Rules of St. Nicholas, Patriarch of Constantinople with interpretations by Bishop. Nikodima (Milasha)

Rule 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Question. Can a monk enter the holy altar, since the 38th rule of the Holy Council of Trullo prohibits this, which does not allow a monk who has not been promoted to reader to sing and read from the pulpit, and also the 15th and 21st rules of the Laodicean and 14th of the Second Nicene Councils prohibit this? Answer. It is forbidden for an unproduced monk to perform the duties of a reader on the pulpit; however, out of respect for the monastic order, I do not think that a monk, free from any crime, would be forbidden to enter the altar to light candles or lamps. (Trul. 83, 69; VII Om. 14; Laod. 15, 19, 21, 44). Like all others, we translate these rules of Patriarch Nicholas of Constantinople from Af. Syntagmas. In this collection, these rules or canonical answers are presented, as mentioned above (vol. I, p. 43) 1, in a different edition than in other collections; they are fewer in number. It is possible that a more accurate number (17) of these responses from Patr. Nicholas is in Κανονικαί διατάξεις Gideon, which corresponds to the number of them in our Helmsman (although not in the wording of the answers themselves). We found it more reasonable to follow the Athenian collection here, especially since it agrees with the publication of Beveregius (Beveridge), and, in essence, with Pidalion. Under what numbers are these patr rules located? Nicholas in Kormchay, - we have already noted (vol. I, p. 44) 2. About this rule patr. We have already mentioned Nicholas in the interpretations of the 69th Trullian rule and the 15th rule of Patriarch Nicephorus; and for a better understanding of it, it is necessary to compare the interpretations of other parallel rules. Question. Is it really forbidden to kneel on Saturday, as it is prohibited on Sunday and during Pentecost? Answer. This is not prohibited by the rule; however, many do not kneel because they do not fast on the Sabbath. (Ap. 66; I Om. 20; Trul. 55, 66, 90; Gangr. 18; Laod. 29; Petra Alex. 15; Basil the Great. 91; Theophilus Alex. 1). Since in the rules Saturday in relation to fasting is equated with Sunday (Ap. 66), many thought that if one cannot fast on Saturday, then one cannot bend the knee, just as one cannot do this on Sunday (I Om. 20). This rule states that there is no canonical injunction prohibiting kneeling on Saturdays and, therefore, those who kneel do not sin. Question. Should you fast in the month of August? Answer. In former times this fast was observed; it was subsequently moved so as not to coincide with the pagan fasts that took place in the same month. However, many still observe this fast. (Trul. 26, 56; Laod. 49–52; Peter Alex. 15; Timothy Alex. 8, 10). The canonical fast is the fast of St. Pentecost, before Easter, and fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays every week. This is the order of the 69th Ap. rules. Over time, other posts were established, between which was the so-called Assumption Fast (ή νηστεία της κοιμήσεως της Θεοτόκου) in the month of August. This fast is discussed in the present rule of Patriarch Nicholas and, as can be seen from this rule, the question of the duration of this fast was controversial at that time (at the beginning of the 12th century). Balsamon, in his 55th canonical response to Patriarch Mark of Alexandria, interpreting the present (3) rule, says that it is a synodal decree from the time of this patriarch (Nicholas). This decree was that during all annual fasts, including the Assumption fast, one should fast only seven days (πλην επταήμεροι), for only one fast lasts forty days (μια γάρ τεσσαρακονθήμερος νηστεία εστίν), namely, fasting before St. Great Easter; however, if anyone wishes to fast before other holidays, including the feast of the Dormition of St. Mother of God), more than seven days, or if this is prescribed by any clergy charter, then he can do this 3. The present (3) rule of Patriarch Nicholas was discussed at a meeting of the Council of Constantinople under Patriarch Luke (1156–1169), and, according to the reports of Balsamon, some at this council argued that this fast should not be observed, since it was postponed (δια μετάθεσιν) to another time, as evidenced by this answer of Patriarch Nicholas; others, on the contrary, argued that it should be observed, for the answer itself says that in former times this fast was observed, and was subsequently transferred to another time. However, when and where this was done is not mentioned in the answer. The Patriarch and other bishops at the council decided that this fast should be observed without any excuse (άπαραίτητον είναι), and, in support of this, they referred to the famous τόμος τής ενώσεως of 921, which says that trigamists can proceed to St. sacrament three times a year, namely: on Easter, on the Dormition of the Most Holy. Mother of God and on the Nativity of Christ, for before these holidays people usually fast. When opponents pointed out that nowhere was it said how long the fast should last, the patriarch noted that if there is no written decree about this fast (Assumption), as well as about the Nativity fast, then in this case we must still follow the unwritten tradition of the church (τη άγράφω έκκλησιαστικη παραδόσει) and begin the Assumption Fast on August 1, and the Nativity Fast on November 15. And this instruction of Patriarch Luke has become generally accepted in the Eastern Orthodox Church, so that, in accordance with it, one must understand the present rule of patriarchs. Nicholas. Question. Should we give Holy Communion to St. the secrets of the demoniac, for St. Timothy answers the question put to him differently, and St. Apostles and otherwise later ones? Answer. If someone is in fits of black sickness, so that it seems as if he is possessed by an unclean spirit, he should not be prevented from taking communion; but if he is truly possessed, then in no way can he be awarded St. communion, for what fellowship does light have with darkness? (Ap. 79; Trul. 60; Timothy Alex. 2, 3, 4, 14). Question. Can a priest consume indifferently and as much as he pleases from the church offerings, i.e. prosphora and wine, and can prosphora be eaten as ordinary bread, and if a lot of this has been collected, then what to do with it? Answer. Particles left over from the prosphora brought to the altar - in no way, but such (should) be used only in church and without a trace; As for the rest of the prosphoras, they should be eaten separately, and in no way with milk, cheese, eggs, or fish. (Ap. 3, 4, 38, 41; Gangr. 7, 8; Carth. 37: Theophila Alex. 8). Question. If a monk, no matter where he received tonsure, is embarrassed by something that burdens his soul and wants to leave the monastery, and the abbot subjects him to punishment for this, then what should he do: ignore either his spiritual confusion or the punishment? Answer. He must tell the abbot what bothers him, and if this puts him in obvious danger, then let him leave and let the punishment go unnoticed. (IV Om. 4; VII O. 19, 21; Carth. 13; Dvukr. 2, 3, 4). For a better understanding of the meaning of this rule, it is necessary to compare mainly the instructions of the 3rd and 4th rules of the Double Council on when monks leave their monasteries. The fact that, according to this rule, a monk can ignore the punishment imposed on him by the abbot should not be understood in the sense that the monk can free himself from the punishment imposed on him by the superior superior, but that this person, having retired from the monastery, is obliged to appear before the relevant local bishop, who will judge him and, at his own discretion, allow him not to return to the monastery, for this, in essence, was the punishment imposed on him abbot, designated in the rule by the word δεσμός (vinculum). Question. If, before his death, the abbot leaves himself a deputy, obliging him not to leave his place, and the deputy, having realized his weakness, leaves, then what should be done, in this case, with this obligation? Answer. This obligation is meaningless and, therefore, has no force, therefore the one who was bound by this obligation will be released from it by coming to the bishop and telling him everything about himself. (Ap. 32; Serdic. 14; Carth. 141). Any abbot, being on the verge of death, will wish to transfer the abbot's power to someone from the brethren of the monastery that pleases him, and in order to further strengthen his desire, he will oblige this brother in writing or by oath (for this means in the rule: δεσμός, vinculum) that he will indeed be the abbot and that, in case of failure to fulfill the promise, he must be subject to canonical punishment. Upon the death of the abbot, the brother appointed as his successor will accept, according to the promise, the abbess, but after some time he will become convinced that he is not capable of governing and will renounce the abbess. This was the question, and to this question the rule answers that the order of the said abbot is unfounded and the obligation is therefore meaningless, to which the new abbot (in vain) obeyed. And since the obligation still existed, in writing or in the form of an oath, it was necessary to formally invalidate it, and therefore the rule allows the local bishop, as the subject of authority, to do this. Question. Can a priest who, as a result of some crime, was deposed, or who, on his own volition, resigned from the priesthood and subsequently admitted his guilt, can cry: “Blessed is God,” and “God is generous to us,” and “True Christ,” also perform incense or receive communion at the altar? Answer. No, because he is already listed among the laity. (Ap. 62; I Om. 9; III Om. 9; Trul. 21, 26; Neokes. 9; Basil the Great. 3, 27; Cyril Alex. 3). The question is whether a priest who, as a result of some crime, was deposed, or voluntarily renounced the priesthood, can officiate. The answer to this question is absolutely in the negative sense, because such a person is no longer a priest, but a simple layman. This conclusion is based on the definition of the 21st canon of the Trullo Council, which we have already discussed in detail; is further based on the definition of the 62nd Apostolic Canon regarding persons who renounce the name of a cleric, which was discussed in detail in the interpretation of the 9th Canon of the Council of Ephesus, or the message of this Council to the Pamphylian Council about Metropolitan Eustathius. And that not a single sacred person who has undergone a canonical eruption can perform a single sacred act under any circumstances, and that, otherwise, his sacred act has no meaning either in itself or in relation to the person for whom it was performed - we spoke about all this in detail in the interpretation of the 4th canon of the Council of Antioch. Question. What does it mean when Basil the Great says in small penances: Let him be removed from blessing to the extent of his fall? Answer. This means depriving someone of the blessing that is taught in the church. The ecclesiastical blessings (έκκλησιαστικαι εολογιαι) mentioned here are blessings given by bishops and elders, for prayer or for strengthening the faithful with God's help; and therefore this or that sinner is more or less deprived of these blessings to the extent of the sin into which he has fallen 4 . Small penances are those that Basil prescribed for minor sins and which are among the other general penances of Basil the Great, numbered from 11 to 60 (according to the Migne edition) 5 . Question. Can someone who is forbidden to receive communion eat from the prosphoras brought to the altar? Answer. In the life of St. Theodore Sikeot says that this is forbidden to such people. (Ap. 3, 4, 38, 41; Gangr. 7, 8; Laod. 14; Carth. 37). St. Theodore Sikeot, in whose life it is said that one who is unworthy of St. cannot receive antidor in the church. communion, - was the archimandrite of several monasteries in Galatia and the bishop of Anastasiople. He became famous for many miracles and died in 613 6. Question. Is it necessary to subject the subject persons to penance according to the Canonicon of the Faster? Answer. The said Canonicon, with his excessive leniency, destroyed many; and therefore those who know that good and move away from good should be corrected. We mentioned this rule in the interpretation of the 3rd rule of St. John the Faster and saw that, despite such a merciless condemnation, the Canon of the Fast still came into general use in the Eastern Church, and on the basis of this Canon, the Nomocanon was mainly compiled for our B. breviary. Various canonical instructions. 1. What evil have we suffered? Is it really sad that they suffered nothing and were not recognized as worthy of suffering for Christ (Acts 5:41). If it saddens you that another owns a house of prayer, and you worship the Creator of heaven and earth in the open air, then consider that the eleven disciples were imprisoned in the upper room, and those who crucified the Lord performed Jewish worship in the notorious church. Judas, who preferred the death of strangulation to a shameful life, showed himself to be perhaps better than those who now indifferently accept all the reproaches of people, and therefore are shamelessly ready to commit vile deeds. Do not be deceived only by their deceitful speeches when they attribute to themselves the correctness of their faith. For they are sellers of Christ, and not Christians; They always prefer what is useful for them in this life to the true life. When they decided to acquire this empty power, they joined the enemies of Christ: and when they saw the people irritated, they again imposed the guise of Orthodoxy. I do not recognize as a bishop and will not rank among the priests of Christ the one who, through defiled hands, to ruin the faith, was elevated to the position of leader. This is my decision! And you, if you have anything in common with me, will obviously hold the same opinion. If you come up with something on your own, then everyone is free in their opinion, and we are clean from this blood 7 . This excerpt is from one (240 al. 192) message of Basil the Great, addressed in 376 to the elders of Nicopolis. A certain Fronton was illegally installed as bishop of Nicopolis and tried by all means, either by force or by cunning, to establish himself in the Nicopolis church, for the sake of which he persecuted the elders who did not want to recognize him as such. St. Basil encourages these presbyters, advises them not to lose heart, but to hope for God’s help, which will free them from the man about whom Basil says that he does not consider him a bishop. 2. It is good and beneficial to partake and accept the divine mysteries every day: for Christ Himself clearly says: whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood will have eternal life (John 6:54). However, we commune four times every week: on the Lord’s Day, on Wednesday, on Friday and Saturday, and also on other days, if there is a commemoration of a saint. And no matter how dangerous it is, if someone, during persecution, in the absence of a priest or servant, finds it necessary to take the sacrament with his own hand, it would be unnecessary to prove this, because long-standing custom confirms this in practice. For all monks living in deserts where there is no priest, keeping the sacrament in the house, commune to themselves. And in Alexandria and Egypt, every baptized layman, for the most part, has communion in his home, and partakes himself when he wants. For, when the priest has once performed and taught the Sacrifice, then he who has accepted it as a whole, receiving communion daily, must rightly believe that he is receiving and receiving communion from the one who taught it. For in church, too, the priest teaches a portion, and the one who receives it holds it with full right, and thus brings it to his lips with his own hand. Therefore, it has one force, whether someone accepts one part from the priest, or many parts together 8 . And this is also the message (93 al. 289) of Basil the Great, addressed by him around the year 372 to a certain Caesarea. Two questions are raised here: 1) how one should receive communion of the holy body and blood of Christ, and 2) that during persecution, when there is no priest, one can receive communion from one’s own hands. Regarding the second question, see the interpretation of the 58th and 101st rules of the Trullo Council. 3. The priest strive to be an impeccable worker, rightly ruling the word of truth. Never come to a church service if you are at enmity with someone, so that the Holy Spirit does not leave you on the day of the service. Do not sue or quarrel on that day, but while staying in church, pray and read until the time comes to perform the divine sacrament, and then contritely and with a pure heart approach the holy altar, and do not look around, but with trembling and fear appear before the heavenly King. For the sake of pleasing people, do not rush and do not shorten your prayers, do not pay attention to people, but turn your gaze to the King present here and the heavenly forces standing around. Be a worthy executor of the holy rules. Do not serve with those for whom it is prohibited. Look who you stand before, how you serve and whom you give communion to. Do not forget the Lord's commandment and the commandment of the holy Apostles, which says: Thou shalt not give the holy thing unto a dog, neither castest thy pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). Watch the dogs, etc. Be careful not to fall, fearing man, and do not give the Son of God into the hands of the unworthy. At that hour, do not be afraid of the nobles of the earth and even of the one who wears the diadem. Those who are worthy of divine communion, receive communion freely, just as they themselves received it freely; but do not give communion to those who are forbidden by divine rules, for they are like pagans, and if they do not convert, woe to them and to those who give them communion. Be careful (not my business, but yours) that through your negligence a mouse or anything else does not touch the holy gifts, that the gifts do not spoil, that the smoke does not turn black, that the hands of the unclean and unworthy do not touch them. If you always keep this and the like in your mind, you will be able to save yourself and those listening 9 . Sermo ob sacerdotum instructionem is called in the Migne edition the present instruction (παράγγελμα) of Basil the Great, given to the priest who is to serve St. liturgy. This is the instruction of St. Basil compiled it in 375, and each priest received a copy of it immediately upon ordination. 4. (At this point, the author cites in a Serbian translation from Greek from Af. Syntagma (IV, 387) a manual for confessors belonging to St. John Chrysostom, which was mentioned in Volume I (44 pages) and which we have already given in the Russian translation on pp. 216–217 of the same Volume I of this edition) 10. I notice that many simply, as it happens, more by custom and routine than with reason and consciously, partake of the body of Christ. The time has come, they say, for St. Pentecost and St. Easter, everyone, no matter who they are (according to their internal disposition), must partake of the mysteries. You don’t have to celebrate the holiday, but you need to clear your conscience and only then take communion. For anyone who is not pure and worthy has no right to partake of the most holy and most terrible body on the feast day. Thoughts that those who participated in the ancient sacrifice used great precautions. They were purified in advance and appeared purified in everything; But you, approaching the sacrifice at which the angels tremble, determine the completion of this deed at a certain time and dare to accept the body of Christ with unclean lips and hands? You don’t even dare to kiss the king when you have a bad smell from your mouth: how can you, with a fetid soul, dare to kiss the King of Heaven? Such an act is an insult to Him. Therefore, if you are unworthy of communion, then you do not belong to those who are worthy of prayer and church service. Listen to the Lord, who says: Those who are in repentance (those are the ones who come), but those who do not receive communion are not in repentance 11 . This canonical instruction on how one should approach Holy Communion was taken from the conversation of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians. 6. Many partake of this (holy) sacrifice once a year, others twice, and others several times. Our word applies to everyone, not only to those present here, but also to those in the desert, for they receive communion once a year. Who should we approve? Are those who receive communion once, or those who often, or those who rarely? Neither one nor the other, nor the third, but those who receive communion with a clear conscience, with an impeccable life. Let such people always begin, but not such people - not once. Why? Because they bring upon themselves judgment, condemnation, punishment and torment. Do not be surprised at this: just as food, which is nutritious in itself, when it enters an upset stomach, produces harm and disorder throughout the body and becomes the cause of illness, so it happens with terrible (holy) mysteries. You become worthy of a spiritual meal, and then again you defile your lips with uncleanness. You anoint yourself with myrrh and then again become filled with the stench, and after a year you begin communion. Do you think that forty days is enough for you to cleanse your sins for the entire time, and then, after a week, you again indulge in the same things? Tell me, if you, having recovered for forty days from a long illness, then again took up the same food that caused the illness, would you not have ruined your previous work and ruined yourself even more? If in this way the natural order is perverted, then even more so the moral order, which depends on the will. You spend forty days restoring the health of your soul, or maybe not even forty, and you think to appease God? Tell me, are you laughing? For this reason the deacon also exclaims, saying: holy to holies, i.e. he who is not holy, let him not approach. He doesn’t just say: who is pure from sin and who is holy 12. And this canonical injunction belongs to St. John Chrysostom: it was taken from his conversation on the epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews. 7. Question: What is better: to take communion often or rarely? Answer. The Apostle says: let a man tempt himself, and let him eat of the bread, and let him drink of the cup. He who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment without considering the body of the Lord. For this reason, there are many in you who are weak and ill, and sleep contentedly. Even if they had reasoned with themselves, they would not have been condemned. If we judge, we are punished by the Lord, lest we be condemned with the world (1 Cor. 11:28–32). It is clear that we must first cleanse ourselves and appear clean from every opposite deed, and only then proceed to the divine sacrament, so that it does not serve to destroy our souls and bodies. For God, through Moses, says to Israel: Throughout your generations, if every person of every seed of yours comes to the saints, if the sons of Israel sanctify the Lord, and his uncleanness is on him, his soul will be required of me: I am the Lord your God (Lev. 22:3). And in another place: And the children of Israel shall be reverent from their uncleanness: and let not the uncleanness die for its own sake, so that they may defile my tabernacle even in them (Lev. 15:31). For the apostle also says to those who partake unworthily, as was said above, that many of you are weak and sick, and many are dying, i.e. sick and dying. Therefore, the divine David and those who were with him, when they wanted to eat the showbread, which served as a prototype of the body of Christ, the bishop asked them: if the fathers are saved only from the wife, they will be eaten (1 Sam. 21:4) 13. This canonical answer belongs to St. Anastasius, Patriarch of Antioch (from 561). As you can see, this answer concerns the same subject to which the canonical instructions we cited above under numbers 2, 5 and 6 are devoted to, namely: when and how one should receive St. Communion. Rules of Nikephoros the Confessor (†818). Nikephoros became Patriarch of Constantinople in 806 and ruled the church until 815, when he was deposed from the pulpit by the iconoclastic emperor Leo the Armenian because he wanted to remain faithful to the definitions of the 7th century. cathedral, and died in captivity. Some of his many writings are important for church law. We know: a) about the first (6) ecumenical councils, b) canonical regulations on various subjects, c) rules extracted from his type, and d) rules extracted from church decrees that he, together with other holy fathers, issued. Of all the rules of Nikephoros, Blastarus collected 37 main ones, which were included in the Pidalion, and according to another manuscript, 38 were included in the Athenian Syntagma. 7 more rules were added in both collections, then in the Athenian Syntagma 9 more from the general church decrees of Nicephorus, and 17 canonical questions and answers from one of his canonical epistles. The Helmsman (57 chapters) includes 23 rules collected by Vlastar. The chapters of the church, and the correct questions, and the answers of the holy council, which took place in the days of the Most Reverend and Ecumenical Patriarch Nicholas of Constantine, the questioning of John the Mnich and the Silent One, who was in the Holy Mountain, and the monk who was with him.” This appears to be a translation of what Cave states (p. 538): άπόκρισιν ζητηθέντα παρά τού μονάχού ᾿Ιωάννου τού ήσυχαστού τού έν τψ άγίψ όρεί , τψ μακαρίω πατριάρχη Κωνσταντινουπόλεως κύρψ Νικολάψ. If this is so, as I believe, 70 in the indicated chapters the answers contained in the Pidalion and the Athenian Syntagma were repeated, since in the Pilot questions 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 16, 17 and 20 correspond fully to those mentioned in these two collections. In M. I. Κωνσταντινουπόλεως (Κωνσταντίνουπ. 1888–1889, I,9–16) 17 questions and answers. Interpretation of Balsamon in Af. Synth., IV,425. In the book of Lives of Saints there is the life of this saint under April 22 (Published Moscow, 1815, II, 82–93) [Cf. Archbishop Sergius, Complete Monthly Books of the East, 2nd ed. Vladimir 1901, vol.II, p.152]. For the Greek text, see Af. Syntagme, IV,386 [Cf. Migne, s.g., t.32, col.893–898. The Russian translation offered here is borrowed, with some, in relation to the text of Af. Syntagms, modifications, from “The Works of St. Vasily the Great" in Russian translation from Moscow. spirit. Academy, 3rd ed. 1892, part 7, p. 173]. For the Greek text, see Af. Syntagme, IV, 389 [Cf. Migne, s.g., t.32, col.483–486. The Russian translation offered here is borrowed, with some, in relation to the text of Af. Syntagms, modifications, from “The Works of St. Vasily the Great" in Russian translation from Moscow. spirit. Academy, 3rd ed. 1892, part 6, pp. 201–2]. For the Greek text, see Af. Syntagme, IV, 391–2 [Cf. Migne, s.g., t.31, col.1685–8. The proposed Russian translation is made from the Greek text Af. Syntagmas]. “When imposing penance, you need to look not so much at the number of sins as at the disposition of the sinner, so that, intending to sew up what is torn, you do not make an even bigger hole, and when you want to pick up what has fallen, you do not cause even greater destruction; because the sick, absent-minded and generally devoted to secular pleasures, just like those who can be proud of their origin and their power, will only little by little be able to force themselves to think about their sins and only gradually will be able to free themselves from the evil to which they have fallen. Thus, whoever wants to turn them to the true path immediately with the help of severity can easily achieve that they will not repent even partially. Because when the soul reaches the point where it ceases to be sensitive, it falls into despair and no longer listens to good words, is not frightened by threats and is not strengthened by virtue, but becomes worse than that city about which the prophet says with contempt: “Your face is like that of a harlot, and you have no shame in anything.” As a result, the pastor needs a lot of knowledge in order to be able to penetrate from all sides into the aspirations of the soul. Because, just as many fall into madness and despair of their salvation only because they could not bear too bitter medicines, so there are those who, having not been punished in accordance with the extent of their sins, no longer look back at their souls, but become even worse and sin even more. So, the shepherd must not leave anything unexamined, but must test everything accurately and, in accordance with this, use what is necessary so that his work is not in vain” (Aph. Synth., IV, 387). For the Greek text, see Af. Syntagme, IV,390 [Cf. Migne, s.g., t.62, col.28–9. Proposed Russian translation based on the abridged text of Af. Syntagms, and for the widespread Russian translation of the widespread text in Min’s edition, see the complete collection of “Works of St. John Chrysostom", ed. St. Petersburg spirit. Academy 1905, vol. 11, pp. 29–30]. For the Greek text, see Af. Syntagme, IV, 390–391 [Cf. Migne, s.g., t.63, col.131–2. The proposed Russian translation is borrowed from the complete collection of “Works of St. John Chrysostom", ed. St. Petersburg spirit. Academy, 1905, vol. 12, pp. 153–154, with some, in relation to the Greek text Af. Syntagms, modifications]. For the Greek text, see Af. Syniagme, IV,388. You might be interested in: