenerates. I'll take my Constitutional Republic, founded after we kicked out King George III, over all the imbred kings and queens who ever lived. One need only read how many times a King of Israel or Judah was said to have done evil in the eyes of the Lord, before it becomes obvious that when you get a Godly Hezekiah, he can have a diabolical father like Ahaz and a son like Manasseh.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2 |
What is it with this fixation with living in a monarchy ? Don't you realise that for every Godly king or queen you get, you'll have numerous tyrannical pleasure loving degenerates. I'll take my Constitutional Republic, founded after we kicked out King George III, over all the imbred kings and queens who ever lived. One need only read how many times a King of Israel or Judah was said to have done evil in the eyes of the Lord, before it becomes obvious that when you get a Godly Hezekiah, he can have a diabolical father like Ahaz and a son like Manasseh. If my memory is correct, I believe scripture indicates God tried to talk Israel out of having a king. I don't understand the fixation on monarchy either. Some of it may be romantic nonsense in wanting to relive "glory" days full of pomp and pageantry. Others may think things will be like some imagined golden age in Constantinople. I have encounted a few who would like their families restored to the positions of privilege their ancestors enjoyed. Of course, no one ever mentions that all that glory and privilege rested on the backs of the lower classes who often suffered greatly. And while I admire greatly some of the holy and pious monarchs mentioned in this thread, they often were weak and bungling rulers. Proving again that excellence in one area doesn't translate to excellence in any other.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 264 |
Hello from a lurker who almost never posts ... had to jump in here.
Our republic's history is pretty well whitewashed contra monarchy. It's made to fit the republican ideology. Let's not forget ...
The war crimes of General Sherman.
The WWII fire-bombings.
Twentieth-century racial segregation.
The abuse of American Indian treaties.
The Waco slaughter.
The victimization of farmers leading up to Shay's Rebellion.
The Tuskeegee Experiment.
Roosevelt's gold confiscation (theft).
Kosovo.
That's just off the top of my head. I didn't even get to Woodrow Wilson.
And I can't imagine even the worst, most evil Catholic monarch of the Catholic Era ever allowing state-funded abortion on demand.
Booth
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2 |
I think monarchy has often illustrated the truth of the old saying that absolute power corrupts absolutely. As bad as some of our leaders have been, can you imagine how much worse they would have been with more power? Monarchy is based on the idea that certain families are divinely ordained as superior to everyone else. One can only look at the brilliance of some of the British royals to see the nonsense of that. I see monarchs as often being very mediocre people who by an accident of birth, have unwarranted and unearned status. As for abortion, it is certainly nothing new. It was rampant in the Roman Empire and has been around to one degree or another ever since. I would agree that technology has made it easier to obtain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 264 |
I myself would not argue for absolute monarchy, either.
"Divine Right" and absolute monarchy in the modern understanding are late developments, in fact often tinged with Protestant or nationalistic theories (but not always).
The average pre-Reformation king had less power than the average president does today. There are exceptions, but subjects owed loyalties to the king, sometimes to an emperor, oftentimes to a multinational guild, and always to the local nobility. They didn't have our standing army system, and the nobles were an independent military power. And the church played referee.
As for kings not earning their status, I for one am comforted by that. In an electoral system, the one who acquires power is the one with the most lust for power. Thus, even though hypothetically anyone can be president, the same basic type of person always does.
But in a monarchy, while any given person can't become king, any type of person can. This is why there can be kings that are saints and philosophers, but presidents are never either.
I would agree that most royals are very mediocre people. Most people are very mediocre people, probably myself included, and particularly in the secular modern era. But the last, worn-out, and marginalized examples of monarchy are not representative of their forebears in the heyday of the system.
Last edited by Booth; 07/19/08 05:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 384
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 384 |
Well, I don't see any monarchist here proposing a rational
game plan for a restored monarchy. Fr. Serge who, if I may
say so, I regard as the most learned and intelligent poster
on this forum, opted out, presumably because he had no such
game plan to propose. If he couldn't come up with one, I don't
expect anyone else will. However, feel free to surprise me.
Let me also observe, in re Fr. Serge, that without the
Romanovs we would not have had Lenin and Stalin, and without
the Hohenzollerns we would not have had Hitler.
Edmac
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217 Likes: 2 |
We're safe from becoming a monarchy in these United States. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8 of our Constitution, prohibits the granting of titles of nobility. And to attempt to bring about a monarchy by force would constitute treason. Article 3, Section 3. Still I think it's rather bizarre contemplating an idea that I'd be surprised if 1 pct of Americans would even support.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6 |
Ed, try this, it may answer your question.
The Russian Fundamental Laws of 1906
1. The Russian State is one and indivisible....
2. The Grand Duchy of Finland, while comprising an inseparable part of the Russian state, is governed in its internal affairs by special decrees based on special legislation.
3. The Russian language is the general language of the state, and its use is compulsory in the army, the navy and state and public institutions....
Chapter I. The Essence of the Supreme Autocratic Power
4. The All-Russian Emperor possesses the supreme autocratic power. Not only fear and conscience, but God himself, commands obedience to his authority.
5. The person of the Sovereign Emperor is sacred and inviolable.
6. The same supreme autocratic power belongs to the Sovereign Empress, should the order of succession to the throne pass to a female line; her husband, however, is not considered a sovereign; except for the title, he enjoys the same honours and privileges reserved for the spouses of all other sovereigns.
7. The sovereign emperor exercises power in conjunction with the State Council and the State Duma.
8. The sovereign emperor possesses the initiative in all legislative matters. The Fundamental Laws may be subject to revision in the State Council and State Duma only on His initiative. The sovereign emperor ratifies the laws. No law can come into force without his approval. . . .
9. The Sovereign Emperor approves laws; and without his approval no legislative measure can become law.
10. The Sovereign Emperor possesses the administrative power in its totality throughout the entire Russian state. On the highest level of administration his authority is direct; on subordinate levels of administration, in conformity with the law, he determines the degree of authority of subordinate branches and officials who act in his name and in accordance with his orders.
11. As supreme administrator, the Sovereign Emperor, in conformity with the existing laws, issues decrees for the organization and functioning of diverse branches of state administration as well as directives essential for the execution of the laws.
12. The sovereign emperor takes charge of all the external relations of the Russian State. He determines the direction of Russia's foreign policy. . . .
13. The Sovereign Emperor alone declares war, concludes peace, and negotiates treaties with foreign states.
14. The sovereign emperor is the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian army and navy.
15. The sovereign emperor appoints and dismisses the Chairman the Council of Ministers and individual Ministers....
16. The Sovereign Emperor has the right to coin money and to determine its physical appearance.
17. The Sovereign Emperor appoints and dismisses the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Ministers, and Chief Administrators of various departmerits, as well as other officials whose appointment or dismissal has not been determined by law.
18. As supreme administrator the Sovereign Emperor determines the scope of activity of all state officials in accordance with the needs of the state.
19. The Sovereign Emperor grants titles, medals and other state distinctions as well as property rights. He also determines conditions and procedures for gaining titles, medals, and distinctions.
20. The Sovereign Emperor directly issues decrees and instructions on matters of property that belongs to him as well as on those properties that bear his name and which have traditionally belonged to the ruling Emperor. The latter cannot be bequeathed or divided and are subject to a different form of alienation. These as well as other properties are not subject to a different form of alienation. These as well as other properties are not subject to levy or collection of taxes.
21. As head of the Imperial Household, the Sovereign Emperor, in accordance with Regulations on the Imperial Family, has the right to issue regulations affecting princely properties. He also determines the composition of the personnel of the Ministry of the Imperial Household, its organization and regulation, as well as the procedure of its administration. 22. Justice is administered in the name of the
Sovereign Emperor in courts legally constituted, and its execution is also carried out in the name of His Imperial Majesty.
23. The Sovereign Emperor has the right to pardon the accused, to mitigate the sentence, and even to completely forgive transgressions, including the right to terminate court,actions against the guilty and to free them from trial and punishment. Stemming from royal mercy, he also has the right to commute the official penalty and to generally pardon all exceptional cases that are not sub'ect to general laws, provided such actions do not infringe upon civil rights or the legally protected interests of others.
24. Statutes of the Svod Zakonov (Vol. 1, part i, 1892 edition) on the order of succession to the throne (Articles 3-17), on the coming of age of the Sovereign Emperor, on government and guardianship (Articles 18-30), on the ascension to the throne and on the oath of allegiance (Articles 31-34 and Appendix V), on the sacred crowning and anointing (Articles 35 and 36), and on the title of His Imperial Majesty and on the State Emblem (Articles 37-39 and Appendix 1), and on the faith (Articles 40-46), retain the force of the Fundamental Laws.
25. The Regulation on the Imperial Family (Svod zakonov, Vol. 1, part i, 1892 edition, Articles 82-179 and Appendices II-IV and VI), while retaining the force of the Fundamental Laws, can be changed or amended only by the Sovereign Emperor personally in accordance with the procedure established by him, provided these changes or amendments of these regulations do not infringe general laws or provided they do not call for new expenditures from the treasury.
26. Decrees and commands that are issued directly or indirectly by the Sovereign Emperor as supreme administrator are implemented either by the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, or a subordinate minister, or a department head, and are published by the Governing Senate.
Chapter II. Rights and Obligations of Russian Subjects
27. Conditions for acquiring rights of Russian citizenship, as well as its loss, are determined by law.
28. The defence of the Throne and of the Fatherland is a sacred obligation of every Russian subject. The male population, irrespective of social status, is subject to military service determined by law.
29. Russian subjects are obliged to pay legally instituted taxes and dues and also to perform other obligations determined by law.
30. No one shall be subjected to persecution for a violation of the law except as prescribed by the law.
3I. No one can be detained for investigation otherwise than prescribed by law.
32. No one can be tried and punished other than for criminal acts considered under the existing criminal laws, in force during the perpetration of these acts, provided newly enacted laws do not exclude the perpetrated criminal acts from the list of crimes.
33. The dwelling of every individual is inviolable. Breaking into a dwelling without the consent of the owner and search and seizure are allowed only in accordance with legally instituted procedures.
34. Every Russian subject has the right to freely select his place of dwelling and profession, to accumulate and dispose of property, and to travel abroad without any hindrance. Limits on these rights are determined by special laws.
35. Private property is inviolable. Forcible seizure of immovable property, should state or public need demand such action, is permissible only upon just and decent compensation.
36. Russian subjects have the right to organize meetings that are peaceful, unarmed, and not contrary to the law. The law determines the conditions of meetings, rules governing their termination, as well as limitations on places of meetings.
37. Within the limits determined by law everyone can express his thoughts orally or in writing, as well as distribute these thoughts through publication or other means.
38. Russian subjects have the right to organize societies and unions for purposes not contrary to the law. Conditions for organization of societies and unions, their activity, terms and rules for acquiring legal rights as well as dosing of societies and unions, is determined by law.
39. Russian subjects enjoy freedom of religion. Terms of enjoyment of this freedom are determined by law.
40. Foreigners living in Russia enjoy the rights of Russian subjects, within limitations established by law.
4I. Exceptions to the rules outlined in this chapter include localities where martial law is declared or where there exist exceptional conditions that are determined by special laws.
Chapter III. Laws
42. The Russian Empire is governed by firmly established laws that have been properly enacted.
43. Laws are obligatory, without exception, for all Russian subjects and foreigners living within the Russian state.
44. No new law can be enacted without the approval of the State Council and the State Duma, and it shall not be legally binding without the approval of the Sovereign Emperor.
45. Should extraordinary circumstances demand, when the State Duma is not in session, and the introduction of a measure requires a properly constituted legal procedure, the Council of Ministers will submit such a measure directly to the Sovereign Emperor. Such a measure cannot, however, introduce any changes into the Fundamental Laws, or to the organization of the State Council or the State Duma, or to the rules governing elections to the Council or to the Duma. The validity of such a measure is terminated if the responsible minister or the head of a special department fails to introduce appropriate legislation in the State Duma during the first two months of its session upon reconvening, or if the State Duma or the State Council should refuse to enact it into law.
46. Laws issued especially for certain localities or segments of the population are not made void by a new law unless such a voiding is specifically intended.
47. Every law is valid for the future, except in those cases where the law itself stipulates that its force is retroactive or where it states that its intent is to reaffirm or explain the meaning of a previous law.
48. The Governing Senate is the general depository of laws. Consequently, all laws should be deposited in the Governing Senate in the original or in duly authorized lists.
49. Laws are published for general knowledge by the Governing Senate according to established rules and are not legally binding before their publication.
50. Legal decrees are not subject to publication if they were issued in accordance with the rules of the Fundamental Laws.
5I. Upon publication, the law is legally binding from the time stipulated by the law itself, or, in the case that such a time is omitted, from the day on which the Senate publication containing the published law is received locally. The law itself may stipulate that telegraph or other media of communication be used to transmit it for execution before its publication.
52. The law cannot be repealed otherwise than by another law. Consequently, until a new law repeals the existing law, the old law retains fully its force.
53. No one can be excused for ignorance of the law once it is duly published.
54. Regulations governing combat, technical, and supply branches of the Armed Forces, as well as rules and orders to institutions and authorized personnel of the military and naval establishments are, as a rule, submitted directly to the Sovereign Emperor upon review by the Military and Admiralty Councils, provided that these regulations, rules, and orders affect primarily the above mentioned establishments, do not touch on matters of general laws, and do not call for new expenditures from the treasury; or, if they call for new expenditure, are covered by expected savings by the Military or Naval Ministries. In cases where the expected saving is insufficient to cover the projected expenditure, submission of such regulations, rules, and orders for the Emperor's approval is permitted only upon first requesting, in a prescribed manner, the necessary appropriation.
55. Regulations governing military and naval courts are issued in accordance with Regulations on Military and Naval Codes.
Chapter IV. The State Council, State Duma, and the Scope of Their Activity
56. The Sovereign Emperor, by a decree, annually convenes the session of the State Council and of the State Duma.
57. The Sovereign Emperor determines by a decree the length of the annual session of the State Council and of the State Duma, as well as the interval between the sessions.
58. The State Council is composed of members appointed by His Majesty and of elected members. The total number of appointed members of the Council called by the Emperor to deliberate in the Council's proceedings cannot exceed the total number of the elected members of the Council.
59. The State Duma consists of members elected by the population of the Russian Empire for a period of five years, on the basis of rules governing elections to the Duma.
60. The State Council examines the credentials of its members. Equally, the State Duma examines the credentials of its members.
61. The same person cannot serve simultaneously as a member of the State Council and as a member of the State Duma.
62. The Sovereign Emperor, by a decree, can replace the elected membership of the State Council with new members before its tenure expires. The same decree sets new elections of members of the State Council.
63 The emperor who holds the throne of all Russia cannot profess any religion save the Orthodox. . . .
64. The State Council and the State Duma have equal rights in legislative matters.
65. In the administration of the church, the autocratic power act through the intermediary of the Holy Governing Synod which it has instituted.
66. All subjects of the Russian state who do not belong to the established church . . . as well as foreigners . . . residing in Russia, shall everywhere be free to profess their religion, and to worship in accordance with its ritual.
67. Freedom of religion is accorded, not only to Christians of foreign denominations, but also to Jews, Muslims and heathens. . . .
68. Those legislative measures that are considered and approved by the State Duma are then submitted to the State Council for its approval. Those legislative measures that have been initiated by the State Council are reviewed by the Council and, upon approval, are submitted to the Duma.
69. Legislative measures that have been rejected either by the State Council or by the State Duma are considered defeated.
70. Those legislative measures that have been initiated either by the State Council or by the State Duma [and approved by both], but which have failed to gain Imperial approval, cannot be resubmitted for legislative consideration during the same session. Those legislative measures that have been initiated by either the State Council or by the State Duma and are rejected by either one of the Chambers, can be resubmitted for legislative consideration during the same session, provided the Emperor agrees to it.
71. Legislative measures that have been initiated in and approved by the State Duma and then by the State Council, and likewise legislative measures initiated and approved by the State Council and then by the State Duma, are submitted by the Chairman of the State Council to the Sovereign Emperor.
72. No one can be prosecuted for criminal offences except in the manner prescribed by law.
73. No one can be held under arrest except in cases prescribed by law. . . .
74. If the state budget is not appropriated before the appropriation deadline, the budget that had been duly approved in the preceding year will remain in force with only such changes as have resulted from those legislative measures that became laws after the budget was approved. Prior to publication of the new budget, on the decision of the Council of Ministers and rulings of Ministries and Special Departments, necessary funds will be gradually released. These funds will not exceed in their totality during any month, however, one-twelfth of the entire budgetary expenditures.
75. All dwellings are inviolable. No search or seizure may take place in a dwelling without the consent of the head of the household, except in cases and in a manner prescribed by law.
76. Every Russian subject has the right freely to choose his place of residence and occupation, to acquire and dispose of property, and to travel abroad without hindrance. Limitations of these rights are regulated by special laws.
77. Property is inviolable. Compulsory alienation of property, when such is necessary for the welfare of the state or the public, is permissible only on the basis of just and adequate compensation.
78. Russian subjects have the right to organize meetings for purposes that are not contrary to the laws, peacefully, and without weapons. . . .
79. Everyone may, within the limits of the law, express his ideas orally and in writing and may also disseminate them by means of the press or by other methods.
80. Russian subjects have the right to form societies and associations for purposes that are not in contravention of the laws. . . .
81. The Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Ministers, and Heads of various departments, are responsible to the Sovereign Emperor for State administration. Each individual member is responsible for his actions and decisions.
82. For official misconducts in office, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Ministers and Heads of various departments are sub')ect to civil and criminal punishment established by law.
86. No new law can come into force without the approval of the State Council and State Duma and the ratification of the sovereign emperor.
87. If extraordinary circumstances require legislative action whilst the State Duma is in recess, the Council of Ministers may make recommendations direct to the sovereign emperor. Such a measure may not, however, introduce changes in the Fundamental Laws, in the statutes of the State Council and State Duma or in the regulations governing elections to the Council and the Duma. Should such a measure not be introduced into the Duma as a bill within two months from the date of its next meeting . . . it loses force. . . .
98. The State Council and State Duma are summoned annually by edict of the sovereign emperor. . . .
106. The State Council and the State Duma possess equal legislative powers. . .
108. The State Council and State Duma may . . . interpellate ministers . . . concerning actions taken by them, or by persons or agencies under their jurisdiction that are held to be illegal.......
123. The Chairman of the Council of Ministers and the Ministers..... are responsible to the sovereign emperor for the general operation of the state administration. Each of them is individually responsible for his own actions and orders.
Source: Svod Zakonov Rossiiskoi Imperii, 3rd series,
vol. 1, pt. 1. St Petersburg, 1912, pp. 5-26.
Alexandr
|
|
|
|
|
