Epistola Fidei Catholicae In Difensione Trium Capitulorum

Facundus's Letter on the Catholic Faith In Defense of the Three Chapters. From volume III of the Spicilegium of Dom Luc d'Achery. Some are disturbed and ask what the cause of the Three Chapters is, on account of which nearly the whole world is scandalized, the members of Christ; and they say, what harm can the condemnation that has been made of the Chapters do to the Catholic Church, whether it be of persons or of sayings? Especially, they say, since the condemnors themselves profess to hold the faith with those who do not condemn, to baptize with one creed, and to celebrate with one rite both the solemnities of the readings and the order of the sacrifice. To these, since they demand that a concise account be rendered to them, it must be answered thus briefly, with the Lord's bounty, that these very condemnors of the Three Chapters, who cannot deny that their cause was determined in the holy Council of Chalcedon almost one hundred and twenty years ago, must first be compelled to say whether they harmed or did not harm the Catholic Church in which they were baptized before their condemnation impiously came about.

If they should say that it harmed, they are shown to be bringing a charge of error and crime against the Catholic Church: so that either it was heretical—which it is forbidden to say—since those whom they have condemned as heretics, it not only did not condemn, but even praised, and pronounced their statements orthodox by the decrees of the Synod of Chalcedon; or certainly, surrounded by a cloud of ignorance, it is to be marked out by all heresies, because for so many years it did not know, nor could it understand, what they, before even a year, led astray by various and foreign doctrines contrary to the apostolic precept and by obeying palatine commands, have come to know. And on account of this, they themselves are heretics, and are baptized by heretics, and have not yet been reconciled by anyone: since, as they themselves say, those are Catholics who have recently condemned or do condemn the Three Chapters, and communicate with those condemners; but those are heretics who have neither condemned nor do condemn, nor communicate with the condemners.

Since these things are so, either that Church was, as it truly was, is, and will be, the Catholic Church, which neither condemned nor condemns the Three Chapters, and which does not communicate with these most wicked condemnors and their communicants except under due satisfaction; and these men are without doubt heretics, who have newly admitted what they did not receive in the Church that regenerated them. Or if that Church—which it is sacrilegious to hear—was not the Catholic Church, then these men are likewise, all ambiguities removed, heretics, because, as has been said, that same Church baptized them, which Church never condemned these Chapters. For which reasons, whichever objection they may answer, they must be convicted as heretics. But if, as is true, they should say that the same Chapters harmed the Catholic Church not at all for a hundred years and more, as was previously stated, then let them understand themselves to be all the more inexcusably guilty: let them note how great an evil they have committed against its decrees by condemning what it did not condemn; let them recognize what they have done, and let them feel themselves cut off from that Church whose decrees they, as far as in them lies, have torn asunder, stubbornly joining themselves to the bands of heretics by favoring their wishes. For indeed, the condemnation of the Chapters was sought and elicited from the Acephali heretics, that is, the Semi-Eutychians; and the writings of Vigilius and Pelagius, the Roman prevaricators, and of Primasius of Byzacena, the chief teacher of the Acephali, published against the Church, bear witness to this.

Since these things are so, how can it now be established for them, as they say, that they hold one faith with those who do not condemn? For we confess in our one Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God and man, the property of two natures in the unity of the person, which the Catholic Church always guards and teaches. But these men, obeying the Acephali, and saying in writing: "We anathematize the impious letter of Ibas which he wrote to Maris the Persian, together with those who vindicate it and say it is correct, or any part of it," are proved without doubt to have anathematized the whole Church, which vindicated and vindicates it, and said and says it is correct, inasmuch as it confesses concerning the Incarnation of Christ, in which the mystery of our salvation consists, what that same letter contains throughout. For the words of that letter, where the soundness of the Catholic confession stands, after other things, are as follows: "The Church, however, says: Two natures, one power, one person, which is one Son, our Lord Jesus Christ." Therefore, if this confession of the two natures of our Lord Jesus Christ in the unity of the person, as they have said, is impious and without God, let them themselves say anew what is pious and fitting for the correct faith of Christians.

Therefore, just as the truth, refuting them by their works and writings, compels them to confess, they either say that there is one nature in Christ, as the Eutychians or Acephali, to whose wishes they have yielded and from whom they have withdrawn from the Church, or that there is none: which is how impious and blasphemous, and alien from catholic truth, anyone endowed with a sound mind will know without doubt. Now next let us examine that which they say in words, that they baptize with one creed, whether it is true for them in deeds and effects. So that this may be clearly evident, the force and magnitude of the truth of the creed itself must first be considered and weighed; because unless the means by which one believes has preceded, the virtue and gift of belief, which follows, is by no means granted, as it is written: Unless you believe, you will not understand (Isa. 7:11, according to the LXX). Therefore, the creed, a collection or pact which is made between man and God, our catholic fathers and teachers have taught to be interpreted. Since therefore we have made a pact with God, and have been baptized in this way in the one name of the Holy Trinity, if anyone dissolves one iota or one apex from the pact which he entered into with God, he is undoubtedly proven to have lost the faith by which he believed in God, and God himself in whom he believed. Who these are who have violated this pact we will soon see, when we have set forth the words of this creed, not indeed in order for the sake of avoiding prolixity, but having tasted them lightly.

Therefore, the beginning of the Creed is this: We believe in one God, the Father Almighty; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, born from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, who was crucified and buried under Pontius Pilate; on the third day he rose from the dead; he ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, whence he will come to judge the living and the dead, and the rest. Indeed, in this now the whole question concerning the judgment of the living and the dead consists: which, against no heresy ever, as that concerning the equality of the Father and the Son in the Council of Nicaea against Arius, or that concerning the omnipotence of the Holy Spirit in the Council of Constantinople against Macedonius, was added to the Creed, has ever been violated by any heresy, except by this one, which has arisen in the most recent times as if from the compacted dregs of all heretics; namely, through the condemnation of the living and the dead, which they thus set forth in writing, saying among other things: "If anyone defends the impious Theodore and his impious writings, but does not anathematize him and his impious writings, and all who receive or defend him, and say that he set forth orthodox teachings; and those who have written for him, and have thought the same things, or write for him or for his impious writings, and those who think or have ever thought similarly to him, let such a one be anathema. If anyone defends the impious writings of Theodoret, but does not anathematize them, and those who have thought or think similarly to him, let such a one be anathema.

If anyone defends the impious letter which is said to have been written by Ibas to the heretic Maris the Persian, but does not anathematize it and its defenders, and those who say that it, or a part of it, is correct, and those who have written or who write in its favor, or in favor of the impiety contained in it, and presume to defend it, let such a one be anathema. By this blasphemous sentence, they have involved in an equal anathema, as far as in them lies, both those dead whom no one condemned while they were alive, nor did anyone judge their doctrine heretical—indeed, on the contrary, as can be proved by the most evident documents, the authority of the Fathers in synodical letters pronounced it orthodox, and a devoted posterity has preserved and still preserves it—and also the Fathers themselves who praised them and their statements, and us who are living. Where, then, is what they wish to appear or be called Christians, and boast with empty verbosity that they keep the faith of the Creed, who have usurped for themselves the judgment which the Father gave to the Son alone, with the arrogance of a too great and deeply lamentable rashness, since by such presumption they are proven to surpass even the madness of the devil? For he, with the most proud appetite of his heart, said: I will be like the Most High (Isa. 14:14).

But they, by anticipating the judgment of God and by perpetrating a deadly work of condemnation against the dead and the living who do not consent to them, have established themselves not as equals or similar, as he [Christ] still said of the future, "I will be," but as superior to their Lord, as far as their intention is concerned. And these wretches are not ashamed, with sacrilegious mouth and shameless impudence, to say that they hold one faith with those who condemn! As if indeed demons do not also believe and tremble, but are known to have no operation except that of error, which these same plagues also exercise, themselves erring and casting others into error. And not only do they lead into error by lying words, but they also compel by violent persecutions, dragging and forcing those whom they can to consent to them or to communicate. And these unhappy ones do not intend nor notice that it does not help them, but rather greatly burdens them, to promise in words that they know God, but to deny Him by deeds? Since truly, if they have truthfully confessed, or others on their behalf when they were baptized have professed to believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ His Son, and in the Holy Spirit, as the authority of the creed holds, they ought also to have believed truthfully and patiently awaited the same Son of God and man, Jesus Christ our Lord, coming at the appointed time from the heavens to judge the living and the dead; and not now, with impious and vehement atrocity.

state, and we the living, and the once Catholic pontiffs long dead, not only to judge but also to condemn with the anathema of a perpetual sentence. But perhaps, on account of their sanctity and the efficacy of their miraculous works, as though they were judges of the living and the dead, appointed by themselves—or rather by their father the devil—they claim to have resurrected these very dead whom they have condemned, and thus, having heard their case, just as the Lord says in the Gospel: "I judge as I hear" (John 5:30), they have pronounced a sentence of judgment against them. We therefore ask them when they gathered the revived ashes of these dead and resurrected them, or where they sat to judge. Surely the Lord will judge all nations in the Valley of Jehoshaphat, although this also has another meaning. Yet is Constantinople, where this sacrilege was begun, the Valley of Jehoshaphat? Are the other cities and towns, which, along with the condemnation of the living and the dead, subscribed to and received the decree that was issued, the Valley of Jehoshaphat? Let them also say and show where they have placed their condemned, so that it may be known by no one who does not condemn, except by the condemners alone, whether the entrance to the underworld has been opened only to them? Let them then tell us, the living, whom they have condemned together with the long dead, when they caused us to die and immediately resurrected us, as in that, or before that, judgment of the Lord which the Catholic Church confesses will happen in the future toward those whom His advent finds living in the flesh.

But if these and other things, which we believe will come to pass in a time known only to God, they were unable to accomplish, what madness invaded their hearts, and their smoky vanity, like the dark night of dense and palpable shadows, blinded their eyes, so that they did not see nor steadfastly hold what they received in the creed when they were baptized? But according to their own will, sometimes corrupted by bribes, sometimes enticed by honors and ambitions, sometimes also led astray by a foreign or rather serpentine cunning doctrine, and blown up and inflated by the wind of pride, they raised the crests of pride against God, usurping His judgment, and establishing a new error by the condemnation of the living and the dead, and restoring the old, since they became both supporters and accomplices of the Acephali, and gave their right hands to other heretics, so that it is permitted to them, as often and as they please, to rescind or condemn the decrees of orthodox pontiffs. For it is not, as some ignorant persons say, a matter of the Three Chapters, but of all the pontiffs who, from the apostles and the successors of the apostles up to the Council of Chalcedon, in which the same Chapters were judged orthodox, and thereafter up to our own times, persevering in one and the same defense and communion, departed from this life as Catholics; their condemnation, once perpetrated, is lamented. We could demonstrate this more fully here with the clearest documents and truthful reasons of paternal traditions, if chastened brevity allowed.

Those who fear the judgment of God, and who believe and confess that the Son of God will come as a manifest judge in due time in the form of a servant which He assumed for us, having learned by faith that He came hidden in the fullness of time, should carefully consider and weigh these things, and then judge whether such men—who are prouder and more arrogant in their audacity than the devil, and even worse than Antichrist—are to be counted as Christians at all, and not rather to be called ministers of Antichrist, and to be fled by all means. Since this is so, how can they still be certain of what they claim to believe—that is, in God the Father and in His Son, which precedes in the Creed—when they are not certain of what follows there, specifically concerning one and the same Christ, who is to come to judge the living and the dead? For these men, as has been said and shown above, have already hurled the darts of their condemnation both at the dead of old and at us who are living. But having set forth these things, let us now consider another point. For if they say that the dead whom they condemned taught wrongly and wrote books with heretical intent, we ask them whether, while they were alive, they were admonished according to the custom of Catholic observance and discipline, so that they might hold sound and right opinions, and whether they obstinately resisted, and were convicted of their error, or were summoned to some council—as Arius at Nicaea, Macedonius at Constantinople, Nestorius at the First Council of Ephesus, and Eutyches and Dioscorus at Chalcedon—and were condemned, or not.

If they say it was a creation, we will immediately demand that the synodal acts be brought forward, just as these are produced, where their error was condemned, where the sentence pronounced against them is shown. If they show them, we ask again how it is that for a series of more than a hundred years they lay hidden from the whole Catholic Church, since even human laws remove human questions after thirty years, and our Lord Jesus Christ gave His apostles a divine law of binding and loosing only those things which are upon the earth. Or where do we think those same acts lay hidden, so that they could recently have come to the knowledge only of those condemning, and not also of those not condemning? But if, which is more true and certain, they are unable to produce anything of the sort done in antiquity, because in truth they have nothing to produce, we on the contrary produce the synodical letters of the Council of Antioch in defense of Theodorus and his statements, who has been condemned by these men now branded with a new name of heresy and crime, that is, as Necrodiocts or Porcianists. Then we show the acts of the holy Council of Chalcedon, whose authority no one but a heretic contradicts; where not only were the praises of the blessed Theodorus received and recited, and proclaimed with admirable glory, but also the letter of the venerable Ibas, which has been condemned by these men as impious, is there declared orthodox and praised.

The teaching of Theodoret also, from long ago and from the beginning, was acclaimed in the same synod as being in harmony with the orthodox faith, and both, that is Theodoret and Ibas, were judged worthy of the episcopate, and were appointed to govern the churches entrusted to them as before. Having set these things forth, we propose to those who condemn these Chapters and to us, and to their communicants, what they think about the same great Council of Chalcedon, whether they say it is catholic or not? If they say: It is catholic, we reply: Therefore you are without doubt heretics. Because whatever or whomever those Fathers presiding there praised and pronounced to agree with the catholic faith, you have condemned as heretics and impious: whence it follows, whether you wish it or not, as the consequence of reason demands, that those whom they condemned as heretics, that is Nestorius, Eutyches, and Dioscorus, you, even if not in words perhaps from fear of men, yet certainly by deeds, and by unbridled persecutions, and by the expulsion of catholic pontiffs, and by the substitution of heretics, and by condemnations pronounced in writing against catholics, proclaim and preach as orthodox. Finally, in one and the same Chalcedonian synod, among other things, this cause also is established, namely the approval and condemnation of the three.

For behold, on one side stand, as it were, the same council’s Theodorus—though already deceased, yet living in the synodical letters containing his praises, which were left there and approved—and also Theodoretus and Ibas, praised and pronounced orthodox; and on the other side, nonetheless, Nestorius, condemned indeed first at Ephesus, but bound at Chalcedon with a renewed chain of condemnation; and likewise Eutyches and Dioscorus condemned there as heretics. What say you? Is it not so? Can you, however much your brow is hardened with the usual lies, deny that it is so? But if, from your double confusion, you should wish to deny it, behold, here are the acts of the Council of Chalcedon; behold, here stand the six hundred and thirty bishops gathered there; they cry out, as it were, through that council, and say: We received and approved the praises of Theodorus, who died in the peace and communion of the Catholic Church, when they were read again to our assembly. We pronounced the venerable Theodoretus and Ibas orthodox, and we truly know that they subscribed with us to the definition of the Catholic faith. The letter which the venerable Ibas wrote to Mari the Persian, when read again by us, we judged to be orthodox, and we confirmed our judgment by subscribing in agreement.

We have cast down Nestorius, previously condemned, with a repeated condemnation together with Eutyches and Dioscorus, the Holy Spirit presiding over us: whoever attempts to violate our judgment is a heretic; whoever dares to tear away at our decrees in any respect is a stranger to the catholic faith, a stranger to the Christian name. For whoever condemns those whom we, pronouncing them catholic, have praised, and on the contrary praises those whom we have condemned as heretics, is therefore a heretic—whoever does not acquiesce in what we have well defined, whoever proudly rebels against what has been determined by legitimate and catholic order. Hearing these things, what, we ask, are you going to say to so many illustrious pontiffs or to the universal catholic Church spread throughout the whole world, which has always devoutly kept their statutes, and up to now keeps them in its relics propagated everywhere; unless perhaps you wish to speak the truth, and how was the heresy of the Necrodioctae or Porcianistae to arise? But if they should say: The Council of Chalcedon is heretical, it is no longer necessary to contend against them anew, except that they be held by all who are truly catholic, just as the one who, when asked by the Lord in the Gospel what his name was, replied: "Legion, for we are many" (Mark 5:9).

Since truly whoever presumes or attempts to contradict in any respect the authority of the holy and great Synod of Chalcedon is both an Arian, a Macedonian, a Nestorian, an Eutychian, and an Acephale, or whatever can be derived from the various seeds of heretical impiety and be fitted to them, against which twin plagues the intention of that same synod kept watch, so that it might strike down past heretics with a repeated condemnation, anathematize present ones, and bind future ones with the chains of condemnation, by the prescient Spirit of God, together with their followers and any kind of participants. Now further concerning this, that some celebrate the solemnities of the readings or the order of the sacrifice with the same rite, we could briefly respond, since, as we have taught, once cut off from catholic unity, the invocation of the divine name with feigned words and deeds profits nothing, nor does a celebration usurped and drawn from the Church; since even the devil, tempting the Lord, brought forth testimonies from the Scriptures, but from which he was to be destroyed, not from which he was to be strengthened: and the holy Scriptures themselves consist not in reading, but in understanding, and various heretics, what they had received well and wholesomely in the catholic Church, once cut off, they retained perniciously and lethally. We could also say this concerning the sacrifice, that at the beginning of the world the Lord said to Cain: If you offer rightly, but you do not divide rightly, you have sinned.

But also that which the Lord says through the prophet to the transgressors and violators of the covenant with God, the priests: "When you have multiplied your prayers, I will turn my face away from you. And when you offer sacrifice to me, I will not accept it from your hands, nor will I be appeased by you, because your assemblies are iniquitous" (Isa. 1:13, 15); and many similar things which it would be long to recount. But we judged it opportune to bring forth also one or two testimonies from the most glorious martyr and bishop Cyprian, written against them for a similar cause; because whoever is of understanding heart, having diligently considered and examined with the eyes of the heart, will perceive whether he ought to seek after the sacrifices of the new heretics. For here, in the epistle for the holy Cornelius, likewise a martyr and bishop of the city of Rome, whom the heretic Novatian had expelled and had substituted himself in his place, just as has now been done by the new heretics, written to Magnus, after other things he says: "But if the flock is one, how can he be counted among the flock who is not in the number of the flock? Or how can he be considered a pastor who, while the true pastor remains and succeeds in an orderly manner and presides in the Church of the Lord, himself succeeding no one and beginning from himself, becomes alien and profane, an enemy of the Lord's peace and divine unity, not dwelling in the house of God, that is, in the Church of God, in which only those who are concordant and unanimous dwell?

Finally, how inseparable is the sacrament of unity, and how without hope and acquiring for themselves a ruin of the soul from the indignation of God are those who make a schism, and, having abandoned the bishop, set up for themselves another pseudo-bishop. But if someone objects, saying that Novatian holds the same law that the Catholic Church holds, and baptizes with the same creed as we do, and knows the same God the Father, the same Son Christ, the same Holy Spirit, let him know who thinks this should be objected that this cannot help such persons. For Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, together with the priest Aaron and Moses, knew the same God, living by the same law and religion, and invoked the one true God who was to be worshipped and invoked; yet because they transgressed the ministry of their place against Aaron the priest, who had received the legitimate priesthood by the grace of God and by ordination, and claimed for themselves the license to sacrifice, they were struck by divine power, immediately paid the penalty for their unlawful attempts, and the sacrifices irreligiously and illicitly offered against the right of divine ordinance could not be valid or effective. Therefore, those who champion Novatian, or others of this kind, contend in vain.

And so that the divine judgment against such audacity might be better understood, we find that in such a crime not only the leaders and authors, but also the participants, are destined for punishments, unless they separate themselves from communion with the wicked, as the Lord commands through Moses, saying: "Separate yourselves from the tabernacle of these very hard men, and do not touch anything that belongs to them, lest you perish together in their sin" (Num. 16:26). And what the Lord had threatened through Moses, he fulfilled: so that whoever did not separate himself from Korah, Dathan, and Abiram immediately paid the penalty for impious communion. By this example it is shown and proven that all who have mixed with schismatics against the bishops and priests of God in irreligious temerity are liable to both the guilt and the punishment, just as the Holy Spirit also testifies through the prophet Hosea, and says: "Their sacrifices are like the bread of mourning; all who eat of them will be defiled" (Hos. 9:4), teaching and showing that all without exception are joined in punishment with the authors, who have been contaminated by their sin. What is more evident than this testimony? What is clearer? What can be said more truly? For behold, it teaches that all without exception are bound by equal guilt and equal punishment, as many as have been polluted by communion with the wicked. What then is it that some say, as if excusing themselves: "My bishop himself knows if he has condemned someone," to such he says: "But you have hated discipline and have rejected my words.

If you saw a man committing adultery, you would run to him and place your portion with the adulterers (Ps. 49:17-18). And further on, the Apostle Paul makes clear and proves (Rom. 1:32) that not only those who do evil, but also those who consent to those who do such things, are worthy of death and liable to punishment: those who, by illicit communion, mingle with the wicked and sinners who do not repent, are polluted by the contacts of the guilty, and while they are joined in guilt, they are not separated even in punishment. But these men say: "We do not consent, however, to the condemnation of the dead." An intolerable evil! An unheard-of reproach: they say they do not consent, in words, to the condemnation, and they consent by their works, which is worse, to an execrable communion; since a more severe punishment awaits those who not only are ignorant of the truth, but nevertheless communicate with the enemies of the truth. For if those with whom you communicate have committed heresy, as we have taught, by condemning the living and the dead; if they have gone over to the heretics, by doing what the Acephali wanted, then both parties have certainly remained heretics after their admitted offenses. How, therefore, will those who communicate with heretics be denied to be held by the crime of heresy? Or by what face do they seem to themselves to communicate with Catholics? Or do you think that the Catholic faith and Christian peace reside in walls, because they have seized churches built by hand, supported by palatine influence, after driving out the Catholics?

If you think this, hear what the blessed Hilary, bishop, confessor, and distinguished doctor, writes to certain bishops at the time of the Emperor Constantius, when the Arians, under the name of peace and the emperor, had overrun almost all the local churches of the whole world, just as now the Eutychians or Acephali do, concerning this matter, saying after other things: "I beseech you, bishops, who believe yourselves to be such, by what supports did the apostles use to preach the Gospel? By what powers did they preach Christ and transfer almost all nations from idols to the Lord? Did they assume some dignity from the palace?" And further on: "One thing I advise," he says, "beware of Antichrist; for the love of walls has seized you badly, you venerate the Church badly in beds and buildings, you bring in the name of peace badly. Is it ambiguous that Antichrist will sit in these? Mountains, forests, lakes, prisons, and chasms are safer for me. For in these the prophets remained and prophesied by the Spirit of God." For the present, let these testimonies, brought forth for brevity, suffice, since if we wished to heap up more or to reason, we might perhaps burden the memory of the readers. Now we must also briefly recall that which they object from the works of the blessed Augustine written against the Donatists, saying: Saint Augustine said: "Peace is good, have peace; unity is good, love unity, let unity not be torn.

But these and similar testimonies of the distinguished doctor—how much they undermine them, but strengthen us—they do not at all perceive. For if these men, who set these things against themselves rather, were unwilling to rend unity; if they were unwilling to wage war on the Catholic Church, through which peace would be violated; what they found in it, they ought certainly to have preserved and manfully guarded, as has been shown above. But what they did not receive from it, or from her, they ought to have fled and shunned as truly harmful and deadly. For peace is to be had, according to apostolic teaching, with all men, if possible, but not to be held with all. Since it is one thing to have something, another to hold it. Therefore, peace is to be had not only with schismatics and heretics, but also with carnal Jews and pagans. But that peace is indeed that by which we desire and long to acquire them for God, and to join them to Catholic truth and unity; on account of which we also pray for them to be converted, according to the command of God: not so to be held that we go out to them, and what they are, we also become. Finally, what blessed Augustine said and urged to the Donatists—to have peace, to love unity—he said it excellently and wholesomely: for he desired them, just as we desire these men, after condemning their error, to return to the Catholic Church, as he most lucidly teaches in many works written against their schism.

Not that he himself, or any of the orthodox, abandoning the Catholic faith (which God forbid), would be mixed in with their sacrilegious communion. This we also say to them with great peace: Condemn the error which you have introduced, remove the evil of condemnation which you have inflicted, through which you have both become heretics and have stood forth as supporters of heretics; and having peace with us, and holding as before, you have confounded all heretics and restored yourselves to Catholic unity. Whoever therefore reads these things, do not seek eloquence, but diligently consider the matter and the weight of truth. And if you are not polluted by the communion of the transgressors, pray to God that you may persevere. But if you have lapsed, either ignorantly or violently, hasten to repair by returning to Catholic truth, resuming her communion: for pardon is promised to all who repent. Let no one be broken by despair. Let no one be further ensnared by serpentine deceptions: since, just as for transgressors and those remaining with an unrepentant heart eternal punishment is prepared with the devil, so for those preserving their pact with the Lord God, and guarding the foundations of the Catholic faith, and avoiding profane novelties, a glorious and eternal reward without end is reserved.