Послание 22. К нему же 30

Again, we considered it good to ask your fatherly holiness, so that you would diligently take up a generally beneficial work and serve it in the best possible way. For our refusal to communicate is not against our pious rulers, and the reason for it is not the love of strife, as we wrote before, but rather reverence, respect, obedience and proper reverence, but against the one who unlawfully married an adulterer, contrary to the word of the Lord; against the one who dared to promote and approve such evil before the whole world. And in order to more fully explain what has been said, not for teaching, but for reminder, if you allow, we will cite the sacred prayer that is read at the wedding of those married, and we will see from here how he - although he boldly said it - contradicted and resisted with his unclean lips, declaring himself innocent. For Christ calls an “adulterer” the one “who divorces his wife” who was legally married to her husband (Matthew 19:9); adultery, as you know, is a grave sin and equivalent to the sins of a murderer, a sodomite, a bestialist, a poisoner and an idolater, according to the rule of the divine Basil 31. He, having placed such a one before the altar, dared to utter his unclean words in front of all the people. Let's see, Father, I convince you how scary and obscene this is, for it says: “You Yourself, Master, send down Your hand from Your holy dwelling, and unite Your servant and Your maidservant; unite me in one mind, crown me in one flesh, even as you deigned to unite with each other; Show them an honest marriage, observe their immaculate bed, favor their immaculate cohabitation” 32. Isn't what is heard and what is implied scary? What kind of insult to the Holy Spirit must be supposed here with such blasphemy and at the same time the grief of the holy Angels with such slander? Or how did the earth, immediately opening up, not swallow up, like Dathan and Abiron, the herald of lies, calling darkness light and trying to present Christ as having fallen into contradiction? For what the priest says, God also unconditionally promises to confirm, according to the words of the great Dionysius 33. But He endured everything patiently, opening the door of repentance to those guilty of sin. And this one, instead of crying and sobbing to death and remaining excommunicated and rejected as an example of divine punishment for subsequent generations, again entered the Church and is openly a priest! So, he entered as having done something good, and Christ was defeated as having unreasonably condemned him. And this should, through his ministry together with others, spread throughout our entire Church, and everyone should approve of such a thing. For what else will happen if not this? But let it not be! In imitation of this, the following should soon happen: both adulterers will be married, and those who marry, as if they have accomplished something great and can thus benefit many and introduce this into custom, will be welcomed by many. But let it not be! For he is not a priest, and neither are those who imitate him. Let him not be deceived by the fact that the King was an adulterer, for the laws of God rule over everyone, as it is written. However, the one who committed this grave crime still tries to pass off lawlessness as truth and, so to speak, present himself as more holy than the Forerunner and Baptist. For he denounced Herod’s adultery and died for the truth; and this second Herod, who turned out to be truly guilty of the same adultery, married and kissed him to death, expressing not in words, but in deeds that St. John the Baptist seemed to be mistaken, inappropriately and illegally denouncing and being subjected to death. But let it not be! For he was a champion of the law and a denouncer of wickedness; and this one trampled on the Divine Mysteries, combined and sealed an illicit connection. Even after death he cries out: “You must not have a wife for Philip your brother” (Mark 6:18), and in the person of Herod he tells the whole universe that no one should dare to do the same; and this very deed, on the contrary, still says to the second Herod: “You must have as a wife” Theodotia the adulteress, and in his person openly commands people to commit adultery until the end of the age, and those who marry them to be priests. O bold heart! Oh, contempt for the statutes of God! Why does everyone no longer condemn this act and does not move away from such a person, either in food or in communication, until he confesses his sin, undergoing complete excommunication from all priestly service? Therefore, we ask your piety and accuracy in observing the sacred order to instill these words in our pious rulers. For we believe that if they curb it with the permission of our Holy Patriarch, then the Angels will praise them, all the saints will glorify them, and the whole Church will rejoice, and their power will receive a great increase from Divine help from above, with victory over enemies and adversaries and their peaceful long life. And what do we, Holy Father, do with the sacred rules that excommunicate him from the priesthood? The first, as we have already said, does not allow the presbyter to even feast at the second marriage, although this marriage is permitted by God. If he feasted for thirty whole days at a forbidden and adulterous marriage, and did not only this, but also placed the victorious crowns of virginity on the adulterers and the unclean, then what is he worthy of? Is it not enough, perhaps, to depose? If this remains unpunished, then divine objects will turn into a joke, and the rules will become nothing. According to the second rule, let us remind you that if someone has fallen into some crime and is excommunicated for it, if he does not take care of his restoration within a year, then his votes will no longer be accepted. And this one, after delaying for more than nine years, invaded the Church. If he says that he received an order from the primate and his action was impeccable, then why didn’t the one who ordered the wedding himself? Usually patriarchs crown Emperors, and not some simple priest; this never happened. It is obvious that when he (the patriarch) was in danger of losing the archbishopric itself, he, having found someone ready for such a thing - for this one moved at court - shifted the danger onto the latter’s head, if only he really ordered, which we do not believe, based on the testimony of you and many others. If he also says that he was not excommunicated by the previous patriarch, then why did he not serve for nine years? Why now, as he says, is it allowed by the council? It is known that bound, but not unbound, is resolved 34 . Thus, he contradicts himself and in this case finds himself bound, since for a year, as a rule, he did not prove his innocence and did not openly receive permission, if only a completely bound person could have permission, even if he presented a thousand false witnesses... Written in 808, also on behalf of St. Plato and on the same occasion as the previous letter. To Amphilochius. Rule 7. Works in Russian translation. T.VII. P.10. M., 1892. See Wedding sequence. About the church hierarchy. Chapter 7. In Russian translation. 1855. P.230. Economy Joseph was admitted to communion with the Church by a council of 15 bishops convened by Emperor Nikephoros, with the consent of Patriarch Nikephoros, in 806. You might be interested in: