Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers Series 2 - The Still Small ...

man to perjure himself in the matter of his transfer, and last of all lies in pretended forgetfulness.
I am no judge of hearts; I only judge by what I hear; let us leave vengeance to the
Lord, and ourselves pardon the common human error of forgetfulness, and receive the man
without question.
XI. The man who is guilty of unintentional homicide has given sufficient satisfaction
in eleven years. We shall, without doubt, observe what is laid down by Moses in the case
of wounded men, and shall not hold a murder to have been committed in the case of a man
who lies down after he has been struck, and walks again leaning on his staff. 2644 If, however,
he does not rise again after he has been struck, nevertheless, from there being no intent to
kill, the striker is a homicide, but an unintentional homicide.
XII. The canon absolutely excludes digamists from the ministry. 2645
XIII. Homicide in war is not reckoned by our Fathers as homicide; I presume from
their wish to make concession to men fighting on behalf of chastity and true religion. Perhaps,
however, it is well to counsel that those whose hands are not clean only abstain from
communion for three years. 2646
XIV. A taker of usury, if he consent to spend his unjust gain on the poor, and to be rid
for the future of the plague of covetousness, may be received into the ministry. 2647
2644 Exod. xxi. 19.
2645 Ap. Can. xiii. 14: “It is clear from the Philosophumena of Hippolytus (ix. 12) that by the beginning of
the 3d century the rule of monogamy for the clergy was well established, since he complains that in the days of
Callistus ‘digamist and trigamist bishops, and priests and deacons, began to be admitted into the clergy.’ Tertullian
recognises the rule as to the clergy. Thus in his De Exhortatione Castitatis (c. 7) he asks scornfully; ‘Being a di-
gamist, dost thou baptize? Dost thou make the offering?’” Dict. C. A. i. 552. Vide also Canon Bright, Notes on
the Canons of the first four General Councils. On Can. Nic. viii. p. 27.
2646 The Ben. note quotes Balsamon, Zonaras, and Alexius Aristenus as remarking on this that Basil gives
advice, not direction, and regards the hands, not the hearts, of soldiers as defiled; and as recalling that this canon
was quoted in opposition to the Emperor Phocas when he wished to reckon soldiers as martyrs. The canon was
little regarded, as being contrary to general Christian sentiment. cf. Athan. Ep. xlviii. p. 557 of this edition: “In
war it is lawful and praiseworthy to destroy the enemy; accordingly not only are they who have distinguished
themselves in the field held worthy of great honours, but monuments are put up proclaiming their achievements.”
2647 cf. Can. Nic. xvii. Canon Bright (On the Canons, etc., p. 56) remarks: “It must be remembered that in-
terest, called τόκος and fenus, as the product of the principal, was associated in the early stages of society,—in
Greece and Rome as well as in Palestine,—with the notion of undue profit extorted by a rich lender from the
needy borrower (see Grote, Hist. Gr. ii. 311 H.; Arnold, Hist. Rome i. 282; Mommsen, Hist. R. i. 291). Hence
Tacitus says, ‘sane vetus urbi fenebre malcum, et seditionum discordiarumque creberrima causa’ (Ann. vi. 16),
and Gibbon calls usury ‘the inveterate grievance of the city, abolished by the clamours of the people, revived by
their wants and idleness.’” (v. 314.)
To Amphilochius, concerning the Canons.
658
228