This morning I was perusing the canons of the early Roman ecumenical councils – Lateran I (1123), Lateran II (1139), and Lateran III (1179).

I live around the corner from the great basilica – I can see it from my roof very clearly. I went today for mass and confession. I can’t help but marvel how much times have changed.

Don’t get me wrong. The infamous Cadaver Synod was also held at the Lateran, as well as any number of unbelievably debauched parties (in the palace or basilica itself, I don’t know). But at least there was a certain kind of formality and seriousness to things… I just don’t know how we can be spending millions on the Synod on Synodality but can’t afford real candles for the railings by the high altar at the mother church of all Christendom.

The early Lateran councils are odd events. The first two were not so clearly ecumenical, at least for a long while. None of the first three even issue real teaching content – just laws. So, no, Vatican II was not the first ecumenical council like that (viz., definitive, infallible teachings by anathemas/teaching canons – obviously Vatican II issued teachings).

We don’t have the “acts” or proceedings of these councils. They might yet be discovered. It sometimes happens that things fall behind a shelf in the great archives of the Church and sit there – yes, even for centuries. And sometimes things just go missing… A friend who works with such things in the Vatican informed me not long ago that he can’t find the original copies of the proceedings of the canonization of St. Thomas Aquinas… It’s just gone. Poof.

Lateran III could hardly be clearer or more severe in its treatment of certain unnatural acts against the 6th commandment. See canon 11 for yourself. It was evidently pressing enough of an issue in 1179, this despite the Council coming near the end of almost 20 years of uncertainty and controversy about who was actually the Pope.

The concerns of these councils centered largely on ecclesiastical revenues (who gets money and how) and the right order of ecclesiastical governance. (Suffice it to say that it is not foreseen to have laity particularly involved with ecclesiastical administration.) There are also many concerns over peace.

Some legislation was very particular, such as Lateran I’s treatment of fraudulent exchange (canon 13): “Whoever knowingly makes or intentionally spends counterfeit money shall be separated from the communion of the faithful as one accursed, an oppressor of the poor and a disturber of the state.” Or, take Lateran II’s treatment of arson (canon 18): “We completely detest and forbid, by the authority of God and the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, that most dreadful, devastating and malicious crime of incendiarism. For this pernicious and inimical calamity surpasses all other kinds of destruction. Nobody is unaware of the extent to which it is injurious to the people of God and the damage it brings to souls and bodies. It is necessary, therefore, to oppose it and to labor with all one’s might, that so great a harm and danger be eradicated and suppressed for the sake of the people. If anyone, then, after the publication of this prohibition of ours, from some wicked design born of hate or vengeance, starts a fire or causes it to be started, or knowingly provides counsel or help to those starting one, let him be excommunicated. And when an arsonist dies, he is to be deprived of a Christian burial. Nor is he to be absolved unless, having first made reparation for the loss according to his means, he swears that he will never raise a fire again. Moreover, let him be given the penance of remaining a whole year in Jerusalem or Spain in the service of God.” Canon 19 continues, “If any archbishop or bishop relaxes this decree, he is to make restitution for the loss and abstain from his episcopal office for a year.”

Lateran II also contains an allusion to the famous rule of “sanctuary,” in canon 15: “In the same way we have decided to legislate that if anyone, at the instigation of the devil, incurs the guilt of the following sacrilege, that is, to lay violent hands on a cleric or a monk, he is to be subject to the bond of anathema; and let no bishop presume to absolve such a person unless he is in immediate danger of death, until he has been presented before the apostolic See and submits to its decision. We also prescribe that nobody dare to lay hands on those who flee to a church or cemetery. If anyone does this, let him be excommunicated.“

There’s so much more. Go learn what these councils said about pilgrims, crusaders, the Templars… and jousting.

The older ecumenical councils remain relevant. They cannot be forgotten. They are the greatest moments in the history of the Church’s life as a whole, in governance and teaching. They deserve our attention, our study, our serious consideration and reflection.

Even the obscure ones.

Happy Monday…

-Eamonn