Timothy, Bishop of Alexandria

of the Word, who from the beginning was with the Father, signifying two persons: the one, concerning the man created and fashioned from Mary; the other, concerning Him who is before the ages without beginning, and of eternal birth. Since, therefore, the seducers of words, and the unlearned in the spirit, observing these things, cause the uninstructed to err, saying, "The operation of the Lord's body is from four hundred years ago," and how some refer to Him that which was said: "The Lord created me the beginning of his ways for his works," as Scripture says, "before the mountains and the hills, before the fountains and before the age, begotten and created"? Those who say these things are thought by some to be praised, not distinguishing which person cries out through the prophetic spirit concerning the body of the Lord, and which teaches concerning His eternal generation from the Father. ^A

ANNO DOMINI CCCLXXXV. TIMOTHEUS ALEXANDRINUS EPISCOPUS. — NOTITIA.

I. Petrus—to whom we have referred above—dies, says Socrates (a), "leaving his brother Timotheus as his successor in the Alexandrian see; ‹διάδοχον καταλιπὼν Τιμόθεον ἀδελφὸν ἑαυτοῦ.› He was a disciple of the Great Athanasius, whose virtue, as Facundus testifies (b), he acquired, as well as his see. His election, accomplished by all the orders of Egypt, the Emperor Theodosius records with praise in a rescript concerning episcopal judgment sent to Optatus, the Augustal Prefect, in these words (c): 'All have preferred Timotheus to themselves, even by their own judgment. For he is a man, he adds, to be venerated for every virtue he has taken up, and moreover approved by our judgment.' The same Theodosius also mentions him in another sanction concerning the Catholic faith (d). No sooner, however, had the Alexandrian pontiff been ordained than all the Westerners embraced his communion, as is evident from the synodical letter of the Council of Aquileia to the same Emperor Theodosius (e). Afterwards, indeed, he was present at the first Council of Constantinople, celebrated in the year 381, in which we understand the cause of Gregory of Nazianzus to have been agitated. Nor do we find anything further recorded in ancient writings concerning his deeds. He departed from the living in the year 385, on the 20th of July, during the first consulship of Arcadius Augustus and Bauto (f); and ^B to him succeeded Theophilus. Furthermore, concerning the year of his death, you may see more in Tillemont (g) and Sollerius (h): nor would I have you omit Renaudotius (i), who narrates several things concerning this patriarch from Eutychius, Elmacinus, and others, which you might elsewhere seek in vain.

II. There are extant among the collectors of canons the *Canonical Responses* of Timotheus of Alexandria, which, having been taken from the *Synodicon* of Beveridge (j) with the scholia of Theodore Balsamon, we have brought forward below (k). Likewise, there remains of the same Alexandrian prelate, in the work of Facundus (l), an epistle inscribed to Diodorus, Bishop of Tyre. Sozomen also records (m) that Timotheus wrote a history of certain monks, to which perhaps Rufinus alluded, while speaking of Macarius of Alexandria (n): "The holy Macarius of Alexandria," he says, "also accomplished magnificent virtues, concerning which others have written some things." Moreover, a *Narrative of the Miracles of the holy Menas, the Egyptian martyr at the city of Cotyaeum*, is circulated under the name of the same Timotheus, the beginning of which, from the Baroccian codex CXLVII, Fabricius thus reports (o): ‹Ἐγένετο κατὰ τὴν τελευτὴν τοῦ ἀσεβεστάτου.› It exists in Latin, however, in Surius (p). But indeed, one must not overlook at this place the ^C excellent sentiment of our Timotheus...

...[the opinion concerning the most holy abbot Ammonius; whom, if you brought forward with his nose cut off, were he of good morals, I would ordain bishop.] ^A This rule should be observed among the Jews. But as for me, even if you bring me one with his ears cut off, if he is worthy in his habits, I ordain him. It is worth noting concerning this Alexandrian prelate what is recorded in the *Apophthegmata Patrum* to memory: namely, that he had acquired the nickname of "the destitute" (*aktēmonos*); which fact, as Tillemont rightly argues, redounds to the great praise of the patriarch of the second see. ^B

CANONICAL RESPONSES OF TIMOTHEUS, THE MOST HOLY BISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA, Who was one of the 150 Fathers assembled at Constantinople, to the interrogations proposed to him concerning bishops and clerics.

*Interrogation.* ^C "If a catechumen child, for instance seven years of age, or even a perfect man, happens to be present opportunely while the oblation is being made, and being ignorant, becomes a partaker of It, what ought to be done concerning him?"

*Response.* "He ought to be illuminated: for he has been called by God."

BALSAMON: This Father was asked whether, if a child or even a perfect man, placed in the order of catechumens and having not yet attained holy baptism, should be present opportunely—that is, having met the favorable time—while the oblation is being made (or rather, the mystical sacrifice being offered), and should become a partaker of the sacraments, not knowing that he should not partake before he is baptized, yet not doing so out of contempt—what ought to be done? And he replied that he ought to be baptized. ^D For since he...

[Footnote 1 text:] Regarding the canonical responses of Timotheus. A certain scholion is found in the Amerbachian codex concerning this bishop Timotheus of Alexandria, conceived in these words: "It must be known that after Dionysius the Great, the fourteenth bishop established at Alexandria, the episcopal offices were fulfilled by Theonas, Maximus, Peter the holy martyr, Achillas, Alexander, Athanasius, Gregory the Arian from Cappadocia, Athanasius again, Peter expelled by Valens, Lucius the Arian, Peter again. Afterward, this great Timotheus was promoted to the throne in the fourth year of the reign of Theodosius the Great; he was present in the fourth year of the reign of Theodosius the Great at the synod of the 150 holy Fathers, gathered against Macedonius, the opponent of the Spirit: after seven years, moreover, he departed to the Lord, having as his successor Theophilus."

baptized. For because he did not approach the communion of the holy gifts with malice, and made use of the opportunity, not being prohibited by anyone—the faithful who were present, and perhaps even he who gave the communion, being ignorant that he was a catechumen—he seems to have been called by God. And as for what the holy apostle Peter said concerning Cornelius and those around him, at the time when they were catechumens and the Holy Spirit fell upon them, and they spoke in tongues and glorified God, as it is written in the book of Acts: “Can any one forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” ^A This is almost exactly what Timothy said, that being called by God and deemed worthy of the holy things, he ought to be illuminated. ^B

Interrogation. “If a catechumen be possessed by a demon, and he himself or his own people wish for him to receive holy baptism, ought he to receive it or not, especially if he be near to death?”

Response. “If one who is possessed by a demon has not been cleansed from the unclean spirit, he cannot receive holy baptism; but at the departure from life, he is baptized.”

BALS. He who is possessed by a demon is seen as a habitation of a demon. It is judged, therefore, that if the unclean spirit had not found the man to be a suitable habitation for itself, it would not have dwelt in him. But he who is baptized, through baptism, receives the grace of the Holy Spirit to dwell within him. How then is it possible for the same person to be recipient of two opposites at the same time? For this reason, the Father deemed the catechumen who had not been delivered from the demon that troubled him to be unworthy of holy baptism. If, however, he is dying, he says, he shall be baptized, so that he may not be devoid of the grace of baptism, and passing from this life, be deprived of such viaticum and depart unsigned.

Interrogation. “If anyone, being a believer, is possessed by a demon, ought he to be a partaker of the holy mysteries, or not?”

Response. “If he does not divulge the mystery, and does not blaspheme in any other way, let him be a partaker: but not every day. For it is sufficient for him to do so only at stated times.”

BALS. Judas is said to have divulged the mystery, as one who, having been taught by the Lord, revealed to the Jews what he had learned, as if to those who did not believe, not paying attention to Him who taught these things as God, but as a mere man. But as for him who is possessed by a demon: if he is mad all the time, he shall neither be deemed worthy of the holy things, nor shall he be condemned for divulging the mystery and blaspheming, as one who does not know what he is doing. If, however, he has intervals, and in the time when he is of sound mind, he insults the mystery and blasphemes, he shall not only not share in the holy things, but he shall not even pray or be numbered with the faithful. Wherefore this divine Father, concerning one possessed by a demon and having intervals...^{C D}

says: If, therefore, when he is not being agitated by the demon, he says nothing against the faith, he shall be a partaker of the sacraments. ^B

Question. If any catechumen, being ill, has become of deranged mind, and cannot himself confess the faith, and his own people urge that he receive holy baptism while he lives, ought he to receive it, or not?

Answer. He ought to receive it, if he is not being tempted by an unclean spirit.

Balsamon: The question was about a catechumen who, because of illness, is out of his mind, so that he cannot answer the questions asked at baptism, whether he ought to be baptized. The answer is that it is necessary that he who is as he is should be baptized, and rightly so; because since he was a catechumen, he showed by his resolve that he embraces the faith, and although he cannot answer at the baptism, he has already shown his own resolve. But if he is being tempted by an unclean spirit, he shall not be baptized, he says, but it shall be done to him as was stated above.

Question. If a wife has cohabited with her husband at night, or a husband with a wife, and intercourse has taken place, ought they to communicate, or not?

Answer. They ought not, since the Apostle cries out: "Defraud ye one another not, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency."

Balsamon: The question is about those who live together lawfully, whether they ought to be partakers of the sacraments having come together to one another that night. And the answer is that they ought not. And for the confirmation of his statement, he used the words of the great Paul.

Question. If a woman who is a catechumen has given her name, that she might be baptized, and on the day of baptism the custom of women happens to her, ought she to be baptized on that day, or to defer it, and for how long to defer it?

Answer. She ought to defer it until she has been purified.

Question. If a woman has observed the customary menses occur to her, ought she to approach the holy mysteries or not?

Answer. She ought not, until she is purified.

Balsamon: Those who were to be deemed worthy of the divine baptism were enrolled by those performing the ecclesiastical office. If, therefore, he says, the woman who was enrolled, as

she is about to be baptized, should fall into a menstrual flux: when ought she to be baptized? And this divine Father replied to this, that it should be when she is purified. For until the prescribed days have passed, she is judged to be in a state of impurity, and she shall neither be baptized nor deemed worthy of the divine mysteries. ^A

*Interrogatio.* If a woman has given birth, ought she to fast during Pascha and not drink wine, or is she absolved from the fast and from the prohibition of wine on account of having given birth?

*Responsio.* The fast was devised in order to humble the body. If, therefore, the body is in a state of humility and weakness, it ought to be partaker of such food and drink as it wishes and is able to bear.

BALS. Being asked if a woman who has given birth during the forty-day fast of Pascha ought to drink wine and be absolved from the fast. He replied that the fast was ordained for the humbling of the body. But if the body is humbled and infirm, it needs no discipline of fasting from elsewhere; rather, it has need of restoration and recovery. She who has given birth during Pascha—that is, during the fast observed for the sake of Pascha—ought, therefore, to make use of both wine and food. ^B

*Interrogatio.* If a cleric ought to pray when Arians or other heretics are present; and if it does no harm to him when he himself performs the prayer, that is, the oblation?

*Responsio.* In the divine oblation, the deacon before the salutation announces: "You who are not communicants, walk away." They ought not, therefore, to be present unless they promise to repent and to avoid the heresy. ^C

BALS. The inquiry is made concerning a cleric, whether he ought to pray or offer the unbloody sacrifice when heretics are present. He replied that when the Holy Things are about to be carried to the sacred table, it is said to the uninitiated: "You who are not communicants, walk away," or, "Catechumens, go out." If, therefore, catechumens are not allowed to be present while the sacrifice is being performed, how shall heretics be allowed? Unless, he says, they profess that they will repent and desist from the heresy; ^D and even then, I suppose, they will not be permitted to be inside the temple, but outside with the catechumens. But if they do not profess that they will desist from the heresy, they shall not even stand with the catechumens, but shall be cast out.

*Interrogatio.* If someone is ill, and extremely weak from great infirmity, and the holy Pascha arrives: must he by all means fast, or does the cleric absolve him to take what he can, or even oil and wine, because of his great infirmity?

^A

Response. "The sick person ought to be absolved to take both food and drink, as much as he can bear. For it is just that he who is once wasted away should be a partaker of oil."

BALS. With regard to one who is sick and wasted away by disease, the question is: must he by all means fast during the fast for Pascha, that is, inexcusably and without any compassion, or may he consume wine and oil because of his infirmity? The response says that it is just for him who is wasted away by disease to consume both wine and oil, as much as he can endure, that is, either throughout or on certain days, according to the judgment of him who is administering it to him. Understand, therefore, from this canon and from the eighth, that the fast of the forty days of Pascha is the eating of dry food, and also abstinence from wine. Some say, however, that in both of these canons the fast in Pascha refers to the week of the holy Passion, and not the entire forty days.

Question. "If someone invokes a cleric to join a marriage, but hears that the marriage is illicit, for instance, a marriage with an aunt, or that the woman being joined is the sister of his deceased wife, ought the cleric to follow through or perform an oblation?" ^B

Response. "Say in one word: If the cleric has heard the marriage is illicit. If, therefore, the marriage is illicit, the cleric ought not to communicate in the sins of others."

BALS. He says that it behooves clerics who are called to the celebration of the mystery of marriage, so that they may pray and join the bride and groom, if they hear that the marriage is illicit, neither to go, nor to pray, nor to offer, and thus communicate in the sins of others.

Question. "If a layman who has had a dream asks a cleric whether he ought to permit him to communicate or not?" ^C

Response. "If the desire for a woman underlies it, he ought not. But if Satan is tempting him so that by this pretext he might be alienated from the communion of the divine mysteries, he ought to communicate. For the tempter will not cease at that time when he ought to communicate, attacking him."

BALS. Regarding those to whom phantasms appear in dreams, to whom perhaps there also occurs a flux of seed, this Father says that if, before this, the thought of the desire for a woman attacked the one dreaming, and his mind persisted in the desire, and he dwelt upon it, and thence the imagery arose, and the release of semen followed, he ought not to communicate. And with good reason: for the assent of him who dreamed polluted his mind. And how will he approach the Holy Things with such a thought? But if nothing of the sort preceded, he says it is a temptation of the devil, so that he might thus alienate him from divine communion; and it behooves him to communicate. For if the Wicked One sees that he is being accomplished thus, ^D

^A he will never cease from plotting against the man, as often as he knows him to be willing to communicate. Question. « To those joined in the bonds of matrimony, regarding which days of the week is it necessary to propose that they abstain from mutual relations, and on which ones do they have authority? »

Answer. « What I said before, I say again: The Apostle says, [I Cor. VII, 5] "Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency." It is necessary, however, to abstain on the Sabbath and the Lord's Day, because on them the spiritual sacrifice is offered to the Lord. »

Question. ^B « If someone, while not being in his right mind, has laid hands upon himself, or has thrown himself from a precipice, is an oblation made, or not? »

Answer. « The cleric ought to discern this, whether he did this while being truly out of his mind. For often those who are related to the one to whom this has happened, wishing to obtain the oblation and the prayer for him, lie and say that he was not in his right mind; sometimes, however, it is because of the insult of men, or in some other way through negligence that he has done this. For such a person, an oblation is not to be made; for he is a suicide. The cleric must therefore inquire with accuracy, lest he fall into judgment. »

BALS. « Being asked if, when someone not having a sound mind, but with wits overturned, becomes his own slayer, or pushes himself over a precipice, it is necessary to hold a prayer or an oblation for him; he said that if the man had truly become distracted and, not knowing what he was doing, had laid hands upon himself, or cast himself down, or destroyed himself in any other way, a prayer and oblation shall take place for him. However, those who are called to the prayer must investigate subtly regarding this, lest perhaps out of cowardice, or the insult of men, or in some other way, he had laid hands upon himself prudently and while knowing what he was doing. For concerning such a one, it is not fitting either to pray or to offer, ^C because he is a suicide. »

Question. « If someone’s wife is possessed by a spirit, so that she even wears iron shackles, and the husband says: "I cannot remain continent," and he wants to take another: ought he to take another, or not? »

Answer. « Adultery intervenes in this matter; and concerning this, I have nothing to answer, nor do I find anything. »

BALS. « The question is about a husband who has a wife possessed by a spirit, or rather agitated by an evil spirit, and so raging that she is even bound with iron fetters and manacles, so that she might not kill herself or harm others, ^D

^A he states that it is impossible for him to live with her, and he says he has self-control, and he wishes to take another wife lawfully. The answer is that one cannot say anything. For it is adultery if, while the marriage still subsists, a man takes another woman into cohabitation. However, by the novella of the Emperor Lord Leo the Philosopher, it is granted to the husband, if the wife suffers from perpetual madness, to dissolve the marriage; and the marriage being dissolved, it is permitted to the husband to introduce another wife lawfully.

Question. "If someone fasting, in order to communicate, while washing his mouth or in the bath, swallows water unwillingly: ought he to communicate?"

Answer. "Since Satan also finds an opportunity to hinder him from communion, he will do this more frequently."

Question. "Often hearing the word of God and not doing it, are we liable to judgment?"

Answer. "If we do not do it, it does not happen that we accuse ourselves because, while hearing, we do not obey. But it is a part of salvation to accuse oneself."

Question. "From what age are sins judged by God?"

Answer. "According to the knowledge and prudence of each: to some from the age of ten, to others from a more advanced age." ^C Balsamon: He says that sins are judged by God according to the knowledge and intellect of each. For children who are of a sharper and more vigilant nature discern good and evil more quickly; but those who are of a duller and slower wit are slow to the knowledge of what ought to be done. Therefore, he says that for the former, sin is reckoned from the tenth year of their age, but for the latter, from a more advanced and perfect age.

TIMOTHEUS OF ALEXANDRIA

EPISTLE TO DIODORUS THE BISHOP OF TYRE

To my lord, in all respects honorable and most holy bishop and fellow-priest Diodorus, Timotheus sends greeting in Christ. Your virtue and the perfection of your life and the zeal of your right and apostolic faith, I shall by no means be able to proclaim according to its dignity, even if I should hasten overmuch; for words and realities are not equal. To you it has been granted by certainty, not only to believe in Christ Jesus, but also to suffer for his sake. This right and blessed will of yours towards God, and hence—