|
Introduction
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter10
Chapter 11
Chapter 12
Chapter 13
Glossary
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
|
Appendix E.
Canons from Nicea 1, 325[147]
Introduction
This council opened on 19 June in the presence of the
emperor, but it is uncertain who presided over the sessions. In the extant
lists of bishops present, Ossius of Cordova, and the presbyters Vitus and
Vincentius are listed before the other names, but it is more likely that
Eustathius of Antioch or Alexander of Alexandria presided. (see Decrees of
the Ecumenical Councils, ed. Norman P. Tanner S.J.)
The bold text [not contained in this version] in the
profession of faith of the 318 fathers constitutes, according to Tanner “The
additions made by the council to an underlying form of the creed”, and that
the underlying creed was most likely “derived from the baptismal formula of
Caesarea put forward by the bishop of that city Eusebius” or that it
“developed from an original form which existed in Jerusalem or at any rate
Palestine.” “A direct descent from the creed of Eusebius of Caesarea is
manifestly out of the question.” (Vol. 1, p. 2)
The figure of 318 given in the heading below is from Hilary
of Poitier and is the traditional one. Other numbers are Eusebius 250,
Eustathius of Antioch 270, Athanasius about 300, Gelasius of Cyzicus at more
than 300.
The Profession Of Faith Of The 318 Fathers
1. We believe in one G-d the Father all powerful, maker of all things both
seen and unseen. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of G-d, the
only-begotten begotten from the Father, that is from the substance [Gr.
ousias, Lat. substantia] of the Father, G-d from G-d, light from
light, true G-d from true G-d, begotten [Gr. gennethenta, Lat.
natum] not made [Gr. poethenta, Lat. factum],
Consubstantial [Gr. homoousion, Lat. unius substantiae (quod Graeci
dicunt homousion)] with the Father, through whom all things came to be,
both those in heaven and those in earth; for us humans and for our
salvation he came down and became incarnate, became human, suffered and rose
up on the third day, went up into the heavens, is coming to judge the living
and the dead. And in the holy Spirit.
2. And those who say (1) ”there once was when he was not”, and “before he was
begotten he was not”, and that (2) he came to be from things that were not,
or from another hypostasis [Gr. hypostaseos] or substance [Gr.
ousias, Lat. substantia], affirming that the Son of G-d is subject
to change or alteration these the catholic and apostolic church anathematises.
The choice of Nicaea was favourable to the
assembling of a large number of bishops. It was easily accessible to the
bishops of nearly all the provinces, but especially to those of Asia, Syria,
Palestine, Egypt, Greece, and Thrace. The sessions were held in the principal
church, and in the central hall of the imperial palace. A large place was
indeed necessary to receive such an assembly, though the exact number is not
known with certainty. Eusebius speaks of more than 250 bishops, and later
Arabic manuscripts raise the figure to 2000—an evident exaggeration in which,
however, it is impossible to discover the approximate total number of
bishops, as well as of the priests, deacons, and acolytes, of whom it is said
that a great number were also present. St. Athanasius, a member of the
council speaks of 300, and in his letter “Ad Afros” he says explicitly 318.
This figure is almost universally adopted, and there seems to be no good
reason for rejecting it. Most of the bishops present were Greeks; among the
Latins we know only Hosius of Cordova, Cecilian of Carthage, Mark of Calabria,
Nicasius of Dijon, Donnus of Stridon in Pannonia, and the two Roman priests,
Victor and Vincentius, representing the pope. [148]
The year 325 is accepted without hesitation
as that of the First Council of Nicaea. There is less agreement among our
early authorities as to the month and day of the opening. In order to
reconcile the indications furnished by Socrates and by the Acts of the
Council of Chalcedon, this date may, perhaps, be taken as 20 May, and that of
the drawing up of the symbol as 19 June. It may be assumed without too great
hardihood that the synod, having been convoked for 20 May, in the absence of
the emperor held meetings of a less solemn character until 14 June, when
after the emperor’s arrival, the sessions properly so called began, the
symbol being formulated on 19 June, after which various matters—the paschal
controversy, etc.—were dealt with, and the sessions came to an end 25 August.
The Council was opened by Constantine with
the greatest solemnity. The emperor waited until all the bishops had taken
their seats before making his entry. He was clad in gold and covered with
precious stones in the fashion of an Oriental sovereign. [149] A chair of gold had been made ready for him, and
when he had taken his place the bishops seated themselves. After he had been
addressed in a hurried allocution, the emperor made an address in Latin,
expressing his will that religious peace should be re-established. He had
opened the session as honorary president, and he had assisted at the
subsequent sessions, but the direction of the theological discussions was
abandoned, as was fitting, to the ecclesiastical leaders of the council. The
actual president seems to have been Hosius of Cordova, assisted by the pope’s
legates, Victor and Vincentius.
The emperor began by making the
bishops understand that they had a greater and better business in hand than
personal quarrels and interminable recriminations. Nevertheless, he had to
submit to the infliction of hearing the last words of debates which had been
going on previous to his arrival. Eusebius of Caesarea and his two
abbreviators, Socrates and Sozomen, as well as Rufinus and Gelasius of
Cyzicus, report no details of the theological discussions. Rufinus tells us
only that daily sessions were held and that Arius was often summoned before
the assembly; his opinions were seriously discussed and the opposing
arguments attentively considered. The majority, especially those who were
confessors of the Faith, energetically declared themselves against the
impious doctrines of Arius. …
St. Athanasius assures us that the
activities of the Council were nowise hampered by Constantine’s presence. The
emperor had by this time escaped from the influence of Eusebius of Nicomedia,
and was under that of Hosius, to whom, as well as to St. Athanasius, may be
attributed a preponderant influence in the formulation of the symbol of the
First Ecumenical Council, of which the following is a literal translation:
We believe in one
G-d the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in
one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the
substance [ek tes ousias] of the Father, G-d of G-d, light of light,
true G-d of true G-d, begotten not made, of the same substance with the
Father [homoousion to patri], through whom all things were made both
in heaven and on earth; who for us men and our salvation descended, was
incarnate, and was made man, suffered and rose again the third day, ascended
into heaven and cometh to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy
Ghost. Those who say: There was a time when He was not, and He was not before
He was begotten; and that He was made our of nothing (ex ouk onton);
or who maintain that He is of another hypostasis or another substance [than
the Father], or that the Son of G-d is created, or mutable, or subject to
change, [them] the Catholic Church anathematizes.
The adhesion was general and enthusiastic.
All the bishops save five declared themselves ready to subscribe to this
formula, convinced that it contained the ancient faith of the Apostolic
Church. The opponents were soon reduced to two, Theonas of Marmarica and
Secundus of Ptolemais, who were exiled and anathematized. Arius and his
writings were also branded with anathema, his books were cast into the fire,
and he was exiled to Illyria.
The lists of the signers have reached us in
a mutilated condition, disfigured by faults of the copyists. Nevertheless,
these lists may be regarded as authentic. Their study is a problem which has
been repeatedly dealt with in modern times, in Germany and England, in the
critical editions of H. Gelzer, H. Hilgenfeld, and O. Contz on the one hand,
and C. H. Turner on the other. The lists thus constructed give respectively
220 and 218 names. With information derived from one source or another, a
list of 232 or 237 fathers known to have been present may be constructed.
Other matters dealt with by this council
were the controversy as to the time of celebrating Easter and the Meletian
schism. The former of these two will be found treated under “Easter
Controversy”; the latter under Meletius of Lycopolis.
Canons
There has long existed a dispute as to the
number of the canons of First Nicaea. All the collections of canons, whether
in Latin or Greek, composed in the fourth and fifth centuries agree in
attributing to this Council only the twenty canons, which we possess today. …
Canon 1: On the admission, or support, or expulsion of
clerics mutilated by choice or by violence. If
anyone in sickness has undergone surgery at the hands of physicians or has
been castrated by barbarians, let him remain among the clergy. But if anyone
in good health has castrated himself, if he is enrolled among the clergy he
should be suspended, and in future no such man should be promoted. But, as it
is evident that this refers to those who are responsible for the condition
and presume to castrate themselves, so too if any have been made eunuchs by
barbarians or by their masters, but have been found worthy, the canon admits
such men to the clergy.
Canon 2: Rules to be observed for ordination, the avoidance of
undue haste, the deposition of those guilty of a grave fault. Since, either through necessity or through the importunate demands
of certain individuals, there have been many breaches of the church’s canon,
with the result that men who have recently come from a pagan life to the
faith after a short catechumenate have been admitted at once to the spiritual
washing, and at the same time as their baptism have been promoted to the
episcopate or the presbyterate, it is agreed that it would be well for
nothing of the kind to occur in the future. For a catechumen needs time and
further probation after baptism, for the apostle’s words are clear: “Not a
recent convert, or he may be puffed up and fall into the condemnation and the
snare of the devil”. But if with the passage of time some sin of sensuality
is discovered with regard to the person and he is convicted by two or three
witnesses, such a one will be suspended from the clergy. If anyone
contravenes these regulations, he will be liable to forfeit his clerical
status for acting in defiance of this great synod.
Canon 3: All members of the clergy are forbidden to dwell
with any woman, except a mother, sister, or aunt.
This great synod absolutely forbids a bishop, presbyter,
deacon or any of the clergy to keep a woman who has been brought in to live
with him, with the exception of course of his mother or sister or aunt, or of
any person who is above suspicion.
Canon 4: Concerning episcopal elections.
It is by all means desirable that a bishop should be appointed
by all the bishops of the province. But if this is difficult because of some
pressing necessity or the length of the journey involved, let at least three
come together and perform the ordination, but only after the absent
bishops have taken part in the vote and given their written consent. But in
each province the right of confirming the proceedings belongs to the
metropolitan bishop.
Canon 5: Concerning the excommunicate.
Concerning those, whether of the clergy or the laity, who have
been excommunicated, the sentence is to be respected by the bishops of each
province according to the canon which forbids those expelled by some to be
admitted by others. But let an inquiry be held to ascertain whether anyone
has been expelled from the community because of pettiness or quarrelsomeness
or any such ill nature on the part of the bishop. Accordingly, in order that
there may be proper opportunity for inquiry into the matter, it is agreed
that it would be well for synods to be held each year in each province twice
a year, so that these inquiries may be conducted by all the bishops of the
province assembled together, and in this way by general consent those who
have offended against their own bishop may be recognised by all to be
reasonably excommunicated, until all the bishops in common may decide to
pronounce a more lenient sentence on these persons. The synods shall be held
at the following times: one before Lent, so that, all pettiness being set
aside, the gift offered to G-d may be unblemished; the second after the
season of autumn.
Canon 6: Concerning patriarchs and their jurisdiction.
The ancient customs of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis
shall be maintained, according to which the bishop of Alexandria has
authority over all these places since a similar custom exists with reference
to the bishop of Rome. Similarly in Antioch and the other provinces the
prerogatives of the churches are to be preserved. In general the following
principle is evident: if anyone is made bishop without the consent of the
metropolitan, this great synod determines that such a one shall not be a
bishop. If however two or three by reason of personal rivalry dissent from
the common vote of all, provided it is reasonable and in accordance with the
church’s canon, the vote of the majority shall prevail.
Canon 7: Confirms the right of the bishops of Jerusalem to
enjoy certain honours. Since there prevails a
custom and ancient tradition to the effect that the bishop of Aelia is to be
honoured, let him be granted everything consequent upon this honour, saving
the dignity proper to the metropolitan.
Canon 8: Concerns the Novatians.
Concerning those who have given themselves the name of Cathars,
and who from time to time come over publicly to the catholic and apostolic
church, this holy and great synod decrees that they may remain among the
clergy after receiving an imposition of hands. But before all this it is
fitting that they give a written undertaking that they will accept and follow
the decrees of the catholic church, namely that they will be in communion
with those who have entered into a second marriage and with those who have
lapsed in time of persecution and for whom a period [of penance] has been
fixed and an occasion [for reconciliation] allotted, so as in all things to
follow the decrees of the catholic and apostolic church. Accordingly, where
all the ordained in villages or cities have been found to be men of this kind
alone, those who are so found will remain in the clergy in the same rank; but
when some come over in places where there is a bishop or presbyter belonging
to the catholic church, it is evident that the bishop of the church will hold
the bishop’s dignity, and that the one given the title and name of bishop
among the so-called Cathars will have the rank of presbyter, unless the
bishop thinks fit to let him share in the honour of the title. But if this
does not meet with his approval, the bishop will provide for him a place as
chorepiscopus or presbyter, so as to make his ordinary clerical status
evident and so prevent there being two bishops in the city.
Canon 9: Certain sins known after ordination involve
invalidation. If any have been promoted
presbyters without examination, and then upon investigation have confessed
their sins, and if after their confession men have imposed hands upon such
people, being moved to act against the canon, the canon does not admit these
people, for the catholic church vindicates only what is above reproach.
Canon 10: Lapsi who have been ordained knowingly or
surreptitiously must be excluded as soon as their irregularity is known.
If any have been promoted to ordination through the
ignorance of their promoters or even with their connivance, this fact does
not prejudice the church’s canon; for once discovered they are to be deposed.
Canon 11: Penance to be imposed on apostates of the persecution of
Licinius. Concerning those who have transgressed without necessity or
the confiscation of their property or without danger or anything of this
nature, as happened under the tyranny of Licinius, this holy synod decrees
that, though they do not deserve leniency, nevertheless they should be
treated mercifully. Those therefore among the faithful who genuinely repent
shall spend three years among the hearers, for seven years they shall be
prostrators, and for two years they shall take part with the people in the
prayers, though not in the offering.
Canon 12: Penance to be imposed on those who upheld Licinius in his war
on the Christians. Those who have been called by grace, have given
evidence of first fervour and have cast off their [military] belts, and
afterwards have run back like dogs to their own vomit, so that some have even
paid money and recovered their military status by bribes — such persons shall
spend ten years as prostrators after a period of three years as hearers. In
every case, however, their disposition and the nature of their penitence
should be examined. For those who through their fear and tears and
perseverance and good works give evidence of their conversion by deeds and
not by outward show, when they have completed their appointed term as
hearers, may properly take part in the prayers, and the bishop is competent
to decide even more favourably in their regard. But those who have taken the
matter lightly, and have thought that the outward form of entering the
church is all that is required for their conversion, must complete their term
to the full.
Canon 13: Indulgence to be granted to excommunicated
persons in danger of death. Concerning the
departing, the ancient canon law is still to be maintained namely that those
who are departing are not to be deprived of their last, most necessary
viaticum. But if one whose life has been despaired of has been admitted to
communion and has shared in the offering and is found to be numbered again
among the living, he shall be among those who take part in prayer only [here
a variant reading in Les canons des conciles oecumeniques adds “until
the term fixed by this great ecumenical synod has been completed”]. But as a
general rule, in the case of anyone whatsoever who is departing and seeks to
share in the eucharist, the bishop upon examining the matter shall give him a
share in the offering.
Canon 14: Penance to be imposed on catechumens who had
weakened under persecution. Concerning
catechumens who have lapsed, this holy and great synod decrees that, after
they have spent three years as hearers only, they shall then be allowed to
pray with the catechumens.
Canon 15: Bishops, priests, and deacons are not to pass
from one church to another. On account of the great disturbance and
the factions which are caused, it is decreed that the custom, if it is found
to exist in some parts contrary to the canon, shall be totally suppressed, so
that neither bishops nor presbyters nor deacons shall transfer from city to
city. If after this decision of this holy and great synod anyone shall
attempt such a thing, or shall lend himself to such a proceeding, the
arrangement shall be totally annulled, and he shall be restored to the
church of which he was ordained bishop or presbyter or deacon.
Canon 16: All clerics are forbidden to leave their church. Formal
prohibition for bishops to ordain for their diocese a cleric belonging to
another diocese. Any presbyters or deacons or in general anyone
enrolled in any rank of the clergy who depart from their church recklessly
and without the fear of G-d before their eyes or in ignorance of the church’s
canon, ought not by any means to be received in another church, but all
pressure must be applied to them to induce them to return to their own
dioceses, or if they remain it is right that they should be excommunicated.
But if anyone dares to steal away one who belongs to another and to ordain
him in his church without the consent of the other’s own bishop among whose
clergy he was enrolled before he departed, the ordination is to be null.
Canon 17: Clerics are forbidden to lend at interest.
Since many enrolled [among the clergy] have been
induced by greed and avarice to forget the sacred text, “who does not put out
his money at interest”, and to charge one per cent [a month] on loans, this
holy and great synod judges that if any are found after this decision to
receive interest by contract or to transact the business in any other way or
to charge [a flat rate of] fifty per cent or in general to devise any other
contrivance for the sake of dishonourable gain, they shall be deposed from
the clergy and their names struck from the roll.
Canon 18: Recalls to deacons their subordinate position
with regard to priests. It has come to the
attention of this holy and great synod that in some places and cities
deacons give communion to presbyters, although neither canon nor custom
allows this, namely that those who have no authority to offer should give the
body of Christ to those who do offer. Moreover it has become known that some
of the deacons now receive the eucharist even before the bishops. All these
practices must be suppressed. Deacons must remain within their own limits,
knowing that they are the ministers of the bishop and subordinate to the
presbyters. Let them receive the eucharist according to their order after the
presbyters from the hands of the bishop or the presbyter. Nor shall
permission be given for the deacons to sit among the presbyters, for such an
arrangement is contrary to the canon and to rank. If anyone refuses to comply
even after these decrees, he is to be suspended from the diaconate.
Canon 19: Rules to be observed with regard to adherents of
Paul of Samosata who wished to return to the Church.
Concerning the former Paulinists who seek refuge in the
catholic church, it is determined that they must be rebaptised
unconditionally. Those who in the past have been enrolled among the clergy,
if they appear to be blameless and irreproachable, are to be rebaptised and
ordained by the bishop of the catholic church. But if on inquiry they are
shown to be unsuitable, it is right that they should be deposed. Similarly
with regard to deaconesses and all in general whose names have been included
in the roll, the same form shall be observed. We refer to deaconesses who
have been granted this status, for they do not receive any imposition of
hands, so that they are in all respects to be numbered among the laity.
Canon 20: On Sundays and during the Paschal season prayers should be
said standing. Since there are some who kneel on Sunday and during
the season of Pentecost, this holy synod decrees that, so that the same
observances may be maintained in every diocese, one should offer one’s
prayers to the Lord standing.
The Letter Of The Synod In Nicaea To The Egyptians[150]
The
bishops assembled at Nicaea, who constitute the great and holy synod, greet
the church of the Alexandrians, by the grace of G-d holy and great, and the
beloved brethren in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis.
Since the grace of
G-d and the most pious emperor Constantine have called us together from
different provinces and cities to constitute the great and holy synod in
Nicaea, it seemed absolutely necessary that the holy synod should send you a
letter so that you may know what was proposed and discussed, and what was
decided and enacted.
First of all the
affair of the impiety and lawlessness of Arius and his followers was
discussed in the presence of the most pious emperor Constantine. It was
unanimously agreed that anathemas should be pronounced against his impious
opinion and his blasphemous terms and expressions which he has blasphemously
applied to the Son of G-d, saying “he is from things that are not,” and
“before he was begotten he was not,” and “there once was when he was not,”
saying too that by his own power the Son of G-d is capable of evil and
goodness, and calling him a creature and a work.
Against all this
the holy synod pronounced anathemas, and did not allow this impious and
abandoned opinion and these blasphemous words even to be heard.
Of that man and the
fate which befell him, you have doubtless heard or will hear, lest we should
seem to trample upon one who has already received a fitting reward because of
his own sin. Such indeed was the power of his impiety that Theonas of
Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais shared in the consequences, for they too
suffered the same fate.
But since, when the
grace of G-d had freed Egypt from this evil and blasphemous opinion, and from
the persons who had dared to create a schism and a separation in a people
which up to now had lived in peace, there remained the question of the
presumption of Meletius and the men whom he had ordained, we shall explain to
you, beloved brethren, the synod’s decisions on this subject too. The synod
was moved to incline towards mildness in its treatment of Meletius for
strictly speaking he deserved no mercy. It decreed that that he might remain
in his own city without any authority to nominate or ordain, and that he was
not to show himself for this purpose in the country or in another city, and
that he was to retain the bare name of his office.
It was further
decreed that those whom he had ordained, when they had been validated by a
more spiritual ordination, were to be admitted to communion on condition that
they would retain their rank and exercise their ministry, but in every
respect were to be second to all the clergy in each diocese and church who
had been nominated under our most honoured brother and fellow minister
Alexander; they were to have no authority to appoint candidates of their
choice or to put forward names or to do anything at all without the consent
of the bishop of the catholic church, namely the bishop of those who are
under Alexander. But those who by the grace of G-d and by our prayers have
not been detected in any schism, and are spotless in the catholic and
apostolic church, are to have authority to appoint and to put forward the
names of men of the clergy who are worthy, and in general to do everything
according to the law and rule of the church.
In the event of the
death of any in the church, those who have recently been accepted are
thereupon to succeed to the office of the deceased, provided that they appear
worthy and are chosen by the people; the bishop of Alexandria is to take part
in the vote and confirm the election. This privilege, which has been granted
to all others, does not apply to the person of Meletius because of his
inveterate seditiousness and his mercurial and rash disposition, lest any
authority or responsibility should be given to one who is capable of
returning to his seditious practices.
These are the chief
and most important decrees as far as concerns Egypt and the most holy
church of the Alexandrians. Whatever other canons and decrees were enacted in
the presence of our lord and most honoured fellow minister and brother
Alexander, he will himself report them to you in greater detail when he
comes, for he was himself a leader as well as a participant in the events.
[The following is not found in the
Latin text, but is found in the Greek text:]
We also send you
the good news of the settlement concerning the holy Pasch, namely that in
answer to your prayers this question also has been resolved. All the brethren
in the East who have hitherto followed the Jewish practice will henceforth
observe the custom of the Romans and of yourselves and of all of us who from
ancient times have kept Easter together with you. Rejoicing then in these
successes and in the common peace and harmony and in the cutting off of all
heresy, welcome our fellow minister, your bishop Alexander, with all the
greater honour and love. He has made us happy by his presence, and despite
his advanced age has undertaken such great labour in order that you too may
enjoy peace.
Pray for us all
that our decisions may remain secure through almighty G-d and our lord
Jesus Christ in the holy Spirit, to whom is the glory for ever and ever.
Amen. |
|