So-called First-and-Second Council

Interpretation.

Other bishops are not allowed to take a strange cleric without the consent and approval and a letter dimissory of his bishop. But originally and in the beginning the throne of Carthage enjoyed this privilege of taking clerics from any province,²⁰⁵ and anyone whom any province subject to it might ask for by name and desire, and to ordain them bishops, according to what the present Canon says (and see the Interpretation of Ap. c. XVI). But the good will of Carthage demands that it employ this privilege and authority in a moderate fashion, or, in other words, to refrain from taking strange clerics peremptorily, but to satisfy the hearts of their bishops, and to take them with their consent and approval and express permission, for peaceableness and brotherly love. Hence, if there should be found any bishop having one single presbyter deserving to be a bishop, he must give him to the bishop of Carthage and let the latter ordain him a bishop. But if another bishop has a number of clerics in his bishopric, he shall be compelled reciprocally to give one of them to that bishop and to let him ordainhim a presbyter to take the place of the presbyter he parted with. See also Ap. c. XV together with the Canons in the parallel series.

65. The right portion has been allotted to each Bishop, in order that none of the entire realm of parishes should sneak away with a view to getting a Bishop of its own, except with the consent of the one possessing authority. But if that one concede the permission to that same diocese to acquire a Bishop of its own the one thus ordained must not encroach upon the rest of the dioceses, because, being one province out of the many belonging to the one body, it alone was deemed worthy to assume the honor of having an episcopate of its own. (c. VI of Sardica; cc. LXII, CIX of Carthage.).
Interpretation.

Inasmuch as each bishop was provided with a suitable province, no small parish ought to break away from the totality of the province and receive a separate bishop, without the consent and approval and express permission of the bishop of the province in question, which is the same as saying of the Metropolitan, according to this Canon. But if the Metropolitan does give permission for this new bishop to be made such, the latter ought not to appropriate other parishes and districts of the Metropolis, since it was but one member and region that was separated from the entirety of the body of the whole province and deemed worthy to become an episcopate. Accordingly, the new bishop ought to confine himself to it alone, while all the rest of the members of the see ought to be subject to the chief head, the Metropolitan that is to say, and to remain inalienable from him. See also c. VI of Sardica.

66. It is decreed that as regards the children being baptized by the Donatists, which children have not yet been able to realize the ruin resulting from their error, after becoming susceptible of the age of discretion, the truth having come to be more fully understood, so that they loathe the villainy and rascality of those persons, to the catholic Church of God which is diffused over the whole world, by virtue of an ancient procedure through imposition of the hand let such persons be raised out of the error of a name. They ought not to be prevented from entering an order of clergy when in fact they considered the true Church their own upon joining the faith, and coming to believe in Christ therein, they received the sanctifying gifts of the Trinity, which all it is plainly evident are true and holy and divine; and in these accordingly the soul’s every hope exists, notwithstanding that the aforesaid rashness of the heretics impetuously teaches certain things opposed to the name of the truth. For these things are simple, as the holy Apostle teaches by saying: “One God; one faith; one baptism” (Eph. 4:5). And what ought to be given but once is something that it is not permissible to repeat; the name of the error being anathematized, through imposition of the hand let them be admitted into the one Church, the one spoken of as a dove (Song of Songs, 6:9), and sole mother of Christians, in whom a” the sanctifying gifts, soterially everlasting and vital, are received, which, however, inflict upon those persisting in the heresy the great punishment of damnation, in order that what to them in the truth was something brighter that they ought to follow for the purpose of gaining everlasting life, might, in become to those in the error darker and still more damned. Which same is what caused some of them to flee, and after gaining a better understanding of the straightest possible lines embodied in the doctrines of the mother catholic Church, all those Holy Mysteries, they believed in the love-charm of the truth, and embraced it. To such persons when the experience of a benign life accrues, undoubtedly even clerical orders will be conferred upon them to enable them to engage in the ministration of the Holies, and especially in the midst of such a great dearth of the things there is no one who is not ready to concede this right. If, on the other hand, there be some of the same dogma who are Clerics together with the multitude and who are desirous of these honors in coming across to us, they shall be entitled to avail themselves of their love of honor for the purpose of a livelihood, and may keep it for their salvation. But we deem this to be understandable to a higher comprehension, that when the aforesaid brethren are elected they ought to discern the reason for our report with their more sensible and prudent counsel, and deign to assure us in regard to what ought to be formally stated by us concerning this matter. We content ourselves with the question concerning persons who have been baptized, in their infancy, in order that, if it pleases them, they may agree to our own choice as concerning the ordination of these persons.

(Ap. cc. XL, LXVII1; c. VIII of the 1st; c. VII of the 2nd; c. XCV of the 6th; ec. LV, LXXV, LXXVI, LXXVII, LXXVIII, XCIX, C, CI, CII, CIII, CX, CXXVIII, CXXIX of Carthage.).

Interpretation.

The present Canon decrees that if persons baptized by the Donatists in their infancy learn the truth of Orthodoxy after coming of age and attaining to discretion, and come to hate the cacodoxy, whether they, I say, seeing that they have been baptized in the baptism which is performed in accordance with tradition, to wit, that performed by the Orthodox ecclesiastics (which is one, as St. Paul says), ought not to be baptized a second time, but, of course, to be obliged to anathematize the heresy of Donatus, and then after the imposition of the hand of the bishop or priest, in accordance with the old procedure of the Church (see c. VIII of the First EC. C.), to be received into the catholic Church, which has spread all over the world, and which is the common mother of all Christians, and a perfect dove of Christ, in accordance with the Song of Songs. But if those who have thus been accepted exhibit also a virtuous life, befitting them for ordination and the clergy, they ought undoubtedly to be also ordained: first, because they ought not to be prevented from entering clerical orders, simply because they were heretics formerly; for after eschewing the heresy they recognized the catholic and true Church as their own, believed Orthodoxly in Christ, and accepted as true and holy and with unfeigned yearning and love the sanctifying gifts of the Trinity,²⁰⁶ or, more expressly the intemerate Mysteries, upon which depend all the soul’s hope and salvation. Accordingly, as regards those persons who persist in the heresy greater darkness and damnation result therefrom; but as regards the Orthodox, they result in light and life everlasting (though the rashness and factiousness of the heretics audaciously itself pretends to teach certain mysteries, either opposed to the name of the truth, or, though having a name of truth, are actually false and destitute of divine grace). Secondly, they ought to be ordained also on account of the great dearth and need which Africa has of men in holy orders and of clerics.²⁰⁷ If, moreover, the clerics and priests of the Donatists choose to come to Orthodoxy with the laities subject to them, with their clericates, who indeed in order to keep these things may advise their laities to return to Orthodoxy — if, I say, this should occur, what is to be done? But this question, adds the Canon, has· to be clarified to us hereafter by Pope Anastasius and Venerius (the bishop) of Milan.²⁰⁸ As for us, we merely content ourselves for the present with asking them to tell us whether they are pleased to have those returning from the Donatists ordained. See also c. LV of the present C., and Ap. cc. XLVI, XLVH, and LXVIII.

67. The exceedingly religious Emperors must be petitioned to order that the remains of idols that have been left all over Africa be completely removed and eliminated therefrom. For indeed in many maritime regions and various possessions there still flourishes the unrighteousness of error, so that these things ought to be ordered to be wiped out of existence; and their temples, too, which have been built infields and in concealed places without any regard for decency, ought by all means to be ordered to be destroyed.

(c. XCII of Carthage.).

Interpretation.

Notwithstanding the fact that the figurative and supersensible Dragon was dealt a shattering blow in the head through the incarnate economy, it was again wagging its tail nevertheless. For even after the widespread campaign of preaching there remained in some regions temples of idols, but what is worse yet, there were many of them situated in maritime egions and on latifundia (or farmlands) and other hidden parts of Africa. On this account the present Canon decrees that a report be made to the most pious Emperors, Honorius, that is to say, and Theodosius the Little, with a view to having them command that all these remains of idols in Africa be entirely destroyed, as well as the temples of these idols, including even those which had no ornamentation,²⁰⁹ but, in fact, had already practically half disappeared, and that all of the temples in question be completely razed to the ground. This same fact is mentioned also in c. XCII of this same Council.

68. A further request must be made with a view to inducing them to deign to prescribe that if any persons in the Church attempt to rebut any cause whatever, and if perhaps the finding of the Clergymen should be displeasing to one side, when the matter is amenable to Apostolic Law prevailing in the Churches, it shall not be permissible to have that Clergyman hailed into court to give testimony who had already previously judged the same matter, nor anyone who had happened to be present at the examination, and that neither shall anyone related to an ecclesiastic be compelled to give testimony respecting it.

(Ap. c. LXXV: c. II of the 1st; cc. XXXVIII, CXL of Carthage.).

Interpretation.

St. Paul the Apostle commands that Christians be tried in the ecclesiastical courts, and not in the civil courts, by saying: “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?” (I Cor. 6:1). So, then, according to this Apostolic Law and prerogative, if certain clergymen tried any cause in the Church, but one side was dissatisfied with their decision, the present Canon seeks to have the Emperors prescribe that the person dissatisfied shall not be permitted to summon into another court the one who tried the case, or any clergyman who was present at the trial, to give testimony about it, and not even to hail in any other kinsman of the clergyman to give testimony: for one thing, because men in holy orders and clerics will not give testimony unless they want to; and for another thing, because one who has judged a matter is forbidden to give testimony concerning it.²¹⁰ See also Ap. c. LXXV.

69. There is still another request to be made of the Christian Emperors, since contrary to the divine commandments, banquets are held in many regions in such a way that Christians are misled by the heathenish error into congregating with the Grecians on the sly in order to attend the ceremony of these men, that they forbid such events both in the cities and in the villas, the more so in view of the fact that even on the birthdays of the blessed Martyrs, in certain cities and in the sacred places themselves, such misdemeanors are detected on the spot, on which days (a fact which it is a shame to mention) they perform detestable dances in the fields and in the streets, so that they offer lewd insults to the honor of housewives and to the modesty of countless other reverent women who assemble there on the holy day, in such a manner as nearly to cause them to forgo even the holy faith itself.

(Ap. cc. XLII, XLIII, LIV; cc. IX, L, LXII of the 6th; c. XXII of the 7th’ cc. XXIV, LIII, LV of Laodicea; c. XLVII of Carthage.).

Interpretation.

Since Grecian²¹¹ banquets used to be held in many regions and were attended on the sly by even the Christians, who were wont to go to them with the Greeks; but also since such banquets were held on the memorial days²¹² and feasts of the martyrs, and disorderly dances were held in which the dancers made bold to assault indecently and lasciviously the decent women who attended these festivals for the sake of reverence, in such a way that they caused them to avoid even going to church. So on this account the present Canon decrees that they should beg the Emperors to command that all such things be prevented by the civil authorities, and be forbidden to be done either in cities or in landed estates outside or before the sacred temples and courts of martyrs. Read also Ap. c. XLII.

70. There is still another request to be made (of the Emperors), that the spectacles of theatrical plays be prohibited on Sunday and on the other gala days of the Christian faith, especially in view of the fact that during the octave of Holy Easter the populace gather at horse-races much more than at church. The days fixed for these ought to be transferred to other convenient dates, and none of the Christians ought to be compelled to witness these spectacles.

(cc. XXIV, LI, LXII, LXVI of the 6th; c. XII of the 7th; cc. LIII, LIV of Laodicea; c. XVII of Carthage.).

Interpretation.

In the present Canon the Council is seeking to have an Imperial rescript issued whereby to eliminate the holding of horseraces or games with other animals on Sundays and the other feast days, especially during the period of Easter week, since Christians used to attend these spectacles more than they did the churches; and to provide that no Christian be compelled to go to these spectacles, which ought to be transferred to other days. See also c. XXIV of the 6th.

71. Another thing to be requested is that they deign to prescribe that as regarding a Clergyman of any rank of honor who has been condemned by Bishops at a trial, it shall not be permissible for him to be defended in court either by the church with which he was connected or by any person whatsoever; the penalty for this being one involving a monetary fine and the forfeiture of the honor and rank, with the provision that neither age nor physical state may be pleaded in

(Ap.c. XXVIII.).

Interpretation.

By means of this Canon the Council is seeking to have the Emperors command that neither his church nor any other person possessed of an official capacity shall be permitted to plead the case of any clergyman who may have been condemned by the bishops for any crime of his that deserves condemnation;²¹³ and that whosoever should do so be fined a sum of money and be deprived of his honorable rank and office, and have nothing to plead in his own defense, or, in other words, he is to benefit nothing by reason of his age, on the ground that he is an old man or a young man, nor by reason of his physical state or condition, on the ground that he is a man or a woman, or in good health, or sickly by nature. See also Ap. c. XXVIII.

72. We must further request that if anyone should care to take to the grace of Christianity from any kind of playful occupation, and to remain free from those shoals, it shall not be permissible for anyone to urge or force such a person to relapse into the same sports again.

(Ap. c. LII; c. LIII of Carthage.).

Interpretation.

This too is another thing which the Council is seeking by means of the present Canon to have prohibited by the Emperors, to wit, if any Greek player, such as, for instance, an actor, or a mime, or anything else of the kind, should become a Christian, and should wish to have nothing to do any longer with such dirty games, that no one shall be allowed to compel such a person, or to incite him, to resort to them again. For in those times on holidays it was the obligation and task of such players to do these things, as paid servants, and if they refused they would be duressed. Read also Ap. c. LII.

73. As concerns the rightfulness of proclaiming men free, it is plain that if our fellow priests appear to be doing this all over Italy, and if our own conviction plainly tends in this direction, permission having been granted upon the sending of a legate, in order that any effort worthy of the faith may be made in behalf of the ecclesiastical situation and the salvation of souls, and we ourselves may be praisably received before the Lord.

(Ap. c. LXXXII; c. IV of the 4th; c. LXXXV of the 6th; c. Ill of Gangra; c. XC of Carthage; cc. XL, XLII of Basil.).

Interpretation.

The Fathers of this Council being in doubt as to whether the emancipations which masters might make of their slaves ought to be proclaimed in church, they are expressing in the present Canon the opinion that a legate should be sent to Italy, and if their fellow bishops there were doing this that they should have the courage to follow in this direction, and to accept the matter as trustworthy and praisable, and as something done in favor of ecclesiastical good order and the salvation of the slaves being liberated Read also Ap. c. LXXXIL

74. As regarding Equitius, who long ago was condemned upon the opinion of the Bishops in accordance with his deserts, the matter ought not, I think, to be omitted from the embassy, in order that if he (sc. the legate] should happen to find him in those parts, it be made the business of the same brother of ours to act in behalf of the ecclesiastical advantage, as required, and wherever he may be able, to prosecute him.

(Ap. c. XXVIII; c. LXXI of Carthage.).

Interpretation.

Since this man Equitius, when a bishop, was rightly and justly condemned, as he deserved to be, by the bishops, he departed to the land of Italy, and failed to quiet down there, the present Canon decrees that the envoy and legate who is to be sent there shall make it his business to pursue him wherever he may be found, in order to prevent him disturbing the state of the Church. Hence from the present Canon, notwithstanding that it is one issued by a regional Council, we learn that all other such bishops that may be found ought to receive like chastisement.

75. Hereupon, all matters having been looked into and fully understood that seem to conduce to the usefulness of the Church, the Spirit of God nodding approval and voicing helpful suggestions, we have elected gently and peaceably to deal with the persons mentioned, notwithstanding the fact that with a restless mind they keep doing their worst to split away from the Lord’s body, in order that, so far as lies in our power, it may be made known in general to all those who have been snared into communion and fellowship with those persons all over all the provinces of Africa, that they have been embogged in a woeful error. Perhaps, as the Apostle says: “In meekness if we restrain those who entertain different views, God will give them repentance to the end that they may come to realize and comprehend the truth, and in order they may recover who have been taken captive in the DeviVs snares and made subject to him and his will” (II Tim. 2:25-26).

(cc. LXV, LXVI, LXXVI, LXXVII, LXXVIII, XCIX, C, CI, CII, CIII, (CX, CXXVIII, CXXIX.).

Interpretation.

Having written in accordance with c. LXVI to the bishop of Rome and of Milan, and having received letters from the bishop of Rome advising them to deal with the Donatists pacifically, as is plainly seen in the Fourth Act of this Council, these Fathers are now themselves in agreement upon this point and in the present Canon are expressing their determination, under the Holy Spirit’s nodded approval, to deal meekly with those who have split off from the Lord’s body, this phrase meaning the Church (or even the Mysteries, on the ground that respecting these they were at variance, as we have said), in order that, in view of such meekness they might feel ashamed and become conscious of the woeful error in which they had got entangled; and in order that through such tameness perhaps God might give them repentance which would awaken them to the truth and free them from the snares of the devil in which they had been caught with the result that they were doing his will, to use the phraseology of the Apostle. See also c. LV of the same C.

76. It has pleased the Council, therefore, to decree that letters be dispatched on the part of our Council to the leaders of Africa, wherein it has seemed advisable to ask them to help the common mother the catholic Church in matters in which the authority of the bishops in the cities is being defied. That is, with the power and diligence which the leaders possess, and with Christian faith, to investigate the facts in all regions in which the Maximiniasts occupied the churches; and further those who split off from them; and let them make all the facts concerning these matters known to all who need such knowledge.

(Ap. c. XXVII; cc. LV, LXVI, LXXVI, LXXVIII, XCIX, C, CI, CII, CIII, CX, CXXVIII, CXXIX of Carthage; c. V of Antioch; c. IX of the lst-&-2nd.).

Interpretation.

So they accordingly decree in the present Canon that letters be sent to the leaders of Africa beseeching them to help the common mother the Church, and with official authority and diligence to attempt to find also the Maximianists (who, though formerly Donatists, later split away from them and created a faction of their own), and whatever evil deeds they wrought in defying the authority of the bishops and occupying their churches; and to write up a certified report of all these things in the public and state records, as being really necessary and beneficial information. See also c. LV of the same C., and Ap. c. XXVII.

77. It has pleased the Council to have letters sent to our brethren and fellow bishops, and especially to the Apostolic See, in which our adorable brother and fellow minister Anastasius aforementioned (i.e., St. Anastasius I), since he knows Africa to be in great need, so that for the sake of the peace and usefulness of the Church, even through the Donatists, of whom whatever ones are Clerics, provided their resolution is corrected, and willing to come over to the catholic unity, in accordance with the voluntary choice and resolution of each individual catholic Bishop governing the church in the same region, if this appear to conduce to the peace of Christians, to readmit them in their own honors, just as also in previous times it was evidently done in regard to the same dissension, a fact attested by the examples of many and nearly all the churches in Africa wherein such error arose. Not that the Council held in transmediterran parts regarding this matter should be dissolved, but that that arrangement should remain in effect as respects those who are willing to come over to the catholic Church on such terms, so that in the case of these persons no abbreviation of their rights shall be involved in the unity. Whereby in every way the catholic unity must be advanced and consummated to the manifest profit of brotherly souls in those regions in which they are living, to the end that no obstacle may be set up against what has been decided in regard to their honors in the transmarine Council, whenever and so long as the right to be saved has been denied to no person. That is, if those who have been ordained within the Donatist party and who have submitted to correction should wish to come over, that it should be provided that in spite of the declaration of the transmarine Council that they are not to be admitted in their proper honors they must on the contrary rather be welcomed by whatever means the catholic unity can be furthered.

(cc. LV, LXVI, LXXVI, LXXVII, LXXVIII, XCIX, C, CI, CII, CIII, CXXVIII, CXXIX.).