Concilium Iconiense contra Cataphrygas

Council of Iconium Against the Cataphrygians Celebrated in the Year under Pope Stephen I. The Council of Iconium was held in the year 258, or rather 256, at Iconium in Phrygia, on the occasion of the Cataphrygian heretics, so that they might inquire what should be decreed concerning the validity of the baptism of these and all other heretics. Bishops from Cappadocia, Cilicia, Galatia, and other nearby Eastern regions came to this synod. By all of them it was established and decreed that nothing which had been done by heretics was to be received by the Catholic Church: ordinations, baptism, the imposition of hands, or any other sacred act administered by heretics was invalid. Stephen, the Roman pontiff, excommunicated the Eastern bishops who established these things and deprived them of communion with the apostolic see; he reproved the synod itself as erratic, confirming an erroneous dogma contrary to apostolic tradition. The Easterners indeed sent their legates to the Pontiff, who would give an account of the matters transacted in the synod before the pontiff; but upon coming to Rome, they were neither received nor heard by the holy pontiff Stephen. For this reason, Firmilian, bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, wrote to Cyprian the following letter, which recounts the acts of this council and complains greatly about the legates not being heard. Baronius, year 258, 14 and 16.

It is certain, says Pagius in the year of Christ 255, number 16, that the Council of Iconium, in which the rebaptism of heretics was decreed, was celebrated before the pontificate of Stephen. For Firmilian clearly testifies to this in his letter to Cyprian, where he speaks of the Iconian synod as follows: "All of this we long ago at Iconium, which is a place in Phrygia, gathered together, with those coming from Galatia and Cilicia and the other neighboring regions, confirmed." In this passage the pronoun "we" is to be understood not of Firmilian's own person, but rather of his predecessors; since Firmilian affirms that this synod was gathered long ago, and at the end of the same letter he most clearly indicates the antiquity of this synod, as Valesius observed in his Eusebian Notes to Book VII, chapter 7. For, when Pope Stephen, writing to Cyprian, had opposed the ancient custom of the Church in receiving heretics against the followers of the new dogma, Firmilian says that this argument might perhaps have force against the Africans, and he there teaches how the Africans might refute it. He demonstrates that against the Orientals it has no force at all, among whom heretics had always been rebaptized, ever since the Iconian synod, which had been convened on account of the Montanists. To this Valesius adds that Dionysius of Alexandria, in his letter...

to Philemon, a presbyter of the city of Rome, which he wrote at the beginning of the pontificate of Pope Xystus, where he says: "Moreover, I have learned that this custom was not first introduced only by the Africans, but that long before, in the times of earlier bishops, in the most populous churches, and in councils of the brethren at Iconium and Synnada, and among many others, the same thing was decreed." Hence, under the final years of Alexander Severus, when Firmilian had recently been promoted to the priesthood of the church of Caesarea, as Eusebius teaches in Book VI, Valesius believes the Council of Iconium was gathered, and therefore before the pontificate of Pope Cornelius. Thus far Pagius. Hardouin, in the Index of Councils, volume I, affirms that the councils of Iconium and Synnada were held around that year. On these matters, see also Augustine, Book III against Cresconius, chapters 1 and 3. LETTER OF FIRMILIAN BISHOP OF CAESAREA IN CAPPADOCIA, TO CYPRIAN AGAINST THE LETTER OF STEPHEN.

The argument is entirely the same as the preceding one, but written somewhat more vehemently and bitterly than befits a bishop, chiefly, I suspect, for this reason: that Stephen had also written another letter to Firmilian, Helenus, and the other bishops of those parts, saying that he would not communicate with them as long as they persisted in their opinion concerning the baptism of heretics; as is shown from the letter of Dionysius of Alexandria to Xystus, Stephen's successor, which Eusebius records in his Ecclesiastical History, Book VII, chapter 4. And perhaps it would have been more prudent if this letter had never been published, so that I think Manutius deliberately omitted it. However, since it has been made public by Morellius, I did not wish to pass it over, both because it contains some noteworthy matters and because the words of the aforementioned letter of Dionysius to Stephen, which Eusebius has in the said book, chapter 3, and which Nicephorus repeats more fully in his Ecclesiastical History, Book VI, chapter 7, can serve as an antidote; from these it is clear that he sang a palinode, as they say. "Know, brother," he says, "that the Eastern and even the more remote churches, which were previously in disagreement, have been brought back to unity, and that all their bishops are unanimous and consenting, rejoicing exceedingly over the peace and concord which have come about beyond expectation; especially Demetrianus of Antioch, Theoctistus of Caesarea, Mozabenes of Aelia, the successor of the deceased Alexander, Marinus of Tyre, Heliodorus of Laodicea.

who was substituted in the place of Thelymedris, Helenus of Tarsus, and all the churches of Cilicia. Firmilian, and all Cappadocia. For I have named the principal bishops, lest the letter become too long, or I be more burdensome with many words. But also all Syria and Arabia, Mesopotamia itself, Pontus, Bithynia: and, to say it once, all rejoice there, glorifying God in concord and fraternal charity. Thus far Dionysius, to whom similar things are to be seen in St. Jerome against the Luciferians, and in St. Augustine, Book III Against Cresconius the Grammarian, chapters 1 and 3, where, from the very confession of the Donatists, he relates that the Eastern bishops rescinded or rather corrected their own judgment, by which it had pleased them that it was necessary to consent to Cyprian and the African council concerning this question of Baptism. Pamelius. FIRMILIAN TO CYPRIAN HIS BROTHER 21, GREETING IN THE LORD. We have received through our beloved deacon Rogatian, sent by you, the letters which you made to us, most beloved brother; and we have given the greatest thanks to the Lord for this, that it has happened that we, who are separated from each other in body, are so united in spirit as if we were not only holding one region, but dwelling together in the same house. Which it is fitting to say, because the spiritual house of God is one. For in the last days, says the prophet, the manifest mountain of the Lord and the house of God will be upon the tops of the mountains (Isa. II).

In which they assemble with joy, according to what is also sought from the Lord in this Psalm: to dwell in the house of God for all the days of life (Psalm 26). Whence also in another place it has been revealed that among the saints there is great charity of will in coming together. Behold, it says, how good and delightful it is that brothers dwell together! II. For assembly and peace and concord bring the greatest delight not only to faithful men who know the truth, but also to the heavenly angels themselves, to whom the divine word says there is joy in a single sinner repenting and returning to the bond of unity (Luke 15). This would certainly not be said of angels dwelling in the heavens, unless they too were united with us, who rejoice in our unity; just as, on the contrary, they are certainly saddened when they see the diverse minds and divided wills of certain people, as if they do not simultaneously invoke one and the same God, but with them separated and divided from each other, neither conversation nor common speech can any longer exist. Except that we can give thanks to Stephen in this matter, because through his inhumanity it has now come about that we have gained experience of your faith and wisdom. But if we have received this benefit of grace because of Stephen, Stephen has not thereby committed deeds worthy of the grace of the benefit.

For neither can Judas, by his perfidy and betrayal, through which he wickedly acted against the Savior, seem worthy as though he himself provided the cause of such great goods, so that through him the world and the people of the nations might be freed by the Lord's Passion. III. But let these things which were done by Stephen be passed over for now; let us not, by recalling his audacity and insolence, bring upon ourselves a longer sorrow from the things he wickedly did. But concerning you, learning that according to the rule of truth and the wisdom of Christ you have disposed of that which is now in question, we have exulted with great joy and given thanks to God, because we have found in brothers so far away such great unanimity of faith and truth with us. For the grace of God is able to bind and join together, by the bond of charity and unity, even those things which seem to be divided by a great expanse of lands, just as once, separated by an interval of time from Job and Noah, who were among the first, Ezekiel and Daniel, later in age, were joined by divine power to the bond of unanimity, so that, although they were separated by long periods of time, they thought with the same divine inspiration. Which we now observe in you, that although you are separated from us by the most distant regions, you have proven yourselves to be joined to us in sense and spirit. All of this happens by divine unity.

For, since the Lord is one and the same who dwells in us, He everywhere joins and binds His own with the bond of unity. Hence the sound of those who were sent by the Lord has gone out into the whole world, running swiftly with the spirit of unity; just as, on the contrary, it profits nothing that some are near and joined to one another in body, if they are divided in spirit and mind, since souls which have separated themselves from the unity of God cannot be united at all: "For behold," He says, "those who distance themselves from you will perish" (Ps. 72:27). But such men will undergo the judgment of the Lord according to their merit, withdrawing from His words, who prays to the Father for unity and says: "Father, grant that, just as I and You are one, so also may these be one in us" (John 17:21). IV. We, however, have received what was written by you as if it were our own, and we have not read it cursorily, but, after frequent repetition, have committed it to memory. Nor does it harm salutary usefulness either to repeat the same things for confirming the truth, or to add certain things for heaping up proof. But if anything has been added by us, it is not added as if something less had been said by you, but because divine speech surpasses human nature, and the soul cannot conceive the whole and perfect thing; therefore the number of prophets is so great, so that manifold and divine wisdom may be distributed through many. Hence it is also commanded that the first to speak in prophecy be silent, if a second revelation has been given (1 Cor. 14:30).

For this reason it is necessary among us that each year the elders and presidents assemble together to arrange those things which have been entrusted to our care, so that if any matters are more serious, they may be directed by common counsel, and that for fallen brothers also, who after the saving bath were willing to be wounded by the devil, a remedy may be sought through penance; not that they obtain remission of sins from us, but that through us they may be turned to an understanding of their own offenses and be compelled to make fuller satisfaction to the Lord. V. But since this legate sent by you was hastening to return to you, and the winter season was pressing, we have replied to your letters as fully as we could. And indeed, as far as concerns what Stephen said, that the apostles forbade those who come from heresy to be baptized and handed this down to be observed by posterity, you have replied most fully that no one is so foolish as to believe that the apostles handed this down, when it is established that the heresies themselves arose later as execrable and detestable, since Marcion, the disciple of Cerdo, is found to have existed long after the apostles and after a long interval from them to have introduced a sacrilegious tradition against God; Apelles also, consenting to his blasphemy, added many other new things more hostile to faith and truth. And the time of Valentinus and Basilides is manifest, that they also, after the apostles and after a long age, rebelled against the Church of God with their wicked falsehoods.

It is also established that the other heretics introduced their depraved sects and perverse inventions later, each as he was led by error; all of whom it is manifest have been condemned by themselves, and have pronounced an inexcusable sentence against themselves before the day of judgment. He who confirms their baptism, what else does he do but adjudge himself with them, and condemn himself by making himself a participant in such things? VI. Moreover, that those who are at Rome do not observe in all things what has been handed down from the beginning, and that they vainly claim the authority of the apostles, anyone can also know from this: that concerning the celebration of the Paschal days and concerning many other sacraments of the divine office, he sees that there are some diversities among them, and that not all things are observed there equally as they are observed at Jerusalem, just as in very many other provinces many things vary according to the diversity of places and names, and yet on account of this there has never been a departure from the peace and unity of the Catholic Church. Which now Stephen has dared to do, breaking the peace against you, which his predecessors always preserved with you in mutual love and honor, even still defaming the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, as if they themselves had handed this down, who in their letters execrated heretics and warned us to avoid them. Whence it appears that this tradition is human, which asserts heretics and defends that they have baptism, which belongs to the sole Church alone.

VII. But you have also well responded to that part where Stephen in his letter said, "heretics themselves come together in baptism, and that when they come to one another they do not baptize, but only communicate," as if we ought to do this as well. In this place, although you have already sufficiently proven how ridiculous it is to follow those who err, we add this from abundance: it is not surprising if heretics act thus, who, although they disagree in certain lesser matters, nevertheless in that which is greatest hold one and the same consensus, that they blaspheme the Creator, fabricating for themselves certain dreams and phantoms of an unknown God; whom it is consequently fitting to consent in the vanity of their baptism just as they consent in repudiating the truth of divinity. Concerning these, since it is lengthy to respond to each of their either criminal or superfluous details, it is enough to say briefly in summary: those who do not hold the true Lord, the Father, cannot hold the truth of either the Son or the Holy Spirit, according to which also those who are called Cataphrygians, and attempt to usurp new prophecies, can have neither the Father nor the Son nor the Holy Spirit; from whom if we ask what Christ they preach, they will answer that they preach the one who sent the Spirit that spoke through Montanus and Prisca.

In whom, since we observe that there was not the Spirit of truth but of error, we recognize that those who vindicate that false prophecy of theirs against the faith of Christ cannot have Christ. But also all other heretics, if they have cut themselves off from the Church of God, can have no power or grace, since all power and grace is established in the Church, where the elders preside, who possess the power of baptizing, of laying on hands, and of ordaining. For a heretic, just as he is not permitted to ordain nor to lay on hands, so also he is not permitted to baptize nor to do anything in a holy or spiritual manner, since he is a stranger to spiritual and deifying sanctity. All this we long ago in Iconium, which is a place in Phrygia, gathered together with those coming from Galatia and Cilicia and the other neighboring regions, confirmed to be held firmly and vindicated against heretics, when there was doubt among some about this matter.

VIII. And since Stephen and those who agree with him contend that the remission of sins and the second birth can proceed in the baptism of heretics, among whom they themselves confess that the Holy Spirit is not, let them consider and understand that spiritual birth cannot exist without the Spirit, according to which the blessed apostle Paul also rebaptized with a spiritual baptism those who had been baptized by John before the Holy Spirit was sent by the Lord, and then laid hands on them so that they might receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 19). But what kind of thing is it, that when we see that Paul rebaptized his disciples after John’s baptism, we should hesitate to baptize those who come from heresy to the Church after their illicit and profane dipping? Unless it is that these bishops, to whom Paul was inferior, are now able to give the Holy Spirit to heretics coming to them by the mere laying on of hands, while Paul was not capable of giving the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands to those baptized by John, unless he had first baptized them also with the baptism of the Church.

IX. It is also absurd that they think it unnecessary to inquire who the baptizer was, on the ground that the one baptized can obtain grace by the invocation of the names of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Then this would be the wisdom which Paul writes exists in those who are perfect. But who in the Church is perfect and wise enough to defend or believe that this bare invocation of names suffices for the remission of sins and the sanctification of baptism, since these things then alone avail when both the baptizer has the Holy Spirit and the baptism itself is not constituted without the Spirit? But they say that one who is baptized outside in any manner can, by his own mind and faith, obtain the grace of baptism. This too is undoubtedly ridiculous, as if a perverse mind could draw down from heaven the sanctification of the just, or a false faith the truth of believers. Not all who invoke the name of Christ are heard and can obtain some grace by their invocation, as the Lord Himself declares: "Many will come in my name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and they will deceive many" (Mark 13:6). For there is no difference between a pseudo-prophet and a heretic. For as the former deceives in the name of God or Christ, so the latter deceives in the sacrament of baptism: each relies on falsehood to deceive the wills of men.

X. I also wish to relate to you a history that occurred among us, pertaining to this very matter. For about twenty-two years ago, in the times after the Emperor Alexander, many conflicts and pressures occurred here, both common to all men and privately to Christians; also very many and frequent earthquakes took place, so that through Cappadocia and Pontus many things were overthrown, and some cities even, swallowed into the depths, were devoured by the gap of the broken earth; from this also a severe persecution arose against us, the Christian name, which, after a long period of peace in past ages, suddenly breaking out from an unexpected and unaccustomed evil, became more terrible for disturbing our people. Serenianus was then governor in our province, a harsh and cruel persecutor. In this disturbance, the faithful were placed, and fleeing here and there from fear of persecution, leaving their homelands and crossing into other parts of the regions (for there was opportunity to cross, since that persecution was not throughout the whole world, but in these places), there suddenly emerged here a certain woman, who, placed in ecstasy, presented herself as a prophetess and acted as if filled with the Holy Spirit. She was carried by the impulse of the principal demons in such a way that for a long time she solicited and deceived the brotherhood, performing certain wonderful and portentous deeds, and promising to make the earth move.

Not that the demon had such power that it could move the earth or shake an element by its own force, but because the evil spirit, sometimes foreseeing and understanding a future earthquake, would pretend that it itself was doing what it saw would happen. By these lies and boasts it had subdued the minds of individuals so that they would obey it, and follow wherever it commanded and led; it also made that woman go barefoot through the harsh snow in the raw winter, without being troubled or harmed in any way by that running about; it also said that it was hastening to Judaea and Jerusalem, pretending as if it had come from there. It also deceived one of the presbyters, Rusticus, and likewise another deacon, so that they had intercourse with that same woman, which was discovered shortly afterward: for suddenly there appeared to him one of the exorcists, a proven man and one who had always conducted himself well in religious discipline, who, roused also by the exhortation of very many brothers, who themselves were strong and praiseworthy in the faith and were present, rose up to overcome that evil spirit; which spirit, with subtle deceit, had also predicted a little before that a certain adversary and unfaithful tempter would come. Nevertheless, that exorcist, inspired, strongly resisted by the grace of God, and showed that it was the most wicked spirit which had previously been thought holy.

And that woman, who previously through the tricks and deceptions of the demon had contrived many things to deceive the faithful, among other things by which she had deceived very many, also frequently dared this: that with a not contemptible invocation she would pretend to sanctify bread and make the Eucharist, and offer the sacrifice to the Lord without the sacrament of the customary preaching; she also baptized many, usurping the usual and legitimate words of interrogation, so that she might not seem to differ from the ecclesiastical rule. XI. What, then, shall we say about her baptism, by which a most wicked demon baptized through the woman? Do Stephen and those who agree with him also approve of this, especially since neither the symbol of the Trinity nor the legitimate and ecclesiastical interrogation was lacking? Can it be believed that either remission of sins was given or that the regeneration of the saving bath was duly performed, where everything, although in the image of the truth, was nevertheless done through a demon? Unless, indeed, those who defend the baptism of heretics also contend that the demon gave the grace of baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; among whom, without doubt, the same error exists, the deception of the demon is the same, since among them the Holy Spirit is entirely absent.

XII. And what of this, that Stephen wishes that for those who are baptized among heretics, the presence and sanctity of Christ be at hand? For, if the Apostle does not lie when he says: “As many of you as have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ” (Galatians 3:27), then surely he who has been baptized in Christ there has put on Christ. But if he has put on Christ, he could also have received the Holy Spirit, who was sent by Christ, and it is in vain that the hand is laid upon him when he comes to receive the Spirit; unless it be that among heretics Christ is indeed present, but the Holy Spirit is not there. XIII. Let us now run through briefly the other things that have been said by you copiously and most fully, hastening especially to you, Rogatianus, our dearest deacon. For there follows that which must be asked by us of those who defend heretics: whether their baptism is carnal or spiritual. For if it is carnal, it differs in nothing from the baptism of the Jews, who use it in such a way that, as a common and vulgar washing, it only washes away filth; but if it is spiritual, how can spiritual baptism exist among those among whom the Holy Spirit is not present? And by this, the water with which they are dipped is for them only a carnal washing, not the sacrament of baptism.

XIV. But if the baptism of heretics can possess the regeneration of a second birth, then those who are baptized among them are to be counted not as heretics, but as sons of God; for the second birth, which is in baptism, generates sons of God. But if the spouse of Christ is one, which is the Catholic Church, it is she alone who generates the sons of God. For there are not many spouses of Christ, since the Apostle says: “I have betrothed you to one husband, to assign a chaste virgin to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:2); and, “Hear, daughter, and see, and incline your ear, and forget your people, because the king has desired your beauty” (Ps. 44:21); and, “Come, spouse, from Lebanon, you will come and pass through from the beginning of the faith” (Song 4:8); and, “I have entered my garden, my sister, my spouse” (Song 5:1). We see one person everywhere presented, because the spouse is one. But the synagogue of heretics is not one with us, for it is not a spouse, but an adulteress and a fornicator; hence it cannot bear sons of God: unless, as it seems to Stephen, heresy indeed bears and exposes them, but the Church receives the exposed, and nurtures as her own those whom she herself did not bear, though she cannot be the mother of others’ children. And therefore our Lord Christ, manifesting that his spouse is one and declaring the sacrament of her unity, says: “He who is not with me is against me; and he who does not gather with me scatters” (Luke 11:23).

If Christ is with us, but heretics are not with us, then heretics are certainly against Christ. And if we gather with Christ, but heretics do not gather with us, they are without doubt dispersing. XV. But neither should that be passed over by us which was necessarily said by you, that the Church, according to the Song of Songs, is an enclosed garden and a sealed fountain, a paradise with fruit of apple trees (Song 4:12, 13). But those who have never entered this garden, nor have seen the paradise planted by God the creator, how will they be able to provide the living water of the saving bath to anyone from the fountain which is enclosed within and sealed with the divine seal? Since, moreover, the ark of Noah was nothing other than a sacrament of the Church of Christ, which then, while all perished outside, saved only those who were within the ark, we are clearly instructed to perceive the unity of the Church, just as the apostle Peter also set forth, saying: "And so likewise baptism will make you safe" (1 Pet. 3:21), showing that, just as those who were not with Noah in the ark were not only not cleansed and saved through water, but immediately perished in that flood, so also now, whoever are not in the Church with Christ will perish outside, unless they turn through penance to the one and saving bath of the Church.

XVI. But what great error and what great blindness it is for one who says that remission of sins can be given in the synagogues of heretics, and who does not remain on the foundation of the one Church, which was once solidified by Christ upon a rock, can be understood from this: that Christ said to Peter alone: "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19); and again in the Gospel, when Christ breathed upon the apostles alone, saying: "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you remit anyone's sins, they will be remitted to him; and if you retain anyone's, they will be retained" (John 20:22-23). Therefore, the power of remitting sins was given to the apostles and to the churches which they, sent by Christ, established, and to the bishops who succeeded them by vicarious ordination. But the enemies of the one Catholic Church, in which we are, and our adversaries, who have succeeded the apostles, what else are they, claiming illicit priesthoods for themselves against us and setting up profane altars, than Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, equally sacrilegious in their crime, and about to suffer the same punishments as they did, together with those who consent to them, just as then their participants and supporters perished with them in a like death?

XVII. And I in this matter am justly indignant at this so open and manifest folly of Stephen, that he who so glories in the place of his episcopate and contends that he holds the succession of Peter, upon whom the foundations of the Church are placed, introduces many other rocks and constitutes new buildings of many churches, while he defends that baptism exists there by his own authority. For those who are baptized undoubtedly complete the number of the Church. But he who approves their baptism confirms that the Church is there from those who are baptized. Nor does he understand that he obscures and in a certain way abolishes the truth of the Christian rock, who thus betrays and abandons unity. Yet the Jews, although blind in ignorance and bound by the gravest crime, the Apostle declares that they have the zeal of God. Stephen, who proclaims that he holds the chair of Peter by succession, is stirred by no zeal against heretics, granting them not a moderate but the greatest power of grace, so that he says and asserts that through the sacrament of baptism they wash away the filth of the old man, forgive the sins of ancient death, make sons of God by heavenly regeneration, and restore to eternal life by the sanctification of the divine washing. He who thus grants and bestows such great and heavenly gifts of the Church to heretics, what else does he do than communicate with those to whom he defends and claims so much grace?

XVII. And I in this matter am justly indignant at this so open and manifest folly of Stephen, that he who so glories in the place of his episcopate and contends that he holds the succession of Peter, upon whom the foundation XVIII. And it is now vain for him to hesitate also in other matters to consent to them and to be a partaker, so that he both meets together with them and mingles prayers equally with the same, and establishes a common altar and sacrifice. XVIII. But, it is said, the name of Christ greatly avails for faith and the sanctification of baptism, so that whosoever and wheresoever has been baptized in the name of Christ immediately obtains the grace of Christ, when to this point a brief reply can be made and it can be said that, if baptism outside availed in the name of Christ for purifying a man, then in the same name of Christ the imposition of hands could also avail there for receiving the Holy Spirit. And other things also which are done among heretics will begin to seem just and legitimate, since they are performed in the name of Christ, according to what you have set forth in your letter, that the name of Christ can avail only in the Church alone, to which alone Christ has granted the power of heavenly grace.

XIX. As for refuting the custom which they seem to oppose to the truth, who is so foolish as to prefer custom to truth, or who, once the light is seen, does not abandon the darkness? Unless even the Jews, when Christ came, that is, when truth arrived, are helped in some way by the most ancient custom, in that they remained in antiquity, having abandoned the new path of truth. Indeed, you Africans can say this against Stephen, that having recognized the truth, you have abandoned the error of custom. For our part, we join custom to truth, and we oppose the custom of the Romans to custom, but to truth, holding from the beginning what was handed down by Christ and the apostles. Nor do we recall that this ever began among us, since it has always been observed here that we acknowledge only one Church of God, and we count holy baptism only as belonging to the holy Church. Clearly, since some were doubting about the baptism of those who, although they do not receive the prophets as we do, nevertheless seem to know the Father and the Son along with us, many of us, assembling together in Iconium, very carefully discussed and confirmed that every baptism whatsoever established outside the Church is to be rejected.

XX. As for that which they put forward on behalf of heretics, and say that the Apostle declared: “Whether by occasion or by truth, Christ is announced” (Phil. 1:18), it is foolish to respond, when it is manifest that the Apostle in his epistle where he said this made no mention either of heretics or of their baptism, but spoke only concerning brethren, whether those speaking among themselves faithlessly or those persevering in sincere faith; nor is it necessary to examine this at length, but it suffices to read the epistle itself and to recognize from the Apostle himself what the Apostle said. XXI. What then, they say, will become of those who, coming from heretics, were admitted without the Church’s baptism? If they have departed from this world, they are counted among those who among us were indeed catechized, but died before they were baptized; they are said not only to have the benefit of the truth and faith, to which, having abandoned error, they had arrived, even though they did not obtain the consummation of grace, being prevented by death. But those who still remain in this world are to be baptized with the Church’s baptism, so that they may be able to obtain remission of sins, lest, by another’s presumption, remaining in their former error, they die without the consummation of grace. For the rest, what a fault it is.

or of those who admit, or of those who are admitted, so that, with the filth not washed away by the Church’s laver, and with sins not exposed, they may, by a rashly usurped communion, touch the body and blood of the Lord, whereas it is written: “Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Cor. 11:27). XXII. We have also judged that those whom these men—who were formerly bishops in the Catholic Church, and afterward, assuming to themselves the power of clerical ordination, have baptized—are to be regarded as unbaptized. And this is observed among us, that whoever, having been dipped by them, come to us, as strangers and as having obtained nothing, are baptized among us with the one and true baptism of the Catholic Church, and obtain the regeneration of the life-giving laver. And yet there is a great difference between one who, unwilling and compelled by the necessity of persecution, has yielded, and that one who, with sacrilegious will, audaciously rebels against the Church, or blasphemes with impious voice against the Father and God of Christ and the creator of the whole world. And Stephen is not ashamed to assert this, that through those who are [in such a state], when they themselves are placed in all sins, he says that remission of sins can be given, as if the laver of salvation could exist in a house of death!

XXIII. Where, then, will that be which is written: “Abstain from alien water, and drink not from an alien spring” (Prov. 9:19, LXX), if, having abandoned the sealed fountain of the Church, you take up alien water as your own and pollute the Church with profane springs? For when you communicate with the baptism of heretics, what else do you do but drink from their abyss and filth, and, yourself cleansed by the sanctification of the Church, become defiled by the contacts of alien impurities? And you do not fear the judgment of God, bearing witness against the Church in favor of heretics, since it is written: “A false witness will not go unpunished” (Prov. 19:5). Nay rather, you are worse than all heretics: for, when many of them, having recognized their error, come to you to receive the true light of the Church, you aid the errors of those who come, and, with the light of ecclesiastical truth obscured, you heap up the darkness of heretical night. And when they confess themselves to be in sins and to have no grace, and therefore to be coming to the Church, you withdraw from them the remission of sins, which is given in baptism, by saying that they are already baptized and have obtained the grace of the Church outside the Church. Nor do you understand that their souls will be demanded from your hand when the day of judgment comes, you who denied the drink of the Church to the thirsty, and were the cause of death to those wishing to live. And, moreover, you are indignant.

XXIV. See with what inexperience you dare to reproach those who strive for truth against falsehood. For who ought more justly to be indignant against another: he who asserts that they are enemies of God, or he who, against one who asserts that they are enemies of God, consents for the truth of the Church? Except that it is manifest that the inexperienced are also headstrong and wrathful, while through lack of counsel and speech they are easily turned to wrath, so that divine Scripture says of no one more than of you: “A headstrong man stirs up quarrels, and a wrathful man aggravates sins” (Prov. 29:22). For how many quarrels and dissensions have you stirred up throughout the churches of the whole world! And how great a sin have you aggravated for yourself, when you cut yourself off from so many flocks! For you have cut yourself off. Do not deceive yourself; since he is truly a schismatic who has made himself an apostate from the communion of ecclesiastical unity: for while you think that all can be kept away from you, you alone have kept yourself away from all. Nor could the precepts of the Apostle, warning and saying, inform you to the rule of truth and peace: “Therefore I beseech you, I who am bound in the Lord, to walk worthily in the calling to which you are called, with all humility of mind and gentleness, with patience bearing with one another in love, taking sufficient care to preserve the unity of spirit in the bond of peace; one body, and one spirit, as you are called in the one hope of your calling.

One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all 87, and through all, and in all of us (Ephes. IV, 1-6). XXV. How diligently Stephen fulfilled these apostolic commands and salutary warnings, preserving humility in sentiment and gentleness in the first place. For what is more humble or gentle than to have disagreed with so many bishops throughout the whole world, breaking peace with each one by various kinds of discord, sometimes with the Easterners, which we trust does not escape you, sometimes with you who are in the South; from whom he received legate bishops patiently and gently enough, so that he would not even admit them to the speech of common conversation, and moreover, mindful of affection and charity, he commanded the whole brotherhood that no one should receive them into his house, so that to those coming, not only peace and communion, but also shelter and hospitality would be denied. This is to have preserved the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, to cut oneself off from the unity of charity, and to make oneself alien to brothers in all things, and to rebel against the sacrament and faith with the stubborn fury of discord. In such a one can there be one body and one spirit, in whom perhaps the soul itself is not one, but so slippery and mobile and uncertain? But as far as he is concerned, let us leave him aside. Let us rather examine that which is the greatest question.

Those who contend that those baptized by heretics ought to be received as though they had obtained the grace of legitimate baptism say that there is one baptism for us and for them, and that it differs in no respect. But what does the apostle Paul say? One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God (Ephes. IV. 3). If the baptism of heretics is one and the same as ours, without doubt the faith is also one. But if the faith is one, then certainly the Lord is one. If the Lord is one, it follows to say that He is one. But if this unity, which cannot at all be separated or divided, is itself also present among heretics, why do we contend further, why do we call them heretics and not Christians? Moreover, since with us and with heretics there is neither one God, nor one Lord, nor one Church, nor one faith, nor even one spirit or one body, it is manifest that baptism cannot be common to us and to heretics, with whom we have nothing at all in common. And yet Stephen is not ashamed to lend such patronage to these men against the Church and to rend the brotherhood for the sake of defending heretics, and moreover to call Cyprian a pseudo-Christ, a pseudo-apostle, and a deceitful worker. He, conscious that all these things are in himself, anticipates by falsely charging another with what he himself deservedly ought to hear.

We wish you well, together with all of us and with all the bishops who are in Africa and all the clergy and the whole brotherhood of the whole world, that we may have them, united in perpetual unanimity and of one mind, even those who are joined to us from afar.