It is said that many of the people of the Angles, while still unbelievers, have entered into such unlawful marriages, and therefore they should be warned when they accept the faith that they must dissolve them, for such marriages are a mortal sin. Let them fear the severity of God's judgment; for connivance with their carnal desires they will endure eternal torment. But this in itself does not prevent them from being vouchsafed the holy flesh and blood of the Lord, since they will not be punished for sins committed by them through ignorance, until they receive the grace of baptism. For the Holy Church corrects some sins by firmness, others by gentleness, treating them with tolerance in its wisdom – for the resistance of evil is often overcome by tolerance and forbearance. But all who have come to faith must refuse to continue such cohabitation. If they do not do this, they will not be worthy of the Lord's flesh and blood, for sin can be forgiven to some extent to those who do it out of ignorance, but it must be severely punished for those who do it knowingly [240].

VI. Augustine's Question: Can a bishop be consecrated without the presence of other bishops, if they are at a great distance from each other and cannot arrive quickly?

Gregory answers: In the Church of the Angles, you are still the only bishop, so it is impossible for you to perform consecration except alone. As for the bishops from Gaul, they can be present at the consecration as witnesses. However, it is our desire, my brother, that you should appoint bishops so that they may not be separated by great distances, and that at the consecration of a bishop they may be easily assembled, for their presence is highly desirable. For when bishops, with God's help, are consecrated in places close to other bishops, the consecration should not be performed except in the presence of three or four of them. For even in spiritual matters we must follow the example of the works of the flesh, so that they may be done intelligently and to the end. When the laity are married, they invite those who are already married, so that those who have previously entered the path of family life share in the joy of those who follow them. Why, then, can not a person who is united with God in a spiritual marriage call those who have already done so, so that they may rejoice at the elevation of a new bishop and together offer up prayer for him to Almighty God?

VII. Augustine's question: In what relationship should the bishops of Gaul and Britain be?

Gregory answers: We have not given you authority over the bishops of Gaul, for the bishop of Arelat not so long ago received the pallium from our predecessors, and we should not diminish his authority. Therefore, my brother, if you happen to be concerned with the affairs of the province of Gaul, you must make arrangements with the bishop of Arelat. But if he shows negligence, let your zeal inspire him. We have already sent him a letter, urging him to take advantage of your sojourn in Gaul to remove that which in the customs of the bishops there does not correspond to the precepts of our Creator. You have no right to judge the Gallic bishops, since they are not subject to you; but by encouraging them and setting a good example to follow, you can move them to greater zeal in works of holiness [242]. The law says: "When you come to harvest your neighbor, you shall pluck the ears of grain with your hands, but you shall not bring the sickle into your neighbor's harvest" [243]. Do not bring the sickle of condemnation over the harvest grown by others, but by your good deeds cleanse the Lord's wheat from the chaff and by encouragement and persuasion turn it into the body of the Church. But everything that requires the use of authority must be done by you with the consent of Bishop Arelat, for it is unseemly to reject the rules of obedience established by the ancient fathers. We remind you, brother, that all the bishops of Britain must obey you, so that the unlearned may be taught, the weakened will be encouraged by advice, and the erring may be corrected by your authority.

VIII. Augustine's Question: Can a pregnant woman be baptized, and when she has a child, how long will it take for her to enter the church? And after how many days can a child receive the grace of holy baptism, in order to prevent his possible death? And how long will it take for her husband to have intercourse with her, and is she allowed to enter church or receive Holy Communion during her period? And can a man who has had intercourse with his wife enter the church or receive the sacrament of Holy Communion before he is washed? All these things are necessary for the unenlightened people of the Angles to know.

Gregory answers: My brother, I had no doubt that you would ask me these questions, and I have already prepared an answer to them. I have no doubt that you just want this answer to confirm your own thoughts and premonitions. Indeed, why can't a pregnant woman be baptized if her pregnancy is not sinful in the eyes of Almighty God? After all, when our forefathers sinned in paradise, they lost the immortality granted to them by God, but the Lord did not wish to destroy the entire human race for this sin. Having deprived a man of immortality for his transgression, He left him male power for the continuation of the race. So why should that which was given to man by God Himself prevent him from receiving the grace of holy baptism? It would be extremely unwise to make this sacrament, which erases all guilt, dependent on such a cause.

How many days can a woman enter the church after she gives birth? From the Old Testament you know that she should abstain from this for thirty-three days if she had a boy, and sixty-six days if she had a girl. However, this should be understood differently. After all, if she had entered the church even an hour after giving birth to thank the Lord, she would not have committed a sin; for the pleasures of the flesh are sinful, but not its torments. Intercourse takes place in pleasure, and childbirth takes place in pain, which is why it was said to the first of the mothers: "In sickness you will give birth" [245]. If we forbid a woman who has given birth to enter the church, we will consider her punishment for sin.

Nor should anything restrain you from baptizing a woman who has given birth or her child, if they are threatened with death, even if it is at the very hour of her childbirth and his birth. For if the grace of the holy sacrament is equally given to all who are alive and well, then it is all the more necessary to grant it without delay to those who are threatened with death, for fear that, waiting for a more convenient time to prepare for the sacrament of the Resurrection, we may not allow their souls to be resurrected at all.

Her husband should not approach her until the child is weaned. A harmful custom has spread among married people: mothers do not nurse the children they give birth to, but give them to other women to feed. This happens because of intemperance, because, not wanting to abstain, they cannot nurse their children. But those women who, according to the bad custom mentioned, give their children to nurse others, should still refrain from intercourse with their husbands until the prescribed period of purification has passed. Except after childbirth, women may not have intercourse with their husbands during menstruation, and the sacred law even commands that anyone who approaches a woman at this time should be punished with death. However, a woman should not be forbidden to enter church during her period, for she should not be blamed for what is given by nature, and from which she suffers against her will. For we know that a woman suffering from an issue of blood came from behind to the Lord and touched the hem of His garment, and immediately her illness left her. Why, then, if she could touch the Lord's garment with an issue of blood and be healed, can't a woman during her menstruation enter the church of the Lord? You will say, "She suffered from an illness, and we are talking about the natural order of things." But after all, my beloved brother, from which we suffer in our mortal body through infirmities, is sent to us by God's judgment for sins. Hunger and thirst, heat, cold, and fatigue alike afflict us because of the imperfection of our nature. And if we eat when we are hungry, drink when we are thirsty, cool ourselves when we are hot, dress warmly when we are cold, and rest when we are tired, is it not natural for us to seek a cure for other ailments as well? The flow of blood in women is the same disease, so that since a woman who in her infirmity touched the Lord's garment was right in her boldness, why is it that which was permitted to one is not permitted to all women who suffer from the weakness of their nature?

At such a time, it is also impossible to forbid a woman to receive the sacrament of Holy Communion. If she does not dare to receive him out of great reverence, it is commendable; but if she accepts it, she will not commit sin. The fate of pious souls is to blame themselves for deeds that are sinless in themselves, but rooted in sin. Thus, when we are hungry, it is not a sin to eat, although hunger arose as a result of the sin of our forefathers. And menstruation in women is not sinful, for it comes from their nature. In spite of this, because of the imperfection of our nature, we are defiled against our will, and man is responsible for sins committed consciously as well as for those committed involuntarily. Leave women to their own understanding, and if they do not dare to approach the mystery of the Lord's flesh and blood during their periods, they should be commended for their piety. If, however, they, having become accustomed to a pious life, wish to receive this sacrament, they should not, as we have already said, be hindered from doing so. If in the Old Testament external circumstances are considered, then in the New Testament the main attention is paid not to what is outside, but to what is inside, and the punishment for this is imposed with greater caution. While the law forbids eating many things as unclean, the Lord says in His Gospel: "It is not that which enters into the mouth that defiles a man, but that which comes out of the mouth that defiles a man" (248). And then he explains: "For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts" [249]. From this it is quite clear that all impurity, as shown by Almighty God, comes from mental impurity. Thus the Apostle Paul says: "For the pure all things are pure, but for the defiled and unfaithful there is nothing pure" [250]. And further, speaking of the cause of this defilement, he adds: "But both their mind and conscience are defiled" (251). Therefore, since no food can spoil him whose soul is not subject to corruption, why should that be considered unclean that which in the pure soul of a woman comes from her nature?

A man who has had intercourse with his wife should not enter the church until he has washed, and even after washing, he cannot enter immediately. In ancient times the law stated that a man should wash himself after intercourse with a woman and not enter the temple until sunset, but this should also be understood in a spiritual sense. When a man has intercourse with a woman, their souls are jointly directed to the pleasure [253] of carnal lust; Therefore, until the fire of lust is extinguished in his soul, he should not appear among the faithful in the temple, burdened with sinful desires. Although different peoples think differently about this and observe different rules, it was the custom of the Romans from ancient times to wash themselves after intercourse with their wives and to abstain for some time from going to the temple. Of course, we cannot consider marriage a sin, but since even lawful intercourse does not take place without bodily desire, it is right to refrain from visiting a holy place after it, for there is no desire without sin. He who said, "Behold, I was conceived in iniquity, and in sin my mother bore me,"[254] was not born in adultery or debauchery, but in lawful marriage. But he knew of himself that he had been conceived in iniquity, and he grieved that he had been born in sin, and like a tree he flowed in the branches the sap of sin that came from the roots. There are many things that are just and just, by doing which we are nevertheless defiled; Thus, often with anger we aggravate the guilt of another and disturb the peace of our own soul, and even with righteous anger, the violation of peace of mind does not serve us well. He who said: "My eye is dried up with anger" [255] was angry with sinners, but only the tranquility of the soul allows one to bask in the rays of wisdom; therefore he grieved, because his eye was withered with anger. And if he is angry because of evil deeds, he will remain confused and indignant afterwards and in thoughts of the higher. And so it turns out that anger against sin is righteous, but nevertheless harmful, because the one who is angry takes the blame upon himself, disturbing the peace of his soul. In the same way, carnal copulation is lawful if it is performed for the sake of procreation, and not for the sake of lust and the satisfaction of passions. Therefore, if a man approaches his wife, moved not by the desire of lust, but by concern for the procreation of offspring, then he can at his own discretion both attend church and receive the sacrament of the Lord's flesh and blood; For he who has entered into the fire and is not burned cannot be condemned. But if in coition not the desire for procreation prevails, but lust, those who copulate have reasons to grieve, although, according to the holy sayings of the prophets, copulation itself is a cause for sorrow. When the Apostle Paul says: "Whoever cannot abstain let each one have his own wife," he deems it necessary to add: "Nevertheless, this I have spoken as a permission, and not as a commandment" (257). That which is lawful does not need permission; therefore, by his permission, he emphasizes that there is guilt in this. It should be remembered that the Lord, speaking to the people on Mount Sinai, first of all commanded them not to touch their wives [258]. And if the Lord, communicating with people through an intermediary, demanded that they not touch their wives for the sake of bodily purity, then should not women who eat the Body of the Lord Almighty and are imbued with the greatness of this incomprehensible mystery observe the purity of the flesh? Wherefore the priest also told David that his men would receive the showbread if only they abstained from women, and David, in order to receive these loaves, swore an oath of the purity of his people. In accordance with what has been said, a man who has washed himself after intercourse with his wife can come to church and receive the sacrament of Holy Communion.

IX. Augustine's question: Can anyone partake of the Body of the Lord after a vision in a dream, and if it is a priest, can he then administer the Holy Sacraments?

Gregory answers: The Old Testament, as we have said before, declares such a person to be unclean and, until he is washed, forbids him to enter the temple until evening. Spiritual people accept this rule, but, as we have explained, they understand it differently. If a person in reality is defiled by false [261] visions that come to him in a dream, he must wash himself with the water of understanding, which will wash away the sin of thought with his tears; until the fire of temptation is extinguished, let the guilt weigh on him until evening, as it is said. However, visions should be distinguished by the reason for which they enter the soul of the sleeper: sometimes they come from drunkenness, sometimes from excesses or from weakness, and sometimes from thought. Visions that come from natural excesses or weakness are not to be feared, although it is regrettable that the soul involuntarily suffers from them. When an immoderate appetite leads to gluttony and the receptacle of food is overflowing, the soul should feel guilty, but not so much as to restrain a person from partaking of the Holy Mysteries or from participating in Mass, if the feast day so requires, or if he needs to perform the sacrament in the absence of another priest in that place. If there are those who can perform the service for him, he should nevertheless not refrain from communing of the Holy Mysteries, unless his soul is filled with sinful images. I think, however, that out of shame he will try to refrain from communion. There are those whose soul is not defiled by obscene images, but it should be remembered that the soul feels guilt and is not purified even by repentance, for even if a person does not remember what he saw in a dream, he remembers that he had previously indulged in excesses. If the visions in a dream come from sinful thoughts in reality, then the guilt is obvious to his soul, for he sees where his defilement comes from, when what he thought about voluntarily later involuntarily appears to him in a dream. But it is necessary to distinguish whether these thoughts arise from suggestions and motives or, what is much more serious, from the indulgence of sin. For all sins come from three causes, called suggestion, inducement, and indulgence—the devil suggests, the flesh induces, and the spirit permits. The first sin was inspired by the serpent, which impelled Eve to it, and the spirit of Adam allowed the sin to be committed [263]; Thus, when the soul is brought before its own judgment, it is important to distinguish suggestion from inducement, and inducement from indulgence. For if the evil spirit does not inspire sin in the soul, and if the flesh does not find pleasure in sin, then sin cannot be committed. When the flesh begins to rejoice in sin, sin increases, and when the soul allows sin, sin wins. Thus, the seed [264] of sin is in suggestion, the growth of sin is in the motive, and its maturity is in its allowance. It often happens that an evil spirit penetrates the thoughts and confuses the flesh, but the spirit nevertheless does not allow temptation. Since the flesh cannot give itself over to sin apart from the spirit, the spirit, resisting the desires of the flesh, conquers the urges of sin, because it refuses to allow it, or, yielding, bitterly grieves over its own weakness. For this reason, the chief warrior of the heavenly host also grieved when he said: "But in my members I see another law, which is contrary to the law of my mind, and which makes me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members." If he had been a prisoner, he could not have fought, but he fought; thus he was a prisoner, and at the same time fought for the law of his mind against the law of his members; but if he fought, he was not a prisoner. A person who speaks in this way is both a prisoner and a freeman: free because of the love of truth and a prisoner because of the impulses to which he involuntarily yields."