Disciplina Clericorum in Sardinia, 6th century. according to the letters of St. Gregory the Great

The publication was prepared with the support of a Grant from the President of the Russian Federation for state support of young Russian scientists - candidates of science: Interpretation of Roman legal concepts in the works of Gregory the Great and the formation of the legal culture of the Middle Ages (MK-885.2017.6). The article examines the church life of the metropolis of Sardinia in the 6th century. based on the letters of St. Grigory Dvoeslov. Metropolitan Januarius of Sardinia was not able to ensure order on the island, monitor the behavior of subordinate clergy, and he himself more than once found himself involved in crimes. The article examines various examples of violations of church discipline by clergy in Sardinia and non-compliance with the resolutions of church councils. Thus, the priests often behaved inappropriately: they were debauched, did not listen to the metropolitan, and baptized incorrectly. The provincial council was rarely convened, and some departments, due to the oversight of Januarius, remained unfilled. All this was very depressing for St. Gregory the Great, who tried with all his might to strengthen church discipline on the island. In his letters addressed to Januarius, the pope examined the latter's mistakes and sins, appealing to the Holy Scriptures and the decrees of the council canons. It is characteristic that St. Gregory always argues for his position. At the same time, he tried to increase the authority of Januarius in the eyes of the clergy, seeing this as a guarantee of order and stability. Letters to St. Gregory the Great show that church life in the region ultimately directly depended on the personality and character of the metropolitan. This conclusion is consistent with the “Pastoral Rule” of St. Gregory, in which the ideal of a bishop is given: only by possessing certain moral qualities, a bishop can govern his community and instruct his flock and clergy on the true path. Among the works of Pope Gregory Dvoeslov (590–604), a special place is occupied by the “Pastoral Rule” - a treatise that describes the way of life of a priest, and also provides instructions in accordance with which he should build his sermon. In the “Pastoral Rule” of St. Gregory formulated the ideal of a priest, which had a huge influence on the works of other Christian writers and was even partially embodied in the cathedral canons 1. It is obvious, however, that in practice this ideal was not always observed. Fortunately, in addition to the “Pastoral Rule” from St. Gregory was left with a whole collection of letters. His Register epistolarum contains about 850 epistles, divided into 14 books according to the number of imperial indicts that came during his pontificate. Most letters represent the pontiff's response to a specific case that requires his intervention and advice 2 . Thus, the letters of St. Gregory provide us with a unique opportunity to analyze real life incidents in all their complexity and imperfection. In this sense, especially indicative are the letters to Januarius, bishop of the city of Caralis (modern Cagliari), Metropolitan of Sardinia, whose case, according to the English researcher R. Marcus, was extremely difficult 3 . Thus, Januarius did not care at all about piety or the appropriate behavior of priests, did not care about his flock, and he himself often violated the norms of church and secular legislation. During the 14 years of his pontificate (which coincided with the time of the bishopric of Januarius), St. Gregory regularly wrote letters to Sardinia: in total there are about 40 of them, 21 of which were addressed to Januarius. Such a large number of letters inevitably attracts the attention of researchers. State of affairs in Sardinia in the 6th century. It is traditionally considered to be viewed as an example of disgusting church governance, and the attempts of St. Gregory to restore order there - as evidence of the well-known weakness of papal power in the conditions of the Lombard invasion and the ongoing arbitrariness of the Byzantine governors 5 . In this regard, an interesting article by the modern Italian researcher L. Giordano, who examines the rhetoric and arguments used by St. Gregory in correspondence with the Bishop of Caralis - quotations from the Bible, supported by the norms of Justinian's legislation 6. However, L. Giordano limits himself to an analysis of the sins and crimes committed by Januarius personally, rightly noting, however, that his misdeeds provoked the sins and crimes of the priests under his control 7 . Meanwhile, the question of how the relationship between Januarius and the clergy of Sardinia developed seems very important, since it allows us to clarify the status of the metropolitan in early medieval Italy, both within the church province and in relations with Rome. It is worth saying a few words about the place of the province of Sardinia within the framework of the Universal Church. If in the territory of Central and Southern Italy (including Sicily) the pope had undoubted authority both as a metropolitan and as a bishop of the city of Rome, a political and cultural center, then in Sardinia in the city of Caralis already from the 4th century. there was a metropolitan see 8. Thus, the bishop of Caralis enjoyed a certain degree of autonomy from Rome, although, of course, he had to obey it in matters of faith and church discipline 9. Sardinia and Rome were connected not only by church, but also by economic relations: the lands of the patrimonial body of the Roman Church were located on the island, the income from which went directly to Rome 10. This patrimony was controlled by defensors - officials of the Roman Curia, clergy or monks who carried out various orders of the pope 11. At the beginning of the pontificate of St. Gregory's defender of Sardinia was Sabinus (letter III.36, 593 was addressed to him), and then, no later than 598, he was replaced by Vitaly. From letters to the latter we know that the duties of the defensor included organizing the collection of wheat and sending it to Rome, 12 the purchase of slaves (mancipia) who were supposed to work in the church fields, 13 and, last but not least, intervention, if necessary, in the affairs of the Sardinian metropolitanate, for example, resolving conflicts between clergy 14 or carrying out punishment imposed by the pope 15. Thus, the defensors were actually the executors of the will of the pope; they also informed him about various incidents and conflicts within the metropolis. Another source of information is St. Gregory had letters from his friends and confidants Abbot Cyriacus and Bishop Felix 16, who c. 594 they preached Christianity in Sardinia 17. In particular, from Felix and Cyriacus, the pope learned about the conflicts of Januarius of Caralitan with the clergy of Sardinia 18. Finally, one cannot fail to mention the complaints addressed to the pope about the arbitrariness of the governor or bishop Januarius 19 . Letters from St. Gregory testify to the pontiff's unflagging interest in the state of affairs on the island. Perhaps the most eloquent evidence of this is the last “Sardinian” letter dated September 603, written shortly before the death of the pope in May 604. Perhaps anticipating his imminent death, St. Gregory points out to his defensor Vitaly the problems of the Sardinian metropolis, which he must solve: the repair and maintenance of hospice houses, bishoprics left without primates, theft of church funds, etc. 20 Thus, the letters of St. Gregory can be seen as the instrument through which the pope controlled the archdiocese of Sardinia and its head, Bishop Januarius. The latter really needed constant monitoring. There were plenty of difficulties in the metropolis, but the main problem was that Januarius did not want or could not get the clergy to observe discipline. St. This became clear to Gregory quite early - in 593–594. This is evidenced by the already mentioned letter IV.9 of September 593, in which the pope pointed out numerous violations of church rules and canons. Moreover, at the very beginning of the letter, the pope clearly indicates the cause of the troubles: according to him, Januarius lacks pastoral zeal (pastoralis zelus) 21 22. Meanwhile, if we turn to the “Pastoral Rule,” zeal and diligence are one of the hallmarks of a good shepherd 23 . In fact, in a veiled form, St. Gregory made it clear to Januarius that he lacked the qualities necessary for his rank. Januarius' lack of zeal and consistency in implementing his decisions can be clearly illustrated by an example from another letter. Januarius forbade his archdeacon to live with women, but limited himself to only a warning, so the archdeacon did not listen to him. Having learned about this, St. Gregory ordered that the archdeacon be deprived of his dignity if he did not obey the order of Januarius 24. However, Januarius’ soft-heartedness manifested itself not only in relation to the clergy. Not wanting to come into conflict with the authorities of the island, he did not consider it necessary to protect either ordinary residents or even the clergy from the arbitrariness of the governors. St. Gregory points out to him that, according to information received from Abbot Cyriacus and Felix, officials (alaicis iudicibus 25) humiliate priests (sacerdotes 26), and Januarius is treated with contempt, and not only the officials themselves, but even their assistants 27 do not regard him at all. Perhaps the pope's informants had specific bishops in mind, in particular Marinian, whose see was located in the Sardinian region of Turritana. At the beginning of the pontificate of St. Gregory Marinian informed him about the arbitrariness of the governor of Sardinia, Theodore. He illegally subjected the inhabitants of the province and its priests to corporal punishment, robbed them and threw them into prison 28. St. Gregory turned to Theodore’s “immediate superior,” Exarch of Africa Gennadius, and after some time (no later than 594) a new governor appeared in Sardinia, 29 however, probably, the situation on the ground did not change radically, and Marinian, like other clerics, suffered from the arbitrariness of Byzantine officials. Since there was no need to expect support from Januarius, the priests and monks of Sardinia began to seek protection from powerful magnates and, as a result, came under their patronage. The dependent position of the clergy and monks was destroying the church hierarchy in Sardinia, and the power of Januarius would weaken even more, and with it church discipline. This is how St. reasoned. Gregory, when he ordered Januarius to stop the patronage relationship that connected clergy and secular persons 30. To strengthen his position, the pope turned to church law, interpreting existing norms. He wrote to Januarius that, according to the canons, clergy are under the jurisdiction of their metropolitan (tuae... iuris dictioni subdantur); indeed, this is confirmed by numerous decrees of ecumenical and provincial councils, according to which the trial of clergy should be carried out not by anyone, but by a bishop or metropolitan 31 . Obviously, for St. Gregory, this was supposed to mean that since the priests are under the jurisdiction of the metropolitan, they should obey only him. If our reasoning is correct, then we have an interesting example of how St. Gregory broadly interprets the norms of the conciliar canons in order to convince Januarius to establish church discipline. In addition to laziness and negligence, Januarius had another quality that greatly hindered him from exercising church governance: St. Gregory points out his simplicity (simplicitas). Actually, the blatant behavior of officials who offend the clergy and despise Januarius himself was a consequence of this very simplicity of Bishop Caralis 32. What did Gregory mean when he called Januarius simplex? First of all, it is worth saying that this word in the language of St. Gregory is not entirely negative. Thus, in “Morals,” the pope quotes a verse from the book of Job, where simplex (in the Synodal translation - immaculate) is on a par with the epithets “just” (rectus), “fearing God” (timens Deum) and “removing from evil” (recedens a malo) 33. Next St. Gregory begins his interpretation of this verse: “For some are so simple that they do not know what is righteous. And therefore they depart from the innocence of true simplicity, because they do not achieve the virtue of righteousness; and since, until they know how to be careful in righteousness, they cannot possibly remain innocent in simplicity. This is what Paul instills in his disciples with these words: “I desire that you be wise in good and simple in evil” (Rom. 16:19)” 34. As can be concluded from the commentary of St. Gregory, the pontiff believed that simplicity in itself cannot be the key to a pious life; on the contrary, excessive simplicity (translating into stupidity) often prevents a person from taking the right path. This was the case with Januarius. His simplicitas manifested itself especially clearly in the case of the field of Donatus, which deeply outraged the pontiff. One day, before the Sunday Liturgy, Januarius, together with his assistants, snuck into the field of a certain Donatus, reaped the harvest, and after the Liturgy hurried back to the field to destroy the boundary signs and thereby cover his tracks 35 . The victim turned to his father for help. St. Gregory was angry, however, on reflection, he decided that Januarius had fallen victim to his own old age and simplicity, and as a result, he punished not the bishop himself, but his advisers 36 . Based on this incident, we can conclude that the concept of simplicitas includes the inability to distinguish bad advice from good and excessive gullibility. Probably, due to his character, Januarius did not enjoy authority in the eyes of the clergy and flock, which had the most detrimental effect on church discipline. And in general, as follows from the letters, Bishop Karalis did not particularly care about her and did not always fulfill his direct duties. First of all, it was he who had to ensure that each region had its own bishop. We learn about Januarius’s lack of attention to this issue from letter IV.29 of 594. According to the pope, the bishop of Fausiana, one of the Sardinian regions, had long been appointed by the metropolitan, but then this custom was abolished; As a result of this confusion, the department remained vacant. St. Gregory pointed out to Januarius that without the preaching of the shepherd, the local pagans remained in their error, and therefore they should intervene as soon as possible and appoint a bishop 37. Apparently, the practice of appointing a bishop as metropolitan of Caralis was widespread not only in one region, but throughout Sardinia. An indirect confirmation of this is another letter from Gregory addressed to the defensor Vitaly. The Pontiff asks him to ensure that Januarius does not appoint clerics of the Caralitan Church alone as bishops to the vacant sees, ignoring the rest 38 . It is important to remember here that Januarius was in almost constant conflict with the clergy of Sardinia. Things got to the point that the pontiff was forced to create a special “bureau” in Rome to consider complaints and claims coming from Sardinia 39 . That is why Januarius sought to place “his” people in the vacant departments, but he overdid it in his endeavor, which attracted the attention of St. Gregory. It is curious, however, that the pope does not try to directly influence the choice of Januarius, leaving the last word to Januarius as the head of the metropolis 40. However, several years earlier St. Gregory tried to introduce some criteria that a bishop must meet. Thus, the pontiff learned that in Sardinia, bishops who had been guilty and temporarily removed from office often returned to office without even completing repentance. The Pontiff imposed a ban on such a practice, motivating it by reference to the conciliar canons 41. Although he did not indicate a specific norm, it can be assumed that he was referring to the 10th canon of the Council of Nicea, according to which it is expressly forbidden to ordain apostates (lapsos) to the priesthood. The next, eleventh, canon of the same council establishes the terms of repentance 42. The text of the canons of the Council of Nicaea uses the word lapsi (lit. “slipped, rolled down”); and, probably, here we are talking about those who denied Christ during the persecution, i.e. the word lapsi has a very specific, rather narrow meaning. However, the use of St. Gregory of the same word may be indirect evidence that the pope had in mind precisely these canons of the Council of Nicea, of course, using the word lapsi in an expanded sense. It is noteworthy that in letters to Januarius, St. Gregory never specified a specific norm, limiting himself to a general reference to the law of the Church; perhaps he believed that this was enough, in view of his authority as Pope 43. Further in his letter to St. Gregory cited the main criteria that the future bishop must meet: this is the only way, according to St. Gregory, it will be possible to avoid a scandal with defrocking and the imposition of repentance on the bishop. So, first of all, a candidate for bishop must be mature, educated (in particular, be able to read and deliver sermons) 44. It should be noted that from the same requirement of St. Gregory began describing the image of the ideal bishop in his “Pastoral Rule” 45, therefore, literacy and knowledge of sacred texts were the most important skills for the future pastor. Along with this, the applicant must be generous in giving alms (elemosynae amorem habuerunt); further - which is very important - not to be a bigamist and not to belong to the decurion class 46. The last limitation was due to the fact that the duties of a member of the curia (local government) were extremely burdensome and were inherited, so many decurions preferred to enter a monastery or become priests in order to avoid ruin. It is no coincidence that Emperor Constantine the Great in 320 forbade decurions to become clergy 47, so in this case St. Gregory simply follows the letter of imperial legislation. Compliance with the criteria formulated by the pope in his letter to IV.26 was supposed to cut off all unworthy candidates. The Pontiff asked Januarius to convey these rules to all the bishops of Sardinia, so that from now on only worthy people would be ordained. St. Gregory I tried to correct the behavior of already ordained priests. To do this, he insisted on convening a provincial council twice a year, as required by the resolutions of the cathedral canons and existing custom. The council was supposed to deal with conflicts between bishops, as well as the behavior of clergy and the purity of their morals. According to St. Gregory, such a council was supposed to become something like a court, where it would be possible to expose an unworthy and immoral bishop and, on the contrary, talk about how to take care of the flock 48. Apparently, St. Gregory hoped that if such a council was regularly convened, the behavior of the clergy could be corrected. However, not only this problem bothered St. Gregory. Judging by his letters, the bishops and deacons of Sardinia often violated the order of church sacraments and rituals - of course, with the full connivance of Januarius. Thus, from letter IV.9 (Sept. 593) we learn that bishops baptize incorrectly: they anoint the baby’s forehead twice, whereas a bishop should do this once, and the first anointing should be done by a presbyter 49 . However, as is clear from another letter written eight months later (May 594), in some bishoprics the baby’s forehead is anointed by presbyters, not bishops. It is likely (and this is confirmed by the following text) that for some reason these particular Churches did not have a bishop. At the same time, such a practice may indicate that the duties of each clergyman in the 6th century. has not yet been fully determined. Upon learning of the pope's ban, some Sardinian clergy were outraged (scandalizatos fuisse) 50 . St. Gregory had to clarify his position: his ban was dictated by an ancient custom that existed in “our Church” (ecclesia nostra), obviously referring to the Roman Church. However, the pope further allowed presbyters to perform confirmation, but only in those bishoprics where, for some reason, there is no bishop 51 . These two letters well illustrate the nature of communication between Sardinia and Rome. As noted above, eight months passed between the papal prohibition on presbyters to perform anointing and his second letter. During this time, the pope's order managed to come from Rome to Caralis, spread through the churches of Sardinia through Januarius and create a lot of noise in the local communities, which during the same eight months managed to reach St. Gregory (it is possible that the same Abbot Cyriac wrote to him). Therefore, at least in 593–594. The postal connection between Caralis and Rome was serviceable, and the pope promptly learned about the events in Sardinia. However, exercising control over church life in Sardinia, St. Gregory showed a certain flexibility and pliability. It is significant that he, albeit briefly, was forced to justify his ban. He did not insist on the immediate and unquestioning execution of his instructions: in those bishops where there were no bishops, the pontiff allowed deviating from the established church custom, because violating the church hierarchical order is still a lesser evil than leaving infants without confirmation. This well-known compliance of St. Gregory also referred to the personality of Bishop Januarius himself. Reading the correspondence of the pontiff, it is impossible not to be amazed at the patience of the pope, who time after time unsuccessfully called on Bishop Karalis to finally restore order in his metropolis. Only once was Januarius summoned to Rome for a church council - to sort out his litigation with the “most eloquent man” Isidore, whom Januarius unjustly anathematized 52 . Even in the case of the field of Donatus, which was discussed above, the pontiff punished not Januarius himself, but his “advisers.” However, depriving a bishop (and even more so a metropolitan) of his rank was very problematic; for example, during the pontificate of Gregory, only six bishops were deprived of their chairs 53; this circumstance determined the Pope's willingness to compromise. The situation in Sardinia was further complicated by the arbitrariness of the governors: in order to defend the interests of ordinary landowners, the power and authority of the metropolitan had to be indisputable, so the open conflict of St. Gregory and Januarius could lead to a crisis. St. Gregory the Great decided to act differently. First of all, he tried to instill in Januarius the zeal and zeal necessary for a bishop. Perhaps the most eloquent is letter IX.11 (October 598), written after the incident with the field of Donatus. In it St. Gregory reminded his correspondent that he was appointed to guard souls, and not to increase wealth 54. The pontiff remembered the parable of the talents (Matthew 25.14–30) and began to convince Januarius to use all his zeal (studium) and take care (sollicitudinemadhibere) to appear before the Lord to account for the talents entrusted to him - his flock. This is the only way, according to St. Gregory, Januarius will be able to receive eternal glory 55. Moreover, the current inappropriate behavior of Bishop Caralis cannot but sadden the Bishop of Rome, for both of them belong to the same Church and are related to each other as members of one body 56 . So, as we see, for his argument, St. Gregory uses a reference to the Bible, and also appeals to the image of an ideal shepherd. St. Gregory not only instructed Januarius, but tried with all his might to restore his authority in the eyes of the clergy and flock. Thus, in the already mentioned letter IV.26, the Pope asks Bishop Karalis to bring to the attention of all bishops the requirements for applicants for this position. St. Gregory frankly admitted that he did not want to write to them directly, so as not to diminish the dignity of Januarius as a metropolitan 57 . Another intervention by St. Gregory into the church life of Sardinia was due to the fact that some bishops actually ceased to depend on Januarius. In particular, the bishops decided to break the ancient custom and stopped asking Januarius about the day of Easter 58. In addition, some of them dared to leave the island without the knowledge and without the permission of the Metropolitan 59. Attention St. Gregory to such behavior of bishops and his attempts to stop these violations, relying on the decisions of the council canons, testify to his desire by all means to increase the significance of the figure of the metropolitan 60. Even in the conflict between his defensor Vitaly and Januarius, St. Gregory sided with the latter. When the clerics of Caralis began to complain about Januarius and found protection in the face of the defensor, the pope forbade him to provide any protection to the rebels 61. All these examples prove that one of the most important tasks of St. Gregory was to restore and maintain the authority and influence of Januarius in his metropolis, so that he could worthily lead the church life of the Sardinian region. So, Gregory's letters are an excellent source illustrating the status of the bishop and the state of affairs in the Sardinian metropolitanate at the end of the 6th century. From the point of view of St. Gregory, the cause of all the problems is the primate of Karalis - Metropolitan Januarius, who lacks zeal, zeal, wisdom and authority in order to carry out church governance. The example of Januarius perfectly illustrates the role of the bishop, and especially the metropolitan, in the life of Christian communities: his shortcomings and misdeeds lead to violations of church discipline, to unrest, to the arbitrariness of magnates, etc. Everyone suffers from the bad behavior of the metropolitan - both the clergy of Sardinia and ordinary landowners, because, not having sufficient authority, such a bishop cannot curb the willful magnates. He is unable to restore order in the metropolis: the bishops and clergy behave inappropriately, not listening to the admonitions of the metropolitan. St. Gregory the Great was extremely depressing about the current situation, as can be seen from the number of letters he wrote to Sardinia. The power of the pope was not yet strong enough to deprive Januarius of his dignity, so the pontiff had to restore order in the metropolis in other ways. So, the pope explained to Januarius how a metropolitan should behave, what measures he should take in a given case. It is characteristic that the pope, as a rule, did not simply dictate this or that decision, but supported his position by referring to the conciliar canons, thereby acting as a mentor and arbiter. St. Gregory never directly intervened in the church life of Sardinia, giving only general recommendations, while the resolution of specific issues remained with the Metropolitan of Caralis. The reason was that St. Gregory the Great tried to restore the authority of Januarius in the eyes of the clergy of Sardinia. Only then, according to the pontiff, would he be able to maintain church discipline and influence the clergy, who, alas, did not always listen to him. "Sardinian" letters to St. Gregory show how significant the figure of the metropolitan was in the church life of the Sardinian region, because, not possessing the necessary qualities, he could not effectively manage the communities entrusted to him. In this sense, the “Pastoral Rule” is not an abstract treatise on the ideal shepherd, but a kind of instruction compiled on the basis of real observations of St. Gregory. Proof (albeit by contradiction) of the significance of the words formulated by St. Gregory of ideas is his correspondence with Januarius and Vitaly. 1. Marey E. S. Code of Theodosius on the duties of the vicar and governors of the province // Historical Bulletin. 2017. Vol. 19. pp. 320–336. 2. Saint Gregory the Great (Dvoeslov). The Pastoral Rule, or On Pastoral Ministry / D. Podgursky, trans. from lat. M., 2011. 3. Boesch Gajano S. Gregorio Magno. Alle origini del Medioevo. Rome, 2004. 4. Castaldi L. II Registrum epistolarum di Gregorio Magno // Filologia mediolatina. Studies in Medieval Latin Texts and their Transmission. Rivistadella Fondazione Ezio Franceschini. 2004. Vol. XI. P. 55–98. 5. Dudden F. H. Gregory the Great. His place in History and Thought. L., 1905. Vol. I. 6. Eidenschink J. A. The election of bishops in the letters of Gregory the Great with an appendix on the pallium. Washington, 1945. 7. Forlin Patrucco M. Registrum epistolarum // Scrittura e storia. Per una lettura delle opere di Gregorio Magno. Firenze, 2005, pp. 339–356. 8. Giordano L. Giustizia e potere giudiziario ecclesiastico nell’epistolario di Gregorio Magno. Bari, 1997. 9. Giordano L. I “crimina” di Gianuario // Gregorio Magno e la Sardegna / L. G. G. Ricci, ed. Firenze, 2007, pp. 151–160. 10. Guillou A. L'évêque dans la société méditerranéenne du VIe–VIIe siècles. Un modèle // Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes. Vol. 131. P., 1973. P. 5–19. 11. Guillou A. Régionalisme et indépendance dans l’Empire Byzantin au VIIe siècle. L'example de l'exarchat et de la Pentapole d'Italie. Rome, 1969. 12. Markus R. A. Gregory the Great and his World. Cambridge, 1997. 13. Markus R. A. Gregory the Great’s pagans // Belief & Culture in the Middle Ages / R. Gameson, H. Leyser, eds. Oxford, 2001, pp. 23–34. 14. Martínez Díez G., Rodríguez F. La colección canónica hispana. Vol. III: Concilios griegos y africanos. Madrid, 1982. 15. Meloni P. La missione del vescovo in san Gregorio Magno // Gregorio Magno e la Sardegna / L. G.G. Ricci, ed. Firenze, 2007, pp. 59–68. 16. Norberg D. Qui a composition les lettres de saint Grégoire le Grand? // Studi medievali. 1980. Vol. 21 (1). P. 1–18. 17. Padoa-Schioppa A. Gregorio Magno giudice // Studi medievali. 2010. 51 (2). P. 581–610. 18. Recchia V. Gregorio Magno e la società agricola. Roma, 1978. 19. Richards J. Consul of God. The Life and Times of Gregory the Great. L., 1980. See, for example: Guillou A. L’évêque dans la société méditerranéenne du VIe–VIIe siècles. Un modèle // Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes. 131. P., 1973. P. 5–19; Meloni P. La missione del vescovo in san Gregorio Magno // Gregorio Magno e la Sardegna / L. G. G. Ricci, ed. Firenze, 2007, pp. 59–68. This ideal is briefly formulated at the beginning of the second book of the treatise (see: St. Gregory the Great (Dvoeslov). The pastoral rule, or On pastoral service / D. Podgursky, translated from Latin. M., 2011). On the compilation and existence of the register of Gregory's letters, see: Norberg D. Quiacomposé leslettresdesaint Grégoire le Grand? // Studimedievali. 1980. Vol. 21(1). P. 1–18; Castaldi L. II Registrum epistolarum di Gregorio Magno // Filologia mediolatina. Studies in Medieval Latin Texts and their Transmission. Rivistadella Fondazione Ezio Franceschini. 2004. Vol. XI. P. 55–98; Forlin Patrucco M. Registrum epistolarum // Scrittura e storia. Per una lettura delle opere di Gregorio Magno. Firenze, 2005. P. 339–356 etc. Markus R. A. Gregory the Great and his World. Cambridge, 1997, pp. 110–111. Perhaps more often than in Sardinia, St. Gregory wrote only to Sicily, where the lands of the papal patrimony were located, and to the Frankish bishops, whom he accused of simony. Dudden F. H. Gregory the Great. His place in History and Thought. L., 1905. Vol. I.P. 366–367; Richards J. Consul of God. The Life and Times of Gregory the Great. L., 1980. P. 114–117; Markus R. A. Gregory the Great and his World. Cambridge, 1997, pp. 81–82, 110–111; Boesch Gajano S. Gregorio Magno. Alle origini del Medioevo. Roma, 2004. P. 126–127. Giordano L. I “crimina” di Gianuario // Gregorio Magno e la Sardegna / L. G. G. Ricci, ed. Firenze, 2007, pp. 151–160. Giordano. I “crimina” di Gianuario... R. 156. Yes, St. Athanasius the Great called Lucifer of Kalaritan "Metropolitan of the Sardinian Islands" (ὁ μητροπ ό λεως τ ω ͂ ν ϰ ατὰ Σαρδιν ί αν ν ή σων) (Athanas. Alex. Apol. de fuga sua. Compare: Athanas. I thank G. E. Zakharov for this interesting remark. See: Dudden. Op. cit. P. 357–358; Guillou A. Régionalisme et indépendance dans l’Empire Byzantin au VIIe siècle. L'example de l'exarchat et de la Pentapole d'Italie. Rome, 1969, pp. 163–164. Most of the lands were in Sicily, but certain territories belonging to the patrimony of St. Peter, were also located in Campania, Bruttia, Apulia-Calabria, Sardinia, Gaul, Dalmatia. For more details see: Dudden. Op. cit. P. 296–320; Recchia V. Gregorio Magno e la società agricola. Roma, 1978. P. 11; Markus R. A. Gregory the Great and his World. Cambridge, 1997, pp. 112–124. Markus. Op. cit. P. 112–124; Richards. Op. cit. P. 126–139. Greg. Ep. IX. 2. Quote. from: S. Gregorii Magni Registrum epistolarum (Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina. Vol. 190A) D. Norberg. ed. T. 1–2. Turnholti: Brepols, 1982 Greg. Ep. IV.23, 25, 26; IX.1. Letters to St. Gregory indicate that the rural population of Sardinia at the end of the 6th century. continued to practice pagan cults with the full connivance of the Byzantine administration and Bishop Januarius (Greg. Ep. IV.23, 26, 29; V.38; IX.205. See also: Markus. Op. cit. P. 81–82; Idem. Gregory the Great’s pagans // Belief & Culture in the Middle Ages / R. Gameson, H. Leyser, ed. Oxford, 2001. P. 23–34; Boesch Gajano S. Gregorio Magno. Alle origini del Medioevo, 2004. P. 126–128). Greg. Ep. I.46, 47, 59; VIII.35; IX.1, 196, 198; X.3; XIII.4. Greg. Ep. IV.9: “After all, you should have been diligently incited by pastoral zeal itself, so that even without our support you would preserve the flock safely and prudently received and so that you would carefully and carefully preserve it from being kidnapped by cunning enemies (hereinafter, except as otherwise stated, my translation. - E. M.)” (Satis quidem te ipse pastoralis zelus instigare debuerat, ut gregem quem suscepistis etiam sine nostro sollacio salubriter ac prouide tuereris et a callidis inimicorum subreptionibus cum diligenti circuminspectione seruares). In this and other cases, typos in the spelling of Latin words were corrected. – Editorial of the ABC of Faith. Greg. Reg. Past. II.1: “One must be... a steadfast champion of truth before the wicked...” – trans. D. Podgursky (Sit ergo, necesse est, ... contra delinquentium uitia per zelum iustitia erectus...). Greg. Ep. IV.26: “As I heard, you forbade your archdeacon to cohabit with women, but to this day he does not give a penny about your prohibition. And if he does not obey your command, we wish that he be deprived of his holy orders" (Archidiaconem uero tuum, ut audio, habitare cum mulieribus prohibuisti, et nuncusque in ea prohibitione despiceris. Qui nisi iussioni tuae patuerit, eum a sacro ordine oolumus esse priuatum). The term iudex in the Late Empire meant not only a judge, but also a governor of a province - a person vested not only with administrative and financial, but also judicial power (see: Code of Theodosius: CTh. I. 15–16; translation into Russian: Marey E. S. Code of Theodosius on the duties of vicars and governors of provinces // Historical Bulletin. 2017. Issue 19. P. 320–336). This term may imply a bishop (see: Isidori De eccl. off. II. 5), but I deliberately use the more general word "priest" to avoid too narrow an interpretation. Greg. Ep. IV.26: “From the report of our brother and co-bishop Felix and Abbot Cyriacus, we learned that on the island of Sardinia the lay governors oppress the priests, and their servants do not consider you, our brother, at all” (Fratris et coepiscopi nostri Felicis et Cyriaci abbatis relatione cognouimus eo quod in insula Sardinia sacerdotes a laicis iudicibus opprimantur et fraternitatem tuam ministri sui despiciant). See letter IV.25 addressed to the governor of Sardinia Zabarda (Gregorius Zabardae duci Sardiniae). Greg. Ep. IV.24: “Let monks and clerics avoid meetings and the patronage of the laity. Let them be entirely under your jurisdiction, according to the canons, so that because of your weakness, my brother, the discipline of the Church of which you are the primate is not violated. dissoluatur ecclesiae). See, for example, Conc. Chalcid. can.9: Quod non oporteat clericos praetermisso episcopo ad saecularia iudicia commeare; Conc. III Carthag. can.9: Vt clerici publica iudicia non appellent (quoted from: Martínez Díez G., Rodríguez F. La colección canónica hispana. Vol. III: Concilios griegosy africanos. Madrid, 1982). Greg. Ep. IV.26: “From the report of our brother and co-bishop Felix and Abbot Cyriacus, we learned that on the island of Sardinia the lay governors oppress the priests, and their servants do not consider you, our brother, at all. And while you only indulge in simple life, discipline, as we see, you neglect. Therefore, I beg you, without citing any circumstances, to rule the Church that God has entrusted to you, to maintain the discipline of the clergy and to try not to be afraid of anyone’s words.” tuam ministri sui despiciant. Dumque solum simplicitati a uobis studetur, quantum uidemus, disciplina neglegitur. Greg. Moral. I.2: Nonnulli namque ita sunt simplices, ut rectum quid sit ignorent. Sed eo verae simplicitatis innocentiam deserunt, quo ad virtutem rectitudinis non assurgunt; Quia dum cauti esse per rectitudinem nesciunt, nequaquam innocentes persistere per simplicitatem possunt. Hinc est quod Paulus discipulos admonet dicens: Volo vos sapientes esse in bono, simplices autem in malo (Rom. XVI.19). Greg. Ep. IX.1: “For they told me that on Sunday, before serving the solemn liturgy, you went to the field of the bearer of this letter to reap the harvest, and after the harvest you celebrated the solemn liturgy. And after the solemn Liturgy, you were not afraid to uproot the boundary markers of his domain” (Dictum quippe mihi est quod dominicorum die, priusquam missarum sollemnia celebrares, ad exarandem messem latoris praesentium perrexisti et post exarationem eius missarum sollemnia celebrasti. Post missarum sollemnia etiam terminos possesionum illius erradicare minime timuisti). For an analysis of this incident, see the work: Giordano. I “crimina” di Gianuario... P. 154. Ibid.: “And although the sentence of punishment should be brought down on you, since we know about your simplicity coupled with old age, we will remain silent for now. But we order that those on whose advice you acted thus be excommunicated from the Church for two months...” (Et quidem poenae sententia in te fuerat iaculanda, sed quia simplicitatem tuam cum senectute nouimus, interim tacemus. Eos uero quorum consiliis haec egisti in duobus mensibus excommunicatos esse decernimus...). Compare: Giordano. I “crimina” di Gianuario… R. 152–153. Greg. Ep. I.29: “It has come to our attention that in a place in the province of Sardinia, which is called Fausiana, there used to be a custom of installing a bishop, but it was long ago, of necessity, abolished. And since, as we know, there is no bishop now, pagans live there who, like beasts, do not know at all about the worship of God. And therefore we pray to you, our brother, that you, in accordance with ancient custom, hasten to install a primate...” quosdam illic paganos remanere cognouimus et ferino degentes modo Dei cultum penitus ignorare, hortamur fraternitatem tuam ut illic secundum pristinum modum ordinare festinet antistitem...) Greg. Ep. XIV.2: “Concerning the Churches in which, as you pointed out, there are no bishops, we wrote to our venerable brother and co-bishop Januarius that he should install them, however, in such a way that the bishops were chosen not only from his Church” (De ecclesiis autem quas uacare sacerdotibus indicasti praedicto reuerentissimo Ianuario fratri et coepiscopo nostro scripsimus ut eas debeat ordinare, sic tamen, ut non omnes ad episcopatum de ecclesia ipsius eligantur). Richards. Op. cit. R. 117. Eidenschink J. A. The election of bishops in the letters of Gregory the Great with an appendix on the pallium. Washington, 1945, pp. 44–45. Greg. Ep. IV.26: “It has also come to our attention that some who are deprived (lapsos) of holy dignity, either after or before repentance, are again called to serve. We categorically prohibit this, and the most holy canons also contradict this” (Peruenit et iam ad nos quosdam de sacris ordinibus lapsos, uel post paenitentiam uel ante paenitentiam, ad ministerio sui officium reuocari. Quod omnino prohibemus, et in hac re sacratissimi quoque canones contradicunt). Conc. Nicaen. Can.10: "On the ordination of fallen clergy." If one of the fallen was ordained through ignorance or negligence of those who ordained, this does not detract from the power of the church rule; let them be defrocked as soon as this is revealed" (De lapsis clericis ordinatis. Quicumque ex his qui lapsi sunt et per ignorantiam ordinati sunt uelc ontemptu eorum qui eos ordinauerunt, hoc non praeiudicant regulae ecclesiasticae; cum enim compertum fuerit deponantur). Conc. Nicaen. can.11: De his qui sponte lapsi sunt qualiter debeant paenitere. Padoa-Schioppa A. Gregorio Magno giudice // Studi medievali. 2010. Vol.51 (2). P. 592–596. Greg. Ep. IV.26: “And so that those who are ordained never perish, one should first consider which ones to ordain: first consider how many years they are, whether they have a desire for preaching and reading, whether they like to give alms” (Sed ne umquam hi qui ordinati sunt pereant, prouideri debet quales ordinentur, ut prius aspiciatur, si uita eorum continens in annis plurimis fuit, si studium orationis, lectionis, si elemosynae amorem habuerunt). Grigory Dvoeslov. The rule is pastoral. I.1: “And, however, it often happens to see that those who are not at all familiar with spiritual rules are not afraid to pose as doctors of souls, while those who do not know the power and effect of herbs and ointments do not dare to pose as physical doctors” (translated by D. Podgursky) Greg. Ep. IV.26: “You also need to ask whether he was suddenly a bigamist. It is also worth taking into account whether he is illiterate, or whether he, subject to the curia, will not be forced, after receiving holy orders, to return to the performance of public duties "(Quaerendum quoque est ne fortasse fuerit bigamus. Videndum etiam ne sine litteris, aut ne obnoxius curiae compellatur post sacrum ordinem ad exactionem publicam redire). CTh. XVI.2.3, a. 320, Constantinus. Greg. Ep. IV.9: “We also wish that you convene a council of bishops twice a year: this, as they say, was the custom in your province, this is also prescribed by the authority of the cathedral canons, so that if anyone among them (bishops - E.M.) deviates from the behavior proposed to him or does not correspond to his morals, the brothers could expose him with reproaches and, for the safety of the entrusted flock and souls, subject him [the matter] to his father consideration" (Episcoporum etiam concilia, sicut tam tuae mos dicitur fuisse prouinciae quam quod sacrorum canonum auctoritate praecipitur, bis in anno celebrare te uolumus, ut et si quis inter eos a sui forma propositi actionis atque morum qualitate discordat, sociali fratrum possit increpatione redargui, et pro securitate commissi gregis animarumque statu paterna ualeat circum inspectione tractari.). Wed: Conc. Antioch. 20: Vtbis in anno synodus celebretur; Conc. Chalcid. 19: Quod oporteat per prouincias bis in anno conciliumfi eri. Greg. Ep. IV.9: “Let the bishops not presume to anoint the foreheads of infants twice with chrism at baptism, but let the elders anoint their chests so that the bishops will then anoint their foreheads” (Episcopi baptizandos infantes signare in frontibus bis chrismate non praesumant, sed presbyteri baptizandos tangant in pectore, ut episcopi in postmodum tangere debeant in fronte). Greg. Ep. IV. 6: “And it has also come to us that some were indignant at our prohibition that elders anoint with chrism those whom they are about to baptize” (Peruenit quoque ad nos quosdam scandalizatos fuisse, quod presbyteros chrismate tangere eos qui baptisandi sunt prohibuimus). Greg. Ep. IV.26: “We did this according to the ancient custom of our Church. But if because of this they are greatly distressed where there are no bishops, then we admit that the elders should also anoint their foreheads with chrism at baptism" (Et nos secundum usum ueterem ecclesiae nostrae fecimus. Sed si omnino hac de re aliqui contristantur, ubi episcopi desunt, ut presbyteri et in frontibus baptizandos chrismate tangere debeant concedimus). See Greg. Ep. II.41, III.36. Richards. Op. cit. P. 114–115. Greg. Ep. IX.11: “Know that you have received a government to care not for earthly things, but for souls” (Non terrenarum rerum curam sed animarum te ducatum suscepisse cognosce). Greg. Ep. IX.11: “So, for this (to care for souls. - E.M.) strengthen your heart, to this you must direct all your cares and zeal and think more diligently about the benefit for them, so that when, at the coming of the Lord, you return to Him the talents that He entrusted to you, you would be worthy to receive from Him the fruit of reward and rise in eternal glory among His faithful servants" (Ibi ergo cor fi gere, ibi sollicitudinem, ibi totum debes studium adhibere atque de earum lucro diligentius cogitare, ut, dum uenienti Domino multiplucata quae tradidit talenta reddideris, retributionis ab eo fructum consequi et inter fi deles famulos in aeternam merearis gloriam exaltari). Greg. Ep. IX.11: “For since we are one member of the body of our Redeemer, I am tormented by your guilt just as I rejoice in a good deed” (Nam dum unum in redemptoris nostri corpore membrum sumus, sicut in culpa tua dilaceror, ita quoque et in bona actione laetifi cor). Greg. Ep. IV.26: “What we have written to you, our brother, inform all your bishops, since I did not want to write to them, so that it would not seem that I belittled your dignity” (Ea autem quod fraternitati vestrae scripsimus cunctis sub uos episcopis innotescite, quia ego illis scribere nolui, ne honorem uestrum uiderer imminuere). Greg. Ep. IX.203: “We know that the custom of your island is such that when, after the celebration of Easter, you go or send your representatives to the metropolitan, he must notify you in writing regarding the day of the next Easter, whether you know about it or not. And as they say, some of you, having delayed the fulfillment of this custom, have also turned the hearts of others from obedience" (Cognouimus quod mos uestrae sit insulae post paschalem festiuitatem uobis euntibus aut directis responsalibus uestris ad metropolitam uestrum, utrum sciatis an minime ipse uobis de uenturo pascha scripta debeat denuntiatione mandare. Et quantum dicitur, quidam uestrum hoc facere secundum consuetudinem postponentes aliorum quoque ad non oboediendum corda peruertunt). Greg. Ep. IX.203: “To this is added the fact that some of you, going overseas on business connected with their Churches, dare to go there without notifying and without receiving a letter from the said metropolitan, as the order of the canons prescribes” (Additur etiam quod ex uobis aliqui pro ecclesiae suae emergentibus causis transmarina petentes sine praedicti metropolitae sui cognitione uel epistulis, sicut canonum ordo constituit, audeant ambulare). Conc. Cartag. III. can. 1: Ut comprouinciales episcopi de pascha suum primatem inquirant; can. 28: Vt episcopus sine formata metropolitani longius non profi ciscatur. Compare: Giordano L. Giustizia e potere giudiziario ecclesiastico nell’epistolario di Gregorio Magno. Bari, 1997. P. 59. Greg. Ep. IX.204: “We have been informed that some clerics of the Caralitan Church violate the order established by their bishop and seek your support and protection from him, and therefore they - which is difficult to pronounce - become rebels... So, let your experience never dare to undertake something like that...” (Indicatum nobis est quod quídam Caralitanae ecclesiae clerici disciplinam sui refugientes episcopi contra eum solacium tuaed efensionis exquirant atque per hocilli, quod dici graue est, contumaces exsistant.