What are church canons: let’s explain it on your fingers

THOMAS

What canons exist in the Church? What do they regulate? Are canons needed to deprive a person of freedom or, conversely, to help him? Why is there such legal formalism in the Church at all? Is there really no way to be saved without it?

Archpriest Dmitry Pashkov, a teacher at the Department of General and Russian Church History and Canon Law at PSTGU, answered these and other questions especially for “Thomas.”

What are church canons and why are they needed?

The word “canon” is of Greek origin, and it is translated as “rule”, “norm”. Canons are generally binding rules of behavior adopted in the Church. Therefore, we can say that the canon in the Church, in its content and meaning, is the same as the law in the state.

The need for church canons is generally clear. Finding ourselves in any society, we must comply with certain rules of conduct accepted in it. So it is in the Church. Having become its member, a person must obey the norms in force within its boundaries - the canons.

You can use this analogy. When we improve our health in a hospital, we are faced with certain rules that, whether we like it or not, we must obey. And these hospital rules may at first seem unnecessary or even absurd until we try to understand them.

At the same time, there cannot be canonical formalism in the Church. Each person is individual, and therefore a confessor plays a significant role in his church life. Knowing the weaknesses and strengths of the person coming to him, the priest, relying on the canonical norm, can act quite freely. After all, we must not forget that the main body of canons was formed a very long time ago, back in the first millennium, and many canons cannot be literally applied in the present time. Therefore, the priest has a lot of room for “maneuver” (the canons themselves suggest this, leaving the priest, for example, the right to shorten or, on the contrary, extend penances), and this is very important when it comes to such a complex and extremely delicate matter as shepherding.

BOOK OF RULES

[full title - “The Book of Rules of the Holy Apostles, Holy Ecumenical and Local Councils and Holy Fathers”], official. a collection of general church canons that form the foundation of the current church law of the Russian Orthodox Church. The Constitution includes 85 Apostolic Rules, Rules of the Ecumenical Councils (20 rules of the First Ecumenical Council, 7 of the Second Ecumenical Council, 8 of the Third Ecumenical Council, 30 of the IV Ecumenical Council, 102 of the Trullo Council, 20 of the VII Ecumenical Council) , Rules of Local Councils (25 rules of the Ancyra Council (see art. Ancyra Councils), 15 - Neocaesarea Council, 21 - Gangra Council, 25 - Antioch Council (see art. Antioch Councils), 60 - Laodicean Council, 20 - Sardician Council, 1 - K-Polish Council of 394 (see in the article. Councils of Constantinople), 133 (according to a different numbering, 147) - Carthage Council of 419 (see in the article. Carthage Councils), 17 - Double Council , 3 - K-Polish Council in the Church of St. Sophia in 879 (see art. Councils of Constantinople)), Rules of the Holy Fathers (4 rules of St. Dionysius the Great, 12 - St. Gregory the Wonderworker, 14 - schemer Peter I of Alexandria, 3 - St. Athanasius I the Great, 92 - St. Basil the Great, 18 - Timothy I, Archbishop of Alexandria, 1 - St. Gregory the Theologian, 1 - St. Amphilochios of Iconium, 8 - St. Gregory of Nyssa, 14 - Theophilus I, archbishop. Alexandriysky, 5 - St. Kirill, Archbishop. Alexandriysky, 1 - St. Gennady I, Patriarch of K-Poland, and 1 - St. Tarasius, Patriarch of Poland).

Before the publication of K. p. in glory. The churches knew the canons from their translations in different editions of the Helmsman's Book. The disadvantages of the printed Helmsman, used in the Russian Church, were the translation, which was far from perfect, as well as the fact that most of the normative acts contained in it were outdated and fell out of use (for example, the laws of the Byzantine emperors).

In 1839, instead of the Helmsman's Book, the Holy Synod published K. p. Work on the publication was carried out in 1836-1839. in connection with the preparation of the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire. Before the revolution, printed articles were published only in the synodal printing house, official. publishing house of the Russian Church. The first edition of the K. p. was supplied with the Greek text of the canons; subsequent editions, as a rule, included only a translation. Beginning with the 2nd edition (1843), the book was equipped with an alphabetical subject index.

The advantages of the Code of Law include the fact that the canons in it are reproduced in full and are separated from the heterogeneous legal material that is either of lesser authority or has completely lost its force, which the Kormchaya is overloaded with. The translation was carried out not into Russian, but into modernized Slavic. This approach is explained by the desire of the publishers to preserve and convey to the reader the content of the ancient Greek original as much as possible. The syntax of the Church Slavonic language is adapted from Greek, which makes it possible to translate from Greek into Slavic, almost completely preserving the word order, which, according to the publishers, guarantees greater accuracy of the translation. In those places where the corresponding Greek Church Slavic. words differ significantly from Russian and are difficult to understand; in K. p. Russian is used. words in Church Slav. grammatical format. Despite its undoubted linguistic advantages, the book is still not without textual shortcomings. Canonists also noted direct errors in the translation of individual Greek. terms. Thus, according to A. S. Pavlov, “in the first three editions, one even very important mistake was made, namely: the Greek word ἐξαδέλφη, used in the 54th rule of the VI Ecumenical (Trullo) Council and meaning in the legal language of the Greeks “cousin "(Latin consorbina), was translated as "niece", which created an obvious inconsistency in the cathedral canon: marriage in marriage was prohibited up to the 4th degree inclusive (precisely in combination: two brothers cannot marry two sisters), while in consanguinity, the prohibition of marriages was extended only to the 3rd degree. Now this error has been corrected, but others remain, although not so important, but requiring correction” (Pavlov. 1902). In addition, probably due to the translator’s not entirely clear idea of the state adm. In the division of the Roman Empire and the territorial division of the ancient Church, the words παροικία and ἐπαρχία are not always translated correctly. In the rules, παροικία in almost all cases means bishopric, in modern times. rus. in language - a diocese, and ἐπαρχία - a metropolitan district. In K. p. the first word is often mistakenly translated as “parish”, and the second as “diocese”.

In the synodal publications of the K. p., unlike the Greek. Pidalion, Athenian syntagma, as well as glory. There are no classical interpretations of these rules by helmsmen. In con. XIX century The canons included in the K. p., with the blessing of the Holy Synod, were published several times. issues of the “Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” with interpretations of Aristin, John Zonara and Theodore IV Balsamon. However, these publications are not called K. p. and have never been considered as official. collection of canons.

Ed.: Book of rules of the holy apostles, holy Ecumenical and Local Councils and holy fathers. M., 1893. St. Petersburg, 1993. M., 1993.

Lit.: Barsov T.V. About the collection of spiritual laws. St. Petersburg, 1898; Pavlov A.S. Course of Church Law. Serg. P., 1902. P. 131; Shakhmatov M.V., Kostritsyn N.N. Review of the history of the codification of spiritual rules and legalizations of the Orthodox Church. Greco-Ros. churches with con. XVIII century to this day time. Pg., 1917; Tsypin V., prot. Canon law. M., 2009. pp. 245-246.

Prot. Vladislav Tsypin

But is it really impossible to be saved without this formalism?

No, the point here is not in formalism itself, but in ourselves. Since even after baptism we remain imperfect, lazy, self-centered creatures, we need to be brought to some kind of pious life that corresponds to our faith.

Of course, our communication with God is not subject to normative regulation, for example, how a person prays at home: whether long or short, with or without a lamp, looking at an icon or closing his eyes, lying or standing - this is his personal matter and depends solely on how he can pray better. But if a Christian comes to a meeting of believers, to the Church, where there are already many like him and everyone has their own views, interests, some preferences, there are no specific rules that will lead all this diversity to some kind of correct uniformity , not enough.

That is, generally binding norms, canons, are needed where a society appears, where it is already necessary to prescribe certain rights and obligations to its members in order to avoid chaos and disorder in it.

In addition, the canons serve to maintain the original image of the Church, which arose on the day of Pentecost, so that it remains unchanged under any state, culture, or social formation. The Church is always and at all times the same: in the 1st century, and in the era of the Ecumenical Councils, and in late Byzantium, and in the Muscovite kingdom, and now. And the canons protect this identity of the Church with itself through all centuries.

The Book of Rules is a written Tradition in the Church of Christ, and therefore it is as holy and inspired by God as the Holy Scriptures, as the Holy Gospel, from which this book comes, as a logical necessity to help Orthodox Christians adhere to the gospel path. If life according to the Holy Gospel is the path to the Kingdom of Heaven, then the Book of Rules serves as milestones along this path.

Content

SECTION 1. Creed

In Church Slavonic In modern Russian

The Creed of the Three Hundred and Eighty Saints of the Father of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, compiled in 325.

The Creed of the One Hundred and Fifty Saints of the Father of the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople, supplemented in 381.

Dogma of the Six Hundred and Thirty Saints, father of the Fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon. About the two natures in the one person of our Lord Jesus Christ (451) Dogma of the One Hundred and Seventy Saints, father of the Sixth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople. On the two wills and actions in our Lord Jesus Christ (680)

Dogma of the Three Hundred and Sixty-Seven Saints, father of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, Nicaea. On the veneration of icons (783-787)

SECTION 2. Rules of the Saints Apostle

Rules of the Holy Ecumenical First Council, Nicaea (325) Rules of the Holy Ecumenical Second Council, Constantinople (381) Rules of the Holy Ecumenical Third Council, Ephesus (431) Message of the same Holy Ecumenical Third Council to the Holy Council of Pamphylian about Eustathius, their former metropolitan Rules of the Holy Ecumenical Fourth Council, Chalcedon (451) About the Fifth Ecumenical Council Rules of the Holy Ecumenical Sixth Council, Constantinople, like in Trulla in the royal chambers (691) Rules of the Holy Ecumenical Seventh Council, Nicaea (787)

SECTION 4. Rules of Holy Local Councils

Rules of the Holy Local Council of Ancyra (314) Rules of the Holy Local Council of Neocaesarea (315) Rules of the Holy Local Council of Gangra (340) Rules of the Holy Local Council of Antioch (341) Rules of the Holy Local Council of Sardicia (344) Rules of the Holy Local Council of Laodicea (364) Rules of the Holy Local Council of Carthage (419) Message of the African Council to Celestine, Pope of Rome Rule of the Holy Local Council of Constantinople (394) Rule of the Holy Council of Constantinople, in the temple of the Holy Apostles of the former, verb Double (861) Rule of the Holy Council, which was in the temple of the Wisdom of the Word of God (879 )

SECTION 5. Rules and Canonical Epistles of the Holy Fathers

Canonical Epistle like our holy father Dionysius, Archbishop of Alexandria and Confessor, to Bishop Basilides (260) Rules of St. Peter, Archbishop of Alexandria and Martyr, from his word on repentance (304) Canonical Epistle of Saint Gregory, Archbishop of Neocaesarea, wonderworker (262) Epistle Saint Athanasius the Great, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Ammun the monk (326-371) Epistle of Saint Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Rufinian Saint Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria, from the 39th Epistle on the Feasts

RULES of Saint Basil the Great First Canonical Epistle of our holy father Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium (370-378)

Introduction Second Canonical Epistle of our holy father Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium Preface Third Canonical Epistle of our holy father Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium From another Canonical Epistle, our holy father Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium Epistle to Diodorus, Bishop of Tara Introduction. The same Epistle to Gregory the Presbyter The same to the archbishops The same Canonical Epistle to the bishops subordinate to him St. Basil from the 27th chapter of the book on the Holy Spirit, to Blessed Amphilochius The same, from the 29th chapter of the same work Canonical Epistle of St. Gregory, bishop of Nyssa, to Litoius, Bishop of Melitene (372-394) of St. Gregory the Theologian on what books of the Old and New Testaments should be read (370-391) of St. Amphilochius Bishop to Seleucus on what books are acceptable (394) Canonical answers of Holy Timothy, Bishop of Alexandria, one of the one hundred and fifty fathers who were at the Council of Constantinople Rules of Theophilus, Archbishop of Alexandria Proclamation, at the onset of the holy Epiphanies in the week of His same instruction given to Ammun His same to Athingius the bishop, about the so-called pure His same Agathon bishop His own Mina bishop

RULES like the saints of our father Cyril, Archbishop of Alexandria Canonical letter to Domnus, Patriarch of Antioch His same to the bishops existing in Libya and Pentapolis District letter of Gennady, Patriarch of Constantinople, and with him the Holy Council, to all the most reverend metropolitans and to Pope Tarasius , His Holiness Patriarch of Constantinople, new Rome, to Hadrian, Pope of ancient Rome Canon 29 of the Saints Apostle From the Acts of Saints Apostle From the Third Book of Kings From the Fourth Book of Kings From the interpretation of Saint Basil on Isaiah From his epistle to the bishops subordinate to him From the life of Saint John Chrysostom From the rules of the saints 630 father, gathered in Chalcedon From the district message of Gennady, His Holiness Archbishop of Constantinople, and with him the Council From the rules of the Holy Sixth Council

DEPARTMENT 6

Accepted abbreviations Alphabetical index

Did Christ say anything in the Gospel about the need to follow some rules?

Of course he did. The Lord sets some standards for Christian life directly in the Gospel. For example, there are canons that regulate the sacrament of Baptism. And in the Gospel, Christ is the first to establish this norm: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe everything that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Amen" (Matt. 28:19–20).

Here we find the baptismal formula - “in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” - which is pronounced today by the priest during the celebration of the sacrament. In addition, it is said that one must first teach, and only then baptize. And this is where, for example, the practice of so-called catechetical conversations before baptism originates, when a priest or catechist must explain in detail the basics of Christian faith and piety to a person who wants to enter the Church.

In addition, the Lord Jesus Christ established monogamy as the norm (Matthew 19 :4-9). It was on the basis of His words that the Church developed its teaching on the sacrament of Marriage. However, she somewhat softened the “severity” of the Gospel, where, as we know, it is said: whoever divorces his wife not for adultery and marries another commits adultery; and he who marries a divorced woman commits adultery (Matthew 19 :9). The Church, being forgiving of human weakness and understanding that not everyone can bear the burden of loneliness, allows, under certain circumstances, entering into a second and even third marriage.

However, there are other canons that are not taken directly from the New Testament. The Church, led by the Holy Spirit, acts as a successor of the Lawgiver Christ, expanding, clarifying and renewing its legal norms. At the same time, I repeat, this very detail and, in general, all the legislative activity of the Church is based on the principles given by the Savior in the Gospel.

Book of Rules of the Orthodox Church

Saint Basil from chapter 27 of the book about the Holy Spirit, to Blessed Amphilochius. 91 rules of St. Basil the Great
Of the dogmas and sermons preserved in the church, some we have from written instruction, and some we received from apostolic tradition, by succession in secret, both of them have the same power for piety. And no one will contradict this, although he has little knowledge of church institutions. For if we undertake to reject unwritten customs, which do not have great power, then we will imperceptibly damage the Gospel in the main subjects, or, moreover, we will reduce the sermon into a single name without the actual thing. For example, first of all I will mention the first and most general thing, so that those who trust in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ are marked by the image of the cross. Who taught this in Scripture? What scripture taught us to turn to the east in prayer? The words of invocation at the breaking of the bread of the Eucharist and the cup of blessing, which of the saints left us in writing? For we are not content with those words that the Apostle or the Gospel mentioned, but before and after them we pronounce others, as having great power in the sacrament, having received them from the unwritten teaching. We also bless the water of baptism and the anointing oil, and also the person being baptized, according to what scripture? Is it not according to legend, silent and secret? And what else? What written word taught you about anointing with oil? Where does the triple immersion of man come from? And other things that happen during baptism, denying Satan and his angels, from what scripture is it taken? Is it not from this unpublished teaching, which our fathers preserved in a silence inaccessible to curiosity and prying out, having been wisely taught to guard the sanctity of the sacrament through silence? For what decency would it be to announce in writing the teaching of something that is not permissible for those uninitiated into the mystery and view? And further. This is the fault of tradition without scriptures, so that many people do not lose their reverence for the knowledge of dogmas repeatedly studied, out of habit. For the dogma is different, and the preaching is different. Dogmas are kept silent, but sermons are made public. The same kind of silence is also obscurity, which is used by Scripture, creating the mind of dogmas that are difficult to contemplate, for the benefit of those who read. Therefore, we all look to the east during prayers, but few know that through this we are looking for the ancient fatherland of paradise, which God planted in Eden in the east (Gen. 2 :8). Likewise, while standing, we say prayers together on Saturdays, but we don’t all know the reason for this. For not only, as those who have been resurrected with Christ and must seek the things above, by standing during prayers, as the day of resurrection, we remind ourselves of the grace given to us, but because we do this, as if this day seems to be some kind of image of the expected age. Why, like the beginning of days, Moses also called him not first, but one. And there was, he says, evening, and there was morning, one day (Gen. 1 :5): as if one and the same day revolved many times. And so the one, which is the whole and last day, which the psalmist mentions in some of the inscriptions of the psalms, marks the future state of this age, the unceasing day, the unevening, the unsuccessive, the never-ending and ageless age. And so the church thoroughly teaches its pupils to perform standing prayers on this day: so that, with frequent reminders of endless life, we do not neglect the instructions for this repose. But the entire Pentecost is a reminder of the resurrection expected in the next century. For this one and first day, being multiplied sevenfold, constitutes the seven weeks of holy Pentecost. Pentecost, beginning with the first day of the week, ends with it. Turning fifty times through similar intermediate days, in this likeness it imitates the century, as if in a circular motion starting from the same signs, ending with the same ones. Church statutes teach us these days to prefer an upright position of the body during prayer, with a clear reminder, as if transporting our thoughts from the present to the future. With every kneeling and rising, we show by action both that we fell to the earth through sin, and that through the love of the One who created us we were again called up to Heaven. But I don’t have time to talk about the indescribable sacraments of the church. I'll leave the rest. The very confession of faith, in order to believe in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, from what scriptures do we have? If, by a pious conclusion, having a duty to believe as we are baptized, from the tradition of baptism we make a confession of faith similar to the sacramental saying in baptism: then let us, by the same conclusion, be allowed to send out words similar to the confession of faith. But if they reject the form of vocabulary as unwritten, then let them provide us with written evidence, both the confession of faith and the rest of what we have listed. So, since there is so much unwritten, and it has such power in the sacrament of piety: will they not allow us one saying that has come down to us from the fathers, which we have found remaining from an unimaginable custom in intact churches, and which has considerable importance, and considerable benefits the power of the sacrament.
Zonara. The saint teaches about customs originating from unwritten tradition, and says that there are many things that we have accepted to perform without writing as related to piety, and if we refuse to observe this, then in essential points we will damage the Gospel, that is, the faith proclaimed to us through Gospel. Then he calculates what happens even without writing, namely, he says: who taught in scripture that believers in Christ should be marked, that is, imprint on themselves the image of the cross, or that believers should turn to the east during prayer? And the words of invocation - those through which the priest calls on the grace of the Spirit when he illuminates the bread of the Eucharist and the cup of blessing, from whom does he say we have? For we are not content with what is given in writing by the Apostle (Paul) and in the Gospel, but we say something both before this (calling) and after. Where did we come from to bless the water of baptism and the oil of anointing? And who taught us in Scripture the very anointing of one who is baptized with oil? And where do we get that a person must be immersed three times? (other things, indeed, were handed down to us without writing; and for the baptized person to be immersed three times, we have this from the 7th rule of the Holy Apostles; so, I am surprised how the saint said that this too was handed down to us without writing; for it is impossible to think that the rule remained unknown to him). And to deny Satan and everything else that needs to be said to the baptized person, all this is said from an ineffable and unprofessed teaching, that is, not preached publicly, not known to everyone, which those who came before us kept in silence, that is, without inquiring or exploring; for they were taught to silently guard and observe the sanctity of the mysteries, that is, everything that is (in the church) glorious, venerable and ineffable; for what, he says, is impossible for the uninitiated to see or examine, this should not have been made public and clearly preached in writing.
Hitherto the saint spoke about what we observe from unwritten tradition; and now he expresses the reasons why this is given without writing, and why we pray, turning to the east, and why we perform prayers, one from the Sabbath, while standing. The reason that not everything is given to us in writing is that dogmas should not be published and made known to everyone; for, he says, sermons are made public, and dogmas are kept silent, so that being repeatedly studied, that is, having become the subject of constant study, out of habit, they do not become neglected. The type of silence is also obscurity; for what is said is unclear, so that it is not understood by many, it is similar to what is being kept silent. So, this, says the saint, is the reason that not everything is given to us in writing. And the reason why we look to the east during prayer is that we are looking for the ancient fatherland, that is, paradise, which God planted in Eden in the east. And it is committed not to kneel on Sunday because on this day we have resurrected Christ, and that we must seek the things above, that on Sunday there is an image of the future age and, as the beginning of days, is called by Moses not the first, but the one, because revolves and is, one and eighth, and depicts that eighth day, that is, the future age, endless and limitless, which David mentioned in the inscriptions of the psalms, inscribing them: “eighth.” Therefore, he says, the church urgently instructs its pupils, that is, the faithful whom it has raised, to stand during prayer (on this day) in order, through the contemplation of heavenly things, to constantly remind themselves of the future life and prepare parting words for it. Then he speaks about the days of Pentecost, that they also mean the resurrection we expect, because the first day of the Resurrection of the Lord, being sevenfold sevenfold through the middle days, constitutes Pentecost. For it begins with the Sunday of Easter and reaches another new Sunday, from which it again moves to the next Sunday. And thus, rotating and moving through seven weeks, it ends with Pentecost, and imitates the age, starting with the same days and ending with the same ones, as if in a circular motion. For the line that forms a circle and is called the periphery, where it begins, there it ends. So, church definitions, that is, laws or statutes, taught us to prefer to pray on the days of Pentecost, standing upright, as if raising our minds from the earthly to the heavenly with real, that is, a visual reminder (of heaven); for with a straight body position, looking at grief, we remind ourselves of the future and the heavenly. But kneeling does not remain without meaning for us; for bowing to the ground means that we, having sinned, fell to the ground; and the uprising again from the earth - that we, by the grace of God, who loved mankind for us, were raised from the fall. And why, he says, am I listing this? For if I want to talk about all the sacraments that we have received without writing, then the day will leave me, that is, I will not have enough time for the story. Then he adds something unwritten, saying: “I’ll leave the rest; but where do we have in scripture that we must confess the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit? For if, on the basis of the tradition in baptism, that is, on the basis of what Christ said to the Apostles: Baptizing in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit - as we are baptized, so we must believe, and therefore we make a confession of faith similar to baptism, then let them allow us so that as we confess, so we glorify, that is, believe, or glorify. If they say: “We did not accept to glorify in this way through the Scriptures,” then let them present us with written evidence, that is, let them prove through the Scriptures and the confession of faith, etc., what has been counted. And this is what the saint says to the Doukhobors, because they do not want to glorify the Holy Spirit together with the Father and the Son, since they represent Him as a slave and unequal, and he says that we do not find that it was given to the church through Scripture to glorify Him together with the Father and the Son. The saint also adds the following: “So, since there is so much unwritten, and it has so much power in the sacrament of piety: will they not allow us one saying that has come down to us from the fathers?” And so on. These words have the following meaning: since there is so much that we have accepted without writing, and this has such power for faith: then will they not allow us one expression that was not introduced by us, but which we found in the non-fictional, that is, ingenuous and a simple custom preserved in intact, that is, in Orthodox churches not corrupted by heretics - an expression that is of no small importance and brings no small benefit to the power of the sacrament of faith, that is, which can be very useful for the sacrament of faith?
Synopsis. The church has many important things from unwritten tradition. And, first of all, the faithful mark their faces with the image of the cross; then - that they pray, turning to the east; what is said at the breaking of the bread of the Eucharist and the cup of blessing, that we bless the water of baptism, the anointing oil, the person being baptized, and much more, which, as mysterious, should not have been made public to the uninitiated through writing.
And differently: The dogma is different, the preaching is different; for one thing is kept silent, and another is preached. So, we look to the east during prayer, because we are looking for the ancient fatherland, paradise, planted in Eden in the east; We pray on Sundays standing and as those who have risen with Christ and are seeking what is above, and because the Sunday day is an image of the expected age, being one and at the same time the eighth, as indicated by the whole Pentecost, which is made up of this same one, multiplied seven times on yourself, day. And kneeling shows our fall and - again the uprising.
Valsamon. About the unwritten customs of the church, read the 3rd chapter of the 1st title of this meeting and what we have written in it. And what the real message says is this. Since the Doukhobors said that we should not glorify the All-Holy Spirit along with the Father and the Son, because this is not given to us in writing, then the saint, after setting forth various unwritten customs, which by absolute necessity cannot be violated, but must forever be in force, He also gives reasons why some of them are not written down, and says: why do we pray, looking to the east, and why on Saturdays alone do we pray standing? The reason why not everything is given to us in writing is that dogmas should not be published and made known to everyone. For sermons, he says, are made public, and dogmas are kept silent, so that, having been studied many times, that is, having become the subject of constant study, out of habit, they do not come into disdain. And ambiguity is a kind of silence; for what is said is unclear, so that not many understand it, it looks like something that is kept silent. For just as no one knows what another has in mind, so what is said is not clear remains unknown to the majority. So, this, says the saint, is the reason that not everything is given to us in writing. And the reason that during prayer we look to the east, he says, is that we are looking for the ancient fatherland, that is, paradise, which God planted in Eden in the east. Not to bend the knee to one from the Sabbath, which is Sunday, is committed because on this day we resurrected Christ, since he rose from the grave, and through him we rose from the ancient fall; and because we must seek things above, and not bow to earthly and corruptible things; and because the Sunday day is an image of the future age and, like the beginning of days, is called by Moses not the first, but one, because it revolves and is one and the eighth and means that eighth day, that is, the future age, endless and limitless, oh which David also mentioned in the inscriptions of the psalms, inscribing them: “about the eighth.” Therefore, he says, the church urgently instructs its pupils, that is, the faithful whom it has raised, to stand during prayer (on this day), in order, through the contemplation of heavenly things, to constantly remind themselves of the future life and prepare parting words for it. Then he speaks about the days of Pentecost, that they also mean the resurrection we expect; because the first day of the resurrection of the Lord, being seven times sedemic by means of the middle days, constitutes Pentecost. For it begins with the Sunday of Easter and passes to another Sunday; and thus rotating and moving through seven weeks, it stops at Pentecost and imitates the age, since it begins with the same days and comes to the same ones, as in a circular movement.
Slavic helmsman. From the message of Saint Basil to Bishop Amphilochius, about Saint Dus. Chapter 27, about unwritten customs. Rule 90. The faithful pray to the east. The church has many and great things to draw from unwritten tradition; and the first is to mark the face of the faithful with a cross. Then turn to the east, pray, and say over the display of the bread of thanksgiving. And we bless the cup of blessing. The water of baptism, and the oil of anointing, and the very one being baptized: and many other things, which are not the scriptures, but which are a mystery. And it is not appropriate to reprove them with writing, for the sake of the ignorant. Otherwise there is a command, and otherwise there is a sermon. Ovo is honored in silence: Ovo is preached. We look to the east, praying, as if we are seeking the ancient fatherland, like the planted paradise in Eden on the east. Forgive us, we pray worthwhile prayers throughout the week, as if we have risen with Christ, and have the things on high, as if there is an image of the expected existence of the age, one, even having washed over the being, and by it the whole Pentecost is marked, even as this one does, turning to this seven times, and multiplying. But bowing to the knees, our fall, also reveals our rebellion.

What canons exist? And what do they regulate?

There are a lot of church canons. They can be divided into several large groups. There are, for example, canons regulating the administrative order of governing the Church. There are “disciplinary” canons that regulate the life of believers and the ministry of clergy.

There are canons of a dogmatic nature that condemn certain heresies. There are canons that regulate the territorial administration of the Church. These canons establish the powers of the highest bishops - metropolitans, patriarchs, they determine the regularity of holding Councils, and so on.

All the canons in all their diversity were formulated in the first millennium of church history, and some of them are somewhat outdated. But the Church still honors these ancient canons and studies them very carefully, because the unique era of the Ecumenical Councils is a kind of standard, a model for all subsequent centuries.

Nowadays, from these ancient norms we extract, if not direct rules of behavior, then at least their spirit, principles, in order to establish in a new form such norms that will meet the needs of today.

Book of rules of the holy apostles, holy councils, ecumenical and local, and holy fathers

The proposed “Book of the Rules of the Holy Apostles, Holy Ecumenical and Local Councils, and Holy Fathers” is a collection of general church canons that form the foundation of the current church law of the Russian Orthodox Church. It consists of 85 Apostolic Rules (canonical tradition recorded in the middle of the 4th century); rules of the Ecumenical Councils (except for the fifth and sixth, supplemented by 102 rules of the Trullo Council of 691); rules of ten Local Councils of the IV-IX centuries. (Ancyra, Neocaesarea, Gangra, Antioch, Laodicea, Sardicia, Carthage and three Constantinople); rules of the thirteen holy fathers: the primates of the Alexandrian see (St. Dionysius the Great, Hieromartyr Peter I of Alexandria, St. Athanasius the Great, Archbishop Timothy I, Archbishop Theophilus I and St. Cyril of Alexandria), representatives of the Cappadocian theological school (St. Gregory the Wonderworker, Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Amphilochius of Iconium and Gregory of Nyssa) and the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Saints Gennadius and Tarasius.

Set in modern transcription from the publication “The Book of the Rules of the Holy Apostles, Holy Councils of Ecumenical and Local Councils, and Holy Fathers.” - M., 1893

Recommended for publication by the Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Content:

Preface to the publication - 3

SYMBOL OF FAITH Creed of the 380 holy fathers of the First Ecumenical Council, Nicaea (325) - 12 Creed of the 150 holy fathers of the Second Ecumenical Council, Constantinople (381) - 13 Dogma of the 630 holy fathers of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, Chalcedon, about two natures in the one person of our Lord Jesus Christ (451) - 14 Dogma of the 170 holy fathers of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, Constantinople, on the two wills and actions in our Lord Jesus Christ (680) - 15 Dogma of the 367 holy fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, Nicaea, on the veneration of icons (783-787) - 15

RULES OF THE HOLY APOSTLES – 18

RULES OF THE HOLY Ecumenical Councils Rules of the holy First Ecumenical Council, Nicaea (325) - 43 Rules of the holy Second Ecumenical Council, Constantinople (381) - 55 Rules of the holy Third Ecumenical Council, Ephesus (431) - 61 Message of the same holy Ecumenical Third Council to the holy council Pamphylius about Eustathius, their former metropolitan - 66 Rules of the Holy Fourth Ecumenical Council, Chalcedon (451) - 69 About the Fifth Ecumenical Council (Constantinople, 553) - 84 Rules of the Holy Sixth Ecumenical Council, Constantinople, like the royal chambers in Trulla (691) - 85 Rules of the Holy Ecumenical Seventh Council, Nicaea (787) - 152

RULES OF LOCAL COUNTERS Rules of the holy local council of Ancyra (314) - 172 Rules of the holy local council of Neocaesarea (315) - 182 Rules of the holy local council of Gangra (340) - 186 Rules of the holy local council of Antioch (341) - 192 Rules of the holy local council of Laodicea (364 ) - 206 Rules of the Holy Local Council of Sardicia (344) - 220 Rules of the Holy Local Council of Carthage (419) - 236 Epistle of the African Council to Celestine, Pope of Rome - 313 Rule of the Holy Local Council of Constantinople (394) - 318 Rules of the Holy Council of Constantinople, in the temple holy apostles of the former, verb Double (861) - 319 Rules of the holy local council that was in the Temple of the Wisdom of the Word of God (879) - 337

RULES AND CANONICAL EPISTLES OF THE HOLY FATHERS Canonical epistle from our holy father Dionysius, Archbishop of Alexandria and Confessor, to Bishop Basilides (260) - 340 Epistle of Saint Peter, Archbishop of Alexandria and martyr, from his word on repentance (304) - 347 Canonical epistle of the saint Gregory, Archbishop of Neocaesarea, wonderworker (262) - 364 Epistle of Saint Athanasius the Great, Archbishop of Alexandria - 371 To Ammun the monk (326-371) - 371 Epistle of Saint Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Rufinian - 376 Saint Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria, from the 39th Epistle about holidays - 379

RULES OF SAINT BASIL THE GREAT First canonical letter of our holy father Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium (370-378) - 383 Second canonical letter of our holy father Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium - 399 Third canonical letter our holy father Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium - 415 From another canonical epistle to the same - 426 The same epistle to Diodorus, Bishop of Taras - 427 The same epistle to Gregory the Presbyter - 433 The same canonical epistle to the chorebishops - 435 The same to the bishops subordinate to him - 437 St. Basil from the 27th chapter of the book on the Holy Spirit, to Blessed Amphilochius - 439 The same from the 29th chapter of the same work - 443 Canonical letter, St. Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa, to Litoius, Bishop of Melitino (372- 394) - 445 St. Gregory the Theologian, on what books of the Old and New Testaments are appropriate to read (370-391) - 461 St. Amphilochius the Bishop to Seleucus, on what books are acceptable (394) - 463 Canonical answers of Holy Timothy, Bishop of Alexandria , one of the one hundred and fifty fathers who were at the Council of Constantinople - 466

RULES OF THEOPHILUS, ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA Proclamation, at the onset of the holy Epiphanies in the week - 472 His own, the instruction given to Ammon - 473 Himself, to Bishop Athenius, about the so-called pure - 477 Himself, to Bishop Agathon - 478 Himself, to Bishop Menas - 478

The rules of our father of our Cyril, the Archbishop of Alexandria, the canonical message to the Domn, the Patriarch of Antioch - 480 of his own, to the bishops, which are in Libya and Pentapol - 483 District Epistle of Gennady, the Patriarch of Constantinople, and with him the Holy Council, to all the overpressure of the Metropolitan to the Pope of Rome - 486 Epistle of Tarasius, the most holy patriarch of Constantinople, new Rome, to Hadrian, pope of ancient Rome - 491

Dictionary - 502 Abbreviations - 598 Main editions of Russian translations of the canonical corpus - 600

Does a layman need to know the norms of church law?

I think it is necessary. Knowledge of the canons helps to understand what rights and responsibilities he has. In addition, church canons are also very useful in everyday life.

For example, the life of a newborn baby hangs by a thread and he urgently needs to be baptized. Can the mother herself do this in the maternity hospital, and if she can (and in fact this is the case), how can she do it correctly so that the sacrament of Baptism actually takes place? Or you were invited to become a godfather. What does this mean from a canonical point of view, what responsibilities do you have? Many complex issues are associated with the sacrament of Marriage. For example, is it possible, from a canonical point of view, to marry a non-Orthodox person?

Preface

VIII

At the end of 1874, in the Moscow Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment, the idea arose of publishing the Reading of the Rules of St. in the journal of the Society. apostle, St. Ecumenical and Local Councils and St. father with interpretations. In the February book of Readings for 1875, the printing of the Rules with interpretations began, which continues continuously.

Now the Society, without waiting for the completion of the entire work, has found it useful to publish especially the “Rules of the Apostle Saints” with interpretations to familiarize those people who do not have the Reading magazine with this work.

At the same time, the “Society” sets itself the obligation to bring deep gratitude to the persons who honored the editors of this work with the communication of their instructions and comments on the best conduct of the matter, namely: His Eminence Platon, Archbishop of Kostroma and Galich, Cathedral Archpriest of the Moscow Archangel Cathedral, Doctor of Theology, Mikhail Izmailovich Bogoslovsky and professor of canon law at Moscow University, doctor of canon law, Alexey Stepanovich Pavlov. The society allows itself to hope that those who love the Orthodox Church and its statutes will continue to report their comments on errors in translation, or indicate the best ways to conduct this matter.

Here the Society considers itself obliged to testify with deep gratitude to the warm sympathy for this enterprise of society and the assistance that the late, ever-memorable honorary member provided to Bose

Society, father rector of the Moscow Theological Academy, Archpriest Alexander Vasilyevich Gorsky. The great guardian of every holy work useful for the church, Alexander Vasilyevich, before starting this work, promised the editors his assistance in all difficult cases. When the first pages of the translation then appeared, he, already in a painful state, read the translation,, according to his usual custom, compared it with the original, made some deeply apt comments on the book, and on this occasion had a brief conversation with the editor. Not content with this, the next day he sent a letter to the editor, in which he outlined a whole learned excursion about the meaning of the Greek word: σημειοῦσϑαι in Balsamon’s interpretation of the 14th rule of St. apostle. He who sows blessings, may he reap blessings in the world to come!

___________

PREFACE

Starting to publish interpretations of the rules of St. apostle, St. Ecumenical and Local Councils and St. Father, it is necessary to explain: I) the motivation and goals of this publication; II) the composition of the interpretations that have a place in the publication, and III) the method of publication itself.

The code of rules of the ancient church, which began not at one time, but during the first nine centuries of Christianity, not in one place, but in various churches of the East and, partly, the West, already by this very thing, i.e., their different times and places of origin, necessitates interpretation and clarification of these rules. One spirit of pure and holy Orthodoxy animated the holy fathers at different times and in different places, who included the original apostolic tradition in written rules. But not the same forms of language, not the same technical terms for denoting certain canonical concepts were used at all times. The same essential and fundamental rules for all Orthodox churches, generally binding, are set forth by all holy councils and fathers. But not all the rules set forth by the councils and fathers are of a generally binding nature (compare, for example, Neoces. sob. pr. 15 and VI Ecumen. 16, or Carthage sob. pr. 81 and VI Ecumen. 12 and 13). The general and essential were observed everywhere in the Orthodox Church; but there were some private and local features in relation to

specific Orthodox churches adopted by the councils of these churches, local exceptions from the general rule (compare, for example, Ankir. Council of Rights. 10, Apost. 26 and VI Ecumenical Council, etc. 6). Upon recognition of Christianity as the dominant faith in the Roman Empire, the secular legislator, on the one hand, gave the force of state law to the church rule, and on the other, he himself began to pay attention to church life and issue his own laws relating to it. Thus, next to the church rule there was a state law, which was not always in agreement with it. All this made it necessary to interpret the rules for the Greek Church: it was necessary to explain technical terms and designations; it was necessary to indicate in the rules what had only local significance, or an exception from the general rule; it was necessary to harmonize the church rule with the secular law on the same subject.

All the more urgent is the need to interpret the ancient rules for our Russian Church. We are in a very special position in relation to the rules than the Orthodox Christians of Hellenic origin were in relation to them. We are deprived of all the benefits of visibility and direct acquaintance with church life, which come from cohabitation with the people who have acquired the right. We must reward this deprivation with spiritual exertion; we must try and strive to absorb ancient church law in all its peculiarities, so that this will reward us for the deprivation that we suffer from the fact that we do not live in the time when the rules were published and with the people in whose language they were published . Our situation is more difficult, and the need for interpretation is more urgent for us. What for an Orthodox Christian of Hellenic origin was clear from constant practice, from word usage, for us can sometimes only be understood

with interpretation aid. This is why our church authorities have been concerned since ancient times with publishing the best interpretations of ancient church rules. For this reason, our church-governmental and judicial practice has always had a need for interpretation and turned to it. For the same reason, the church life of all Orthodox Christians, usually based on the canons, and church science, which is also obliged to adhere to the rules, make demands for interpretations of the rules. The latter was revealed with particular clarity in the disputes about the judicial power of the diocesan bishop, waged in 1871-1873. Then such speculations appeared which threatened, if they were put into practice, with a complete distortion of the entire structure of Orthodox church life, and which were at the same time supported by references to the rules. The calculation was obviously that, given the lack of clarity of some church rules and the unknown interpretations of the rules in our society, readers would be convinced of the correctness of the proposed speculations. This calculation was not justified, solely because the rules and interpretations on them were presented, from which the contradiction of the stated speculations with the church rules was revealed with invincible clarity.

II.

The above leads to the conviction of the need to publish interpretations of church rules and together to the question of which interpretations deserve to be published.

And in the Greek Church, and here, and in the West, there were and are different interpretations of the rules of the Orthodox Eastern Church. In the Greek church there are interpretations of Zonara, Balsamon, Aristen and other interpreters unknown by name, interpretations laid down in the Greek helmsman - Pidalion. We have interpretations

set out in the helmsman's book, some interpretations and notes set out in the book of rules published by the Holy Synod, and recently appeared interpretations of the late Smolensk Bishop John and interpretations of the rules of the first three Ecumenical Councils of the Right Reverend John, Bishop of Aleut. In the West, there are interpretations of the rules of the Eastern Church, compiled by the learned Roman Catholic Bishop Hefele and the Anglican Beveregius. It is obvious that it would be both impossible and unnecessary to undertake the publication of all existing interpretations. But what guides the choice of interpretations, and on what basis to give preference to one interpretation over another?

There are safe grounds for resolving this issue.

Preference should be given to the interpretation that has the approval of the highest church authority, which either comes from it, or was used by it in deciding cases, or was recommended by it, as an interpretation that deserves preferential trust.

If we apply this principle to the above interpretations, it turns out that:

1) The interpretations and comments of the Holy Synod, set out under certain rules in the book of Rules, must take first place among all interpretations, as coming from the highest ecclesiastical authority in the Russian Church and proposed by it.

2) The interpretations placed in the printed Slavic Helmsman's Book should also receive a place in the series of interpretations: for these interpretations are authorized by the highest church authorities in Russia. The interpretations of the printed Helmsman's book are borrowed from Ariston and partly from Zonara. They were translated from Greek into Slavic by St. Savva, the first Archbishop of Serbia; in Russia, through Bulgaria, appeared in 1262, and since that time have had constant use in our church practice: they were used by All-Russian metropolitans and councils, sometimes

even as and instead of rules (see Pavlov’s original Slavic-Russian Nomocanon, pp. 62-73); accepted into the printed Slavic helmsman, the printing of which began with the blessing of His Holiness Patriarch Joseph in 1649; The Holy Synod were used in the same way as in ancient times, that is, sometimes instead of and as the rules themselves (see, for example, Synod. Proceedings. 1725, July 2; 1732, Oct. 4; 1734, Nov. 6 ; 1735, Oct. 27; 1780, Sept. 25, etc.).

3) Of the other interpretations, the attribute we indicated is attached only to the interpretations of three famous Greek canonists - Zonara, Balsamon and Aristen. But it should give some information about the interpreters themselves and about the distinctive properties of their interpretations.

John Zonara, the most famous Byzantine historian and canonist, lived in the first half of the 12th century and initially held important court positions in Constantinople, but then became a monk and devoted himself to scientific studies. The fruit of these studies, among other things, was “Explanation of the sacred and divine rules of the holy and glorious apostles, sacred councils of ecumenical and local, or private and other saints.” father". Zonara was the first to deviate from the order of councils that had been in use until that time, adopted in Canon 2 of the VI Ecumenical Council and set first of all the rules of ecumenical councils, followed by local ones and after St. father. The order is accepted by Pidalion and our book of Rules. In the interpretation itself, Zonara strictly adheres to the direct literal meaning of the rules, explains the technical, artificial terms of the rules, and their immediate meaning, and rarely refers to secular laws. But these explanations of his, within the limits of his task, for the most part leave nothing to be desired, presenting the essence and meaning of the rule in a completely clear and easily understandable form. That is why Balsamon in many cases follows Zonara

and almost literally reproduces it, especially in the interpretation of those rules, in the explanation of which there seems no need to turn to secular laws. Balsamon calls Zonara the most excellent and some of his interpretations cannot be better (Athan. Great. to Ammun), and one unknown Greek notes that the wondrous Zonara interpreted the church rules in the most clear and pious way (σαϕéςατα ϰαὶ ευλαβέςατα). Interpretations of Zonara on the rules of St. Gregory of Nyssa, Timothy, Theophilus and Cyril of Alexandria have not survived, and perhaps did not exist at all.

Another interpreter of church rules, who lived after Zonara, Alexius Aristen, nomophilax and economist of the great Church of Constantinople, wrote interpretations on abbreviated rules in the same 12th century. The reduction itself was made before Aristen, and is not universally approved by him (for example, Ap. 75, Ank. 19). The abbreviated text of the rules is explained by Aristen; Accordingly, its interpretations are mostly brief. In some cases, they contain only parts of the complete rule omitted in abbreviation (for example, VI Omni. 53, etc.). Clear rules are left without interpretation with the addition: clear, or: “this rule is clear,” or without the addition.

The most famous of the Greek canonists, Theodore Balsamon, belongs to the last half of the same 12th century. A native of Constantinople, Balsamon was originally a deacon of the patriarchal church in Constantinople, nomophilax and chartophylax patriarch, and abbot of Blachernae. The most important of these positions was that of the chartophylax, who was considered the mouth and eye of the patriarch and his right hand. During the reign of Isaac Angelus, Balsamon was elevated to the Patriarchal throne of Antioch. But Balsamon could not take his throne in Antioch, which was at that time in the power of the Latin crusaders and was forced to fulfill the duties of patriarch

Antioch, while staying in Constantinople. - Of the many canonical works of Balsamon, the most important is - “An explanation of the sacred and divine rules of the Holy and All-praised Apostles and sacred councils of the Ecumenical and local or private and other holy fathers, and at the same time “an indication of the laws, valid and ineffective, contained in fourteen titles, placed before the “rules, compiled by order of the royal and patriarchal.” The royal command referred to here was given to Balsamon by the Emperor Manuel Komnenos, and to the Patriarch by the Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Anchialus. The essence of this command was to examine the sacred canons, explain and interpret what is unclear in them and what seems to be inconsistent with the laws. The order was carried out by Balsamon already under Patriarch George Xiphilinus (1191–), to whom he dedicated his work. — The first part of Balsamon’s work, preceding the interpretation of the canons, is an interpretation of the Nomocanon of Patriarch Photius, devoted more to the harmonization of various secular laws than to church rules. The interpretation of the church rules themselves constitutes the second part of this great work. The subtlety of legal analysis, the wealth of canonical, legal and historical information are the distinctive features of Balsamon's interpretations. Balsamon owns an enormous amount of canonical and legal material and uses it with extraordinary skill to comprehensively explain the rules. His personal and direct participation in church-governmental affairs as the head of the patriarchal chancellery placed at his disposal such

Funds that could not be owned by anyone who did not have participation in all matters. Hence, its interpretations are enriched with examples from church practice, resolution of various issues that were or may be presented in the application of this or that rule, indications of irregularities that have crept into practice contrary to the canons, and references to secular laws.

For Valsamonov’s science, the commentary is valuable because only it preserved many patriarchal and synodal decisions, as well as imperial laws. - Balsamon is considered the most knowledgeable in both laws and rules and the wisest ώτατος), Patriarch Philotheus (Συντ. τ. ϑεείων ϰανόνων ν, 128), Mark of Ephesus and Patriarch Gennady Scholarnus (Τόμος ἀγαπῆς 583, 264). But the publishers of Pidalion are not favorable to Balsamon and place him much lower than Zonara.

The interpretations of the three interpreters we have named have always enjoyed authority in the Greek and Russian Orthodox Churches. And this is not only for the sake of their internal dignity, but also due to their approval by the highest church authorities. Balsamon undertook his interpretations at the behest of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople (Michael Aphial), and when he finished, he presented them to the Ecumenical Patriarch (George Xiphilinus). In subsequent times, the Patriarchs of Constantinople referred to Balsamon's interpretations to base practical decisions. Thus, Patriarch Philotheus of Constantinople (1362) refers to the authority of Balsamon’s interpretation in the preface to the Gangra rules about the non-binding nature of one synodal decision that took place under Patriarch Alexy. When the publication of the Greek helmsman's book (Pidalion) was undertaken at the end of the last century, its publishers compiled their interpretation, adhering exactly and primarily to the interpretations of Zonara, Balsamon and Aristen. “Under the original text of the rules,” the publishers write, we have put in the simple (Modern Greek) dialect the true Greek interpretations of the Orthodox and church-tested interpreters of the divine and sacred canons (τας ἀληϑεῑς και ἑλληνικας ερμηνεί ας τῶν γνησίων καὶ παρὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐγκρινομένων ἐξηγήτων τῶν ϑ εείων καὶ ἱερῶν κανόνων), first of all and for the most part and almost everywhere having

first place of the wondrous and glorious John Zonara, then Theodore Balsamon, and occasionally Alexius Aristen.” How the publication of the Greek Helmsman and the interpretations contained in it was undertaken and printed according to the determination and command of the Most Holy Ecumenical Patriarch and the Holy Synod τ? ); then in this very thing the approval of the interpretations of Zonara, Aristen and Balsamon by the highest ecclesiastical authority of the Orthodox Greek Church was already expressed. Then the same approval of the highest ecclesiastical authority of the Greek Church to the interpretations of these interpreters was again expressed during the publication of church rules with the interpretations of these interpreters in Athens in 1852-1854, also made “with the permission of the holy and great Church of Christ (Constantinople) and the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece.” .

In the Russian church, the interpretations of Aristen and those interpretations of Zonara that were included in the translated St. Savva the Serbian Helmsman was used by the highest church authorities since 1262. In the 17th century, a translation of the interpretations of all three interpreters of Zonara, Aristen and Balsamon was completed by Epiphanius Slovenitsky, and supplemented in the same century by Hieromonk Euthymius (Synod. Biblical Russian No. 223, 224, 225, 226, 464, 465, 475 former Catholic .), but remains unpublished, although it has the approval of Patriarch Hadrian. The Holy Synod in 1734 ordered the book of Beveregius “Pandects”, in which the authentic interpretations of Balsamon, Zonara and Aristen were published under the rules, to be translated from Latin into Russian as soon as possible without continuation of time (1734, November 23, syn. proto. l. 235, 236). The translation is indeed done; but not published.

When publishing the “book of rules,” the Holy Synod borrows its interpretations and notes contained in it from Zonara (for example, on the 5th Apostle) and Balsamon (for example, VI Ecumenical.

71, Laodice. 15, 18, etc.) sometimes naming them, sometimes not naming them.

Having thus expressed general approval of the interpretations of the three named Greek interpreters, the Holy Synod also turns in particular cases to their interpretations to justify its decisions. So in 1765 (Aug. 17, protocol No. 47) the Holy Synod referred to Balsamon on the issue of non-dissolution of marriage in a case where the father-in-law committed incest with his daughter-in-law, his son’s wife. And in 1864, the Holy Synod resolved in a positive sense the question of the permissibility of second-weds to remain in lower ecclesiastical positions on the basis of Balsamon’s interpretation of the 18th Apostolic Canon (Feb. 17, protocol No. 221).

So, what is presented shows that the interpretations of the three famous Greek interpreters - a sign that should be revered as essential, namely the approval of the highest church authority as guiding interpretations, have, and therefore should receive a place in the publication of interpretations.

The interpretations of Pidalion, published with the approval of the Patriarch of Constantinople, also have this feature. But since they in themselves do not constitute a special interpretation, but are only repetitions of the interpretations of Zonara, Balsamon and partly Aristen; then it seems unnecessary to reproduce these interpretations. - Other existing interpretations of the rules of the Eastern Church - both our Russian and Western ones - do not have the said attribute, and therefore should not be accepted for publication.

III.

The question of the method of publication itself can be resolved in different ways. It is possible to publish one consolidated interpretation, extracting it from all the individual interpretations and omitting what is repeated in each individual interpretation.

This is what the publishers of Pidalion did. - But such an interpretation would already have the form of an essay, the form of a new interpretation compiled from individual interpretations. In this case, there might be a benefit that the publication would have a smaller volume. But at the same time this would also have the disadvantage that the interpretations approved and authorized by the highest church authority would be deprived of their authentic appearance, replacing them with a new composition, which always leaves room for the question: is it made completely in accordance with the originals? Beveregius and the Athenian publishers acted differently and presented under each rule the interpretations of the canonists Zonaras, Aristen and Balsamon in their complete and separate form. This method also seems preferable when publishing interpretations in Russian. The interpretations of the famous Greek canonists, who guided and still guide the entire Orthodox Eastern Church, will be transmitted in Russian in the form in which they came from the pen of each interpreter in Greek.

The editors ask all Orthodox readers who know the matter to deign to post their comments and instructions; Any comment aimed at improving the publication will be accepted with gratitude.

The general appearance of the publication will be as follows: under each rule, given according to the text of the book of rules and, moreover, in both languages - Greek and Slavic-Russian, there will be interpretations of 1) Zonara, 2) Aristen, 3) Balsamon, 4) Slavic printed helmsman and 5 ) book of Rules. This sequence deviates somewhat from that adopted by Beveregius and the Athenian publishers. In Beveregius, Balsamon is in first place, followed by Zonara and Aristen. Athenian publishers considered it more correct to deviate from this order and more accurately observe the chronology; which is why they put the oldest of the interpreters, Zonaru, in first place. But they didn’t quite stand their ground.

started by placing after Zonara not Aristene, as exact chronology required, but Balsamon. The order indicated above, in which Aristen follows Zonara, and Balsamon after Aristen, accurately follows the chronological sequence.

In cases where the interpretation of either of the interpreters represents some inaccuracy, or does not quite satisfactorily convey the idea of the rule, the editors will make notes borrowed from other reliable sources - definitions of the patriarchs and Synods of the Greek Church, the Holy Synod of the Russian Church, etc. This will be done either during the interpretation itself, or at the end of the volume.

The translation of the Greek interpretations is done from the currently best edition - the Athenian, completed in 1852-1854 with the permission of the holy and great Church of Christ (Constantinople) and the Holy Synod of the Church of the Kingdom of Hellenism. The full title of this edition is as follows: μων ᾿Αποςόλων, καὶ τϖν ἱερϖν οἰκουμενιϰῶν καὶ τοπικῶν, Συνόδων, κα ὶτϖνκατὰ μέρος, ἀγίων, ἐκδοϑὲν σὺν πλέιςαις ἄλλαις τὴν ἐκκλησιαςι κὴν κατάςασιν διουπούσαις διατάξεσι μετα τϖν ἀρχαίων ἐξηγητϖν, καὶ δια ϕόρων ἀναγνωσμάτων ὑπὸ Γ. A. Ράλλη καὶ Μ. Πότλη, ἐγκρίσει τῆς Α᾿γίας καὶ Μεγάλης τοῦ Χριςοῦ Εκκλησίας καὶ ἱ 1852-1854. T. 2-4. — When translating, it is expected to maintain all possible accuracy and fidelity to the original.

Interpretations of the Slavic printed Helmsman are printed from the first edition of the Helmsman, made under His Holiness Patriarch Joseph.

Interpretations and notes of the book of rules are printed from the latest edition of this book.