Правило 17 Василия Великого

You asked us about Presbyter Vianor, could he be accepted into the clergy after taking the oath? I remember that for the Antioch clergy I had already outlined a certain general definition about all those who swore together with him, that is, let them withdraw from national meetings, but in private, let them act in a presbytery manner. By this, permission is given to him for his ministry: because his priesthood is not in Antioch, but in Iconium, which, as you wrote to us, he chose to live instead of Antioch. And this is how this husband can be accepted: only your piety will require from him repentance for the inclination to the oath that he gave to an unfaithful man, not being able to bear the anxiety of this small calamity. (Ap. 25; Trul. 95; Basil Vel. 10, 28, 29, 64, 81, 82). The present and the thirty-three rules following it (17–50) are compiled from the second canonical letter of Basil the Great dated 375 to the same Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium, to whom the first letter was addressed. After the above preface, Basil the Great begins to give answers to all the questions of Amphilochius. This rule is an answer to the question of whether a certain presbyter Vianor, who has made a vow similar to the vow of Cyriac, should be accepted into the clergy, as stated in the 10th rule of St. Basil. It is not clear from the text of the rule what the matter was. According to the interpretation of this rule by Zonaro, a certain non-Orthodox nobleman of Antioch, by threats, forced some of the local elders to swear that they would not perform priestly services. Among the priests who listened to the nobleman was Presbyter Vianor. Regretting what he had done, this presbyter moved from Antioch to Iconium to Amphilochius and asked to be accepted into the clergy of the Iconian church. To the question of Amphilochius about what he should do in this case, Basil replies that he has already issued one general instruction (κοινόν δρον) regarding all Antiochian clergy who took the mentioned oath together with Vianor, namely, that they should not serve openly, but privately. And so Vasily ordered so that these presbyters would not be a reason for temptation for the people, who could know that they had sworn not to serve, and now meanwhile they are serving again and, therefore, they violated their oath. As a result of this, Basil allows Vianor to serve as a presbyter, and this is all the more so since he did not intend to return to Antioch, where he took the mentioned oath, but will serve in Iconium, where he settled, however, on the condition that this presbyter must withstand the appropriate penance for the fact that, out of cowardice, he hastened to take the mentioned oath 51. The permission given by Saint Basil to the Antiochian presbyters that they could serve privately, but not openly, must be looked at as an exception to the general rule. According to Canon 58 of the Council of Laodicea, it is forbidden not only for presbyters, but also for bishops, to offer the holy sacrifice privately, in private houses. Subsequently, when, with the blessing of the bishop, it was possible to open house churches, the 31st Trullan rule prohibited presbyters from serving in them without the knowledge of the bishop. Vasily himself prohibits and condemns this ministry of elders in private homes (right 1), as did other fathers and teachers of the church 52. Basil allowed this to the Antioch presbyters in view of the exceptional circumstances created by the aforementioned nobleman in Antioch in order to save them from persecution. Interpretation of Zonara in Af. Synth., IV, 139. Cyrill. alexandr., Adv. Anthropomorphitas, c. 12 [Migne, s. g., t. 9, col. 1097]; Euseb., in psalm. 27 [Migne, s. g., t. 23, col. 245 et seq.]; Iren., lib. IV, c. 26 [Migne, s. g., t. 7, col.1052–56]. You might be interested in: