No, that was actually intentional, so he couldn't be accused of abandoning the See of Anagni for the See of Rome. (Apparently, bishops are supposed to stick to their posts, or something like that.)
But being a bishop is a major eligibility condition for becoming pope, right? So if he declares he was never made a bishop (of Anagni), doesn't that equate to denouncing himself as a false pope?
I think one just has to be a priest. But see this site for more details on Stephen. I'm not really too sure about how it all works (or, for that matter, how it worked in the ninth century) but other sites seem to confirm this view.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 10:56 am (UTC)That seems to have been the fatal flaw, given that Stephen's own ordination was performed by Formosus! Unless I'm misunderstanding something.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 01:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 01:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 01:27 pm (UTC)