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

people as they go in to prayer that each and all will mercifully offer on his behalf their
prayers with earnestness to the Lord. After this let him be received for another period of
three years to hearing alone, and while hearing the Scriptures and the instruction, let him
be expelled and not be admitted to prayer. Afterwards, if he has asked it with tears and has
fallen before the Lord with contrition of heart and great humiliation, let kneeling be accorded
to him during other three years. Thus, when he shall have worthily shown the fruits of repentance,
let him be received in the tenth year to the prayer of the faithful without oblation;
and after standing with the faithful in prayer for two years, then, and not till then, let him
be held worthy of the communion of the good thing.
LXXVI. The same rule applies to those who take their own daughters in law.
LXXVII. He who abandons the wife, lawfully united to him, is subject by the sentence
of the Lord to the penalty of adultery. But it has been laid down as a canon by our Fathers
that such sinners should weep for a year, be hearers for two years, in kneeling for three years,
stand with the faithful in the seventh; and thus be deemed worthy of the oblation, if they
have repented with tears. 2846
LXXVIII. Let the same rule hold good in the case of those who marry two sisters, although
at different times. 2847
LXXIX. Men who rage after their stepmothers are subject to the same canon as those
who rage after their sisters. 2848
2846 The Ben. note points out the St. Basil refers to the repudiation of a lawful wife from some other cause
than adultery. It remarks that though Basil does not order it to be punished as severely as adultery there is no
doubt that he would not allow communion before the dismissal of the unlawful wife. It proceeds “illud autem
difficilius est statuere, quid de matrimonio post ejectam uxorem adulteram contracto senserit. Ratum a Basilio
habitum fuisse ejusmodi matrimonium pronuntiat Aristentus. Atque id quidem Basilius, conceptis verbis non
declarat; sed tamen videtur hac in re a saniori ac meliori sententia discessisse. Nam 1 o maritum injuste dimissum
ab alio matrimonio non excludit, ut vidimus in canonibus 9 et 35. Porro non videtur jure dimittenti denegasse,
quod injuste dimisso concedebat. 2 o Cum jubeat uxorem adulteram ejici, vix dubium est quin matrimonium
adulterio uxoris fuisset mariti, ac multo durior, quam uxoris conditio, si nec adulteram retinere, necaliam ducere
integrum fuisset.
2847 cf. Letter clx. p. 212.
2848 The Ben. note is Prima specie non omnino perspicuum est utrum sorores ex utroque parente intelligat,
an tantum ex alterutro. Nam cum in canone 79 eos qui suas nurus accipiunt non severius puniat, quam cui cum
sorore ex matre vel ex patre rem habent, forte videri posset idem statuere de iis qui in novercas insaniunt. Sed
tamen multo probabilius est eamdem illis pœnam imponi, ac iis qui cum sorore ex utroque parente contaminantur.
Non enim distinctione utitur Basilius ut in canone 75; nec mirum si peccatum cum noverca gravius quam cum
nuru, ob factam patri injuriam, judicavit.
To Amphilochius, the Canons.
727