Epistle to Kerzhenets. On Rebaptism

Epistle of Spiridon Ivanov.

[On the discord in baptism among those of the same and single agreement, about which the following epistle will clearly show. The quarrel arose by chance. Epistle of Spiridon Ivanov from Little Russia to the Lower Regions for true counsel concerning the matter in question.]

To the God-loving fathers and brethren: Jacob, Nikephor, Simeon, John, Elisha, Emelian, Maximus, Hermolaus, Basil, and John, and to all who love the truth.

Of old, Rebekah grieved because in her womb two disagreeing sons, Jacob and Esau, waged war with each other and afflicted their mother’s womb with brotherly strife over the birthright. Now in us our mother, the Church, grieves—oh, how she grieves because of these disagreeing sons of hers: Peter Timofeev, Makar and Ivan Osipov, and Afanasy Strelkov, who emulate in their strife the corrupted Esau. They hate and revile their own brethren, and with these blasphemies and offenses they tear the beloved womb of the mother—the holy Church—and have covered her herself with craftily woven false words, and have trampled upon the counsel of the most wise man Andrei that was handed down to us. They themselves dare to command and to rebaptize from the newly ordained, from which ordinations our most wise fathers in common did not consent to rebaptize—as your own prudence also knows. In support of such a second baptism they put forward the following interpretation of the 46th Apostolic Canon: “If a bishop, or presbyter, or deacon does not reject or mock heretical baptism, but accepts one baptized by them, let him be deposed.” But we examine it and find that in this matter of heretical baptism the holy, catholic, and apostolic Church has rendered different judgments, which we present here.

First Judgment.

Sylvester, Pope of Rome (president of the First Ecumenical Council), Alexander, Patriarch of Alexandria, Eustathius of Antioch, Macarius of Jerusalem, and the other 318 holy fathers, as well as those of the Second and Sixth Ecumenical Councils and other local councils—divine men acting by the grace of the Holy Spirit—established different judgments concerning heretical baptism. Some they commanded to be rebaptized when coming to the catholic Church from heretics. Others they ordered only to be anointed with chrism. Others, having only anathematized their heresies, to be received. And the judgment of such holy fathers was not contrary to the mind of the holy apostles; but just as the holy apostles, so also the councils of the holy fathers wrote their rules by one and the same Holy Spirit, and therefore are worthy of all acceptance.

Second Judgment.

Your prudence well knows that the Encratites and Apotactites, having fallen into the Marcionite heresy in the year from the creation of the world 5648, held these heresies:

1. They abhor marriage, calling it satanic.
2. They offer water instead of wine to God.
3. They reject the eating of living things.
4. They blasphemously declare God’s creation to be unclean. And because of such heresies the Holy Spirit departs from them in all the sacraments—therefore their baptism was also heretical. Nevertheless, it seemed good to certain ones in Asia, for the sake of economy and on account of many, to accept their baptism, and it was accepted [Margin note: Nikon the Black Mountain, Word 63].

And Archdeacon Alexius the Law-keeper, who interpreted the canons of all the holy councils in the year from the creation of the world 6400 (more than 700 years after the Encratites fell into heresy), says the same about them on Canon 47 of Basil the Great: “The baptism of those who stand by water and the Encratites, even if it is not accepted (since the Holy Spirit departs from them), yet for the sake of economy it shall be accepted.” After him the Venerable Nikon, who lived in the year 6585 (900 years after the fall of the Encratites into heresy), says the same about them: “I fear,” he says, “lest by wishing to make them more negligent (that is, to rebaptize them), we hinder those who are being saved.” And further: “With every word it must be made clear that those coming from baptism are to be anointed, so that they may approach the sacraments openly with the faithful.” [Nikon, Word 63]. And Matthew Blastares, who lived in the year 6843 (1200 years after the Encratites fell into heresy), says the same about them: “But lest, holding to excessive caution, we make them more negligent in approaching the catholic Church. Let us accept,” he says, “the custom, and let us follow the fathers who arranged things for us, that they, it seems, are to be anointed with holy chrism.” And all these church teachers and interpreters of the canons of the holy fathers, though in this judgment they appear to contradict that apostolic rule on baptism, nevertheless wrote and interpreted the canons in the same Holy Spirit and understanding, looking to the benefit and edification of the Church; therefore they are also acceptable.

Third Judgment.

The Armenian heretics fell away from the orthodox faith into the Eutychian and Dioscorian heresy. Concerning their heresies, Saint John of Nicaea and other church historians describe them as follows:

1. They blaspheme the co-throne holders and like-minded ones of the holy great city of Rome, because they proclaimed two natures, two operations, and two wills in Christ.
2. They call their piety impiety.
3. They say their confession is rejection.
4. They curse the pious.
5. They declare the ancient books that rightly understand the truth about Christ to be deniers of Christ’s incarnation and perverters of the holy Gospel.
6. They deify trees: having bound three crosses together, they call them the Holy Trinity—with this naming (even if they do not say it outright) they resemble the heresies of those who attribute suffering to God.
7. In the holy liturgy they do not mix water into the wine, as Canon 32 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council shows.
8. They admit to the priesthood only those of priestly descent, as Canon 33 of the same council states.
9. They boil meat in the altars and distribute it to all the priests, as we read in Canon 100 (99th).
10. They receive the lifeless azyme in place of the body of Christ—that is, they perform the sacrament—and say that Gregory, bishop of Greater Armenia, commanded to give azymes without water in Azime, about which Nicephorus Callistus writes in Book 18, Chapter 54 [On the Faith. Belarusian print, fol. 282].
11. They do not accept ordination from the Church of Caesarea, without which they are in every way unordained and unbaptized. And all these heresies were among the Armenians, according to the testimony of Holy Scripture, up to the Seventh Ecumenical Council, besides the eight deeds of Chalep. Nevertheless, in the great and patriarchal sees, Armenians who turn to the holy Church are only anointed with chrism and not rebaptized.

Thus, from all these church judgments it has been shown that heretical baptism is not always repeated, but is accepted into the Church of God in various ways.

Fourth Judgment.

Your zeal well knows that at the request of the Great Russian archpastors, the book Skrizhal was sent from the Ecumenical Patriarch Paisius in the year 7161, as is attested in the same Skrizhal on page 100 of the second count. Then a temptation concerning the faith began among the Great Russian archpastors. And for this reason they first held a council in the year 7162, from which they sent a man named Manuel with letters to Constantinople to Patriarch Paisius concerning all the faults. In accordance with this, a Conciliar Act was sent from there in the year 7163. And because of that Act they again held a Great Russian council in the year 7163, at which were Nikon, Patriarch of all Russia, Macarius, Patriarch of Antioch, Gabriel, Patriarch of Serbia, with metropolitans and abbots. Having read that Conciliar Act, they then newly published the Sluzhebnik and ordered other books to be printed in the year 7163 [Preface, fol. 4 and 8]. And in the year 7164, together with the Great Russian archpastors, the Eastern patriarchs Macarius and Gabriel, and with them also Gregory, Metropolitan of Nicaea, in the week of Orthodoxy in the cathedral church cursed those who cross themselves with two fingers in this way: “If anyone does according to the writing of Theodoret and the false tradition, let him be accursed.” And this curse is attested in the Zhezl on page 58, that it was confirmed in the year 7164, and those who did not submit were given over to anathema. And thus the edition appeared with changes—with both removals and additions. The Sluzhebnik with various changes was printed in the year 7163. The Lenten and Flower Triodions were printed in the year 7164. The Irmologion in the years 7165 and 7166. The Psalter with the Follow-up in the year 7166. In this same year yet another newly published Sluzhebnik appeared, in which on folio 1 it is printed thus: “By the blessing and command of the great sovereign, the most holy Nikon, Archbishop of Moscow, Patriarch of all Russia, in the sixth year of his patriarchate, this book the Sluzhebnik was issued for the sixth time, in the year from the creation of the world 7166, indiction 11, on the 1st day of the month of July.” And according to the testimony of the newly printed books, we understand that up to the beginning of the year 7167 the following innovations were introduced into Great Russia by the archpastors:

1. To sign oneself with three fingers, and those who sign with two fingers are cursed. This curse is laid upon the two-finger sign in the Skrizhal, in the question and answer of Macarius, Patriarch of Antioch, and others, in this way: such a one, it says, is a heretic and an imitator of the Armenians, and for this reason we hold him cut off from the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and accursed.
2. Confessing the Holy Trinity with the three first fingers, they newly ordered to make the sign of the cross upon oneself with them, according to Damascene the Studite, the subdeacon, about which there is in the Skrizhal and the Psalters: those who do not do so are accursed.
3. To hierarchs it was newly handed down to bless the people by folding the index finger with the middle, the thumb with the fourth, and the little finger apart and slightly inclined (which signify IC and XC, thus ІС. ХС., and interpreting without titles), and to sanctify all the church sacraments with this blessing—I mean: in baptism, in chrismation, in ordination, in the Eucharist, in repentance, in marriage, and in the anointing of the sick.
4. In the liturgy, instead of seven prosphoras they newly handed down to have five prosphoras.
5. On the prosphora for the Lamb of God: the removal of the three-barred cross, the removal of the round seal signifying the Godhead, the removal of the inscription “Behold the Lamb of God,” and the rest; the removal of the Savior’s name written with a single letter: ІС. And instead of these it was newly handed down to have on the prosphora a two-part cross, a four-cornered seal, and to print the Savior’s name “Jesus.”
6. In the Creed it was newly handed down: instead of “Jesus”—“Iisus”; instead of “begotten, not made”—“begotten, not made” (with different spelling); instead of “there is no end”—“there shall be no end.”
7. In the newly printed Trebniks issued in the year 7166, in the sacrament of holy baptism there are many changes in the most important renunciations and vows, newly handed down, about which one may read in the answers.
8. In the same Trebnik an improper rite of churching an infant after forty days is placed: to trace a cross before the doors for the infant, and so forth.
9. An abbreviation in the rite of confession.
10. In the same Trebnik, the new insertion of the unheard-of prayer of Tryphon.

Having briefly run through all this, mentioning only the main points and indicating the importance of them and the others, so as not to obscure the memory with an excess of words—yet whoever desires more detailed knowledge may read about this there.

And all these things came about before the completion of the year 1666, for which reason we cannot consider them to be orthodox. We prove this. Because the seer John in the Apocalypse, in chapter 20, foretold that after a thousand years Satan would be loosed. This prediction of John the church teachers understand as having been fulfilled after a thousand years upon Pope Sylvester the Magus, as we read in the Book of Faith, chapter 27. However, the same writer of the Book of Faith, in chapter 21, understands the Romans to be in apostasy not after the completion of 1000 years, but after the Seventh Ecumenical Council, which was in the year 787 after the Nativity, under Pope Leo III: in France the Franks dared to violate the faith of the seven ecumenical councils, that is, they began to add another clause to the Symbol of the universal confession of faith: “and from the Son.” Also in the Prologue, on the 9th day of May, on page 362, it is printed thus: the Westerners, beginning from the year 809 concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit—which is the cause of all schism—erred. Thus far the Prologue. And for the azymes the theologians accuse the Romans not only after 1000 years, but the Sixth Ecumenical Council itself, which was in the year 680 after Christ, accuses and forbids it in Canon 11. Similarly Philaret also writes in his Exposition. The Monastic Trebnik, folio 236.

And just as the holy fathers up to the year 1000 do not confess the descent of the Holy Spirit in the novel sacraments of the Latins, so also now the skilled men up to the completion of the year 1666 [1658 in modern reckoning] do not confess the descent of the Holy Spirit in the sacraments because of the innovations and the anathemas. But from the year of the changes 1663 to 1667 many were ordained in those three years [in the 4th, 5th, and 6th years] and many were baptized by them, and afterward they approached the ancient orthodox Church. And concerning such people, the skilled men who had labored many years in the divine Scriptures and had poured out their blood for the confession of the orthodox faith—all the very discerning assembly of fathers, both the Solovki and Pomor, as well as the Foreign and Novgorod ones—paying attention to the examples of the ancients (about which earlier), who accepted heretics in two ways, likewise with one mind established a judgment to accept in two ways. Those who were born in those three years before the completion of the year 1666 and were baptized by those newly ordained, because the changes had not yet been completed, they judged not to rebaptize when they turned. But those who were born after the completion of the year 1666, they ordered to rebaptize.

And from such prudent judgment of our fathers, all the Solovki, Pomor, Nizhny Novgorod regions, and the Feodosievites accept without rebaptism at any time those who were born and baptized in those three years and who have turned to the ancient orthodox faith. Nevertheless, for this they are neither blamed nor condemned by anyone, because this decision has proofs from ancient cases and reliable traditions, as the above-placed judgments show: that the holy fathers accepted without rebaptism the Encratites, the Armenians, and other heretics for necessary and blessed reasons. And Timothy, presbyter of the Great Church, says: “We, having examined all this,” he says, “ought to follow the custom now holding in the patriarchates and metropolises.”

Thus also our fathers and the skilled men, who were well-versed in the Scriptures, having examined it, followed the same practice with even greater adherence to the custom of the saints: the hierodeacon Ignatius the Solovki man [this deacon Ignatius was of the Solovki Monastery, and later lived in Pomorie in the Danilov Monastery], Daniel Vikulievich, Andrei Denisovich with his brother Simeon, Leonty Feodosiev, Prokopy Makariev, Peter Prokopyev [Prokopy and Peter, one after the other, were typikon-keepers of the Pomor Monastery, and after them Tryphon], and others.

But as the ancient sufferers and most wise fathers, in so many of the above-mentioned new dogmatizings, changes, and anathematizings of the truth by the newly ordained, prudently judged to accept baptism by repentance — of which you yourselves are well aware, and are true followers of it, and we understand the same and keep it. And we truly know that Andrei, Simeon, Nikephor, Merkury, Mikhail, and others are of one mind and one accord with us. And sometimes, conversing with us in the words of eternal truth, and presenting to us all the previously written likenesses, they testified that it was the custom among the holy fathers — because of very great changes — not to rebaptize those coming from heretical ordinations. And according to such a suffering judgment, the Church receives these most heavily oppressed fugitive newly ordained. For the newly ordained, who contend for the new traditions, persecute the truth, blaspheme and anathematize those who hold to the truth, and, folding their fingers according to the new tradition, bless in the sacrament of baptism. But the fugitive ordained flee for the sake of the true faith and the old-church traditions, and do not err in any articles of theology; rather, they even suffer for this, so as not to accept the novelties.

However, since even Patriarch Philaret, although dealing with known heretics, the Latins, yet without enumerating and likening the changes, did not dare to place them under the judgment of baptism, but first by comparison and likening them to other heretics, ordered them to be baptized — therefore it will not be unknown to us to recall the difference between the present ordained and the holy Church, so that, not burdened by excessive vain talk, we do not fall away from the custom of the saints.

But let us set forth a judgment and in it examine: are these fugitive newly ordained, who anathematize the truth, heavier in evil-doing than the Encratites, the Armenians, and the others? Not at all. For the fugitives only err in certain traditions of these:

1. That, without regard to the canonical command concerning baptism, they accept those baptized by the new-dogmatizers without rebaptizing them.
2. They keep chrism of uncertain efficacy or consecration, or, holding simple oil, they say to anoint with chrism, for they do not have the true one.
3. Receiving the priesthood from outside, without archpastoral authority and blessing, a priest is ordered to perform all the church sacraments.
4. They have churches without archpastoral blessing and keep antimensions from foreign churches.
5. They perform the Eucharist without having received grace from a bishop, and give it to various people without regard to worthiness.
6. They crown unblessed marriages without parental consent.
7. They crown a groom and bride of different faiths.
8. They commune in prayer and eating with those of contrary faith and never apply excommunication to those who commune with them.
9. They blaspheme true Christian teachers, and some even dare to curse them.

And because of such transgressions, although the fugitive priests are under canonical guilt, they are nevertheless far from the previously mentioned innovations, and therefore they are subject to a different and different judgment.

And on this our fathers and wise teachers, bringing forth firm proofs, spoke to us. Saint Athanasius the Great, in his answer 110 to Prince Antiochus, speaks thus: There is heresy and heresy; there is judgment and judgment. And further: Not only this, but even in that one heresy there are many and various judgments: one is the sin of one who curses the people. And further: And another, of one who curses the truth. Thus far Athanasius. And also bringing forward how Saint Epiphanius, Archbishop of Cyprus, in the description of all heretics, in chapter 47, does not place the Encratites, disciples of Marcion taught by Tatian, under one judgment because of the inequality of the heresy. And again: the Venerable Nikon in Word 51 says: It is fitting also to know this, that we should not accept the previously cited testimonies simply and thoughtlessly, but especially the demonstrations of the divine Scriptures, when something similar to these happens to us by necessity and affliction. And further, bringing forward the Venerable Matthew Blastares, in chapter 4, commanding thus concerning customs: For those things about which no written law lies, it is fitting to keep the practiced habit and custom. But if there is a lack even of this, it is fitting to follow those things that more closely approach and bear likeness to what is sought.

But concerning the present newly ordained, how to receive them — although we do not have a written law, yet we have much greater likeness and church custom to what is sought, which, as to a written law, the Venerable Matthew commands us to follow.

Will someone say: Which of the saints received the baptism of heretical newly ordained, who had not been baptized with true baptism, without rebaptizing them, into the Church, and where is such a custom and likeness to what is sought? We answer:

1. Custom with likeness to what is sought: the divine fathers in the Asian metropolis, accepting by custom from the Encratites and others, did not rebaptize them [Nikon, Word 63].
2. The Venerable Nikon speaks concerning the Encratites: Following the fathers who arranged things for us, I fear lest, wishing to make them more negligent by rebaptizing them, we hinder those who are being saved.
3. The Venerable Matthew speaks concerning the Encratites: But lest, holding to excessive caution, we make them more negligent in coming to the catholic Church, let us accept, he says, the custom, and let us follow the fathers who arranged things for us [1st composition, ch. 2].
4. In the great cathedral churches, that is, in the patriarchates, metropolises, and others, they anoint Armenians and others with divine chrism and do not rebaptize them.
5. Timothy the presbyter speaks concerning the Armenians and others: We, having examined all things, ought to follow the custom now holding in the patriarchates and metropolises.
6. All our pious ancient sufferers, wherever salvation is accomplished for those turning to the orthodox faith, up to the present year for more than 67 years, have accepted every year those born according to the newly printed books from the year 1663, baptized by the newly ordained who anathematize the truth, without rebaptism and without episcopal chrism up to the year 1667.

And having thus commonly judged concerning this: that the fugitive ordained are far from those Encratites and Armenians, and from these newly ordained who anathematize the truth, and are in no way like them. And they commanded us to accept those baptized by them without rebaptizing.

Afterward, by God’s good pleasure, the most excellent man Andrei himself, being with us [he was in the settlements in the year 7220], reasoning about this church need, likewise commanded us to keep unchanged their common ancient decision concerning these fugitive newly ordained. Therefore we cannot transgress their counsel and command in anything or do otherwise — except for the aforementioned schismatics and troublemakers, who are true emulators of Ham, blasphemers and persecutors of the paternal good counsel, who have transgressed all the paternal bounds and statutes, having exalted themselves above all, and who, not only against your admonitions but even against the most wise man Andrei himself, have begun in their senseless audacity to rebaptize the children of the Church.

1. The man who came from us to Nizhny, Leonty, was received by Merkury from the fugitive ordained without rebaptism and was confessed into the Church [this Merkury was confessor to the streltsy Makar, Ivan Osipov, and others]. And when this Leonty came from Nizhny to us in Little Russia, he was for three years in the church equal to the Christians in all things. But afterward, following your letters, Strelkov rebaptized him on Great Saturday. Having done so, he neither respected his own spiritual father (to dishonor the matter) nor spared his own brother in this.
2. Those who were received into the Church by Alexey Feodorovich and were in the presence of Andrei, Strelkov now, going beyond the counsel and deed of these, rebaptized them on Great Saturday [without the counsel of Andrei he baptized Alexey. Andrei was in Chernetsk].
3. And further: those whom we, the poor, received according to the paternal counsel, this same aforementioned Strelkov perverts, leads away from the paternal counsels, and having caught them in his deceit, rebaptizes them.
4. And again: to the newly come from whatever lands, pretending to be inexperienced, he slanders and reviles us, and on their account rebaptizes those baptized by the fugitives, troubling the flock of Christ and casting doubt upon the zealots, saying as if we had united with the priestly party in this.
5. For the aforementioned reception of that Leonty by Merkury and for the fact that in Moscow he baptized publicly with the renunciation of Satan, he called him a rogue and blasphemer among us [his spiritual children Makar and others called him so].
6. To the letters sent by your prudence for the admonition of their strife they say: We do not believe and do not follow, because they were not written by the fathers but by such a peasant as we are, and he is free to write whatever he wishes [for this was written not by Merkury but by the simple teacher Simeon Yeremeyev].
7. And concerning the God-wise man Andrei, to whom, because of his wisdom and high life, the whole church assembly shows reverence, this one, in his ignorance, says: Even if the fathers do not act according to us, we shall be strangers to them.
8. As many as he has torn away from the fence of the teaching of our fathers into self-will, he forbids them to keep company with us in any society—I mean: in drinking, eating, and in prayer he orders them to separate themselves more than from other schismatics.
9. Out of one flock of Christ these vain-minded ones have made three agreements. We, as we were, remain in the paternal counsels. But these, the offspring of Esau, having risen up against their own brethren, us, have separated themselves and become enemies, haters, and transgressors of the paternal blessing. Through the prohibitions of our fathers they have begun to rebaptize, as their senseless audacity has directed them. Therefore those who are with them, remaining in schism, seeing them rebaptizing after their fathers, have risen up against them, saying: If your fathers, teaching you, baptized you, then it is fitting to rebaptize you also. And thus these, having torn themselves away from them, call them partakers of the Nikonite tradition, because their chief fathers accepted without rebaptism those baptized by the new ordained up to the year 1667, and now, they say, you accept those born from the year 1663 in the 4th, 5th, and 6th years and baptized in that heresy—therefore you are partakers of the novelties. And thus in their ignorance, like bats and night ravens deprived of the true light of the holy fathers, having wandered in the darkness of ignorance, they give much offense to outsiders and harm the Church of Christ.

Therefore, for these reasons, with pain of our heart, we beseech your paternal mercy: have compassion on us, strive with prudent words to extinguish this flame of discords, and strengthen the wavering feet of the weak brethren shaken by church disturbance by a letter from your lofty reason. And give counsel to the light-minded among us how to discern the good from the evil and to separate deceit from the truth. With whom does your prudence command them to stand: with that Andrei and the others, or with that Strelkov and those like him? Likewise, for the Lord’s sake, we tearfully ask concerning us: take care and deign to declare to us in writing in which faith we are to be found. We desire your good counsel to be made manifest to us concerning this, like Daniel with the assembly of prophetic voices against the slaying of the fierce serpent — the church discord — and to give us the bread of consolation, as Habakkuk to Daniel in the lions’ den, for those who tear the Body of Christ and sharpen their teeth against it, that nothing of its goodness may be lost.

May the God of peace and mercies, by thine ineffable love for mankind, make known to thy good heart what is profitable for us ourselves and for our brethren, and grant all things conducive to salvation without stumbling, to the glory and honor of his beloved Church. Amen.

The most sinful and unworthy: Monk Sergius, monk Theodosius, monk Stephen, Mikhail Nesterov, Spiridon, Arkhip, Nikon, and the others, falling at your honorable feet, we ask that you mercifully accept what is written, patiently read it through, and pour out the oil of mercy upon those who wrote it, crying out: Do not leave our need without resolution.

Insofar as anything has been spoken ignorantly herein, we ask you to cover it with your prudence. And concluding this, we desire your paternal blessing and your fervent prayers to God for the peace of the Church and the salvation of our souls. Amen.

Written in the year 7223 [now briefly copied in the year 7259, November 27].