peace of the Churches. I pray that you fare well in the Lord, beloved son.
ADMONITION ON THE THREE SUBSEQUENT EPISTLES
I. Beyond those things which we noted in the general preface to these epistles, we wish to warn the learned reader that we have paid no regard here to chronological order, and therefore have transmitted them to the end, so that they might be placed here in the same order in which they exist in collections of the Canons; for they appear only in codices of the Canons, and have been arranged in this volume in the same way. They have been edited by Theodore Balsamon, with the scholia of the same Balsamon. They are also included in the Oxford Collection of Canons, vol. II, p. 36, with the scholia of Zonaras and Balsamon. Something must be said here about each of them.
II. The EPISTLE TO AMUN has nothing that would not point to Athanasius as the author; the style persuades us of this, as does the energy of the language and arguments, and finally the name of Amun the monk, most familiar to Athanasius, concerning whom see above p. 672. This epistle was given on the occasion of a certain question raised among the monks. For there were some who contended that nocturnal illusions stain the purity of soul and body, a matter regarding which Athanasius, being asked by Amun, the Father of the monks, fights with valid arguments, [asserting] that no more sin is involved in this event—provided that intention is absent—than in the discharging of any of the body's excrements. Furthermore, since Amun died before Antony, as is said on p. 672, and Antony died at the beginning of the year 356, it is necessary that this epistle was given before that year, though we cannot conjecture the exact date.
III. THE FESTAL EPISTLE, mutilated at the beginning, as is evident to anyone, seems to be one of the festal epistles of Athanasius commemorated by Jerome in his book *On Ecclesiastical Writers*, in which, however, perhaps some contrary suspicion might occur. For while Athanasius lists the canonical books, he mentions naught of the various opinions regarding the authority of certain books of Scripture: for many at that time called into question the last two Epistles of John, as well as certain others, and most of all the Apocalypse of John: concerning which matter Eusebius, *Eccles. Hist.* book III, p. 97, and Gregory Nazianzen, *Carm.* pp. 98 and 194, should be read. But in our judgment, there is nothing for which we should hesitate on that account. For Athanasius could have set forth his own truer opinion to the people, without bringing into the middle of the discussion various disputes about the matter which exceed the grasp of the common people. Wherefore we judge it to be indeed the work of Athanasius.
IV. In the EPISTLE TO RUFINIANUS, there is nothing to be encountered that is not Athanasian, nor did any controversy about it ever arise anywhere. He wrote it, however, to answer Rufinianus, who was asking under what condition heretics are to be admitted when they return to the sound faith. To this Athanasius says that for those who return, if they have of their own accord championed heresy, one should indeed grant pardon, but they must by no means be admitted into the clergy: if, however, forced by violence, they have consented with heretics, they are not to be moved from their place or grade. And he mentions, briefly, the synod held at Alexandria in the year 362, hinting that it was celebrated long before: from which it seems that this epistle was given in the last years of Athanasius's life. Furthermore, Athanasius wrote almost the same things to Basil concerning the lapsed as he did to Rufinianus, as can be seen in the 75th epistle of Basil.
Letter of our Holy Father Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Amun the monk.
The handiwork of God is all good and pure; for the Word of God has created nothing useless or unclean. For we are a sweet savor of Christ in those who are being saved, according to the Apostle A. But since the darts of the devil are various and manifold, and he prepares those who are more simple in mind to be disturbed, and hinders the brothers from their accustomed exercises, sowing in them thoughts of impurity and defilement; come, let us in a few words drive away the deception of the evil one through the grace of our Savior, and let us strengthen the mind of the more simple. All things indeed are pure to the pure B: but of the impure, both their conscience and their
A defilement are polluted. I admire the trick of the devil, who, being himself corruption and plague, suggests thoughts that appear to be full of purity. He acts in this way more for the sake of stratagem than of testing. For in order, as I said before, to distract B the ascetics from their accustomed and salutary meditation, and to seem to prevail, he stirs up such trifles as these, which bring nothing useful to life, but only empty questions and chatter, which we must reject. For tell me, O beloved and most pious, what sin or impurity is there in a natural excretion? Who would wish to blame the mucus ejected from the nostrils, or the spittle emitted from the mouth? To which we could add many more things, such as the excretions of the bowels, which are necessary to the animal for life. In addition to this, if we believe according to the Scriptures that man is the work of God’s hands, how could a contaminated work proceed from a pure power? And if, as is read in the Acts of the Apostles, we are God’s offspring, we have nothing impure in ourselves. For then alone are we polluted, when we perform the most foul work, namely, sin. But when a natural excretion occurs involuntarily, then by the necessity of nature, as we said before, we endure this along with the rest. But since those who have no C care but to oppose well-spoken words, or rather things enacted by God, pervert that evangelical saying: *Not what enters, but what comes out pollutes a man*; let us refute this madness of theirs, not to say question. For first, being unstable men, they pervert the Scriptures according to their own ignorance. Now the divine oracle is as follows: since some, just like these, were arguing about foods, the Lord Himself, to relieve their ignorance and uncover the deceit to all, says, *Not that which enters the man pollutes him, but that which comes out.* He adds after this, and from where they come out: *from the heart.* For He knows that there are the wicked treasures of profane thoughts and other sins. And the Apostle, having learned this same thing, says more concisely: *Food will not commend us D to God.* Someone might now reasonably say: A natural excretion will not subject us to punishment. Perhaps even the sons of physicians (that these men might be put to shame even by those outside) will defend with us that certain necessary passages have been given to the animal, for the discharging of humors which are held in our individual members: such as the excretions of the head, hair, and the watery substances which are emitted from the head: the [excretions] of the belly,
and consequently, that excretion from the seminal ducts. What sin, therefore, in the sight of God, O most religious elder, is there in this, since the Lord Himself who created the living creature took care and caused that these members should be equipped with such passages? But because the arguments of the wicked must be anticipated—for perhaps they might say: "Therefore, there is no sin in their use either, if the organs were made by the Creator"—let us impose silence upon those who speak thus by this questioning: "What use do you speak of? Is it the lawful one, which God permitted with these words: *Increase and multiply, and fill the earth* 53; which the Apostle also approved, when he said: *Marriage is honorable, and the bed undefiled* 54; or that common [use] which is practiced secretly and lasciviously?" For in other matters also, which are customarily performed during this life, we shall find that distinctions exist depending on how they are done. For instance, to kill is not permitted, but in war to slay adversaries is both lawful and worthy of praise. Thus, indeed, those who distinguish themselves in war are judged worthy of great honors, and pillars are raised for them, proclaiming their achievements. B So that the same thing is, in one respect and at one time, not permitted, but in another respect and at a suitable time, it is allowed and permitted. The argument is, therefore, the same regarding intercourse. Blessed is he who in his youth, joined in free marriage, has used his nature for the procreation of children; but if he has used it for lust, the punishment written by the Apostle for fornicators and adulterers shall await him. Since there are two ways in this life concerning these matters—one that is more moderate and secular, namely marriage; and another that is angelic and the highest of all, namely virginity—if someone should choose the worldly one, that is to say marriage, he is indeed free from blame, but he will not receive so many gifts. He will receive some, however, insofar as he himself also bears the fruit of thirty. C But if someone should embrace the chaste and higher-than-worldly life, although this other way is rougher and more difficult, nevertheless he is to be endowed with more excellent gifts; for he has brought forth the perfect fruit, namely the hundred-fold. Therefore, their obscene and malicious questions have their own solutions, already brought forth long ago from the divine Scriptures. Strengthen, therefore, O Father, the flocks under you, and exhort them with apostolic words. Soothe them with the evangelical [words], and offer counsel from the psalms: *Vivify me*, saying, *according to thy word* 55: and His word is this, that we should serve Him from a pure heart. D Since the Prophet himself is not ignorant of this, he interprets himself, as it were, saying: *Create a clean heart in me, O God* 56, that obscene thoughts may not disturb me. Again, David himself: *And establish me with a governing Spirit* 57, that