Sixth Nomocanon of the Synode of Carthagene

Canon six of the two hundred and seventeen blessed fathers assembled at Carthage, that the chrism not be made by presbyters. Bishop Fortunatus said: "In the preceding councils, was this determination recalled, that the chrism, or the reconciliation of penitents, or the consecration of women and places, not be performed by presbyters? But if someone should be found acting contrary to these, what is fitting to be determined concerning him?" Bishop Aurelius said: "Your reverence has heard what has been introduced by our brother and fellow priest Fortunatus, that the making of the chrism and the consecration of women by presbyters not be done, nor also the imposition of some lay person at the liturgy be fitting for a presbyter." They said with one accord: "This pleases all." The necessity, the most excellent fulfillment, and the salvific nature of the present canon show a manifold circumspection, for not once, but many times, this holy council investigated these matters, which are also brought forward in other councils from the discussion of these things, and now in three places from the proposition for the same inquiry. But the present council speaks of the preceding councils, not of those before them, nor of other fathers, but of their own.

because there is a canon of the holy apostles which says: "that a council of bishops be held twice a year, and that they examine matters of mutual good service and of faith, and that they resolve cases of those who have fallen into ecclesiastical disputes." According to the ordinance of this same canon, the present chapter concerning the holding of a council by these holy fathers was being investigated; but, according to the appointed time for the gathering of the council and the many preliminary matters, at that time not all of the fathers were able to complete it because of the lateness of some, who only then received completion when the entire multitude of bishops and the remaining persons gathered for the necessary matters of the council and unanimously heard, stirred, and examined the pending questions, and with common consent confirmed the judgments, as is seen to have been accomplished in the courts. For when one person, of whatever sort, begins to judge, the decision is inoperative, and it is often extended over many times among many. Thus, as it seems, it was already decreed in the preceding councils concerning this present canon, but the decree was not written down, but remained unwritten; and it was determined that the chrism not be made by a presbyter.

concerning the chrism, however, a deed was not written, that is, a monument, within which the judges and the names of the judges were recorded. So that for this reason the willing may be known to the fathers who come after this and to the subsequent generations of men, and that it may be held firmly and unshakably and be transmitted, and not by custom without writing, but by written transmission it may be possessed. All the bishops said: the recording of the established matters, as before this, in the concurrences and co-presences, not all being present there at this time, as was said. Hereafter it makes clear the saying of all: then before, not all the bishops being present there, and the unanimity of all. And it makes clear the transmission before the present council. But the second, the words previously uttered. Question: It seems necessary to the fathers the establishment concerning the penitents, and how does it, as if unnecessary, neglect what is by us?

Receiving: I do not have to say the reason for the neglect of the stricter cause, but if we have difficulty in reaching and I have heard from other wise speakers, this is it: that the majority of the divine scriptures, some through negligence, some through ignorance, and others through the envy of the envious and malice and many other kinds of causes and forms of teachings, have been neglected, such as the form of Wednesday and Friday, their apostolic and patristic teachings, and also those concerning this person, for which reason the willing priest and the priestless monk will accept with self-will the thoughts, and will bind harmlessly, will loose by self-election, not receiving that grace from the bishop of that place, but being a self-seizer for the sake of satanic vainglory, either through folly or through ignorance. For the bonds by such priests and solitaries do not bind, and again, those loosed are not loosed, and they err on both sides, both the binders and the bound. But the proof of the forgetting of the now-mentioned canon is this: that it has been so neglected that it is not even known, and if there is a canon concerning such a person.

Because at some time, from among the monks of certain virtues and from the great renown of their own divine ascetics, and from those living a strict life, I have previously counted such persons as were made burdensome by such deeds, as their external discourse. But as the canons concerning the deposition show, their idleness and that of many other canons they boldly spoke to me face to face, not those who were unblushing concerning them, but rather as our knowledgeable enumerators. However, now these holy ones are not of such a kind, but rather they do not conceal by the agitations of forgetfulness those that are utterly cut off and torn by time and forgotten through ignorance and scattered through lack of learning, nor do they send them into the depth of ignorance, but they set them forth clearly, and they transmit them in writing, they make the unclear clear and distinguish the clear, and they confirm the complete, while they make the incomplete complete and bring the neglected to the agreeable.

Now, since the precedence of the previously mentioned councils shows the urgency of the present inquiry, and the worthiness of this deliberation for much and manifold care and joint investigation, while the determination also presents the authority which the archpriests possess, and altogether the unhindered conduct of the matter, and the necessity, inevitability, and firmness of the decree. And who would dare, in the face of so many fathers of such manifold laborious diligence and of such a council’s written determination, to pass over into contumacy? But if someone has transgressed, who is not worthy of punishment, as not of men but of God the despiser of the ordinance, as it itself says in the Gospels: “Those who despise you despise me,” speaking not only of the foremost preachers of truth, the apostles, but also of their successors. Concerning the making of chrism, not the act of anointing, the canon now speaks even of the baptized, since priests also anoint the baptized with holy myrrh.

without delay, but in the sacred celebration of the holy myron, for its performance is everywhere difficult, not being capable of being completed by any presbyter, but only by the high priests on the great and awesome and mysterious Thursday of the Lord's Supper, after the completion of the Gospel, the myron prepared by material ointments is transformed spiritually and immaterially. For although it appears materially and in material things, so also is the performance of the anointings accomplished by it. Now, how those who are defiled by sin can again, through the laying on of hands, be spiritually and immaterially manifested, for this reason first the myron, then the laying on of hands is established, as with the anointing of the anointed kings, the sons of God. But by forgiveness through the love of God manifested by men, and immediately again by the grace of the anointing without delay, for what the anointing by the high priest performed at the beginning, that same thing the laying on of hands by him again, although not in the same way, accomplished.

the composition of the myron, the gathering of which for some of the good-scented substances, the rich possessor of his own among the spiritual conditions, whose recipients, according to the spiritual correspondence of the quantity among them of the spiritual reception and the spiritual, until the mixing and union by some weight and balance, as it is said, and for their utterly strict long-term testing, the perfections of such preparation they spoke. But we, concerning the myron performed by the high priest, let us say how we are unable. The composition of the myron itself under that prescribes Jesus, the source of all spiritual substances, from which the recipients of the incorruptible mind and the divine and the purified possessors take their place.

And the twelve baskets, under which the cherubic hymnody is conducted, place the myron with the appropriate vessels upon the holy altar by the archpriest, according to the order of the holy seraphim, for as Isaiah says, "with six wings each," and with six wings each of those standing before Jesus and those reconciled, or in the many-hymned divine utterance "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Hosts," or in the hymnody of the superintendence of the priestly divine prophets, the "alleluia," which the learned among the Hebrews interpret either as praise of God or as glorification of the Lord's being. Christ, as a man, receives the holy soul purified, and as God, gives it to those for whom this is signified by the prayer performed by the archpriest over the myron, for by our power he sanctifies his own head, the all-holy Jesus, and again fills us, his servants, with all holiness and all virtue. For this reason the completion of the myron is also called, for it perfects the sanctifying incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ for men, and by divine action perfects and sanctifies all for the fulfillment of the mysteries.

For all priestly completions, the archpriest has the authority of elevation, as concerning those acts performed by him through the orders beneath him, to whom the power of their performance is given, except also that of the archpriest, and as something most superior is not left over for any other reason, but for the consecration of the myron performed by him and by him alone, which the canon called the oil of salvation. And the offering of the sacrifice of the repository through the all-holy anointings upon it, of the all-priestly myron perfected, that is, of the distributed one, to be received and perfected and given and communicated through the completions of the archpriesthoods, for the priestly gifts. And even if a priest baptizes, the archpriest baptizes, and even if a priest offers the sacrifice, the archpriest performs the priestly act, whether by some laying on of hands, or by some anointing upon the repository of the myron, and by the preservation of the remnants of the repository, and by the perfection of baptism as well; for wherever a priest offers the completion of the repository, it is by the bishop, without whom a presbyter cannot preside, but rather the first, by the bishop himself, performs the priestly act upon the perfected one.

Or how, if one is baptized without chrism, is it not that the bishop is defiled, and the chrism is spiritually transformed into chrism? For this reason, therefore, the remission of sins is preeminently proper to him alone, as to our archpriest who reveals Jesus Christ. Now, a certain rule is shown in this canon of the sixth Council of Carthage, and especially in the inquiry of Fortunatus; for not without words or without order is the first anointing, then the laying on of hands established, but with words and with a certain fitting order, concerning which this has been brought to my attention, that the one who performs the laying on of hands has the possession of this anointing, rather than the one who does not possess its completion, and undoubtedly the other would not have it either.

For the maker of chrism and the bestower of spiritual grace through it, by which remission of the first-formed errors is given, that same one, separated from sins, is enabled by the act of imposition to incompetence, and those of us who are recipients first lost the gift, that same bestower again deceives us with it later. But if in the reception of the assembly the imposition is established a third time, this does not contradict that sequence of reception, the third imposer of the second, so that just as the imposition is more broadly transferred, it is established at the end of the reception, and so that the second established one does not again alienate the imposition by means of contraction. But the ecclesiastical service of women speaks of the virginity of women, or of those lawfully united to one husband and then widowed, and thus of those abiding in manifold knowledge and in all purity, according to the apostle's ordinance concerning widows and virgins, who are made deaconesses by the laying on of hands not by priests, but by chief priests, for service at the time of baptism.

For deacons do not perform these things, as some are accustomed to say, for neither do they put on the same vestment with which deacons are girded, nor do they recite the psalmody from the deacon's place as deacons do, nor do they proclaim or act as heralds, nor do they give the holy paten to the recipients, but, as was said before, they are sealed as sponsors for baptism, holding the vessels for baptism and anointing the entire body after the sign of the cross by the priests, and these, being holy women and spouses of God, are sanctified by God and set apart solely and joined to the holy bride of the holy women or of the soul. For the renewal and consecration of temples or places, I recognized the renovation and establishment of churches once performed by archpriests, when a temple is newly built and a new house is erected from the foundation for God, and the holy dwelling is completed upon the holy, and the holy myron is anointed by the archpriest, and the holy table distributes its place. It is clear that the mediator, like Christ the Messiah, who suffered for us in the middle of the earth, at midday, between the two thieves, so that he might become the intercessor between God the Father and men.

The repository of the sacrifice is indeed the image of Christ, which is sanctified by the holy myron and is completed as an altar, as we might say in a figure, for which reason it occupies the central place of the altar. Yet it also possesses some imitation of the divinely created creation, on account of which it never prepares the upper storey above the holy table, but rather, like cheese on the ground, it is defined, bound by the four pillars set for its foundation, or the outer, non-sacrificial church floor, within which is accomplished that prophetic utterance, "God wrought salvation in the midst of the earth." For if it were not so established, how could it be said by the performers and believers of this great mystery in India that the body of our God Christ Himself was crucified, buried, and resurrected, and that this salvation was wrought by the Lord in the midst of the earth?

Or as the inhabitants of the Vretanian fields, the faithful, together with the saved, were to be received from all the confessional acts in Jerusalem, without the external sacrifice of the middle land, undoubtedly, for the divine altar, being the middle boundary of heaven and earth, and again, as the middle of the heavenly firmament, is established and holds the place of the middle of the surrounding orders of pillars according to its position; this, wherever it may be, shows the middle action of the earth of the Savior, where the Lord endured all the passions: the giving, the judgment, the first of the cross and the subsequent of the cross, rightly therefore the blessed fathers decreed this completion. But for the one who says that not every church has a repository and orders and pillars, let the half-circle of the altar, decreed in every church, suffice, whose vault depicts the half-sphere of heaven, having the middle direction of the holy altar. It is not, therefore, permissible for a priest, without a bishop, to grant absolution to a penitent from the people or to a monk.

For the canon says that enmity becomes a cause of forgiveness, for our enmity is made by the enmity of sin with God, and by this we are separated from God and from the Church, and as those who have fallen away from something of heaven, we are cast out. But we are cast out by the command of the chief shepherds, and as we are separated by the assembly of the faithful through him, we are placed together with the unbelievers and are expelled from the divine temple; and likewise, at the time of the fulfillment of the liturgy, the celebrants, without the permission of our chief shepherd who has deposed us, have no authority to bring anyone else into the Church of God, just as from a flock of sheep, no one has the power to bring in a lamb from another flock. It speaks of the secular service of the divine priestly action. Secular, that is, as gathered from the whole multitude of the people and from all that is mixed; and service, as specially designated in this way, is called service, that is, the utterly awesome mystery.

For in the Church many gatherings take place, but one is called "for the day," another "for mourning," and another "as a result of a feast," and yet another "for a vigil"; but only the assembly of the third hour and the gathering and collection of the laity and communicants for the divine mystery is designated by a distinct term for service, in which all communicants serve God, for the multitude of the people serves the Lord, according to the order of the substitute ministers, for even if this is not from the same honor, yet this one also serves the same king. Hence those err who, through ignorance or lack of foresight, say that they have served the Church, for instead of saying "we have served," they say "we have been served," for only God is served, while all who are worthy of the ecclesiastical gathering serve, both those within the sanctuary and those outside it.

It is not fitting, it says, for a priest of God to be a deputy for anyone, so that he might serve and minister at the time of the revealed and special service, because this is granted to archpriests by the first archpriest, Christ, who said to the apostles: "As many as you bind on earth, they shall be bound also in heaven, and as many as you loose on earth, they shall be loosed in heaven," and "As my Father sent me, so I send you, and if you forgive some their sins, they shall be forgiven; if you bind some, they shall be bound." Now then, how can priests be capable of granting to others what they themselves have not received? For they also hear that he who has not been cleansed, how can he bestow, and he who has not received, how can he grant? But if some say that at the laying on of hands for the priesthood, this grace is also immediately granted to them, let this council hear, so extensively and clearly from the teacher, that the power of absolution is given only to those who consecrate the holy myron and ordain deacons, and who sanctify the places of the Lord's temple. But for those to whom this is not entrusted, neither is that grace granted.

But as for the general service of the liturgy, it is opposed to the division of the heterodox and untimely services of the heretics. It is not said that we should serve in a general manner, for the orthodox have the right to all the revelations of the sacrifices and the completions of the feasts and all the assemblies, while the heterodox have all shame and concealment. For whatever kind of person there is, but in the places of the water-springs and pastures of the knower, and in the front-fighting of the wolves and beasts of the trainer, and of the sick person the observer, and the one who settles on the good meadow, and the one who leads to the cool and sweet water, and the one who raises the flock from this pasture to another pasture, and the one who is somewhat of a shepherd, but mostly of the one who burns the stubble.

Likewise, the precedence of the verbal flock does not belong to one person or another, but to the one who nourishes with better life and words, according to the word of the Lord: the simplest ones, even the most imperfect, are to be led most simply and gently, like lambs; while the more manifold and perfect ones are to be led more strictly and swiftly by the shepherd, if they obey with joy; but if they also lift up their heads and do not heed the shepherd's voice, and are separated and cut off from the strange-made, then they are to be led more humbly by their nourisher, and now even by the one who displaces them, when this one presides over the better, and now by the one who introduces them, when this one does no harm. If, for the sake of the laity, you consider the secular service, hold in great contempt the faults that are committed in the assembly. But if, for the sake of a cleric, you consider a small fault, then the group of each one of these becomes clear. And from the secular service, the faults on both sides, and because the cleric, even a minor sinner, is removed from the service for the sake of dissolution, or for some causeless reason, and being enraged and abusive and a slave to the belly, is dismissed to the secular state and is handed over to the secular.

Likewise, a manual laborer or a layman who is a litigant, a mocker of such a one, or one who is not at all brought forward for examination, like a eunuch, or one who is temporarily pardoned, as again before and after, any murderer, adulterer, and blasphemer of the Church is not merely excommunicated but is cut off. But whoever commits something akin to these is excommunicated, and after a short time they are again received into their own rank, or another into the lay rank by the same. And those eunuchs who have been slightly hindered are deemed worthy of the same higher service, such as one who laughs improperly, or laughs at someone with sharpness, or is disrespectful and insults a brother, but is again received into the lay rank, since he was excommunicated as a layman, and they are deemed worthy of the same higher standing, by which also laymen who are great sinners, after the given excommunication. And for great sins of laymen, for the sake of the small offenses of a monk, this canon now proceeds. Many times, indeed, a small offense of a monk is punished similarly to great offenses of a layman.

and again before and after, those who, according to the determination of the bishop’s own penance, receive back clearly for the sake of common benefit and unhinderedness and unbrokenness and discernment and fearfulness. Whenever a faster has transgressed the commonly presented fast, that is, the holy great forty days and the great feast days of Wednesday and Friday, he was admonished many times by the chief shepherd. He was instructed properly by the chief priest, but he did not listen, did not submit to the observance of the common fasts; he is cut off according to the sixty-ninth apostolic canon, unless he had the illness mentioned by that canon as an impediment to the transgression. Likewise, the unfasted is expelled from the church, is suspended from communion until, having been confirmed as a keeper of these fasts, he returns. One knows from the partakers the punishment for great sins—excommunication from the service. One knows not even from the non-partakers. His own preaching and diminution from the sanctities, but as for each one’s sins, the ecclesiastical order shows.

And if someone suffers bodily punishment, it is known from the words of the councils, even from the lesser external laws, that for even small faults, the bishops are not left without the power to punish, for it says later that for the deficiency of the laity, judgment among neighbors is much more appropriate.