Letter 22: Theodore Studite, Letter 22; Greek heading: Τῷ αὐτῷ.

And once again we have thought it good to entreat your paternal holiness to apply yourself to what is for the common benefit and most advantageous. For the cause of our refusal of communion [the breaking of ecclesiastical fellowship] and the ground of the dispute is not directed against our pious sovereigns, as we have written before -- rather, to them belong honor and veneration [proskynesis], submission and intercession, as is owed -- but it is directed against the man who unlawfully crowned the adulterer, contrary to the word of the Lord; against the man who dared to become the agent and ratifier of so great an evil in the sight of the whole world. And so that what is being said may be the more plain -- not for instruction, but for a reminder -- we will, if you bid us, set down the very sacred prayer that accompanies the marriage crowning, and consider from it how this man, who declares himself blameless, spoke and fought against Christ himself, even though it is a daring thing to say, through his accursed mouth. For when Christ called him an adulterer who dismisses a wife lawfully joined to a man (and adultery, as you know, is a grievous sin, equal in force to that of a murderer, of one who corrupts males and of one who couples with beasts, of a sorcerer and an idolater, according to the canon of the divine Basil [St. Basil of Caesarea]), this man, presenting that adulterer at the altar in the hearing of all the people, dared to break forth in those profane words. And let us consider, father, I beg you, the fearful and monstrous thing; for it runs thus: 'Do thou thyself, O Master, send forth thy hand from thy holy dwelling place and join together thy servant and thy handmaid. Yoke them together in one mind, unite them into one flesh, these whom thou hast been pleased to join to one another; show their marriage to be honorable; preserve their bed undefiled; be pleased that their life together remain unstained.' Is this not a horror both to hear and to contemplate? How great here must we reckon the provocation of the Holy Spirit at such blasphemy, and how the holy angels too were stirred to wrath at such impieties! Or how did the earth not at once gape open and swallow up, as it did Dathan and Abiram [Numbers 16, swallowed by the earth for rebellion], the teacher of falsehood, who calls darkness light and attempts to drive Christ into self-contradiction? For assuredly, whatever the priest signifies below, this God also pledges to ratify, according to the great Dionysius [Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite]. But God, being long-suffering, bore with it, opening a door of repentance to the man guilty of the sin. Then, instead of weeping and mourning for such a man unto death, and instead of his being one to be spat upon and abhorred, an example to later generations of divine jealousy -- is he again to enter the church and again to be openly a priest? Then has he entered in as one who has done some good thing, and is Christ, perversely declared against, vanquished by him? And must this needs be spread through this man's public celebration of the liturgy into our whole church, and must all consent to such a deed? For what else, and not this, will come to pass? But God forbid. It seems indeed that henceforth, out of rivalry, such a thing will come to pass: let adulterers be crowned, and let those who crown them, as having achieved some great thing and as able to benefit the many and lead them into the same manner of life, be embraced by the many. But God forbid; for neither is that man a priest, nor are those who imitate him. Let no one be deceived in his case, on the ground that the one who committed adultery was an emperor; for the laws of God rule over all, according to what is written. Yet, even though he has done this most grievous thing, he still contends to make lawlessness pass for righteousness and, as the saying goes, to prove himself more holy than the Forerunner and Baptist [John the Baptist]. For while that man, reproving the adultery of Herod, died for the truth, this man both crowned and embraced unto death the second Herod, truly shown to be guilty of the same kind of adultery -- proclaiming, not in words but by the very deeds themselves, that John the Forerunner went astray, having reproved unseasonably and unlawfully, and having died for it. But God forbid; for the one was a champion of the law and a reprover of the abomination, while the other is a trampler upon the divine mysteries and one who joins together and seals up the unlawful union. And the one, even in dying, cries out, 'It is not lawful for thee to have the wife of Philip thy brother,' and in the person of Herod he cries aloud to the whole inhabited world that no such thing should ever again be dared; but the other, even to this very day, by the very deeds themselves cries out openly to the second Herod, 'It is lawful for thee to have Theodote the wanton as thy wife,' and in this man's own person he expressly commands men to commit adultery unto the end of the age, and that those who crown such people are to be priests. O daring heart! O contempt of the judgments of God! Why does not each one rather denounce the affair and separate himself from such a man, even as regards eating or company, unless he confesses his sin after being utterly excluded from all priestly ministry? But for this reason we beseech your godliness and the strict observance proper to our sacred habit [the monastic order] to sound such words into the ears of our pious sovereigns. For we believe that, if they should remove this man with the good pleasure of our most holy patriarch, the angels will applaud, all the saints will join in praise, the whole church too will rejoice, and there will also come to their dominion great addition of divine help from above, both in the overcoming of enemies and adversaries and in a peaceful and long life for them. And where, holy father, shall we place the sacred canons that bar him from exercising the priesthood? The first, which does not permit even the presbyter to feast at the wedding of a man marrying a second time, although that marriage is permitted by God. But if it is not the permitted marriage that this man feasted at, but the rejected and adulterous one, for thirty whole days -- and not only this, but because he also placed the victors' crowns proper to virginity upon adulterers and unclean persons -- of what would he be worthy? Deposition is perhaps too small a thing. But if this goes unpunished, then the divine things are a mockery and the canons are stale. Again, according to the second canon: that he who has fallen into some fault and has on that account been excommunicated, if he does not within a year struggle for his own restoration, his voice may no longer be admitted. But this man, after exceeding nine years, leapt into the church. And if he should say that he received permission from the one who preceded [the previous patriarch] and that the affair is blameless, why then did not the one who gave the permission himself perform the act of crowning? For it belongs to patriarchs in every case to crown emperors, not to any priest; for it has never happened. But it is plain that, since the danger of deposition lay against his very high-priestly office, finding this man eager (for he was a frequenter at the palace), he passed the danger on to that man's person -- if indeed it is even true that he gave permission; for we do not believe it, since he has assured both us and many others to the contrary. And if, again, he should say that he was not excommunicated by his predecessor, why then did he not serve the liturgy during the nine years? Why is he now, as he says, released by a synod? It is plain that the bound man is released, not the unbound. So that he falls into self-contradiction here too, being barred, inasmuch as he did not within the year, according to the canon, show himself innocent and openly receive his release -- if indeed there were any release for one wholly bound -- even if he should produce ten thousand false witnesses. These, holy father, are the things that frighten and constrain our heart. And because of these things, in order not to be in communion with him and with the preceding patriarch, when he was giving communion to the adulterer, I myself was shut up in the place where you are seated, while the abbot and the rest, together with the archbishop, were banished to Thessalonica. But God again gathered us together by your prayers; and even so we were not united with the patriarch in any casual way, except that he confessed that we had acted rightly. If, then, when the adultery existed and the transgression of the canons, we did not give way, by the power of God, how then now, when the empire is pious, shall we, for the sake of one deposed presbyter, give way and betray the truth, endangering our souls? By no means; rather, all things are bearable to us, even unto death, rather than to share in his communion and that of those who concelebrate with him, until he should cease from priestly ministry, just as in the case of the former man -- although the second is more grievous; for the predecessor never concelebrated with him at all. And there, indeed, it was improper to assemble, yet not so great an evil; but here it would be the deposition of our priesthood, if we should concelebrate. Let him be a steward; why does he also concelebrate unworthily? Has the supply of presbyters run out? But if it seems nothing to those who concelebrate with him, let them look to what they do. Let them spare our lowliness, since we acquiesce and have said nothing up to the present, but have exercised forbearance [oikonomia, prudent accommodation] during these two years since he entered, so that we may thus proceed more peaceably -- our good sovereigns, mediators and judges of what is just, lovers of those who speak boldly in truth, as their own honored mouth often declares. Let the priests act in priestly fashion; let them either persuade or be persuaded. But if there is nothing of the kind, but even our mere murmur is not to be borne, God watches over -- He than whom none is greater, whose fear alone is fearful, and the judgment seat from thence, before which we shall all stand to be called to account in all things. But we beseech your goodness, and as it were prostrating ourselves at your honored footsteps, we entreat and implore you to do mercy with us and a common benefit for our pious emperors themselves, and for the most holy patriarch and for the whole church -- not only for the one among us, but also for that throughout the whole inhabited world -- so that this one man may cease, to the glory of God, and that his church may not be troubled. But if not, then at least the second thing: that we be allowed to remain in the same condition, just as during these ten years. For as to the rest, even if there be ten thousand of them, hierarchs and priests and abbots in communion with him, it is no wonder; since they themselves also assembled with the adulterer, and no one said anything. These things God, through us -- even though it is a daring thing to say -- both entreats and addresses, and as you command.