Canon Law & Easter Computus 3 part 2/11

To these matters we therefore reply—not because we believe you to be ignorant of anything, but that with greater authority you may either instruct your own people, or, if any err from the institutions of the Roman Church, admonish them; or do not delay to make it known, that we may be able to learn who they are that either introduce novelties or suppose that the custom of any church other than the Roman is to be observed. On giving the peace after the mysteries are completed. I. You assert, then, that certain men command the peace to the peoples before the mysteries are completed, or give it among themselves the priests, whereas after all those things which I ought not to disclose, the peace must of necessity be announced.

By which it may be established that the people have given their consent to all the things that are done in the mysteries and celebrated in the church, and that these things are shown to have been concluded by the seal of the concluding peace. On the names not to be recited before the priest's prayer. II. As for the names to be recited before the priest makes his prayer, and as for his commending in his prayer the oblations of those whose names are to be recited—you yourself, in your prudence, recognize how superfluous it is to insinuate a person's name beforehand, when you have not yet offered his victim to God, although nothing is unknown to Him.

First, therefore, the oblations are to be commended, and then the names of those whose they are are to be pronounced, that they may be named amid the sacred mysteries, not among the other things which we send forth beforehand, so that by the mysteries themselves we may open the way for the prayers to come. That the baptized are not to be signed except by bishops. III. As for the signing of infants, it is manifest that it is not lawful for it to be done by any other than a bishop. For presbyters, although they are priests, nevertheless do not possess the summit of the pontificate.

But that this belongs to bishops alone—either to sign, or to bestow the Paraclete Spirit—is shown not only by ecclesiastical custom, but also by that reading of the Acts of the Apostles which asserts that Peter and John were sent to give the Holy Spirit to those already baptized. For to presbyters, whether apart from the bishop or in the presence of the bishop when they baptize, it is permitted to anoint the baptized with the chrism—but that which has been consecrated by the bishop—yet not to sign the forehead with the same oil, which is owed to bishops alone when they bestow the Paraclete Spirit. But the words I cannot tell, lest I should seem rather to betray than to answer the consultation. That fasting is duly to be kept every Sabbath. IV.

That fasting is to be kept on the Sabbath, the clearest reasoning demonstrates. For if we celebrate the Lord's day, on account of the venerable resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, not only at Easter but also frequent the image of that day through every succession of weeks; and if on the sixth day we fast on account of the Lord's Passion, we ought not to pass over the Sabbath, which is seen to be enclosed between the sorrow and the joy of that time. For it is certainly established that the apostles were, during those two days, in sorrow and in grief, and that they hid themselves for fear of the Jews. And it is certainly not doubtful that they fasted so greatly during those two days mentioned, that the tradition of the Church holds that during those two days the sacraments are not at all to be celebrated.

This form is certainly to be kept through each week, because the commemoration of that day is always to be celebrated. But if they think that one should fast once and on one Sabbath only, then the Lord's day and the sixth day too will likewise be celebrated only once, at Easter. But if the image of the Lord's day and of the sixth day is to be renewed through each week, it is the mark of a madman to keep the custom of the two days while passing over the Sabbath, since it has a cause not unequal—namely, from the sixth day on which the Lord suffered, when He also went down to those below, that rising on the third day He might restore joy after the preceding two-day sorrow.

We therefore do not deny that one should fast on the sixth day, but we say that this is to be done on the Sabbath also, because both days brought sorrow to the apostles, or to those who had followed Christ, who, made glad on the Lord's day, willed not only that it should be most festive, but also judged that it should be frequented throughout all the weeks. On the leaven to be sent to the presbyters of the city. V.

As for the leaven which we send through the titular churches on the Lord's day, you have wished to consult us superfluously, since all our churches are established within the city; and because their presbyters, on that very day, cannot assemble with us on account of the people entrusted to them, for this reason they receive through the acolytes the leaven prepared by us, so that on that day above all they may not judge themselves separated from our communion. This, I do not think, ought to be done through the parishes, because the sacraments are not to be carried far, nor do we send it to the presbyters established throughout the various cemeteries, and the presbyters have the right and license of preparing these things themselves. On the baptized who are possessed. VI.

As for those baptized persons who afterwards are seized by a demon, or by some fault, or by an intervening sin, your love has inquired whether they can or ought to be signed by a presbyter or a deacon: this is not lawful unless the bishop has commanded it; for in no way is a hand to be laid upon such a one, unless the bishop has given authority to do it. But that it may be done, it belongs to the bishop to command that a hand be laid upon him either by a presbyter or by the other clerics. For how could this be done without great labour, that a possessed person established far off should be led to the bishop? Since, if such a case should befall him on the journey, he can neither easily be carried to the bishop nor brought back to his own home. On penitents. VII.

As for penitents who perform penance, whether for graver offences or for lighter ones, if no sickness intervenes, the custom of the Roman Church shows that they are to be granted remission on the Thursday before Easter. For the rest, it belongs to the priest to judge concerning the estimation of the weight of the offences: that he attend to the confession of the penitent, and to the weeping and tears of the one amending his life, and then command him to be released, when he sees fitting satisfaction. But if anyone has fallen into sickness and come even to despair, remission is to be granted to him before the time of Easter, lest he depart from the world without communion. On the epistle of the holy apostle James, in which prayer for the sick is prescribed. VIII.

Indeed, since your love wished to be informed about this, as about other matters, my son Caelestinus the deacon also added in his letter that this point was raised by your love—namely, that which is written in the epistle of the blessed apostle James: 'If any among you is sick, let him bring in the presbyters, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith shall save the sick man, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him.'

There is no doubt that this ought to be received and understood concerning the faithful who are sick, who can be anointed with the holy oil of chrism, which, prepared by the bishop, it is lawful not only for priests but for all Christians to use, to be applied in their own or their kinsfolk's necessity. For the rest, we see it superfluously added that there should be doubt about the bishop in a matter which there is no doubt is lawful for presbyters. For it was said of presbyters for this reason, that bishops, being hindered by other occupations, cannot go to all the sick. But if a bishop is either able, or judges someone worthy to be visited by himself, he can both bless and touch with chrism without hesitation, since it is his to prepare the chrism itself.

For this cannot be poured upon penitents, because it is a kind of sacrament. For to those to whom the rest of the sacraments are denied, how is it thought that one kind can be granted? To all these matters, therefore, most beloved brother, which your love wished to be explained by us, we have taken care to reply as we were able: that your church may be able to keep and observe the Roman custom, from which it draws its origin. But the rest, which it was not lawful to write, we shall be able to declare when you are present and have been questioned. But it will be in the power of the Lord also to bring this about: that you may well instruct both your church and our clerics who serve in the divine offices under your pontificate, and may furnish to others a form which they ought to imitate. Given on the fourteenth day before the Kalends of April, in the consulship of Theodosius Augustus

…seventh consulship, and that of Palladius, most distinguished man. (In the year of Christ 416.) Innocent to Victricius, bishop of Rouen, greeting. Although to you, most beloved brother, on account of the merit and honour of the priesthood in which you greatly excel, all things pertaining to living and teaching according to the ecclesiastical rules are known, and there is nothing that may seem to you to have been less gathered from the sacred readings:

Nevertheless, because you greatly requested the norm and authority of the Roman Church, complying very much with your wish, I have sent, annexed to my letters, the digested disciplines of life and of approved morals, through which the peoples of the churches of your region may perceive by what rules and regulations the life of Christians ought to be contained, in whatever each man's profession may be, and what kind of discipline is observed in the churches of the city of Rome. It will be for your love sedulously to insinuate this book of rules, as a teaching manual and monitor, throughout the neighbouring congregations and to our fellow-priests who preside over their own churches in those regions: that they may both come to know our practices, and may be able, by diligence in teaching, to form their faithful unto the same morals.

For either they will recognize their own purpose from this fitting reading of ours, or, if anything is still lacking, they will easily be able to supply it by good imitation. Let us begin, therefore, with the help of the holy apostle Peter, through whom both the apostolate and the episcopate took their beginning in Christ: so that, since many causes have often arisen which in some cases were not causes but crimes, henceforth let it be the care of each priest in his own church to have such oversight—as the apostle Paul preaches, that such a church is to be presented to God as not having spot or wrinkle (Eph. v)—lest by the love of any diseased sheep our conscience, being contaminated, should be violated.

On account of those, therefore, who either through ignorance or through sloth do not keep the ecclesiastical discipline, and presume many things not to be presumed, you have rightly requested that in those parts the form which the Roman Church holds in such matters should be observed. Not that any new precepts are being commanded, but that we desire those things which through the sloth of certain men have been neglected to be observed by all—which nevertheless have been established by apostolic and patristic tradition. For it is written to the Thessalonians, Paul admonishing: 'Stand fast, and hold the traditions which we have taught, whether by word or by our epistle' (II Thess. ii, 14).

This indeed ought the more vehemently to rouse your mind: that, free from every stain of this present age, you may be found secure before the sight of God; for to whom much is entrusted, more is exacted from him in usury of punishments. Therefore, since we are compelled to render an account not for ourselves only, but for the people of Christ, we ought to instruct the people with deifying [Cod. ms.: sanctified] discipline. For there have arisen not a few who, not holding the statutes of their elders, would violate the chastity of the Church by their own presumption, following the favour of the people and not fearing the judgment of God. Therefore, lest by our silence we should be thought to offer consent to these men—since the Lord says, 'You saw a thief, and you ran with him' (Ps.

…XLIX, 18)—these are the things which henceforth, in view of the divine judgment, it is expedient for every catholic bishop to keep. That a bishop is not to be ordained without the cognizance of the metropolitan. IX. First, that without the cognizance of the metropolitan bishop no one may dare to ordain; for that judgment is whole which is confirmed by the opinions of the many, and let not one bishop presume to ordain, lest the benefit conferred should seem stealthy. For this was established and defined by the Synod of Nicaea. Who cannot be received into the clergy, and that the causes of clerics are to be settled by their own bishops. X. Likewise, if anyone, after the remission of sins, has held the belt of secular military service, he ought by no means to be admitted to the clerical office.

But if any causes or contentions arise among clerics, both of the higher order and also of the lower, let the quarrel be settled, according to the Synod of Nicaea, by the bishops of the same province being gathered together; nor let it be lawful for anyone, without prejudice however to the Roman Church, leaving those priests who govern the Church of God in the same province by the divine nod, to fly off to other provinces. But if anyone should perhaps presume this, let him be both removed from the office of the clergy and judged by all to be guilty of injuries. But if greater causes have been brought into the midst, let them be referred, after the episcopal judgment, to the Apostolic See, as the synod has established. That a cleric is not to take a widow as wife. XI.

That a cleric is not to take a widow as wife, because it is written: 'Let the priest take a virgin to wife, not a widow, nor one cast off' (Lev. xxi, 13). Certainly he who strives toward the priesthood by his own labour and the uprightness of his life ought to take care lest, hindered by this prejudice, he be unable to attain it. That if a layman has married a widow, he is not to become a cleric. XII. That he who has married a widow as wife, though a layman, whether before baptism or after baptism, is not to be admitted to the clergy, because he is seen to be excluded by the same fault. For in baptism crimes are remitted, but the fellowship of a wife once taken is not loosed. That he who has had a second wife is not to be a cleric. XIII. That he who has married a second wife is not to become a cleric, because it is written:

'The husband of one wife' (1 Tim. iii); and again: 'Let my priests marry but once' (Lev. xxi); and elsewhere: 'My priests shall not marry again' (Ezek. xliv). And if it is supposed by some that, before baptism, if perchance a man took a wife, and—she departing from the world—he married another, this was remitted in baptism, he errs greatly from the rule, because in baptism sins are remitted, but the number of wives taken is not abolished; since indeed a wife is taken by the precept of the law, so much so that even in paradise, when the parents of the human race were joined together (Gen. ii), they were blessed by the Lord Himself, and Solomon says, 'A wife is prepared for a man by God' (Prov. xix)—which form usage itself shows that all priests also of the Church observe.

For it is quite absurd for anyone to believe that a wife taken before baptism is not to be counted after baptism, since the blessing which is imposed by the priest upon those marrying is taught not to have given matter for sinning, but to have held to the form of the law instituted by God of old. But if a wife who was taken before baptism is not thought to be counted, then neither are the sons who were begotten before baptism reckoned as sons. That no bishop is to usurp the ordaining of another's clerics. XIV. That no one is to usurp the ordaining of a cleric from another church, unless his bishop, entreated by prayers, has willed to grant it.

This too the Synod of Nicaea established: that one church is not to receive a cleric cast off by another. That those who come to the Church from the Novatians or the Montanists are not to be rebaptized. XV. That those coming from the Novatians or the Montanists are to be received only through the laying on of hands, because, although baptized by heretics, they were nevertheless baptized in the name of Christ—except those who, if perchance crossing over from us to them, have been rebaptized; these, if, coming to their senses and considering their ruin, they have preferred to return, are to be admitted under a long satisfaction of penance. That priests and Levites are not to come together with women. XVI.

Moreover, what is worthy, and chaste, and honourable, the Church ought by all means to hold: that priests and Levites should not come together with their wives, because they are occupied with the necessities of daily ministry; for it is written: 'Be holy, because I also am holy, the Lord your God.' For if in ancient times the priests did not depart from the temple of God in the year of their course, as we read of Zacharias (Luke i, 8), and did not touch their house at all—men to whom indeed the use of a wife had been relaxed for the sake of the succession of offspring, because none had been commanded to approach the priesthood from another tribe and other than from the seed of Aaron (Num.

…xviii)—how much more ought these priests or Levites to preserve chastity from the day of their ordination, men whose priesthood or ministry is without succession, nor does a day pass on which they are free either from the divine sacrifices or from the office of baptism? For if Paul writes to the Corinthians, saying: 'Abstain yourselves for a time, that you may be free for prayer' (1 Cor.

…vii), and he certainly prescribed this for laymen, much more shall priests, whose office of praying and sacrificing is continual, always be bound to abstain from such fellowship; who, if they are contaminated with carnal concupiscence, with what shame will they perhaps presume to sacrifice, or with what conscience, or by what merit do they believe themselves to be heard, since it has been said: 'All things are clean to the clean, but to the defiled and unbelieving nothing is clean' (Tit. i)? But perhaps one believes this to be lawful, because it is written: 'The husband of one wife' (1 Tim. iii)—he did not say one remaining in the concupiscence of begetting, but on account of the conscience to come. For he did not exclude those whole in body, who said: 'I would that all were as I myself am' (1 Cor. vii).

And more openly he declares, saying: 'But those who are in the flesh cannot please God; you, however, are now not in the flesh, but in the spirit' (Rom. viii). That a monk, if he has been made a cleric, ought to keep his purpose. XVII. Concerning monks who, after long remaining in monasteries, have afterwards come to the order of the clergy, they ought not to deviate from their former purpose. For either, as he was in the monastery and as he long preserved it, being placed in a higher grade he ought not to lose it; or if, having been corrupted after he was baptized, sitting in the monastery, he should wish to approach the order of the clergy, he can by no means have a wife, because one already corrupted beforehand cannot be blessed with a spouse.

Which form is kept especially among clerics, since the old rule holds this: that whoever, being corrupted after baptism, should wish to be a cleric, should pledge himself by no means to take a wife. That a member of the city council (curialis) is not to become a cleric, on account of the pleasures which, being invented by the devil, he is compelled to exhibit. XVIII. Moreover, certain of our brethren frequently strive to make clerics of decurions, or of any persons occupied with public functions; from whom afterwards a greater sorrow arises, when something is commanded by the emperor concerning their being recalled, than the joy that arose over those received.

For it is established that they, in those very offices, also exhibit pleasures which there is no doubt were invented by the devil, and either preside over the apparatus of games or spectacles, or perhaps take part in them. Let there be set forth as an example the anxiety and sorrow of the brethren, which we have often borne with the emperor present; when we more than once entreated on behalf of these men—as you yourself, being placed with us, came to know—against whom a great vexation pressed, that not only the lower clerics from among the decurions, but even those already established in the priesthood, should be given back. On veiled virgins, if they go astray. XIX.

Likewise, those who have spiritually married Christ and are veiled by a priest, if afterwards they either publicly marry, or secretly join themselves, are not to be admitted to perform penance, unless he to whom they had joined themselves has departed from the world. For if this principle is observed concerning men—that whatever woman marries another while her husband lives is held to be an adulteress, and the license of performing penance is not granted to her unless one of these has died—how much more is it to be held concerning her who had previously joined herself to an immortal Spouse, and afterwards passed over to human nuptials? On unveiled virgins, if they go astray. XX.

But those women who, though not yet covered with the sacred veil, have nevertheless always given themselves out to be continuing in the virginal resolve—although they were not forbidden—if perchance they should marry, must for a considerable time undergo penance twice over, because their pledge was held bound before the Lord. For if among men a contract entered in good faith is wont by no reasoning to be dissolved, how much more shall that promise which they made with God not be loosed without punishment? For if the Apostle Paul said of those women who had departed from the resolve of widowhood that they have damnation, because they had made void their first faith (1 Tim. 5), how much more so the virgins who have attempted to break the faith of their earlier promise?

This rule, therefore, dearest brother, if it be observed with full vigilance by all the priests of God, ambition will cease, dissension will be put to rest, heresies and schisms will not arise, the devil will gain no place for raging, unanimity will abide, iniquity overcome will be trodden underfoot, truth will blaze with spiritual fervour, the peace proclaimed by the lips will accord with the will of the soul, and the saying of the Apostle will be fulfilled, that, being of one mind and thinking the same thing, we may abide in Christ (Phil. 2), claiming nothing for ourselves through contention nor through vain glory, pleasing not men but God our Saviour: to whom be honour and glory unto the ages of ages. Amen. Given on the fifteenth day before the Kalends of March, in the consulship of Honorius Augustus for the sixth time and of Aristaenetus, vir clarissimus.

(of the consuls; in the year of Christ 404.) Innocent to Exuperius, bishop of Toulouse, greeting. When you consulted me, dearest brother, as to what I thought concerning each proposed matter, I have, according to the measure of my understanding, answered what seemed best—what right reason might teach should be followed, or what the authority of the sacred reading might show, or what the observed sequence of the ages might demonstrate. Indeed your Charity, following the practice of the prudent, chose rather to refer to the Apostolic See what it ought to observe in doubtful matters, rather than, by presumptuous usurpation, to retain in particular cases whatever might seem good to itself. For why should we think it more shameful to learn something than to be wholly ignorant?

To me also there accrues a teachableness from the conferring of counsel, so that, the reasons having been searched out, I am constrained to answer the questions put; and thus it comes about that he who is asked to teach always learns something. I will therefore set forth each point, and append the answer. On the incontinence of priests or levites. XXI. You have proposed what ought to be observed concerning those who, set in the ministry of the diaconate or in the office of the presbyterate, the general voice of the sons has reported to be, or to have been, incontinent.

Concerning these the discipline of the divine laws is manifest, and the clear admonitions of Siricius, bishop of blessed memory, have come down to us, namely, that the incontinent set in such offices should be deprived of all ecclesiastical honour, nor be admitted to that ministry which ought to be fulfilled by continence alone. For there is a very ancient authority of the sacred law (1 Chron. 25; Luke 1), kept from the very beginning, that in the temple the priests were commanded to dwell in the year of their course, so that, serving the sacred oblations, they might claim the divine mysteries for themselves pure and cleansed from every stain; nor is it lawful that those be admitted to the sacrifices who practise carnal intercourse even with a wife, because it is written:

Be ye holy, for I also am holy, the Lord your God (Lev. 20). To these men, indeed, the use of a wife had been relaxed for the sake of the succession of offspring, because no one from another tribe had been commanded to approach the priesthood: how much more ought these priests or levites to keep their chastity from the day of their ordination, whose priesthood or ministry is without succession, and for whom no day passes by on which they are free from the divine sacrifices or from the office of baptism? For if Paul writes to the Corinthians, saying: Abstain ye for a time, that ye may have leisure for prayer (1 Cor.

7), and this he enjoined certainly upon the laity, much more must priests, whose office of praying and sacrificing is continual, always abstain from intercourse of this kind: and if such a one be defiled by carnal concupiscence, with what shame will he presume to sacrifice, or with what conscience, or by what merit does he believe himself to be heard, when it is said: To the pure all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure (Tit. 1)? But perhaps he believes this to be permitted, because it is written: The husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3); he did not say this of one continuing in the concupiscence of begetting, but for the sake of future continence. For he did not refuse those who are whole in body, who said: But I would that all were even as I myself (1 Cor.

7), and more openly he declares, saying: But they that are in the flesh cannot please God; but ye are not now in the flesh, but in the spirit (Rom. 8). And he said one having children (1 Tim. 3), not one begetting them. But this is plainly a distinct and divided sentence; for if it shall not be proved that that pattern of ecclesiastical life and discipline alike, which went forth from bishop Siricius to the provinces, reached certain persons, pardon for their ignorance shall be granted to them twice over, on this condition: that henceforth they utterly begin to abstain, and so retain the grades in which they were found, in such wise that it be not lawful for them to ascend to higher ones: to whom it ought to be a benefit, that they lose not the very place which they hold.

But if any are detected to have known the pattern of living sent forth by Siricius, and yet not at once to have cast off the desires of lust, they are by all means to be removed—those who, after the admonition had become known, judged that pleasure should be preferred. On the final penance. XXII. This also has been asked, what ought to be observed concerning those who, after baptism, having given themselves up at all times to the pleasures of incontinence, at the very end of their life beg at once for penance and for reconciliation of communion. Concerning these the earlier observance was harsher, the later, with mercy intervening, is more lenient; for the earlier custom held that penance be granted them, but communion denied.