Nicaea II (787): the canons (1 of 2)

Canon I.

That the sacred Canons are in all things to be observed.

The pattern for those who have received the sacerdotal dignity is found in the testimonies and instructions laid down in the canonical constitutions, which we receiving with a glad mind, sing unto the Lord God in the words of the God-inspired David, saying:  “I have had as great delight in the way of thy testimonies as in all manner of riches.”  “Thou hast commanded righteousness as thy testimonies for ever.”  “Grant me understanding and I shall live.”  Now if the word of prophesy bids us keep the testimonies of God forever and to live by them, it is evident that they must abide unshaken and without change.  Therefore Moses, the prophet of God, speaketh after this manner:  “To them nothing is to be added, and from them nothing is to be taken away.”  And the divine Apostle glorying in them cries out, “which things the angels desire to look into,” and, “if an angel preach to you anything besides that which ye have received, let him be anathema.”  Seeing these things are so, being thus well-testified unto us, we rejoice over them as he that hath found great spoil, and press to our bosom with gladness the divine canons, holding fast all the precepts of the same, complete and without change, whether they have been set forth by the holy trumpets of the Spirit, the renowned Apostles, or by the Six Ecumenical Councils, or by Councils locally assembled for promulgating the decrees of the said Ecumenical Councils, or by our holy Fathers.  For all these, being illumined by the same Spirit, defined such things as were expedient.  Accordingly those whom they placed under anathema, we likewise anathematize; those whom they deposed, we also depose; those whom they excommunicated, we also excommunicate; and those whom they delivered over to punishment, we subject to the same penalty.  And now “let your conversation be without covetousness,” crieth out Paul the divine Apostle, who was caught up into the third heaven and heard unspeakable words.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon I.

We gladly embrace the Divine Canons, viz.:  those of the Holy Apostles, of the Six Ecumenical Synods, as also of the local synods and of our Holy Fathers, as inspired by one and the same Holy Spirit.  Whom they anathematize we also anathematize; whom they depose, we depose; whom they cut off, we cut off; and whom they subject to penalties, we also so subject.

Harnack.

(Hist. of Dogma [Eng. Trans.], Vol. V., p. 327).

Just as at Trent, in addition to the restoration of mediæval doctrine, a series of reforming decrees was published, so this Synod promulgated twenty-two canons which can be similarly described.  The attack on monachism and the constitution of the Church had been of some use.  They are the best canons drawn up by an Ecumenical Synod.  The bishops were enjoined to study, to live simply, and be unselfish, and to attend to the cure of souls; the monks to observe order, decorum, and also to be unselfish.  With the State and the Emperor no compromise was made; on the contrary, the demands of Maximus Confessor and John of Damascus are heard, though in muffled tones, from the canons.

Van Espen.

From the wording of this canon it is clearly seen that by the Fathers of this Council the canons commonly called “Apostolical” are attributed to the Apostles themselves as to their true authors, conformably to the Trullan Synod and to the opinion then prevalent among the Greeks.

For since the Fathers were well persuaded that the discipline and doctrine contained in these canons could be received and confirmed, they cared but little to enquire anxiously who were their true authors, being content in this question to follow and embrace the then commonly received opinion, and to ascribe these canons to them, just as, the other day, the Tridentine Synod (Sess. XXV., cap. j., De Reform) calls these, without any explanation, the “Canons of the Apostles,” because then as now they were commonly called by that name.

Beveridge.

(Annotat., p. 166, at end of Vol. II.).

Here are recognized and confirmed the canons set forth by the Six Ecumenical Councils.  And although all agree that the fifth and sixth Synods adopted no canons, unless that those of the Council in Trullo be attributed to them, yet when Tarasius the Patriarch of Constantinople claimed Canon 82 of the Trullan Canons as having been set forth by the sixth synod (as is evident from the annotations on that canon), all the canons of Trullo seem to be confirmed as having issued from the Sixth Synod.  Or else, perchance, as is supposed by Balsamon and Zonaras, as also by this present synod, the Trullan was held to be Quinisext (πενθέκτη), and the canons decreed by it to belong to both the fifth and the sixth council.  Otherwise I do not see what meaning these words [“of the Six Ecumenical Synods”] can have, for it will be remembered that the reference is to the ecclesiastical canons of the Six Ecumenical Synods, and not to their dogmatic decrees.

Canon II

That he who is to be ordained a Bishop must be steadfastly resolved to observe the canons, otherwise he shall not be ordained.

When we recite the psalter, we promise God:  “I will meditate upon thy statutes, and will not forget thy words.”  It is a salutary thing for all Christians to observe this, but it is especially incumbent upon those who have received the sacerdotal dignity.  Therefore we decree, that every one who is raised to the rank of the episcopate shall know the psalter by heart, so that from it he may admonish and instruct all the clergy who are subject to him.  And diligent examination shall be made by the metropolitan whether he be zealously inclined to read diligently, and not merely now and then, the sacred canons, the holy Gospel, and the book of the divine Apostle, and all other divine Scripture; and whether he lives according to God’s commandments, and also teaches the same to his people.  For the special treasure (οὐσία) of our high priesthood is the oracles which have been divinely delivered to us, that is the true science of the Divine Scriptures, as says Dionysius the Great.  And if his mind be not set, and even glad, so to do and teach, let him not be ordained.  For says God by the prophet, “Thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me.”

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon II.

Whoever is to be a bishop must know the Psalter by heart:  he must thoroughly understand what he reads, and not merely superficially, but with diligent care, that is to say the Sacred Canons, the Holy Gospel, the book of the Apostle, and the whole of the Divine Scripture.  And should he not have such knowledge, he is not to be ordained.

Aristenus.

Whoso is to be elevated to the grade of the episcopate should know…the book of the Apostle Paul, and the whole divine scripture and search out its meaning and understand the things that are written.  For the very foundation and essence of the high priesthood is the true knowledge of holy Scripture, according to Dionysius the Great.  And if he has this knowledge let him be ordained, but if not, not.  For God hath said by the prophet:  “Thou hast put away from thee knowledge, therefore I have also put thee away from me, that thou mayest not be my priest.”

Fleury.

The persecution of the Iconoclasts had driven all the best Christians into hiding, or into far distant exile; this had made them rustic, and had taken from them their taste for study.  The council therefore is forced to be content with a knowledge of only what is absolutely necessary, provided it was united with a willingness to learn.  The examination with which the ceremony of the ordination of bishops begins seems to be a remains of this discipline.

Van Espen.

The Synod teaches in this canon that “all Christians” will find it most profitable to meditate upon God’s justifyings and to keep his words in remembrance, and especially is this the case with bishops.

And it should be noted that formerly not only the clergy, but also the lay people, learned the Psalms, that is the whole Psalter, by heart, and made a most sweet sound by chanting them while about their work.

But as time went on, little by little this pious custom of reciting the Psalter and of imposing its recitation and a meditation thereon at certain intervals, slipped away to the clergy only and to monks and nuns, as to those specially consecrated to the service of God and to meditation upon the divine words, as Lupus points out.  And from this discipline and practice the appointment of the Ecclesiastical or Canonical Office had its rise, which imposes the necessity of reciting the Psalms at certain intervals of time.

This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars I., Dist. xxxviij., C. vj., in Anastasius’s translation.

Canon III

That it does not pertain to princes to choose a Bishop.

Let every election of a bishop, presbyter, or deacon, made by princes stand null, according to the canon which says:  If any bishop making use of the secular powers shall by their means obtain jurisdiction over any church, he shall be deposed, and also excommunicated, together with all who remain in communion with him.  For he who is raised to the episcopate must be chosen by bishops, as was decreed by the holy fathers of Nice in the canon which says:  It is most fitting that a bishop be ordained by all the bishops in the province; but if this is difficult to arrange, either on account of urgent necessity, or because of the length of the journey, three bishops at least having met together and given their votes, those also who are absent having signified their assent by letters, the ordination shall take place.  The confirmation of what is thus done, shall in each province be given by the metropolitan thereof.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon III.

Every election made by a secular magistrate is null.

This is a canon of a synod recognized by East and West as ecumenical!  The reader can hardly resist the reflection that in this case there have been and are a great many intruding clergymen in the world, whose appointment to their several offices is “null.”  Van Espen, however, suggests an ingenious way out of the difficulty, which is followed with great approval by Hefele.

Van Espen.

Canon xxix. of those commonly called Apostolic, and canon iv. of Nice are renewed in this canon.

From the words of this canon it is sufficiently clear that in this canon the synod is treating of the choice and intrusion of persons into ecclesiastical offices which the magistrates and Princes had arrogated to themselves under the title of Domination (Dominatio); and by no means of that choice or rather nomination which Catholic princes and kings have everywhere and always used.

This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars I., Dist. xciii., C. vij.

Canon IV

That Bishops are to abstain from all receiving of gifts.

The Church’s herald, Paul the divine Apostle, laying down a rule (κανόνα) not only for the presbyters of Ephesus but for the whole company of the priesthood, speaks thus explicitly, saying, “I have coveted no man’s silver or gold, or apparel.  I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak;” for he accounted it more blessed to give.  Therefore we being taught by him do decree, that under no circumstances, shall a Bishop for the sake of filthy lucre invent feigned excuses for sins, and exact gold or silver or other gifts from the bishops, clergy, or monks who are subject to him.  For says the Apostle, “The unrighteous shall not possess the kingdom of God,” and, “The children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children.”  If then any is found, who for the sake of exacting gold or any other gift, or who from personal feeling, has suspended from the ministry, or even excommunicated, any of the clergy subject to his jurisdiction, or who has closed any of the venerable temples, so that the service of God may not be celebrated in it, pouring out his madness even upon things insensible, and thus shewing himself to be without understanding, he shall be subjected to the same punishment he devised for others, and his trouble shall return on his own head, as a transgressor of God’s commandment and of the apostolic precepts.  For Peter the supreme head (ἡ κερυφαία ἀκρότης) of the Apostles commands, “Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre but of a ready mind; neither as being lords over the clergy (τῶν κλήρων [A.V. God’s heritage]); but being ensamples to the flock.  And when the chief shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.”

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon IV.

We decree that no bishop shall extort gold or silver, or anything else from bishops, clerics, or monks subject to his jurisdiction.  And if anyone through the power of gold or of any other thing or through his own whims, shall be found to have prevented any one of the clergy who are subject to him, from the celebration of the holy offices, or shall have shut up a venerable temple so that the sacred worship of God could not be performed in it, he shall be subject to the lex talionis.  For Peter the Apostle says:  Feed the flock of God, not of necessity but willingly, and according to God; not for filthy lucre’s sake, but with a prompt mind; not exercising lordship over the clergy, but being an example to the flock.

Balsamon.

Note the present canon, which punishes those bishops by the lex talionis, who for filthy lucre’s sake, or out of private affection, separate any from themselves, or close temples.  Wherefore he who cuts off others thus, let him be cut off.  But he who shuts off a temple shall be punished even more than by cutting off.  But lest any one should say, by the argument á contrario, that a bishop should not be punished who neither for the sake of filthy lucre nor out of private spite, but lawfully cuts some off, or closes temples, I answer that this argument only holds good of the cutting off.  For a bishop who for any reason, whether just or unjust, shuts up a temple, should be punished, so it seems to me, as I have said above.

Van Espen.

It would seem that at that time among the Greeks the use of local interdict (interdicti localis) was not known.  But very many theologians wish to find a vestige of this interdict in the IV century, in St. Basil’s epistle cclxx. (otherwise ccxliv.), where the holy doctor teaches that the person who carries off by force a virgin, and those who are cognizant of this wickedness ought to be smitten with excommunication, and that the village or its inhabitants, to which the ravisher shall escape and where he shall be kept in safety, shall be shut out from the prayers.

This canon, or rather the first part of it, is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars II., Causa XVI., Q. I., Canon lxiv.; all the latter part is represented by the words “et infra.”

Canon V

That they who cast contumely upon clerics because they have been ordained in the church without bringing a gift with them, are to be published with a fine.

It is a sin unto death when men incorrigibly continue in their sin, but they sin more deeply, who proudly lifting themselves up oppose piety and sincerity, accounting mammon of more worth than obedience to God, and caring nothing for his canonical precepts.  The Lord God is not found among such, unless, perchance, having been humbled by their own fall, they return to a sober mind.  It behoves them the rather to turn to God with a contrite heart and to pray for forgiveness and pardon of so grave a sin, and no longer to boast in an unholy gift.  For the Lord is nigh unto them that are of a contrite heart.  With regard, therefore, to those who pride themselves that because of their benefactions of gold they were ordained in the Church, and resting confidently in this evil custom (so alien from God and inconsistent with the whole priesthood), with a proud look and open mouth vilify with abusive words those who on account of the strictness of their life were chosen by the Holy Ghost and have been ordained without any gift of money, we decree in the first place that they take the lowest place in their order; but if they do not amend let them be subjected to a fine.  But if it appear that any one has done this [i.e., given money], at any time as a price for ordination, let him be dealt with according to the Apostolic Canon which says:  “If a bishop has obtained possession of his dignity by means of money (the same rule applies also to a presbyter or deacon) let him be deposed and also the one who ordained him, and let him also be altogether cut off from communion, even as Simon Magus was by me Peter.”  To the same effect is the second canon of our holy fathers of Chalcedon, which says:  If any bishop gives ordination in return for money, and puts up for sale that which cannot be sold, and ordains for money a bishop or chorepiscopus, or presbyter, or deacon, or any other of those who are reckoned among the clergy; or who for money shall appoint anyone to the office of œconomus, advocate, or paramonarius; or, in a word, who hath done anything else contrary to the canon, for the sake of filthy lucre—he who hath undertaken to do anything of this sort, having been convicted, shall be in danger of losing his degree.  And he who has been ordained shall derive no advantage from the ordination or promotion thus negotiated; but let him remain a stranger to the dignity and responsibility which he attained by means of money.  And if any one shall appear to have acted as a go-between in so shameful and godless a traffic, he also, if he be a cleric, shall be removed from his degree; if he be a layman or a monk, let him be excommunicated.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon V.

It seems that such as glory in the fact that they owe their position to their liberality in gold to the Church, and who contemn those who were chosen because of their virtue and were appointed without any largess, should receive the lowest place in their order.  And should they continue in their ways, let them be punished.  But those who made such gifts so as to get ordinations, let such be cast forth from communion, as Simon Magus was by Peter.

Hefele.

Zonaras and Balsamon in earlier times, and later Christian Lupus and Van Espen, remarked that the second part of this canon treats of simony, but not the first.  This has in view rather those who, on account of their large expenditure on churches and the poor, have been raised, without simony, to the clerical estate as a reward and recognition of their beneficence; and being proud of this, now depreciate other clergymen who were unable or unwilling to make such foundations and the like.

Canon VI

Concerning the holding of a local Synod at the time appointed.

Since there is a canon which says, twice a year in each province, the canonical enquiries shall be made in the gatherings of the bishops; but because of the inconveniences which those who thus came together had to undergo in travelling, the holy fathers of the Sixth Council decreed that once each year, without regard to place or excuse which might be urged, a council should be held and the things which are amiss corrected.  This canon we now renew.  And if any prince be found hindering this being carried out, let him be excommunicated.  But if any of the metropolitans shall take no care that this be done, he being free from constraint or fear or other reasonable excuse, let him be subjected to the canonical penalties.  While the council is engaged in considering the canons or matters which have regard to the Gospel, it behoves the assembled Bishops, with all attention and grave thought to guard the divine and life-giving commandments of God, for in keeping of them there is great reward; because our lamp is the commandment, and our light is the law, and trial and discipline are the way of life, and the commandment of the Lord shining afar giveth light to the eyes.  It is not permitted to a metropolitan to demand any of those things which the bishops bring with them, whether it be a horse or any other gift.  If he be convicted of doing anything of this sort, he shall restore fourfold.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon VI.

Whenever it is not possible for a synod to meet according to the decree formulated long ago, twice in each year, at least let it be held once, as seemed good to the Sixth Synod.  Should any magistrate forbid such meeting, let him be cast out:  and a bishop who shall take no pains to assemble it, shall be subject to punishment.  And when the synod is held, should it appear that the Metropolitan has taken anything away from any bishop, let him restore four-fold.

Hefele.

Anastasius remarks on this, that this ordinance (whether the whole canon or only its last passage must remain undecided) was not accepted by the Latins.  That this canon did not forbid the so-called Synodicum, which the metropolitans had lawfully to receive from the bishops, and the bishops from the priests, is remarked by Van Espen, l. c. p. 464.

Compare with this (as Balsamon advises) the eighth canon of the Council in Trullo.

This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars I., Dist. XVIII., C. vij.

Canon VII

That to churches consecrated without any deposit of the reliques of the Saints, the defect should be made good.

Paul the divine Apostle says:  “The sins of some are open beforehand, and some they follow after.”  These are their primary sins, and other sins follow these.  Accordingly upon the heels of the heresy of the traducers of the Christians, there followed close other ungodliness.  For as they took out of the churches the presence of the venerable images, so likewise they cast aside other customs which we must now revive and maintain in accordance with the written and unwritten law.  We decree therefore that relics shall be placed with the accustomed service in as many of the sacred temples as have been consecrated without the relics of the Martyrs.  And if any bishop from this time forward is found consecrating a temple without holy relics, he shall be deposed, as a transgressor of the ecclesiastical traditions.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon VII.

Let reliques of the Holy Martyrs be placed in such churches as have been consecrated without them, and this with the accustomed prayers.  But whoever shall consecrate a church without these shall be deposed as a transgressor of the traditions of the Church.

Balsamon.

But someone may be surprised that oratories to-day are consecrated without any deposition of reliques.  And they may ask why the Divine Liturgy is not celebrated in them by bishops and not by priests only.  The answer is that the superaltars (ἀντιμένσια) which are made by the bishops when a church is consecrated, suffice oratories in lieu of consecration or enthronement when they are sent to them, on the occasion of their dedication or opening.  They are called ἀντιμένσια because they are in place of, and are antitypes of those many like tables which furnish thoroughly the holy Lord’s table.

On the rite of consecrating churches with reliques see Cardinal Bona.  (De Rebus Lit., Lib. I., cap. xix.)

The Antimensia are consecrated at the same time as the church; a full account of the ceremony is found in the Euchologion (Goar’s ed., p. 648).  A piece of cloth is placed on the altar and blessed, and then subsequently, as need requires, pieces are cut off from it and sent to the various oratories, etc.  The main outline of the ceremony of consecration is as follows.

J. M. Neale.

(Int. Hist. East. Ch., p. 187. )

Relics being pounded up with fragrant gum, oil is poured over them by the bishop, and, distilling out to the corporals, is supposed to convey to them the mysterious virtues of the relics themselves.  The holy Eucharist must then be celebrated on them for seven days, after which they are sent forth as they are wanted.

Canon VIII

That Hebrews ought not to be received unless they have been converted in sincerity of heart.

Since certain, erring in the superstitions of the Hebrews, have thought to mock at Christ our God, and feigning to be converted to the religion of Christ do deny him, and in private and secretly keep the Sabbath and observe other Jewish customs, we decree that such persons be not received to communion, nor to prayers, nor into the Church; but let them be openly Hebrews according to their religion, and let them not bring their children to baptism, nor purchase or possess a slave.  But if any of them, out of a sincere heart and in faith, is converted and makes profession with his whole heart, setting at naught their customs and observances, and so that others may be convinced and converted, such an one is to be received and baptized, and his children likewise; and let them be taught to take care to hold aloof from the ordinances of the Hebrews.  But if they will not do this, let them in no wise be received.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon VIII.

Hebrews must not be received unless they are manifestly converted with sincerity of heart.

Hefele.

The Greek commentators Balsamon and Zonaras understood the words “nor to baptize their children” to mean, “these seeming Christians may not ‘baptize their own children,’” because they only seem to be Christians.  But parents were never allowed to baptize their own children, and the true sense of the words in question comes out clearly from the second half of the canon.

Canon IX

That none of the books containing the heresy of the traducers of the Christians are to be hid.

All the childish devices and mad ravings which have been falsely written against the venerable images, must be delivered up to the Episcopium of Constantinople, that they may be locked away with other heretical books.  And if anyone is found hiding such books, if he be a bishop or presbyter or deacon, let him be deposed; but if he be a monk or layman, let him be anathema.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon IX.

If any one is found to have concealed a book written against the venerable images, if he is on the clergy list let him be deposed; if a layman or monk let him be cut off.

Van Espen.

What here is styled Episcopium was the palace of the Patriarch.  In this palace were the archives, and this was called the “Cartophylacium,” in which the charts and episcopal laws were laid up.  To this there was a prefect, the grand Chartophylax, one of the principal officials and of most exalted dignity of the Church of Constantinople, whose office Codinus explains as follows:  “The Chartophylax has in his keeping all the charts which pertain to ecclesiastical law (that is to say the letters in which privileges and other rights of the Church are contained) and is the judge of all ecclesiastical causes, and presides over marriage controversies which are taken cognizance of, and proceedings for dissolution of the marriage bond; moreover, he is judge in other clerical strifes, as the right hand of the Patriarch.”

In this Cartophylaceum or Archives, therefore, under the faithful guardianship of the Chartophylax, the fathers willed that the writings of the Iconoclasts should be laid up, lest in their perusal simple Catholics might be led astray.

Canon X

That no cleric ought to leave his diocese and go into another without the knowledge of the Bishop.

Since certain of the clergy, misinterpreting the canonical constitutions, leave their own diocese and run into other dioceses, especially into this God-protected royal city, and take up their abode with princes, celebrating liturgies in their oratories, it is not permitted to receive such persons into any house or church without the license of their own Bishop and also that of the Bishop of Constantinople.  And if any clerk shall do this without such license, and shall so continue, let him be deposed.  With regard to those who have done this with the knowledge of the aforesaid Bishops, it is not lawful for them to undertake mundane and secular responsibilities, since this is forbidden by the sacred canons.  And if anyone is discovered holding the office of those who are called Meizoteroi; let him either lay it down, or be deposed from the priesthood.  Let him rather be the instructor of the children and others of the household, reading to them the Divine Scriptures, for to this end he received the priesthood.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon X.

A clergyman who after leaving his own parish has settled in another far off from his own bishop and from the bishop of Constantinople, shall be received neither into house nor church.  And if he shall persevere in his course, he shall be deposed.  But if they shall do this with a knowledge of what we have said, they shall not receive a secular position; or should they have received them, they shall cease from them.  And if they refuse they shall be deposed.

Hefele.

On the office of the μειζότεροι , the Greek commentators Zonaras and Balsamon give us more exact information.  We give the substance of it, viz.:  they were majores domus stewards of the estates of high personages.

Balsamon.

On account of this canon it seems to me that the most holy Patriarch at the time and his Chartophylax allow alien clergymen to celebrate the liturgy in this royal city, even without letters dimissory of the local bishop of each one.

Canon XI

That Œconomi ought to be in the Episcopal palaces and in the Monasteries.

Since we are under obligation to guard all the divine canons, we ought by all means to maintain in its integrity that one which says œconomi are to be in each church.  If the metropolitan appoints in his Church an œconomus, he does well; but if he does not, it is permitted to the Bishop of Constantinople by his own (ἰδίας) authority to choose an œconomus for the Church of the Metropolitan.  A like authority belongs to the metropolitans, if the Bishops who are subject to them do not wish to appoint œconomi in their churches.  The same rule is also to be observed with respect to monasteries.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon XI.

If the Metropolitan does not elect an œconomus of the metropolis, the patriarch shall do so.  If the bishop shall not do so, the Metropolitan shall; for so it seemed good to the fathers assembled at Chalcedon.  The same law shall hold in monasteries.

Hefele.

The Synod of Chalcedon required the appointment of special œconomi only for all bishops’ churches; but our synod extended this prescription also to monasteries.

Van Espen.

Bishops at their ordination among other things promise that they will observe the canons, and the bishops of the Synod say that among these canons they are bound to keep the one that orders them to appoint an Œconomus.

Among the officials of the Constantinopolitan Church, Codinus names first The Grand Œconomus, “who” (he says) “holds in his own power all the faculties of the Church, and all their returns; and is the dispenser in this matter as well to the Patriarch as to the Church.”

Balsamon and Aristenus refer to Canon xxvj. of Chalcedon; and point out how here the power of Constantinople was added to.

This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars. II., Causa IX., Quæst. III., Canon iij.

Canon XII

That a Bishop or Hegumenos ought not to alienate any part of the suburban estate of the church.

If bishop or hegumenos is found alienating any part of the farm lands of the bishoprick or monastery into the hands of secular princes, or surrendering them to any other person, such act is null according to the canon of the holy Apostles, which says:  “Let the bishop take care of all the Church’s goods, and let him administer the same according as in the sight of God.”  It is not lawful for him to appropriate any part himself, or to confer upon his relations the things which belong to God.  If they are poor let them be helped among the poor; but let them not be used as a pretext for smuggling away the Church’s property.  And if it be urged that the land is only a loss and yields no profit, the place is not on that account to be given to the secular rulers, who are in the neighbourhood; but let it be given to clergymen or husbandmen.  And if they have resorted to dishonest craft, so that the ruler has bought the land from the husbandman or cleric, such transaction shall likewise be null, and the land shall be restored to the bishoprick or monastery.  And the bishop or hegumenos doing this shall be turned out, the bishop from his bishoprick and the hegumenos from his monastery, as those who wasted what they did not gather.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon XII.

According to what seemed good to the Holy Apostles, any act of alienation of the goods of a diocese or of a monastery made by the bishop, or by the superior of the monastery, shall be null.  And the Bishop or Superior who shall have done this shall be expelled.

Van Espen.

As at the time of this Synod by the favour of kings and princes the way was frequently open to ecclesiastical dignities, clergymen might easily be induced through ambition to make over to princes some part of the Church’s possessions, if only by so doing they might arrive at the coveted preferment through their patronage, and then desiring to make good this simoniacal promise, they studied to transfer the church’s goods to their patrons; with regard to these the present decree of the synod was made.

But because human ambition is cunning, and solicitously seeks a way of attaining its ends, ambitious clerics tried by various colouring to give a tone to and to palliate these translations of church-goods to princes and magistrates, so that they might attain to that they aimed at by the favour of said princes and magistrates.