Talk:Jordan, Bishop of Poland
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Poland or Poznan?
A bishop is always bishop of a region, not just a city. But a bishop's diocese/bishopric is always called after his seat/see, that is, the place where his actual seat (throne, chair, cathedra, cathedral) is located: in a city. The only source I have on the matter says definitively that Jordan had his seat at Poznan and calls him bp of Poznan. Undoubtedly he was the first bishop of Poland and that in its entirety comprised his see. And he was probably also a missionary bishop, but I can see no reason not to name him after his seat like all other bishops. Srnec 04:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not allways, usually. Jordan was most probably missionary bishop. That's why he had so specific title. There are some doubts. Tradition and most part of historians think that he had title "bishop of Poland" (Polish: biskup Polski) with seat in Poznań. Other group thinks that he was rather attached to court of Polish duke, who was "peregrine ruler" moving between main grody (Poznań, Gniezno, Giecz, Ostrów Lednicki). In this case only cathedral and curia were in Poznań. This situation, according to known facts, took place up to year 1000, and estabilishing metropolis in Gniezno and nwe dioeceses in Kraków, Wrocław and Kołobrzeg (in this year seat of bisops of Poland in Poznań was transformed to seat of bishops of Poznań, that kept for some time his authonomy from new metropolis) Radomil talk 10:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
-
- There are exceptions for bishops without fixed sees, but the only source which has been verified refers to his fixed seat (cathedra) of Poznan. One could be a missionary bishops with a fixed see. I will do some more looking into this. Srnec 19:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)