1. The Theological Basis for the Church's Law
Canon Law
Although generally referred to as canon law,
such a name given to the Church's law suggests a parallel to secular
law. It would be more correct to call it the tradition of the holy
canons, since they are the object of its concern. This law of the
Church, her canonical tradition, is an outgrowth of the holy canons; and
it appears on the surface to have much in common with secular law,
involving persons invested with authority (bishops), as well as the
means of creating, formulating, interpreting, executing, validating,
amending and revoking laws (through synods or conciliar actions).
Church and Secular Law
The apparent similarity of the Church's law to
secular law led some to contest the integrity of the former. Yet without
it, it is clear, there would be many varied problems besetting the
Church. In the last analysis, the Church's law exists to safeguard
particular interests from the arbitrary intervention of superior
interests. It should not be understood as subjecting a person to
subservience, but as guaranteeing his freedom. Contrary to what some
have believed, the Church's law differs essentially from secular law.
Its difference lies mainly in the premise that the original source of
canon law is found in the will of God to establish His Church on earth.
Consequently, the source of its authority stems from the will of God.
Furthermore, the Church's law differs from secular law in purpose
(humanity's salvation), time (extending beyond this life into the next
life), scope (including one's conscience), and place (the universal
Church).
The Main Goal of Canon Law
When our Lord entrusted the work of salvation
to the Church, which is a society of mortal men and women, He obliged
her to provide herself with the necessary means of survival. This was to
assist her in organizing herself, in overseeing the orthodoxy of her
members, and in guarding against factions. In short, He obliged her to
provide herself with a set of rules to live by. In so doing, the Church
as a community of faith came to be associated with a juridical
organization. This does not mean, however, that the community of faith
was thereby reduced to a legal institution. The distinction is an
important one.
Historical Background
Our Lord Himself instituted some elements of
such an order. He preached the gospel of salvation to His contemporaries
but did not leave to their arbitrary will the task of spreading His
message for the benefit of future generations. He assigned that task to
a group of men chosen with divine care and wisdom, the apostles, who
were clearly aware of the sacred mission with which they were entrusted
by the Master. Following His ascension, He endowed them with the
authority to make the decisions necessary to assure the continuation of
the work He had already begun. Decisions such as the election of
Matthias to take the place of Judas among the apostles and setting the
conditions for entry into the Church were made at the outset. In fact,
they constitute the beginnings of the Church's law, in the development
of which Saint Paul played a predominant role.
With the spread of the Christian community
throughout the entire area of the Mediterranean, the initial
organization of the Church soon had to be extended. During this stage of
growth, a hierarchy was developed and new conditions of life modeled
after the teachings of Christ came into existence. It thus became
necessary to define the status of the believer within the Christian
community and society at large.
This organization was only rudimentary, but it
clearly was there. It is quite evident that the Church in her primitive
period had no precisely defined juridical organization, much less a
technique or science of law. However, all the elements of a true
juridical organization were there. Those persons invested with authority
made rules and demanded strict adherence to them. Synods came out
unsparingly against those who threatened the unity of the Church and the
purity of her doctrine. They did not hesitate, furthermore, to impose
severe sanctions upon those who opposed her discipline. It was the First
Ecumenical Synod of Nicaea (325) which referred to canons as the
disciplinary measures of the Church. The distinction, therefore, between
kanones, the disciplinary measures and rules adopted by the
Church, and nomoi, the legislative actions taken by the state,
came about quite early.
Canon Law in the Christian Society
The law which emerged from the earliest times
developed in response to the needs of the ecclesiastical community.
During both good and bad periods of the Church's history, her law has
adapted itself constantly to the circumstances of he time, up to the
present day. The collections of laws which the Church has promulgated in
no way detract from her exalted status and sacred character. They
reflect a certain imperfection; however, this imperfection lies not in
the institution of the Church but in those individuals of whom it is
composed. As an institution of divine origin composed of human beings,
the Church is at the same time both a human and a divine institution. It
might be said that it is at the crossroads of the finite and the
infinite, the created and the uncreated, the human and the divine.
Our Lord entrusted the work of salvation to His
Church - that is, to human beings. Because of this, He gave the Church
roots in history and subjected her to temporal contingencies. It is in
the Church and through the Church that human beings must in principle
attain their salvation. When we speak of the Church, we speak of a
society. As such, she is governed by rules which determine her
organization and her relations to her members and to those outside her
fold.
Finally, it must not be forgotten that the
Church is not to be identified with her rules. The Church indeed has
rules, but she has much else besides. She has within her treasures of
another order and another value besides her canons. She has her
theology, her spirituality, her mysticism, her liturgy, her morality.
And it is most important not to confuse the Gospel and the Pedalion
(collection of canons), theology and legislation, morality and
jurisprudence. Each is on a different level and to identify them
completely would be to fall into a kind of heresy. The canons are at the
service of the Church; their function is to guide her members on the way
to salvation and to make following that way easier.
The Church's legislation is only one aspect of
her life, and above all does not represent her essence. The Church is
the Mystical Body of Christ; however, her presence in history
necessarily has brought forth a juridical system and juridical
institutions. Law indeed has its purpose in the Church and is
justifiable. But it must also be recognized that this law is of a
special character. The uniqueness of canon law, which sets it apart from
secular law, is due to the special character of the Church it serves.
Because it shares to some extent in the exalted mission of the Church,
it differs from all other systems of law.
2. The Composition of the Church's Law
The Essence of Canon Law
Given the above justification for the existence
of the Church's law, it now remains to define what in fact it is and of
what it is composed. The Church's law, commonly referred to as canon
law, is the system of law emanating from the holy canons, which derive
from the Church on her own authority. The Church, as has already been
stated, is at the same time both a human and a divine institution. As an
institution with a human element, the Church has need of laws to govern
her organization, her relations to her members, to those outside her
fold, to the state, and to other religious and secular bodies.
Nevertheless, the Church's law is first and foremost spiritual, since
its main purpose is the spiritual growth of the faithful. Furthermore,
its main object of concern is the inner disposition and intention behind
one's actions.
Collections of Canon Law
The holy canons, which are the basis of the
Church's canonical tradition, stem from three main sources: Ecumenical
Synods (representing the universal Church), Local Synods (subsequently
ratified by the Ecumenical Synods as representing the tradition of the
universal Church), and the Fathers of the Church. All of these canons,
which number about one thousand, are contained in several collections.
The one most widely used today in the Greek-speaking Orthodox Churches
is the Pedalion (the "Rudder"), which takes its name from the
metaphor of the Church depicted as a ship. As the ship which is guided
safely to its destination by means of a rudder, in like manner are the
members of the Church guided on their voyage through life by means of
the holy canons.
Unlike the canon law of the Roman Catholic
Church, the canon law of the Orthodox Church has not been codified.
Neither is it prescriptive in character, anticipating a situation before
it actually takes place; instead, it is corrective in nature, responding
to a situation once it has occurred. Because of the absence of a
universal codification binding upon all autocephalous or self-governing
Orthodox Churches, great importance is attached to the local legislation
of each of these Churches. Canon 39 of the Quinisext Synod or the Synod
of Trullo, held in 691, recognized the right of a local Church to have
its own special laws or regulations: "For our God-bearing fathers also
declared that the customs of each church should be preserved..." Such
laws or regulations, however, must always reflect the spirit of the
Church's universal law as found in the holy canons.
The Canonical Tradition
The overriding consideration in the acceptance
of a local Church's custom as law is the spiritual well-being of the
members of Christ's Mystical Body. What is of importance is how people
in any age or place may best serve and worship God. It is obvious that
what is well intentioned for the Church as a whole may not be so well
suited to some particular local conditions. Similarly, what is good for
one age or place may under different conditions constitute a hindrance.
Thus it is that the Church's canonical tradition has such regard for
local custom. Having evolved within the context of local conditions, it
best expresses the mind of the local Church on how the cause of God may
be served in her special conditions. Custom is the continuously
expressed will of God's people. The significance of this statement
becomes apparent when one realizes that the last Ecumenical Synod with
universally binding legislation occurred twelve centuries ago (787
A.D.). Consequently, the emergence and growth of local custom especially
since that time is what in large measure has sustained the Orthodox
Church throughout the ages.
The growth and development of a local custom
that acquires the force of law is what gives to the Church's canonical
tradition its great flexibility. Local laws or regulations are the means
by which the Church's universal canonical tradition adapts itself to
changing circumstances. Although this is true, it must not be supposed
that any local custom automatically establishes itself as part of the
Church's canonical tradition. For that, certain conditions must be met.
In the first place, it must be the conviction of the ecclesiastical
community concerning a certain act repeated in the same way for a long
time. Therefore, two main conditions are necessary for the acceptance of
the custom as law: it must have enjoyed a long and steady practice, and
the consensus of opinion must be that it has the force of law. In order
for custom to be accepted as a source of the Church's canonical
tradition, it must be in full harmony with the holy tradition and
scripture, as well as doctrine.
One example of local legislation is the current
charter of the
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.
According to Article I of the Charter, the Archdiocese is:
"a province within the territorial
jurisdiction of the most Holy Apostolic and Ecumenical Patriarchal
Throne of Constantinople ... governed by the holy canons, the
present charter, and the regulations promulgated by it; and, as to
canonical and ecclesiastical matters not provided therein, by the
decisions thereon of the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate."
As a province of the Ecumenical Patriarchate,
the first-ranking see among the autocephalous Orthodox Churches, the
American Archdiocese is an ecclesiastical body deriving its authority
from a central source. The various components comprising its canonical
structure are elements included in the legal system of every local
Orthodox Church.
Codification of Canon Law
Because of the apparent dissimilarity among the
legal systems of the various autocephalous Churches, there are those who
consider a uniform codification of the Church's law a near
impossibility, and that a separate codification for each of them will be
necessary. Then there are those who reject codification outright as
conflicting with the spiritual essence of Orthodoxy. They believe that
the deep unity which exists among all the Orthodox Churches in faith and
sacramental life can continue to be maintained according to the local
traditions of each autocephalous Church.
Nevertheless, both views mentioned above have
been challenged by former Metropolitan [now Patriarch] Bartholomaios of
Philadelphia in his article entitled "A Common Code for the Orthodox
Churches" (Kanon I [Vienna, 1973], 45-53); he reminds those who stress
the dissimilarity among the legal systems of the autocephalous Churches
that within Orthodoxy there is basically a single law, whose most
important sources are common to all the Orthodox Churches. Furthermore:
"... the Orthodox Church is neither the
sum of a number of independent Churches, nor a federation of
Churches with an external, inter-church law, but one Church, the
Body of Christ, within which the local Churches are expressions of
the one, undivided, living, holy, catholic Church in various
places." (Archondonis, "A Common Code," p. 48).
On the other hand, those who reject
codification on the grounds that it conflicts with the essence of
Orthodoxy are reminded that the Church is not only a charismatic body;
she is an institution with both a divine and a human element; and, as
such, she is in need of a code of laws to enhance the evolution of
ecclesiastical life and to assure the further development of Orthodox
canon law.
3. The Characteristics of the Church's Law
Applicability of Canon Law
Any discussion of the characteristics of the
Church's law must necessarily address the question of the applicability
of the holy canons to today's realities. Viewpoints expressed on this
vital issue range from one extreme to the other, and are mutually
exclusive. On the one hand, there are those who revere the letter of the
canons. But as has already been remarked, "no one seems to absolutize
all of them" John Meyendorff, "Contemporary Problems of Orthodox Canon
Law," The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 17 (1972): 41.) Then there
are those who deny the relevancy of the entire body of canons in its
present state. Obviously, both views leave little room for a
conciliatory approach but rather tend to polarize.
In order to effect a rapprochement between the
widely divergent views just mentioned, the question must first be asked:
How were the holy canons meant to be understood? Nicholas Afanasiev, in
his article entitled "The Canons of the Church: Changeable or
Unchangeable?" offers a formula which might be acceptable to all
factions, (St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 11(1967) 54-68.):
"Canons are a kind of canonical
interpretation of the dogmas for a particular moment of the Church's
historical existence... They express the truth about the order of
Church life, but rather than expressing this truth in absolute
forms, they conform to historical existence" (Ibid., p. 60).
Such a formula recognizes the absolute validity
of all the canons as practical aids which gave expression to doctrinal
truths at some point in history. Some of these aids, however, it sees as
having outlived the purpose for which they were originally intended,
i.e., they are conditioned by time. Consequently, they cannot give
expression to doctrine without causing distortion, simply because they
were intended for another era. This, of course, cannot be said of all
the canons, since there are many which express doctrine as clearly today
as when they were first adopted by the Church. Therefore, while some
canons continue to reflect doctrine in practice, others do not and must
be seen in historical context in order to be understood. The following
example will illustrate this point.
It is a doctrine of the Church that the
ecclesiastical hierarchy is an institution ordained by God. There are
canons which express this doctrine, but in conformity with the era in
which they were adopted. Canon 5 of the Holy Apostles forbids a bishop,
presbyter, or deacon to put away his wife under the pretext of religion.
A later decision of the Sixth Ecumenical Synod introduced celibacy for
the episcopate and directed that all previously ordained bishops should
leave their wives. This synod was correct when it said that it was
publishing the new decree "not with any intention of setting aside or
overthrowing any legislation laid down by the Apostles, but having due
regard for the salvation and safety of people and for their
advancement." (Ibid., p. 63) The apostolic canon expressed a doctrine
concerning the ecclesiastical hierarchy, but in conformity with its era.
When the historical conditions of life changed, so too did the manner in
which this doctrine was expressed.
Pastoral Significance of Canon Law
The canons ought also to be understood as
pastoral guidelines. As such, they should serve as models upon which
subsequent ecclesiastical legislation is based whenever possible. The
canons of the Fathers, in particular, reflect the pastoral nature of
their contents. The Fathers who wrote them did not think that they were
writing legislative texts. In most cases, they were either responding to
the questions put to them by individuals seeking their counsel, or else
expressing their views on matters of grave concern to the Church.
Because of their pastoral sensitivity and the high esteem in which they
were held, these Fathers greatly influenced both their contemporaries
and succeeding generations. As a result, the directives contained in the
canons of the Fathers prior to the Sixth Ecumenical Synod were
recognized by the second canon of that synod as equal in authority to
the synodal canons themselves. In fact, several of the canons of St.
Basil, repeated among the canons of the same Sixth Ecumenical Synod were
recognized by the second canon of that synod as equal in authority to
the synodal canons themselves.
The Fathers whose canons appear in our
canonical collections exerted no less an influence upon the development
and formation of the canons of other synods. Consequently, the pastoral
nature evident in the canons of the Fathers is also easily discernible
in the canons of the synods. It is because of this characteristic that
the canons have been referred to as "fruits of the Spirit," whose
purpose is to assist mankind in its quest for salvation. Certainly such
a lofty purpose can only be appreciated when the canons are understood
as pastoral guidelines and not as legislative texts. Viewed simply as
legislative texts, the canons differ little from laws to be upheld
rigidly and absolutely. Recognized, however, as the pastoral guidelines
which in fact they are, the canons serve the purpose for which they were
intended with compassion and flexibility. It is this latter
understanding of the canons which makes comprehensible the exercise of
"economy" as practiced in the Orthodox Church today.
The Concept of "Economy."
Unlike secular law, or Mosaic law, the purpose
of the Church's law is the spiritual perfection of her members. Mere
application of the letter of the law is replaced by a sense for the
spirit of the law, and adherence to its principles. This purpose is the
determining factor when authority is granted to apply the law when
circumstances warrant according to each individual case. The spirit of
love, understood as commitment to the spiritual perfection of the
individual, must always prevail in the application of the law. The
abolition of the letter of the law by the spirit of the law has led to
the institution of "economy," exercised in nonessential matters. Through
"economy," which is always an exception to the general rule, the legal
consequences following the violation of a law are lifted.
"Economy" is granted by the competent
ecclesiastical authority and has not so much the character of urgency as
it does the character of compassion for human frailty. The character of
compassion is justified by the Church's ardent desire to prevent any
adverse effects from the strict observance of the law in exceptional
circumstances. The premise upon which an exception is granted is the
general welfare of all concerned. This premise exists in all systems of
law but it finds its fullest expression in the Church's law. As the law
of grace, it is characterized primarily by the spiritual attributes of
compassion, pastoral sensitivity, and forgiveness.
"Economy" is not something to be applied at
random or arbitrarily. It is governed by defined guidelines which must
be strictly adhered to by the competent ecclesiastical authority
granting it. First and foremost, exception from a law which has been
endowed with universal recognition and validity is not possible. It is
only from a law that has not been endowed with such authority that a
person can be released, if this is deemed spiritually beneficial.
The right to exercise "economy" is the sole
prerogative of the legislator (council or holy synod of bishops). This
right can in turn be delegated to individual bishops by the corporate
authority of the synod. This delegation must, however, be within the
limits prescribed by the canons and according to the express
authorization of one's superior legislative authority. (See, for
example, canon 2 of Ancyra:
"It is likewise decreed that deacons
who have sacrificed [to pagan idols] and afterwards resumed the
conflict shall enjoy their other honors, but shall abstain from
every sacred ministry, neither bringing forth the bread and the cup,
nor making proclamations. Nevertheless, if any of the bishops shall
observe in them distress of mind and meek humiliation, it shall be
lawful to the bishops to grant more indulgence, or to take away
[what has been granted].")
As evidenced by the phrase: "it shall be lawful
to the bishops to grant more indulgence, or to take away [what has been
granted]," "economy" may be both a more lenient or a more strict
observance of the rule. Consequently, "economy" is any deviation from
the norm. The exercise of "economy" ceases if its cause no longer exists
or if the basis for its application rested upon false or pretended
grounds. Once "economy" has been applied, the normative practice is
restored as before. Furthermore, temporary departure from the normative
practice through "economy" does not set precedent.
The institution of "economy" has been actively
invoked throughout the history of the Orthodox Church. This is perhaps
due in part to liberal trends of thought in the cultural milieu within
which the Orthodox Church flourished. Although authority in the exercise
of "economy," especially in matters of great importance, rests with the
synod of bishops of each local church, this authority, as indicated, can
be delegated to individual bishops as well. The Ecumenical Synod, as
supreme administrative, legislative and judicial body in the Church,
administers ultimate authority in the exercise of "economy." It alone
can alter or overrule the decision of any subordinate ecclesiastical
authority. In the realm of conscience, however, it is the spiritual
father who has been entrusted with the authority to exercise "economy"
according to his good judgment. The determining factor in its
application, however, must always be the spiritual welfare of the
penitent.
Canonical Discipline
Since the realm of conscience has been
mentioned, a final word remains regarding the character of canonical
discipline. Following a penitent's admission of guilt in the sacrament
of Penance, the spiritual father determines whether acts of penance (epitimia)
should be prescribed. These acts of penance may include fasting,
prostration, prayer, acts of charity, or minor excommunication
(temporary exclusion from holy communion) among others. Acts of penance
must not be confused with punishment in the sense of retribution for
evil committed. They must not have any element of vindictive punishment
about them. On the contrary, the purpose of the Church's canonical
discipline is both pastoral and pedagogical. It seeks both to correct
and reform the repentant sinner and to protect the community from the
resulting sin. Consequently, by depriving the sinner of holy communion
for a time, it seeks to impress upon the individual the gravity of his
sin. At the same time, if the sin is publicly known, it seeks to
demonstrate that certain acts are, beyond any doubt, inadmissible for
everyone.
The Church, which is the Mystical Body of
Christ, disposes of her own means to achieve the salvation of all her
members. Although the Church is simultaneously a human and a divine
institution, her earthly aspect is predominantly spiritual. So long as
the Church retains this aspect of her existence, the holy canons
together with the canonical tradition emanating from them will be an
essential part of her earthly life. In conclusion, it is the Church's
canons and canonical tradition which assure the external means of
security within which the life of the spirit is nurtured and preserved.
SUGGESTED FOR FURTHER READING
N. Athanasiev. "The Canons of the Church:
Changeable or Unchangeable?" St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly,
11(1967), pp. 54-68.
B. Archondonis. "A Common Code for the Orthodox
Churches," Kanon I (1973), pp. 45-53.
D. Cummings, trans. The Rudder. Chicago:
Orthodox Christian Educational Society, 1957.
Lewis J. Patsavos. The Canon Law of the
Orthodox Catholic Church (Mimeographed Notes). Brookline, Mass.: Holy
Cross Bookstore, 1975.
Henry R. Percival, Ed. The Seven Ecumenical
Councils. "Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers," Second Series, Vol. 14.
Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1956.
Lewis Patsavos, Ph.D.