Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Jump to content
WikipediaThe Free Encyclopedia
Search

Synod of Elvira

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Christian ecclesiastical synod held at Elvira in the Roman province of Hispania Baetica
If the ancient Roman city of Elvira was located in the Albaicín district of Granada, as some think, the synod may have taken place just inside the Puerta de Elvira (eleventh-century), seen here.

TheSynod of Elvira (Latin:Concilium Eliberritanum,Spanish:Concilio de Elvira) was an ecclesiasticalsynod held at Elvira in theRoman province ofHispania Baetica, nowGranada in southern Spain.[1] Its date has not been exactly determined but is believed to be in the first quarter of thefourth century, approximately 305–6. It was one of three councils, together with theSynod of Arles (314) and theSynod of Ancyra, that first approached the character of general councils and prepared the way for the firstecumenical council. It was attended by nineteen bishops and twenty-six presbyters, mostly resident inBaetica. Deacons and laymen were also present.[2] Eighty-one canons are recorded, although it is believed that many were added at later dates. All concern order, discipline and conduct among the Christian community. Canon 36,forbidding the use of images in churches, became a bone of contention between Catholic and Protestant scholars after theProtestant Reformation.

It is one of a number ofpre-ecumenical ancient church councils and synods. The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia refers to this as a "council," conveying a wider scope than a synod.[3] The Vatican refers to it using both terms.[4]

Place and purpose

[edit]

The place of meeting, Eliberri, rendered as Elvira,[5] was not far from the modernGranada, if not, as A.W. Dale[6] and Edgar Hennecke[1] think, actually identical with it. There the nineteen bishops and twenty-four presbyters, mostly fromHispania Baetica andCarthago Nova,[a] assembled, probably at the instigation ofHosius of Córdoba, but under the presidency of Felix of Accitum (Guadix) in Baetica, probably by virtue of his being the oldest bishop present,[7] with a view to restoring order and discipline in the church. The canons which were adopted reflect with considerable fullness the internal life and external relations of the Spanish Church of the 4th century. The reputation of this council drew to its canons further canons that came to be associated with the Synod of Elvira.

Victor De Clercq[8] notes "that except forHosius of Córdoba, we know practically nothing about these men, nor do we know with certainty when and why the council was held, and that the church of Spain is one of the least known in pre-constantinian [sic] times".

The canons

[edit]

Maurice Meigne[9] considers that only the first twenty-one canons in the list that has been transmitted[10] were promulgated at Elvira; the remainder having been added to the collection.

The social environment ofChristians in Hispania may be inferred from the canons prohibitingmarriage and other intercourse withJews,pagans andheretics, closing the offices offlamen andduumvir to Christians, forbidding all contact withidolatry[11] and likewise participation in pagan festivals and public games. The state of morals is mirrored in the canons denouncing prevalent vices. The canons respecting the clergy exhibit the clergy as already a special class with particular privileges, as acting under a more exacting moral standard, with heavier penalties for delinquency. Thebishop has acquired control of thesacraments,presbyters anddeacons acting only under his orders; the episcopate appears as a unit, bishops being bound to respect one another's disciplinary decrees.

The canons are almost entirely concerned with the conduct of various elements of the Christian community, and have no theological content as such. Sanctions include long delays before baptism, exclusion from theEucharist for periods of months or years, or indefinitely, sometimes with an exception for the death-bed, though this is also specifically excluded in some cases. Periods ofpenance, often for sexual offences, extend to 5 or 10 years: "Canon 5. If a woman beats her servant and causes death within three days, she shall undergo seven years' penance if the injury was inflicted on purpose and five years' if it was accidental. She shall not receive communion during this penance unless she becomes ill. If so, she may receive communion."[12]

All the canons which pertain to Jews served to maintain a separation between the two communities. Canon 15 prohibited marriage with pagans, while Canon 16 prohibited marriage of Christians with Jews. Canon 78 threatens Christians who commit adultery with Jews withostracism. Canon 49 forbade the blessing of Christian crops by Jews, and Canon 50 forbade the sharing of meals by Christians and Jews.[citation needed]

Among the early canons (which are possibly the only original ones), Canon 1 forbade giving holy communion to lapsed Christians evenin articulo mortis, an unusually severe application ofNovatianist principles, which had divided the church since the recovery from mid 3rd-century persecutions: compare the severity ofCyprian of Carthage. The subject of this leading canon is a major indication for a date following recent persecution.[citation needed]

Among the later canons, of especial note are Canon 33, enjoiningcelibacy upon all clerics, married or not, and all who minister at the altar (the most ancient canon ofclerical celibacy).[13] Also relating to the subject of clerical celibacy is Canon 27, which calls for bishops and other clergy to refrain from living with women unless they are of relation.[14] This canon is believed to be condemning the practice ofSyneisaktism, or spiritual marriage, which was growing more and more popular among ascetic men and women.[citation needed]

Canon 36 states, "It has seemed good that images should not be in churches so that what is venerated and worshiped not be painted on the walls."[15][16][b] It allegedlyforbids pictures in churches (compare theIconoclastic Controversy in the East); according toPhilip Schaff this canon "has often been quoted by Protestants as an argument against image worship as idolatrous; while Roman Catholic writers explain it either as a prohibition of representations of the deity only, or as a prudential measure against heathen desecration of holy things".[17] Canon 36 was the first official statement on art by the Christian Church and so of special interest in the history of Early Christian and medieval art, even if it represents Church policy only within the limits of the synod's jurisdiction of Spain.

Canon 38, permits laybaptism under certain conditions, and Canon 53, forbids one bishop restoring a personexcommunicated by another.

Other provisions relating to images forbade Christian slave-owners from allowing their pagan slaves to keep their personal idols, or "if this is impossible to enforce, they must at least avoid the idols and remain pure. If this does not happen, they are alienated from the church" (Canon 41). Canon 60 says "If someone smashes an idol and is then punished by death, he or she may not be placed in the list of martyrs, since such action is not sanctioned by the Scriptures or by the apostles." Canon 34 says "Candles are not to be burned in a cemetery during the day. This practice is related to paganism and is harmful to Christians. Those who do this are to be denied the communion of the church". Other canons imposed "the rigorous form of fasting" every Saturday (Canon 26), forbade the baptism of chariot racers or stage performers (Canon 62), and many tightly control the reception of former pagan priests into the Christian church and clergy (Canons, 2,3,4,55).

Several canons relate only to the behaviour of women, such as Canon 67: "A woman who is baptized or is a catechumen must not associate with hairdressers or men with long hair..." Canon 81 reads: "A woman may not write to other lay Christians without her husband's consent. A woman may not receive letters of friendship addressed to her only and not to her husband as well." However married former prostitutes are not to suffer delays in baptism on that account (Canon 44).

Date of the synod

[edit]

The solution of the question of the date hinges upon the interpretation of the canons, that is, upon whether they are to be taken as reflecting a recent persecution, or as redacted in a time of peace, that is either after or before thepersecution under Diocletian. Thus the earliest investigators,Louis Duchesne[18] and Victor De Clercq,[19] argue for a date between 300 and 303, i.e. before the persecution underDiocletian; others for a date between 303 and 314, after the persecution, but before theSynod of Arles (314); a few others argue for a date between the synod of Arles and theCouncil of Nicaea, (325).Karl Josef von Hefele andRobert William Dale follow early compilers of the canonsGiovanni Domenico Mansi andJean Hardouin in agreement upon 305 or 306, while Hennecke[1] concludes that "the whole attitude points to a time of peace, not to one immediately following a persecution; the complete absence of any provisions as to the case of the lapsed is enough to preclude the modern theory as to the date".

Documentation

[edit]

The scanty documentation of the Synod of Elvira was first assembled by Ferdinand de Mendoza,De confirmando Concilio IIIiberitano ad Clementem VIII, 1593.

The canons are available onlinein English andin Latin (with dictionary lookup links)

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Hennecke noted that Legio (Leon) and Saragoza were represented, but not Tarragona.
  2. ^ A possible translation is also: "There shall be no pictures in the church, lest what is worshipped and adored should be depicted on the walls."

References

[edit]
  1. ^abcHennecke, Edgar, "Elvira, Synod of",Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (3rd ed.).
  2. ^Schaff, Philip,History of the Christian Church.
  3. ^Catholic encyclopedia, New Advent, 1913.
  4. ^Congregation of the clergy, The Vatican: Roman curia.
  5. ^Eliberri, Elimberri orIlumberri was an ancient cognate of today BasqueHiriberri orIrunberri that mean 'new domain', 'new town.
  6. ^Dale 1882.
  7. ^Wace, Henry,"Hosius (1)",Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature.
  8. ^De Clercq, Victor (March 1975), "Samuel Laeuchli,Power and Sexuality: The Emergence of Canon Law at the Synod of Elvira",Vigiliae Christianae (review), vol. 29, p. 76.
  9. ^"Concile ou collection d'Elvire,"Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique70 (1975) pp 361-387
  10. ^Problems of the textual transmission of the canons are discussed in Hamilton Hess,The Early Development of Canon Law and the Council of Serdica (Oxford Early Christian Studies, Oxford: 2002) pp 40-42.
  11. ^Grigg, Robert (December 1976), "Aniconic Worship and the Apologetic Tradition: A Note on Canon 36 of the Council of Elvira",Church History, vol. 45, pp. 428–33 finds that the hostility toicons, forbidding the introduction of images into the churches is based on Christianapologists' use of pagan sources denouncing the veneration of images, rather than on the prohibition inExodus, which it fails to cite. He instances the contemporaneous apologistsArnobius andLactantius.
  12. ^Fordham,Canon 5.
  13. ^Frazee, Charles A (1988), "The Origins of Clerical Celibacy in the Western Church",Church History,57 (Supplement Centennial):108–26,doi:10.2307/3165654,JSTOR 3165654.
  14. ^Hefele, Karl Joseph von, Joseph Hergenröther, Alois Knöpfler, and Henri Leclercq. 1907. Histoire des conciles d'après les documents originaux. 236. Paris: Letouzey et Ané.http://www.llmcdigital.org/default.aspx?redir=87181.
  15. ^Elvira canons, Cua, archived fromthe original on 2012-07-16,Placuit picturas in ecclesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur et adoratur in parietibus depingatur.
  16. ^The Catholic Encyclopedia,This canon has often been urged against the veneration of images as practised in the Catholic Church.Binterim, De Rossi, andHefele interpret this prohibition as directed against the use of images in overground churches only, lest the pagans should caricature sacred scenes and ideas;Von Funk, Termel, andDom Leclerq opine that the council did not pronounce as to the liceity or non-liceity of the use of images, but as an administrative measure simply forbade them, lest new and weak converts from paganism should incur thereby any danger of relapse into idolatry, or be scandalized by certain superstitious excesses in no way approved by the ecclesiastical authority.
  17. ^Schaff,"55",History, vol. II, The Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
  18. ^Duchesne, Louis (1887), "Le concile d'Elvira et les flamines chrétiennes" [The Elvira council and the Christian…],Mélanges Renier (in French), Paris:159–74.
  19. ^De Clercq (1954),Ossius of Cordova.

Bibliography

[edit]
  • Giovanni Domenico Mansi,Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio (Florence and Venice, 1758–98) vol.II.ii.1-406; reprint (Paris) 1906 Reprints the account of Ferdinand de Mendoza, pp. 57–397.
  • Jean Hardouin,Conciliorum collectio regia maxima i. pp. 247–258.
  • Karl Josef von Hefele,Conciliengeschichte I, pp. 148–192 (2nd ed. 1873) (English translation, i. pp. 131 sqq.)
  • Alfred W. Dale,The Synod of Elvira and Christian Life in the Fourth Century (London, 1882)
  • Edgar Hennecke, inSchaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (3rd ed), sv. "Elvira", especially bibliography.
  • Samuel Laeuchli,Power and Sexuality: The Emergence of Canon Law at the Synod of Elvira (Philadelphia: Temple University Press) 1972. Power dynamics, sexual controls and the emergence of a clerical elite.
  • Conrad Rudolph, "Communal Identity and the Earliest Christian Legislation on Art: Canon 36 of the Synod of Elvira,"Perspectives for an Architecture of Solitude, ed. Terryl Kinder (2004) 1-7
  • Philip SchaffHistory of the Christian Church, vol. II "Ante-Nicene Christianity AD 100–325" Section 55. "The Councils of Elvira, Arles, and Ancyra."
  • José F. Ubina. Le concile d'Elvire et l'esprit du paganisme // Dialogues d'histoire ancienne. V. 19. No. 19-1, 1993 pp. 309–318.Available online

External links

[edit]

Wikisource This article incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domainChisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Elvira, Synod of".Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 9 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 301.

Antiquity
Al-Andalus era
Late Middle Ages
Expulsion and aftermath
Former communities
Spain
Aguilar de Campoo
Albacete
Alcalá de Henares
Alcañiz
Alcaraz
Alfaro
Almagro
Almadén
Almazán
Almería
Almodóvar del Campo
Ágreda
Albarracín
Alicante
Andújar
Aranda de Duero
Arévalo
Astorga
Atienza
Ávila
Badajoz
Baena
Balaguer
Barcelona
Belalcázar
Belchite
Béjar
Bembibre
Berlanga de Duero
Besalú
Briviesca
Buitrago del Lozoya
Bujalance
Burgos
Calahorra
Calatayud
Cáceres
Carmona
Cartagena
Castellón de la Plana
Castrojeriz
Cervera
Chillón
Ciudad Real
Ciudad Rodrigo
Coria
Córdoba
Cuenca
Daroca
Denia
Durango
Écija
El Puente del Arzobispo
Ejea
Estella
Fraga
Frómista
Girona
Granada
Guadalajara
Guadalupe
Haro
Hita
Huesca
Huete
Jaén
Jaca
Játiva
Jerez de la Frontera
A Coruña
Laguardia
Laredo
León
Lleida
Llerena
Lucena
Madrid
Maqueda
Medellín
Medina del Campo
Medina de Pomar
Medinaceli
Mérida
Miranda de Ebro
Molina de Aragón
Monzón
Montiel
Mora
Murcia
Nájera
Ocaña
Olmedo
Oñati
Ourense
Orihuela
Osuna
Oviedo
Oña
Palencia
Palma de Mallorca
Palma del Río
Pastrana
Peñafiel
Perpignan
Plasencia
Salamanca
San Sebastián
Santiago de Compostela
Santa Coloma de Queralt
Segovia
Seville
Sigüenza
Sos del Rey Católico
Soria
Solsona
Sos del Rey Católico
Tarazona
Tarragona
Tàrrega
Tauste
Tembleque
Teruel
Toledo
Trujillo
Tudela
Tui
Úbeda
Valencia
Balmaseda
Valladolid
Vélez-Málaga
Vic
Villadiego
Vilarreal
Vitoria
Zamora
Zaragoza
Portugal
Arronches
Belmonte
Bragança
Castelo Branco
Castelo Rodrigo
Coimbra
Covilhã
Elvas
Évora
Faro
Guarda
Guimarães
Lisbon
Marvão
Miranda do Douro
Mogadouro
Moura
Porto
Porto Judeu
Santarém
Serpa
Tavira
Vila Viçosa
Vilar Formoso
Culture
Modern era and legacy
International
National
Other
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Synod_of_Elvira&oldid=1311502625"
Categories:
Hidden categories:

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp