Folia Theologica et Canonica 9. 31/23 (2020)
Ius canonicum
78 PÉTER ERDŐ ordinate to the bishop of the city.24 However, the Council of Sardica, which came to enjoy a particularly notable authority, established that for villages it was sufficient to appoint a presbyter.25 What were the functions of this presbyter? What were the limits of his activity? Presbyters who visited only rural and suburban centres (or, in large cities, those distinct from the bishop’s church), as the bishop’s delegates held the commission and had the ability to celebrate the Eucharist in the bishop’s absence. This in particular seems to be the reason for requiring the presence of a presbyter. As early as the first half of the third century, in the document known as the Traditio Apostolica, it is presumed that presbyters recite the central part of the Eucharistic prayer together with the bishop, which deacons could not do.26 The Apostolic Canons (ca. 380) state explicitly that it is the presbyter (even alone, without the bishop present) who is to offer the sacrifice on the altar.27 The evidence of the canons of certain councils indicates that presbyters guilty of various sins were punished with a prohibition on offering the sacrifice. This implies that they would otherwise have been able and allowed to do so.28 The Council of Gangra condemned those who looked down on married presbyters and would not attend the liturgy when they presided.29 The status of country presbyters was nonetheless lower than that of the urban clergy. The former could only celebrate the liturgy in the city in the absence of the bishop and the city presbyters.30 The conferral of baptism was subject to the bishop’s control, but on his commission both presbyters and deacons were able to baptise.31 As for the consecration of Chrism32 and that of virgins,33 34 these functions appertained to bishops. Neither were presbyters able to grant reconciliation to penitents in the context of a public ceremony, though they could do so on the order of their bishop if the penitents were in grave danger34 It appears that in Roman Africa presbyters could reconcile the faithful in cases of urgent ne24 Cf. Conc. Ancyr. (314) c. 13; Conc. Neocaes. (314/319) c. 14 (13b); Conc. Antioch. (330/337) c. 10. 25 Conc. Sardicen. (342/343) c. 6; cf. giá Conc. Neocaes. (314/319) c. 13. 26 Traditio Apostolica 4,2. 27 Can. Ap. c. 3. 28 Cf. e.g. Conc. Ancyr. (314) c. 1. 29 Conc. Gangr. (ca. 340), Ep. synod. 30 Conc. Neocaes. (314/319) c. 13; cf Noethlichs, K. L., Anspruch und Wirklichkeit. Fehlverhalten und Amtspflichtverletzungen des christlichen Klerus anhand der Konzilskanones des 4. bis 8. Jahrhunderts, in Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftungfür Rechtsgeschichte. Kanonistische Abteilung 76 (1990) 1-61,20. 31 Cf e.g., Didasc. III, 12, 3. 32 Cf e.g., Conc. Carth. (390) c. 3; Conc. Tolet. (400) c. 20; Breviarium Hipponense (393/397) c. 34. 33 Cf e.g., Conc. Carth. (390) c. 3; Breviarium Hipponense (393/397) c. 34. 34 Cf e.g., Conc. Carth. (390) cc. 3-4.
