Wow. Casting one enchantment from library (and avoiding fiddly mana costs) could well be worth . Getting the second one for free as well sounds somewhat gratuitous.

Huh. There are no enchantments with a casting cost of zero (not counting Ghastly Haunting, which isn't a target). Man, this card could have been broken in half with a single suspend card.

Personally, I think the casting cost might have been appropriate if there wasn't the whole "I can put two enchantments into play at instant speed." Thingy. As it stands, this card is a good card without even searching for the library. If it just let you put two enchantments into play at instant speed, uncounterable, then it would be worth the cost. Refuse to block my creatures? Eat double Sinister Strength. Don't block? Man, are you gonna love this double One With Nature trick...

But, you know, with a little deck tweaking, you can get some pretty silly results. For example, if you have two Abundant Growths in your library, you get a card that's much better than Divination. That should be a big warning that the cost is off.

All the cards you cited are Auras, jmgariepy. The casting cost does need to go up, though.

I don't have the chance to do a Gatherer search right now to see what breaks this...

Hm, I think all the cantrip 1-mana enchantments are actually Auras. Why does this have the non-Aura clause, anyway?

Both because most cheap enchantments are auras, and because I think people would be confused about auras entering the battlefield without being cast. If I recall correctly, it lets the auras attach to creatures with shroud.