Letter 86: Severus answers a long canonical question about how to receive converts from the two-nature party without repeating baptism, chrism, or ordination.

I do not claim for myself the power you attribute to me when you say that the reputation of my poor name has gone everywhere and that I am competent to teach and heal wounds of the soul. If I say anything useful, it comes from the writings and labors of the inspired teachers of the church. Paul is always sounding in my ears: What do you have that you did not receive? If you received it, why boast as though it were your own? I therefore answer as one who has received help from others, and I try to set before you the rules the fathers left us. You ask about people who come over from the two-nature party, the party of Nestorius and Chalcedon. Should they be baptized again? Should they be anointed again? Should their clergy be ordained again? My answer is that we must not decide such matters by private zeal or by the force of anger. We must look at what the church has already judged, and we must distinguish one spiritual disease from another. Every deviation from sound teaching can be called a heresy, but not every heresy is cured in the same way. The church is not defined by buildings, crowds, or an outward name. It is the body that keeps the apostolic faith. Gregory the Theologian said of the Arians that they had the houses, while the orthodox had the true inhabitant of those houses. The same distinction matters here. Those who have lost the true confession cannot be treated as though nothing has happened. But if they return with a sincere anathema of their error and a clear confession of the fathers' faith, the question is not whether we hate their former error. We do. The question is what form of reception the canons require. Cyprian of Carthage and the bishops gathered with him in Africa once judged that converts from every heresy should be perfected by the true baptism of the church, without distinguishing the particular character of each group. Their zeal was godly, and Cyprian's letters to Jubaianus, Quintus, and Magnus show how seriously he cared for the church's purity. Yet soon after him Dionysius of Alexandria wrote to Dionysius of Rome and to Stephen, and he made a more careful distinction. People baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, even by certain heretics, were not all to be baptized again; others, whose error destroyed the confession itself, did need the church's baptism. The fathers at Nicaea followed this more discriminating rule, and so did those who came after them. The African bishops had looked at the common name heresy and applied one remedy to all. Dionysius and the later fathers looked at the different kinds of disease and applied the remedy suited to each. A fever, dropsy, and elephantiasis are all diseases of the body, but no physician treats them with one medicine merely because they share one name. So also in the faith. The common word heresy does not erase the particular judgment required in each case. This is why the canons do not speak with one voice for every group. The nineteenth canon of Nicaea requires those coming from Paul of Samosata to be baptized, because their doctrine corrupts the very confession into which baptism is given. But the council of Laodicea ordered those coming from Photinus and Novatus to be received by chrism. We do not set up clever private theories against these decisions, nor do we retreat to whatever once pleased Cyprian in Africa. We follow the public determinations made at different times by orthodox rulers of the churches. Private opinions, even of holy men, cannot overthrow common ecclesiastical judgment. Cyprian himself teaches us this humility. He says that if something better and more useful is shown, we should accept it gladly. When better things are set before us, we are not defeated; we are taught, especially in matters that preserve the unity of the church and the hope of salvation. For that reason we must also consider what was done at Ephesus, where Nestorius was deposed and his doctrines were anathematized. After that examination, Charisius, a presbyter from Philadelphia in Lydia, brought forward the false creed composed by Theodore of Mopsuestia, teacher of Nestorius' error. Many who had abandoned the faith of Nicaea for that spurious creed came forward, anathematized Nestorius, and returned. The fathers did not order them to be baptized again or anointed again. That precedent is decisive for your question. Those people had been drawn into a creed shaped by Theodore and Nestorius. They had denied the accurate confession of the three hundred and eighteen fathers and had embraced an alien symbol. Yet when they anathematized the error and confessed the orthodox faith, the fathers accepted them without imposing a new baptism or a new chrism. If such was the order followed after Ephesus, how can we now invent another rule for those who come from the same root of error? To receive them by confession and anathema is not laxity. It is obedience to the fathers. The same principle applies to ordination. If you insist that converts from Diphysitism must be baptized again, you will also have to insist that all clergy ordained among them must be ordained again. But the church has not made that law. We do not say that their former communion was healthy, nor do we praise the hands that ordained them. We say that when a person turns away from the error, confesses the right faith, and is received by the church according to the canons, the church's judgment heals what must be healed. The power of the church's reception is not weaker than the injury caused by the error renounced. You bring up Timothy of Alexandria and suppose that he contradicted himself. He did not. When the people, burning with zeal, did not even want to look at those ordained by Proterius, Timothy used a pastoral remedy. He told them to regard those men as though they had been ordained by him, or, if you prefer the other wording, he said that he had determined to give them ordination. But once that word softened the people's harshness, he did not violate the moderation of the canons. He restrained zeal by wise administration and led the people back to the established order. A physician may use one treatment to calm a fever and another to restore strength; the variation does not make him inconsistent. Paul acted in just this way. He circumcised Timothy because of the Jews in that place, but when some tried to make circumcision necessary for the gospel, he declared that if people accepted circumcision in that way, Christ would profit them nothing. The action is not judged by its outward form alone. It is judged by the need it serves. Timothy of Alexandria acted with the same kind of pastoral economy. His purpose was not to create a new canon of re-ordination, but to quiet an inflamed people and bring them back under the canons already received. Scripture gives another example in the days of Hezekiah. When Israel had fallen into idolatry and neglected the law, Hezekiah restored the Passover. The law required the sons of Aaron to offer the sacrifices, but because the priests were too few and the people had come with hearts prepared to seek the Lord, Levites were brought forward in ways that did not follow the usual order. Hezekiah prayed that the good Lord would pardon everyone who had set his heart to seek God, even if not according to the exact purification of the sanctuary. God heard him. The point is not that law does not matter. The point is that restoration sometimes requires the church to recognize repentance and set things in order without pretending the whole act must be done over from the beginning. The church's later history says the same. Socrates tells how at Synada in Phrygia a bishop named Theodosius persecuted the Macedonians there, not from true zeal but from greed. While he was away seeking help from the imperial authorities, Agapetus, the Macedonian bishop, took counsel with his clergy and people, accepted the faith of consubstantiality, and brought the whole multitude into the church. He did not receive a second anointing, and the people were not treated as if they had never approached Christian initiation. Their hearts had turned to the right confession, and the church accepted that turn according to the rule of faith. Do not make the Spirit a prisoner of our sequence. In the Acts of the Apostles, Cornelius and those with him believed Peter's preaching, and the Holy Spirit came upon them before water was given. Peter then asked who could forbid baptism to those who had received the Spirit just as the apostles had. The Spirit blows where it wills, and the Spirit accompanies the sacred judgments of the high priests of the church. We must therefore be careful not to command more than the fathers commanded, as though our strictness could improve on the Spirit's own order. You point to Theodotus as though his recent use of chrism for converts from the Diphysites proves the stricter case. It proves nothing of the sort. Others have been stricter still and have acted unlawfully in the name of zeal. Cassian, a disciple of the holy father Romanus and a man once admired for ascetic gifts in Palestine, separated disciples and went off to baptize converts from the Chalcedonian error. Severity can become disobedience. It can look holy while it breaks the order of the church. We must not let the excesses of zealous men become a law for everyone. Nor should Theodotus be treated as a secure guide. He changed positions repeatedly and was carried in different directions, like the teachers of the opposing party. He also followed the foolishness of John the Rhetor, who said that the Word of God suffered the saving cross in his divine essence and refused to confess the one Lord Jesus Christ as consubstantial with us in the flesh. You yourself wounded us by omitting that confession in the preface of the document you published. Still, I will not build my case out of another person's faults. We must establish our position from the church's ordinances and the fathers' administrations, not by collecting the sins of our opponents. You are also troubled because the bishops at Laodicea called those who divide Emmanuel into two natures Paulianists. Do not be alarmed. The fathers often named heresies by the roots from which they sprang, in order to shame the likeness. They called Arian corruption idolatry, because it leads people to worship a creature. They called Sabellian confusion Judaism, because it collapses the three substances into one person in a Jewish manner. Yet they did not receive Arians as pagans or Sabellians as Jews. In the same way, to call the two-nature error Paulianist does not mean that every convert from it must be treated exactly like a convert from Paul of Samosata. Cyril himself used this manner of speech against Theodore of Mopsuestia, saying that Sodom had been justified more than he, and that he had surpassed the babblings of pagans and the arrogance charged against the Jews. Cyril did not mean that Theodore was literally every one of those things in the same formal sense. He meant that the error deserved shame by comparison. So when Laodicea uses a severe name for those who divide the one Christ after the ineffable union, the name exposes the kinship of the evil; it does not create a new baptismal rule against the canons. We should therefore receive those who repent from that error by their anathema and confession, not rebaptize them as though they came from Paul of Samosata. I have written this while burdened by many affairs, and I have not been able to expand the refutation of every proposition as much as I wished. Yet because you have a right disposition and are not ruled by prejudice, what has been written should be enough. I have answered each point as fully as my ability allows, quoting the testimonies of the God-clad doctors of the church. Hold to their laws. Do not make private severity stronger than the fathers' order. Receive repentance where the church has taught us to receive it, and let confession, anathema, and communion do the work the canons assign to them.

I for my part am not conscious in myself of any quality such as that to which you bear witness, when you say that the fame of our meanness has gone out over all the earth, and that we are one competent to teach and to heal the afflictions of the soul: but I know clearly that, if I utter anything that is on the right side and is capable of profiting, it is out of the writings and labours of the God-clad educators ^ of the church that I utter and speak this: and I think that I hear plainly from God what is said by the wise Paul, " And what hast thou that thou didst not receive? but if thou didst indeed receive it why 1 Maithyai raze = fxva-Tayoiyot. boastest thou as if thou didst not receive it? " ^ For I for my part am not competent to break the bread of knowledge for those that are hungry: on the contrary I gather the food of learning by picking up the crumbs of the orthodox shepherds, and so I seem to give this to others also. Wherefore it is from their labours that I make answer to your affection also, and it is by adducing their utterances that I find a solution of the doubts that have been raised. Whereas you say that those who assembled at Chalcedon, and divided our one Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ by calling Him two natures after the union fell under the anathema laid down against abominable godless heresies, and that men coming from them are not to be received, but their " end is to be burned," "' because they are devoid of the grace of the Holy Spirit, know that you have missed the truth. That by denial of the faith they are stripped of every spiritual heavenly gift it is impossible for me to gainsay; but that when they repudiate and renounce the heresy and condemn it by anathema, and come over to the church, they are according to the ordinances of the fathers to be received, I will try to show in what I am about to say (by the church I too mean the confession which is founded on the true faith, since Peter also heard the words, "Thou art Cephas and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of Hades shall 1 I Co. iv. 7. 2 He. vi. 8. 20 not prevail against it ": ^ and I find that Gregory the Theologian also says of the Arians who formerly held the temples of God, " They have the house, we the dweller in it: they the temples, we the privilege of becoming temples of the living God""), Now, when Cyprian held a prominent position at Carthage in Africa, and God-loving bishops assembled there, who were in number eighty-seven, some from the same Africa itself, some from Mauretania and Numidia, - they determined that those who come from all heresies should be perfected by the true baptism of the church,^ as if they had not been baptized at all, not distinguishing the character of each of the heresies, but bringing all under one pronouncement/ It was from God-loving zeal that these adopted this resolu- tion: as is clearly shown by the words which the holy Cyprian who has been mentioned wrote in epistles to Juvian and Quintus and Magnus, where he also includes a reference to those who are baptized on their beds during sickness.^ And soon afterwards Dionysius to whom it fell at that time to feed the church of the city of the Alexandrines, writing to Dionysius his namesake and Stephen, who presided over the holy church of the city of the Romans, made a distinction, saying that those who had been baptized in the name of the three substances, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, even though it were by heretics ^ Mt. xvi. 1 8. - Or. xxxiii. 15. ^ Cf. * dTTo^ao-is. * Ep. 69, 71, 73. that they were baptized, but still such as confess the three substances, should not be re-baptized: but - converts from the other heresies should certainly be perfected by the baptism of the church. This opinion the three hundred and eighteen fathers who assembled at Nicaea also followed, and those who fed the churches after them. Those who assembled in Africa in the days of Cyprian, looking at the common name of the heresies only, applied a single method of cure. But the contemporaries of the great Dionysius and those who came after him distingruished the varieties of diseases, and so applied to each of them the cure suited for it. Just as in bodily troubles every infirmity is termed disease, and they are ex- pressed by this general name, which however covers many different diseases, fever for instance and dropsy and elephantiasis, so also in the weaknesses of the faith every aberration from the sound word is named generally heresy, but every one of the diseases that are included in this term is not of the same character: for neither do they hold an equal eminence in impiety. But, as a skilful physician heals a man with fever in one way, and in another a man who has ague maybe or dropsy, or is troubled by a swelling of the spleen, in the same way those also who healed and fed the churches with more than ordinary spirituality and sagacity judged it right to distinguish the nature of each heresy, and did not think the same cure fit to be applied to those who shared in the sickness of Novatus and of Photinus, and to those who had been stained with the corruption and mire of Paul of Samosata. The nineteenth canon of the three hundred and eighteen fathers requires those who come from Paul of Samosata to be re-baptized: ^ but in the case of converts from Photinus and Novatus to the orthodox church the hundred and tenth canon, which was enacted by the synod that assembled at Laodicea in Phrygia, decided that they should be perfected by chrism: " although much the same folly gives birth to the miserable heresy of Paul of Samosata and of Photinus, and they do not differ from one another except to a slight extent. And yet we for our part follow the regulations of the fathers and do not make ingenious investigations, nor have recourse to that which in former times pleased Cyprian and those who assembled in Africa, whom we mentioned shortly before. For we must follow the common conclusions made at different times by the God-loving orthodox rulers of the churches, and not adduce the private conclusions of different men, or opinions which seem to contain self-created scrupulosity ^ or strict teaching, and lay down a contrary law, and presumptuously contend against the holy fathers. Indeed the holy Cyprian himself, as if laying down a general canon in his letter to Quintus, enjoins that we ought to follow- later principles adopted as a matter of expediency and for the sake of the union of the church, and not be ^ Mansi ii. 676. - Ibid. 566. ■^ Sebyaiiayuth dehltha = iOeXoOprjaKeca (Col. ii. 23). shackled by prejudices held at an earlier time: and I am convinced that he was moved by the Holy Spirit to say this beforehand: and that though he was then insistingr that converts from all heresies should be - perfected by the baptism of the church. This is what he says: " Moreover also Paul the Apostle, being himself also concerned for peace and concord, entreats and teaches in his letter in such words as these: ' Let two or three prophets speak: and let the rest discern. But, if a revelation be made to another while sitting, let the first keep silence.' By this he clearly taught and showed that many things are revealed to each man for the better: and therefore each man ought not to be constantly and at all times contending for the opinions which once won his approval and prevailed: but, if anything better and more beneficial show itself, gladly accept it. For, when better things are brought before us, we are not conquered, but are instructed: especially in things that conduce to the unity of the church, and to the hope and assurance of our salva- tion."^ Therefore it is right to consider what was determined by those who assembled at Ephesus to depose the impious Nestorius and anathematize his doctrines. Now after the examination of the heresy and its refutation, and the deprivation of that wicked man, Charisius a presbyter from Philadelphia (this is a city of the province ^ of the Lydians) came through into the midst, and laid before everyone a silly ^ Ep. 71. 3. '" lwap)Q.a. symbol composed by Theodore of Mopsuestia the teacher of the folly of Nestorius, and showed that there were many from that country who had denied the accurate faith of the three hundred and eighteen fathers, and had fallen away to this alien and spurious symbol. And they were moreover brought in and anathematized the hateful heresy of Nestorius; ^ and they did not put forward any such canon declaring that converts from his perdition to the bright light of orthodoxy must be perfected by baptism or by chrism; nor has anyone been shown to have been anointed at that time: and this thouo^h the schism lasted a lone time, and the bishops of the East supported Nestorius, and separated themselves from the Catholic synod, and afterwards joined themselves to the same and were reconciled at the time when Paul bishop of the city of the Emesenes went to Alexander's city and acted as mediator of the union between the churches in Egypt and in the East. As it seemed necessary to the men of earlier days that converts from heresies should be perfected through baptism, but afterwards a sagacious discrimination regarding the matter introduced the principle that some must be re-baptized, others re-anointed, so concerning the Nestorian heresy the fathers after examining the character of the heresy decided that the impious doctrine should only be anathematized by those who repent. Paul of Samosata and Photinus sinned ^ Mansi iv. 1344. against the very substance of God the Word, and assert the Lord born of Mary to be a mere man. But Nestorius says that He is the Word which ex- isted before the ages, but divides the mystery of the dispensation into two by saying that it was not in substance but by brotherly conjunction that God the Word was united to the flesh containing the intellectual soul. Therefore we embrace the conclusion adopted by the fathers, and the cure that was introduced by them with reference to converts from the Nestorian heresy we hold as a law that cannot be shaken, and we do not have recourse to the conclusions that were adopted and introduced by the men of earlier days with reference to other heresies: but we decide that each conclusion has its own validity in the case of those with reference to whom it was introduced: for everything whatever that God's priests decide, this is a law. As the men of earlier times gave the gift of the Holy Spirit to the heretics who were devoid of His grace by means of the true baptism of the church, and those who came later filled up what was lacking in those that repented by means of chrism, so in the case of converts from the evil belief of Nestorius also the fathers thought that an anathema of the heresy ought to be sufficient to fill up what is lacking in them; and, whatever was determined by them to be sufficient, this we, as I said, observe as a law. For it is written; " the lips of a priest shall keep knowledge: and they shall ask law at his mouth, because he is an angel of the Lord the All-ruler." ^ And, since this course was approved by them, we believe that it was rightly approved, in accordance with the apostolic statute that says. "With the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth man confesseth unto salvation,"" according^ to the Lord's utterance that does not lie which says, " By thy words thou shalt be justified."^ This same principle one may see in the case of ordinations also. For the statute is that converts should be re-ordained, or should be ordained, when they come from those same heresies from which when men come over to piety after having received a spurious baptism from them they are per- ^ fected by the true baptism.' And I will show you clearly that ordinations also that were performed by the Arians were accepted by those who then presided over orthodoxy. Now in the times of the Arians there were two sections among our brothers who confessed the orthodox faith in this great Christ-loving city of Antiochus, because of the wrongful expulsion of Eustace; and each of the same sections had an orthodox bishop, one having Paulinus and the other Melitus: and, Paulinus having left the life here and uncanonically appointed Evagrius his successor (for he ordained him alone without having two or three bishops with him as the ordinance of the church com- mands), after Melitus' decease and his departure to God the other section lawfully and according to the 1 Mai. ii. 7. - Ro. x. 10. ^ Mt. xii. 37. ^ Cf. canons nominated Flavian, by the psephisnia of a large number of bishops, and Evagrius and Flavian disputed the throne;^ and, the ordination of Evagrius (who had also departed from the life here) having been repudiated as unsound, Theophilus who was bishop of the city of the Alexandrines writes to Flavian to accept the clergymen who had been ordained by Evagrius, speaking thus: "Therefore in your days allow those also who assemble apart by themselves to be united to the clergy under your religiousness, and to the whole people. If we are in communion with the devout Anastasius, bishop of the church of the Romans, and he gives the communion of clergymen to those who assemble by themselves, and communicates with them all, you understand to what the conclusion points. Therefore, seeing that the reverend Anastasius our fellow - minister has - communicated with them, I think it henceforth necessary that a concession on the ground of policy should be made to them, in order that the peace with our beloved fellow-ministers in the West may not be disturbed on account of anything that is wanting. Therefore I pray you to assume a salutary courage for a good end, in no point yielding to those who maintain the principles of strictness. Being an old man, you are well aware that our holy fathers cured more difficult matters than these, and that, adopting intelli- gent counsels, they became ' to those not under the 1 Cf. law as not under the law,'^ and checked things difficult to cure, and did not disturb the whole body of the church. Wherefore Ambrose also of blessed memory [received those who had received ordination from Auxentius his predecessor in Milan: and they received many others in the East who had not been ordained by the orthodox, lest, if these remained out- side, the heresy of the Arians should strike root, and the flocks perish, and the greater portion of the body of the nations be lost. In this way they treated both those of Palestine and Phoenice and many others; properly relaxing the strict rules of ordination for the sake of the salvation of the nations, so that after these thinors the universal concord mioht remain firm and P- 344 unshaken. Accordingly, since things that are serious and are incurable were by making a great concession as far as was possible healed without turning to evil, it is not difficult, but very easy, for these things to be now managed; since we have chosen by comparison the faults of the orthodox rather than the virtues of the Arians." Bearing these things in mind, show us that men who come from the heresy of Diphysitism, that is of the Nestorians, ought to be re-baptized, in order that we may be compelled to insist upon re-ordination also; or, if you do not show this, respect the laws laid down by the fathers, and orderly administration. For neither has Timothy of holy memory, who fed the church of the Alexandrines in apostolic fashion, ^ I Co. ix. 21. been shown to have been inconsistent with himself, as you vainly suppose/ When the people under the influence of ardent enthusiasm were unwilling ' even to look at those who had received ordination from Proterius, he, wishing to soften their sternness and to follow a course opposed to them, spoke to them in such words as these, " Regard them just as if they had received ordination from me "; or, as you say, " I have determined to give them ordina- tion " (for we will allow it to be thus): and, after seeing that by the application of this remedy the sternness of the zeal was softened, he did not in the matter of the reception of those who derived ordina- tion from Proterius transgress against the moderation of the canons, nor was he carried away by the violence of zeal; but he restrained enthusiasm by the cords of politic action; and he induced them to acquiesce in the established canons. And, when he accepted the repentance of the converts, he did not give them ordination at all, a thing contrary to the intention of the canons; nor did he recur to the strictness of the men of early days and their stern method. As to the principle that these things are rather matters of politic administration, and not inconsistent, the divine Paul also signifies It to be so in that he circumcised Timothy by reason of the policy which he adopted towards certain persons, as the Book of the Acts clearly states, saying: " And he took and circum- ^ Cf. pp. 181, 276. cised him, because of the Jews who were there in the country. For all these knew that his father was a Gentile."^ But to the Galatians, who had turned to the observances of Judaism, he writes as for the general profit, and as if laying down a law for the whole church, and says: " Behold I Paul say unto you that, if ye are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing." - And that this is so the saintly John will bear witness, who with wisdom fed the holy church at Constantinople, in that in the fifth book of his Praises of the apostle Paul he speaks thus: " For he desires those things only which bring- him advantages in God, even though it happened that these were contrary to the previous actions. For he was something versatile, and rich in expedients; not that he acted hypocriti- cally (far be it!); but he became everything which the necessity of the preaching and the salvation of men required: and in this also he imitated his Lord. For God too would appear as a man also when it was necessary for Him so to appear; and again in fire when the time required this; and at one time in the form of an armed man and a soldier; and at another in the guise of an old man; and at another in the breeze; and at another as a wayfarer; and at another He becomes human, and did not refuse even to die so. But, when I said that this was necessary, let no one think that there is reference to compulsion; but to His mercifulness only. And He sits sometimes upon ^ Ac. xvi. 3. - Ga. V. 2. a throne; sometimes again upon the cherubim. But all these things He did in accordance with the sub- servient dispensations. For this reason He said through the prophet also, ' I have multiplied visions; and through prophets I have made myself like.' [Here follows the citation given at ff I give such variations only as are nearer to the original, which are as follows: 1. 5 ' Paul, who imitated his Lord, have been condemned. He becomes now a Jew, now as one not under the law; now one who keeps '; 1. 1 2 om. ' again'; 1. 19' For this reason he now supports the law, now subverts'; 1. 9 ' For this the man of professional skill does '.] For those that are diseased in soul require treatment and cure no less than those that are sick in body: and, if you simply offer them everything, the cause of their salvation will be ruined."^ Holding this same opinion, the holy Theophilus also in the letter to Flavian, which we mentioned shortly before, speaks thus: " Therefore carry out this policy boldly. If the Apostle ' became to them that were without law as without law, beine not without law to God, but under the law of Christ,' and ' became everything to every man that he might by all means save some,' "^ the reception of those who assemble apart according to the rank which they hold does not steal away your reputation,^ but rather indeed in- creases it; nor yet are you acting inconsistently when the urgency of the case compels the adoption of a ^ P. G. xlix. 498, 499. ^ I Co. ix. 21, 22. ^ vTr6Xr}i{/Ls. policy of concession for the sake of profit. You know that the blessed Paul also, looking to what was of advantage, circumcised Timothy; but puts the Gala- tians, who were circumcised, to shame, in that he writes, 'If ye are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.'^ And, among wise men, he does not appear to be inconsistent, but to be acting in a politic manner towards living men, while healing troubles that occur with great profit." But perhaps when you hear these things you will say, " Who is there among orthodox bishops who received those who assembled at Chalcedon, or rather those who succeeded to their sees, upon repentance? " But I as against this will bring before you a scriptural law which shows how the God of repentance accepts and justifies a sudden conversion to virtue, such as has now taken place in the countries of the East, where all by the divine counsel under behest from above have cast forth and banned the heresy of the duality of the natures with definite anathemas, and have in pure fashion confessed the faith of the fathers, which is pure from all corrupt mixture and alien addition. When in old times the Jews had lapsed, and had fallen into the pits of idolatry, and had so much neglected the law of their fathers that even the places for the performance of the priestly service that was commanded by Moses were no longer maintained, then Hezekiah was established as king, and, his mind having been en- ^ Ga. V. 2. lightened by God, he wished to sacrifice the passover according to the law, and according to the law he f- 349- commanded that Aaron's sons only should offer the sacrifices, as is said in the Book of the Priests: " And they shall kill the calf before the Lord, and the priests Aaron's sons shall bring the blood near, and pour it out all round by the side of the altar that is before the doors of the tent of witness. And they shall flay the burnt-offering, and cut his limbs in pieces." ^ But at that time, since the priests were too few,'^ contrary to the intention of the law, Levites also were brought forward together with Aaron's sons to perform the service: and the passover was celebrated without the purification of the whole people having been strictly carried out. And God accepted the pleasant savour, having had regard to the completeness of the repent- ance of their hearts, though it was thought to be de- fective in the matter of lack of faith. But it is well also to recite to you the actual words of the Holy Spirit, which are written as follows, in the second part of the Book of Chronicles: " And the priests received the blood from the hand of the Levites, by reason of the numbers of the congregation, and they were not sancti- fied. And the Levites had the charge of sacrificing the passover, for everyone who could not be sanctified to the Lord, by reason of the multitude of people from Ephraim and from Manasseh, and from Issachar and 1 Le. i. 5, 6. - 12,168 " But, since the priests were at that time too few." from Zebulon, and they were not sanctified; but they even ate this passover contrary to the scripture. And Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, ' The good Lord God be propitious toward every heart that has turned in sincerity to seek the Lord God of their fathers, and not according to the purification of the holy things.' And the Lord hearkened to the voice of Hezekiah, and healed the people."^ Observe clearly the reason for which God accepted such repentance, as stated in the divine scriptures; because they had prepared their hearts to seek the Lord God of their fathers. And even after the coming of Christ in the flesh one may see that this happened in the church also. Socrates, who wrote the Church History, related a similar thing in the seventh book and the second chapter; and he writes thus: " At Synada, a city of Phrygia Pacatiana, a certain Theodosius was bishop, who vigorously persecuted the heretics of the religious party of the Macedonians, of whom it contained many, expelling them not only from the city, but from the country-districts also. And this he did although it is not the practice of the church of the orthodox to persecute; and not out of zeal for the right faith, but because he ministered to the passion of avarice, and was desirous of amassing gold from the heretics. For this reason he set everything in motion against those who held the opinions of Macedonius, putting arms into the hands of the clergymen who were subject to Pa. XXX. 16-20. him, and using countless tricks against them; and he did not even refrain from putting them in bonds in law-courts: and especially their bishop, whose name was Agapetus, he harassed in various ways. But, since the governors of the country seemed insufficient for his purpose in the infliction of punishment, he betook himself to Constantinople, and asked for orders from the prefects/ And, while Theodosius was for this same reason spending time in Constantinople, Agapetus, the leader as I said of the religious party of Mace- donius, came to a good resolution. For he consulted with the whole of his clergy, and summoned the people who were under subjection to him, and per- suaded them to accept the faithj^ of the co-essentiality. And, having arranged this, he ran immediately to the church as fast as he could with a orreat multitude or rather with the whole people. And after conducting prayer he occupies the throne on which Theodosius was wont to sit. And, having united the people, and preaching from that time the faith of the co-essentiality, he took possession of the churches under Synada. And, these things having happened in this way, not long afterwards Theodosius arrives, bringing with him assistance from the prefect.'^ But, not knowing any- thing of what had happened, he made his way to the best of his ability towards the church. But, being driven from it by all alike, he again made his way to ^ v7rap)(0L. 2 The bracketed portion is supplied from anottier version: see text,, note 7. ^ e7rap;)(os. 21 Constantinople. And, when he was there in the presence of bishop Atticus, he bewailed his fortune as having been without reason driven from the bishopric. But Atticus, since he knew that the affair had turned out for the benefit of the church, consoled Theodosius in words, persuading him to embrace a retired life without anger, and taught him to prefer the common good to his own, while he writes to Agapetus to keep the bishopric without imagining that any annoyance would result from Theodosius' anger. "^ Tell us therefore in this case, my excellent man, what chrism or what laying on of hands, or what ordination, confirmed these proceedings. Or is it matter of previous knowledge that the uprightness of their heart, to use the words of the divine scripture," made these also genuine instead of spurious,^ and this though they had been converted from the stinking heresy of Macedonius which blasphemes against the Holy - Spirit, in the case of which the perfecting rite of chrism is in fact laid down as necessary for those who repent from it? But perhaps under the influence of a mis- taken feeling you will further bring up against us that you do not accept the testimony of Socrates who is a Novatian in heresy. But know plainly that especially in historical narratives even the statements of those that are such are accepted. For instance the holy Basil in his letter to Amphilochius cited the testimony 1 Socr. vii. 3. - Ps. cxviii. 7. ^ The word is corrupt: the other version shows this to be the meaning. both of Eusebius known by the name of Pamphilus and of Origen, who in doctrines are faulty, saying that they are trustworthy owing to their great experience. And Basil cited the testimony of those men to support doctrines: but we do so only for a statement of bare historical fact. But it is well that we quote to you the actual testimony of the holy doctor, which is as follows: " But, if Eusebius the Palestinian also is trustworthy in any man's eyes on account of much experience, we produce the same expressions from him too in the ' Difficulties concerning the polygamy of the ancients.' For he speaks thus, encouraging himself to deal with the subject: ' Inviting as a guide the holy God of the prophets through our Saviour Jesus with the Holy Spirit.' "1 Upon Origen also, a man who has not much that is sound in him in all his tenets concerning the Spirit, we now find that under the Spirit's direction he bestows praise in many of his comments on the Psalms. Follow therefore the statutes of the divine scripture, and the dispensations of the fathers of which they made use from time to time, under the influence of miore subtle consideration and being much concerned for the abolition of the divisions and for church unity. There is in fact no one who denies that heretics are base and split coin, and in need of the grace of the Spirit. But the educators ^ of the church supplied this want in many ways; in some cases by fresh baptism, in others by chrism, in others by those who repent ^ De Sp. S. 72. - Maithyai raze = fivcrTaytjiyoi. - merely condemning the impious belief by anathema, and renouncing the stain of heresy, and attaching - themselves to orthodox opinions. If you have recourse to what was approved by the men of earlier days, and say that the Holy Spirit must be given through chrism to converts from heresies, inasmuch as the heretics cannot give what they have not, it is time for you to have recourse to the other rule too and say that it is also absolutely necessary for them to be re-baptized, according to the opinion held by Cyprian. But it is very plain that we must follow the more recent precepts of the fathers, and the methods of cure which they introduced for each disease, and not issue commands out of presumption and pride, and lay down a law going beyond what seemed to them to be good. For " the Spirit bloweth where it listeth 'V as it is written, and it determines the regulations of the high-priests, and accompanies their sacred utterances. I am con- vinced that it was for this reason that in the Acts of the Apostles also, when Cornelius the centurion and those with him had with all their heart believed in the preaching of Peter the chief of the apostles, the Holy Spirit went in advance of the water, so that Peter said, " Can any man forbid water to these that they should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Spirit even as we? " " If you think Theodotus^ a man of strict practice ^ John iii. 6. ^ ^^.^ x. 47. ^ C/. Zach. Rh. v. 4; Evag. iii. 6; and see » because he recently introduced chrism in the case of the heresy of the Diphysites, know clearly that others also among those who were zealous against this heresy were afflicted with a madness that surpassed his in strictness. For instance a certain Cassian, who was a disciple of father Romanus who is among the saints, who after an approved fashion was distinguished in Palestine for ascetic life and excelled at that time in tens of thousands of gifts of the Spirit, caused many of the disciples to secede: and he betook himself to Skan- thin (?),^ and used audaciously and illegally to baptize converts from the Chalcedonian evil belief. About this same Theodotus, who went through tens of thousands of changes, and contradicted himself, and is led in different directions at different times like the teachers of the adverse party, I might have said much, which I pass over. For he further also adhered to the fatuities of John the Rhetor,^ who said that it was in His essence that the Word of God endured the saving cross and took upon Himself the passion on our behalf, and would not consent to call the one Lord and our - God and Saviour Jesus Christ of one essence with us in the flesh: a point which you also omitted in the preface ^ of the document that was published in which you make confession of faith, and thereby dealt us no small blow and eave cause of offence. Nevertheless, o just as I said, it becomes us to pass his affairs by in 1 14,601 " Skthys " (Scythopolis?). ' Cf. Zach. Rh. iii. 10. silence: for we do not draw a defence from the sins of others for propositions advanced by ourselves, nor do we take the weakness of others as a support to strengthen our own position, but we establish our own case by the good and invincible arguments that we have, adducingf the ordinances of the church and the dispensations of the fathers. As to this other statement of yours, i.e. that diffi- culty has been caused to your mind by the fact that the God-loving bishops who assembled at Laodicea call those who cleave Emmanuel into two natures Paulianists,^ you must on no account be alarmed by this. It is in fact a custom of the fathers to refer heresies to the roots from which they sprang by way of reducing them to something shameful. Hence they called the corruption of Arius idolatry, inasmuch as it exhorts us to worship a creature, and the witlessness of Sabellius they termed Judaism, inasmuch as it includes the three substances in one person after the Jewish fashion. But they did not on this account receive those who repented from these heresies as Gentiles or Jews, and men who have never been initiated. In consonance with this principle which I have just stated they also term those who are infected with the phantasmal tenet of Eutyches Manichees: not because they are in all respects enveloped in the nets of the Manichees, but because the fatuous idea of a phantasy is part of the vitiated conception of Mani, 1 Cf. and is derived from him. After this manner the holy Cyril also in writing against Theodore of Mopsuestia said, " ' Sodom has been justified more than you '; you have surpassed the babblings of the heathen which they uttered against Christ, ' reckoning the cross foolishness '; you have shown that the charges against Jewish arrogance are nothing," ' Therefore neither is anything shameful said by the saintly bishops who assembled at Laodicea, who called those who cleave the one Christ into a duality of natures after the ineffable and incomprehensible union Paulianists: nor ought we on this account to re-baptize those who repent from them like converts from Paul of Samosata. Thus much we have written to your affection as in a few words, lying as we are under a mass of many affairs, and not able, as we wished, to extend the refutation of your propositions,"' so as to cover a wider field of examination: but, since you have a right disposition, and are not subject to prejudice, even what has been written is enough. We have in fact dealt with each of them in no defective manner in accord- ance with our ability, quoting the testimonies of the God-clad doctors of the church.