Objection & response

Does “pollution” mean the sacraments become invalid?

Whether defilement (μολυσμός) from communion with an uncondemned heretic means his mysteries are empty of grace.

The objection, at its strongest

If communion with a heretic defiles, then his sacraments must already be void: grace has departed, and what he celebrates is no true mystery.

Why it is raised

“Defilement” sounds like loss of grace; some patristic language places heretics outside the Church; and the intuition that heresy automatically severs is widespread.

Evidence for the objection

Strong patristic statements that heretics are “outside” and that their assemblies profane the holy things.
The sense, in some texts, that the Spirit does not operate through those who have abandoned the faith.

Evidence against it

The Ecumenical Councils addressed heretics as genuine bishops until the moment of deposition, and could even receive their ordinations.
The Fourth Council speaks of the deposed as “deprived of the grace of the priesthood”, deposition removes what was possessed, rather than announcing an already completed loss.
St Neophytos Kausokalyvites and St Nikodemos hold that the canons do not operate automatically: only a synod deposes; the “automatic loss” view is identified with the Latin latae sententiae.
St Theodore the Studite’s own concern is the defilement of the communicant, not the voidness of the mystery.

A limited conclusion

Strongly supported

The mainstream reading distinguishes validity from benefit: the mystery remains real (ἐνυπόστατον) until a synod deposes the celebrant, yet a knowing communicant may receive it to his own judgment. “Defilement” and “invalidity” are not the same claim. A minority view collapses them; it is the weaker position in the tradition.