Question I

GRATIAN. That anyone cannot be deposed or excommunicated by a heretic is easily proved. For every heretic either follows a heresy already condemned or fashions a new one. But he who follows a heresy already condemned makes himself a participant in its condemnation. Hence, when Acacius complained that he had been condemned by the Apostolic See without synodal authority, Gelasius writes against him, saying:

Acacius was not made the inventor of a new error, but an imitator of an old one, and therefore it was not necessary that new decrees go forth against him, but only that the old ones be renewed. And so I was made the executor of an old constitution, not the promulgator of a new one. For whoever falls into a heresy once condemned envelops himself in its condemnation.

The same, [in the epistle to the bishops of Dardania]. Our forebears, discerning by divine inspiration, necessarily took precaution that they not permit that which a synod, once assembled against each heresy, had promulgated for communion of faith and Catholic and apostolic truth to be mutilated afterward by new reconsiderations, lest an occasion be furnished to the depraved to assail the things that had been established medicinally; but, after the author of any insanity and his error had alike been condemned, they judged it sufficient that whoever should at any time become a participant in this error be bound by the principal sentence of its condemnation. § 1. Thus a synod condemned Sabellius, and it was not necessary that his followers afterward be condemned; but according to the tenor of the ancient constitution, the universal church considered that those who became participants either in that depravity or in its communion were to be rejected. Thus, by condemning Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, and Nestorius, the synod once held does not permit anyone thereafter to come to new councils—

Likewise Felix. Acacius was not the inventor of a new or his own error, so that new decrees should proceed against him, but mingled his communion with another’s crime. And so it was necessary that by the just balance he fall into that sentence which the author of the error had received together with his successors through synodal agreement. GRATIAN. Therefore, if that bishop fell into a heresy already condemned, being condemned by the ancient excommunication he was not able to condemn others. For one excommunicated is not able to excommunicate others. Hence Alexander II writes to Valerian, bishop and martyr:

We have heard that Henry, called archbishop of Ravenna, has attempted to excommunicate you. But because one excommunicated could not excommunicate you, absolving you and yours by apostolic authority, we command you never to be concerned about it. GRATIAN. But if from his own heart he fashioned a new heresy, from the time he began to preach such things he could condemn no one, because one already prostrate cannot cast anyone down. For the power of binding and loosing was handed over by the Lord to true priests, not false ones. For when he was about to say to the Apostles, “Whose sins you shall remit, etc.,” he first said, “Receive the Holy Spirit,” so that he might show evidently to all that he who does not possess the Holy Spirit cannot retain or remit sins. Moreover, no one receives the Holy Spirit except within the church, because he also creates that very unity through grace. § 1. Hence it was said only to those gathered into one, “Receive the Holy Spirit,” and only upon those gathered into one on the day of Pentecost did the Holy Spirit descend. But just as he is not received outside the church, so outside her he works nothing. Therefore, since, as the Apostle says, the Spirit petitions and the Spirit obtains, outside the church he causes neither petitioning nor obtaining. Hence the Lord, when about to say, “Whatever you shall ask, etc.,” first said, “If two of you shall agree upon earth, etc.” And again: “Wherever two or three shall have been gathered in my name, there am I also in their midst,” plainly showing to all that he does not dwell in the hearts of those who, having followed the singularity of pride, tear themselves away from the joining together of Christ’s body. But in those in whom Christ does not dwell, the Holy Spirit, fleeing the rifts of minds, has no place. Therefore, since remitting or retaining sins, excommunicating or reconciling, is the work of the Holy Spirit and the power of Christ, it appears that those who are outside the church can neither bind nor loose, neither by reconciling restore anyone to ecclesiastical communion nor by excommunicating deprive anyone of her fellowship, of which they themselves—polluted by heresy or schism or marked by a sentence—are proved to be entirely deprived. Hence, when the Lord gave all the disciples an equal power of binding and loosing, he promised that he would give Peter, for all and before all, the keys of the kingdom of heaven, saying: “To you I shall give the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” Therefore, whoever shall have been alien from the unity of the church—which is understood through Peter—cannot execrate and is not able to consecrate; he does not possess the power of excommunication or reconciliation. Hence the Apostle, when he wrote that the Corinthian fornicator was to be excommunicated, said: “I indeed, absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged as though present him who has acted thus: in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you and my spirit have been gathered together, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to hand such a person over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh.” In this, showing the form of excommunication, he taught that no one except a faithful person is to be marked, and only by a faithful person. For only a faithful person is able to work anything in the name of the Lord and with his power cooperating, since no one can say, “The Lord Jesus,” except in the Holy Spirit. Likewise, since the Lord prohibits the lamb from being eaten outside the Catholic Church, those who are alien from her by profession of faith are not repelled from her participation, which they abandoned by their own choice, but are permitted to depart, like those who, hearing, “Unless you shall have eaten the flesh of the Son of Man and drunk his blood, etc.,” said, “This saying is hard, and who can hear it?” and so went backward, not repelled but permitted to depart. Hence also the Apostle, when treating of those to be excommunicated, first said, “If any brother”; but concerning unbelievers he added, saying, “The Lord will judge those who are outside.” But he entrusted to us judgment concerning those who are within. Now, just as from the fact that the Apostle said “brother,” and from the things he added concerning the faithful and unbelievers, it appears that only a faithful person is to be excommunicated, so from the fact that this is written only to the faithful—or rather, because just as he who blesses is greater than the person who is blessed, so he who curses by office is greater than the person who is cursed—it is clearly established that he who withdraws from the integrity of the Catholic faith possesses no power of cursing or blessing. For he is not able to curse a Catholic, as one superior to himself; he cannot give a sentence against one alien from the faith, as against one equal to himself. But these things that have been said concerning heretics, schismatics, or excommunicated persons—namely, that they do not possess the power of binding or loosing—are proved by the authorities of many. For Pope Leo says, [sermon III on the anniversary of his elevation, and sermon II on the birthday of the Apostles]:

Therefore, Peter’s privilege remains wherever judgment is rendered from his equity, and there is neither excessive severity nor remission where nothing will be loosed or bound except what blessed Peter shall either have bound or loosed.

Likewise Augustine on John, [tractate 50, at c. 12]. “Whatever you shall have bound upon earth will be bound also in heaven.” If this was said to Peter alone, the church does not do this. But if it is also done in the church—as surely the things bound on earth are bound also in heaven, and the things loosed on earth are loosed also in heaven, because when the church excommunicates, the excommunicated person is bound in heaven; when the church reconciles, the reconciled person is loosed in heaven—if, therefore, this is done in the church, Peter, when he received the keys, signified the holy church. If the good in the church were signified in the person of Peter, the evil in the church were signified in the person of Judas.

Likewise Ambrose, [at c. 5 of Luke]. The ship that has Peter is not disturbed; that one which has Judas is disturbed. Although the merits of many disciples were sailing there, nevertheless the faithlessness of the betrayer was still agitating it. Peter is in each, but he who is firm in his own merits is disturbed by those of another. Therefore, let us beware of the faithless man; let us beware of the betrayer, lest through one man many of us be tossed upon the waves. Therefore, this ship in which prudence sails is not disturbed; faithlessness is absent, faith prevails. For how could that ship be disturbed over which he presided in whom is the foundation of the church? Disturbance is therefore there where faith is small; security is where love is perfect. Finally, although others are commanded to let down their nets, to Peter alone it is said: “Put out into the deep,” that is, into the depth of disputations. For what is so deep as to see the depth of riches, to know the Son of God, and to take up the profession of divine generation? Although the human mind cannot comprehend it fully by the investigation of reason, nevertheless the fullness of faith embraces it.

The same, [in the same place, a little below]. There is another apostolic kind of fishing, by which kind the Lord commands Peter alone to fish, saying: “Cast in a hook, and take the fish that first comes up.”

Likewise Pope Lucius to all bishops. Therefore, do not withdraw from the right faith and the apostolic path on account of any disturbance, knowing that, according to the sentence of the Savior, blessed are those who suffer persecution on account of justice. This is the living tradition of the Apostles; this is true charity, which is to be preached and especially loved and cherished, and held confidently by all; this holy and apostolic mother of all churches, the church of Christ, which by the grace of almighty God is proved never to have erred from the path of apostolic tradition, nor has succumbed to being depraved by heretical novelties, but, as in the beginning she received the rule of the Christian faith from her founders, the chief Apostles of Christ, remains unblemished in faith.

Likewise Sixtus, [Pope Sixtus II to Bishop Gratus, epistle 1]. I remember that I preside under the name of that church whose confession was glorified by the Lord Jesus Christ, and whose faith never cherishes any heresy but indeed destroys them all. But I understand that it is not lawful for me to act otherwise than to expend all my efforts upon that cause in which the salvation of the universal church is assailed.

Likewise Pope Eusebius, [to the bishops of Tuscany, epistle 3]. In the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved without stain.

Likewise Innocent, [Pope Innocent to the bishops of the Council of Milevis, epistle 26]. Whenever a matter of faith is debated, I judge that all our brothers and fellow bishops ought to refer only to Peter—that is, to the authority of his name and honor—that which can benefit all the churches throughout the whole world, just as your Charity has now referred it.

Likewise Pope Julius, [to the eastern bishops, epistle 1]. In consideration of our office, it is not for us to dissemble; there is no freedom to be silent for us, upon whom a greater zeal for the Christian religion lies than upon all others.

Likewise Jerome, [to Damasus in the exposition of the creed]. This is the faith, most blessed Pope, that we learned in the Catholic Church and that we have always held. If perhaps something has been set forth in it less skillfully or too incautiously, we desire to be corrected by you, who hold both the see and the faith of Peter. But if this confession of ours is approved by the judgment of your apostolate, whoever wishes to blame me will prove himself unskilled, or malevolent, or even not Catholic but a heretic. Likewise: § 1. The holy Roman church, which has always remained immaculate, by the Lord’s providence and with the blessed Apostle Peter bringing aid, will remain in the future without any assault by heretics, and will persist firm and immovable at every time.

Likewise Marcellus to all the bishops established throughout Antioch, [epistle 1]. We ask you, most beloved brothers, that you teach and think nothing other than what you have received from blessed Peter the Apostle and the other Apostles and Fathers. For he is the head of the whole church, to whom the Lord says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.” For his see was first among you, which afterward, at the Lord’s command, was transferred to Rome, over which, with divine grace giving support, we preside on this present day. But if your see of Antioch, which was formerly the first, yielded to the Roman See, there is no see that is not subject to its dominion. Nor ought you to deviate from its ordering, to which, by the ordering of divine grace, all greater ecclesiastical affairs have been commanded to be referred, so that they may be ordered regularly by that see from which they took their beginnings.

Likewise Bishop Leo to Dioscorus, Bishop of Alexandria, [epistle 79, otherwise 81]. Since the most blessed Apostle Peter received the primacy from the Lord, and the Roman church remains in his institutions, it is impious to believe that the holy bishop Mark, his disciple, who first governed the church of Alexandria, confirmed the decrees of his traditions by other rules, since without doubt disciple and master were of one spirit from the same fountain of grace, and the ordained could hand down nothing other than what he received from the ordainer.

Likewise Gregory. If Peter deliberately struck the ear, he taught that they ought not to have in appearance the ear that they did not have in ministry. But the good Lord both restored hearing even to him, according to the prophetic sayings, and showed that even those who have been wounded in the Passion of Christ can be healed if they are converted, because every sin is washed away in the ministry of faith. Peter, therefore, takes away the ear. Why Peter? Because he is the one who received the keys of the kingdom of heaven. For he condemns who also absolves, since the same man obtained the power of binding and loosing. Moreover, he takes away the ear of one who hears badly; with the spiritual sword he takes away the inner ear of one who understands badly. Let us beware lest anyone’s little ear be taken away. The Passion of the Lord is read: if we refer the weakness of his bodily Passion to his divinity, the little ear is cut off, and it is cut off by Peter, who did not permit Christ to be considered a prophet, but taught that he should be designated the Son of God by a faithful confession.

Likewise Cyprian, [in the treatise On the Unity of the Church]. The Lord speaks to Peter: “I say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.” Upon one man he builds the church, and although after his resurrection he grants equal power to all the Apostles and says, “As the Father has sent me, I also send you. Receive the Holy Spirit,” nevertheless, in order to manifest unity, by his authority he arranged that the origin of that same unity should begin from one man. The other Apostles assuredly were what Peter was, endowed with an equal partnership both of honor and of power. But the beginning proceeds from unity, so that the church of Christ may be shown to be one; this one church the Holy Spirit also designates in the Song of Songs from the person of Christ the Lord, saying: “One is my dove, my perfect one; one is she to her mother, chosen by her who bore her.” Blessed Paul the Apostle also teaches this unity of the church and reveals the sacrament of unity, saying: “One body and one spirit; one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God.” We ought firmly to hold and vindicate this unity, especially we bishops who preside in the church of God, so that we may prove the episcopate itself also to be one and undivided. Let no one deceive the brotherhood; let no one corrupt the truth of the faith by faithless prevarication. § 1. The episcopate is one, a share of which is held by each for the whole. And the church is one, which by an increase of fruitfulness is extended more widely into a multitude, just as there are many rays but one light, and there are many branches of a tree but one strength founded upon a tenacious root, and just as from one fountain very many streams flow down; and although their numerousness appears diffused by the abundance of overflowing plenty, unity is nevertheless preserved in the source. Tear a ray of the sun from its body: unity admits no division. Break a branch from the tree: it will not be able to put forth fruit. Cut off a stream from the fountain: once cut off, it dries up. So too the Lord’s church, flooded with light, extends its rays throughout the whole world; nevertheless, it is one light that is diffused everywhere, nor is the unity of the body divided. By the abundance of her fruitfulness she extends her branches throughout the whole earth, pours forth her flowing streams, and spreads more widely; nevertheless, there is one head, and one origin, and one mother rich in fruitfulness. The bride of Christ cannot be defiled: she is incorrupt and chaste. She knows one house; with chaste modesty she guards the sanctity of one bedchamber.

The same, [in the same place, a little below]. He is an alien, he is profane, he is an enemy: he cannot have God as Father who does not hold the unity of the universal church. The same: § 1. When the Lord urged unanimity and peace upon his disciples, he said: “I say to you that if two of you agree upon earth concerning anything whatever that you ask, it will be granted to you by my Father, who is in heaven. For wherever two or three have been gathered in my name, I am with them,” showing that very much is granted not to the multitude but to the unanimity of those praying. “If two,” he says, “of you agree upon earth”: he placed unanimity first; he set the concord of peace before it, and taught that we should agree faithfully and firmly. But how can he agree with anyone who does not agree with the body of the church itself and with the universal brotherhood? And how can two or three be gathered in the name of Christ who, it is established, are separated from Christ and from his Gospel?

Likewise Jerome. All things considered, I think that I do not rashly say that some are in the house of God in such a way that they themselves are also that same house of God, which is said to be built upon the rock, which is called the one dove, the beautiful bride without wrinkle and blemish, the enclosed garden, the sealed fountain, the well of living water, and the paradise with the fruit of apples; this house also received the keys and the power of loosing and binding. If anyone despises this house when it corrects and reproves, “let him be to you,” he says, “as a gentile and a publican.” Of this house it is said: “Lord, I have loved the beauty of your house and the place where your glory dwells”; and: “Who makes those of one mind dwell in a house”; and: “I rejoiced in the things that were said to me: We shall go into the house of the Lord”; and: “Blessed are those who dwell in your house; they will praise you for ages of ages.”

Likewise Jerome. Let us not bring deceitful scales on which we weigh what we wish according to our judgment, saying, “This is grave; this is light”; but let us bring the divine scale from the Holy Scriptures, as from the Lord’s treasuries, and upon it let us weigh what is graver. At the time when the Lord showed that earlier offenses were to be guarded against by recent examples of penalties, an idol was both fashioned and worshiped, a prophetic book was burned by the wrath of a contemptuous king, and a schism was attempted: idolatry was punished by the sword; the burning of the book, by slaughter in war and captivity in a foreign land; schism, by the opening of the earth, its authors being buried alive and the others being consumed by heavenly fire. Who now would doubt that the deed which was punished more gravely was the more criminal?

Likewise Gregory in the Morals, [book 35, c. 6]. Because the truth is beheld from the Catholic Church alone, the Lord declares that with himself is the place from which he may be seen. Moses is placed upon the rock so that he may contemplate the face of God, because unless one holds the solidity of faith, he does not recognize the divine presence. Of this solidity the Lord says: “Upon this rock I will build my church.” § 1. For she alone is the one through whom the Lord gladly receives sacrifice; she alone is the one who confidently intercedes for those who err. Hence the Lord also commanded concerning the offering of the lamb, saying: “In one house you shall eat it, and you shall not carry any of its flesh outside the doors.” For it is eaten in one house because in the one Catholic Church the true offering is sacrificed to the Redeemer. The divine law forbids any of its flesh to be carried outside because it forbids what is holy to be given to dogs. She alone is the one who guards those placed within her by the strong bond of charity. Hence also the water of the flood indeed raised the ark to higher places, but destroyed all whom it found outside the ark.

Likewise Ambrose, [in the funeral oration On the Death of His Brother]. Satyrus summoned a bishop to himself and thought no grace true except the grace of the true faith; and he inquired of him whether he was in agreement with the Catholic bishops—that is, with the Roman church. And perhaps in that region the church of that locality was in schism. For Lucifer had divided himself from our communion, and although he had gone into exile for the faith and had left heirs of his faith, nevertheless Satyrus did not think that faith existed in schism. For although they held faith toward God, nevertheless they did not hold it toward God’s church, whose limbs, as it were, they allowed to be divided and whose members to be torn apart. For since Christ suffered for the sake of the church, and the church is the body of Christ, faith does not seem to be exhibited toward Christ by those by whom his Passion is made void and his body is torn apart. And so, although he owed a debt of gratitude and feared to sail as a debtor of so great an obligation, nevertheless he preferred to cross over to the place where he could safely discharge it. For he judged that the payment of gratitude to God lay in disposition and faith; and indeed, as soon as freer access to the church was first available, he did not delay to fulfill it, and he both received the desired grace of God and preserved it once received.

Likewise Bede on the Epistle of John, [the second, sole chapter]. “Everyone who departs and does not remain in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who remains in the doctrine of Christ has both the Son and the Father. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house, nor say ‘Hail’ to him. For he who says ‘Hail’ to him shares in his evil works.” What John here taught in words about avoiding schismatics or heretics, he also displayed in deeds. § 1. For his hearer, the most holy and most valiant martyr Polycarp, bishop of the Smyrnaeans, relates of him that at one time, when he had entered the baths at Ephesus for the sake of washing and had seen Cerinthus there, he immediately leapt out and departed without washing, saying: “Let us flee from here, lest the very baths in which Cerinthus, the enemy of truth, is washing should collapse.” This same Polycarp also, when he once encountered Marcion saying to him, “Do you recognize us?” answered: “I recognize the firstborn of Satan.”

Likewise Jerome, [to Damasus]. Since the ancient East, dashed against itself by the fury of its peoples, tears the Lord’s seamless tunic, woven from above, piecemeal into fragments, and foxes lay waste Christ’s vineyard, amid broken cisterns that have no water it is difficult to understand where the sealed fountain and that enclosed garden may be; therefore I judged that I should consult the chair of Peter and the faith praised by the apostolic mouth, now requesting food for my soul from the place from which formerly I received the garments of Christ. Nor indeed could the vastness of so great a liquid element and the intervening breadth of lands prevent me from seeking the precious pearl. Wherever the body shall be, there too the eagles will be gathered. Though the patrimony has been squandered by wicked offspring, among you alone the uncorrupted authority of the fathers is preserved. There the earth, with its fertile turf, returns the purity of the Lord’s seed in hundredfold fruit; here the grain buried in the furrows degenerates into darnel and oats. Now in the West the sun of justice arises; but in the East that Lucifer who had fallen has placed his throne above the stars. You are the light of the world; you are the salt of the earth; you are vessels of gold and silver; here the earthen vessels await the iron rod and eternal burning. Therefore, although your greatness frightens me, your kindness nevertheless invites me.

From the priest I, a sacrificial victim, ask salvation; from the shepherd I, a sheep, demand protection. Let envy of the Roman summit depart; let ambition recede. I speak with the successor of the fisherman and the disciple of Christ. Following no reward except Christ, I am joined in communion with your Beatitude—that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that the church was founded upon that rock. Whoever shall have eaten the lamb outside this house is profane. If anyone shall not have been in Noah’s ark, he will perish when the flood reigns. And because, on account of my crimes, I migrated to that desert which bounds Syria along the adjoining frontier of the barbarians, I cannot, with so many intervening spaces, always seek the holy thing of the Lord from your Holiness; and therefore I follow your colleagues, the Egyptian confessors, and conceal myself, a little boat, beneath ships of burden. I do not know Vitalis; I reject Meletius; I am ignorant of Paulinus. Whoever does not gather with you scatters—that is, he who is not Christ’s is Antichrist’s.

Likewise Ambrose, [in the commentary on Luke, c. 9]. What house is more worthy of the entrance of apostolic preaching than the holy church? Or who appears more worthy to be preferred to all than Christ, who was accustomed to wash the feet of his guests, and does not permit any whom he has received into his house to dwell there with polluted footsteps, but, although stained by their former life, deigns nevertheless to cleanse them for the remainder of their course? He, therefore, is the only one whom no one ought to abandon, no one ought to exchange, to whom it is well said: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we believe.” Do you see the executor of the heavenly precepts, who, because he did not change his lodging, merited the fellowship of a heavenly dwelling? Therefore, it is commanded that the faith of the church be sought first; if Christ is an inhabitant in her, without doubt she is to be chosen. But if a faithless people or a heretical teacher deforms the dwelling, communion with heretics is judged to be avoided and the synagogue to be fled; the dust of the feet is to be shaken off, lest, when the barren dryness of faithlessness is crumbling away, the footprint of your mind be polluted as though by dry and sandy soil. For just as the preacher of the Gospel ought to take upon himself the bodily infirmities of the faithful people, according to what is written, “Who is weak, and I am not weak?” so, if there is any church that rejects the faith and does not possess the foundations of apostolic preaching, it is to be abandoned lest it be able to sprinkle any stain of faithlessness. This the Apostle also asserted plainly, saying: “Avoid a heretical man after one correction.”

Likewise Bede on Matthew, [in the homily for the feast of the Apostles Peter and Paul, on Matthew c. 16]. Whoever shall in any way have separated themselves from the unity of the faith or fellowship of the Apostle Peter can neither be absolved from the bonds of sins nor enter the gate of the heavenly kingdom.

Likewise Jerome on the prophet Amos, [on c. 5]. “I have hated and cast away your festivals, and I will not receive the odor of your assemblies. But if you offer me your holocausts and gifts, I will not accept them, and I will not regard the vows of your fatlings.” § 1. Moreover, God hates—and not only hates but casts away—the festivals of those who celebrate not God’s festivals but their own. And a little later: § 2. Moreover, to hate, not to smell, and to cast away are spoken by a human similitude, so that in our words we may recognize the disposition of God. And if they offer holocausts, so that they appear to fast, to give alms, and to promise chastity—which are true holocausts—the Lord does not receive them. For he judges not the greatness of the sacrifices, but the merits and causes of those offering them. § 3. Hence also the widow who had put two mites into the treasury is preferred by the Savior to all, because the Lord regards not the things that are offered but the will of those offering them.

Likewise Augustine, [On the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, Book I, c. 9]. Where sound faith is not, justice cannot be, because the just man lives by faith. Nor should schismatics promise themselves anything from this reward, because likewise, where charity is not, justice cannot be. For love of neighbor works no evil; if heretics possessed this love, they would not tear apart the body of Christ, which is the church.

Likewise Innocent, [Pope Innocent to Alexander, epistle 18]. When heretics departed from the Catholic faith, they lost the perfection of the Spirit that they had received.

Likewise Cyprian, greeting his son Magnus, [Book I, epistle 6]. We say that absolutely all heretics and schismatics have no power or right. For this reason Novatian neither ought nor can be excepted from being himself also counted among the adversaries and antichrists, since he stands outside the church and acts against the peace and love of Christ. And a little later: § 1. The church is one, which is one and cannot be both within and without. For if she is with Novatian, she was not with Cornelius. But if she was with Cornelius, who succeeded Bishop Fabian by lawful ordination and whom, after the honor of the priesthood, the Lord also glorified by martyrdom, Novatian is not in the church, nor can he be counted a bishop, since, after despising the evangelical and apostolic tradition, he succeeded no one and arose from himself. For he who was not ordained in the church can in no way possess or hold the church. And a little later: § 2. But as to their being said to know the same God the Father as we, the same Son Christ, and the same Holy Spirit, not even this can assist such persons. And below: § 3. We find that in such a crime not only the leaders and authors but also the participants are destined for punishment unless they separate themselves from the communion of the evil, the Lord commanding through Moses and saying: “Separate yourselves from the tents of these most hard men, and do not touch anything that belongs to them, lest you perish together in their sins.” And the Lord fulfilled what he had threatened through Moses, so that whoever had not separated himself from Korah, Dathan, and Abiram immediately paid the penalties for impious communion. By this example it is shown and proved that all will be liable to punishment and guilt who with irreligious rashness mingle themselves with schismatics against their prelates and priests, just as the Holy Spirit also testifies through the prophet Hosea and says: “Their sacrifices are like the bread of mourning; all who eat them will be contaminated,” plainly teaching and showing that absolutely all who have been contaminated by their sin are joined in punishment with their authors. What merits, therefore, can there be with God among those upon whom punishments are divinely inflicted? And below: § 4. But if all heretics and schismatics who are outside do not possess the Holy Spirit, and therefore the hand is imposed upon them among us so that here that may be received which is not there and cannot be given there, it is manifest that the remission of sins cannot be given through those who, it is established, do not possess the Holy Spirit.

Likewise Pope Liberius, [in the epistle to Athanasius]. Those who are against the peace of the church, if they possess a dignity or the belt of military service, are to be stripped of them. But if they are private persons, then, if they are noble, let them suffer proscription of their property; but if they are of low birth, let them not only be beaten in the body but also be punished with perpetual exile.

Likewise Pope Pelagius. Shameful, so to speak, is the plunder in division: a bishop not consecrated but execrated. For if we examine the very name of consecration with rational and vigorous understanding, he who refuses to be consecrated together with the universal church can by no reason be called or be consecrated. For to consecrate is to make sacred together. But, divided from the inward parts of the church and separated from the Apostolic Sees, he himself rather execrates; he does not consecrate. Rightly, therefore, will he be able to be called only execrated, not consecrated, whom the church does not recognize as making sacred together in unity with her joined members. Nevertheless, let us see whether he preserved even the custom of those very regions in his disordering. Assuredly, this was the ancient custom: because it had been burdensome for them to be ordained by the Apostolic See on account of the distance or difficulty of the journey, the bishops of Milan and Aquileia ought to ordain one another, yet in such a way that the pontiff of the other city ought to come to the city in which the bishop was to be ordained, so that the election of the person to be ordained could be recognized better and more easily by the ordainer present, from the consent of the universal church over which he was to be placed, and so that the man who was to be advanced to the episcopate, but was nevertheless not to be subjected to his ordainer, might be ordained in his own church. For since, as we have said, the church is one, to whom it is said in the Song of Songs, “One is my dove,” it is established that there is no other except the one founded upon the apostolic root, by whom it cannot be doubted that the faith itself was propagated throughout the whole world. Although this is altogether very well known to you, let us nevertheless prove it by the testimony of blessed Augustine. Hear what the most illustrious doctor of the church says in a certain work of his. For he says: “But if the church in which there is schism can in no way rightly be called the church, it remains that, since the church cannot be nonexistent, she is the one who, established upon the root of the Apostolic See through the successions of bishops, can in no way be extinguished by the malice of any men—even if that malice is known and cannot be excluded, but is judged, according to the circumstances of the times, to be tolerated.”

The same. Schism itself, which is a Greek name, signifies a tearing. But a tearing cannot be in unity. Therefore, he who communicates with schismatics does not communicate with unity. They made parties for themselves and, separating themselves from that which is one—to speak now in the words of the Apostle Jude—they do not have the Spirit. From all these things it is brought about that, because they are not one in unity, because they wished to be in a party, and because they do not possess the Spirit, they cannot possess the sacrifice of the body of Christ. § 1. But the question for us now is not whether we should tolerate the evil, but whether we ought to be joined with schismatics. If they themselves too, although abounding in their own opinion, nevertheless sought the truth while placed within the maternal inward parts, they were not to be repelled by us until, with reason as guide, the truth of the matter had become clear among them. But because they divided themselves from the universal church, as blessed Augustine says, every Catholic securely detests that party which he knows does not communicate with the universal church strengthened by the Apostolic Sees. § 2. Nor indeed does it lighten their crime—but rather increases it—that you said they resisted for a long time lest they receive into their communion those communicating with the Apostolic Sees. For in this, while those too are to be blamed who wished to communicate with such persons, nevertheless much more are those to be execrated who scorned communion with the Apostolic Sees not only in priests but even in laypersons themselves. Nor does it profit them that in the same letter you declare that they suspended themselves from our communion either through ignorance of reason or through the simplicity of their understanding. For this very thing is rather why they are schismatics: not a judgment of thinking differently, but a certain most evil opinion divided them, because they feared things reported among themselves yet unknown to them and rashly believed them against the Apostolic See. § 3. Blessed Augustine announces this to be schism in a special sense, saying concerning such persons: “By rashly believing against the authority of those churches that merited to receive letters from the Apostolic See, he will not be able to repel from himself the most monstrous crime of schism.” In sum, either you believe them to be the church—and, since there cannot be two churches, you will judge us, which may it not be, to be schismatics—or, if it is established that the true church is in the Apostolic Sees, recognize them also as divided from unity, and that the question of communion has been removed, since it is established that true communion cannot exist except in unity. § 4. Therefore, do not wish to be joined indiscriminately to the sacrifices of both, as though there were no difference between schismatics and the church. What a schismatic confects is not the body of Christ, if we are directed with truth as guide. For no one will be able to invent that Christ can be divided without the Apostle’s reproof. It is established that the church—which, as has often been said, is Christ’s body—is one, and she cannot be divided into two or more. For as soon as anyone shall have departed from her, he ceases to be the church.

Likewise Pope Nicholas writes to Emperor Michael, [epistle 7]. Pope Celestine, writing to the eastern bishops, says: “If anyone was either excommunicated or stripped of the dignity of bishop or cleric by Bishop Nestorius or by others who follow him, from the time they began to preach such things, it is manifest that he both has remained and remains in our communion; nor do we judge him to have been removed, because the sentence of one who had already rendered himself fit to be removed could remove no one.”

Likewise to the clergy of Constantinople. The authority of our see, he says, has openly decreed that no bishop, cleric, or Christian of any profession who was cast down from communion or from his place by Nestorius or those like him, from the time they began to preach such things, is to be seen as either cast out or excommunicated; but all these persons remain in our communion to this day, because he who staggered while preaching such things could cast down or remove no one. You have understood, emperor, from the things recalled above that those who had formerly been removed and already cast down could not remove anyone, so that we need not say even their own prelate, or cast down anyone already prostrate.

Likewise Pope Nicholas, [in the same place, a little below]. We marvel how excommunicated persons were received to render judgment, since according to the apostolic canons they are prohibited from being received into communion alone without commendatory letters. For it is absurd that one who, according to the sacred rules, is not permitted even to communicate with the least should be permitted even to judge those who are almost his superiors. GRATIAN. By these authorities it is manifestly shown that, from the time anyone begins to teach anything contrary to the faith, he is able neither to cast anyone down nor to condemn him. § 1. Nevertheless, that saying of Augustine is objected: “Those departing from the faith lose neither baptism nor the power of baptizing.” Therefore, since both powers—namely, of baptizing and of excommunicating—follow priestly anointing, those departing from the faith will either retain both or lack both. But the power of office is one thing, its execution another. Often the power of office is either received, as by monks in priestly anointing, or, once received, is retained without its execution, as by suspended persons, to whom administration is forbidden but the power is not taken away. Therefore, the power is not removed from those departing from the faith, just as it is not restored to those returning, lest injury appear to be done not to the man but to the sacrament. Hence those baptized or ordained by heretics, when they return to the unity of the Catholic faith, if perhaps for the sake of ecclesiastical peace they are received in their orders, will not have repeated the sacrament that is proved to have been administered in the church’s form; but through the imposition of the hand the efficacy of the sacrament will be supplied, which is taught to have been conferred upon no one outside the church. Therefore, since both powers remain in heretics, if a heretic excommunicates a Catholic or another heretic in order to draw him into the communion of his heresy, because the sentence is unjust it lacks weight. § 2. But if he gives sentence against a Catholic living wickedly or against a heretic devoted to flagitious deeds or crimes, so that otherwise each might return to the rule of right living, it appears deservedly to be asked whether both are bound by his sentence, or only the heretic. It can be said, however, that the Catholic is in no way bound by the heretic’s sentence. For he cannot strike with the sword of the mouth one whom he is unable to accuse or against whom he is unable to testify. For if those whom divine testimonies do not support, because they are outside the church, have lost the weight of human testimony against those who appear to be in the church, neither will those who are proved to have departed from her faith, and therefore have been condemned by the church, be able to possess the weight of ecclesiastical authority against those same persons. But a heretic appears to have power over a heretic, just as the devil also has power over the evil, as over his own livestock. Hence Augustine writes to Vincentius the Donatist and Rogatist, [epistle 48]:

Whoever receives one cast out by you for some flagitious deed or crime in the same way as those are received who, apart from the error by which you are separated from us, lived among you without crime, displeases us. But you do not easily show these things either; and if you show them, we tolerate certain persons whom we cannot correct or punish; nor on account of the chaff do we abandon the Lord’s threshing floor, nor on account of the bad fish do we break the Lord’s nets, nor on account of the kids to be separated at the end do we desert the Lord’s flock, nor on account of the vessels made unto dishonor do we migrate from the Lord’s house.

The same to Eusebius, [epistle 169]. A former subdeacon of the church of Hispania, named Primus, when he was prohibited from undisciplined access to consecrated women and despised orderly and sound precepts, was removed from the clergy. § 1. I, if it pleases the Lord, observe this rule: whoever, after being degraded among them for discipline, wishes to pass over to the Catholic Church is to be received in the humiliation of penance, to which perhaps they too would compel him if he had wished to remain among them. GRATIAN. But this statement of Augustine is understood to have been made not on account of the sentence, whose power outside the church is none, but in detestation of crimes, which are equally to be punished in heretics as in Catholics. Nevertheless, that statement of Augustine can be understood of the power of baptizing, not of binding or loosing or of administering the other sacraments. For baptism, whether it shall have been administered by a heretic or even by a layman, provided that it is received in the unity of the Catholic faith, will not lack effect. But the other sacraments—such as those of the sacred body and blood of the Lord, excommunication, or reconciliation—if they are administered by a heretic or by a Catholic who is not a priest, will have either no effect or a deadly one. Hence they are by no means to be received by faithful men. On this Augustine writes in Book I On the One Baptism, [against the Donatists, c. 2]:

If extreme necessity should perhaps compel someone, and he should not find a Catholic through whom he might receive it, and, preserving Catholic peace in his mind, should receive through someone placed outside Catholic unity what he would have received within Catholic unity itself, if he should immediately depart from this life, we reckon him only a Catholic. But if he shall have been delivered from bodily death, when he restores himself by bodily presence to the Catholic congregation, from which he had never departed in heart, we not only do not condemn what he did but even praise it most securely and truly, since he believed God to be present to his heart, where he preserved unity, and did not wish to depart from this life without the sacrament of holy baptism—which, wherever he found it, he recognized to belong not to men but to God. But if anyone, although he can receive it within Catholic unity itself, through some perversity of mind chooses to be baptized in schism, even if he afterward comes to the Catholic Church, it is certain that there the sacrament profits which can be received elsewhere but cannot profit elsewhere; he is perverse and iniquitous, and the more perniciously so, the more knowingly he acts.

Likewise Pope Julian. If anyone shall have given or received communion from the hand of a heretic and does not know that the Catholic Church forbids it, upon understanding it afterward let him do penance for one complete year. But if he knows and neglects it, and afterward performs penance, let him do penance for ten years. Others judge seven, and certain persons more humanely, that he should do penance for five years. § 1. If anyone shall have permitted a heretic to celebrate his mass in a Catholic church and does not know, let him do penance for forty days; if from reverence for him, let him do penance for one year; if for condemnation of the Catholic Church and of the custom of the Romans, let him be cast out of the church as a heretic unless he has repentance; if he has it, let him do penance for ten years. If he shall have withdrawn from the Catholic Church into a congregation of heretics and persuaded others, afterward, if he performs penance, let him do penance for twelve years: three outside the church, seven among the hearers, and two still outside communion. Concerning these it is said thus in the canon: that in the twelfth year they should receive communion without an oblation.

Likewise Gregory, [Pope Gregory, Dialogues, Book III, c. 31]. The young King Hermenegild began, despising an earthly kingdom and seeking the heavenly one with strong desire, to lie bound in haircloth and to pour forth prayers to almighty God for his strengthening, and to despise the glory of the passing world all the more loftily, inasmuch as, when bound, he had recognized that what could be taken away was nothing. But when the day of the Paschal feast arrived, in the silence of the dead of night his faithless father sent an Arian bishop to him so that he might receive from his hand the communion of a sacrilegious consecration and through this merit to return to his father’s favor. But the man devoted to God reproached the arriving Arian bishop as he ought and repelled his faithlessness from himself with fitting rebukes; for although he lay bound outwardly, nevertheless within himself he stood secure upon a great summit of mind. And so, when the Arian bishop returned to him, his father raged and immediately sent his attendants to kill the most steadfast confessor of God there where he lay.