69

to confirm matters from the random drift of speech or human custom, but from the divinely-inspired Scripture itself and the patristic and canonical tradition. Therefore, it is clear that second marriage has been permitted by the holy apostle and through him by Christ, not, however, as a law, as Gregory the Theologian says, but a concession; and a concession would not be for something blameless and faultless (for how and why?), but for some defeat and a reprehensible act. For the divine apostle hinted at this very thing when he said, if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. But incontinence, having lost the strength of fortitude, is the offspring of defeat and of a fall. Proceeding from this, the divine fathers subjected those in a second marriage to a penance, those of the synod in Laodicea indefinitely by saying, after a short time has passed and they have devoted themselves to prayers and fasts, we have decreed that communion be restored to them by indulgence, but Basil the Great, definitely; for he says, concerning those in a third or multiple marriage they established the same canon, the fathers, that is, which also applies to those in a second marriage analogously; for one year for those in a second marriage, but others, two years. It has been shown, therefore, from what has been said that second marriage, being a transgression, received the penance. For this reason, also, the holy fathers of the synod in Neocaesarea forbade a presbyter from feasting at the wedding of one in a second marriage, saying: Since the one in a second marriage is required to do penance, what presbyter will there be who by feasting assents to the marriage? What, then, is the necessary conclusion? That the first marriage, being properly a law, is rightly crowned by the priesthood as untouched, as undefiled, as unconsumed by the passion of fornication and for this reason is wreathed as a victor over sin. Upon which also follows the partaking of the sanctified gifts, and the feasting at such a wedding of the one who crowned them and of every other clergyman. Just as our Lord and God deigned to dine in Cana of Galilee, blessing every wedding feast through his feasting there. But also of the crowning union, he himself anticipated and placed the blessing upon our forefather Adam; how? And God made man; in the image of God he made him, male and female he made them. And God blessed them, saying: Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it. This, then, is the blessing of the marital union, from which comes every blessing of a monogamous union; since Adam also was monogamous. And it should be observed that the crowning invocation also originated from there, commemorating the formation of the first man and his union with the woman from his side. But the second marriage, although it is permitted, has been penanced. For how could it be worthy of crowning, having been defeated and not victorious? And who is the presbyter who would crown this, who is even forbidden by patristic decree from simply feasting at its banquet? And how will he partake of divine communion who for this very reason is excluded for a period of one or two years from the holy gifts? And what or what kind of prayer of blessing can be said over this union, since there is no other than the one for a monogamous and first marriage? It is concluded, therefore, from all this, both scripturally and patristically, that a second marriage does not partake of crowning, for this reason it is not joined by a priest, nor indeed is it handed down, but it is accepted then, when there is fulfillment of the penance given, however it may be, according to priestly judgment; after which he will also have the partaking of the divine gifts, whence they are blessed as if at a crowning, in a secondary sense, after the concession. For the gift at that time is a blessing and a sign of the union from the priest, since from then on he is not forbidden to feast with those who have married a second time, as is the case for the monogamous. And so second marriage proceeds by a concessive law according to the apostle, knowing that it holds second place to monogamy and not unreasonably seeking the rights of the first marriage, which it had previously enjoyed. But you might say:

69

ἐκ φορᾶς, ὡς ἔτυχεν, λόγου ἢ συνηθείας ἀνθρωπίνης πιστοῦσθαι τὰ πράγματα, ἀλλ' ἐξ αὐτῆς τῆς θεοπνεύστου Γραφῆς καὶ τῆς πατρικῆς καὶ κανονικῆς ἐκδόσεως. Ἡ μὲν οὖν διγαμία παρακεχώρηται δῆλον ὅτι ὑπὸ τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἀποστόλου καὶ δι' αὐτοῦ παρὰ Χριστοῦ, οὐ μὴν νόμος, ὥσπερ ὁ Θεολόγος Γρηγόριος, ἀλλὰ συγχώρησις· συγχώρησις δὲ οὐκ ἐπὶ ἀμέμπτου καὶ ἀπταίστου γένοιτ' ἂν (πῶς γὰρ καὶ διατί;), ἀλλ' ἐπὶ ἥττης τινὸς καὶ ἁλωσίμου δράματος. αὐτὸ γὰρ τοῦτο ὁ θεῖος ἀπόστολος ᾐνίξατο εἰπών, εἰ οὐκ ἐγκρατεύονται, γαμησάτωσαν. ἡ δὲ ἀκρασία, τὸ κράτος τῆς ἀνδρείας ἀπολέσασα, ἥττης ἐστὶν καὶ ἀποπτώσεως ἔκγονον. ἐντεῦθεν ὁρμηθέντες οἱ θεῖοι πατέρες ἐπιτιμίῳ ὑπέβαλον τοὺς διγάμους, οἱ μὲν τῆς ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ συνόδου ἀορίστως διὰ τοῦ εἰπεῖν, ὀλίγου χρόνου παρελθόντος καὶ σχολάσαντας ταῖς προσευχαῖς καὶ νηστείαις κατὰ συγγνώμην ἀποδίδοσθαι αὐτοῖς τὴν κοινωνίαν ὡρίσαμεν, ὁ δὲ Μέγας Βασίλειος ὡρισμένως· φησὶ γάρ, περὶ τριγάμων καὶ πολυγάμων τὸν αὐτὸν ὥρισαν κανόνα, οἱ πατέρες δῆλον ὅτι, ὃν καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν διγάμων ἀναλόγως· ἐνιαυτὸν μὲν γὰρ ἐπὶ τῶν διγάμων, ἄλλοι δὲ δύο ἔτη. ∆έδεικται τοίνυν ἐκ τῶν ῥηθέντων ὡς ὑπὸ τὸ πταιστὸν γεγονυῖα ἡ διγαμία εἰλήφει τὸ ἐπιτίμιον. διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ οἱ τῆς ἐν Νεοκαι σαρείᾳ συνόδου ἅγιοι πατέρες ἀπεῖρξαν καὶ τοῦ ἑστιαθῆναι πρεσβύτερον εἰς διγαμοῦντος γάμον, λέγοντες· ἐπεὶ μετάνοιαν αἰτοῦντος τοῦ διγαμοῦντος, τίς ἔσται ὁ πρεσβύτερος ὁ διὰ τῆς ἑστιάσεως συγκατατιθέμενος τοῖς γάμοις; τί οὖν τὸ συμπεραινόμενον ἐξ ἀναγκαίου; ὅτι ὁ μὲν πρῶτος γάμος ὡς κυρίως ὢν νόμος εἰκότως ἐστεφάνωται ὑπὸ τῆς ἱερωσύνης ὡς ἀνέπαφος, ὡς ἄρρυπος, ὡς ἀνάλωτος πορνικῷ πάθει καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ὡς νικητὴς τῆς ἁμαρτίας κατεστεμμένος. ἐφ' ᾧ ἕπεται καὶ ἡ τῶν ἁγιασμάτων μετάληψις, καὶ ἡ τοῦ στεφανώσαντος καὶ παντὸς ἄλλου ἱερατικοῦ ἐν τῷ τοιούτῳ γάμῳ ἑστίασις. καθὰ καὶ ὁ Κύριος καὶ θεὸς ἡμῶν ἐν Κανᾷ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ἠξίωσεν ἀριστῆσαι, διὰ τῆς ἐκεῖσε ἑστιάσεως πάντα γαμικὸν ἄριστον κατευλογήσας. ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς στεφανικῆς ἁρμογῆς αὐτὸς προλαβὼν τὴν εὐλογίαν ἔθετο ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀρχιπάτορος ἡμῶν Ἀδάμ· πῶς; καὶ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον· κατ' εἰκόνα θεοῦ ἐποίησεν αὐτόν, ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτούς. καὶ εὐλόγησεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεός, λέγων· αὐξάνεσθε καὶ πληθύνεσθε καὶ πληρώσατε τὴν γῆν καὶ κατακυριεύσατε αὐτήν. Αὕτη οὖν ἡ εὐλογία τῆς γαμικῆς συναφείας, ἀφ' ἧς πᾶσα εὐλογιστία μονογαμικῆς συζεύξεως· ἐπεὶ καὶ μονόγαμος Ἀδάμ. ἐπιτηρητέον δὲ ὅτι καὶ ἡ στεφανικὴ ἐπίκλησις ἐκεῖθεν ὥρμηται, τὴν τοῦ πρώτου ἀνθρώπου διάπλασιν καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἐκ πλευρᾶς αὐτοῦ γυναῖκα σύζευξιν ὑπομνηματίζουσα. ὁ δὲ δεύτερος γάμος, εἰ καὶ συγκεχώρηται, ἀλλ' ἐπιτετίμηται. πῶς γὰρ ἂν καὶ εἴη στεφανώσεως ἄξιος, ἡττηθεὶς ἀλλ' οὐ νικήσας; τίς δὲ καὶ ὁ στεφανώσων τοῦτον πρε σβύτερος, ὃς καὶ τὸ ἁπλῶς ἑστιαθῆναι ἐν τῷ κατ' αὐτὸν ἀρίστῳ πατρικῶς κεκώλυται; πῶς δὲ καὶ μεθέξει τῆς θείας κοινωνίας ὁ δι' αὐτὸ τοῦτο εἰργόμενος χρόνῳ ἑνὶ καὶ δυσὶ τῶν ἁγιασμάτων; τίνος δὲ ἢ οἵας τῆς εὐλογητικῆς προσευχῆς γινομένης ἐπὶ τῆς συναφείας αὐτοῦ, μὴ οὔσης ἄλλης παρὰ τὴν μίαν τῆς μονογαμικῆς καὶ πρώτης; Συνῆκται οὖν ἐκ πάντων γραφικῶς τε καὶ πατρικῶς ἀμέτοχον εἶναι στεφανώματος τὴν δευτερογαμίαν, διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἱερέως ζευγνυμένην, ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδὲ παραδεδομένην, τότε δὲ προσδεδεγμένην, ὁπηνίκα εἴη πλήρωσις τοῦ ὁπωσοῦν κατὰ ἱερατικὴν δοκιμασίαν δοθέντος ἐπιτιμίου· μεθ' ἣν ἕξει καὶ τῶν θείων δώρων τὴν μετάληψιν, ἐντεῦθεν εὐλογουμένους αὐτοὺς οἱονεὶ ὡς ἐπὶ στεφανώματος, κατὰ δεύτερον λόγον μετὰ συγχώρησιν. εὐλογία γὰρ τὸ δῶρον τηνικαῦτα καὶ συναφείας παρὰ τοῦ ἱερέως δεῖγμα, ἔκτοτε μὴ κεκωλυμένου αὐτῷ συνεστιαθῆναι τοῖς διγαμήσασιν ὡς ἐπὶ τῶν μονογάμων. καὶ οὕτω νόμῳ ὁρμᾶται συγχωρητικῷ ἡ διγαμία κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον, γινώσκουσα τὰ δευτερεῖα ἔχειν τῆς μονογαμίας καὶ μὴ ἀλόγως τῆς πρώτης ἐπιζητοῦσα τὰ δικαιώματα, ἅπερ προαπήλαυκεν. Φαίης δ' ἄν·