Letter 108: Severus says medical castration caused by illness can be a defense, while self-mutilation remains canonically punishable.
Severus of Antioch→Cassian, bishop of Bostra|c. 515 AD|Severus of Antioch|From Antioch, Syria|To Bostra, Arabia|AI-assisted
Cassian of Bostra; castration; physicians; clergy; canon law; Julian; Dorotheus
The letter distinguishes medical necessity from self-mutilation and folds the Dorotheus dispute into the same reply. Source id VIII.2; Brooks page 394; original Syriac source-text backfill remains pending.
In this one letter I answer all the letters Your Holiness has written at different times.
Among other matters: concerning the man whose genitals have been cut off, you are not right to say that the absence of his name from the proceedings against the impious Julian is enough, in my judgment, to acquit him. If a time of inquiry comes, we will certainly ask why such a charge was drawn up. Still, this principle must be observed: under the canon, it is a strong defense for him if he truly suffered this at the hands of physicians because of an illness that arose in him, and was not the destroyer of his own body. Self-mutilation is what falls under accusation and canonical punishment.
If the facts appear to be as described, then place him among the clergy out of kindness. You will not be relaxing the ordinances of the church in any way. Julian of the hateful name was deprived for other and greater reasons; this charge was added to them as an additional count, and even if it is false, it cannot help him. Since you have written to us about the gentle Dorotheus, you seem to have forgotten the points on which he gave us just cause for vexation. I made them known to Your God-loving Reverence in another letter, and for your full knowledge I have thought it good to include a copy of that letter here.
In this one letter I make answer to all those written at different times by your sanctity.
And after other things. As to the case of the man whose genital members have been cut off, you are not right in saying that the fact that his name is not mentioned in the transactions against the impious Julian is enough to secure acquittal in our eyes. In fact, if a time of inquiry come, we shall certainly insist upon saying why such a count was drawn up. But this principle must be observed, that according to the provisions of the canon this shall be a great defence for him, that he in truth suffered this at the hands of physicians, by reason of some infirmity that had arisen in him, and he was not himself his own destroyer: for this is what falls under accusation and the canonical punishment. If therefore this appear to be so, out of benevolence place him among the clergy: you will not be in any way whatever relaxing the ordinances of the church. Julian of the hateful name was deprived for other reasons greater than these: and this count was added to those by way of addition: and, even if it is not true, it cannot benefit him in any way. Since you have written to us about the gentle Dorotheus, it seems you have forgotten the points on which he caused us just vexation, which I made known to your love of God in another letter: and for your perfect knowledge I have thought good to insert a copy of that in this letter.
◆
In this one letter I answer all the letters Your Holiness has written at different times.
Among other matters: concerning the man whose genitals have been cut off, you are not right to say that the absence of his name from the proceedings against the impious Julian is enough, in my judgment, to acquit him. If a time of inquiry comes, we will certainly ask why such a charge was drawn up. Still, this principle must be observed: under the canon, it is a strong defense for him if he truly suffered this at the hands of physicians because of an illness that arose in him, and was not the destroyer of his own body. Self-mutilation is what falls under accusation and canonical punishment.
If the facts appear to be as described, then place him among the clergy out of kindness. You will not be relaxing the ordinances of the church in any way. Julian of the hateful name was deprived for other and greater reasons; this charge was added to them as an additional count, and even if it is false, it cannot help him. Since you have written to us about the gentle Dorotheus, you seem to have forgotten the points on which he gave us just cause for vexation. I made them known to Your God-loving Reverence in another letter, and for your full knowledge I have thought it good to include a copy of that letter here.
AI-assisted translation - This translation was produced with AI assistance and has not been peer-reviewed. See the 19th-century translation or original Latin/Greek below for scholarly use.
Latin / Greek Original
Original text not yet available in this corpus.
This letter still needs a Latin or Greek source-text backfill. The source link, when available, is preserved so the text can be checked and added later.