So-called First-and-Second Council

120 Note that according to the anonymous expounder of the Canons the Photinians, since they had renewed the heresy of Paul of Samosata and of Sabellius and of Montanus, being imbued with a belief that the God Logos is not beginningless and the creator of the aeons, or ages, but, on the contrary, a mere youngster born and having derived his beginning from the Virgin, ought on this account and for this reason to be baptized too when joining the Orthodox faith, just as must also the Paulinianists (according to c. XIX of the 1st EC. C). and the Sabellians and Montanists (according to VII of the 2nd), whose heresy they borrowed.

121 For precisely as this Council in the above c. IX forbade members of the Church from going to the cemeteries of heretics, including both clerics and faithful laymen, as it itself explains this, so and in like manner also in the present Canon in saying that members of the Church must not marry heretics it means both clerics and Christian laymen.

122 Nevertheless, the Canon did not forbid them to be ordained deaconesses, as they asserted, since these old women in the times of this Council used to be made deaconesses. That is why, in commenting on ch. 28 of the second book of the Apostolic Injunctions, Franciscus Turrianus declares that Clement calls deaconesses presbytides, as anyone may learn, I say, even from St. Epiphanius in his pages on the heresy of the Collyridians. For “presbytides” and “old ladies” are the women sixty years of age from whom deaconesses were made, as is stated by St. Paul and the Footnote to c. XL of the 6th (which the reader must consult for himself). But it also prohibits them from being ordained to act as Presby tides and women presiding over and having precedence over the others. These Presby tides are mentioned also in the Apostolic Injunctions, Book II, ch. 57. “Let virgins and widows, and Presbytides be the first ones of all to stand up or to sit down.” Even St. Paul mentions them specifically in his Epistle to Titus, ch. 2, v. 3. (where the A.V. as well as the R.V. of the English Bible calls them “aged women”). “That aged women likewise be priestly in their deportment, not calumniators, not enslaved to excessive wine, teachers of refinement, in order that they may persuade the young women to be sensible.” I am astonished that some persons have suggested that they were the wives of presbyters or of priests, owing to the fact that they were required to be “ priestly,” a conjecture which is wrong. For, by saying “in order to persuade the young women to be sensible,” the Apostle revealed that by the word “aged women” (or, in Greek, “presbytides”) he meant old women, just as he called old men presbytae (i.e., “aged men,” according to the A.V. and R.V). further above, and not presbyteroi (or elder men). Canon XLVI of the 6th also calls old nuns (i.e., aged nuns) presby tides. The said St. Epiphanius, on the other hand, in his Heresy 79 states that the older widows were called presby tides. And see Footnote 3 to c. XIX of the First EC. C.

123 Note that according to Eustratius, in his discourse concerning Mysteries, p. 284, for various reasons holy bread used to be kept at that time. First, in order that Christians might commune on Wednesdays and Fridays and at any other times that they might wish (since Liturgy was not celebrated daily, both in the East, as St. Basil states, in his letter to Caesar.Patric., and in the West, as St. Cyprian bears witness, in his letter 56, and as does also St. Jerome to Pammachius, down to the times of the Christian emperors. Secondly, for sick persons. Thirdly, for travelers. Fourthly, for anchorets. Fifthly, according to St. Justin, in his Second Apology for Christians, in order that it might be sent through the deacon even to those who were not present at laturgy on account of sickness or for some other good reason. And sixthly, according to the present Canon, in order that it might be sent at Eastertide from one province to another, not only for the sake of a blessing, as this Canon explains, but also for the sake of union and communion. I say it right out. Bishops used to send the holy bread to other bishops, in order to show by this that they recognized them as communicants and Orthodox Christians, just as, in the contrary case, when they did not send any, they showed that they regarded them as being excluded from communion, or non-communicants. For this reason Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, Book V, ch. 26, states that Irenaeus the Martyr told Victor, the Bishop of Rome, when he was at odds with the Asiatics respecting the festival of Easter: “The Presbyters preceding thee used to send Eucharist to those from the parishes (or dioceses)” or, in other words, the Popes before you, namely, Anicetus, Pius, Hyginus, Telesphorus, and Xystus, used to send Eucharist to the bishops of Asia. “And how is it that thou darest to regard them as noncommunicants (or excluded from communion)?” See page 303 of the same Eustratius.

124 For according to the historical record furnished by Herodotus, those who lived before his time used to employ the skins of goats and sheep to write on because they had no books, and even in his own time many barbarians (i.e., non-Greeks) still wrote on such parchments. “Owing to the scarcity of sheets of paper,” he says, “they used to employ parchments made of goatskins and sheepskins; and even in my own days many of the barbarians write on such parchments.” For it was not till A.D. 1048 that paper was invented. See also the Footnote to c. LXVIII of the 6th.

125 I said that Gospels were not read, though other memoirs of the Apostles, or the writings of the Prophets, used to be read at divine Liturgy, according to what St. Justin says (in his second Apology for Christians), which Liturgy was conducted not only on Sunday, but also on Saturday, according to St. Chrysostom; and indeed the Psalms of David used to be chanted in church at all times, at both matins and vespers, and in all services and rites of the Mysteries, according to Argentes (p. 271 of his book concerning Mysteries). But as for the fact that monks ought to read excerpts from the New Testament daily, and especially from the holy Gospel, is attested openly and decreed by both Basil the Great, in his letter to Chilo, and Peter Damascene, in Philocalia, as well as by Callistus Xanthopoulos, on p. 1041 of the same Philocalia. That laymen too ought to read it is shown by the fact that Emperor Theodosius copied the Gospel with his own hand and used to read passages therefrom every day; and by the fact that divine Chrysostom (Homily 32 on John, and Homily 19 on Statues) stated that even women used to have Gospels hanging from their neck. But when these men read the divine Gospel, they ought to stand upright, just as is prescribed by the said St. Callistus and the historian Sozomen, who even reprehends the bishops of Alexandria for sitting down and not standing up while reading the holy Gospel, because the holy Gospel is the New Testament which was dedicated with the blood of beloved Jesus, the Son of God, according to Luke the Evangelist (Luke 22:20; cf. Heb. 9:18). The Gospel, according to St. Maximus, is an embassy of God to men, through a Son incarnate, who bestows upon those who obey Him the reward of unbegotten deification. St. Ambrose represents the Gospel as the open sea in which the fullness of the gracious gifts is to be found, and an ocean of spiritual Mysteries in which swims the Mystic Fish, Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior (or the Cross, according to the acrostic of Sibylla). Bartholomew the Apostle said (in Diony-sius, ch. If Mystic Theology) that although the Gospel is abbreviated and small in size it is nevertheless big and broad in capaciousness of thoughts. Hence Jerome called the Gospel an epitome of all theology, while Origen called it a first-fruit of all the Bible. The man made no mistake who called the Gospel the basis and center of the Old Testament and the sun of the New. And if the whole Bible is called by St. Augustine an encyclopedia of all the sciences, and by Basil a workshop of souls and a storehouse of spiritual herbs by which any disease can be cured, certainly the Gospel excels. See also the other praises of the Gospel on p. 739 of the Dodecabiblus of blessed Dositheus. I said for monks to read the New Testament, because from the Old, and especially from the Prophets, some of them were harmed, not that the Old Testament itself is harmful (God forbid!), but on account of their weakness, as St. Basil the Great wrote to Chilo his disciple.

126 Concerning this psalmody and the praying done between whiles, see the Footnote to c. LXXV of the 6th.

127 The custom of kissing at Liturgy is a most ancient one. For chapter 57 of Book II of the Apostolic Injunctions says: “Let the Deacon standing by the Bishop say, ‘let no one be against anyone; let no one wear the cloak of pretense.’ ” And again it says: “Let the men kiss each other, and the women each other, with the kiss in the Lord; and the members of the Clergy the Bishop, but let none of them do so deceitfully, as Judas betrayed the Lord with a kiss.” St. Justin too, in his second Apology, and Clement the Alexandrian, in Paedag. Ill, say this same thing. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Catechesis 5, asserts that the kiss is a sign, or token, that the souls of the kissers are united, and that they have eliminated and banished every grudge from their persons. “The kiss,” he says, “is a sign that the souls have merged their personalities, and are banishing every revengeful feeling.” See Eustratius, p. 275.

128 Inasmuch as our subject is the Liturgy, we note here five points which Christians ought to know, and especially those who are priests. 1) Directly the priest has had time to officiate at the Liturgy, all Christians must no longer stand outside of the church and prate, but instead must go inside into the church; and let the hours be read as long as the priest is engaged in the preparatory rite (called in Greek prosco-mide). 2) After the priest finishes the preparatory rite and mentions all his own names, he must knock from within so that the Christians outside may hear the knock and take it as a signal for them to leave their stalls, and for every Christian to stand bare head and secretly mention, or remember, the names of his parents and other relatives, and at the same time the priest within must say nothing else but “Mnestheti Kyrie, mnestheti Kyrie” (or, in English, “Lord, remember; Lord, remember:” cf. Luke 23:42) continuing until all of them finish repeating the names they have to be remembered and enter their stalls. 3) The priests must not bless with their hand either the prothesis in their prayer over it, or the upper seat, but must only make a gesture towards them, as is stated also in c. XII of St. Nicephorus, which see further on in the Footnote to c. XXI of the present Council. 4) When priests are celebrating the liturgy of St. Basil, in the hour of the transessentiation and of the sanctification of the Mysteries, they must not repeat the words “after changing them with Thy Holy Spirit,” because that is an addition made by some ignorant and bold person who, being opposed, it would seem, to the Latins, took these words from the liturgy of St. Chrysostom and inserted them in the liturgy of St. Basil. Hence these words are not found in the old handwritten liturgies, as we have determined by a search, but neither will such words fit the context there. 5) And lastly, we give notice that the old scrolls and books of liturgies, at the time of the sanctification of the Mysteries, do not contain the words “Lord, who sendest down Thine All-holy Spirit,” nor the lines; but, immediately after saying “And send down Thy Holy Spirit upon us, and upon these gifts exposed here,” they contain the words “And make this bread,” etc. For some later persons have added those words on the pretext of reverence, which, however, have no place there. Yet if anyone wants to say them, because custom prompts him to do so, let him say them before the prayer beginning with the words “We further offer Thee this rational worship,” etc.

129 Some writers have asserted that the word orarium is derived etymologically from the Latin verb or are, meaning to pray, because the deacon holds it when he is saying the petitions; others have asserted that it is derived from the Latin noun hora, meaning an hour, because by means of it the deacon shows the hour and time of the ecclesiastical service — of whom one is Nicholas Boulgaris, in his Sacred Catechism. But Balsamon and Blastaris derive it from the Greek verb horo, meaning to see, because while holding it the deacon sees and supervises what has to be done in the divine Liturgy. The best and aptest explanation, however, is that which most learned and most erudite Eustratius Argentes offers by asserting that the word is etymologically derived from the Latin noun os, genitive oris, meaning the mouth, though the derived word is a late formation. So the word orarium means a cloth or handkerchief with which to wipe the mouth, because when the deacon used to give Christians a portion from the holy chalice (as we have said in the Footnote to c. XXIII of the 6th), he had that orarium over his shoulder, with the greater part of it hanging down in front, which he held with three fingers of his right hand, while he held the holy chalice with the other two fingers of the same hand with the help of the left hand. Hence all persons who approached and drank of the holy chalice would thereupon wipe their mouth on the orarium. In this sense of a handkerchief St. Ambrose also used the orarium in the life of his brother Satyrus, and in the place of sudarium, another word meaning in Latin a handkerchief, wherewith the face of Lazarus was covered, according to the Gospel, in stating which fact St. Ambrose says that it was covered with an orarium (instead of saying with a sudarium). It is further to be noticed that the simicinthia (translated as “aprons” in the A.V. and R.V. of the English Bible) mentioned by St. Paul (Acts 19:12), with which various cures of the sick were effected, were what were called, properly speaking, oraria and sudaria, or, in other words, handkerchiefs, nose-wipers, as Barinus says, although others, like Hesychius, assert that they were headkerchiefs, or kerchiefs for the head, or the girdles of priests. Today, however, these oraria worn by the deacons serve no purpose but that of adornment and decoration and of bearing a picture or representation of the seraphim’s wings, according to the anagogical interpretation offered by Symeon of Thessalonica. That is why the words “holy, holy, holy” from the hymn to the Seraphim are to be seen printed on many oraria. It is also worthy of note that Suidas the lexicographer, in connection with the Greek word phosonion (written with omega), calls the orarion an ecmageiont or wiper, of the face. As for the silver casket (called in Greek cibotion) which deacons bear upon their shoulder in the sacred monasteries of the Holy Mountain when they are censing, it was invented for no other want and notion, meseems, than to provide a receptacle in which to put incense or frankincense, which casket though unembellished in the beginning has already come to have such an ornamental figure as to contribute to the adornment of the church.

130 What was called the diaconicum was the sacristy, or room for keeping the sacred vessels and vestments. It was thus named because it was therein that the deacons (called diaconi in Greek) used to get the sacred vessels ready for the service of bishops and presbyters. According to Theodore the Anagnost it was also called mensatorium, from mensa, which denotes in Latin a table. This room was like another prothesis at the left side of the Bema, according to Symeon of Thessalonica, when we look from the Bema westward, as is to be seen in the catholica of the monasteries of the Holy Mountain. But some writers would have it that this sacristy and diaconicum was also set on the righthand side, or, in other words, where the holy prothesis is, inferring this from c. XII of St. Nicephorus, which forbids a “seal” being made in the prayer over the sacristy in connection with the holy chalice, or, in other words, it prohibits a priest from blessing with his hand the precious gifts in the prothesis when he says the prayer over the prothesis. See also John Nathanael the Oeconomus in the interpretation of the divine liturgy (ch. 17, p. 11).

131 Note that although the present Canon does not insist that Christians must remain idle on Sunday, but has added the proviso that if they can and have the means of doing so they ought to remain idle. In spite of this the civil laws have decreed that 011 Christians except farmers must necessarily remain idle on Sunday. But this is not strange in view of the fact that Novel 54 of Leo the Wise thereafter decreed that even farmers must remain idle on Sunday. Nicephorus the Confessor in the second volume of the collection of Councils, p. 918, according to his second Canon, which is one of only the seventeen contained therein, says that one ought not even to travel or journey on Sunday without being compelled to do so by necessity and force. Christians, however, ought not to use the idleness of Sunday and of other holidays as an occasion for drunkenness, games, songs and disturbances, but, instead, ought to go to church and listen to the divine words, and ought to read the sacred books and do other good works on such days. That is why God-bearing Ignatius (in his letter to the Magnesians) says: “Let each one of us take his Sabbath spiritually, by rejoicing in meditation of the law, not in comfort of the body, not in dancing and noises, in which there is no sense.” St. Ambrose says that we ought not “to turn days of idleness into holidays of libidinousness.” St. Chrysostom (p. 357 of volume V, in his discourse on the calends) says: “But what is the holiday that befits a Christian? Let us listen to St. Paul saying: ‘Therefore let us celebrate the holiday not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth’“ (I Cor. 5:8). And again the same saint says: “A holiday is nothing else than a spiritual feast” (p. 603 of vol. V in discourse 1 on the Pentecost). Balsamon (Reply 51, p. 386 of Jus Graeco-Romanum) says that one ought not even to bathe on the Lord’s day, nor ought owners of baths to have them burning on that day; and that anyone who bathes on that day is to be chastised with a penalty imposed at the bishop’s discretion. The Apostolic Injunctions, too, in Book III, ch. 9, say the following: “Nor do we permit you to utter or to do anything that is indecent on Sundays. For the Bible says somewhere, “Serve ye the Lord in fear, and rejoice in him in terror; and one must indulge in your rejoicings with fear and trembling.”

132 According to Epiphanius, these persons called themselves Angelics either because they were proud of being ranked with Angels in point of conduct in public and private life, or because they used to prate that the world was built by Angels. But according to divine Theodoret (in his Interpretation of the Epistle to the Colossians). it was because they used to say that the Law was given through the Angels, on which account they both respected and worshiped them. The reason why this Council issued the present Canon, as Theodoret himself asserts, was this, that this sect dwelt for many years in Phrygia and Pisideia, the metropolis of which territories was Laodicea. Hence the present Council which was held in Laodicea forbade their praying to the Angels — that is to say, in other words, it prohibited their calling upon them as Gods, with respect to worshipful faith. But Origen in his Book V against Celsus says that the reason why they used to call upon the Angels as Gods was that they found them being called divine and Gods in the Holy Bible. In mentioning this sect in his Epistle to the Colossians (2:18) St. Paul says: “Let no one rob you of the prize by trying on the score of humility and religion of the Angels to insinuate what he hath not seen" — or, more explicitly, let no one deprive you of the prize or reward of faith in Christ (for the Greek verb catagrabeuein, translated here “rob one of the prize,” means not to give the prize and crown to the victor, but to someone else, the victors being thus wronged and treated unjustly, a thing which the Angelics used to do by giving the crown and worship to the Angels who had not vanquished death and the devil and sin, thus taking this right away from Christ, who by means of the Cross vanquished all opposing powers), by trying, on pretense of humility and reverence in calling upon the name of Christ, to separate you from the correct, or right, faith, and to induce you to go over to the religion of the Angels, or, in other words, to worship the Angels as Gods.

133 See the explanations of each of these terms in the Footnote to e. LXI of the 6th. The folly of astrologers is exposed by both divine Ambrose, in his Book IV on the Hexaemeron (i.e., the Six Days of Creation), and by sacred Augustine, in his letter to Simplicianus. Furthermore divine Epiphanius, in his work on Bases, states that Aquila, the translator of the divine Scripture, was expelled from the Church of Christ, because he engaged in the practice of consulting the stars for horoscopes of everyone.’ But the tribe of astrologers was hated not only among Christians, but even among heathen too. That is why astrologers were banished from Rome, as Dio in Book XLIX and Tacitus in Book XVII of their histories record. But God too has said of them: “Thus saith the Lord, Learn not after the ways of the heathen, and be not afraid of the signs in the sky” (Jer. 10:2). Perhaps the present Canon calls astrologers “mathematicians,” since it is by means of the various species of general mathematics, which indeed are the more elementary branches thereof, Geometry and Arithmetic’ that such persons advanced in Astrology. Chapter 22 of Title XXXIX of Book LX says the following: “The art (or science) of Geometry may be taught publicly, but that of Mathematics is condemned.” And a writer of old says that what it called Mathematics was Astrology (in Balsamon, Reply 27, extant in manuscript).

134 Note that Zonaras says for bishops to go to these Synods also with a view to correction of the Church, or, more expressly speaking, of Christians and the rest, or, more expressly speaking, the heretics. As for me, however, I like the above interpretation better, on the ground that it more suitable.

135 I said qualifiedly that the night of Great Saturday is the middle between the burial and the resurrection of the Lord, and not Great Saturday, as both Zonaras and Balsamon have lumpingly said, because although the daytime of Great Saturday clearly includes the burial of the Lord, while Easter Sunday clearly includes the resurrection, yet the night of Great Saturday, intervening between the two days in question, partakes of both of them. “On this account the Western local Council held in Cabilone concerning hierurgy (or celebration of the Liturgy), in Division 1st and the Canon which begins with the expression “It has been the custom,” decrees that so far as regards all the other days of the fasts Liturgy is to be celebrated round the hours of Vespers, but on Great Saturday it is to be celebrated at the commencement of night.” Furthermore, all rituals with great discrimination and observation state that the Ecclesiarch must be possessed of accuracy in order that the time when the Liturgy of Great Saturday ends it shall be two o’clock in the night. But why on all other days of fasting should the Liturgy be celebrated in the evening, but on Great Saturday must be celebrated in the nighttime? The reason, of course, is that the Gospel is read containing the words “Late on the Sabbath” (Matt. 28:1), and generally affording an introduction to the resurrection, and in order that persons who have been baptized at that time may partake of communion in it. Hence the Apostolic Injunctions, Book V, ch. 19, go right ahead and lay it down as a rule that catechumens are to be baptized still further in the night. For they say concerning the night of Easter: “Reading the Law in your pernoctation till the crowing of cocks, and having baptized your catechumens, and having read the Gospel, and having delivered an address to the laity, cease your mourning.” That is why St. Gregory the Theologian in dilating upon Easter, and Damascene, borrowing from Gregory, call the night of Great Saturday soterial for those persons who get baptized on that night. “Being a radiant night and a herald of the day appareled in splendor.” On account of the many lights of the ones illuminated (i.e., baptized). “How sacred in reality and universally festival this soterial night is and radiant!” etc.