Letter 2: Severus tells Solon that unusual ordination procedure should not undo a ministry rooted in orthodox faith and the church's good.

Solon already knows how to judge the Lord's wise providence, so Severus reminds him first of his struggle for the orthodox faith. From now on, he says, Solon must clothe himself in the unseen robe of the priesthood. Instead of the old ephod he must bear the cross of the Lord; instead of a linen tunic he must put on the many-colored tunic of the virtues. The struggles of the martyrs, and especially the witness of Thecla, should strengthen him. His true mitre and golden crown will be orthodox faith, purity, good character, sincerity, and bold preaching that stirs others to the same zeal. With such marks in place, Severus asks who can fault the unusual manner of Solon's appointment. The ordination was performed by many bishops acting together, and the point at issue is not the strict heart of the canons but the ordinary discipline by which a patriarch, metropolitan, or provincial synod usually ordains. That order has often had to bend in times of persecution. Basil himself, Severus recalls, was ordained with help from bishops beyond the province because local bishops opposed him through envy or Arian sympathy. Gregory the Theologian did not treat that as a fatal defect. Severus then turns the argument against Flavian and others who want to use procedural objections selectively. If they excuse disorder when it benefits their side, they cannot condemn it in Solon's case when the faith is sound. Nor is church unity produced by formula alone. A passing mention of the Henotikon, or an appearance of external agreement, cannot replace the actual confession of Christ. A bishop must stand in the faith of the church and protect the flock entrusted to him. For that reason Severus encourages Solon to stand firm, not to shrink under criticism. The ordination may have been an innovation in form, but it was not empty or lawless in substance. Solon has been set where he can serve the church, strengthen the orthodox, and teach with understanding. Let him therefore carry the priestly office as a cross, not as an ornament, and feed the flock with understanding.

If anyone who knows how to discern spiritually the dispensations of the Lord, who does all things with wisdom, will recall to mind your struggles on be- half of the orthodox faith, — And after other things. Henceforth clothe yourself in the immaterial dress of the priesthood, and stand firm. Instead of the ephod take upon your shoulders the Lord's cross; and in- stead of the tunic woven of fine linen and blue stuff put on the many-coloured tunic of virtues; and strengthen yourself by the struggles of the martyrs which extended p* 13- to blood. But assuredly the honourable in virginity and first of female martyrs, and skilled maker of these things, I mean the holy Thecla, will clothe you in such raiment to do honour to her vote concerning you. But the crown of the orthodox faith, and purity and good character, and sincerity and vehemence of preaching, by which others also will be stirred up to the same zeal, will be to you the mitre and the crown of gold and the fair-sounding bells. And you are girt with a girdle and a breastpiece, a solitary and unwedded walk in life. Wherefore also Christ shall lie upon your breast, the Word of God, who took flesh for us, who was typified beforehand by the robe and know- ledge and truth.^ When therefore things are thus ' Ex. xxviii. 4-35; Le. viii. 7-9. with you, who will dare to find fault with the innova- tion in the matter of your institution, when so many bishops with one accord canonically performed the ordination? That a patriarch or a metropolitan or the synod of the province ^ should according to custom ordain such and such a man is not a matter of the strictness of the canons, but rather of church disci- pline. But this discipline we see to have been often neglected in times of persecution. Take the holy Basil. Because the bishops of the province ^ were adversely disposed towards him, partly from envy, partly because they were attached to the madness of Arius, Gregory p. 14. the Theologian says that he was ordained by bishops outside the boundaries, writing thus in the funeral dis- course on him: [Here follows the citation given above, p. 9]. However, Flavian may be caught by his own wings. If he himself, and that when accused of heresy, formerly ordained someone in Germanicupolis, and snatched away an ordination that belonged to the metropolitan, let him not be annoyed when he has been treated in the same way, when on our side we have an advocate in defence of a similar act in the orthodox faith; and what can a man think could be a better advocate than this? This has the approval of the holy Gregory the Theologian also when he writes in this manner in the first of the conciliatory discourses, I mean that on the union of the monks, when certain men, perhaps like these, were thought to have intro- rapxi duced an innovation contrary to the law of the Church: " For for our part we received the heads also who were given to the severed part with joy, inasmuch as they introduced an innovation on behalf of piety and to help the right teaching which was in distress, and we did not turn away our faces as from enemies, but welcomed them as our brothers, who for a short time were at discord respecting the paternal inheritance, in a brotherly but not a wicked manner. And we did not praise them on account of the enmity: but we received them on account of the zeal. For separation for piety's p- 15- sake is better than vicious concord. And for this reason we made the loss our gain, silently removing by love the supposition that there was against us: and to this extent we changed the order of things, that the ofift should not follow the election, but the election the gift; and we made use of other men's hands in this matter, having been a little anticipated by the Spirit."^ From the citation it is possible to discern clearly that the innovation which was thought to have been intro- duced at that time was one similar to the present position, and that, while the election and the right of ordaining belonged to one set of men, others ordained, especially from his expression, "and we made use of other men's hands in this matter "; and above again, "who for a short time were at discord respecting the paternal inheritance." But he shows that those who had the right to elect and ordain, one among whom in ^ Or. vi. II. particular was the holy Gregory himself, concurred in the election with those who on account of zeal for the orthodox faith had once made an innovation, by uniting with those who separated and made the innovation, and accepting what had been done by them, in that they said, "and for this reason we made the loss our gain, silently removing by love the supposition that there was acrainst us; and to this extent we changed the order of things, that the grift should not follow the election, but the election the gift." If Gregory the Theologian, and that being orthodox, r ^^■ or rather a guide and teacher of orthodoxy, bore with and endured those who seceded from him out of super- fluous zeal, and accepted the things done by them by way of innovation, let Flavian, who is infected with heresy, either change his evil belief under teaching, and rejoice with us in the things done by us; or if he remains such as he is let him justly suffer annoyance, and put up with it, enwrapped as he is in the bonds of impiety. But. since there was also contained in your letter the question on what conditions it is right to adopt a union with those of the same opinions, it is • necessary to say this much. It is right to unite with those of the same opinions, when they are of the same opinions in everything. Putting aside the complete | union of the holy churches, since that needs a lawful \ concession on certain points, the man who privately wishes to be united with you must in everything seek the same ends; as Constantine also of God-lovinof memory proclaimed to the people before the church; the mention of the Henotikon only being passed over as superfluous: for, if it does not touch the stumbHng- blocks that sprang up at Chalcedon and separated the churches, what is the use of mentioning it? To the pious king this was necessary for the general union of the churches, since he was desirous of showing that the p- 17- king who preceded him also had before him the object of bringing into union those who separated on account of the synod at Chalcedon, and that he is not now the first to introduce this question into the churches, as if making an innovation. We for our part therefore have written these things out of our poverty, because you bade us do this also, giving us an example of a modest or humble disposition. But you will of your- self add things greater and better than these, inasmuch as you have already received from the Spirit together with the pastorate ability also to feed the flock with understanding