Послание 24. К Феоктисту, магистру 36

The fact that Your Excellency cares about our affairs according to his greatest piety was proven by the words conveyed by the most reverent abbot, as well as by the words now conveyed by our brother in response to sent statements and objections. For such a good disposition of yours for the common good, God, who distributes everything “by measure and weight” (Wisdom 11:21), will, of course, reward you even without our requests. But, sir, can there be more economia on our part than what we observed? For both I and the archbishop have until now avoided speaking, remaining silent, since there is “a time to speak and a time to be silent” (Eccl. 3:7), taking all measures to ensure that this matter does not come to light. But the One who judged judged and did not lie, who said: “There is nothing hidden that will not be made manifest” (Mark 4:22), so that even without our desire, by their very nature, these deeds could not for a long time seem like anything other than what they are. And now we, using oikonomia, affirm the following two provisions: either let the deposed one cease to officiate, and we will immediately enter into communion with the holy patriarch, which would generally be useful, or, if this is not accepted, we will remain as reserved as before, leaving the judgment on this matter to the Lord. And what is more than this, then, forgive me, it will no longer be oikonomia, but the guilt of lawlessness and transgression of the divine rules. For the limit of economia, as you know, is not to completely violate any regulation, and not to go to extremes, and not to cause harm to the most important thing in the case when a small relaxation can be made due to time and circumstances, so that in this way it is easier to achieve what you want. We learned this from the apostles from St. Paul, who cleansed himself and circumcised Timothy (Acts 21:26, 16:3), and from the Fathers - from St. Basil the Great, who accepted the offering of Valens and until the time did not proclaim the Spirit as God. But also up. Paul did not continue to purify himself, and Basil did not continue to accept gifts from Valens and call the Spirit God 38; on the contrary, it is clear that they were both ready to accept death for the truth. Thus, whoever adapts to the circumstances of the age does not deviate from good; for he rather achieves what he wants by yielding a little, like a helmsman who lowers the rudder a little in case of a contrary wind. And anyone who does otherwise deviates from the goal, committing a crime instead of adapting to circumstances. There are many examples of this; writing about them verbosely is a waste of time. As for your words, sir, that Chrysostom relaxed the apostolic rule about those who ordain and those who are ordained for money 39 in relation to those six bishops whom he deposed 40, then there was no violation of the rule, although it seems so, when he, having deprived them of all holy orders, allowed them only to receive communion from the altar. But let’s assume that he retreated and made some concessions; let those who wish to imitate him, and no one will hinder him; for he too is the mouth of God and a fellow member of the apostles; much is remembered about him even to this day, and no one argues about it. But this is not the case here: for the one who has married the adulterer again performs the sacrament, as if he had not done anything indecent, and, moreover, speaking not in some hidden place, but in the Catholic Church itself, as if being presented as a good example to the priests. And what does the pagan bigamy of Valentinian 41 seem to us? And is the one who crowned him declared a saint for this, and not a lawless one, if only he was crowned? And which of the then venerable Fathers conveyed in writing that Valentinian acted piously, having two wives, and that this should be done from then on? So many others, whose will is guided not by Divine law, but by human and reprehensible law, have done and, perhaps, will do until the end of the century. But the Church of God remained unharmed, although it was struck by many arrows, and “the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18). It does not allow anyone to do or say anything contrary to the established rules and laws, although many shepherds often went crazy, constituting great and numerous councils, calling themselves the Church of God, apparently caring about the rules, but in fact acting against the rules. Is it surprising if even now fifteen, perhaps, bishops, having gathered, recognized the deposed man as innocent on the basis of the rules for two reasons and allowed him to officiate? So, sir, a council is not just a meeting of bishops and priests, even if there were many of them, for it is said: “better is one” righteous man, “doing the will of the Lord, than a thousand sinners” (Sir. 16:3), but a meeting in the name of the Lord, for peace and observance of rules, and in order to bind and loose, not as it happens, but as it should according to the truth, according to the rule and according to accurate reasoning. Let those gathered either prove that they did this, and then we will be with them; or, if they do not prove it, let them cast out the unworthy, so that this does not serve to condemn them and is not passed on to subsequent generations. For “for the word of God,” according to its nature, “there are no bonds” (2 Tim. 2:9). And bishops are by no means given the power to break any rule, but only to follow the decrees and adhere to the former. I don't know if there is anything that is not defined by the rules and left unattended. For example, Saint Basil has a rule regarding a priest who has truly sworn that he will be content only with his own church and will never bring a gift to another 42; and there is a rule of the Council of Carthage regarding those who ordain those who have left the monasteries, that such are not allowed to officiate in another church except the one where everyone has a bishopric, and those ordained must be deposed 43 . If those who sin in such unimportant matters, which to many do not seem criminal in any way, do not remain unpunished by the judgment and decrees of God, then is it not much more so in the present case? It is not permissible, sir, it is not permissible - neither our church nor any other, to do anything contrary to the established laws and rules, because if this is allowed, then the Gospel is in vain, the rules are in vain. And each during his episcopacy, if he were allowed to do with his own as he pleases, would be a new evangelist, a different apostle, a different legislator. But no. We have a commandment from the Apostle himself that if anyone begins to teach or commands us to do something other than what we have accepted, other than what is written in the rules of the Ecumenical and Local Councils, he should not be accepted and should not be considered holy; Let us not utter the painful word that he spoke (Gal. 1:8). So, for us who are outside the world, there is no other duty than to achieve that and do that in which we can both exalt ourselves and compete. And if life goes on in this way, it will be good; if not, then it is more useful to be in exile and homeless and wandering around the heavens with all the sorrow and distress. So, may your God-loving soul, zealous for divine things, help us as much as possible! This letter and the next two were also written in 808, in the case of the steward Joseph. Those. adaptation to circumstances, laxity towards persons and leniency towards human weaknesses. St. Gregory the Theologian. Funeral homily for St. Basil the Great. Creations in Russian translation. T.IV. P.86 and 103. M., 1889. Life of St. John Chrysostom, written by Palladius. Chapter 15. Those. Emperor Valentinian the Younger (IV century). To Amphilochius. Rule 10. Works in Russian translation. T.VII. P.14. M., 1892. Council of Carthage rule 84. You might be interested in: