§ 24. The Opinions of Recognized Canonists

We have already spoken (§ 16) of the opinions of the more eminent canonists recognized by the Church, and of the significance of their opinions for church law. All these opinions are found in the Athenian Syntagma, and following it we shall record them here.[1]

1. Theodore Balsamon’s sixty-six canonical answers to as many questions of Mark, Patriarch of Alexandria.[2]

2. The same author’s letter to the monastic superior Theodosius concerning novice monks.[3]

3. The same author’s canonical treatise on the offices of chartophylax and protecdicus.[4]

4. The same author’s canonical treatise on the privileges of the patriarchs.[5]

5. Twenty-four canonical answers of Peter the Chartophylax to as many questions put to him.[6]

6. Canonical answers of Elias of Crete to the monk Dionysius on his various questions.[7]

7. Twelve canonical answers of Nicetas the Chartophylax to as many questions addressed to him by various bishops.[8]

8. Two letters of Nicephorus the Chartophylax to a certain monk Theodosius, in which various canonical questions put by this monk are resolved.[9]

9. Sixteen canonical answers of John of Kitros to as many questions of Archbishop Constantine Kabasilas.[10]

10. Four canonical answers of Demetrius Chomatenus to as many questions of the same Archbishop Kabasilas.[11]

Besides these, the canonistic opinions expressed by Balsamon, Zonaras and Aristenus in their commentaries on the canons also carry the character of an auxiliary source for church law—commentaries which are found in full in the Athenian Syntagma, and in part in the aforementioned canonical collections of the several particular churches.

Footnotes

[2] In the Athenian Syntagma (IV, 447) the title reads as follows: Ἐρωτήσεις κανονικαὶ τοῦ ἁγιωτάτου πατριάρχου Ἀλεξανδρείας κυρίου Μάρκου, καὶ ἀποκρίσεις ἐπ᾿ αὐταῖς τοῦ ἁγιωτάτου πατριάρχου Ἀντιοχείας κυρίου Θεοδώρου τοῦ Βαλσαμών. At the end of the preface to these answers stands the year 1203 (καὶ ἐτῶν μετὰ τὴν σάρκωσιν τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ασγ.). J. A. B. Mortreuil (Histoire du droit byzantin. III, 490) points out that Balsamon wrote these answers in the year 1195, and, following him, Heimbach (“Griechisch-römisches Recht” in Ersch und Gruber’s Allgem. Encyklopädie I. Sect. 86. Th. S. 391). Zhishman (Eherecht. S. 47) likewise points to this (1195) year.—There is a difference also as regards the number of the answers: Mortreuil (l. c.) mentions 68 answers, and so does Heimbach (l. c.); whereas in Leunclavii (Jus graeco-rom. I, 362—394) there are only 64 of them. Naturally, the number of these answers in the Ath. Syntagma is authoritative for us.

[7] Ἠλιοῦ τοῦ μητροπολίτου Κρήτης ἀποκρίσεις πρός τινα μοναχὸν Διονύσιον περὶ διαφόρων αὐτοῦ ἐρωτήσεων. Ath. Synt. V, 374—381. Leunclav. I, 335—341. The latter observes that Elias, metropolitan of Crete, must have lived in the second half of the 8th century, since the signature of a Cretan metropolitan, Elias, is found in the acts of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (see the marginal note on p. 335). The editors of the Athenian Syntagma record the same, but observe that in the fourth answer there is mentioned a “document of union” of the year 920, and that in the seventh answer there is mentioned a novel of 1092 of the emperor Alexius Comnenus. Therefore this metropolitan Elias is either not the same one who is signed in the acts of the Second Council of Nicaea, or his answers were supplemented by someone later. See Γεδεὼν Πατρ. πίνακες. σελ. 349.

§ 24. The Opinions of Recognized Canonists

§ 24. Мишљења признатих канониста