But let us examine these very abettors of the Eutychians, who, because something obscure is found in the words of those resting in the peace of the Church, want such words condemned rather than excused—whether they themselves are so vigilantly cautious that in their own words and writings they can in no way be reproved. For if they are so circumspect that they are caught offending in nothing, it might perhaps be called tolerable that, relying on their own wisdom, they do not deign to condescend to us and to those like us who offend in many things. But what shall we do, since we have heard of no books composed by them on any other cause, by the discussion of which we might be able to prove their skill irreproachable and their caution ever-watchful?
Is it their pleasure, then, that in this book which they wrote, or caused to be written, by common and long-continued effort to the prejudice of the holy synod, we should look for their perfect and nowhere blameworthy learning? But now, although not all whom it contains—since we have undertaken to show something else in this work—nevertheless we have exposed many of their errors as occasion offered, and many lies as well, and things contradictory to themselves. Here too we have taught that, while they zealously pursue lying, they do not even know how to lie, and how, by that same learning, they sometimes even speak the truth against themselves. But if, in this book in which they subscribed their names, intent on convicting the errors of others, whether false or true, they have been found at fault in so many things—
with what face do they presume to blame the words, I will not say of Theodore, but of any man whatsoever? But these judges of the dead will blush, if throughout that whole book of theirs we consider their ignorance; and therefore I have proposed to inspect and to demonstrate it in that one sentence alone by which they condemned Theodore together with his doctrines. For they said, as we have related: «If anyone does not anathematize Theodore of Mopsuestia and his doctrines, and those who either have held or do hold things similar to his, let him be anathema.» In this sentence consider, I pray, how many and how great faults I am about to reprove. The first is that they subjected him to anathema against the judgment of the Fathers and of the whole Church, in whose peace he died.
The second is that, by condemning all who do not pronounce anathema upon him, they decreed that the aforesaid venerable Fathers also, and that very Church which held communion with Theodore, and all the faithful now present in the body of Christ—who, whether because they ended their life in the peace of the Church, or because they have heard neither his errors nor his name, do not anathematize him—should become anathema. That this was done openly against justice and against the custom of the Church we have already said, nor do we find any such precedent where those have been made anathema who do not pronounce anathema upon some heretic whom they may well be ignorant of. And this not even these men would have decreed, were it not to the injury of the Council of Chalcedon, which, when his praises were recited before it, did not pronounce anathema upon him.
The third is that, condemning generally and without any exception both his doctrines and all who do not pronounce anathema upon them—doctrines in which not even they themselves deny that very many things are correct—they are without doubt convicted of anathematizing not only those Fathers whom we mentioned above, and others innocent of past or present times, but the very catholic faith itself, by whose assertions Theodore (as John and Domnus of Antioch and the Eastern council testify) overthrew every heresy, and which, according to Cyril—as for the moment they themselves allege—he magnificently asserted against the Arians and Eunomians.
The fourth is that they were not content to anathematize only those who hold similar views, but again, against justice and the Church's rule, they added also those who have held similar views. And although they may have proved that Theodore held nothing amiss, yet, so far as concerns them, they have condemned all who were converted from the error into which they suppose he fell; and their conversion availed them nothing—the fact that they no longer hold such views—since they are condemned for this very reason, that at some time they did hold such views. Here what will they do about Martha and Mary, the sisters of Lazarus, who in familiar devotion clung to the Lord himself while he yet dwelt here in the flesh? And yet each of them—that is, Martha first and then Mary—is recorded to have said to him:
Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died (John 11:21). Although they believed that he himself was the Son of God who had come into the world, nevertheless they would not have said, «if you had been here,» had they known him to be present everywhere as God. They therefore held the very view that Theodore is said to have held, and were anathematized together with Theodore. And how many at that time in the Gospels and apostolic writings do we know to have been such? How many even now do we see to be such in the flock of the faithful, who please God by the mere participation in the holy mysteries and by simple obedience to the precepts? Since even his very first shepherds, the apostles, at some time held such a view—all of whom we have seen condemned, together with Theodore, in this anathema?
For even if Thomas and Philip—who say, Show us the Father, and it suffices us (John 14:8)—be said to have believed Christ to be not merely a man but God, yet less than the Father or separated from the Father (for which reason it was even said to them: Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? [ibid. 10])—they without doubt held views similar to those Theodore is thought to have held. For it was no dissimilar nor lesser ignorance, either to have believed God to be less, or the Son to be separated from the Father. Unless perhaps the Nestorian error displeases us in such a way that the Arian pleases us. However they be said to have held their view, they held without doubt either the same or similar views.
Let them, then, answer for this rash and inconsiderate sentence of theirs—they who know only how to slander the things of others, but do not know how to defend their own; and let them, if they can, loose from these bonds of manifest truth: and perhaps we shall believe that they have received the power of binding those who are not upon the earth—a power which not even the apostles received. Behold, we have shown that they have fallen into four great faults, not obscure, nor drawn out from any hidden matters, but clear and manifest. How, then, was that subtle intellect of theirs—ever-watchful against the words of others by the lucubrations devised in the night of obscure questions—found dull in its own affairs, and lethargic at high noon?
In how many volumes of books are these censorious judges of the dead caught having committed errors so great in number and in magnitude? Is it not one brief sentence, which can be written with one dip of the pen: «If anyone does not anathematize Theodore of Mopsuestia, and his doctrines, and those who either have held or do hold things similar to his, let him be anathema»? And in these very few syllables, pondered for a long time, so many wise men—and, what is more, the most scrupulous and most slanderous discussers of others' words—have so erred in that very sentence of their calumny that, even if the things they hurl against Theodore to the disparagement of the holy synod were true, they could not be compared with their own errors.
And do these men dare to discuss and reprove men of illustrious learning, whose books are innumerable—men who could not pour out a single dipped pen in writing without great and many errors? This too must be considered: that Theodore, when the Nestorians had not yet appeared, intent upon others and meeting head-on the assaulting Synousiasts, in the transition of his discourse as it pressed on toward another point, fell into some offense. But these men—who, not undeservedly, lack pardon—at leisure and at ease through long hatred of peace, if indeed at ease, not only erred in manifold and grievous ways, but interposed an anathema between themselves and so many Fathers, and the whole Church that held communion with Theodore, and even the apostles themselves.
That which he, in the matters for which he is reproved by them, did not do—he who is now, for the sole prejudice of the synod, condemned under anathema. Hence, if a hundred years ago it appeared bold and harsh to the holy Fathers to impose an anathema upon the words of those who died in the peace of the Church, how much more boldly and harshly is it done now, that not only their words—which it is agreed was long ago forbidden—but their persons too should be condemned? And those Fathers who forbade condemning the words of Theodore and others said most prudently: For who among us hopes not to die? Or by whom has nothing been said that might offend another? They were taking care, surely, lest by such a precedent an anathema be imposed upon their own words too after death:
how greatly ought we to fear to give posterity a precedent by which they may condemn not only the words of the speakers after their death, but their persons too? For if Theodore, after so many years since his death, is believed to be detestable—he who is not proved to have resisted correction while he lived; if Theodore is condemned—he who condemned no one who had died in the peace of the Church; if Theodore is excluded—he who is not found to have written anything to the prejudice of the Church, by which the Church herself might be troubled: what, then, will become of us, if, with many contradicting our tumultuous presumption, we give to posterity not only a precedent, but even a cause for presuming such things against us?
—if indeed that is to be called presumption, and not rather the just reproof of presumption. Or perhaps it will seem to someone unworthy that those who, in condemning Theodore, anathematized so many holy Fathers, so many innocent persons, so many persons pleasing to and intimate with Christ, and the apostles themselves—that, lest so great a crime remain, they themselves should rather be condemned together with their abettors? Let them, then, correct their all-too-profane temerity; or, if they think they have done nothing to be corrected, let them render an account of their deed, and let them display the subtlety of intellect of which they boast so much, not in the reproof of others' words, but rather in the defense of their own.
This we ask of your justice: that if they should attempt to answer, it be no longer permitted them to compose their own profane writings under the title of your name; because, although we have learned from the teaching of the apostles that we must obey God rather than men, yet, so far as in us lies, we desire to obey both God and men, so long as men will and command those things which are not contrary to the obedience we owe to God.