Об Анкирском Поместном соборе

The Holy Local Council, convened in Ancyra, in the Archdiocese of Galatia, took place, according to those who wrote about it, in 315 A.D. However, Milias in the 2nd volume of the Synodikon says that it met in 314. There were 18 fathers who gathered at the Council, the foremost of them were Vitaly, Patriarch of Antioch of Syria; Agricolaus, Metropolitan of Caesarea of ​​Cappadocia; Marcellus, Archbishop of Ancyra itself, and smch. Basil, Bishop of Amasia. They set out the real 25 rules about those who renounced Christ under the tyrant Maximus 56 and sacrificed to idols, but then turned to the Church. These rules are directly approved by the VI Ecumenical. 2, and indirectly – IV Omni. 1 and VII Omni. 1, and from this statement they in some way receive the force of the rules of the Ecumenical Councils. The divine Gregory of Neocaesarea predicted the Council of Ancyra 53 years before it took place in his 8th canon. (See about this Council: Dositheus. Twelve Books. P. 976.) 57 25 rules of the Ancyra Local Holy Council with interpretations About the elders who made a sacrifice, but then resumed the feat for the faith, and not in some deceptive way, but truly, without preliminary preparations and begging in order to show that they were being tortured, while they experienced torture only feignedly and in appearance. It was decided that such should share the honor of the presbytery seat, but they were not allowed to make the Offering, or preach, or generally perform any priestly services. Of those Christians who, during persecution, renounced and made sacrifices to idols, some, when subjected to torture, could not withstand the severity of torture and renounced the name of Christ, while others, even before torture, betrayed piety, however, so that it would not seem that they renounced voluntarily, with money or requests they persuaded the torturers to torture them too - not truly, but for appearances. After these circumstances have been clarified, those elders who were truly and truly tortured, without any deception or pretense, and, unable to withstand the torture, first made a sacrifice, but then, repenting, returned to the confession of faith and won, should have external honor and a presbyteral seat (that is, they should be revered as priests and sit with the priests, about which see Antiochus. 1 and note to VI Om. 26), however, they should not have the right to perform sacred functions, or to teach, or to perform any other priestly action [58]. See also Apost. 62.1 All. 1. In the same way, it was decided that deacons who had made a sacrifice, but after that resumed the feat for the faith, were otherwise honored, but were excluded from any sacred service, offering of the Bread and Cup or proclamation. If some of the bishops become aware of their toil or meek humility and want to give or take away something more, let it be in their power. The same thing that determined the previous rule about elders also determines the present rule about deacons. Namely: if they were defeated by the cruelty of torture and made sacrifices to idols, but after that they again began to profess piety, then in all other respects let them enjoy the honor of deacon, but they will distance themselves from all sacred diaconal rites, from the offering of the Holy Bread and the Holy Cup (see note to VI Ecumenical 23) and from the proclamation [59]. However, if the local bishops find out that they repent with obvious zeal for their renunciation, humble themselves in sorrow for sin, and meekly, and not insolently, treat those who reproach them for this renunciation, it is in their power to grant them, for the sake of their ardent repentance, something more than just the outward honor of deaconship. If the bishops find out that they, on the contrary, repent with negligence and lukewarmness, then in this case they have the power to deprive them of the external diaconal honor. See Apost. 62, Double. 11 60. If some fled from persecutors and were captured or betrayed by their household, or otherwise found themselves deprived of property, or suffered torture, or were thrown into prison and at the same time shouted that they were Christians and were tormented, or they involuntarily took what the tormentors forcibly put into their hands, or took some food, but constantly confessed that they were Christians, and always show grief for what happened with all modesty, clothing and a humble life - such, since they are without sin, are not forbidden to communicate. Even if they were prohibited for the sake of greater akrivia or out of ignorance, one must immediately accept them into communication. This applies equally to clergy and all other lay people. Moreover, it was also considered whether lay people who were subjected to the same violence could be raised to a degree. So, it was decided to produce others like them who have not sinned in anything, if their previous way of life turns out to be right. According to Gregory the Theologian, the law of martyrdom consists, on the one hand, in the fact that no one goes to torture voluntarily and on his own impulse, but shows foresight, both because of the weakness and cowardice that he may discover, and because of the death and punishment to which his tormentors will be subjected; and on the other hand, that no one should run away or show lack of faith if it happens that he is dragged to torture 61 . Therefore, the Christians of that time, knowing the weakness of their nature, fled from their persecutors and hid, according to the Gospel saying: When they persecute you in one city, flee to another (Matthew 10:23). So, this rule makes a determination about such fleeing Christians and says: if, while fleeing, they were caught, or betrayed by their pagan relatives, or they were deprived of property, or they were tortured and thrown into prison, or their clothes were torn and their body was exposed, or tyrants forcibly put something for incense or some kind of sacrifice into their hands, and food sacrificed to idols into their mouths, but, all this having endured, they loudly declared themselves Christians, completely excluding the possibility of renunciation - so, I say, if they are sad that they had to endure such a thing, and moreover, show their grief by external humility and modesty, manifested in clothing, and in facial expression, and in the way of life, let them not forbid Divine communion, since these Christians are considered to have sinned in nothing. Even if some have forbidden them Divine Communion - either for the sake of greater acrivia, or out of their own recklessness - then they must immediately be allowed into communion, whether these victims are clergy or laymen. Moreover, such people are so far from sin that if among them there is a layman whose previous life is impeccable and worthy of the priesthood [62], he can become a priest. See also Apost. 62, Gregory Neokesar. 1. About those who made a sacrifice under compulsion and, moreover, feasted in front of idols: if, when they were brought, they entered with a joyful look, and put on more expensive clothes, and indifferently partook of the prepared meal, it was decided that such people should listen for one year, fall down for three years, participate only in prayer for two years, and then begin perfect communication. This rule indicates that those who, under duress, made sacrifices to idols or even ate things sacrificed to idols, must first be tested: with what disposition they did this, and in accordance with their disposition, penances should be assigned. If, at the time when they were attracted to make a sacrifice or taste something sacrificed to idols, they looked joyful, were dressed in expensive clothes and ate what was offered indifferently, in other words, without heartfelt embarrassment and sadness about what they had done, then let them remain among those listening for one year, three years among those falling down, two years among those standing together, and after all this, let them partake of the Holy Mysteries. Those who first endured unbearable torment, and then, being overcome by the weakness of the flesh, renounced, receive penance for three years and forty days, according to the rule of Peter Alexander. 1. Those who endured only imprisonment and the stench of prisons without any other torment and renounced, let them receive penance for four years, according to the 2nd rule of the same Peter. Those who, having been subjected to torture, in mourning attire began to partake of what was sacrificed to idols, are punished for three years or more, according to Ankir. 5. If, during the pagan holiday in the temple, they ate only their own food, let them fall for two years, according to Ancyr. 7. And those who, under compulsion, performed the sacrifice two or three times, let them receive penance for seven years, according to Ancyr. 8. See also I Omni. 14 and the picture of the church at the end of the book. Those who entered in mourning clothes, reclined and ate, crying the entire time they reclined, if they have fulfilled the three-year period of falling, let them be accepted into communion without communion of the Holy Mysteries. And if they did not eat, then, after spending two years among those who fell, in the third year let them be accepted into communion, but without communion, so that they receive perfect communion in the fourth year. But let the bishops have the power to show philanthropy or prolong the time of repentance, having experienced the image of their conversion. First of all, let their lives be examined before and after torture, and let humanity be commensurate with this. This rule continues the previous one. It says that of the Christians who sacrificed under compulsion, those who came in humble mourning clothes and ate what was sacrificed to idols, crying throughout the entire feast, after they have been among the fallen for three years, let them stand with the faithful, but do not receive communion [63]; if they have not eaten anything sacrificed to idols, let them remain among those who fall for two years, and on the third year they stand with the faithful, but do not receive communion, and after four years let them begin communion. Such are the penances imposed by the Council. However, bishops have the power to take into account the manner of their repentance and, if they repent sincerely and ardently, reduce the prescribed period of penance, and if, on the contrary, they repent carelessly and indifferently, increase it. In addition, bishops are obliged to consider the lifestyle of Christians both before and after they ate unclean food. And if their life was and is virtuous, let them reduce the penance, and if it is reprehensible and vicious, let them increase it. See also I Omni. and, 12 and Anchir. 4. About those who, from the mere threat of punishment, deprivation of property or expulsion, could not resist and made a sacrifice and until now have not repented or converted, but now, during this Council, came with the intention of converting, it was decided: before the Great Day, let them be accepted into the number of those listening, after the Great Day, let three years fall and then the next two years, let them be in communion without communion of the Holy Mysteries, after which they will begin to receive Communion and so let them complete a whole six years. If some were accepted for repentance before this Council, then for them it is necessary to count the beginning of the six years from that time. However, if there is a danger of death due to illness or another reason, such people are accepted into communication conditionally. Those Christians who were broken by the mere threats of tyrants (threats of torment, confiscation of property or expulsion), sacrificed to idols and after that have not repented to this day, but came to the idea of ​​repentance and conversion only during this Council, the present rule determines to punish according to the rules. They must remain among those listening from the time of the Council, that is, from the fourth week after Easter (see Apostle 37), until the next great bright day of Easter, in other words, a year without one month. After this, let them remain among the fallen for three years, stand with the faithful for two years, and at the end of the six-year period receive communion. And for those of them who were accepted for repentance before this Council, let the six-year sentence be counted from that time. However, if they are close to death due to illness or other reason, then, out of necessity, let them receive communion, but with a condition, that is, with the following proviso: if they do not die and remain alive, let them not receive communion again until six years have passed, as determined by I Omni. 13. Read also the Apostle. 62, I Omni. And. See also the picture of the church at the end of the book. About those who took part in a feast at a pagan festival in a place reserved for the pagans, but brought and ate their own food. It was decided to accept them into fellowship after two years of seizures. But to check whether everyone should be accepted into communion with the communion of the Holy Mysteries is the job of bishops - as well as to examine everyone’s life in everything else. This rule determines that those Christians who took their food, came to a pagan holiday in a place reserved for pagan celebrations, and ate with the pagans - fell down, and after that were accepted. The bishop, having examined their previous and subsequent lives, will judge sensibly whether to allow them only to pray with the faithful or also to partake of the Divine Mysteries with them. See also I Omni. 12, image of the church at the end of the book and Ancir. 4. Those who for the second and third time under compulsion made a sacrifice, let them fall asleep for four years, remain in communion for two years without communion of the Holy Mysteries, and on the seventh they will be finally accepted. After the fathers spoke about those who made the sacrifice once, now, in this rule, they talk about those who made the sacrifice two and three times [ 64 ]: those who did it under compulsion, let them fall for four years, stand with the faithful for two years, being with them only in prayerful communication (i.e., do not leave the church, like catechumens), and in the seventh year, let them partake of the Holy Mysteries. See the image of the church at the end of the book and Anchir. 4. Those who not only became apostates, but also rebelled against the brothers and forced them or became the perpetrators of such coercion, let them remain among those listening for three years, another six years among those falling down, and remain in communion for another year without communion of the Holy Mysteries, so that after the completion of the ten-year period they begin to receive communion. However, during this time one should also observe their life in general. Those who were so afraid of torment that they not only themselves renounced the faith of Christ, but also rebelled against other Christians and either themselves forced them to make a sacrifice and renounce, or through their fault the persecutors forced other Christians to do so (for example, they declared that they were hiding, fugitive or secret Christians) - such, I repeat, this rule decrees three years of listening to the Scriptures, six years of falling, one year of standing with the faithful and after ten years to partake of the Divine Mysteries. But during these years, the bishop or confessor must observe their lifestyle, and if they live carelessly and viciously, let the term of their punishment be increased. Rule 8 of Gregory the Wonderworker determines that those who were taken captive by the barbarians and then killed Christians with them or pointed out to them those who were hiding should not even be included in the number of listeners, but they should stand among those crying outside the gates until, as Gregory the Wonderworker says, a general Council is held on their issue. This refers to the present Council and this rule concerning them. Those who are ordained deacons, if at the time of their ordination they testify and declare that they need to get married, since they cannot remain so if they later marry, let them continue in their ministry, since the bishop has allowed them to do so. If some, having kept silent about this and agreed to remain so during ordination, subsequently entered into marriage, they should be removed from the diaconal ministry. This rule determines that those deacons who, before ordination, openly, in front of witnesses, admitted that they need to get married after ordination, since they cannot live in virginity if they marry after that, are not expelled, but continue to carry out their diaconal ministry, for it is obvious that the bishop who ordained them allowed them to do so. After all, the bishop, having heard their confession earlier, did not reject them, but ordained them. And those deacons who remained silent before ordination and did not make such a statement, if they marry after ordination, let them cease their diaconal ministry, because their silence shows that they wish to lead a virgin life in the diaconal ministry and have agreed to this. See also VI Omni. 6 and note. to him. Virgins who were betrothed and, after their betrothal, were abducted by others, it was decided to return them to the first betrothed, even if they suffered violence from the kidnappers. Those virgins who were betrothed to their husbands, but after that were kidnapped by others, the present rule determines that they should be returned to the first betrothed, even if the kidnappers corrupted them - however, not forcibly, but if their first betrotheds want this and are looking for them. See also IV Omni. 27. Those who made sacrifices before baptism, but were baptized after that, it was decided to elevate them to the degree of being washed. In ancient times, many accepted Christianity and believed in Christ, but were slow to accept holy baptism. For this reason, both Gregory the Theologian and Basil the Great encouraged people to accept baptism in their words. So, about these people, the present rule says that if they were seized by persecutors as Christians and made a sacrifice, but after the sacrifice were baptized, then they can ascend to the degree of clergy and priesthood, since we believe that holy baptism cleansed them of all previous sins of any kind, venial or mortal. Chorebishops are not allowed to ordain presbyters and deacons, as well as city presbyters in a foreign region (ἐν ἑτέρα παροικίᾳ) [65], unless the bishop gives them permission to do so with his letters. This rule determines that without the written permission of their bishop, chorebishops cannot ordain presbyters and deacons in another village outside their own. After all, even if in their village they cannot ordain presbyters and deacons, but only subdeacons, readers and exorcists, according to Antiochus. 10, then much less can they ordain another! In addition, they cannot ordain elders of the city in which the bishop himself resides, without the written permission of the latter. The rule requires written permission to be issued to avoid any suspicion. See also note. to I Omni. 8. Regarding presbyters or deacons who are in the clergy, even if they abstain from meat, it is decided that they should eat a little of it and then, if they want, abstain from it; if they do not want to do this, so much so that they do not even eat vegetables served with meat, and do not obey this rule, they should be deprived of their rank. Perhaps some actually abhorred meat, but declared that they did not eat it for the sake of the feat of abstinence. In order to eliminate suspicion of this, the present rule decrees that elders or deacons who do not eat meat for the sake of abstinence should eat it in small quantities. And those who abstain from meat so strictly that they do not even eat vegetables cooked with it, let them be deprived of the priesthood, for by their actions they arouse suspicion that they abhor meat, and such philosophizing is characteristic of Manichaeans and other heretics. Read also the Apostle. 51:53. About things belonging to the church (τῷ Κυριακῷ). What the elders sold in the absence of the bishop should be returned to the church (τό Κυριακόν). However, the bishop is given the right to judge whether the purchase price of the item should be returned to those who bought it or not, because often the income from the items sold has already brought more to the buyers than the item was worth. If presbyters and other clergy (for the present rule, when naming a higher degree, also means lower ones), due to some need, sold things belonging to the church of the episcopacy, without the permission and will of the bishop, or in his absence, or after his death, then the church (in the person of the bishop) must take them away from those who bought them. The bishop is given the right to judge whether to return the value of the things to those who bought them or not, since often, due to the fact that these things bring profit, those who bought them can receive from them an income greater than the price they paid for them at the time of purchase. Therefore, it is unfair if they receive their value twice. And about why the church is called the word τό Κυριακόν (house of the Lord), we said in the note. to VI Omni. 74. About those who have fallen or are falling into bestiality. Those who have sinned before the age of twenty, after falling for fifteen years, let them enter into prayerful communion, then, after spending five years in such communion, begin to receive the Holy Mysteries. Let their way of life be tested when they are among those who fall, and depending on this, let them be rewarded with love for mankind. But if some did not know the extent of their sins, they should remain among those who fell for a long time. Those who, having left this age and having wives, fell into such sin, after twenty-five years of falling, let them enter into prayerful communion, then, after five years of being in prayerful communion, let them partake of the Holy Mysteries. If some, having wives, and having passed the age of fifty, have sinned, let them be considered worthy of fellowship when they depart from life. Not all those who have fallen or are falling into sin with dumb animals, that is, have committed so-called bestiality, are punished equally by this rule. But those who have sinned with animals several times, before reaching twenty years of age and without wives, let them spend fifteen years among the fallen, five years stand and pray with the faithful, and after that receive communion. It is, however, necessary to examine their way of life during the period of repentance, and if they repent ardently, let them be punished more leniently; if they are careless, let them not receive any leniency. If they have repeatedly and immoderately fallen into this reckless sin of bestiality, let them remain among those who fall for a long time [66]. The named bestialists are punished so leniently both because they are young and the flame of lust is kindled in them, and because they are unreasonable. Those who, being over twenty years old and having wives, fell into this nasty sin, let them fall for twenty-five years, pray with the faithful for five years and then, after these thirty years, receive communion. And those who, being over fifty years of age and having wives, fell into bestiality, let them receive communion only before death and never again. After all, they cannot, like those mentioned above, bring up any arguments in their justification: neither young age, nor lack of stability of mind. Rule of Gregory Nis. 4 punishes those who commit bestiality for 18 years and calls bestiality adultery against nature, “for an offense is inflicted on an alien race and, moreover, contrary to nature.” Basil the Great in the 7th rule imposes on bestialists the penance of homosexuals, murderers and adulterers, and in the 63rd rule only the penance of adulterers, i.e. fifteen years. According to Ankir. 17, bestialists must pray with those who are overcome. God commands to kill both men and women who fall into sin with animals, and to kill animals along with them: Whoever mixes with cattle, put him to death, and kill the cattle. If a woman goes to any cattle to have intercourse with it, then kill the woman and the cattle: they shall be put to death, they are guilty (Lev. 20:15-16). 6th book. "Basilik", tit. 37, prescribes cutting off the genital member of the bestialists. For those who committed bestiality, like lepers or those who brought on leprosy, the Holy Council ordered to pray with those affected. Just as Moses calls lepers unclean 67, the present rule calls bestialists lepers, that is, unclean, and those who have brought on leprosy, that is, those who have defiled even animals. It determines that such people pray together with those who are overcome, that is, those who are possessed [68]. See also above Ankir. 16. If bishops, who, after their installation, were not accepted in their assigned region, intend to invade other regions, oppress the bishops installed there and raise rebellions against them, such people should be excommunicated. If they want to sit in presbyteral places where they previously were presbyters, do not take this honor away from them. However, if they are at enmity with the bishops installed there, they will even be deprived of their presbyteral honor and expelled. This rule defines: if bishops, after their installation, were not accepted by their region, but went to other episcopal regions, oppressed the bishops installed there and stirred up unrest, then they should be excommunicated and deprived of episcopal honor. However, if they want, let them be content with the presbyteral honor and the right to sit with the presbyters [69]. If even after this they do not keep the peace, but lead intrigues and create discord against the local bishops, let them be deprived of this presbyteral honor and completely expelled from the Church. Read also the Apostle. 35, 36. Those who take a vow of virginity and break it, let them suffer the punishment of bigamists. For virgins who cohabit with someone as sisters [70], we forbade this. Interpreters of this rule, such as Balsamon and Blastar, say that those who have made a vow of virginity to God, that is, a vow to lead a monastic lifestyle, can legally marry before being tonsured and donned monastic clothes, and at the same time suffer the punishment of bigamous people. They say that monastic life is not affirmed in words, but is based on tonsure and putting on monastic clothes and through them receives strength. However, Basil the Great, in his 18th rule, referring to this rule, says that such people do not enter into marriage, but commit adultery, and orders not to accept them into fellowship until they dissolve this, according to interpreters, legal marriage, which, according to Basil the Great, is the gravest sin of fornication. After all, he says in the 6th rule: “The fornication of monks is not considered marriage.” And in IV Universe. 16 says that those who have dedicated themselves to God cannot marry. If some say that a vow given in words does not bind such strong bonds and does not impose such a heavy burden on those who made it, let them listen to St. Athanasius, who says in the word on the Passion of the Lord: “What we promise to God no longer belongs to us, but to God, and if we take away what is promised, then we take away not ours, but God’s, and we become blasphemers” 71 . Just as a promise is supported not only by money, but also by words and will, so monastic life is not based on tonsure and robes, but also on words and vows to God. So, those who promise something good to God are obliged to fulfill it, so as not to be punished, like Ananias and Sapphira. For example, a virgin promises virginity, an abstainer promises abstinence, a married person promises chastity. Moreover, they are obliged to fulfill not only the vow that they made in front of people, but also the one that they made in private with themselves, because the divine Basil says (in the word about covetousness): “You talk secretly with yourself, but your words are heard in heaven” 72, and God, who is in heaven and looks at hearts, is a better witness than people who see only the external [73]. So, in order to harmonize this rule with the rule of St. Vasily, it is better and more correct to understand it this way: those who took a vow of virginity, that is, a promise to lead a monastic lifestyle, and, before becoming monks, entered into marriage, after the dissolution of this illegal marriage and the cessation of this fornication, according to the rules of Vasily the Great. 6 and 18, let them be punished as bigamists, that is, they remain out of communion for one year [74]. In addition, the rule prohibits women who have taken a vow of virginity from cohabiting with men, in justification calling themselves the sisters of these cohabitants or their brothers, in order to dispel any inappropriate suspicion with this imaginary name [75]. See about this in I Omni. 3. If someone's wife or he himself commits adultery, such a person must, after seven years, come into perfect communion, according to the degrees preceding this. This rule prohibits the adulteress and the adulterer from partaking of the Holy Mysteries for seven years. These seven years must be distributed according to the prescribed degrees of repentance, i.e., as defined by the rule of Vasily the Great. 77; Let them cry for one year, listen for two years, fall down for three, and during the seventh year stand with the faithful, and then let them partake of the Divine Mysteries if they repent with tears. Rule of Gregory Nis. 4 punishes the adulterer for eighteen years, Basil the Great in the 58th rule - for fifteen, and John the Faster in his 13th rule - for three years, but with other acts of repentance: dry eating and bowing [76]. See VI Universe. 87, Apost. 48, as well as an image of the church. About women committing fornication and conceiving children and making potions to kill fetuses. The previous ruling forbade them to partake of the Holy Mysteries until death, and they agree with this. We, having found something more humane, determined a ten-year period of repentance according to the established degrees. Those women who secretly commit fornication and conceive, but kill the fetus in their womb - or lift weights beyond their strength, or drink some kind of poison that is destructive to the fetus, another rule, earlier than the present one, prohibits communion of the Holy Mysteries until death. The present rule, in which the fathers of this Council made a more lenient definition, punishes them with ten years of excommunication from communion of the Holy Mysteries, as determined by the rule of Basil the Great. 2. This time, according to Zonara and the anonymous interpreter, should be distributed as follows: let them cry for two years, listen for three years, fall down for four, stand with the faithful for one year and then receive communion. Read also VI Omni. 91, Apost. 66 and look at the picture of the church. About deliberate murderers - let them fall down, and be rewarded with perfect communication at the end of their lives. This rule imposes on deliberate murderers the penalty of taking communion for the rest of their lives, and receiving communion only at the end of their lives. Basil the Great, by his 56th rule, punishes such people for twenty years. Read also the Apostle. 66. Regarding unintentional murderers, the first definition commands that they participate in perfect fellowship after seven years, having undergone the established degrees of repentance, and the second - that they fulfill a five-year period of repentance. Unintentional murderers were punished differently by the two rules that made decisions about them before this Council. An earlier rule punishes such people for seven years (so that they cry for one year, listen for two years, fall down for three years, stand with the faithful during the seventh year and then receive communion). And a later rule punishes them for five years [77]. However, Basil the Great in the 57th rule punishes them for ten years. See also Apost. 66 and a picture of the church. Those who tell fortunes and follow pagan customs or bring someone into their homes to discover enchantment or for purification are subject to a five-year punishment according to certain degrees: three years of prostration and two years of prayer without communion of the Holy Mysteries. This rule prescribes not to partake of the Holy Mysteries for five years not only to those Christians who themselves practice fortune-telling and follow Hellenic and pagan customs, but also to those who go to the fortune-tellers themselves and bring them into their homes either to remove the spell cast from which they allegedly suffered from illness or other misfortune, or so that they show them where these magical objects are hidden. The rule distributes these five years as follows: let them fall for three years, stand with the faithful for two years, and then receive communion. See also VI Omni. 61. Someone who was engaged to a girl corrupted her sister, and she conceived from him (ἐπιφορῆσαι), after which he still married the bride, and the corrupted woman hanged herself. It was commanded that those who knew should be accepted among those standing with the faithful after ten years, after undergoing certain degrees of repentance. Suppose someone got engaged to a girl, but before marrying her, he corrupted his bride’s sister, and she became pregnant by him (for this is what ἐπιφορῆσαι means), after that he married his bride, and her corrupted and pregnant sister, seeing this and despairing, hanged herself from excessive grief. This rule stipulates that if such a case occurs, those who knew about this matter and remained silent should be punished for ten years, and these ten years should be distributed in order among the degrees of repentance [78]. See that here, along with those who sin, those who know about the crime and do not expose it in order to prevent it, but hide it, are also punished. After all, they also committed this crime - they had the opportunity to prevent both this illicit marriage of the one who committed fornication with two sisters, and the death of the person who hanged himself. And having not prevented them, they themselves find themselves committing this monstrous crime, according to the well-known proverb: “Whoever could interfere with the matter and did not interfere, committed it himself.” Therefore, Basil the Great, in the 71st rule, determines to subject to the same penance as the sinner, the one who knows about his sin, but, out of his own impulse, does not tell those who are able to prevent it. And why do I say “the same penance”? Even bigger! For, while the rule of Basil the Great. 78 determines that anyone who marries two sisters at different times will be punished for seven years; the present rule punishes those who know about the crime who molests two sisters with ten years. Firstly, because, according to Balsamon, the one who married two sisters is forced into an illicit marriage by carnal desire, but those who knew about it and did not tell them have no such incentive. Secondly, because he, having taken two sisters as wives, only enters into an unlawful marriage, and through the fault of these not only an unlawful marriage was concluded, but also fornication and suicide occurred. Nikita of Irakli in his 3rd rule says that if someone marries with full sacred rites (ἰερολογία) [ 79 ], but before entering into a relationship with his wife, he commits fornication with his mother-in-law and she becomes pregnant, he must live with his wife, with whom he was married, and move away from his mother-in-law so that he does not look at her inclined to lust. John the Faster says the same thing. Anyone who commits such a sin is excommunicated from the Divine Mysteries for six years, and also receives various other punishments, about which see John the Faster 16. Probably, we are talking about Maximin Daia (Daz), the ruler of Syria, Palestine and Egypt in 305–313. See also the agreement to the 9th rule of this Council. It is clear that, on the contrary, those elders who were not truly tortured, but only for appearances, or who renounced even before the torture, are unworthy of either external honor or the presbytery seat. It is obvious that such people are not worthy to pronounce either peaceful litanies or petitions. And “to proclaim” probably means “to read the Holy Gospel to the people” or “to say prayers in church loudly, and not secretly.” Therefore, Socrates in the book. 2, ch. 11 says that when the general Syrian, together with his soldiers, surrounded the Alexandrian church in order to capture Athanasius the Great, the latter, taking care To ensure that no harm was done to the people, he ordered the deacon to say a prayer. “And having commanded the deacon to say a prayer, he in turn prepared a psalm for reading” (Socr. Schol. Hist. eccl. II, 11 // PG 67, 205B.). Other sources say “preach” instead of “proclaim.” Perhaps this means I Omni. 11. Greg. Nazianz. Or. 43.6 // PG 36, 500D. By analogy it is clear that priests who have undergone similar things are not cast out, according to the rule of Peter Alexander. 14. What do I say “do not spew”? According to the same Peter, they are even considered to be confessors. Obviously, such people should receive communion not in the fourth year, like those who did not partake of what was sacrificed to idols, but much later than them, although the rule does not say this directly. Please note that, based on this rule, the same sin, if committed once, entails a shorter period of penance, and if committed twice or thrice, or, generally speaking, multiple times, a longer period of penance. John of Antioch in his collection of rules (tit. 21) writes: “in every region” (ἐν ἑκάστῃ παροικίᾳ). And in this case, the present rule determines that in each region the chorebishops cannot ordain rural and urban presbyters or deacons without the written permission of the bishop himself. By a long time the rule here means twenty years, according both to the opinion of Zonara and to the following words of the rule. Let us also note here that bestiality is considered to be a sin with animals, whether it be male or female. I cannot keep silent about the prudent method one famous confessor used to correct an insensitive sinner who fell into sin with a heifer. First of all, he told him: “Sinner, you have acquired a new relationship with the heifer and you yourself have become a dumb animal like her. So, every evening for a month, come to your stall, lock yourself in it, and there lie down on the ground like animals, put your donkey’s saddle on your back, and in this form, with tears, ask God for forgiveness for your terrible sin.” By doing this, this unfortunate man realized his great depravity, corrected himself and changed his life, while the previous confessors could not correct him with their condescension (Spiritual Mentor, p. 234). Meletius the Confessor in his “Alphabet of Alphabets”, in the 160th degree, says that bestiality is of four types: he probably means bestiality committed by men with female and male animals and, conversely, by male animals with men and women. For how many years bestiality is punished, see the rules of the Faster, taken from his own “Canon”. Pay attention to the fact that we interpreted the word “possessed” as “possessed”, following the opinion of many others, and above all the divine Dionysius the Areopagite. It's in chapter 3. The book “On the Church Hierarchy” divides those who come out during the Divine Liturgy into three categories: penitents, possessed by spirits (i.e., overwhelmed) and catechumens (Dion. Areop. De eccl. hierarch. III, l // PG 3, 425C.). In addition, the “Apostolic Constitutions” (Book 8, Chapter 6) says: “Pray if you are possessed by unclean spirits. Let us all pray diligently for them” (Const. Ap. III, 20 // PG 1,1080B.). Those who are here called possessed, in the subsequent 35th and 37th chapters. (ibid.) are called those who are overwhelmed: “The deacon will proclaim about the catechumens and those who are overwhelmed, and the enlightened, and the repentant” (Ibid. // PG l, 1137B, 1140C.). The word “possessed” was interpreted as “possessed” by both Armenopulus in a summary of the rules (section 5, tit. 3), and Argentis (p. 259). Balsamon and Zonara do not want to identify those who are possessed with those who are possessed, since those who are possessed from time to time are allowed to partake of the Holy Mysteries (according to the rule of Timothy Alexander 3), and in this case the bestials praying with them must also receive communion, like them, which is not allowed by the previous rule of this Council. To this we answer that, although bestialists pray together with the possessed, it is not at all necessary that they also receive communion as the possessed. After all, those praying and standing together with the faithful, according to the rules, do not partake of the Holy Mysteries, as the faithful do, until the time assigned to them for standing has ended. And the place where the survivors stood, apparently, was the church vestibule (see the image of the church at the end of the book). Argentis's words that with those who were overcome stood those who voluntarily made sacrifices to idols, guilty of sorcery, sorcery and obvious sins, are not acceptable, because the rules making determinations regarding such sins do not say this anywhere. Balsamon says that these rejected bishops should have presbyteral honor in the place where they were presbyters before. This idea is fully consistent with the text of the rule. In other sources, “like with brothers.” Athanas. Alex. De pass, et cruc. 3 // PG 28, 188D. Basil Magn. Hom. 6. 6 // PG 31, 272D. We speak at greater length in the note about the fact that no one should break the vows given to God. to Vasily the Great. 28. We began to interpret the rule this way, following the opinion of Balsamon and Vlastar, who by the vow mentioned in the rule understood only the vow of virginity, and not the vow of a perfect schema. But Basil the Great, in his 18th canon, explains that this conciliar rule was pronounced regarding those virgins who not only promised and took a vow to maintain virginity, but were also tested for a long time and numbered among the virgins after they asked to be accepted. In other words, the rule was spoken about real nuns and monks. What other interpreter is more worthy than Basil the Great? Consequently, in the opinion of this great father, this rule was spoken about real nuns (who also wore black monastic clothes, according to VI Ecumenical 45) and punishes them. In the same way, it was said about real monks and those who were actually ranked in the monastic order, and not about those who only took a vow of virginity, but did not become monks. And not the latter, but the former, this rule punishes gently and leniently for one year, and Vasily - as adulterers, moreover, after they have dissolved the illegal marriage. The rule, having spoken about the vow of virginity, briefly expressed with the word “vow” everything else inherent in the monastic schema. As for the monastic vow, by default we must understand that it was given then, since before Basil the Great men did not take a vow of virginity, but he himself was the first to prescribe this in his 19th rule. The brothers and sisters that the rule speaks of here probably simply mean relatives, since in the Divine Scripture relatives are called brothers and sisters (ἀδελφοί), according to the well-known Gospel saying: “Standing at the Cross of Jesus were His mother and sisters with His brothers (ἀδελφοί)” (See John 19:25.), that is, relatives, as Theophylact interprets (Theoph. Bulg. In Ioan. 19, 24–27 // PG 124, 280AB.). If these fathers commit adultery, the sin is twice as serious as fornication, according to the rule of Gregory Nis. 4, they punished for seven years, then it becomes clear that they punish fornication for four years, which is more than half the punishment for adultery. See also Vasily Velik. 22. The later and second rule on unwitting murderers is probably the 23rd rule of the present Council. In the question of baptism, the same Basil the Great says that one can participate in the atrocity of another in three ways: first, by deed, when someone assists and helps another in an atrocity, having the same goal as him; secondly, by thought, when it agrees with the intention and desire of the sinner and approves of them. But there is also another, third way of participation, which most have no idea about, but a detailed study of the Divine Scripture testifies to it. Namely, when someone, without providing assistance by the deed itself and not agreeing with the intention of the sinner, only learns about his evil intent and remains calm, that is, remains silent and does not expose him. This method of participation is also revealed by the following words of God: You did this and I was silent; you thought lawlessly, as if I would be like you, that is, I would be an accomplice of your crime. Therefore, God, overthrowing this suspicion, says: I will reprove you and bring your sins before your face (Ps. 49:21). In addition, this is indicated by the words of Paul, with which he reproaches the Corinthians for keeping silent and not exposing the man who had fallen into fornication with his stepmother: And you became proud, instead of weeping, so that he who had done such a thing might be taken out from among you, etc. (1 Cor. 5:2) (Basil. Magn. De baptismo II, 9. 4 // PG 31, 1616B-1617A.). Therefore, John the Faster in his 25th rule says that a nun who knows that her other nun sisters are committing adultery or being corrupted, and does not announce this to the abbess, must bear the same punishment as those who sin. Also, Elijah, Metropolitan of Crete, says that the priests should not accept the offerings of that father, whose sons, with his knowledge, commit fornication and fornication, since he, having the opportunity to forbid them to sin and legally marry, allows them, on the contrary, to sin. Moreover, he himself is subject to excommunication, like his sons (Greco-Roman law. P. 337). In the book “Greco-Roman Law”, p. 310 the following is written: “A certain maiden took a husband, and the betrothal prayer and sacred rite were performed.” The ruler says that if someone has just become engaged, but before the full sacrament of marriage and wedding he falls with his mother-in-law or with another person related to his betrothed bride, then the marriage is prohibited and does not take place, for such deliberate incest is illegal. If someone falls with his mother-in-law after the final blessing of the marriage and the wedding with her daughter, the marriage is not dissolved, but those who committed such incest are subject to penance. This complete text is found in Vlastar's handwritten books. The abbreviated version is on p. 512 "Greco-Roman Law". Based on these words of Vlastar and John the Faster, we conclude that the full prayerful rite, which Nikita of Irakli speaks of above, means not only betrothal, but also the final blessing of marriage and wedding (as in the statutes we find that the betrothal prayer is separated from the rite). Consequently, the betrothed must be separated from the bride who, before the marriage was fully consummated, fell with his mother-in-law, because although true betrothal is considered equal to marriage, it is not in all respects a perfect marriage, but something less than marriage. That’s why Vasily the Great’s rule. 69 requires that a reader who, before the marriage is fully consummated, has intercourse with his betrothed bride, should be prohibited from serving and remain without promotion to the next degree. This punishment should not have been imposed on him if he had copulated after the full sacrament of marriage. And Patriarch Theodosius said that betrothal does not have the same power as a perfect marriage (Greco-Roman Law, p. 232). From here we come to the conclusion that the word “sacred rite” (ἰερολογία) is used in relation not only to betrothal, but also to the complete blessing of marriage, as Balsamon confirms this in many places in his answers to Mark and many others.