Letter 32: Severus rules that John's subdeacons should not lose an old exemption from weekly household service without compensation.

Severus writes to John of Alexandria Minor after the subdeacons of John's church have appealed to the apostolic see. They say that an old custom in the church of the Alexandrians exempts their order from serving the weekly turns in the bishop's house. Severus does not treat the claim as strange. Customs differ from church to church, and not every local church follows the same pattern in matters like this. His ruling is practical. If the custom is truly established, and if the subdeacons have to support themselves through ordinary work because the church does not provide their maintenance, John should not disturb the arrangement. A church cannot demand service at a person's own expense while giving no support in return. If John wants to change the burden, he must provide some relief to balance the loss. Severus grounds the decision in Paul. A soldier, a vine-dresser, and a shepherd all receive support from the work they perform, and those who serve at the altar should be supported by the altar. The same principle applies by analogy to these subdeacons. People assigned to church work should not be made poorer by the very service the church asks of them. The conclusion is gentle but firm. The injunction against the subdeacons should be removed, their poverty should no longer be shut up against them, and the harsh measures already taken should be erased by mildness. Severus is not merely protecting a privilege. He is telling John that church order must be fair to the people who keep the church running, especially when they are poor and already carrying their own necessities.

The devout subdeacons of your church have made a complaint to the apostolic see, alleging that an old custom prevails in the holy church of the Alexandrines, which allows their order freedom from the obligation ^ I Co. xiv. 40. 2 Qa ji 2. of serving what are called ' weeks ' i in your venerated bishop's house.- And we considered the statement in no way surprising- if it is absolutely true, since in other holy churches also an exactly similar provision exists upon this point.Such matters are generally regulated in accordance with the customs of the holy churches, and the same model does not prevail in all of them. Seeing then that they both allege the custom in defence, and procure the things required to satisfy their necessities by worldly occupations owing to not receiv- ing sustenance, your love of God should acquiesce p. nr. in all these things, and not disturb that which is the custom by any innovation, unless perhaps some relief be given them as a counterpoise to the loss ^ that falls upon them. That a man ought not to serve at his own charges Paul also who had Christ speaking in him enacted: and to this he further added a saying that resembles it, I mean that a man who devotes himself to the altar should be supported by the altar; ^ and hence he gives the same decision in parallel cases also, and teaches that a man who is engaged in any work should also receive the means of life out of the very same business in which he is engaged. Therefore let the injunction also that has been laid upon them be removed, and the cells of their poverty opened, and the harsh acts that have been done obliterated by means of mildness in all things.