Presbyters Uniwersytet Warszawski
ID
ER 1994
Ambrose of Milan (Italy) in his work "On repentance" says that the right of remitting and retaining of sins was given by Jesus Christ only to the priests who are in the Church; the heresies do not have the valid priesthood. Composed in Milan ca 386-390.
Book 1
 
II.6. Sed aiunt se domino deferre reverentiam, cui soli remittendorum criminum potestatem reservent. - Immo nulli maiorem iniuriam faciunt quam qui eius volunt mandata rescindere, commissum munus refundere. Nam cum ipse in evangelio suo dixerit dominus Iesus: "Accipite spiritum sanctum," et cui "remiseritis peccata," remittuntur ei, "et quorum detinueritis, detenta sunt" [John 20:22-23] quis est, qui magis honorat, utrum qui mandatis obtemperat, an qui resistit? 7. Ecclesia in utroque servat oboedientiam, ut peccatum et alliget et relaxet. Haeresis in altero inmitis, in altero inoboediens vult ligare, quod non resolvat, non vult solvere, quod ligavit. In quo se sua damnat sententia; dominus enim par ius et solvendi esse voluit et ligandi, qui utrumque pari condicione permisit. Ergo qui solvendi ius non habet, nec ligandi habet. Sicut enim secundum dominicam sententiam, qui ligandi ius habet, et solvendi habet, ita istorum adsertio se ipsa strangulat, ut, quia solvendi sibi ius negant, negare debeant et ligandi. Quomodo igitur potest alterum licere, non licere alterum? Quibus donatum utrumque est, aut utrumque licere manifestum est, aut utrumque non licere certum est. Ecclesiae autem utrumque licet, haeresi utrumque non licet; ius enim hoc solis permissum sacerdotibus est. Recte igitur ecclesia vindicat, quae veros sacerdotes habet, haeresis vindicare non potest, quae sacerdotes dei non habet. Non vindicando autem ipsa de se pronuntiat, quod, cum sacerdotes non habeat, ius sibi vindicare non debeat sacerdotale. Ita in inpudenti contumacia pudentem cernimus confessionem.
8. Specta etiam illud, quoniam, qui spiritum sanctum accipit, solvendi peccati potestatem et ligandi accipit. Sic enim scriptum est: "Accipite spiritum sanctum, quorum remiseritis peccata, remittentur eis, et quorum detinueritis, detenta erunt." [cf. John 20:22] Ergo qui solvere non potest peccatum, non habet spiritum sanctum. Munus enim spiritus sancti est officium sacerdotis, ius autem sancti spiritus in solvendis ligandisque criminibus est. Quomodo igitur munus eius vindicant, de cuius diffidunt iure et potestate? 9. Quid quod insolentiores sunt? Nam cum ad misericordiam promptior quam ad severitatem sit spiritus dei, quod ait se velle, id nolunt, quod nolle, hoc agunt, cum vindicare iudicis sit, remittere misericordis. Tolerabilius igitur, Novatiane, remitteres quam ligares; aliud enim quasi delinquendi partem usurpares, aliud quasi aerumnae conpassus ignosceres.
 
(ed. Faller 1955: 121-123)
Book 1
 
II.6. They affirm that they are showing great reverence for God, to Whom alone they reserve the power of forgiving sins. But in truth none do Him greater injury than they who choose to prune His commandments and reject the office entrusted to them. For inasmuch as the Lord Jesus Himself said in the Gospel: "Receive the Holy Spirit: whosesoever sins you forgive they are forgiven unto them, and whosesoever sins you retain, they are retained" [John 20:22-23] who is it that honours Him most, he who obeys His bidding or he who rejects it? 7. The Church holds fast its obedience on either side, by both retaining and remitting sin; heresy is on the one side cruel, and on the other disobedient; wishes to bind what it will not loosen, and will not loosen what it has bound, whereby it condemns itself by its own sentence. For the Lord willed that the power of binding and of loosing should be alike, and sanctioned each by a similar condition. So he who has not the power to loose has not the power to bind. For as, according to the Lord's word, he who has the power to bind has also the power to loose, their teaching destroys itself, inasmuch as they who deny that they have the power of loosing ought also to deny that of binding. For how can the one be allowed and the other disallowed? It is plain and evident that either each is allowed or each is disallowed in the case of those to whom each has been given. Each is allowed to the Church, neither to heresy, for this power has been entrusted to priests alone. Rightly, therefore, does the Church claim it, which has true priests; heresy, which has not the priests of God, cannot claim it. And by not claiming this power heresy pronounces its own sentence, that not possessing priests it cannot claim priestly power. And so in their shameless obstinacy a shamefaced acknowledgment meets our view.
8. Consider, too, the point that he who has received the Holy Ghost has also received the power of forgiving and of retaining sin. For thus it is written: Receive the Holy Spirit: whosesoever sins you forgive, they are forgiven unto them, and whosesoever sins you retain, they are retained. John 20:22-23 So, then, he who has not received power to forgive sins has not received the Holy Spirit. The office of the priest is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and His right it is specially to forgive and to retain sins. How, then, can they claim His gift who distrust His power and His right? 9. And what is to be said of their excessive arrogance? For although the Spirit of God is more inclined to mercy than to severity, their will is opposed to that which He wills, and they do that which He wills not; whereas it is the office of a judge to punish, but of mercy to forgive. It would be more endurable, Novatian, that you should forgive than that you should bind. In the one case you would assume the right as one who rarely offended; in the other you would forgive as one who had fellow-feeling with the misery of sin.
 
(trans. De Romestin 1896: 330)

Place of event:

Region
  • Italy north of Rome with Corsica and Sardinia
City
  • Milan

About the source:

Author: Ambrose of Milan
Title: On the penance, De paenitentia, On the repentance, Concerning repentance
Origin: Milan (Italy north of Rome with Corsica and Sardinia)
Denomination: Catholic/Nicene/Chalcedonian
In the treatise on repentance Ambrose of Milan polemicise against the views of the Novatians concerning the power of the Church to remit sins. The Novatian schism arised in 251 in the aftermath of the persecution of Decius. Its followers claimed that the lapsi, Christians who denied their faith during persecution, cannot be readmitted to communion. The schism have taken a firm root both in the East and West and its traces can still be found in the 5th century. Otto Faller noticed that the treatise does not mention the repentance of the emperor Theodosius in 390 and suggested that the treatise was written earlier. Moreover, there are noticeable similarities between "On the repentance" and the "Expositio Evangelii secundum Lucam" which was written in 386. According to Faller (1955: 63*-64*) then, the treatise was written between 386 and 390.
Edition:
O. Faller ed., Sancti Ambrosii opera pars septima. Explanatio symboli. De sacramentis. De mysteriis. De paenitentia. De excessu fratris. De obitu Valentiniani. De obitu Theodosii, Coprus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 73, Wien 1955, 117-206
R. Gryson ed., Ambroise de Milan, La pénitence, Sources Chrétiennes 179, Paris 1971
 
English translation:
H. De Romestin trans., Ambrose, Concerning Repentance, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, vol. 10, ed. P. Schaff and H. Wace, Buffalo 1896
Bibliography:
J. Romer, Die theologie der Sunde und der Busse beim hl. Ambrosius, Sankt-Gallen 1968
R. Marchioro, La prassi penitenziale nel IV secolo a Milano secondo s. Ambrogio, Rome 1975

Categories:

Religious grouping (other than Catholic/Nicene/Chalcedonian) - Novatianist
    Described by a title - Sacerdos/ἱερεύς
      Ritual activity - Reconciliation/Administering 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, ER1994, http://www.presbytersproject.ihuw.pl/index.php?id=6&SourceID=1994