Letters 1 part 7/55

This letter comes from me alone, the sinner, who am kept in prison, because our father and fellow-servant the recluse, and the archbishop of Thessalonica, and our brother, are likewise being kept on other islands.

They embrace the sacred footsteps of your beatitude.

{To the same. To the angel-like, most blessed, and apostolic father of fathers, Leo, Pope of Rome, Plato the recluse and Theodore, presbyter and hegoumenos of the Studites.} It is truly a great thing for us, the humble, and beyond the loftiest object of prayer, to have been deemed worthy to receive from your apostolic beatitude a word of greeting, and moreover a written record of her Spirit-moved sacred words, through Epiphanius our fellow-servant and beloved child — and this while we are shut up by the ill-minded, having seen the letter-bearer only with our own eyes.

At these things we leapt for joy, we exulted, we gave thanks in return to the Lord, who through her divine prayers granted to us, the unworthy, things beyond hope, in a marvelous way — almost as if, through her words, we could even picture and see her sacred countenance.

You, then, in Christ-imitating fashion, addressed us the lowly and rekindled our spirit, strengthened what was weak and made firm what was faint, as it were anointing us with words of comfort and admonition beyond our merit, and charging us to stand unwaveringly in the orthodox faith until the end (and may this be granted us through her merciful supplications) — and we, the nobodies, have again thought it good, just as before through this same most faithful letter-bearer of ours, and again through Eustathius his companion and our child, so also now to report to her what is fitting.

A synod has taken place among us, O most blessed one, a general assembly, with the officials of the government sitting together also;

and the synod was directed toward the rejection of the Gospel of Christ, whose keys you received from him through the leader of the apostles and those who, in succession, held them down to the one who preceded your most sacred primacy.

And so that your God-imitating clemency may bear to hear it, let us begin from the Law and the prophets.

And so it says: 'You shall not commit adultery, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.'

And Jeremiah says: 'Foolish and impious is he who keeps an adulteress'; and Malachi: 'The lips of a priest shall guard knowledge, and men shall seek the law from his mouth, for he is the messenger of the Lord Almighty.'

Let us now proceed to the Gospel;

'Whoever,' it says, 'divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery.'

And again: 'What God has joined together, let no man put asunder.'

And how great the difference between Law and grace is, we shall learn from the very words of the Lord, who says: 'And behold, something greater than the temple is here.'

Then also from the words of the apostle, who says: 'Anyone who has rejected the law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses;'

how much worse a punishment, do you think, will he be deemed worthy of who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, counted the blood of the covenant a common thing, and outraged the grace of the Spirit? Since these things are so, then, those who, with a lawless tongue, disobey the Lord have proclaimed the undoing of both the Law and the Gospel — that is, the adultery of the man who formerly held power, in the casting out of his lawful wife and the taking in of the adulteress, and the still greater and more grievous transgression beyond this, namely the adulterous union, committed by bearing false witness against God and taking his name upon this unlawful act within the sacred rite, and moreover by giving to the adulterers crowns of victory over Christ through participation in the divine gifts (gifts thereby outraged as common things by the one who effected the union — a man in truth declared to be an angel not of God the Almighty but of Satan, ruler of this world), and likewise the transgression of all those who, by their concurrence and approval, took their part in this transgression together with the adulterer and the one who effected the union — all this they have proclaimed to be a saving economy for the church of God, so firm and God-ratified that they have, by synodal decree, subjected to anathema, along with imprisonments and other sufferings, those who would not yield and agree with them, on the ground that, by not accepting this economy, they were not doing a holy deed.

The Lord has spoken; and we, the lowly, now say to you:

Hear, O great head set by God, and give ear to what Satan has wrought.

If, then, this assembly and its sentence of anathema are according to the will and approval of God, then clearly the Law is not of God, nor are the prophets — among whom the Forerunner, as one who rebuked adultery — nor, further, the Gospel, against which they have made their 'economy' something to be embraced.

For if they should say that both are of the same author, one of two things follows: either they will declare Christ — who spoke and legislated of old in the prophets, and now in his own person in the Gospel — to be a liar; or, since he is truth itself and speaks truly, then they themselves will be shown to be liars and accusers of God, firmly established as such, and on this account liable to the anathema which they themselves pronounced against Christ and his saints, having confirmed adultery, the adulterous union, and complicity in adultery to be an 'economy' of God and of the saints.

For there is no partiality with God, as the Moechians suggest, claiming that his laws are not laid down equally upon all, but that, as they say, in the case of emperors they yield and may be altered.

And where, then, is there a 'gospel for emperors'? But truly they have been exceedingly impious, not understanding that God does not accept the person of a man, as the sacred apostle said, nor that the same God, through one of the prophets, pronouncing them wretched, says: 'You have not kept my ways, but you have shown partiality in the law.'

'Did not one God create you? Is there not one Father of you all?' And Solomon also writes as follows:

'Hear therefore, O kings, and understand;'

'for being servants of the kingdom of the Most High, you have not judged rightly, nor kept the law, nor walked according to the counsel of God.'

'Terribly and swiftly he shall come upon you, for a severe judgment falls upon those who are in high positions.'

For the Master of all shows no partiality of person.

And again, O sacred and divine head, [know] that they have annulled the whole Gospel through the transgressions they have already committed, since even a single transgression suffices to overturn the law entire.

For all the commandments are bound to one another, says the great Basil, so that when one is broken, the rest of necessity are broken together with it — and he says this not of himself but from Christ speaking within him, who says, 'Whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven' — that is, clearly, one who perishes.

And the divinely inspired James [says]: 'Whoever,' he says, 'shall keep the whole law, yet stumble in one point, has become guilty of all.'

They have therefore broken both the Old and the New Covenant, O blessed one, through their violation not of the least but of the very greatest commandments of the Lord — these wretched men having set up a law against the law of the Gospel, [namely] that the will of the emperors is to be preferred to that of God, whenever they should so wish.

and different men will different things, and at different times in different ways.

And because of this there will be an overturning of everything, right up until the Antichrist; and hence what is called by them 'economy' will fittingly be named a forerunner of Antichrist.

For why need one even speak of the transgression of the canons? Since they have recoiled in aversion from the Gospel itself, there is little need to trouble over the canons.

And God, through the prophet, speaks as follows:

'I will place the key of the house of David upon his shoulder; and he shall open, and there shall be none to shut;'

'and he shall shut, and there shall be none to open.'

But they, acting in opposition to God, have shut what he opened, deposing men who are guiltless as it seems to them — though not to God — and have opened what he shut, advancing to office men who, by the judgment of God, once fell under deposition — always according to what seems good and pleasing to them, ever treating the sacred canons despotically, as if they were servants and slaves.

These are the lawless and impious undertakings and outcomes of the Moechian heresy.

And these things, as the least children of the catholic Church, we have been eager to report to you, our foremost apostolic head, as was necessary.

beseeching her, we entreat that she deem us worthy to receive letters written in her own hand and inscribed as if by God's own hand, after the pattern of the saints who shared her zeal — just as now [we have received] her rich blessings and gifts beyond our merit.

And our same brother Epiphanius reported to us, O most divine head, that he received from her an accusation on account of Barsanuphius, Isaiah, and Dorotheus, the heretics, as though we accepted them as orthodox;

and we were utterly amazed [to hear] that we, lowly as we are, who suffer for orthodoxy, should be thought to side with heretics.

Let every mouth that insinuates and slanders against us be stopped.

We are orthodox, even though sinners otherwise, O most blessed one, having not the slightest deficiency in this regard from the apostolic faith, embracing every ecumenical and local council approved by the truth together with the holy canons set forth by them, and abhorring and anathematizing every heresy and heretic.

And anathema to Barsanuphius, Isaiah, Dorotheus, and Dositheus, who were anathematized by St. Sophronius.

But also if there be any other person of the same name as these, yet a heretic according to their heresy or another, whether bishop, or ascetic, or whoever he may be, let him be anathema.

But also if anyone does not anathematize, in due season as is necessary, every heretic, let him be of their portion.

For we are pure of all heretical mindset, by your most sacred prayers, O most holy one.

We further report this also: that although in our letter sent through brother Eustathius it was not made clear that we had written to your holy head through Epiphanius as well, Epiphanius has not spoken falsely — and here is how the matter stands.

We had indeed truly given him the letter, but then again, out of fear of the rulers, we effaced it;

But he, having knowledge of the tokens [of recognition], went of his own right judgment to her holy footsteps after we had been exiled.

For indeed he is the mouth of our lowliness and the word issuing forth from our heart.

And let not your holy soul suppose any scandal in our fellow servant, who is most faithful in all things.

Our brother and archbishop of Thessalonica, with the open hands of his heart, both received the greeting of your beatitude, and through us reverently kisses your most sacred head.

[To Basil the abbot] To Basil, the most devout abbot and archimandrite of Rome, Plato the humble recluse and Theodore the least, presbyter and abbot of the Studites, [write]. Thus we, the lowly, have longed eagerly to receive letters from your paternal holiness, as the earth thirsts for its own rain;

and since we failed of [our] hope, we grieved, as was natural.

However, having learned the reason from Epiphanius, our most beloved and most faithful son, that it was from necessity and not from contempt for us, worthless as we are yet great lovers of your love-of-God, we changed the grief of our heart, gaining a sufficient joy [instead].

For he reported to us that you remain the same in disposition and love toward us, and moreover even increasing rather in goodness in various ways.

And having recounted how great is the arousal of zeal for piety in your holy soul, he made both our ears resound [with it].

And blessed be the Lord of hosts, who has set you in the foremost of cities, a God-shining luminary, holding forth the word of life amid the abundance of good deeds, who has given you a tongue that speaks freely the divine teachings of orthodoxy with lofty proclamation.

Wherein we also entreat [you] to help the Church in our region, both by your own strength and by your intercession to the most holy apostolic [see].

For your manly vindication on behalf of the word of truth is a firm foundation for the Church under heaven, and the zeal that comes from you is by nature ever kindling the whole inhabited world unto the ardent confession, in the Holy Spirit, of our faith.

May you both guard it and not cease to proclaim it, O our most divine and admirable fathers.

For what reason have we again sent our brother and venerator of your footsteps, Epiphanius? That he might in turn report our affairs, [namely] that by your holy prayers things go well with us, we sinners rejoicing and being of good cheer amid persecution and imprisonments, so as to dare to say: it has been granted to us not only to believe in Christ, but also to suffer for his sake.

so that he might stir you to more fervent prayer on behalf of the manly courage of us the weak, and for the common good, concerning which our discourse [is], and our petition to you, most holy ones, made now for the third time — not that we might be released from imprisonment, since we do not even reckon it a disgrace, but rather the greatest glory beyond our unworthiness — but that there may be benefit in the common [cause], even though we are of the least.

For everywhere, says the Theologian, one's own [interest] must be overlooked for the benefit of the many.

And it would be beneficial — as is our purpose and longing — that, just as in former times and from the beginning, those who convened in synod against the Gospel of Christ, and who anathematized those adhering to it and not accepting the adultery, the adulterous union, and the adulterous complicity as an 'economy' of the saints (as the Moechians have taught), thereby calling the saints 'transgressors' in this matter, should be censured in synod through the most preeminent apostolic [see];

because no saint ever cast his lot with an adulterer, nor did he crown those committing adultery and impart to them the divine gifts, since they have decreed not even to share roof and fire with them, even were they emperors.

And that they have even outraged the Divine itself through their crown-giving mysteries, bringing the anathema upon it through their anathematizing of those who held fast to his law.

But if this be not [possible], we for the rest pray for the strength of your prayers, the authority of the ordinances of love, the power of [your] written replies, which we entreat you by all means to send, comforting the fainthearted and strengthening the weak, O our most holy and beloved and ever-venerable fathers.

[To Euprepianus and those with him] I am of good hope, beloved children, concerning your peaceful and divinely-ordered conduct.

Therefore I shall turn my discourse to the pressing matter.

What is this? When we uncover their wicked doctrines and point out the reasons for which they anathematized us along with the others, they are shown altogether to be not merely heretics in some simple sense, but apostates from the Gospel of God, anathematizers of the saints, and destroyers of the canons.

In the first place, setting themselves in opposition to [both] the Old and the New [Covenant];

'You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain;'

'Let there be one law for the native and for the stranger.'

Again the Gospel, that is, Christ, [says]: 'You have heard,' he says, 'that it was said to the ancients, You shall not commit adultery. But I say to you, do not even look at a woman so as to desire her;'

and, 'Whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven' — that is, he shall be cast into the fire, as the Fathers interpret it.

But they (O the dreadful thing to hear!) have named the adultery condemned by both Law and Grace — condemned even to the point of a lustful glance — together with the breaking not of the least but, one might say, of the first and greatest of the practical commandments; and besides this, the taking of the name of God not in vain but upon so unlawful and wicked a deed, namely the adulterous union; and the taking of the name of God, and the reception of Christ's Mysteries, and the crown-bestowing, God-warring act of the adultery-working devil and his minister — [they have named all this] an 'economy' of God, both good and salvific for the Church.

Let us stop our ears, lest we be corrupted by the blasphemy, O brothers.

And their justification is that, they say, in the case of emperors it is necessary to overlook the evangelical laws.

Behold another forerunner of Antichrist.

Does he not accept it? Then who is lawgiver over the emperor? And since [all is ordered] according to the ruler and the ruled, then the evangelical laws are not even [laws] for the ruled either.

For if [the law binds] him, it [binds] them too, so that they may remain obedient and free from strife, as being ranked under one law and one lawgiver.

But if [the law does] not [bind] him, whenever he wills [to break it] — and perhaps he might wish to keep none [of the laws] at all — while it does [bind] them, then one of these two [follows]: either the emperor is God (for only the Divine is not under law), or there is anarchy and sedition;

For where the law is not the same, how can there be peace, when the emperor wills one thing — namely to commit adultery, to choose heresy — while those under his hand are commanded by law neither to cast their lot with an adulterer nor to join in his heretical choice, nor to transgress in any way that which was handed down by Christ and the apostles? And how, from this, does it not appear together that Antichrist is at the doors? For the Moechians will not dare to deny that whatever unlawful thing the emperor does, he also enacts and commands the people to submit to.

And behold, in their very argument, Antichrist has surely entered in;

For he too, being a king, will seek this one thing alone: that whatever he wills and decrees should come to pass; and there is no difference from the kings before him, except that his willing and wishing will not be so limited as theirs — as indeed [one] might already wish even now.

The same authority has been proclaimed synodically by the hierarchs.

And how would anyone who understands and is not contentious not confess that this is so? What then will be worse than this heresy until the manifestation of Antichrist from it? I do not yet think that he is [present], but that this very [heresy], having begun from this point on, will come to its culmination at that [future] time;

and whoever falls under this [heresy] — even if they had existed at that [future] time, they would [likewise] have fallen; and as many as, by the power of God, contending, stand firm, they would also, even in those [last] days, be conquerors of Antichrist in death together with Christ.

But, O the misery of human nature!

How have they, from this point, turned their backs? How do we show what we shall become? For this reason, few are they who are going to stand firm;

for this reason Elijah and Enoch (we do not know whether also the Theologian and Evangelist) [will be] helpers of human weakness, and champions in the front rank, and prize-bearers of the victory won on behalf of the confession of Christ;

for this reason the days of that necessity will be shortened, being brought to an end by the manifestation of Christ.

You who understand, stand firm; do not deny Christ from this point on.

For present events are determinative of what follows.

The second point needs no great clarification, being made evident from the first.

Having then anathematized those who do not accept the adulterous union and the emperor's adultery, and the transgression of everyone who was found to have a share in it, regarding it as a holy 'economy' — what else have they done than anathematize the saints, and first of all the Forerunner? It is true to say, fearful though it is, that they anathematized even the Master of the saints himself.

For he who forbade these things clearly neither accepts nor approves of them, but has severely threatened that the judgment is inescapable, and that it is enough merely to cast one's lot with an adulterer — not this one or that one, but anyone at all, emperor, potentate, small and great.

'For there shall be one law,' he says, 'and we have received one gospel.'

And should anyone shake even the least part of this gospel — even if he were an angel from heaven — let that certainty be enough for you.

Is not the emperor greater than an angel? Is not the world-ruler in the world greater than all who hold worldly dominion, whether demons or men — yet not in a divine manner? And what does the Apostle say? 'Let him be anathema.'

Angels do not dare to shake it, nor, if they should shake it, do they remain unanathematized, as was the case with the devil and his apostate host.

And how then is any man, being in the flesh, who shakes it and introduces innovations — especially innovations such as these — not estranged from God? But he who does not accept what he forbade (for the argument must be resumed from the point where it turned aside into digression) — such a one, according to these Moechians, or rather antichrists, has already been anathematized.

Having devised for them a 'communion with adultery,' an 'economy,' they did not, for this reason, anathematize the saints as lawless men and transgressors of the commandments (and hence they themselves are altogether to be anathematized); or else, by confessing them to be guardians of the law, they anathematized themselves, and not the saints — these wretches having arrogated to themselves the name of the saints in what they call the 'economy' of the adulterous union.

And for this reason again they anathematized the saints, as though they were not saints.

Since, according to them, the saints are those who have made, and continue to make, 'economies' in favor of the adulterous union and the leadership of the adulterous party.

And these — those who do not accept their adultery-founded 'economy' and do not conduct affairs after its pattern — are, in their eyes, estranged from God, lawless, transgressors of the commandments, and anathematized by them.

From whichever point, then, you wish, and whichever of their impieties you would like to see clearly, understand it, O sharp-minded one, and marvel, as you contemplate and take in depth upon depth of godlessness.

For not all heresies display their whole impiety openly; some are altogether far removed from the gospel, while others creep in, bringing along certain sayings taken from the gospel, not claiming that they fail to conform to the evangelical precepts, but rather, seemingly, contending quite earnestly in their defense — their ambiguity residing in whether the divine words are to be understood in this sense or in that.

And since they fail to attain right thinking, they have been named heresies.

But here there is an open lapse of faith — they are not erring in understanding, but saying:

'Christ indeed said thus, but even if the law holds such things concerning emperors to happen thus, let the gospel be overcome.'

Consider how the end follows upon the beginning.

From the incarnation of Christ, heresies began outside the gospel.

Then the devil, having been repelled through the gradual advance of grace, stealthily crept in from within the gospel itself.

He begets heresies all the way up to the iconoclasts, concealing the bait by means of Scripture and its very texts.

And when he perceived that men were obedient to him, and the time of the consummation was pressing on, he began, from this point onward, just as from the beginning, to kindle murder against the gospel itself, so that he might arrive fittingly at the Antichrist, in whom he will dwell and in whom his whole bitterness and apostasy will be revealed — whom the Lord will destroy most swiftly by his appearing.

As for the third point, what shall we say? For those who have dared, with bare head, to transgress the gospel, and have anathematized those who chose not to transgress it — what regard will they have for the canons? For these too have been sealed by the Holy Spirit, and when they are dissolved, all things that come to our salvation are dissolved along with them.

For then there would nowhere be priesthood, sacrifice, or the other remedies for our soul's maladies.

But why do I speak of the canons and make a distinction? It is the same thing to speak, concerning them, of the Gospel of Christ.

For he himself gave the keys of the kingdom of heaven to the great Peter, saying, 'Whatever you loose, and whatever you bind, so it shall be.'

And again, to all the apostles:

'If you forgive the sins of anyone, they are forgiven; and if you retain the sins of anyone, they are retained' — and consequently, transmitting this authority to those who came after them, provided that they should act likewise.

And for this reason the canons of Basil and of the saints of equal standing with him have been received as being apostolic, since they followed closely in the apostles' steps, having introduced no innovation, but rather having even amplified them as was fitting.

These new false apostles, then, declare in their very actions that it is not at all necessary to act according to the established rules of the saints, but that each of the hierarchs may, at times, act by his own authority and judgment, contrary to what was ordained by them — loosing in matters where the loosing was not granted by them, and binding in matters where the binding was not granted by them.

And you see these things happening every day:

the holy things have been profaned, and the adulterous synod has become, both secretly and openly, a provision for sin.

The one who did not deserve deposition is deposed, and the one who is disgraced is ordained, while the one who falls under canons requiring deposition is left, unaccountable, to perform the sacred rites.

And promotions come from human command, and not from a divine and canonical decree.

And alas, woe is me for this misery — to recount it all as a tragedy!

And who, having a sensitive heart, does not grieve and groan? And what mind, reviewing and weighing these things, does not confess this to be an apostasy from Christ among the heresies? And where would it be right for me to say all that is in my mind, and exceed the measure of a letter? What has been said is easy to grasp, not embellished, not hard to understand.

On the one hand, because I myself am not capable of lofty speech, but am very small, of few words, and of limited understanding — this very condition I have through the prayer of our common father and of you; and on the other hand, also because some of you are not able to grasp the heresy in a more doctrinally sophisticated manner, and at the same time because the word of truth is simple, and the heresy itself is manifest, requiring no subtle doctrine, and easily grasped even by a child.

For to whomever God has spoken, the word is concise.

These men do not conform, but even anathematize those who do conform.

May the Lord grant you grace in all things, beloved children.

{To Joseph, Archbishop of Thessalonica} Worthy of your humility and wisdom, and of your love toward wretched me, and of your esteem for me beyond my worth, are the things now sent to me in your letter, shining forth sincere and unmixed truth from your luminous soul, O thrice-blessed brother-father of mine.

Having embraced it, I gave thanks to Christ, the fulfiller of my desire, the giver of all good things.

And how could it be otherwise, since you, enriched with knowledge and fitting zeal, and besides a true child of our common father, both think and are disposed in harmony with us who are the least? Yet, good as this is, I would find still more desirable the concord of both parties being made manifest, through which the ray of truth shines forth the more brightly, while the crookedness — or rather, the mere glimmer-by-night — of those opposed to it is enfeebled and plunged into darkness.

But having found in your letter the distinction concerning the 'necessary,' forgive me — I was struck dumb.

For this distinction does not belong to the necessary, but to the contingent, which is divided three ways: into the 'for the most part,' the 'equally,' and the 'for the lesser part.'

And the former is divided into the present and the future; then the present is further divided into the eternal and the 'as long as it exists.'

And 'as long as it exists' has a further subdivision into subject and predicate: the contingent 'for the most part' passes over into the 'actual,' while the other passes into the 'necessary' — though the conversion does not hold, even though one is proceeding downward from that point.

For it is not the case that whatever is necessary is thereby also contingent; but whatever is contingent for the most part, proceeding through the medium of the actual, is, as long as it exists, necessary.

For instance: 'Every man is literate,' and 'Some man is literate.'

But the first is contingent, for it is possible for it to come about, while the second is necessary, whenever it exists in actuality.

When that man has died, the activity according to necessity ceases.

This is what is meant by 'as long as it exists' — that is, 'until it exists,' or else —

— the other sense: that which never changes from what it is.

Such as the eternal things: angel and soul.

And indeed we have arrived at what was sought.

So that a man convicted under a 'contingent' canon will sometimes, on account of some other wickedness of his, suffer the penalty of what is laid down under the 'necessary' canon — but not, conversely, that such a man suffer the penalty of what pertains to the contingent canon.

For it is no longer contingent, being already equally weighted with the impossible.