Councils Ecumenical Rudder

8/13/2019 Councils Ecumenical Rudder

1/216

Canons of the

Seven Ecumenical Councils.

Content:Canons of the

Seven Ecumenical Councils.

Introduction.

The First Ecumenical Council.Second Ecumenical Council.

Third Ecumenical Council.

Fourth Ecumenical Council.Fifth Ecumenical Council.

Sixth Ecumenical Council.

Quinisext Ecumenical Council.Seventh Ecumenical Council.

Introduction.

In the area of church discipline, the work of the first four ecumenical councils has an oviousinterest for the knowled!e of the law and institutions of earl" Christianit". #urin! this period,$%& to '&(, which corresponds to the flowerin! of the !reat patristic literature, we can follow )

throu!h the canonical le!islation of the Councils of *icea, Constantinople, Ephesus, andChalcedon as well as other decisions made " these assemlies on specific +uestions ) the

evolution of the structures of the Church, of her discipline, and of her relations with the

surroundin! societ". If we compare this and the ante*icene period, we see that all sorts of new

prolems come up while others fade in importance. The canons issued " these councilsconstitute the core of Church -aw in the Christian East, even toda". The" also formed an

important part of the estern Church/s law durin! the first millennium and influenced, in no

small wa", the western medieval s"nthesis.

In considerin! the canonical le!islation elaorated and approved " the first fourecumenical councils, it appears +uite clear that this was a period of particularl" fruitful creativit"in the field of the Eastern Church/s written law. 0lthou!h it was not the intention of the Fathers!athered at *icea to sustitute a written, universal law for the alread" existin! customar" lawwith its local variants, man" factors since then have turned the scales in favor of written law. Inthe first place, the une+ualed presti!e of this 1!reat and hol" council2 conferred an un+uestionedauthorit" on its le!islation. Thus around $$3, Euseius of Caesarea, havin! een asked toecome ishop of 0ntioch, refused the offer " invokin! the re!ulation estalished " the


2/216

Fathers of *icea.( St. 4asil, writin! to a priest to order him to stop livin! with a woman,expressl" made reference to the canon of *icea relevant to this case. %In the est, the re!ulationsof the !reat council were held in e+uall" hi!h esteem. 5ope 6ulius spoke of 1divine inspiration2in referrin! to canon &.$0s for 5ope -eo, he declared the le!islation of *icea to e inviolale.'

0nother factor favored the predominance of written law. #urin! the first centuries ofChristianit", the consciousness of a permanent disciplinar" tradition was ver" stron! in each

local Church. In the fourth centur", man" new dioceses were created due to missionar"expansion on the one hand and to the reinforcement of one or another theolo!ical trend durin!the 0rian crisis on the other. For the same reasons, episcopal transfers, completel" exceptional inearlier times, ecame more numerous7 this phenomenon contriuted to the reakdown of thelinks etween the ishop and his church. Structures of common and coordinated action were setup, and the workin! of these new or!ans had to e made clear. 8nder these conditions, it was nolon!er possile to appeal solel" to ancient customs7 it was necessar" to issue re!ulationsintended to appl" to the whole Church. Finall" the tendenc" which was sketched out after therei!n of Constantine and which took final form under Theodosius I ) namel", !ivin! the forceof state law to the decisions of the church hierarch" ) implied the existence of a od" ofcanonical law.&This evolution was later full" estalished " the le!islation of the Emperor6ustinian which confirmed the 9uridical validit" of the canons issued " the Councils of *icea,Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon as well as of those local councils accepted " theseecumenical assemlies.

In man" cases, the canons merel" endorsed customs which were seen to e le!itimate. Tothe extent that written law ;canons and imperial laws< !ained !round, custom was more or lesslimited to the domain of precedents. e could, it is true, +uote the statement of =etropolitan>achar" of Chalcedon at the time of the Council of St. Sophia ;?@A??3


3/216

order of the wei!htiness of the sources. De placed the Canons of the Dol" 0postles first7 thencame those of the ecumenical councils and the !eneral councils of ?( and ?@A??3. >onaras putthe canons of the local councils and of the Dol" Fathers last. ($0lthou!h this classification hadalread" een used previousl", he made it, henceforth, the accepted order. >onaras was aove allconcerned to set out the exact meanin! of the texts, also !ivin! necessar" clarifications. henre+uired, he compared canons on the same su9ect and proposed a reasoned reconciliation.('

hile he was still deacon and nomoph"lax in Constantinople, Theodore 4alsamon, at there+uest of the Emperor =anuel Comnenus ;(('$((?3< and the Ecumenical 5atriarch =ichaelIII ;((A((@


4/216

other additional material, are of ovious practical interest for the cler!". This recension of thecanons is on the whole correct, as we can see " comparin! the present text with critical editionswhich we now have. St. *icodemus the Da!iorite was no stran!er to the concerns of textualcriticism7 this is ovious from his notes, which !ive the most characteristic variants of therecension of 6ohn the Scholastic. Davin! said this, we must not, however, overestimate the valueof the,e-alion. It constitutes, first and foremost, a valuale witness for the understandin! of the

milieu in which it was formed.%$ 0s for treatin! the ,e-alion as the perfect and thereforeuntouchale expression of rthodox canon law, such an attitude is a manifest exa!!erationwhich we often meet in a strict, inte!rist environment. St. *icodemus/ position on the invalidit"of oman Catholic aptism is particularil" appreciated in that milieu.%'

For a lon! time, the rthodox Slavs were content to reproduce translations of the worksof 4"Bantine commentators on the canons. 4ut in the nineteenth centur", Slavic canonists tookover the first place. Chronolo!icall" speakin!, it is proper to mention first the work of0rchimandrite 6ohn Sokolov, pulished in St. 5etersur! in (?&(.%&*icodemus =ilash ri!htl"considered this ussian canonist as the father of rthodox canonical studies in the modernperiod.%Fr. . Florovsk" underlined the scientific value of this work7 he wrote that 1for the firsttime, the ancient and fundamental canons of the Church were presented in ussian more inhistorical than in doctrinal fashion.2%@

0 work consistin! of the canons of the rthodox Church with commentaries waspulished in (?A& " *icodemus =ilash, who later ecame 4ishop of #almatia7%?this work isstill of !reat interest toda" and shows itself as the fruit of considerale stud".%A Theinterpretations and explanations found in this work, althou!h the" must oviousl" e revised andcompleted on the asis of more recent studies, are not at all to e minimiBed. =oreover, it is stillused toda" as a reference work " rthodox canonists. 0s for canonical commentaries inomanian, we can mention the works of =etropolitan 0ndrew Sa!una, *. 5opovici, and C.#ron.$3

In the est, startin! with the seventeenth centur", we find some +uite worth" workswhich interpret the ancient canons. e can mention the names of Christian olf$(and 6ohnCaassut7$%illiam 4everid!e particularl" stands out ecause of the value of his stud" of the

canons. hen he was vicar of 4alin!, later 4ishop of St. 0saph ;(@3'


5/216

Finall", we can mention the ook of Denr" . 5ercival, which constitutes volume (' inT4e Nicene an- ,ost:Nicene ;at4e3s9 second series.'%It is true that this volume is not an ori!inalwork, properl" speakin!, since the comments are completel" drawn from the works of ancientand modern canonists. Dowever, we elieve it is necessar" to note this ook ecause thee


6/216

that the canon in +uestion is perfectl" clear. & =oreover, the similarit" of each case must esolidl" !rounded. e must correctl" avoid an" su9ectivism which in a particular case ar!ues onthe asis of superficial resemlances.&@ Therefore, an analo!ical interpretation, also called1extensive,2 is not aritrar" as lon! as it conforms to the !eneral intention of the le!islator, evenif that interpretation materiall" !oes e"ond his thou!ht.&?

In what measure can we cate!oricall" affirm that an ancient canon ou!ht no lon!er to e

applied In principle, such is the case when a disciplinar" measure has een aro!ated ormodified " a canon adopted in some later time7 this is in line with the ada!e le< poste3io3-e3ogat p3io3i9 which assumes that the conciliar authorit" issuin! the aro!ation or modificationpossess the necessar" authorit".&AIt is still necessar" to take into account the reasons underl"in!the more recent canon. Thus, canon ? of the S"nod in Trullo e!ins " recallin! the norm whichre+uires semiannual s"nods in each province. Dowever, in the face of a practical impossiilit";JKLMJNOP


7/216

-et us add that the ancient canons and especiall" those of the ecumenical councils wereconsidered to have een issued under divine inspiration, which explains the !reat care taken topreserve the exactness of the texts.@3

From the e!innin! of this centur" on, a remarkale 9o has een carried out inestalishin! a critical edition of ancient canonical collections. It is, of course, these works thatwe have primaril" used in our research. e must first mention the excellent editions of the

Synagoge and of the Syntagma in XIV Titles done " G.*. 4enesevic.@(For the disciplinar"rulin! issued " the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, we also have the monumental work ofEdward SchwartB.@%ith certain exceptions, the reek text of the canons of the first fourecumenical councils found in ;onti is that of the Synagoge9 sometimes with some interestin!variants7 it is nonetheless difficult to appreciate their importance ecause of deficiencies in thewa" the critical apparatus is set out.@$The old -atin versions of the canons, aove all those of*icea I, are worth" of careful consideration. Certain ones in fact show si!ns of ein! ased on areek text earlier than those which have come down to us. 0t least in the one case, the old -atintext allows us to reconstruct with near certaint" the ori!inal form of the canon and to understandthe mens legislato3is.@?e can also add that the old -atin versions have an interest all their own.The variet" of -atin translations of reek terms found in these versions calls for theolo!icalreflection.@& =oreover, certain interpretive translations, indeed additions, constitute precioustestimon" to the histor" of Church institutions in the est. @The research of Strewe@@and, aoveall, the work of Turner,@?as complete as it is serious, !ive the scholar access to correctl" edited-atin texts. The S"riac translation of the canons done at Dierapolis of Euphratesia ;&33&3(< isfar from ein! as interestin! as the old -atin versions. It is in fact ver" close to the oldest reekeditions we have. 0t the most, when a variant is found simultaneousl" in this S"riac version andin the -atin translations of #ion"sius Exi!uus, we can infer that it must reflect the text of the0ntiochian A3aeca a8cto3itas. The critical edition of the manuscript containin! the S"riactranslation mentioned aove has een pulished " F. Schulthess.@A

e have alread" drawn attention to the work of Stephen of Ephesus, the Synopsis9 edited" 0ristenos and completed " S"meon the -o!othete. *o critical edition of this Bpitomecanon8m exists7 we have, therefore, used the work of halles and 5otles. e have done the

same for the commentaries of 0ristenos, >onaras, and 4alsamon.?3

For the anon"mous scholia,we have used the pulication of G.*. 4enesevic.?/

Archbishop Peter LHuillier

The First Ecumenical Council.

The First Ecumenical Council was held in *icea, 0sia =inor, in $%& on the occasion of theheres" of 0rius ;0rianism


8/216

Dosius of Cordova, Cecilian of Cartha!e, =ark of Calaria, *icasius of #i9on, #onnus of

Stridon in 5annonia, and the two oman priests, Gictor and Gincentius, representin! the pope.

The asseml" numered amon! its most famous memers St. 0lexander of 0lexandria,Eustathius of 0ntioch, =acarius of 6erusalem, Euseius of *icomedia, Euseius of Caesarea,

and *icholas of ="ra. Some had suffered durin! the last persecution7 others were poorl" enou!h

ac+uainted with Christian theolo!". 0mon! the memers was a "oun! deacon, 0thanasius of0lexandria, for whom this Council was to e the prelude to a life of conflict and of !lor".

The Council was opened " Constantine with the !reatest solemnit". The emperor e!an

" makin! the ishops understand that the" had a !reater and etter usiness in hand thanpersonal +uarrels and interminale recriminations. *evertheless, he had to sumit to the

infliction of hearin! the last words of deates which had een !oin! on previous to his arrival.

Euseius of Caesarea and his two areviators, Socrates and SoBomen, as well as ufinus and

elasius of C"Bicus, report no details of the theolo!ical discussions. ufinus tells us onl" thatdail" sessions were held and that 0rius was often summoned efore the asseml"7 his opinions

were seriousl" discussed and the opposin! ar!uments attentivel" considered. The ma9orit",

especiall" those who were confessors of the Faith, ener!eticall" declared themselves a!ainst the

impious doctrines of 0rius. St. 0thanasius assures us that the activities of the Council werenowise hampered " Constantine/s presence. To St. 0thanasius ma" e attriuted a preponderant

influence in the formulation of the s"mol of the First Ecumenical Council, of which thefollowin! is a literal translation:

e elieve in one od the Father 0lmi!ht", =aker of all thin!s visile and invisile7 and

in one -ord 6esus Christ, the onl" e!otten of the Father, that is, of the sustance R e1 tes o8siasof the Father, od of od, li!ht of li!ht, true od of true od, e!otten not made, of the same

sustance with the Father R4omoo8sion to pat3i, throu!h whom all thin!s were made oth in

heaven and on earth7 who for us men and our salvation descended, was incarnate, and was made

man, suffered and rose a!ain the third da", ascended into heaven and cometh to 9ud!e the livin!and the dead. 0nd in the Dol" host. Those who sa": There was a time when De was not, and

De was not efore De was e!otten7 and that De was made our of nothin! ;e< o81 onton


9/216

Canon (: n the admission, or support, or expulsion of clerics mutilated " choice or "

violence.

Canon %: ules to e oserved for ordination, the avoidance of undue haste, thedeposition of those !uilt" of a !rave fault.

Canon $: 0ll memers of the cler!" are foridden to dwell with an" woman, except a

mother, sister, or aunt.Canon ': Concernin! episcopal elections.

Canon &: Concernin! the excommunicate.

Canon : Concernin! patriarchs and their 9urisdiction.Canon @: confirms the ri!ht of the ishops of 6erusalem to en9o" certain honours.

Canon ?: concerns the *ovatians.

Canon A: Certain sins known after ordination involve invalidation.

Canon (3:Capsiwho have een ordained knowin!l" or surreptitiousl" must e excludedas soon as their irre!ularit" is known.

Canon ((: 5enance to e imposed on apostates of the persecution of -icinius.

Canon (%: 5enance to e imposed on those who upheld -icinius in his war on the

Christians.Canon ($: Indul!ence to e !ranted to excommunicated persons in dan!er of death.

Canon (': 5enance to e imposed on catechumens who had weakened under persecution.Canon (&: 4ishops, priests, and deacons are not to pass from one church to another.

Canon (: 0ll clerics are foridden to leave their church. Formal prohiition for ishops

to ordain for their diocese a cleric elon!in! to another diocese.Canon (@: Clerics are foridden to lend at interest.

Canon (?: recalls to deacons their suordinate position with re!ard to priests.

Canon (A: ules to e oserved with re!ard to adherents of 5aul of Samosata who

wished to return to the Church.Canon %3: n Sunda"s and durin! the 5aschal season pra"ers should e said standin!.

Canons.

1. If an"one has een operated upon " sur!eons for a disease, or has een excised " ararians,

let him remain in the cler!". 4ut if an"one has excised himself when well, he must e dismissedeven if he is examined after ein! in the cler!". 0nd henceforth no such person must e

promoted to hol" orders. 4ut as is selfevident, thou!h such is the case as re!ards those who

affect the matter and dare to excise themselves, if an" persons have een eunuchiBed "ararians or their lords, ut are otherwise found to e worth", the Canon admits such persons to

the cler!".

;0p. cc. UUI, UUII, UUIII7 c. GIII of the lstV%nd.onaras and the other interpreters, who en!a!e in such thin!s while wearin! the hait of the cler!"7 whereas

the present Canon is speakin! of those who discard even the cler!"manWs or monkWs hait efore en!a!in! in

such thin!s. r perhaps the present Canon is referrin! to those who, after once darin! to do such thin!s, refuse

afterwards to repent and to return to their former life ;which the 0p. c. does not sa"


41/216

Interpretation.hen one cler!"man has a dispute with another cler!"man, the present Canon prescries that he must not

leave his own ishop and present his case to secular courts, ut, on the contrar", he must first present it to his

ishop, or else, with the permission and consent of his ishop, he ma" have his case tried " referees ;or

chosen 9ud!es


42/216

one church to another, and remains thus translated, let him no lon!er receive an" apportionment from the

affairs of the former church, " which is meant inns, poorhouses, and mart"ric temples. hoever should dare

after this Canon of the !reat Council to do an" of these thin!s, he is to e deposed from office. *ovel (

;found in Title III of 4ook III of the 4asilica< prescries that if the cler!"man of an" church should die,

another one is not immediatel" to take his place, ut that if there are more cler!"men in other churches amon!those alread" ordained, let one of them e taken to fill the place left vacant " the cler!"man in +uestion, until

the cler!"men of each particular church reach the numer prescried in the e!innin!. See also 0p. c. UG.

11. 0s for all those who are indi!ent and in need of assistance, upon proof, we have made it arule that the" are to travel onl" with pacific ecclesiastical letters, and not with recommendator"

letters7 for recommendator" letters are to e !ranted onl" to persons who are under suspicion.;0p. cc. UII, UUUIII7 c. UIII of the 'th7 c. UGII of the th7 cc. GII, GIII, and UI of 0ntioch7 cc. U-I, U-II of

-aodicea7 cc. GII, GIII of Sardica7 cc. UUUI, UCGII, and CUGI of Cartha!e.onaras, in fact, declares that it is worse than

sacrile!e for a ishop to e un9ustl" reduced to the rank of pres"ter7 for, sa"s he, it is not somethin! sacred

that is ein! treated sacrile!iousl" and stolen, ut somethin! more than sacred, ecause, sa"s he, throu!h the

invocation of the prelate churches and temples and other sacred o9ects are consecrated and hallowed andsanctified " virtue of the visitation of the Dol" Spirit, and it must e admitted at all events that that which

sanctifies is !reater than that which is sanctified. 0s for wh" this Canon prohiits this, whereas c. UU of the

th reduces to the position of pres"ter an" ishop that !oes teachin! e"ond his oundaries without the

consent and approval of the ishop holdin! swa" over the re!ion in +uestion, see the solution of this puBBlin!

+uestion in 0p. c. UUUG.

3". hereas the most reverent 4ishops of E!"pt postponed suscriin! to the epistle of the mosthol" 0rchiishop -eo for the present, not ecause the" opposed the catholic faith, ut on the

alle!ation that it is a custom in the diocese of E!"pt to do nothin! of this sort without the consent

and formal approval of their 0rchishop, and therefore re+uest to e excused until the one who isto e the 4ishop for the !reat cit" of the 0lexandrians has een ordained: it has appeared to us

reasonale and consonant with the spirit of philanthrop" that the" e excused and allowed to

remain upon the like hait in the Imperial Cit" till an 0rchishop has een ordained for the !reat

cit" of the 0lexandrians. -et them therefore !ive securit" that the" will not leave this cit" till thecit" of the 0lexandrians has een accomodated with a ishop.

Interpretation.It has een written in 0ct ' of the present Council that after the deposition of #ioscorus, the 5atriarch of0lexandria, ten ;or, as others sa", thirteen< ishops of the same 5atriarch of 0lexandria anathematiBed

Eut"ches and #ioscorus himself, and their do!mas7 ut the" could not e prevailed upon to suscrie to theletter of St. -eo, the 5ope of ome, which he had sent to the 5atriarch of Constantinople St. Flavian ;and

which, as we have said, was called a pillar of rthodox" ecause it contained all the rthodox elief of thefaith


52/216

Fifth Ecumenical Council.

The Dol" and Ecumenical Fifth Council ;which was the second one held in Constantinople< was held in the"ear &&$ in the rei!n of Emperor 6ustinian I. 0ccordin! to #ositheus ;4ook G, ch. ( of the Ho-ecaFiFl8sonaras and 4alsamon, or who hadeen orn in Faran, accordin! to -eo II of ome in what he wrote to the Emperor7 =acarius of

0ntioch, to!ether with Stephanus his disciple, and the infantileminded old man named

5ol"chronius, who all had dared to do!matiBe " attriutin! a sin!le will and predicatin! a sin!le

&%


53/216

ener!" to and of Christ, respectivel". 4ut this Council do!matiBed to the contrar" that our -ord

6esus Christ, thou!h ut one person, after Dis incarnation possessed two natural wills and two

natural ener!ies(%(9ust as De also possessed two natures ) that is to sa", in other words, a divinewill and ener!" and a human will and ener!", oth of them ein! at the same time indivisile

and inconflatale. For neither the #ivinit" nor the humanit", the two natures of Christ, remained

without a will and an ener!" after the union. For if the peculiarities of the natures should erefuted, which are the will and the ener!", the natures themselves should inevital" e refuted

too, alon! therewith. For ever" nature consists of and is indentical with its natural peculiarities,

and without these it could not ecome existent. 0ccordin!l", this Council do!matiBed, in rief,that 1in the h"postasis of the odman -o!os each form acted in communion with that of the

other one, which it had had as its own.2 This means, in other words, that the -o!os wrou!ht that

which was the function of the -o!os, whereas the od" performed that which was the function of

the od" ) 9ust as the Fourth Ecumenical Council had do!matiBed, that is the sa", previousl" "means of -eoWs letter. For, as most wise 5hotius sa"s, it was not within the ailit" of one and the

same ener!" to restore a cripple and to ecome tired of travelin! afoot7 to resurrect -aBarus and

to weep over him7 nor, a!ain, was it within the adaptailit" of one and the same will to re+uest

that the cup of death mi!ht pass awa" from Dim and to call it on the other hand Dis !lor", and towant what was unwantale. For the first activities were due to the ener!" of the #ivinit",

whereas the second activities were due to the ener!" of the humanit". 0nd conversel", the firstwill was that of the humanit", while the second will was that of the #ivinit". 4ut this Council too

failed to promul!ate an" Canons.

Quinisext Ecumenical Council.

The Dol" and Ecumenical(%%Quinisext ;or Quinisextine


54/216

catholic Church, notwithstandin! that the modern -atins calumiousl" traduce them ecause the"

censure and controvert their innovations. 0drian I in his letter to Tarasius has left us this

admirale testimon" concernin! these Canons in the followin! words: 1I accept the decisionsmade " the same hol" Sixth Council, to!ether with all the Canons it has dul" and divinel"

uttered, wherein the" are expressed.2 In certain inscriptions of the venerale icons is to e found

added also the whole text of its ei!ht"second Canon ;p. @'@ of the Collection of the Councils


55/216

re!ardin! the faith revealed and stated to us with convincin! clearness the fact that the three

h"postases of the thearchic nature are of the same essence, without allowin! this important point

to remain hidden under a ushel of i!norance, ut, on the contrar", openl" tau!ht the faithfuloutri!ht to adore the Father and the Son and the Dol" Spirit with one adoration, and deposed and

denounced the opinion that divinit" if of une+ual !rades ;or ranks


56/216

the reek m"ths and recountin! to us periods and mutations of certain odies and souls,

prompted " raptures and hallucinations of the mind, and in drunken revelr" impiousl" exultin!

over the resurrection of the dead7 as well as what had een written " Theodoret a!ainst the ri!htfaith and correct elief and a!ainst the twelves heads ;or chapters< of lissful C"ril7 and also the

socalled letter of Ias. 0nd a!ain we faithfull" 9oin to!ether in the promise and vow to preserve

and safe!uard and keep inviolale the faith declared " the Sixth hol" Council recentl"assemled on the !rounds of this Imperial Cit" in the rei!n of Constantine, who ecame our

Emperor and passed awa" at the termination of his divine career, and which received still !reater

validit" " virtue of the fact that the pious Emperor himself sealed up the volumes containin! it" impressin! them with his own seals with a view to ensurin! their safet" in ever" succeedin!

a!e7 and which has with the love of od clearl" enaled us to entertain an rthodox conception

of the strai!htforward do!ma which the" outlined of the truth that there were and are two natural

wills, or, that is to sa", wishes, and two natural ener!ies inherent in the incarnate econom" of ourone -ord 6esus, the true od7 and which Council " a vote of piet" condemned those who teach

their laities outri!ht the doctrine of a sin!le will and of a sin!le ener!" inherent in our one -ord

and od 6esus Christ, amon! whom we cite " name Theodore the 4ishop of Faran, C"rus ;the

5atriarch< of 0lexandria, Donorius ;the 5ope< of ome, Ser!ius, 5"rrhus, 5aul, 5eter, all four ofwhom have acted as presidin! chairmen in this od!uarded cit", =acarius who ecame the

4ishop of the 0ntiochians, Stephanus his disciple, and foolish ;or witless< 5ol"chronius. Dencewe solemnl" decree that this Council, while preservin! intact the common od" of Christ our

od, and, succinctl" speakin!, of all the men who have distin!uished themselves in the Church

of od and have ecome luminaries in the world, D4ol-ing 6o3t4 t4e Go3- o6 li6eJ;5hil. %:(


57/216

easil" intelli!ile to the unlearned. e proceed, therefore, to note that, startin! with a maxim of

St. re!or" the Theolo!ian,(%?which sa"s that it is the est polic" for one who is aout to

commence an" discourse or work to e!in with od, and to end with od ;Note o6 T3anslato3.) This sounds plausile and ma" e true, althou!h the reek text of the Canon does not strictl"

sa" 1end,2 ut instead emplo"s the reek word si!nif"in! 1repose,2 for which in m" translation

of the Canon I sustituted the En!lish word 3elyas etter adapted to the En!lish idiom


58/216

those who held a Council in -aodicea7 further, a!ain, the one hundred and fift" who convened in

this od!uarded and imperial capital cit", .and the two hundred who assemled at an earlier

time in the metropolis of Ephesus, and the six hundred and thirt" hol" and lissful Fathers whomet in Chalcedon. -ikewise those who convened in Sardica7 furthermore those in Cartha!e.

Further and in addition to all these those now a!ain convened in this od!uarded and imperial

capital cit" in the time of *ectarius the president of this imperial capital cit", and of Theophiluswho ecame 0rchishop of 0lexandria. Furthermore also of #ion"sius who ecame 0rchishop

of the !reat cit" of 0lexandria, and of 5eter who ecame 0rchishop of 0lexandria and a =art"r

withal, and of re!or" the Thaumatur!us ;or =iracleworker< who ecame 4ishop of*eocaesarea, of 0thanasius the 0rchishop of 0lexandria, of 4asil the 0rchishop of Caesarea

in Cappadocia, of re!or" of *"ssa, of re!or" the Theolo!ian, of 0mphilochius the

0rchishop of Iconium, Timoth" a former 0rchishop of the !reat cit" of 0lexandria, of

Theophilus an 0rchishop of the !reat cit" of the 0lexandrians, of C"ril an 0rchishop of0lexandria, and of ennadius who ecame a 5atriarch of this od!uarded imperial capital cit".

Furthermore, the Canon promul!ated " C"prian who ecame an 0rchishop of the countr" of

0frica and a mart"r, and " the Council supportin! him, who alone held swa" in the places of the

aforesaid presidents, in accordance with the custom handed down to them7 and no one shall epermitted to countermand or set aside the Canons previousl" laid down, or to reco!niBe and

accept an" Canons, other than the ones herein specified, that have een composed under a falseinscription " certain persons who have taken in hand to arter the truth. If, nevertheless, an"one

e cau!ht innovatin! with re!ard to an" of the said Canons, or attemptin! to suvert it, he shall

e responsile in respect of that Canon and shall receive the penance which it prescries and echastised " that Canon which he has offended.

Interpretation.

Since at ever" Council, and especiall" one that was Ecumenical, there was also a definitionwithin which were comprised the do!mas of the faith, and Canons were composed in writin! to

serve in the wa" of contriutions to the polit" and !ood order of the Church, therefore and on

this account, after havin! ratified and confirmed in its Canon I the definitions of the faith of thehol" and Ecumenical Councils ;precedin! it


59/216

3. hereas our 5ious and Christlovin! Emperor, in his address to this hol" and EcumenicalCouncil, has su!!ested that those enlisted the Cler!" and conve"in! to others the #ivine truths

should e pure and faultless ministers, and worth" of the intellectual sacrifice of the !reat od

and victim and hi!h priest, and eliminate the hatred due to friction resultin! from illicitmarria!es7 and, in addition to this, seein! that the most hol" Church of the omans is disposed to

oserve the Canon of strict conformit"7 while, on the other hand, we under the throne of this

od!uarded and imperial capital cit", have neither carried meekness to excess nor have left onacrid impression of austerit"7 and especiall" in view of the fact that failure due to i!norance

extends to a multitude of not a few men ) therefore we concur in decreein! that, as re!ards

i!amists who have een enslaved to sin and have not chosen to recede therefrom, as of the

fifteenth da" of the month of 6anuar" last past, in the last fourth Indiction, in the "ear sixthousand one hundred and ninet", the" are to e su9ected to canonical deposition7 ut as for

those i!amists who have taken co!niBance of their own interest efore we had notice of their

doin! an"thin! wron!, and who cut out the evil esettin! them, and chased this forei!n and

spurious en!a!ement far awa"7 or even those whose wives " a second marria!e have died, ifthe" too have seen their wa" to return to !ood sense after later learnin! soriet", and have

+uickl" come to for!et their former misdeeds and violations of the law, whether the" happen toe 5res"ters or #eacons ) it has seemed est to us for these men to e dismissed from ever"

sacerdotal office, or priestl" activit", havin! alread" een penanced for an express len!th of

time. 4ut we have decided that in the case of those who have committed the ini+uitous actunwittin!l" and who are weepin! to the -ord to e pardoned therefor, the" deserve to share in

the honor of standin! and sittin! in the place reserved for the presidenc": for to less one that

ou!ht to take care of his own wounds is inconsistent. 4ut, on the other hand, as for those who

have contracted ut one marria!e, and this with a woman that was a widow, and likewise as forthose who after ordination have involved themselves in an ille!al marria!e, ($& that is to sa",

5res"ters and #eacons and Sudeacons, not lon! a!o excluded from the sacred litur!" and

penanced, we order them to e restored to their former ranks, without ein! in an" wa" promotedto an" hi!her rank, it ein! ovious that their ille!al marria!e has een dissolved. e have made

these decrees effective as of the said fifteenth da" of the month of 6anuar", in the fourth

Indiction, in re!ard to those !uilt" of the offenses efore specified and in priestl" offices7 utesides this we henceforth decree and renew the Canon prescriin! that an"one who has ecome

involved in two marria!es after aptism, or has ac+uired a concuine, 1cannot ecome a 4ishop,

or a 5res"ter, or a #eacon, or an"thin! else in the roll of the priesthood. -ikewise in re!ard to

an"one that has taken a widow, or a divorcee, or a harlot, or house servant, or an actress to wife,we decree that he cannot e a 4ishop, or a 5res"ter, or a #eacon, or an"thin! else in the roll of

the priesthood.2

Interpretation.

The Fathers of the present Council, oth correctin! the evil condition then otainin!, and

securin! matters as respectin! the future, issued the present 1economic2 Canon. For inasmuch asthe Emperor had asked them to cleanse those in hol" orders at that time from the uncleanliness of

illicit marria!es, and unlawful ones, into which the" had fallen7 and, on the one hand, the le!ates

and representatives of ome had proposed that the strict letter of the Canons e oserved in

re!ard to them, while, on the other hand, the ishops under the 5atriarch of Constantinople were

&A


60/216

disposed to allow them some lenienc" and philanthrop", the" themselves, deemin! it wise to

con9oin oth ) to temper strictness, I mean, with lenienc" ) ;and especiall" in view of the fact

that a !reat numer of those then in hol" orders had fallen into marria!es unwittin!l" as a resultof i!norance


61/216

eunuchs safe!uard themselves in this ver" same situation too, " providin! themselves with a

lameless character. 0s for those who trans!ress this in9unction, if the" are Cler!"men, let them

e deposed from office7 ut if the" are la"men let them e excommunicated.;c. III of the (st7 cc. UGIII, UUII of the @th7 c. UIU of 0nc"ra7 c. U-G of Cartha!e7 and c.

-UUUIU of 4asil.onaras


107/216

a cler!"man, let him e deposed7 ut if he e a la"man, let him e excommunicated. ead also c. -UUIG of

this same th.

!. The faithful celeratin! the da"s of the soterial 5assion with fastin! and pra"er and contritionmust cease their fast aout the middle hours of the ni!ht after reat Saturda", the divine

Evan!elists =atthew and -uke havin! si!naled us the lateness of ni!ht, the one " addin! thewords Dat t4e en- o6 t4e saFFat4J ;=att. %?:(< and the other " sa"in! DEe3y ea3ly in t4emo3ningJ;-uke %':(


108/216

;which is counted as that of Sunda"< we commence the festival, and keep it up until the li!ht of da" of Sunda",

when we end it, in order that in this manner we ma" celerate the esurrection en masse for a whole ni!ht and

da". See also c. UU of the (st.%%A

!1. 0s for women who furnish dru!s for the purpose of procurin! aortion, and those who take

foetuskillin! poisons, the" are made su9ect to the penalt" prescried for murderers.

Interpretation.Some women, who happen to conceive as a result of secretl" practicin! coition with men, in order to escape

detection swallow certain poisonous drau!hts or hers " means of which the" kill the foetus in their wom

and thus expel it dead. For this reason the present Canon condemns to the penalt" of murderers all women ;or

men< who furnish such means, as well as the women who take these and swallow them.%$3

Concor%.Canon GIII of 4asil decrees this same thin! Ee3Fatim. 4ut treatin! such women more kindl", the Fathers in

0nc"ra, in their c. UUI, and St. 4asil the reat, in his c. II, do not canoniBe for life, ut onl" for ten "ears.

#ru!s for procurin! aortion, termed aFo3ti6acients, are, as some note, and more especiall" Suidas, the

destructive her named in c. UUI of 0nc"ra, ut the same term is also applied ;in reek< to the foetus

destro"ed " it. Even in 4ook -U of the 4asilica, Title $A, oth women furnishin! and those takin! thesepoisonous hers are condemned as murderesses. 0thena!oras, too, in his 0polo!" for Christians, sa"s this

ver" thin!. See also 0p. c. -UGI.

!2. 0s for those who !ra women on the pretext of marria!e, or who aid and aet those who !ra

them, the hol" Council has decreed that if the" e cler!"men, the" shall forfeit their own rank,ut if the" e la"men, the" shall e anathematiBed.

Interpretation.This present Canon is word for word the same as c. UUGII of the 'th, and read its interpretation there.

!3. 0fter her husandWs departure and when he has vanished, "et efore ecomin! convinced of

his death, an" woman that cohaits with another man is committin! adulter". -ikewise the wives

of soldiers, who, when their husands have disappeared, !et married ;a!ain


109/216

married a second time, on account of not havin! heard that their husands are comin! ack, are adulteresses.

Dowever, these women who marr" a second time have some claim to pardon ;more, that is to sa", than have

wives of nonsoldiers who have married a second time< inasmuch as their husands, ein! soldiers and

en!a!ed in wars are more to e suspected of havin! died than of ein! still alive


110/216

those that are clerics, the" are deposed from office accordin! to 0p. c. UUG7 see the Interpretation of the

latter.

!5. 0s for heretics who are 9oinin! rthodox" and the portion of the saved, we accept them inaccordance with the su9oined se+uence and custom. 0rians and =acedonians and *ovations,

who called themselves Cathari%$ and 0risteri,%$@ and the Tessarakaidekatitae, or, at an" rate,

those called Tetradites and 0polinarists, we accept, when the" !ive us certificates ;called liFelli


111/216

how to live in a soer and sane manner, with the o9ect of enalin! them to la" aside the

deception and vanit" resultin! from materialit" in order that the" ma" end their minds towards

a life which is perpetuall" unruffled and lissful, and to en9o" chaste association in fear, and toapproach od as near as possile throu!h their purit" of life, and to adorn the inner rather than

the outer man with virtues and eni!nant and lameless manners, so that the" ma" not have an"

trace left in them of the rudeness of the adversar". If, however, an"one should conduct himself ina manner contrar" to the present Canon, let him e excommunicated.

Interpretation.DMs many o6 yo8 as 4aEe Feen Faptie- in 743ist9 4aEe p8t on 743istJ;al. $:%@


112/216

Concor%.That is wh" 4ook G of the 4asilica, Title I, ch. (%, in a!reement with the present Canon decrees that thosewho, on account of an" cowardice or other wickedness, take refu!e in a church uildin!, throwin! awa" their

weapons at the same time, shall en9o" securit" and safet" as far as the oundaries of the church. 4ut the" are

not to have an" ri!ht to eat, or to drink, or to sleep inside the temple, ut are to sta" in the !ardens or !rounds

outside of it, or else in the vaults, or in the court"ards, or in the residences which are roundaout attached tothe temple ;in 5hotius, Title G, ch. %onaras, and 4alsamon, and 0ristenus, and the 0non"mous Expositor all in common explain that the

0rmenians were wont to roast meat inside of the sacrificial altars. 4ut to me it seems that these expositors,

failin! to punctuate, ut, on the contrar", runnin! to!ether the words 1roastin! pieces of meat2 with the words

1within the space of the sacrificial altars,2 fell into an error. Such was not the meanin! intended. For the

phrase 1within the space of the sacrificial altars2 is not to e comined with the phrase 1roastin! pieces of

meat,2 ut, on the contrar", ein! divided off with a comma, it should e comined with the phrase 1offer

parts assi!ned.2 For it is hi!hl" improale and too asurd to elieve, that meat should e actuall" roastedwithin the space of the hol" 4ema wherein is situated the sacrificial altar of the church, thus turnin! it into akitchen. So what the present Canon sa"s is that this custom which was practiced in 0rmenia, where some

persons would roast meat at home and afterwards offer parts of it in the hol" 4ema to the priests ;9ust as the6ews offer the reast or a le! or some other part of the animals ein! sacrificed to their priests< ) that custom,

I sa", is not to e followed hereafter, ut neither are priests to have permission to take those parts of an animal

which the" want, ut, on the contrar", must e content with whatever parts a Christian offers them7 the offer of

such meat, moreover, must take place outside of the church, and not inside of the sanctuar", or sacred 4ema,

of the church. Dence the sense of the words as set forth " us aove ecomes evidentl" manifest from the

((%


113/216

context. For had it een an actual fact that the" were roastin! that meat in the 4ema, the Canon ou!ht

necessaril" to have prohiited this, as somethin! hi!hl" improper, as it prohiited the offerin! of the meat. -et

an"one !uilt" of violatin! this rule e excommunicated. 4ut 4alsamon states ;in his interpretation of 0p. c.

III< that he saw an aotpriest deposed and ousted from the aac" ecause he rou!ht meat and cheese into

the hol" 4ema. See also the Interpretation of 0p. c. III.

Concor%.*ote, accordin! to >onaras, that the Canon permitted priests to take parts of the meat, not in common and on a

universal asis, throu!hout the world, ut onl" in 0rmenia, and this on account of the custom, which had then

come to prevail amon! the 0rmenians.%&(

1"". DCet t4ine eyes loo1 a3ig4t9 an- 1eep t4y 4ea3t Git4 all -iligenceJ ;5rov. ':%& and %$


114/216

therefore, and on this account, the present Canon will not admit this procedure, even thou!h it e emplo"ed for

the sake of reverence. 4ecause, in view of the fact that a man is one who has een made in the ima!e of od,

and who eats the od" and drinks the lood of Christ, and there" ecomes sanctified, and since he is in fact a

od" and temple of Christ, accordin! to the 0postle, he transcends all sensile thin!s and inanimate creatures,

and conse+uentl" his hands are far more precious than an" vessel. Dence an"one that wishes to partake of the-ordWs od", let him form his two hands into the shape of a cross, %&%and let him receive it therein. 0s for an"

la"man that ma" receive the od" of the -ord in a vessel, and an" priest who ma" impart it in an" such thin!,let oth of them e excommunicated, ecause the" prefer an inanimate ;i.e., soulless< vessel to the human

ein! molded in the ima!e of od.

1"2. Those who have received from od authorit" to ind and to loose must take into

consideration the +ualit" of the sin, and the willin!ness and readiness of the sinner to return, andthus offer a treatment suited to the sin in +uestion, lest " emplo"in! an immoderate ad9ustment

in one direction or the other, the" fail in compassin! the salvation of the one ailin!. For, the

diseases called sin are not simple affairs, ut, on the contrar", various and complex, and the"produce man" offshoots of the in9ur", as a result whereof the evil ecomes widel" diffused, and

it pro!resses until it is checked%&$" the power of the one treatin! it. So that a person who is

professin! the science of treatin! ailments as a spiritual ph"sician ou!ht first to examine thedisposition of the sinner, and ascertain whether he tends to health or on the contrar" provokes themalad" to attack him " his own actions7 at the same time earin! in mind that he must provide

a!ainst an" reversion, and considerin! whether the patient is stru!!lin! a!ainst the ph"sician,

and whether the ulcer of the soul is ein! a!!ravated " the application of the remed"7 andaccordin!l" to mete out merc" in due proportion to the merits of the case. For all that matters to

od and to the person undertakin! pastoral leadership consists in the recover" of the stra"in!

sheep, and in healin! the one wounded " the serpent. 0ccordin!l", he ou!ht not to drive thepatient to the ver!e of despair, nor !ive him rein%&'to dissoluteness and contempt of life, ut, on

the contrar", in at least one wa" at an" rate, either " resortin! to extremer and strin!ent

remedies, or to !entler and milder ones, to cur the disease, and to put up a fi!ht to heal the ulcer

for the one tastin! the fruits of repentance, and wisel" helpin! him on the wa" to the splendidrehailitation to which the man is ein! invited. e must therefore e versed in oth, i.e., oth

the re+uirements of accurac" and the re+uirements of custom. In the case of those who are

ostinatel" opposed to extremities, we must follow the formula handed down to us, 9ust as sacred4asil teaches us outri!ht.

Interpretation.0fter this Council had decreed concernin! man" different penances, lastl" in the present Canon it leaves

ever"thin! to the 9ud!ment of the ishops and spirituals ;i.e., confessors


115/216

lesion of sin with such measures. The confessor, I sa", must first of all make con9ectures respectin! all these

thin!s, and thus with due proportion mete out merc", miti!atin!, or li!htenin!, the penances in dealin! with

the man who is unconcerned and pusillanimous, ut intensif"in!, or makin! them heavier, in the case of a man

who is ma!nanimous7 and doin! oth for merc"Ws sake, in order, on the one hand, to cleanse the ma!nanimous

man from sin, and, on the other hand, to avoid makin! the pusillanimous manWs case worse. 0nd, !enerall"speakin!, the whole aim oth to od and to the confessor is simpl" this, to rin! aout the return of the

stra"in! sheep, to cure the one who has een wounded or hurt " the fi!urative serpent commonl" called the#evil, and neither to drive him to despair " heav" penalties, nor a!ain to let him take the it in his teeth, like

a horse, " li!ht penalties, and hence encoura!e him to contemptuousness and unconcern, ut in ever"

possile wa", whether with austere or with mild remedies, to endeavor to restore the sinner to health and free

him from the wounds of sin, so that he ma" taste the fruits of repentance, and with wisdom mana!in! to help

him to ascend to the splendor of the Dol" Trinit" aove ;which is the kin!dom of heaven, accordin! to St.

re!or" the Theolo!ian


116/216

more those eholdin! are reminded and led to visualiBe anew the memor" of the ori!inals

which the" represent and for whom moreover the" also e!et a "earnin! in the soul of the

persons eholdin! the icons. 0ccordin!l", such persons are prompted not onl" to kiss theseand to pa" them honorar" adoration, what is more important, the" are imued with the true

faith which is reflected in our worship which is due to od alone and which efits onl" the

divine nature ;worship is defined " St. 4asil the reat as ein! an intense and continualand nonavolatin! culture respectin! the o9ect worshiped: see his EpitomiBed #efinitions,

p. ?&3


117/216

Interpretation.

The divine Canons are testimonies%&so far as concerns those in hol" orders in that the"

attest and reveal to them how the" ou!ht to conduct themselves oth pulicl" and privatel".

The" are directions in that when the" are oserved " them the" direct and steer their life.6o"full" acceptin! these Canons throu!h the present Canon, this Council offers up those

prophetic words of #avid as a son! to od which run as follows in paraphrase: 1I have

re9oiced, -ord, in Th" testimonies 9ust as I should re9oice if I owned all the wealth of the

world. 0nd Thou hast commanded me to keep Th" testimonies forever, wherewith e Thoupleased to wisen me, and I shall live in them.2 0nd if this utterance of the prophetWs

commands us to keep the testimonies of od forever, and to live in them, it is manifest that

the" themselves are permanent and ri!id ;for, accordin! to >onaras, the reek word for1unwaverin!2 denotes the weak and fra!ile ranch of a fi!tree7 unwaverin! thin!s,

therefore, are thin!s that are solid and unmovale


118/216

Interpretation.

hile all Christian la"men ou!ht to meditate in the ri!hts of od, and not for!et Dis words,

9ust as the" chant and promise ever" da" with the prophet, this is eminentl" so in the case of

those in hol" orders. For this reason the present Canon decrees that an"one who intends toecome a ishop must without fail e ac+uainted with the thou!hts in the psalter, in order to

teach his lait" therefrom so that the" ma" learn them too. -ikewise an" such person must e

examined " the metropolitan scrupulousl" as to whether he is cheerfull" willin! to read,

not superficiall" and as to the words alone, ut with re!ard to depth and with understandin!of the thou!hts, the sacred Canons, which we have enumerated aove, the hol" ospel, the

0postle, and all the divine Scripture, and not onl" to know these, ut also to conduct

himself oth pulicl" and privatel" 9ust as the" prescrie, and to teach his fold inaccordance with them. For, as #ion"sius the 0reopa!ite%@ declares, the essence and

structure of the ecclesiastical prelac" is the words tau!ht " od., or, more precisel"

speakin!, the true comprehension and exact knowled!e of the divine Scriptures. If not, andhe is in dout, and is not minded to do these thin!s himself, and to teach others too, let him

not e made a ishop7 for od sa"s throu!h the prophet Dosea ;in paraphrase


119/216

" letter the" should carr" out the ordination thereafter. 4ut as for the ratification of the

proceedin!s, let it e entrusted in each province to the =etropolitan.2

;0p. cc. I, II, UUU, -UI7 c. IG of the (st7 cc. G, UIII of -aodicea7 c. -IU of Cartha!e7 c.GII of Timoth".eno, who

re9oiced !reatl" when he eheld it with his own e"es, and, keepin! it safel" in his possession, he ordered it to e read ever""ear on ood Frida" ;called in reek 1reat Frida"2


156/216

ishop is not asolute, ut relative. For a ishop must e the ishop of an episcopate. hoever, therefore, has resi!ned his

episcopate, evidentl" ou!ht not even to e called a ishop ;unless it e with the modification 1former2 or 1formerl"2onaras. 4ut if he ou!ht not to ear the name of ishop, much more ou!ht he not to en9o" eitherthe honor or the activit" of a ishop. For the honor and activit" of the ishop are estowed as a priBe and reward " 0p. c.

UUUGI as well as c. UGIII of 0ntioch, not upon the one resi!nin! his province, ut upon the one who !oes indeed to his

province, ut on account of the withdrawal and disorder of the lait", he does not accept it. Dence in the case of those who

resi!n from their province without an" calamitous reason, and !o to other provinces where there is !reater profit and more

mone" to e made, S"nesius as well as Theophilus want no one to admit them to the altar, and not to call them to the

presidenc", ut, when the" enter the church, to i!nore them like so man" cattle occup"in! pulic scats of authorit". That iswh" c. I of St. C"ril sa"s that 4ishop 5eter 1either ou!ht to have the functions of a ishop, or, if he is not worth" to preside

over the sacrificial altar, neither ou!ht he to e honored with the name of ishop.2 4ut what am I sa"in! that those resi!nin!ou!ht not to have the honor and title of ishop h", the" ou!ht even to e excommunicated in case the" fail to accept the

protection of the flock which has een entrusted to them, in accordance with the aove Canons, 0p. c. UUUGI and c. UGII

of 0ntioch, until such time as the" decide to take it in hand. For this reason it is amaBin! that this $rd Ec. C. did not

reprimand the ishops in 5amph"lia for failin! to force Eustathius to accept the Church entrusted to him, ut, instead of

him, ordainin! someone else. It appears, however, from the words of the letter that the ishops in 5amph"lia wran!led a

!ood deal aout the inactivit" of Eustathius, and that the" opposed him and sou!ht to coerce him. For it said, 1there is no

stron! reason to +uarrel with his incapacit".2 Finall", when the" saw that he could not e persuaded, and that the flock of

Christ had een without a protector for a lon! time ;that the time was lon! is evident from the use of the ver 1remain2

contained in the letter


157/216

those sa"in! this were not deniers of the divinit" r, on the other hand, if it were somethin! else than either, how could it

e said that Christ was not ein! reformed of a different nature than the nature of the Father7 and of a different nature than

the nature of human ein!s Than which could there e an"thin! more recusant or more foolish Than their sa"in!, in otherwords, that the od -o!os ecame a human ein! onl" to corrupt Dis own divine nature and assume the human nature

These thin!s are what 5hotius sa"s in opposin! the recusanc" of the =onoph"sites in the case of the Fourth Ec. C.

?%This hol" St. -eo ;whose memor" the Church celerates on Feruar" (?th< sent this letter to St. Flavian of Constantinople

a!ainst the =onoph"sites. The" sa", moreover, that after composin! it he placed it upon the tom of the hol" 0postle St.

5eter, and with fastin! and while keepin! vi!il, and with a pra"er he e!!ed St. 5eter if there were an" mistakes in the letter

to correct it. The 0postle then appeared to him in person and said to him, 1I have corrected it.2 The excerpt from that letter

which treats theolo!icall" of the two natures of Christ and of the one sustance of Christ in a manner at once exact and

sulime, reads as follows, word for word: 1For each form operates with the concurrent communion of the other, which had

the characteristic peculiarit" of the -o!os functionin! to rin! aout that which is of the -o!os, while the od" executes

that which is of the od". 0ccordin!l", the one of them shines throu!h in miracles, whereas the other succumed to ause,

when ill treated and insulted. 0ccordin!l", 9ust as the -o!os is inseparale from the FatherWs !lor", so and in like manner

Dis od" did not let !o and !ive up the nature of our human !enus. For trul" it ma" e said that De is one and the same Sonof od, and one and the same son of man. De is a od in this respect, to wit, that in the e!innin! De was the -o!os, and

the -o!os was with od, and the -o!os was od7 while De is a human ein!, on the other hand, in this respect, to wit, that

the -o!os ecame flesh and dwelt amon! us.2 Dence when this letter was read aloud at the present Council, the Fathers

shouted: 1That is the Faith of the Fathers7 that is the Faith of the 0postles. St. 5eter uttered these thin!s throu!h -eo.2 That

is wh" it also called that letter a pillar of rthodox". Sophronius of 6erusalem also writes aout this letter to the effect that

4ishop Theodore ;whose ishopric was in -i"a


158/216

Fathers, ecause it is in truth a most theolo!icall" perfect work ;#ositheus, p. 'A of the #odecailus


159/216

the =onotheletes. For if, accordin! to them, there was ut one nature in Christ, it followed as a matter of course that this

sin!le nature had ut a sin!le will too. From them arose the 0!noites, whose leader was Themistius. These persons used to

assert that Christ was i!norant of the da" of 9ud!ment ;i.e., that De did not know precisel" when it would e in the future


160/216

therein in the future7 and then the ishop shall make the matter known to all, and !oin! in person to the spot where the

uildin! is to e erected he shall utter a pra"er and plant a cross therein7 and then the uildin! ma" commence. The" sa" in

addition that whoever e!ins to uild these from the start, or to reuild old ones, he as well as his heirs shall e oli!ed "the ishop and the stewards and the executive of the re!ion to finish the uildin! which he commenced and not to leave it

incomplete.

A3So that accordin! to this Canon those called monks must neither e ordained nor en!a!e in an" wa" in doin! parish work

in connection with the churches in the world. For accordin! to the meanin! of their name monks the" are lone men, or

solita3ies;in that the reek word, monac4os, means lone or solitar"


161/216

the 5atriarch of Constantinople he refers the final appeal, and he wants him to e the chief and supreme 9ud!e over all the

5atriarchs. =acarius was followed also " 0lexias in her Distor", and " *icholas the ishop of =ethone in writin! a!ainst

the principle of the 5ope. The 5apists, a!ain, wish to estalish the monarchal status of the 5ope, follow our authorities andconcede that the 4ishop of Constantinople is chief 9ud!e over all, ecause the 4ishop of ome is chief even of the 4ishop of

Constantinople accordin! to the Canons. So the 4ishop, or 5ope, of ome is the ultimate and common 9ud!e over all the

5atriarchs, and ahead of even the 5atriarch of Constantinople in respect of 9udicature7 accordin!l", it is to him that an"

appeal must e taken from the four 5atriarchs of the inhaited earth ;called in reek the 1 oec8mene2


162/216

5atriarch to!ether with the ishops su9ect to him. So the Exarch of a diocese is the =etropolitan of the diocese who has

some privile!e over and aove the other =etropolitans of the same diocese. 4ut this privile!e of Exarchs is not toda" in

effect. For thou!h certain =etropolitans are called Exarchs, "et the other =etropolitans in their dioceses are not su9ect tothem. So it appears, from what the same 4alsamon sa"s, that in those times the Exarchs of dioceses were certain others

;amon! whom, accordin! to >onaras, were those of Caesarea, Cappadocia, Ephesus, Thessalonica, and Corinth< who wore

pol"stauria in their churches. These polysta83iawere in realit" chasules emroidered with man" crosses, as 4alsamon

sa"s, on pa!e ''@ of the 6uris raecoromanus. *evertheless, that privile!e ceased to e exercised either immediatel" or not

lon! after this Fourth Ec. Council was held. That explains wh" 6ustinian fails to mention it in what he sa"s concernin!

disputes etween cler!"men, notwithstandin! that he enumerates the other courts or triunals of cler!"men.So it is evident that the Canon means that if an" ishop or cler!"man has a dispute or difference with the

=etropolitan of an exarch", let him appl" to the Exarch of the diocese7 which is the same thin! as sa"in! that cler!"menand metropolitans su9ect to the throne of Constantinople must have their case tried either efore the Exarch of the diocese

in which the" are situated, or efore the 4ishop of Constantinople, as efore a 5atriarch of their own. It did not sa" that if

an" cler!"man has a dispute or difference with the =etropolitan of some other diocese, or if a =etropolitan has a dispute or

difference with the =etropolitan of an" diocese or parish whatever, the" must e tried efore the 4ishop of Constantinople.

*or did it sa", -et him appl" first to the Exarch of the diocese, or to the 4ishop of Constantinople, as 5ope *icholas aove

!arles and misexplains the Canon7 ut, on the contrar", it left it to the choice of the ones to e 9ud!ed to determine with

e+ual ri!hts whether the" should !o to the Exarch of the diocese or to the 4ishop of Constantinople and e tried in precisel"

the same manner and e+uall" well either efore the one or efore the other. That is wh" >onaras too sa"s that the 4ishop of

Constantinople is not necessaril" entitled to sit as 9ud!e over all =etropolitans, ut ;onl"< over those who are 9udiciall"

su9ect to him ;interpretation of c. UGII of the present 'th C.< 0nd in his interpretation of c.G of Sardica the same authorit"

sa"s: 1The 4ishop of Constantinople must hear the appeals onl" of those who are su9ect to the 4ishop of Constantinople,precisel" as the 4ishop of ome must hear the appeals onl" of those who are su9ect to the 4ishop of ome.2 *ow,

however, that the S"nod and the Exarch of the diocese are no lon!er active or in effect, the 4ishop of Constantinople is the

first and sole and ultimate 9ud!e of the =etropolitans under him, ut not of those under an" of the rest of the 5atriarchs. For

it is onl" an ecumenical council that is the ultimate and most common 9ud!e of all 5atriarchs, as we have said, and there is

none othe. See also the Footnote to c. GI of the %nd Ec. C., which spoke aout the matter of diocese at !reater len!th.

In view of the fact that, as we have stated, these Exarchs mentioned " the Canon were lon! a!o displumed, those

who are now called Exarchs, as representatives sent aroad " the Church, are mere names for ecclesiastical services.

AI happened to discover in one place that the letters !iven to the indi!ent were of such a character and superscried in such

words as follows: The earth is full of the -ordWs merc". 0s for how these letters are worded at present, see at the end of thisDandook SoBomen ;4ook &, ch. (< calls these letters 1passwords2 of episcopal letters. The Theolo!ian, on the other hand,

in writin! a!ainst 6ulian, calls them 1epistolar" passwords,2 sa"in!: 1ith epistolar" passwords with which we are wont to

e+uip those needin! them in !oin! from one nation to another.2

A@Somethin! of this kind is narrated " St. re!or" the Theolo!ian in his epitaph to St. 4asil as havin! taken place in the

metropolis of Cappadocia when the ishopric of T"ana was honored " ein! converted into a new =etropolis.

A? In this manner after Chalcedon was honored " ein! converted into a =etropolis " =arcianus, and *icaea "

Galentinian, it was decreed that the ri!hts and di!nities elon!in! to the old cities which were reall" and trul" metropolis

should e preserved to them, as appears from what is said in 0ct ' of the present Council. n this account, in spite of the

fact oth 4"Bantium and 0elia were also honored " ein! converted into 5atriarchates, "et as respectin! 0elia c. GII of the

First specifies that to its metropolis Caesarea there shall e preserved the di!nit" ri!htfull" elon!in! to it, as we have

stated. 0s respectin! 4"Bantium, 4alsamon and *icephorus re!oras assert that in their times the 4ishop of Constantinople

was ordained 5atriarch " the 4ishop of Deracleia. 4ut now he onl" receives his croBier from him, ecause efore he

ecame a 5atriarch 4"Bantium used to e the episcopate of the 4ishop of Deracleia.

AA5hotius, too, in Title UII and Title UIII, sa"s that since ordinance ne of 4ook UUIII of Title II la"s down the principle

that marria!e is a consociation of a man and a woman and a coreception of all life, and a communion in a divine and

human ri!ht7 those consociated ou!ht, accordin! to this definition, to e of the same reli!ion. The first ook of the Code, in

Title G, ordinance twelve, sa"s that in case there is a dispute etween the parents ;when, that is to sa", the" are of the same

reli!ion, ut one of them has come to e rthodox in elief, or in some other wa" the" have come to e consociated in astate of uniikeness of reli!ion


163/216

under!o the punishment of adulterers. 0s for an rthodox person, on the other hand, who has taken a heretodox and heretic,

he is not allowed to commune in the divine m"steries unless he first !et divorced and do his penance, accordin! to what

4alsamon sa"s in his Thirt"third epl". S"meon of Thessalonica ;in epl" '@ sa"s the same thin!, addin! that he ma"partake onl" at the end of his life when he is ein! !iven the last rites of unction ;provided he repents, that is to sa"


164/216

(3$In his Collection of Canons, Title ?%, 6ohn of 0ntioch sa"s 1Fellow =onastics,2 instead of 1Fellow Cler!"men.2

(3'0s this is historicall" stated " Gulpian.

(3&5hotius, in Title IU, ch. $@, sa"s that the civil law punishes conspiracies and factions. 4ook -U of the 4asilica, Title

UUUGI, states that an"one that enters into a conspirac" a!ainst the state is !uilt" of the crime of hi!h treason ;or what is

called in reek cat4osiosis, i.e., a violation of the hol" immunit" of the soverei!nonaras and 4lastaris ;line &< take the word 1receivers2 to mean those who take the effects of the ishop in order to provide

for their safe keepin!, and who, if the" purloin an"thin! therefrom, are deposed from office in like manner as are those who

seiBe them.

(3@4ook UI of the 4asilican rdinances, in Title GIII, rdinance &( ;in 5hotius, Title II, ch. (< asserts that sacred thin!s

have a divine ri!ht and are not actuall" owned " an"one. 0 sacred thin! is an"thin! that has een pulicl" consecrated.

0nd a!ain, in rdinance (3, Title I, it is stated that a sacred thin! is that which has een ri!htl" and throu!h a priest

consecrated to od, as, temples and vessels. That which, on the other hand, one makes sacred " his own authorit" andaritrar" will is not reall" sacred. Even if the ;uildin! called the< temple of such a sacred temple or sacred o9ect shouldfall to the !round, the place itself remains sacred and no one, accordin! to 0rmenopoulos ;4ook Title UI


165/216

uildin!,2 as distin!uished from the church, or institution, itself7 thou!h in common parlance no such distinction is usuall"

made


166/216

cares.2 '< The 4ishop of Constantinople ou!ht to have received the privile!es of authorit" over the aovementioned three

dioceses ecause, as appears from 0ct ($ of the Fourth Ec. C., man" scandals arose in Ephesus on account of the ille!al

ordinations of Stephanus and 4asianus, as well as in 0sia and 5ontus and Thrace similar scandals ensued, where, upon thedeath of ishops, man" disturances followed in the wake of the votes and on the heels of the ordinations, owin! to the fact

that the" were without a !overnin! head, accordin! to the letter of the same Fourth Council addressed to -eo. 0nd etween

Eunomius the 4ishop of *icomedia, and 0nastasius the 4ishop of *icaea, a !reat man" nois" rawls occurred in re!ard to

the ishopric of 4asilinoupolis. &< 0nd finall", ecause un!odl" #ioscorus at the -atrocinium, or oer S"nod, held in

Ephesus, placed the 4ishop of Constantinople Flavian, not first, ut fifth in order, contrar" to the Canons, which even -eo

the reat, who was the 5ope of ome, and his le!ates resented, in this Fourth Council, wherefore the" reproached#ioscorus.

For all these reasons, then, the Council, renewin! c. III of the %nd " means of the present Canon, conferred uponthe 4ishop of Constantinople the same and e+ual privile!es of honor that had previousl" een estowed upon the 4ishop of

ome, namel", the 5atriarchal di!nit" and office, and also the same and e+ual privile!es of authorit" that had previousl"

een estowed upon the 4ishop of ome, namel", the ri!ht of ordination in the three said dioceses of the =etropolitans, not

onl" as a matter of custom, ut also as one estalished " means of a Canon, on the !round that the" are included in the

territorial 9urisdiction of Constantinople. For precisel" as the 4ishop of ome has the priorities of honor and of authorit",

which amounts to sa"in! the 5atriarchal di!nit" and office, comprisin! the ri!ht of rulin! his own parish in the est, so and

in like manner the 4ishop of Constantinople has the same priorities ) that is to sa", the 5atriarchal di!nit" and office and

the ri!ht to rule the aovementioned =etropolitans who are comprised in his own parish. 0ccordin!l", these are the

ecclesiastical affairs mentioned here in the Canon, wherein the 4ishop of Constantinople is ma!nified 9ust as is the 4ishop

of ome, without an" difference save this, that the 4ishop of ome is first in point of order, while the 4ishop of

Constantinople is second in point of order. These privile!es of the 4ishop of Constantinople were confirmed and ratified notonl" " the Fathers of this Council, ut also " the entire Senate of civil rulers, notwithstandin! that the le!ates of the 5ope,

thou!h the" had previousl" reproached #ioscorus, "et perceivin! that the ounds of Constantinople were ein! widened,

nearl" fainted in their desperate attempt to oppose them. Dence the 5opeworshipers are manifestl" l"in! when the" sa" that

the primac" and priorit" of ome, and its ri!ht to e ma!nified in ecclesiastical affairs, lend the 5ope a special privile!e of

authorit" in the Church as a whole, which amounts to sa"in!, in other words, a monarchal and inerrale di!nit". For if these

facts indicated an" such thin!, the 4ishop of Constantinople too would have to possess the same di!nit", since the 4ishop of

Constantinople, accordin! to the Canons, is a measure and standard of exactl" the same and e+ual value respectin! honor ofauthorit" and respectin! !randeur as is the 4ishop of ome. 4ut, as a matter of fact, that was never estowed upon the

4ishop of Constantinople " the Canons, nor, it ma" hence e inferred, upon the 4ishop of ome. 4ut neither are the

priorities of ome those which were conferred " the le!endar" edict of Constantine the reat upon Silvester, the 5ope of

ome, as the" alle!e ) which is to sa", more plainl" speakin!, the privile!e of walkin! aout with the decorations of

imperial ma9est" in imitation of an emperor7 the ri!ht to wear upon his head a rilliant riand in place of a wreath or

!arland7 the ri!ht to wear an imperial pallium ;or omop4o3ion< and a purple roe and a scarlet tunic7 the ri!ht to have hishorse caparisoned in imperial st"le, with all the imperial insi!nia and emlems, and to hold the ridle of his horse like a

strator, after the manner of an emperor7 and the privile!e of concedin! to the cler!" of his Church, as well as to the Senatethereof, the ri!ht to ma!nif" themselves and to put on airs of !randeur oth in the matter of wearin! apparel and in the

matter of footwear as well as in the matter of cavaliership. These external manifestations of splendor and luster, I sa", are

not the priorities and di!nities conferred upon the 4ishop of ome " the Canons. 4" no means. Firstl", ecause if the"

were, the" would have had to e conferred similarl" and e+uall" upon the 4ishop of Constantinople also7 and secondl",

ecause, accordin! to c. UGI of the @th Ec. C. and c. UUGII of the th, splendid and lustrous clothes, and ever" other

stultification and adornment of the human od" are alien to and inconsistent with cler!"men and the priestl" order, and

ecause the smokelike puffiness ;or pretentiousness< of mundane authorit" must e taoo to priests of od, accordin! to the

letter of the Council of Cartha!e to 5ope Celestinus. 0p. c. -UUUIII, too, deposes those who wish to exercise oth oman

imperiousness and sacerdotal !overnment. The -ord, too, in the ospels, commands us to eware of those who wish to

walk aout in costumes. n this account, a!ain, the vain and le!endar" edict is 9ud!ed to e spurious and fictitious. 4uteven if we assume, for the sake of ar!ument, that it is true, "et, in view of the fact that it is oviousl" opposed to the sacred

Canons, it is invalid and void and no lon!er in force. For when at an" time or place current forms conflict with the Canons,

the" are invalid and void, as we stated in the e!innin! of this =anual. The priorit" and primac" of omeWs 4ishop,

therefore, consists, as we have said, in his havin! authorit" over all the ishops and metropolitans included in the see, or

diocese, of ome, so that he, to!ether with the other ishops of the see, has the ri!ht to ordain them, and in his ein!

entitled to come first in order amon! the 5atriarchs, the other 5atriarchs comin! second, third, etc. De received these

privile!es, not ecause ome was the seat of St. 5eter, not ecause the 4ishop of ome is the vicar of Christ, as the oman

Catholics vainl" insist ) " no means, ut primaril" ecause ome was honored as the capital of an empire. For, sa"s thepresent Canon, 1the Fathers naturall" enou!h !ranted the priorities to the throne of ld ome on account of her ein! the

imperial capital27 conse+uentl", ecause of the ancient custom which it followed, exactl" as ome was a capital cit", it

ecomes proper to concede the first place to her 4ishop and to re!ard him as the first, or most notale, ishop ) or, as we


167/216

sa" in En!lish, the primate ) and, " further conse+uence of this fact, ecause 9ust in the same wa" that the same privile!e

was estowed upon the 4ishop of Constantinople too owin! to ConstantinopleWs ein! ;at that time< an imperial capital, and

*ew ome, the Canons conferred such a privile!e upon the 4ishop of ome for the same identical reason. Thus, too,ecause it was an imperial capital, it ecame an ancient custom for the 4ishop of Constantinople to ordain the ishops in

0sia, 5ontus, and Thrace7 and ecause it ecame a custom, the Canons were adopted and the ancient custom was ratified.

*ote that in addition to the e+ual privile!es with the 4ishop of ome which the 4ishop of Constantinople received, he

further received also these two titles, namel", the appellation of 10llholiest2 and of 1Ecumenical,2 " wa" of

differentiation from the other 5atriarchs. The appellation of 10llholiest2 was first accorded to the 4ishops of

Constantinople Ser!ius and 5eter " =acarius of 0ntioch at the Sixth Ec. C. in the seventh centur" 0.C.7 while that of1Ecumenical2 was estowed " the cler!"men of 0ntioch and the rthodox Christians in 4"Bantium upon the 4ishop of

Constantinople named 6ohn the Cappadocian in the rei!n of 6ustin the Thracian durin! the sixth centur". I said that the4ishop of Constantinople was !iven the appellation " wa" of differentiation, ecause, althou!h the 4ishop of ome was

!iven " man" the appellation of 10llholiest,2 and so were the 4ishops of 0lexandria, of 0ntioch, and of 6erusalem, and,

in fact, all 5atriarchs in common were called 10llDoliest2 " various persons and at various times, "et, in spite of this,

usa!e won out ultimatel" in the custom of accordin! this appellation exceptionall" and exclusivel" to the 4ishop of

Constantinople. -ikewise the appellation of 1Ecumenical2 was also used " some in reference to tne 4ishop of ome,

thou!h ver" seldom7 whereas from the time that the 4ishop of Constantinople e!an ein! called Ecumenical 5atriarch he

never ceased ein! called such. Dence in times suse+uent to the Cappadocian the 4ishops of Constantinople Epiphanius,

and 0nthimus, and =enas, and Eut"chius were called Ecumenical 5atriarchs " 6ustinian in his *ovels and Edicts,

insomuch that at the Seventh Ecum. Council 5eter the le!ate of the 5ope called Tarasius the Ecumenical 5atriarch. That is

wh" divine 6ohn the Faster in the rei!n of =uricius, followin! the practice of continuin! the use of such a title which had

een initiated " others in deference to the 4ishop of Constantinople, ecame the first to suscrie himself as Ecumenical.0s for the title of 10llholiest,2 this denotes ;speakin! of the correspondin! reek word 1,anagiotatos2< 1in all respects

most hol"2: in the same vein, that is to sa", as Tarasius and 5hotius wrote to 5opes 0drian and *icholas 1To in all respects

most hol" rother and fellow minister 0drian ;or *icholasenon


168/216

((&*ote that these two Canons, the Twent"ninth and the Thirtieth, were issued " this Council onl" as evul!ations written

into its 0ct '7 ut later either interpreters of the Canons or someone else efore the times of these interpreters recapitulated

or summariBed these evul!ations and interlocutions and made them into Canons and #efinitions. Dence, seein! in the

present Thirtieth Canon that 5aschasinus, the le!ate of the 5ope, which is as much as to sa" the entire Council speakin!

throu!h him, consented to let the ten ishops of the E!"ptians merel" !ive others as sureties for themselves to serve as a

pled!e that the" would not leave the cit" of Constantinople without first suscriin! to the letter, while, on the other hand,the secular rulers of the Emperor, actuated " the civil law, added the recommendation that if the" could not furnish sureties

the" mi!ht take an oath that the" would not leave the cit": ) seein!, I sa", these thin!s, we included in the Canon the

securities which the sacred Council demanded throu!h 5aschasinus, while, on the other hand, we left out the oath on the

!round that it was not demanded " the Council, ut " the imperial rulers, and was merel" a re+uirement of the civil law,

and not of the divine Canons ;for nowhere do the divine Canons re+uire an"one to take an oath, either to od or to the

Emperor, as such a re+uirement would e contrar" to the hol" ospelseno.

(%3The -atins move heaven and earth, as the sa"in! !oes, in endeavorin! to estalish the innocence of their !reat pontifex,

the 5ope of ome named Donorius. 4ein! unale to rook ein! told that the one whom the" profess to have een inerrale

was an un!odl" heretic and that he was anathematiBed " an Ecumenical Council, at times the audacious and impudentfellows dare to assert that this Ecumenical Council itself erred ecause it failed to investi!ate the char!es a!ainst him

properl", ut condemned him without due investi!ation7 while at other times the" alle!e that Donorius elieved that there

was a sin!le will onl" in connection with the humanit" of Christ, since all the powers of the soul were su9ect to the

dominant mind of Christ, and there was not in Dis humanit" a different elief of the flesh and a different elief of the Spirit

;divided, that is to sa", 9ust as it is in other men


169/216

thousands of -atins, and its vote and decision, ein! inerrale is to e preferred to all the inventions hatched " the -atins,

which are precarious and erroneous. 4ut what am I sa"in! 1a sin!le2 for Even two or three Councils, and not a sin!le one

onl"7 and two or three 5opes, too, I mi!ht sa". For not onl" the Sixth, ut also the Seventh Ecumenical Council ;0ct

Councils Ecumenical Rudder

Documents