Presbyters Uniwersytet Warszawski
ID
ER 1007
Canon 10 of the Thirteenth Council in Toledo (Iberian Peninsula, AD 683) allows priests who received penance while sick but then recovered to retain their office.
Canon 10
 
Vtrum audeant ministrare ii qui poenitentiam accipiunt in sacerdotio constituti.
 
On the third day of the council abbot Vincentius representing Bishop Gaudentius of Valeria (Iberian Peninsula), asks the council whether his superior can celebrate the holy mysteries because being ill he received penance.
 
[...] Tunc collatis in unum de huiusmodi canonicis instrumentis hoc sancta synodus definiuit, ut reconciliatione praemissa soliti ordinis retentet officia. Si enim regulae praecedentium Patrum eos qui poenitentiam in discrimine mortis accipiunt et nulla de se manifesta scelera confitentur, si adsit tamen in his et talibus probitas morum, ad ecclesiasticos gradus peruenire permittunt, quanto magis ut ii qui in ipso sacerdotio constituti poenitentiam accipiunt, a sui ordinis officio retrahantur? Tantum si se ipsi mortalium criminum professione propria non notarunt. Cum enim omnis sacerdos tunc sibi licitum sacrificare sciat, quando a malis actibus uacat, qua ratione qui paenitentiae remedium suscipit, quod datur in remissionem peccati, a sacrificiis diuinis se abigit? Paenitentia enim ad hoc suscipitur, ut et peccatum diluat et peccati sordes nominem iterare non sinat. Qui ergo confidit per susceptam paenitentiam dimissa sibi peccata, cur confidenter ad altare Domini non accedat, uel cur ordinis sui non audeat retentare officia cum hoc alteri non liceat nisi ei qui se a peccatis abstineat?
Etenim cum paenitentiam accipimus ad similitudinem conditoris nos reformare conamur. Reformatio igitur ipsa medicamentum est quo delentur piacula. Si enim medicamentum istud assumitur, recte creatori suo anima reformatur, recte etiam sacrificandi Deo cultus assumitur quia in eo similitudo conditoris agnoscitur. Si autem paenitentiae medicamentum subtrahitur quod in remissione peccatorum accipitur, ad similitudinem factoris uspiam non uenitur. Etenim paenitentia, ut dictum est, in remedio peccati accipitur, sacerdotium uero propter munditiam retentatur ut os sacerdotis et uita ita fructu bonorum operum floreat, quo et in se delicti passiones exstinguat et praedicamento suo in aliis peccati regnum potentialiter destruat.
Huic igitur taliter, ut praemisimus, sacerdoti uiuenti quid oberit si post acceptas paenitentiae leges diuinis altaribus propositionis offerat panes? Aut numquid paenitentiae donum, quod in remedium fit peccati, in prohibitione deuocandum est sacramenti? Nusquam ergo paenitentiae percepta remedia priuabunt iura coelestia. Paenitens enim abstinere a peccatis pariter et negotiorum saecularium tumultibus debet, non ab his quae sancta uidentur et summa, sese abstrahere, quae operantem plus expiant quam commaculando deturpant. Scriptum est enim: "Sacerdos ad omnem mortuum non accedet" (Lev 21:11), id est mortalium criminum se implicatione non polluet. Non enim dixit Deus ut sacerdos ad sancta quaeque non auderet accedere, de quibus praeceperat ut nullo modo sacerdos de sanctis exiret (Lev 21:12), sed ut mortis opera non auderet contingere. Ergo abigenda sunt ab omni sacerdote quae maculant, exercenda quae mundant.
His ergo rationabili sermocinatione praemissis hoc sancta synodus definiuit, ut stante priscorum canonum sanctione quicumque pontificum uel sacerdotum deinceps per manus impositionem paenitentiae donum exceperint, nec se mortalium criminum professione notauerint, tenorem retentandi regiminis non omittant, sed per metropolitanum reconciliatione paenitentium more suscepta solita expleant ordinis sui officia uel cetera mysteriorum sibi credita sacramenta. Hoc tantum est obseruandum, ut si aut ante acceptionem paenitentiae adiudicatus nec reconciliatus reperitur pro culpis aut si in ipsa acceptione paenitentiae implicatum se dixerit mortalibus factis, iuxta aestimationem metropolitani abstinere huiusmodi oportet a praemissis officiis. Ceterum si, ut dictum est, sub paenitentiae perceptione consistens nihil mortalis criminis se admisisse praedixerit et tamen quod fateri hominibus erubescit, absconsum intra claustra sui pectoris delitiscit, nouerit ipse sibi de se potestatem esse concessam ut iuxta conscientiae suae fiduciam utrum audeat aut non audeat sacrificare Deo, ex sui potius arbitrii potestate quam ex nostri iudicii permissione procedat.
 
(eds. Martínez Díez, Rodríguez 2002: 247-252)
Canon 10
 
Whether the priests who received penance shall presume to minister.
 
On the third day of the council abbot Vincentius representing Bishop Gaudentius of Valeria (Iberian Peninsula), asks the council whether his superior can celebrate the holy mysteries because being ill he received penance.
 
[...] Then having gathered together all the canonical instructions about such a case, the council decreed that after reconciliation one can retain the office of usual order. Because if the rules of the former Fathers allow those who received penance in danger of death, but did not confess any evident crimes, to acquire the ecclesiastical grade if they are of proven morals, how much more those who being priests received penance shall be restored to the office of their order, but only if they did not profess mortal sins as their own. Let then every priest know that he is allowed to offer a sacrifice only when he is free from the wrong deeds, for why should a person who received the remedy of penance separate himself from the divine sacrifice just because he obtained a remission of sins? The penance is received in order to cleanse the sin and not to let the filth of sin repeat itself. Why then should a person who relied upon a received penance that absolved his sins not approach confidently the altar of the Lord, and why should he not presume to retain the office of his order which is not accessible but to those who abstain from their sins?
For when we receive penance, we try to reform ourselves in the image of the Creator. This reformation is a medicine that deletes sins. If then one takes this medicine, rightly his soul is restored to its Creator, rightly then he reassumes the cult of God in offering sacrifices, because the likeness to the Creator is revealed in him. If, however, the medicine of penance which is received for the remission of sins is taken away, one cannot ever acquire a likeness to the Creator. For penance, as it has been said, is received as a remedy of sin, and priesthood is kept according to purity, so that the mouth of a priest and his life bear the fruit of good deeds, so that he put an end to the suffering effected by sin in himself and destroy the kingdom of sin in others by his powerful preaching.
What then hinders, as we have already said, a living priest offering bread on the divine altars after receiving the laws of penance? And why shall the gift of penance that is a remedy to the sin be evoked as an impediment to the sacrament? Because the received remedies of penance will never nullify the celestial laws. A penitent has to abstain from sins, as well as from the confusion of the secular affairs, and shall not separate himself from things that are high and holy that purify one who performs them than disfigure him because of defilement. Because it is written: "The priest shall not go to any dead body" [Lev 21:11]; that is he shall not pollute himself by any involvement in mortal crimes. God did not say that the priest shall not dare to approach what is holy, and He even ordered that he shall not leave the sanctuary [Lev 21:12], but that he shall not dare to touch the doings of the dead. Thus, every priest shall reject things that pollute, and exercise those that cleanse.
After a reasonable conversation the holy council decreed that, according to the previous canons, if a pontiff or priest receives a gift of penance by the imposition of hands but does not confess any mortal sins, he shall not lose hold of his office, but after receiving the usual reconciliation from the metropolitan bishop will fulfil the services of his order and other sacraments of mysteries entrusted to him. It shall also be observed that if before receiving penance he has been judged guilty of sins but has not received penance, or he says in the moment of receiving penance that he had been involved in mortal deeds, he shall abstain from the office he had before, according to the judgement of the metropolitan bishop. But if, as has been said, being a penitent, he did not admit to any mortal crimes, but hid the things that he was ashamed to confess before men in the secrecy of his own heart he should know that he has a licence to proceed according to his own conscience whether he shall or shall not offer sacrifice to God, which is up to his own reasoning rather than to our permission.
 
(trans. M. Szada)

Discussion:

The canon refers most probably to canon 10 of the council of Gerona in AD 517 [175] and canon 54 of the Fourth Council of Toledo in AD 633 [482].

Place of event:

Region
  • Iberian Peninsula
City
  • Toledo

About the source:

Title: Concilium Toletanum XIII a. 683, Concilium XIII Toletanum a. 683, Thirteenth Council of Toledo in 683 AD
Origin: Toledo (Iberian Peninsula)
Denomination: Catholic/Nicene/Chalcedonian
The Thirteenth Council of Toledo took place on 4 November AD 683 during the reign of King Ervig and was presided over by Bishop Julian of Toledo. Forty-eight bishops were present, nine abbots, twenty-six representatives of the absent bishops and twenty-six lay dignitaries. The council focused mainly on the political issues concerning kingdom and dynasty, and it was less concerned with strictly ecclesiastical legislation (Collins 2004: 104-107).
Edition:
G. Martínez Díez, F. Rodríguez eds., La colección canónica Hispana, Monumenta Hispaniae sacra. Serie canónica 6, Madrid 2002.
Bibliography:
R. Collins, Visigothic Spain, 409–711, Oxford 2004.
 

Categories:

Described by a title - Sacerdos/ἱερεύς
    Ritual activity - Eucharist
      Ritual activity - Temporal impediment to presbyterial activity
        Administration of justice - Administration of justice
          Relation with - Bishop/Monastic superior
            Administration of justice - Ecclesiastical
              Administration of justice - Demotion
                Theoretical considerations - On priesthood
                  Administration of justice - Penance
                    Please quote this record referring to its author, database name, number, and, if possible, stable URL: M. Szada, Presbyters in the Late Antique West, ER1007, http://www.presbytersproject.ihuw.pl/index.php?id=6&SourceID=1007