Letter 49: Theodore Studite, Letter 49; Greek heading: Ναυκρατίῳ τέκνῳ.

Speak to me and recount to me on every occasion, my dearly beloved child, nothing superfluous or idly told, but something timely and seemly and conducive to the profit of the soul, just as you have done now. And I, praising your vigor, welcome also your advancing discourse, which you will adorn most of all if you are able to take up the studies of grammar; for he who holds fast to orthodoxy and wishes to contend against the heterodox must also have a share of power and experience in argument. For since those men, supposing that they possess something great by reason of their learning, vaunt themselves loudly, tickling the ears of those whose ears itch [cf. 2 Timothy 4:3], it is best for the right-minded not to be deficient even in the strength of argument, and to cast down their well-aimed siege engines [helepoleis, lit. 'city-takers']. So it is my desire that you be made strong, child. Yet I do not in every case wish for everyone what I wish for you, because each man is differently disposed according to his habit and what is profitable to him. You said that the brother Philip has fallen asleep [died], and Philon. And well done, well done, that both came to a good end -- not that the foretokens were blameworthy (for how could those be blameworthy who renounced flesh and blood for the world's sake and laid upon themselves the easy yoke of submission?), but that they attained the highest blessedness, having been persecuted for the Lord's sake, afflicted and pressed hard. And against these things there is no one who contends except those who have set aside the Gospel, the ill-named adulterer-faction [moicheianoi, the party that condoned the uncanonical second marriage of Emperor Constantine VI]. And as for Philon, let it be agreeable to halt the praise at this point; but as for the good Philip, his many right achievements, which you yourself have already recounted. And I, in addition to what has been said, marvel also at his guilelessness and integrity, his freedom from anger and from remembrance of wrongs, his readiness to feel compassion and his love of the brethren, his obedience and his attentiveness, and, to speak briefly, his freedom from passion, from which came also his readiness for compunction, his hatred of the world and love of God and his shunning of self-display. Tell, as you have already set forth, the man's abundance of tears, his love of his homeland [or 'of the fatherland'] and his love of following [discipline], and in dangers his combative and earnest spirit, wholly without grumbling, and the as it were ever-blooming abundance of virtues of his many-flowered soul. Well also stand the affairs of the steadfast Gaianos, who has passed through nearly every place where there is a dispersion of the brethren. And that they are in health, thanks be to God the Master; that they do not collapse under their afflictions, but rather are made manly, glory to Christ who strengthens them; that they are driven away, not even deemed worthy of shelter by certain monks, especially the Pandeminoi [a monastery/community at Pandemos near Constantinople] who have agreed together with one another in this -- do not be astonished. It is written: and a man's enemies are those of his own household [Matthew 10:36]. For did not the wretches reject Christ our God, who said these things? And indeed the son of thunder [the Apostle John, called 'son of thunder', Mark 3:17] says: he came unto his own, and his own received him not [John 1:11]. What then is the difference, if the one party did not receive Christ, the Redeemer of the world, and the other party did not receive those who for his sake and for the sake of his Gospel endured persecutions and imprisonments? It is nothing other than to crucify and to put to death. May the bond of lawlessness not be reckoned to them, but, as you have said, not bearing the offenses of those who are subject to them, and so that the light of truth may not be kindled for them, but that they may journey on in the darkness of ignorance, they send our brethren away, lest perhaps a holy word of truth and righteousness should become audible to them, that is, admonitory. It will not be, nor shall this counsel of theirs stand; but the word of God, which they have trampled upon, shall be spoken and shall be made firm forever. For heaven, he says, and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away [Matthew 24:35]. And against these things who is able to set himself in opposition, except the tyrant Satan and his prophets, who have ratified the adultery as a saving dispensation [oikonomia, ecclesiastical 'economy' or accommodation] for the Church of Christ -- they who are truly vain-minded and most hostile? We must turn our discourse to your questions. You asked why the divine Cyril [Cyril of Alexandria, d. 444] managed by dispensation not to separate himself from those of the East who in their diptychs [liturgical lists of names commemorated] commemorated Theodore of Mopsuestia, who was a heretic, since the doctrines of piety had most rightly and most timely been preserved among them. For so it is written, and he who comments on these matters, Eulogios among the saints, archbishop of Alexandria, in his treatise On Dispensation, of which we also inserted a use [a citation] in the work labored over by us specifically On Dispensation in general. The solution, then, he himself who recorded the matter has given (for it has not yet been stated elsewhere, and it is sufficient not to seek another; but for the sake of clarity let what we hold be in keeping with the same notion): namely, that of the dispensations made by the fathers, some were for a season, and others have a perpetual character. An example of the perpetual: that 'persons' [prosopa] were conceded in place of 'hypostases' [hypostaseis] by Saint Athanasius to the Italians [a doctrinal concession over Trinitarian terminology]. An example of the temporary [lit. 'for a season']: such as that of the Apostle concerning circumcision, that of Basil the Great concerning the Holy Spirit, such as also is now this of the divine Cyril -- things which, being done for a certain time, have nothing blameworthy, nor anything in any respect discordant and unlawful, but rather something relaxed and not exceedingly strict; for this is the dispensation that is for a season. For it is not possible for a physician to free the sick man too quickly from his disease, nor again to render at once an unbridled horse well-curbed or a dry shoot straight-cut, unless the one most experienced in such matters employs little by little his clickings of the tongue and his coaxings, his emollients and his calling by name. So also is it among the saints in their dispensations, as also with Cyril the great in this case; for he waited a little while for the slowness of the Easterners, or for their inclination not to regard as heretical the one who was truly heretical. For what else was there in the interval, since they were proclaiming the faith in an orthodox manner and in this very thing were anathematizing the one commemorated by them? -- since everyone who is orthodox in all respects anathematizes every heretic by his power [in effect], even if not in word. Then, when the complete understanding had been kindled in them, they were at that time joined to the saint equally in all things. Or do we not also plainly do the same? There are times when certain men who are of one mind with us differ from us in some respect, where there is not much that grieves or that departs from strictness, and nevertheless we accept communion with them, lest on account of some small matter, which can a little later be set right, we should lose the whole; and this is the mark of those who are skilled stewards [oikonomoi] of the mysteries of God, not of the unskilled. Such is the temporary management by dispensation of words and ways in judgment and truth and law, but not in lawlessness and falsehood altogether. Let the adulterer-faction not put forward their tongues here, nor let them suppose the guide to be one who casts off a cliff, nor the helmsman to be one who drowns, nor again the physician to be one who causes disease -- to whom they themselves have been made like, having joined in adultery with the adulterer, having yoked themselves with the adulterer-yoker [moichozeuktes, the priest Joseph who blessed the emperor's unlawful union], having joined in accusing God with the God-accuser, having joined in raving against the Gospel with the Gospel-destroyer, in dog-like fashion -- for so it is more fitting to phrase it. But where or how did the divine Cyril receive Dioscorus, the heretic of Alexandria, as the adulterer-faction say -- they who are darkened about the light, the accusers of the saints? Neither has it been heard, nor does their falsehood have any nature [any basis in reality]; because he [Dioscorus] is later in time than the divine Cyril. How then could the saint himself, who had obtained the things above the world [i.e. had died and gone to heaven], have received the man who was recognized as a heretic after the falling asleep of the saint, at the time of the robber-synod in Ephesus [the 'Latrocinium', the Second Council of Ephesus, 449] after the third and holy [council]? Thus they speak falsely, telling fables, in order that they may hunt souls that walk in simplicity. Therefore be skilled and be knowing in all things, that you may flee the serpent and those who speak with the serpent's voice, by whom very many indeed from generations to generations have been destroyed. As for your other inquiries (whether, if the bishop is not found to have been at the adultery-synod, but calls it a false-assembly, yet commemorates his own metropolitan who was found at it, in the case of a presbyter under the bishop who is orthodox -- whether one ought to have communion): I have answered also through other means, in the letters to Euodios, that yes, for the sake of dispensation, only provided that he does not concelebrate with heretics. For it amounts to nothing, the bishop being commemorated who is orthodox, even if out of fear of that one he commemorates his own metropolitan who is a heretic. When such a presbyter calls one even to an all-night vigil, one should go; and a church given by him should be taken; and when he comes to it, he should be permitted to celebrate the liturgy; or even to commemorate a dead man, an orthodox one however, should be allowed, and it should in no way be hindered that the one who has received it [the church] celebrate the liturgy in it. But if he commemorates a bishop who is a heretic, even if he calls him blessed, even if he is himself orthodox, one must abstain from the divine communion [the Eucharist], but from the common table, when there out of fear he commemorates, here perhaps one may accept him -- both as he blesses and sings psalms together with us -- provided only that he does not concelebrate with a heretic or with his own bishop or with any other, nor knowingly give communion. If anyone eats with the adulterer-yoker or with another heretic indifferently, one must guard against eating together with such men, even if they pretend to be orthodox; for they do not keep the command of the Apostle, who says, with such men do not even eat [1 Corinthians 5:11]. Further than this one need not inquire, asking with whom he who ate with the heretic ate, and with this man another, and from there to draw back the discourse [trace the chain] and withdraw from everyone. Such a thing is willful opinion and not of the saints; for thus far, he says, stand and you shall not pass beyond [cf. Job 38:11]. For did they not know how to investigate these things and to report them to us? But by no means. Therefore it is not good to move the boundaries which our fathers set [Proverbs 22:28]. But the man with whom we do not eat, neither must his gift be accepted, if indeed, having been taught once and twice, he remains indifferent and is not persuaded by us. I do not know whether one may take things from the guards [the prison-keepers], not as blessings but as necessities, or for the sake of dispensation; and the things from the others -- those, however, who shun eating together with heretics indifferently -- I do not know, unless perhaps by chance according to circumstance one may both receive and eat together with these also. But to give food and drink to such men and to the guards one need not discriminate, since one must share with every human being. But into the church of the lord Gregoras, our child, I do not dare to say that a presbyter of ours should celebrate the liturgy, because it was enthroned after the adultery-synod and was consecrated by one who concelebrates and has concelebrated with the adulterer-yoker through the arch-adulterer [protomoicheianos].