[Rec. on:] Almazov A.I. Unpublished canonical answers of the Patriarch of Constantinople Luke Chrysovergus and Metropolitan Nile of Rhodes. It's him. Canonical answers of Joasaph, Metropolitan of Ephesus

The named works belong to the Professor of Church Law of Novorossiysk University A.I. Almazov, the author of a huge and thorough work entitled: Secret Confession in the Orthodox Eastern Church. Odessa. 1894 This is a wonderful and highly desirable novelty in the literature of Orthodox Church law, which is generally sparse in serious works. Both are publications of monuments of canonical Byzantine law, hitherto completely or almost unknown in print, yet very interesting in content. The canonical answers of Luke Chrysovergus (1155–1169), numbering 20, concern spiritual and liturgical practice and contain some interesting features of the medieval life of Byzantium and their assessment by the patriarch. For example, the following question and answer: “I hear that in (some) villages little girls, about 5-6 years old, entering the altar, take censers and help the celebrant, while the canon says that it is not possible for wives to eat what is in the altar: can such girls be understood in any way outside the category of women?” Answer: A female person, no matter what her age, cannot eliminate her nature; Therefore, since in general (all) the inaccessible divine is closed to women, let none of them enter inside (the altar), even if they were at a very young age. For if we allow this (entry into the altar), then great bewilderment will follow from this: for if those who are married are not allowed in because of the marriage itself, then where is marriage honorable in itself and not a bad bed of communion? Let us not allow girls to sin in their ignorance and chastity in view of possible doubts about them. (Right. 4.). From the rules of Nile, Metropolitan of Rhodes (1357–1369), the following deserves attention: “Question: what should be done after the death of any of the adulterers?” “Answer: they should not be buried by the priest, if they did not repent and did not leave the adulterous relationship during their lifetime, as Basil the Great says in the 34th rule: “Bound by adultery, her sin is not allowed, unless it ceases, and even after the death of her lawful husband.” Therefore, on the island of Rhodes, on the occasion when one confessor blessed the adulteress, he was subjected to imprisonment by the chief islands for six months and were expelled from the bishop. In view of the special request for him of the whole people and for the sake of his many tears, especially in view of the absence of confessors and since he lived in a monastery near the mountains, he was allowed to confess. And pay attention: adulterers under excommunication do not partake of the antidor or communion until they repent (look above for the answer of the kiri of Joseph, whose beginning: He held a harlot...) (right 3). If this rule, by the severity of its discipline, can hardly count on a favorable greeting in our modern society, then as historical evidence of the effectiveness of such harsh discipline among the Rhodes Christians of the 14th century, it will not suffer from this in any way in its preciousness. It seems, however, that not without hope of success we can express the following consideration in defense of this severity: the severe punishment here is justified by the unrepentance of the adulteress, her shameless or shameless denial of the commandment of God's law, her “principled” opposition to it. In the rules of Metropolitan Nil there are no instructions on how to act in case of repentance of the adulteress. This gap is fully filled by another, indicated in the title of our article with a monument - Canonical answers of Joasaph Metropolitan of Ephesus (approximately 15th century) Article 29 of these answers reads as follows: "Can an adulterer marry another husband? - The law condemns such a woman to be confined in a monastery and remain there as a penitent. But if she is so shameless that she openly displays dissolute love even after, then if she wants to have a husband, leaving everything that was before, it would be more useful for this to save her from fornication and marry her with her husband." This remarkable rule is accompanied by the venerable publisher with the following commentary: "The answer touches on one of the significant issues in the field of divorce law of the Eastern Church - the question of the marital capacity of a person divorced due to adultery. It is very noteworthy that Metropolitan Joasaph, in contrast to the formal point of view of the canons, suggests that it is possible, under respectful conditions and for the good of the Church, to enter into a new marriage for a person divorced due to adultery, and even for a divorced woman to whom divorce law in the past was generally more severe than for men” (p. 53). For our part, we consider this rule to be a very rare and therefore precious find of Mr. Almazov, which has a keen interest of our time: it represents an important support for those canonists who want to soften the hitherto prevailing harsh discipline in our divorce law, which gives very sad results and therefore urgently requires softening 1 . Other answers of Metropolitan Joasaph - of the most varied content, relate to various issues of public and private content, especially spiritual practice. The venerable publisher himself assesses their significance as follows: "At the present time, of course, the significance of the answers that occupy us is not so much practical as historical. From this side - for a canonist, in general for a historian of Christian Byzantium and in particular for a historian of Christian rituals - they represent very rich and sometimes very interesting material. Judging by the variety of questions raised in them, the present answers, one might say, represent a rare canonical document among monuments similar to it in the nature of the origin of monuments. At the same time, one cannot help but notice that in the general circle of them there is a some systematicity and completeness. By this we want to say that here one or another answer touches on almost everything that is most important that is connected with the concept of worship" (p. 11). Taking into account the scientific importance of these publications, and on the other hand, their low cost, we would like to recommend their mandatory acquisition by the libraries of our theological educational institutions. See our brochure: What is the basis of ecclesiastical jurisdiction in marriage matters? Page 44 et seq. Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra. 1902 You might be interested in: