Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 1/The Council of Ancyra/Canons/Canon XIII

Canon XIII.

is not lawful for Chorepiscopi to ordain presbyters or deacons, and most assuredly not presbyters of a city, without the commission of the bishop given in writing, in another parish.

Notes.

A chorepiscopus is not to ordain without the consent of the bishop.

If the first part of the thirteenth canon is easy to understand, the second, on the contrary, presents a great difficulty; for a priest of a town could not in any case have the power of consecrating priests and deacons, least of all in a strange diocese.&#160; Many of the most learned men have, for this reason, supposed that the Greek text of the second half of the canon, as we have read it, is incorrect or defective.&#160; It wants, say they, &#960;&#959;&#953;&#949;&#8150;&#957; &#964;&#953;, or aliquid agere, i.e., to complete a religious function.&#160; To confirm this supposition, they have appealed to several ancient versions, especially to that of Isidore:&#160; sed nec presbyteris civitatis sine episcopi pr&#230;cepto amplius aliquid imperare, vel sine auctoritate literarum ejus in unaquaque (some read &#7952;&#957; &#7952;&#954;&#8049;&#963;&#964;&#8131; instead of &#7952;&#957; &#7953;&#964;&#8051;&#961;&#8115;) parochia aliquid agere.&#160; The ancient Roman of the canons, Codex Canonum, has the same reading, only that it has provincia instead of parochia.&#160; Fulgentius Ferrandus, deacon of Carthage, who long ago made a collection of canons, translates in the same way in his Breviatio Canonum:&#160; Ut presbyteri civitatis sine jussu episcopi nihil jubeant, nec in unaquaque parochia aliquid agant.&#160; Van Espen has explained this canon in the same way.

Routh has given another interpretation.&#160; He maintained that there was not a word missing in this canon, but that at the commencement one ought to read, according to several &#967;&#969;&#961;&#949;&#960;&#953;&#963;&#954;&#8057;&#960;&#959;&#953;&#962; in the dative, and further down &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#8048; &#956;&#8052;&#957; &#956;&#951;&#948;&#8050; instead of &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#945; &#956;&#951;&#948;&#8050; then &#960;&#961;&#949;&#963;&#946;&#965;&#964;&#8051;&#961;&#959;&#965;&#962; (in the accusative) &#960;&#8057;&#955;&#949;&#969;&#962; and finally &#7952;&#954;&#8049;&#963;&#964;&#8131; instead of &#7953;&#964;&#8051;&#961;&#8115;, and that we must therefore translate, &#8220;Chorepiscopi are not permitted to consecrate priests and deacons (for the country) still less (&#7936;&#955;&#955;&#8048; &#956;&#8052;&#957; &#956;&#951;&#948;&#8050;) can they consecrate priests for the town without the consent of the bishop of the place.&#8221;&#160; The Greek text, thus modified according to some , especially those in the Bodleian Library, certainly gives a good meaning.&#160; Still &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#8048; &#956;&#8052;&#957; &#956;&#951;&#948;&#8050; does not mean, but still less:&#160; it means, but certainly not, which makes a considerable difference.

Besides this, it can very seldom have happened that the chorepiscopi ordained presbyters or deacons for a town; and if so, they were already forbidden, at least implicitly, in the first part of the canon.