Letter 452: Theodore Studite, Letter 452; Greek heading: Νικήτᾳ ἡγουμένῳ.

The present letter, I think, is not untimely for your paternal holiness, not only because it fulfills the duty of love, but also because it makes known a certain grief that has settled upon our lowly soul; and, if you permit, attend to what is said. After the return from the conference of you, the holy fathers, in Akritas, I met with our brother Athanasius, recounting to him each of the things discussed in the Lord, and adding that the man of Medikion [the monastery] too commends Maximinus for that most excellent change of his, that is, his defense and confession. But he shook his head [in dissent], and when I demanded the cause of his dissent, he said: "In the apology which he composed, and which I myself read, he says that he partook, but did not commune, and that this was an economy [oikonomia: a prudent dispensation or accommodation] by way of a relaxation of strictness, but not a falling away from the truth." What is this, O most honored father? Does he not confess, so to speak in summary, that "out of sparing for my old age I destroyed my soul, having communed in the denial of the icon [eikon: the holy image] of Christ, and of the Theotokos [the Mother of God], and of all the saints; for this is precisely the iconoclast heresy [hairesis], and in this I was gathered together with the impious, and then, moreover, I remained until the end in my monastery unpersecuted, while our whole inhabited world was being shaken"? Does he not thus confess and weep over it, but rather utters those stammerings, and, as the one expounding [his case] says, that he even brings forward in his own defense a certain Dianius, one of the fathers, who did the same thing, whom, he says, Saint Basil received, just as also [he received] the father of Gregory the Theologian. O the just indignation both of our sacred high priest and of the whole confessing body! For if that was neither communion nor a falling away, what is the benefit of those men's struggles and contests, of their blood and their sufferings? And why was he himself censured? And why does he abandon the monastery? And why is he barred from the priestly ministry? O, and again I say it, of the divine indignation! For, holding the truth in unrighteousness, he supposes that the fathers too suffered the same as himself. Come then, let us examine this irrational argument: "I partook, but I did not commune." Accordingly, the renowned theologian [Gregory the Theologian] says somewhere thus: "He partook of the icon and did not keep it." He partakes of my weakness, so that he may both save the icon and immortalize the flesh; therefore he communes a second communion, far more paradoxical than the former. Behold, the word "I partook" has been declared to mean "to commune"; for partaking and communion are the same thing, the one named from the being partaken of, the other from the partakers being made to share in common. And so too the divinely inspired Apostle [says]: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of the Lord? For we, the many, are one bread, one body; for we all partake of the one bread." Behold, here too the light of the world [the Apostle] has shown that partaking is communion, and no one who is in his right mind would say that partaking is anything other than participation. As, therefore, the divine bread, being partaken by the orthodox, makes all the partakers one body, so indeed also the heretical bread, making those who partake of it communicants of one another, sets up one body opposed to Christ, and the empty-talker talks emptily in vain. But if [his plea is] that his mind, when he partook, was not in inner agreement with what was being done, this is rather all the more a denial, because, although knowing that he was acting monstrously, he nevertheless sinned with full knowledge, not fearing God who is able to destroy both soul and body by casting them into Gehenna, but fearing the one who for a time strikes the body. What advantage is there in joining together things that cannot be joined? Why does he suppose the saints who are his opponents to be his advocates? Already a mere nod of assent or of dissent is laid down by them as the fulfillment of the deed in confession and in denial, and they did not even admit dissimulation unto martyrdom merely for touching the sacrificial offering, not one offered to idols, nor even one privately sacrificed; and the examples are countless. What else, then, was there in the preceding persecution than this? The sacred patriarch was cast down, banished, confined in an obscure place; an anti-Christ-fighting rival on the throne, a synod of those who set aside [the faith], an anathematizing of the holy synod at Nicaea, a proclamation of the heresy that had of old fought against Christ, banishments of the holy bishops and abbots, of monks and nuns; blood poured out, untimely deaths, prisons, starvings, plunderings; and the more fearful thing, both seen and heard, the venerable icon of Christ outraged, trampled, [and that] of the Theotokos, of all the saints, and the churches and the altars demolished, the holy things profaned, given over to fire. These things being so, is not everyone who communed, that is, partook, of the poison-bearing bread a denier of Christ, an outcast, unholy, unless he be recalled through repentance? So stands the truth, and for this the martyrs were put to death, and all who held fast endured all things. "And as many as walk according to this rule," says the Apostle, "peace be upon them and mercy, and upon the Israel of God." For as to the case of Dianius and of the father of the Theologian, and any other such thing, it was a theft by means of a cunningly contrived document craftily devised by heretics, those holy men having been outwitted in their simplicity and having signed not out of any fear (far from it). Wherefore, as soon as they recognized the deceit, [there came] at once their recantation and their courageous defense. These things, holy father, if it is lawful for you, declare openly to the man, so that, knowing the truth, he may cast away that unjust writing and be ranked among the pious, even though he is an old man and has been censured and on that account has left the celebrated monastery; but if not, then at least pray for us, that we may have no communion in this matter with the man, if indeed he does not repent.