__________________________________________________________________

   Title: NPNF-212. Leo the Great, Gregory the Great
   Creator(s): Schaff, Philip
   Leo the Great (Author of Part)
   Gregory the Great (Author of Part)
   Rights: Public Domain
   CCEL Subjects: All; Early Church; Proofed
   LC Call no: BR60
   LC Subjects:

   Christianity

   Early Christian Literature. Fathers of the Church, etc.
     __________________________________________________________________

   A SELECT LIBRARY

   OF THE

   NICENE AND

   POST-NICENE FATHERS

   OF

   THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

   SECOND SERIES

   VOLUME XII

   Leo the Great, Gregory the Great

   T&T CLARK

   EDINBURGH

   __________________________________________________

   WM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING COMPANY

   GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN
     __________________________________________________________________
     __________________________________________________________________

   THE

   LETTERS AND SERMONS

   OF

   LEO THE GREAT

   BISHOP OF ROME,

   Translated, with Introduction, Notes, and Indices,

   by the

   REV. CHARLES LETT FELTOE, M.A.,

   LATE FELLOW OF CLARE COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Prefatory Note.

   ------------------------

   Except for such valuable help--chiefly however in the way of comment
   and explanation--as Canon Bright's volume (S. Leo on the Incarnation)
   has supplied, both the selection and the translation of the Letters and
   Sermons of Leo Magnus are practically original.  It is even more
   difficult to feel satisfied oneself, than to satisfy others either with
   a selection from a great man's works or with a translation of them.
   The powers of Leo as a preacher both of doctrine and of practice are
   very remarkable, and in my anxiety to keep within the limits imposed by
   the publishers, I have erred in presenting too few rather than too many
   of the Sermons to the English reader.  Only those that are generally
   held genuine are represented, though several of the doubtful ones are
   fine sermons, and those translated are in most cases no better than
   those omitted.  Even when the same thought is repeated again and again
   (as is often the case), it is almost always clothed in such different
   language, and surrounded with so many other thoughts of value, that
   every sermon has an almost equal claim to be selected.

   With regard to the Letters, the series connected with the Eutychian
   controversy--the chief occupation of Leo's episcopate--is given nearly
   complete, whereas only specimens of his mode of dealing with other
   matters have been selected for presentation.  With one or two
   exceptions, however, I feel more confident about the Letters than about
   the Sermons that the omitted are less important than the included.  I
   wish I could make even a similar boast about the merits of the
   translation.

   The text rendered is for the most part that of the Ballerinii as given
   by Migne (Patrologie, Vol. LIV.), though a more critical edition is
   much to be desired.

   Charles Lett Feltoe.

   Fornham All Saints',

   Eastertide, 1894.
     __________________________________________________________________
     __________________________________________________________________

   Introduction.

   ------------------------

   Life.

   The details of Leo's early life are extremely scanty and uncertain.  It
   is probable that he was born between 390 and 400 a.d.  There is a
   tradition that his father was a Tuscan named Quintian, and that
   Volaterrae [1] , a town in the north of Etruria, was his birthplace.
   Of his youth we know nothing:  his writings contain no allusions to
   that or to any other part of his personal history.  One may reasonably
   infer from the essentially Roman character of his literary style, from
   the absence of quotations out of pagan literature, and from his
   self-confessed ignorance of Greek, that his education was, though
   thorough after its kind, limited to Christian and Latin culture.  A
   reference to the pages of any secular history of the Roman empire will
   give the reader an idea of the scenes amidst which, and no doubt by the
   aid of which, Leo the boy was formed and moulded into Leo Magnus, the
   first great Latin-speaking pope and bishop of Rome, the first great
   Italian theologian, ?the final defender of the truth of our Lord's
   Person against both its assailants [2] ? (i.e. Nestorius and Eutyches),
   whom it pleased God in His providence to raise up in the Western (and
   not as oftenest hitherto in the Eastern) portion of His Church.
   Politically, intellectually, and theologically the period in which this
   great character grew up, lived and worked, was one of transition:  the
   Roman Empire, learning and thought, paganism were each alike at the
   last gasp, and neither in Church nor State was there any other at all
   of Leo's calibre.  This consideration will account for the wonderful
   influence, partly for good and partly for bad, which his master-mind
   and will was permitted to exercise on the after-ages of Christendom.

   During his early manhood the Pelagian controversy was raging, and it is
   thought that the acolyte named Leo, whom Augustine mentions in his
   letters on this subject as employed by pope Zosimus to carry
   communications between Rome and the African church, is the future
   pope.  Under Celestine, who was pope from 422 to 432, he was archdeacon
   of Rome, and he seems already to have made a name for himself:  for
   Cassian, the Gallican writer whom he had urged to write a work on the
   Incarnation, in yielding to his suggestion, calls him ?the ornament of
   the Roman church and of the Divine ministry,? and S. Cyril (in 431, the
   date of the Council of Ephesus) appeals to Leo (as Leo has himself
   recorded in Letter CXIX., chap. 4) to procure the pope's support in
   stopping the ambitious designs of Juvenal, bishop of Jerusalem.  Under
   the next pope, Sixtus (432-440), we hear of him in Prosper's Chronicon
   (under the year 439) again in connexion with Pelagianism [3] :  he
   seems to have stirred up the vigilance of the pope against the crafty
   designs of one Julius of Eclanum, who, having been deprived of his
   bishopric for holding that heresy, was attempting to be restored
   without full proof of orthodoxy.

   Next year (440) was a momentous one in the life of Leo, and in the
   history of the papacy.  Leo was away on one of those political
   missions, which bear out our estimate of him as perhaps the most
   conspicuous and popular figure of his times [4] .  The powerful general
   Aetius Placidia, the queen-regent's chief adviser and aide-de-camp, was
   quarrelling (a not unusual occurrence at this stage of the empire) with
   Albinus, a rival general in Gaul.  Leo was sent to bring about a
   reconciliation, and apparently with success.  In his absence Sixtus
   died, and it is not surprising that without any hesitation clergy and
   people should have elected Leo into his place.  A deputation was sent
   after him to hasten his return, and after an interval of forty days he
   arrived.  The whole church received him with acclamation, and on Sept.
   29 he was ordained both priest and 47th bishop of Rome.  His brief
   sermon on the occasion is the earliest in the collection, and will be
   found translated on p. 115 of our selection.  His earliest extant
   letter belongs likewise to the first year of his episcopate, which we
   have also included in our selection:  it is addressed to the bishop of
   Aquileia in reproof of his and his fellow-bishops' remissness in
   dealing with Pelagianism in that province.  Thus early did he give
   proof of his conception of his office, as investing him with an
   authority which extended over the whole of Christendom as the successor
   of S. Peter.  Still clearer proofs were soon forthcoming.  Not to speak
   of a letter in a similarly dictatorial strain to the bishops of the
   home provinces of Campania, Picenum, and Etruria, which belongs to the
   year 443, we find him in 444 interfering, though more guardedly, with
   the province of Illyricum, which was then debatable ground between the
   East and West; in 445 dictating church regulations to S. Cyril's new
   successor at Alexandria, Dioscorus, his future adversary; and in 446
   and 447 asserting his authority on various pretexts, now in Africa, now
   in Spain, now in Sicily; while in 444 also occurred his famous and not
   very creditable encounter with Hilary, bishop of Arles in Gaul.  The
   incidents in this quarrel are briefly these:  Hilary in a provincial
   synod had deposed a bishop, Celidonius, for technical irregularities in
   accordance with the Gallican canons.  Celidonius appealed to Rome.
   Thereupon Hilary set out in the depth of winter on foot to Rome, but,
   after an ineffectual statement of his case and some rough treatment
   from Leo, returned to Gaul.  Leo gave orders that Celidonius was to be
   restored, and Hilary deprived of all his metropolitical rights in the
   province of Vienne.  How far the sentence was carried out is not
   clear.  In a later letter he desires that the bishop of Vienne should
   be regarded as metropolitan, and yet he seems to recognize Hilary's
   successor, Ravennius, as still metropolitan in Letter XL., while in 450
   the bishops of the one district addressed a formal petition for the
   restoration of Arles to its old rank, and the bishops of the other a
   counter-petition in favour of Vienne; whereupon Leo effected a
   temporary modus vivendi by dividing the jurisdiction between the two
   sees.

   Returning to the year 444, besides consulting S. Cyril and Paschasinus,
   bishop of Lilybaeum, on the right day for keeping Easter that year (a
   moot point which recurred in other years) we find Leo still taking
   active measures against heresy, this time that of the Manichaeans [5]
   .  The followers of this sect had since 439 greatly increased at Rome,
   owing to the number of refugees who came over from Carthage after its
   capture by Genseric and his Vandal hosts (see Sermon XVI. 5).  They
   were an universally abhorred body, and deservedly so, if all we read
   about them be really true.  In 444, therefore, it was determined, if
   possible, to stamp them out.  By Leo's order a strict search was
   instituted throughout the city, and the large number of those who were
   discovered, were brought up for trial before a combined bench of civil
   and ecclesiastical judges.  The most heinous crimes were revealed.
   Those who refused to recant were banished for life and suffered various
   other penalties by the emperor Valentinian's decree, while Leo used all
   his influence to obtain similar treatment for them in other parts of
   Christendom.  Three years later the spread of Priscillianism, a heresy
   which in some points was akin to Manichaeism among other heresies, and
   a long account of which will be found in Letter XV., was the occasion
   to which we have referred as giving a pretext for his interference in
   the affairs of the Spanish church.

   We now reach the famous Eutychian controversy, on which Leo's chief
   claim to our thanks and praise rests:  for to his action in it the
   Church owes the final and complete definition of the cardinal doctrine
   of the Incarnation.  The heresy of Eutyches, as was the case with so
   many other heresies, sprang from the reaction against a counter
   heresy.  Most of the controversies which have again and again
   imperilled the cause of Christianity, have been due to human frailty,
   which has been unable to keep the proportion of the Faith.
   Over-statement on the one side leads to over-statement on the other,
   and thus the golden mean is lost sight of.  Eutyches, an archimandrite
   (or head of a monastery) at Constantinople, had distinguished himself
   for zeal during the years 428 to 431 in combating the heresy of
   Nestorius, who had denied the perfect union of the Godhead and the
   Manhood in the one Person, Christ Jesus.  He had objected to the Virgin
   being called Theotokos (God-bearing), and said that Christotokos
   (Christ-bearing) would be more correct.  This position, as involving
   two persons as well as two natures in our Lord, was condemned by the
   3rd General Council, which met at Ephesus in 431, S. Cyril being its
   chief opponent.  But Eutyches in his eagerness to proclaim the Unity of
   the Person of Christ fell into the opposite extreme, and asserted that
   though the two natures of Christ were originally distinct, yet after
   the union they became but one nature, the human being changed into the
   Divine.  Eutyches appears to have been a highly virtuous person, but
   possessed of a dull, narrow mind, unfit for the subtleties of
   theological discussion, and therefore unable to grasp the conception of
   two Natures in one Person:  and nothing worse than stupidity and
   obstinacy is brought against him by his stern but clear-headed opponent
   Leo.

   The person, however, who first brought the poor recluse's heretical
   statements prominently into notice was much more reckless and
   intemperate in his language.  This was Eusebius, bishop of Dorylaeum,
   who took the opportunity of a local synod held in Constantinople under
   the presidency of the gentle Flavian, in November, 448, for other
   business, to petition against his former friend and ally as a
   blasphemer and a madman.  The synod, after expostulating with the
   accuser for his violence, at last reluctantly consented to summon
   Eutyches to an account.  The summons was at least twice repeated and
   disobeyed under the pretext first that he might not leave the
   monastery, then that he was ill.  At last Eutyches yielded, and
   appeared accompanied by a crowd of monks and soldiers and by
   Florentius, a patrician for whom the weak Emperor (Theodosius II.) had
   been influenced by the eunuch Chrysaphius, Eutyches' godson, to demand
   a seat at the council.  After a long conversation, in which Eutyches
   tried to evade a definite statement, he was at last forced to confess
   that our Lord was of two natures before the union, but that after the
   union there was but one nature (see Letter XXVIII. (Tome), chap. vi.).
   As he persisted in maintaining this position, he was condemned and
   thrust out of the priesthood and Church-communion.  During the reading
   of the condemnation and the breaking up of the conclave, Eutyches is
   alleged to have told Florentius that he appealed to the bishops of
   Rome, Alexandria, and Jerusalem.  Flavian, as president of the council,
   thought it his duty to acquaint the bishops of Rome and other Sees of
   the first rank with what had taken place.  For some unknown reason his
   letter to Leo was delayed, and the appeal of Eutyches and a letter from
   the Emperor was the first information that he received.  As might be
   expected from Leo's conception of his office, he was much incensed at
   this apparent neglect, and wrote to the Emperor explaining his
   ignorance of the facts, and to Flavian, complaining of being kept in
   ignorance, and prima facie of Eutyches' treatment.  Meanwhile the
   delayed epistle arrived from Flavian, and the account given was enough
   to satisfy Leo, who thereupon (May, 449) replied briefly expressing his
   approval and promising a fuller treatment of the question.  This
   promise was fulfilled next month in the shape of the world-famous
   ?Tome,? which forms Letter XXVIII. in the Leonine collection.  The
   proper significance of this document is well expressed by Mr. Gore [6]
   :  it is, he says, ?still more remarkable for its contents than for the
   circumstances which produced it,? though ?in itself it is a sign of the
   times:  for here we have a Latin bishop, ignorant of Greek, defining
   the faith for Greek-speaking bishops, in view of certain false opinions
   of Oriental origin.?  Without reviewing in detail the further
   correspondence that Leo carried on with the various civil and
   ecclesiastical authorities at Constantinople (among them being the
   influential and orthodox Pulcheria the Emperor's sister), we pass on to
   the events connected with the second council of Ephesus.  Through the
   influence of Chrysaphius, as we have already seen, the Emperor was all
   along on the side of Eutyches, and it was apparently at his instigation
   and in spite of Leo's guarded dissuasion that the council was now
   convened and met in August, 449.  The bishop of Rome excused himself
   from personal attendance on the score of pressing business at home, and
   sent three legates with instructions to represent his views, viz.
   Julius, bishop of Puteoli, Renatus, a presbyter, and Hilary, a deacon,
   together with Dulcitius, a notary [7] .  They started about the middle
   of June, and the Synod opened on the 8th of August, in the church of
   the B.V.M.  By the Emperor's order Dioscorus, patriarch of Alexandria,
   was president, Leo's chief representative sat next him, and Flavian was
   placed only 5th, the bishop of Antioch and Jerusalem being set above
   him:  130 bishops in all were admitted, those who had condemned
   Eutyches being excluded.  Owing partly to the presence of the soldiery
   and a number of turbulent monks under the Syrian archimandrite
   Barsubas, the proceedings soon became riotous and disorderly.  The
   ?Tome? was not read at all, though that was the purpose of its
   composition.  Eutyches was admitted to make his defence, which was
   received as completely satisfactory.  The acts of the Synod of
   Constantinople on being read excited great indignation.  Amid
   tremendous uproar Eutyches was formally restored to communion and his
   former position, and the president pronounced deposition upon Flavian
   and Eusebius.  Flavian appealed, and Hilary [8] , after uttering a
   monosyllabic protest, ?contradicitur,? managed to make good his escape
   and carry the lamentable tidings to his anxiously-expectant chief at
   Rome.  The other bishops all more or less reluctantly subscribed the
   restoration of Eutyches and the deposition of Flavian and Eusebius.
   The end of Flavian is variously recorded, but the most accurate version
   appears to be that amid many blows and rough usage he was cast into
   prison, then driven into exile, and that within a few days he died of
   the bodily and mental injuries he had received at Epypa, a village in
   Lydia.  These calamitous proceedings Leo afterwards stigmatized as
   Latrocinium (brigandage), and the council is generally known as the
   Robber council of Ephesus.

   At the time when the disastrous news arrived at Rome, Leo was presiding
   over a council which he had convened; in violent indignation he
   immediately dispatched letters right and left in his own and his
   colleagues' name.  There is a letter to Flavian, of whose death of
   course he was not yet aware; there are others to the archimandrites and
   the whole church of Constantinople, to Julian, bishop of Cos, and to
   Anastasius, bishop of Thessalonica.  He used all his influence to
   prevail on the Emperor to summon a fresh council, this time in Italy,
   writing to him himself, and getting Pulcheria on the spot, and
   Valentinian, his mother Placidia and his wife Eudoxia, by letters from
   Rome, to assist his cause.  As yet, however, the very stars in their
   courses seemed to fight against him, and the outlook grew yet darker.
   In the spring of 450 Dioscorus' predominance in the East had become so
   great that ten bishops were found to join with him in actually
   excommunicating the bishop of Rome.  At the Court, though Pulcheria
   remained true to the Faith, Chrysaphius still seems to have swayed the
   Emperor, and to have obtained from him the edict which was issued
   confirming the acts of the Ephesine council.  The fact, too, that
   Flavian's successor, Anatolius, had in the past been associated with
   Dioscorus caused him not unnatural anxiety, and this feeling turned to
   one of actual offence on receiving a letter from Anatolius, in which he
   simply announces his consecration without asking his consent.
   Thereupon Leo demanded of the Emperor that Anatolius should make some
   public proof and profession of his orthodoxy on the lines of the Tome
   and other catholic statements, and in the month of July sent legates to
   support this demand.

   At this moment the horizon suddenly brightened.  Before the arrival of
   the legates, Theodosius was killed by a fall from his horse, and to the
   triumph of the orthodox cause, his sister, Pulcheria (the first Roman
   Empress), succeeded him.  The whole aspect of things was soon changed.
   Chrysaphius was almost at once executed, and shortly afterwards
   Pulcheria married and shared the Eastern empire with Marcian, who was
   for bravery, wisdom and orthodoxy an altogether suitable partner of her
   throne.

   Leo's petition for a new Synod was now granted, but the place of
   meeting was to be in the East, not in the West, as more convenient for
   the Emperor.  In the interval S. Flavian's body was brought by reverent
   hands to Constantinople and buried in the church of the Apostles, and a
   still more hopeful sign of the times--Anatolius and many other bishops
   signed the Tome.  Hitherto Leo had asked that both councils (that which
   had condemned and that which had acquitted Eutyches of heresy) should
   be treated as null and void, and that the matter should be discussed de
   novo.  Now, however, he shows a significant change of front:  the
   Faith, he maintains, is decided:  nothing needs now to be done but to
   reject the heretics and to use proper caution in re-admitting the
   penitents:  there is no occasion for a general council.  And
   consequently he sends bishop Lucentius and Basil a presbyter as legates
   to assist Anatolius in this matter of rejection and re-admission.  But,
   as the Emperor adhered to his determination, Leo was obliged to give
   way, and though still declining to attend in person, sent bishop
   Paschasinus of Sicily and Boniface a presbyter with written
   instructions to act with the former two as his representatives; Julian
   of Cos, who from his knowledge of Greek and Eastern affairs was a most
   useful addition, was also asked to be of the number.  Nicaea in
   Bithynia had been fixed upon as the rendezvous, and there on Sept. 1,
   451, 520 bishops assembled [9] .  The Emperor, however, was too busy
   and too anxious over his military operations against Attila and the
   Huns to meet them there, and therefore invites them to Chalcedon, which
   being on the Bosporus was much nearer to Constantinople.  There
   accordingly on Oct. 8, in the church of S. Euphemia the Martyr, the
   council was at last opened.  The Emperor himself was still absent, but
   he was well represented by a goodly number of state officials.  In
   accordance with Leo's request, Paschasinus, with his brother legates,
   presided:  next sat Anatolius, Dioscorus, Maximus of Antioch and
   Juvenal of Jerusalem, with a copy of the Gospels in the midst.  Leo's
   representatives began by trying to have Dioscorus ejected:  they only
   succeeded in getting him deposed from his seat of honour and placed in
   the middle of the room together with Eusebius of Dorylaeum, his
   accuser, and Theodoret of Cyrus, the eminent theologian, who was
   suspected of Nestorianizing language.  The remainder of the first day
   was spent in reading the acts of the Ephesine council, which in the
   midst of much uproar were provisionally condemned.

   At the second session (Oct. 10), the Tome was read by the Imperial
   secretary, Veronician, and enthusiastically received:  ?Peter has
   spoken by Leo,? they said.  But objections being raised by the bishops
   of Palestine and Illyria that the twofold Nature was over-stated, its
   final acceptance was postponed for a few days, that a committee which
   was nominated might reason with the dissentients.

   At the third Session (Oct. 13), Dioscorus, who refused to appear, was
   accused by Eusebius and by general consent condemned, being deprived of
   his rank and office as bishop, and the Emperor having confirmed the
   sentence, he was banished to Gangra in Paphlagonia, and there three
   years later (in 454) died.  His successor at Alexandria was the
   orthodox Proterius, who was however never recognized by a large portion
   of the Egyptian Church:  even in the Synod of Chalcedon many of the
   Egyptian bishops refused to sign the ?Tome? at the fourth session, on
   the plea that the custom of their church forbade them to act without
   the consent of the archbishop, who was not yet appointed, and the still
   surviving ?Jacobite? schism originated with the deposition of
   Dioscorus.

   The fourth session was held on the 17th, and the misgivings of the
   Palestinian and Illyrian bishops having been quieted in the interval,
   the Tome was adopted.

   In the fifth session (Oct. 24), a difficulty arose over a definition of
   the Faith which had been composed, but did not satisfy the Roman
   legates with regard to Eutychianism.  However a committee, which was
   appointed, took it in hand again, and the result of their labours was
   accepted as fully guarding against the errors both of Nestorius and
   Eutyches.  The remaining sessions were occupied with less important
   matters, and with drawing up the canons of the Council, of which
   one--the 28th--was designed to settle the precedence of the patriarch
   of Constantinople (?New Rome? as it was called), and to give him a
   place second to the bishop of old Rome.  Against this audacious
   innovation the Roman legates in vain protested; the bitter pill,
   enwrapped in much sugar, was conveyed to Leo in the synodal letter, and
   produced the most lamentable results.

   The last meeting of the Council on Nov. 1 was graced by the attendance
   in full state of Marcian and Pulcheria.  The Emperor delivered an
   address, and at its conclusion he and the Empress were vociferously
   applauded, Marcian being styled the ?second Constantine.?

   To return to Leo, we have letters from Marcian, Anatolius, and Julian,
   all trying to carry off the difficulty of the 28th Canon under the
   triumph of the Roman views in other respects.  But Leo refused to be
   conciliated.  The canon, he maintains, is in direct violation of the
   decrees of Nicaea (in which statement he makes an unpardonable [10]
   confusion between the Nicene canons and those of Sardica, which were
   often appended to them).  With Anatolius he was especially displeased,
   considering that his doubtful precedents ought to have made him
   extremely careful not to offend.  He therefore ceased all communication
   with him, eagerly seizing at pretexts of complaint against him, and
   appointing Julian his apocrisiarius or resident representative and
   correspondent.  All this time Marcian continued pleading and Leo
   inflexible, until Anatolius at last yielded, and the matter for the
   time is satisfactorily settled, though it must not be imagined that the
   disputed canon was ever annulled.

   Eutychianism still lingered on and caused disturbances in various parts
   of the East, especially among the monks.  In Palestine, Juvenal, the
   bishop of Jerusalem, was deposed, and the Empress Eudocia, Theodosius
   II.'s widow, who was living in retirement in that city, was suspected
   of favouring the rioters.  Leo therefore wrote letters to her and to
   others, in which he restates the doctrine of the Incarnation,
   endeavouring to clear up any misconceptions which the inaccuracy of the
   Greek version of the Tome may possibly have caused.  Eventually he was
   able to congratulate the Emperor on the restoration of peace and order
   in that quarter of their empire.

   Similar riots were reported in Cappadocia, where the monks were led by
   one of their number named George, in Constantinople itself, where the
   ringleaders were Carosus and Dorotheus, and in Egypt.

   But before we narrate the final victory of the orthodox cause
   throughout Christendom against the Eutychians, there are two events in
   the political world, belonging one to the year 452 and the other to
   455, to which reference must be made, as showing the remarkable
   prestige which Leo's character had gained for him among all classes of
   society.  When he was made pope we found him absent in Gaul mediating
   between rival generals.  We now find him employed on still harder
   missions.  Leo himself makes none but the slightest indirect allusion
   to either of these later incidents, but this silence is only
   characteristic of the man, in whom there is no trace of vain-boasting,
   and who consistently sank the personality of himself as well as of
   others in the principles and causes which absorbed him.  There seems no
   reason, however, to doubt the substantial truth of what Prosper and
   others have related.  In 452 Attila and the Huns, notwithstanding the
   defeat they had sustained from Aetius at Chalons, continued their
   devastating inroad into Italy.  The whole city of Rome was paralysed
   with terror, and at last sent Leo with the Consular Avienus and the
   Prefect Tregetius to intercede with them.  The meeting took place on
   lake Benacus, and Leo's arguments, aided, it is thought, by rumours of
   threatened invasion at home, persuaded Attila to retire beyond the
   Danube, on condition of receiving Honoria with a rich dowry as his
   wife.  This was the last time that Attila troubled the Romans:  for he
   died the next year.

   Less than three years after this successful encounter with the
   barbarian, in 455 Leo's powerful services were again brought into
   requisition by the State.  That year the licentious Valentinian was
   murdered at the instigation of an enraged husband, Maximus, who
   subsequently compelled the widow, Eudoxia, to marry him.  Eudoxia,
   however, discovering the part Maximus had taken in Valentinian's death,
   invited the Vandals under Genseric to invade Italy.  Maximus himself
   was put to death before the invaders reached Rome:  but, when they did
   arrive, the panic-stricken citizens again threw themselves into the
   hands of Leo, who at the head of the clergy went forth to meet the foe
   outside the city.  Once more his intercessions in some measure
   prevailed, but not sufficiently to prevent the city being pillaged
   fourteen days.

   We now return to more purely religious matters.  In 457 Marcian died
   (his wife having pre-deceased him four years), and was succeeded by a
   Thracian, named Leo [11] .  Fresh outbreaks immediately took place both
   at Constantinople and at Alexandria:  at the former place they were
   soon stopped, but at Alexandria they were more serious and prolonged.
   The disaffected monks set up one of their number, Timothy AElurus (or
   the Cat) in opposition to Proterius, who was soon after foully murdered
   in the baptistery, to which he had fled.  This flagrant outrage at once
   aroused the bishop of Rome to fresh energy in every direction:  by his
   promptitude the new Emperor was stirred to action, among the other
   means employed being a re-statement of the Faith in a long epistle with
   a catena of patristic authority, sometimes called ?the Second Tome.?
   AElurus was deposed and banished, and another Timothy, surnamed
   Solophaciolus, of well-approved orthodoxy, elected into his place.
   This satisfactory consummation was effected in 460, while a no less
   orthodox successor, named Gennadius, had been found two years before,
   when Anatolius died, for the See of Constantinople.  Thus Leo's joy was
   full at last, as his latest letters testify.  Late in the year 461 he
   died, after a rule of twenty-one years, during which he had won at
   least one great victory for the Faith, and had given the See of Rome a
   prestige, which may be said to have lasted even to the present day.

   His body was buried in the church of S. Peter's, since which time it
   has been thrice moved to different positions, once towards the end of
   the 7th century by Pope Sergius, again in 1607, after the re-building
   of the church in its present form, and lastly in 1715.  As ?saint? and
   ?confessor? from the earliest times, as ?doctor of the church? since
   1754, he is commemorated in the East on Feb. 18, in the West on April
   11.

   ?It will not be wholly out of place,? says Mr. Gore [12] , ?to mention
   that tradition looks back to Leo as the benefactor of many of the Roman
   churches:  he is said to have restored their silver ornaments after the
   ravages of the Vandals, and to have repaired the basilicas of S. Peter
   and S. Paul, placing a mosaic in the latter, which represented the
   adoration of the four and twenty elders:  we are told also that he
   built a church of S. Cornelius, established some monks at S. Peter's,
   instituted guardians for the tombs of the Apostles, and erected a
   fountain before S. Paul's, where the people might wash before entering
   the church.?

   The only writings of Leo which are usually accepted as authentic are
   his numerous Sermons and Letters.  Certain anti-Pelagian treatises and
   a long tract upon Humility in the form of a letter to Demetrias, a
   virgin, have been ascribed to him; but the most important work of all
   the doubtful ones is a ?Sacramentary,? which is one of the earliest
   extant of the Roman church, and is sometimes held to be Leo's
   composition or compilation.  Many of the collects and prayers which it
   contains bear a remarkable resemblance to his teaching, and may well
   have come from his pen:  there is indeed good reason for the opinion
   that the Collect proper, which is a distinct feature of the Western
   Church, owes its origin to Leo.

   As a theologian Leo is thoroughly Western in type, being not
   speculative but dogmatic:  no one was better suited in God's Providence
   to give the final completeness to the Church's Doctrine of the
   Incarnation than this clear-sighted, unimaginative, and persistent
   bishop of Rome.  His theological position on the cardinal doctrines of
   the Faith is identical with that of the Athanasian symbol, to the
   language of which his own language often bears a close resemblance.
   With his theory of the Pope as universal Ruler of the Church in virtue
   of his being the successor of S. Peter, the vast majority of
   English-speaking people will have but little sympathy:  and yet it can
   but be admired from an objective standpoint as a bold, grand, and
   almost original [13] conception.  And there are no doubt many smaller
   points of detail in his writings connected more with discipline than
   with doctrine, which will now be reckoned if not as actually
   objectionable, at least as arising from forgotten needs or belonging to
   a byegone system:  among these may be instanced his objection to slaves
   as clergy and to the celebration of the Eucharist more than once in one
   day except on festivals, where the church is too small to hold all the
   worshippers at once:  his advocacy of the innovation of private instead
   of public confession for ordinary penitents, and on the other hand his
   insisting on the old rule that baptism should be administered only
   twice a year (at Easter and at Whitsuntide):  and again the somewhat
   undue prominence that he gives to fasting and almsgiving as being on a
   level with prayer for Lenten or Ember exercises, and to the
   intercessions of the saints--particularly of the patron saints of Rome,
   SS. Peter, Paul, and Lawrence.  And yet at the same time there is very
   much more to be thankful for as instructive than to object to as
   obsolete or dangerous.  For on the negative side we have no trace after
   all of the later direct invocation of the saints, nor of the modern
   cultus of the B.V.M. and of relics, while among the many positive good
   points in his teaching must be reckoned his most proper theory of a
   bishop as not only the channel of divine grace in virtue of ordination
   (sacerdos) but also the overseer of the flock (episcopus), in virtue of
   the people's choice and approval, which is essential to his office; his
   strong condemnation of the practice of usury in laity as well as
   clergy; his high appreciation of corporate even more than individual
   action among the faithful; the thoroughly practical view he always puts
   before us of the Christian life; and above all the ?singularly
   Christian? character of all his sermons, in which Christ is the Alpha
   and Omega of all his thoughts and of all his exhortations.  These are
   some of the benefits which Leo has conferred upon the Church, and which
   have rightfully earned for him the title ?Great.?
     __________________________________________________________________

   [1] The objection that Prosper and Leo himself both speak of Rome as
   his patria does not seem of sufficient weight to overthrow a tradition,
   which it is somewhat hard to account for the existence of.  To a native
   of central Italy under the Empire, who had spent all his public life in
   Rome, the Eternal city was equally patria, whether it was his actual
   birthplace or not.  At the same time there is no evidence that
   Volaterrae any more than Rome or any other Italian city can claim the
   honour with certainty.

   [2] Wilberforce on Doctrine On The Holy Eucharist, p. 246, quoted by
   Bright.

   [3] The chief error of Pelagius (=Morgan), who is commonly thought to
   have been of British origin, was, as is well-known, the denial of
   original or birth-sin:  see Article ix.

   [4] This is seen still more clearly when we remember how completely he
   held the Western, if not always the Eastern, Emperors in his power, and
   made them support and carry out his wishes.

   [5] The essential point in the Manichaean heresy (which took its rise
   in the far East) was the existence of two independent and conflicting
   principles:  good, whose kingdom was light and the spiritual world, and
   evil, whose kingdom was over the elements of matter.

   [6] Leo the Great, p. 53 (S.P.C.K.):  this writer should also be
   consulted (pp. 53 to 70), on the merits and importance of the Eutychian
   controversy generally.

   [7] Of these Renatus is said to have died at Delos on the way, and
   Hilary is the future pope of that name.  Julius of Puteoli must be
   carefully distinguished from Julian of Cos, who was also a confidant of
   Leo's.

   [8] What happened to Julius and Dulcitius is not known, though Leo does
   not express any disapproval of their action.

   [9] 110 others voted by proxy in absence through their metropolitans
   (Gore).

   [10] Unpardonable in any case from one in his position, but especially
   so, if he was really connected with the church of Rome, as we have
   suggested, under Zosimus, in whose time the confusion, already existing
   then, was completely cleared up:  see Gore's Life, pp. 113 and 114.
   The Canon itself professed only to confirm one already passed in 381.

   [11] Styled ?Magnus,? like his great namesake, though with infinitely
   less good reason.

   [12] Life, p. 165.

   [13] Milman attributes the real initiation of the Papal theory to the
   imperious Innocent I., who held the See of Rome at the beginning of the
   fifth century (402-417).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Manuscripts.

   I.  At the Vatican.  (a) Of the Sermons.  (1)  Codd. 3835 and 6 are two
   volumes in Roman Character of a Lectionary of about the 8th century;
   the second volume contains the ?Tome? (which in the 8th and 9th
   centuries used to be read in the Church offices before Christmas):
   (2)  3828, a parchment (10th century), also a lectionary:  (3)  1195, a
   parchment folio (11th century), a lectionary containing inter alia some
   of Leo's homilies:  (4)  1267, 8 and 9 of the same character (11th
   century):  (5)  1270 contains the Sermon de Festo Petri cathedrae, (now
   xiv. in Migne's Appendix), from which Cacciari restored Quesnel's
   imperfect edition of it to its present state:  (6)  1271 and 2 are also
   lectionaries:  (7)  4222 in Lombardic characters (9th century), a
   lectionary:  (8)  5451 in Roman characters (12th century), a
   lectionary:  (9)  6450 parchment (12th century):  a lectionary
   containing the sermon de Festo Petri cathedrae in the form found and
   printed by Quesnel; (10)  6451 similar:  it contains sermons de
   Quadragesima  and others:  (11)  6454 similar.

   (b) Of the Letters:  these are mostly rather later (i.e. about 12th or
   13th century):  but (1)  1322 is of an older date, and contains besides
   the epistles, all the acts of the Council of Chalcedon:  (2)  5759 is
   earlier than the 9th century; it used to belong to the monastery of S.
   Columban at Bobbio, and contains 31 letters:  (3)  5845 is very
   ancient, and according to Cacciari, Lombardic:  it contains 24 letters.

   (g) Letters and Sermons together:  of these there are nine collections
   in the Vatican, of which 548 and 9 contain the sermon de Absalom  which
   is condemned by Cacciari.  The Regio-Vaticanus codex 139 is a fine
   collection of Leo's works (12th century).

   II.  At other places:  (1)  The codex Urbinas 65 is thought to be a
   copy of the Regio-Vaticanus 139 made in the 14th century.

   (2)  Codex Grimanicus [14] is a ms. on which Quesnel lays great
   stress:  Quesnel assigns it to the ninth century; it contains 107
   letters, of which 28 had never been printed before Quesnel.

   (3)  The Thuanei; (a) 129 contains 123 letters:  (b) 780 contains the
   Tome:  (g) 729 contains the spurious de vocatione gentium and some
   epistles.

   (4)  The Corbeienses are old.

   (5)  The Taurinensis 29 D. iv. is a fine 13th-century ms. containing 52
   letters.

   (6)  The Florentinus codex belongs to the 13th century also.

   (7)  Ratisbonensis 113 DD. AA., in the monastery of S. Emeramus,
   contains 72 letters:  it is said to date from about 750 a.d.

   (8)  The two Bergonenses are of 12th century, and contain 12 sermons.

   (9)  Two Chigiani also of 12th century contain 4 sermons.

   (10)  The Padilironenses contain 9 sermons and the Tome.

   (11)  There are three Patavini, of which two contain the Tome.

   (12)  Vallicellani:  these are a number of 11th or 12th-century
   codices.

   There are also the Veneti, the Vercellenses, the Veronenses, &c.

   N.B.  The foregoing account is taken from Schoenemann's Notitia
   Historico-Literaria  (1794), and the translator has no means of knowing
   whether it is still correct (1890).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [14] Grimanus, from whom this Codex is named, was Cardinal of S. Mark,
   &c., in the 16th century.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Editions.

   1.  The earliest important edition is P. Quesnel's (pretre de
   l'oratoire), Paris, 1675, Lyons, 1700, of which Migne's Dict. de
   Bibliogr. catholique says, on reproche aux editions du P. Quesnel un
   grand nombre de falsifications, par lesquelles le P. Quesnel se
   proposait notamment d'affaiblir l'autorite pontificale [15]
   ....L'edition que l'on doit aujourd'hui preferer, est  (naturally
   enough!) celle qui a ete publiee par M. l'abbe Migne sous le titre d'

   2.  OEuvres tres completes de Saint Leon le Grand publiees d'apres
   l'edition des freres Ballerinii et celle de Paschase Quesnel enrichees
   de prefaces, d'avertissements et de commentaires, suivies des exercices
   de Cacciari sur toutes les oeuvres du saint docteur.  Paris 1846.

   3.  P. Cacciari (a carmelite) brought out editions at Rome, 1751 and
   1753-5, the latter with dissertations.

   4.  The edition of the brothers P. and H. Ballerinii (Jesuists),
   Venice, 1753-7, was a recension of Quesnel's second edition with
   copious dissertations and notes.

   5.  H. Hurter, S. J., has published selections of Sermons and Letters
   in vols. xiv., xxv. and xxvi. of his SS. PP. opuscula selecta, 1871-4.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [15] That is to say, it upheld the Gallican opinions; and so it was
   condemned and put on the Index in 1682.  But being too valuable a work
   to be altogether suppressed, Benedict XIV. enjoined the issue of (4),
   which rebutted and rectified Quesnel's false deductions in its notes
   and excursuses.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Translations.

   1.  Bright's Leo on the Incarnation, London, 1862 (2nd edn. enlarged,
   1886, in which the Tome is translated), consists of xviii. sermons
   translated and the Tome in Latin, with many valuable notes.

   2.  Reithmayr's Bibliothek  (1869) contains a German translation.

   3.  Dr. Neale's History of the Alexandrian Patriarchate embodies a
   translation of the Tome.

   4.  Dr. Heurtley published a version of the Tome in 1886.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Authorities and Materials.

   The chief ancient and medieval authorities for the life and times of
   Leo the Great are such works as Prosper's, and Idatius' Chronicles,
   Iornandes de rebus Geticis, Anastasius Bibliothecarius Historia de
   vitis Romanorum Pontificum (9th cent.), the Historia Miscella (10th
   cent.), &c.

   Among lives may be mentioned the following:--(1) La vie et religion de
   deux bons papes Leon premier et Gregoire premier par Pierre Du Moulin
   (the younger:  a protestant theologian), Sedan, 1650. 12mo.  (2)
   Quesnel's valuable Dissertatio de vita et rebus gestis S. Leonis Magni,
   originally included in his edition of Leo and re-printed by Migne in
   Vol. ii. of his edition with the Ballerinii's annotations and critical
   remarks, Paris, 1675, Lyons, 1700.  (3) Histoire du Pontificat de Saint
   Leon le Grand par Monsr. L. Maimbourg La Haye, 1687.  (4) The
   Bollandists' Life by Canisius (Acta Sanctorum), April, vol. ii. pp.
   14-22.  (5) Alphonsi Ciaconii Vitae Pontificum (Tom. 1, pp. 303-314),
   Rome, 1677, 4to.  (6) Le Nain de Tillemont, Memoires pour servir `a
   l'histoire Ecclesiastique (vol. xv. pp. 414-832, 885-934), Paris,
   1711.  (7) Breve Descrizione della vita di S. Leone Primo di Gabrielle
   Bertazzolo:  Mantova, 1727.  (8) Memoire istoriche di Sa. Leone Papa da
   Teofilo Pacifico:  Brescia, 1791, 8vo.  (9) Du Pin, L. E., History of
   Ecc. writers (Eng Edn. vol. 1, pp. 464-480), Dublin, 1722.  (10) C.
   Oudinus, de Scriptoribus Ecclesiae (vol. 1, pp. 1271-5), Leipzig,
   1722.  (11) Wilhelm Amadeus Arendt (Roman Catholic), Leo der Grosse und
   seine Zeit, Mainz, 1835, 8vo.  (12) Eduard Perthel, Papst Leo's I.
   Leben und Lehren, Jena, 1843, 8vo. (a counterblast to No. 11, and no
   less exaggerated and prejudiced in statement).  (13) A. de Saint-Chron,
   Histoire du pontificat de Saint Leon le Grand, Paris, 1846.  (14) F.
   Boehringer, die Kirche Xti und ihre Zeugen (vol. 1 part 4, pp.
   170-309), Zuerich, 1845.  (15) Charles Gore's Life of Leo the Great
   (S.P.C.K.); also his article in Smith's Dict. of Christian Biogr.  (16)
   The article in Herzog's Real-Encyklopaedie of which a condensed English
   edition was edited by Dr. Philip Schaff at New York in 1883.  Other
   more general accounts of his times will be found in (1) l'abbe Fleury,
   Histoire du Xtianisme (vol. ii. pp. 384-480), Paris, 1836.  (2)
   Bright's History of the Church from 313-451 (chaps. xiv., xv.), Oxford
   and London, 1860.  (3) Milman's Latin Christianity (Book ii. chap. 4),
   London, 1864.  (4) R. J. Rohrbacher's Histoire Universelle de l'Eglise
   catholique (15th edn., vol. 4, pp. 461-575), Paris, 1868.  A short
   account of Leo's writings is given in Alzog's Grundriss der Patrologie,
   S: 78, pp.368-375:  a most exhaustive one in Ceillier's Histoire
   generale des Auteurs sacres (new edition) (vol. x., pp. 169-276),
   1858-1869.  Baehr's Geschichte der Roemischer Literatur-Supplement Band
   II. Abtheilung (pp. 354-362), im Abendland, vol. 1, p. 448, may also be
   consulted; and Ebert's Allgemeine Geschichte der Literatur des
   Mittelalters.
     __________________________________________________________________
     __________________________________________________________________
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letters.

   ------------------------

   Letter I.

   To the Bishop of Aquileia.

   I.  Through the negligence of the authorities the Pelagian heresy has
   been spreading in his province.

   From the account of our holy brother and fellow-bishop Septimus which
   is contained in the subjoined letter [16] , we have understood that
   certain priests and deacons and clergy of various orders [17] in your
   province who have been drawn in by the Pelagian or Caelestian heresy,
   have attained to catholic communion without any recantation of their
   peculiar error being required of them; and that, whilst the shepherds
   set to watch were fast asleep, wolves clothed in sheep-skins but
   without laying aside their bestial minds have entered into the Lord's
   sheep-fold:  and that they make a practice of what is not allowed even
   to non-offenders by the injunctions of our canons and decrees [18] :
   to wit that they should leave the churches in which they received or
   regained their office and carry their uncertainty in all directions,
   loving to continue wandering and never to remain on the foundations of
   the Apostles.  For without being sifted by any test or bound by any
   previous confession of faith, they make a great point of their right to
   the privilege of going to one house after another under cover of their
   being in communion with the Church, and corrupting the hearts of many
   through men's ignorance [19] of their false name.  And yet I am sure
   they could not do this, if the rulers of the churches had exercised
   their rightful diligence in the matter of receiving such, and had not
   allowed any of them to wander from place to place.

   II.  He orders a provincial synod to be convened to receive the
   recantation of the heretics in express terms.

   Accordingly, lest this should be attempted any further, and lest this
   pernicious habit, which owes its introduction to certain persons'
   negligence, should result in the overthrow of many souls, by this our
   authoritative injunction we charge you, brother, to give diligence that
   a synod of the clergy [20] of your province be convened, and all,
   whether priests or deacons or clerics of any rank who have been
   re-admitted from their alliance with the Pelagians and the Caelestians
   into catholic communion with such precipitation that they were not
   first constrained to recant their error, be now at least forced to a
   true correction, which can advantage themselves and hurt no one, since
   their deceitfulness has in part been disclosed.  Let them by their
   public confession condemn the authors of this presumptuous [21] error
   and renounce all that the universal Church has repudiated in their
   doctrine:  and let them announce by full and open statements, signed by
   their own hand, that they embrace and entirely approve of all the
   synodal decrees which the authority of the Apostolic See has ratified
   to the rooting out of this heresy.  Let nothing obscure, nothing
   ambiguous be found in their words.  For we know that their cunning is
   such that they reckon that the meaning of any particular clause of
   their execrable doctrine can be defended if they only keep it distinct
   from the main body of their damnable views [22] .

   III.  The Pelagian view of God's grace is unscriptural.

   And when they pretend to disapprove of and give up all their
   definitions to facilitate evasion through their complete art of
   deception, unless their meaning is detected, they make exception of the
   dogma that the grace of God is given according to the merits of the
   recipient.  And yet surely, unless it is given freely, it is not a gift
   [23] , but a price and compensation for merits:  for the blessed
   Apostle says, ?by grace ye have been saved through faith, and that not
   of yourselves but it is the gift of God; not of works lest any should
   perchance be exalted.  For we are His workmanship created in Christ
   Jesus in good works, which God prepared that we should walk in them
   [24] .?  Thus every bestowal of good works is of God's preparing:
   because a man is justified by grace rather than by his own excellence:
   for grace is to every one the source of righteousness, the source of
   good and the fountain of merit.  But these heretics say it is
   anticipated by men's natural goodness for this reason, that that nature
   which (in their view) is before grace conspicuous for good desires of
   its own, may not seem marred by any stain of original sin, and that
   what the Truth says may be falsified:  ?For the Son of Man came to seek
   and to save that which was lost [25] .?

   IV.  Prompt measures are essential.

   You must take heed, therefore, beloved, and with great diligence make
   provision that offences which have long been removed be not set up
   again through such men and that no seed of the same evil spring up in
   your province from a doctrine which has once been uprooted:  for not
   only will it take root and grow, but also will taint the future
   generations of the Church with its poisonous exhalations.  Those who
   wish to appear corrected must purge themselves of all suspicion:  and
   by obeying us, prove themselves ours.  And if any of them decline to
   satisfy our wholesome injunctions, be he cleric or layman, he must be
   driven from the society of the Church lest he deal treacherously by
   others' safety as well as forfeit his own soul.

   V.  The canons must be enforced against clerics who wander from one
   church to another.

   We admonish you also to restore to full working that part of the
   discipline of the Church whereby the holy Fathers and we have often in
   former times decreed that neither in the grade of the priesthood nor in
   the order of the diaconate nor in the lower ranks of the clergy, is any
   one at liberty to migrate from church to church:  to the end that each
   one may persevere where he was ordained without being enticed by
   ambition, or led astray by greed, or corrupted by men's evil beliefs:
   and thus that if any one, seeking his own interests, not those of Jesus
   Christ [26] , neglect to return to his own people [27] and church, he
   may be reckoned out of the pale both in respect of promotion and of the
   bond of communion.  But do not doubt, beloved, that we must be somewhat
   sorely moved if, as we think not, our decrees for the maintenance of
   the canons and the integrity of the faith be neglected:  because the
   short-comings of the lower orders [28] are to be laid at the door of
   none so much as of those slothful and remiss rulers who often foster
   much pestilence by shrinking from the application of a stringent
   remedy.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [16] It is to be supposed that the letter of Septimus, bp. of Altinum,
   was sent with this letter.  See Lett. XVIII. n. 3.

   [17] Viz. members of the minor order as they are now called,
   subdeacons, exorcists, &c.

   [18] It has been the rule at least since the council of Nicaea (325)
   that the clergy should stay in the church (or ?diocese? as we should
   call it) of their ordination, cf. Canons of Nicaea xxi. de his qui
   Ecclesias deserunt et ad alias transeunt, and xxii. de non suscipiendis
   alterius Ecclesiae clericis.  And we often find Leo insisting on the
   observance of the rule.

   [19] Inscientiam:  the general reading being scientiam, the sense of
   which is not clear.

   [20] Sacerdotum:  I am in doubt as to what this term here includes, but
   think it probable that all ranks of the clergy were to be summoned.
   The words sacerdos and antistes in early ecclesiastical Latin very
   often mean the bishop (episcopus) specifically rather than the
   presbyter (sacerdos secundi ordinis), because it was the bishop who
   offered the ?sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving? (i.e. the
   Eucharist), and the presbyter only in his default; but the term
   sacerdos does certainly often include the presbyters and also the
   deacons (sacerdotes tertii ordinis) when in connexion with the priests
   and bishops, and it seems likely that the whole body of the clergy of
   the province would be summoned to the synod:  see Bright's note 110:
   also Bingham, Antiq., Bk. II., chap. xix., S:S: 14, 15.

   [21] Superbi (proud):  the epithet is well chosen and not a random
   one:  for pride and presumption are at the root of the Pelagian views
   as birth-sin and baptismal grace:  perfectionism is little in
   accordance with Christian humility.

   [22] For the same sentiment cf. Prosper, de ingratis, v. 188.

   [23] The reader need hardly be reminded that in the New Testament
   ?grace? (Lat. gratia, Gk. charis) signifies ?a free gift.?

   [24] Eph. ii. 8-10.

   [25] S. Luke ix. 10.  Between this and the next chapter some of the
   mss. and the earlier editions insert a passage from Augustine's
   Enchiridion, which thus formed chapter iv.

   [26] A reminiscence of Phil. ii. 21.

   [27] Plebem:  this being the regular term for the ?Laity? in early
   Christian Latin.

   [28] Sc. of the clergy.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter II.

   To Septimus, Bishop of Altinum.

   (Caution must be observed in receiving Pelagians back, and clergy must
   stay in the church of their ordination.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter III.

   From Paschasinus, Bishop of Lilybaeum.

   (About the keeping of Easter in 444; recommending the Alexandrine
   calculation.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter IV.

   To the Bishops appointed in Campania, Picenum, Etruria, and all the
   Provinces.

   Leo, bishop of the city of Rome, to all the bishops appointed in
   Campania, Picenum, Etruria, and all the provinces, greeting in the
   Lord.

   I.  Introduction.

   As the peaceful settlement of the churches causes us satisfaction, so
   are we saddened with no slight sorrow whenever we learn that anything
   has been taken for granted or done contrary to the ordinances of the
   canons and the discipline of the Church:  and if we do not repress such
   things with the vigilance we ought, we cannot excuse ourselves to Him
   who intended us to be watchmen [29] , for permitting the pure body of
   the Church, which we ought to keep clean from every stain, to be
   defiled by contact with wicked schemers, since the framework of the
   members loses its harmony by such dissimulation.

   II.  Slaves and serfs (coloni) are not to be ordained.

   Men are admitted commonly to the Sacred Order who are not qualified by
   any dignity of birth or character:  even some who have failed to obtain
   their liberty from their masters are raised to the rank of the
   priesthood [30] , as if sorry slaves were fit for that honour; and it
   is believed that a man can be approved of God who has not yet been able
   to approve himself to his master.  And so the cause for complaint is
   twofold in this matter, because both the sacred ministry is polluted by
   such poor partners in it, and the rights of masters are infringed so
   far as unlawful possession is rashly taken of them [31] .  From these
   men, therefore, beloved brethren, let all the priests of your province
   keep aloof; and not only from them, but from others also, we wish you
   to keep, who are under the bond of origin or other condition of service
   [32] :  unless perchance the request or consent be intimated of those
   who claim some authority over them.  For he who is to be enrolled on
   the divine service ought to be exempt from others, that he be not drawn
   away from the Lord's camp in which his name is entered, by any other
   bonds of duty.

   III.  A man who has married twice or a widow is not eligible as a
   priest.

   Again, when each man's respectability of birth and conduct has been
   established, what sort of person should be associated with the ministry
   of the Sacred Altar we have learnt both from the teaching of the
   Apostle and the Divine precepts and the regulations of the canons, from
   which we find very many of the brethren have turned aside and quite
   gone out of the way.  For it is well known that the husbands of widows
   have attained to the priesthood:  certain, too, who have had several
   wives, and have led a life given up to all licentiousness, have had all
   facilities put in their way, and been admitted to the Sacred Order,
   contrary to that utterance of the blessed Apostle, in which he
   proclaims and says to such, ?the husband of one wife [33] ,? and
   contrary to that precept of the ancient law which says by way of
   caution:  ?Let the priest take a virgin to wife, not a widow, not a
   divorced woman [34] .?  All such persons, therefore, who have been
   admitted we order to be put out of their offices in the church and from
   the title of priest by the authority of the Apostolic See:  for they
   will have no claim [35] to that for which they were not eligible, on
   account of the obstacle in question:  and we specially claim for
   ourselves the duty of settling this, that if any of these
   irregularities have been committed, they may be corrected and may not
   be allowed to occur again, and that no excuse may arise from
   ignorance:  although it has never been allowed a priest to be ignorant
   of what has been laid down by the rules of the canons.  These writings,
   therefore, we have addressed to your provinces by the hand of Innocent,
   Legitimus and Segetius, our brothers and fellow-bishops:  that the evil
   shoots which are known to have sprung up may be torn out by the roots,
   and no tares may spoil the Lord's harvest.  For thus all that is
   genuine will bear much fruit, if that which has been wont to kill the
   growing crop be carefully cleared away.

   IV.  Usurious practices forbidden for clergy and for laity [36] .

   This point, too, we have thought must not be passed over, that certain
   possessed with the love of base gain lay out their money at interest,
   and wish to enrich themselves as usurers.  For we are grieved that this
   is practised not only by those who belong to the clergy, but also by
   laymen who desire to be called Christians.  And we decree that those
   who have been convicted be punished sharply, that all occasion of
   sinning be removed.

   V.  A cleric may not make money in another's name any more than in his
   own.

   The following warning, also, we have thought fit to give, that no
   cleric should attempt to make money in another's name any more than in
   his own:  for it is unbecoming to shield one's crime under another
   man's gains [37] .  Nay, we ought to look at and aim at only that usury
   whereby what we bestow in mercy here we may recover from the Lord, who
   will restore a thousand fold what will last for ever.

   VI.  Any bishop who refuses consent to these rules must be deposed.

   This admonition of ours, therefore, proclaims that if any of our
   brethren endeavour to contravene these rules and dare to do what is
   forbidden by them, he may know that he is liable to deposition from his
   office, and that he will not be a sharer in our communion who refuses
   to be a sharer of our discipline.  But lest there be anything which may
   possibly be thought to be omitted by us, we bid you, beloved, to keep
   all the decretal rules of Innocent of blessed memory [38] , and also of
   all our predecessors, which have been promulgated about the orders of
   the Church and the discipline of the canons, and to keep them in such
   wise that if any have transgressed them he may know at once that all
   indulgence is denied him.

   Dated 10th of October, in the consulship of the illustrious Maximus (a
   second time) and Paterius (a.d. 443).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [29] Cf. Ezek. iii. 17.

   [30] Sacerdotii, see note 5 on Letter I.

   [31] Though no doubt S. Leo's language is here harsh and offensive to
   modern ears, it is not, I think, substantially out of agreement with S.
   Paul's own teaching (cf. Philemon 1; 1 Cor. vii. 21; Ephes. vi. 5; Col.
   iii. 22; Tit. ii. 9), and certainly not with the spirit of the age.
   The 73rd Apost. Canon forbids any slave to be ordained without his
   master's consent, and without previously obtaining his freedom.
   However, in the times of S. Jerome, S. Basil and S. Greg. Nazianzen, we
   find cases of slaves being ordained.  However much we in the latter
   half of the nineteenth century regret to hear a great father of the
   Church speak in this way we must not forget that in the first half of
   this self-same century the very same opinion would have been held on
   the subject in many parts of the civilized world.

   [32] Qui originali (al. origini) aut alicui condicioni obligati sunt.
   The class of people alluded to were the coloni (serfs):  such of them
   as were so by birth were called originarii:  and there were other
   classes of them also (alicui condicioni obligati).  The essential
   difference between all coloni and the ordinary servi was that the
   latter's service was personal, the former were servi terrae, adscripti
   glaebae.  Thus there is a strong resemblance between them and the
   villeins (villani) of medieval and modern Europe.  For the order
   concerning them here given, cf. 2nd Council of Orleans (538), which
   ordains ?ut nullus servilibus colonariisque condicionibus obligatus
   iuxta statuta sedis Apostolicae ad honores ecclesiasticos admittatur
   nisi prius aut testamento aut per tabulas legitime constiterit
   absolutum.

   [33] 1 Tim. iii. 2, unius uxoris virum with the Vulgate, cf. Letter
   xii. 3.

   [34] Lev. xxi. 13, 14, cf. a letter of Innocent I. to Victricius,
   bishop of Rothomagus (Rouen) chap. v., ut mulierem (viduam) clericus
   non ducat uxorem:  quia scriptum est:  sacerdos virginem uxorem
   accipiat non eiectam,? and for the former quotation, cf. ibid. chap
   vii. ne is qui secundam duxerit uxorem, clericus fiat:  quia scriptum
   est unius virum.  The 18th Apostolic Canon gives a similar order.  All
   these rules would seem to refer to marriage before, not after,
   ordination.  The latter was against the spirit of the early Church.

   [35] The older editions here add pro arbitrio (by dispensation), which
   Quesnel considers a gloss added later when dispensation was sometimes
   granted to digamous clerks.

   [36] The practice of usury and trading generally is often forbidden in
   the Canons, &c., for the clergy, but its prohibition for the laity is
   much more unusual:  cf., however, Canon V. of the Council of Carthage
   (419), quod (sc. fenus accipere) in laicis, reprehenditur id multo
   magis debet et in clericis praedamnari.  Scripture certainly is against
   the clergy participating in lucrative employments, though it was not
   easy always to prevent them:  it had become, for instance, a common
   practice in S. Cyprian's day in the North African Church (cf. de laps.
   6).  But the secular laws certainly countenanced it in the laity (as
   Aug. Ep. 154 acknowledges).  Leo the Emperor is said by Grotius to have
   been the first who ?existimans omne fenus Christiano interdictum, lege
   id ipsum communi sanxit? (Quesnel).

   [37] Crimen suum commodis alienis impendere.  I am not sure that this
   can mean what I say.

   [38] This was S. Innocent I., who was Pope from 402 to 417.  One of his
   decretal letters was quoted from in note 1 to chap. iii. of this
   Letter.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter V.

   To the Metropolitan Bishops of Illyricum.

   (Appointing Anastasius of Thessalonica his Vicar in the province, and
   expressing his wishes about its government, for which see Letter VI.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter VI.

   To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica.

   Leo to his beloved brother Anastasius.

   I.  He is pleased to have been consulted by the bishops [39] of
   Illyricum on important questions.

   The brotherly love of our colleagues makes us read with grateful mind
   the letters of all priests [40] ; for in them we embrace one another in
   the spirit as if we were face to face, and by the intercourse of such
   epistles we are associated in mutual converse [41] .  But in this
   present letter the affection displayed seems to us greater than usual:
   for it informs us of the state of the churches [42] , and urges us to a
   vigilant exercise of care by a consideration of our office, so that
   being placed, as it were, on a watch-tower, according to the will of
   the Lord, we should both lend our approval to things when they run in
   accordance with our wishes, and correct, by applying the remedies of
   compulsion, what we observe gone wrong through any aggression:  hoping
   that abundant fruit will be the result of our sowing the seed, if we do
   not allow those things to increase which have begun to spring up to the
   spoiling of the harvest.

   II.  Following the examples of his predecessors he nominates Anastasius
   Metropolitan of Illyricum.

   Now therefore, dear brother, that your request has been made known to
   us through our son Nicolaus the priest, that you, too, like your
   predecessors, might receive from us in our turn authority over
   Illyricum for the observance of the rules, we give our consent and
   earnestly exhort that no concealment and no negligence may be allowed
   in the management of the churches situated throughout Illyricum, which
   we commit to you in our stead, following the precedent of Siricius of
   blessed remembrance, who then, for the first time, acting on a fixed
   method, entrusted them to your last predecessor but one [43] , Anysius
   of holy memory, who had at the time well deserved of the Apostolic See,
   and was approved by after events:  that he might render assistance to
   the churches situated in that province whom he wished kept up to
   discipline.  Noble precedents must be followed with eagerness that we
   may show ourselves in all things like those whose privileges we wish to
   enjoy.  We wish you to imitate your last predecessor [44] but one as
   well as of your immediate predecessor who is known equally with the
   former to have both deserved and employed this privilege:  so that we
   may rejoice in the progress of the churches which we commit to you in
   our stead.  For as the conduct of matters progresses creditably when
   committed to one who acts well and carries out skilfully the duties of
   the priestly position, so it is found to be only a burden to him who,
   when power is entrusted to him, uses not the moderation that is due.

   III.  Ordinees must be carefully selected with especial reference to
   the Canons of the church.

   And so, dear brother, hold with vigilance the helm entrusted to you,
   and direct your mind's gaze around on all which you see put in your
   charge, guarding what will conduce to your reward and resisting those
   who strive to upset the discipline of the canons.  The sanction of
   God's law must be respected, and the decrees of the canons should be
   more especially kept.  Throughout the provinces committed to thee let
   such priests be consecrated to the Lord as are commended only by their
   deserving life and position among the clergy.  Permit no licence to
   personal favour, nor to canvassing, nor to purchased votes.  Let the
   cases of those who are to be ordained be investigated carefully and let
   them be trained in the discipline of the Church through a considerable
   period of their life.  But if all the requirements of the holy Fathers
   are found in them, and if they have observed all that we read the
   blessed Apostle Paul to have enjoined on such, viz., that he be the
   husband of one wife, and that she was a virgin when he married her, as
   the authority of God's law requires, [then ordain them [45] ].  And
   this we are extremely anxious should be observed, so as to do away with
   all place for excuses, lest any one should believe himself able to
   attain to the priesthood who has taken a wife before he obtained the
   grace of Christ, and on her decease joined himself to another after
   baptism.  Seeing that the former wife cannot be ignored, nor the
   previous marriage put out of the reckoning, and that he is as much the
   father of the children whom he begot by that wife before baptism as he
   is of those whom he is known to have begotten by the second after
   baptism.  For as sins and things which are known to be unlawful are
   washed away in the font of baptism, so what are allowed or lawful are
   not done away.

   IV.  The Metropolitans must not ordain hastily nor without consulting
   their Primate.

   Let one be ordained a priest [46] throughout these churches
   inconsiderately; for by this means ripe judgments will be formed about
   those to be elected, if your scrutiny, brother, is dreaded.  But let
   any bishop who, contrary to our command, is ordained by his
   metropolitan without your knowledge, know that he has no assured
   position with us, and that those who have taken on themselves so to do
   must render an account of their presumption [47] .  But as to each
   metropolitan is committed such power that he has the right of ordaining
   in his province, so we wish those metropolitans to be ordained, but not
   without ripe and well-considered judgment.  For although it is seemly
   that all who are consecrated priests should be approved and
   well-pleasing to God, yet we wish those to have peculiar excellence
   whom we know are going to preside over the fellow-priests who are
   assigned to them.  And we admonish you, beloved, to see to this the
   more diligently and carefully, that you may be proved to keep that
   precept of the Apostles which runs, ?lay hands suddenly on no man [48]
   .?

   V.  Points which cannot be settled at the provincial synod are to be
   referred to Rome.

   Any of the brethren who has been summoned to a synod should attend and
   not deny himself to the holy congregation:  for there especially he
   should know that what will conduce to the good discipline of the Church
   must be settled.  For all faults will be better avoided if more
   frequent conferences take place between the priests of the Lord, and
   intimate association is the greatest help alike to improvement and to
   brotherly love.  There, if any questions arise, under the Lord's
   guidance they will be able to be determined, so that no bad feeling
   remains, and only a firmer love exists among the brethren.  But if any
   more important question spring up, such as cannot be settled there
   under your presidency, brother, send your report and consult us, so
   that we may write back under the revelation of the Lord, of whose mercy
   it is that we can do ought, because He has breathed favourably upon us
   [49] :  that by our decision we may vindicate our right of cognizance
   in accordance with old-established tradition and the respect that is
   due to the Apostolic See:  for as we wish you to exercise your
   authority in our stead, so we reserve to ourselves points which cannot
   be decided on the spot and persons who have made appeal to us.

   VI.  Priests and deacons may not be ordained on weekdays any more than
   bishops.

   You shall take order that this letter reach the knowledge of all the
   brethren, so that no one hereafter find an opportunity to excuse
   himself through ignorance in observing these things which we command.
   We have directed our letter of admonition [50] to the metropolitans
   themselves also of the several provinces, that they may know that they
   must obey the Apostolic injunctions, and that they obey us in beginning
   to obey you, brother, our delegate according to what we have written.
   We hear, indeed, and we cannot pass it over in silence, that only
   bishops are ordained by certain brethren on Sundays only; but
   presbyters and deacons, whose consecration should be equally solemn
   [51] , receive the dignity of the priestly office indiscriminately on
   any day, which is a reprehensible practice contrary to the canons and
   tradition of the Fathers [52] , since the custom ought by all means to
   be kept by those who have received it with respect to all the sacred
   orders:  so that after a proper lapse of time he who is to be ordained
   a priest or deacon [53] may be advanced through all the ranks of the
   clerical office, and thus a man may have time to learn that of which he
   himself also is one day to be a teacher.  Dated the 12th of January, in
   the consulship of Theodosius (18th time) and Albinus (444).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [39] The letter to the college of bishops was written the same day, and
   forms No. 5 in the Leonine series (in Migne).

   [40] Sacerdotum here obviously = episcoporum, see Letter I. note 5.

   [41] quibus sermone epistolis mutuo commeantibus sociamur:  notice the
   interlaced order of the words in the sentence which is not, I think,
   without design as quaintly expressing his meaning.

   [42] Sc. in your province.

   [43] Siricius was Bishop of Rome 384-398.  Damasus, 366-384, is said by
   Innocent I. to have been the first to do this but not like Siricius,
   ?acting on a fixed method,? certa quadam ratione.

   [44] Praedecessoris tui.  Anysius is said to have lived on into the
   time of Innocent.  Anastasius' immediate predecessor, selected by
   Innocent (decessoris tui in the next line), was named Rufus.

   [45] These words are not found in the mss. apparently, but are
   necessary to the sense.  For the requirement cf. Letter IV. chapter
   iii.

   [46] Here the word is antistes and no doubt it signifies ?bishop,? as
   the next sentence clearly shows.

   [47] The organization of the province then included (1) the bishops
   under (2) metropolitans of district under (3) one supreme primate of
   the province, who was in his turn responsible to the Bishop of Rome.

   [48] 1 Tim. v. 22.

   [49] The word is aspiraverit (the notion of which is to favour), not
   inspiraverit (to inspire), as we might have expected.

   [50] Viz., Letter V.

   [51] Circa quos par consecratio fieri debet.  I take this as a valuable
   statement in the mouth of Leo, who so seldom refers specifically to the
   lower orders of the ministry.

   [52] There seems to be no canon on the point before Leo's time:  but he
   alludes to the tradition again in Letter IX. chap. 1 and CXI. chap. 2
   (q.v.).

   [53] Qui sacerdos (? secundi ordinis here) vel levita (= diaconus)
   ordinandus est.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter VII.

   To the Bishops throughout Italy.

   Leo to all the bishops set over the provinces of Italy greeting.

   I.  Many Manichaeans have been discovered in Rome.

   We call you to a share in our anxiety, that with the diligence of
   shepherds you may take more careful heed to your flocks entrusted to
   you that no craft of the devil's be permitted:  lest that plague, which
   by the revealing mercy of the Lord is driven off from our flocks
   through our care, should spread among your churches before you are
   forewarned, and are still ignorant of what is happening, and should
   find means of stealthily burrowing into your midst, and thus what we
   are checking in the City should take hidden root among you and grow
   up.  Our search has discovered in the City a great many followers and
   teachers of the Manichaean impiety, our watchfulness has proclaimed
   them, and our authority and censure has checked them:  those whom we
   could reform we have corrected and driven to condemn Manichaeus with
   his preachings and teachings by public confession in church, and by the
   subscription of their own hand, and thus we have lifted those who have
   acknowledged their fault from the pit of their iniquity by granting
   them room for repentance [54] .  A good many, however, who had so
   deeply involved themselves that no remedy could assist them, have been
   subjected to the laws in accordance with the constitutions of our
   Christian princes, and lest they should pollute the holy flock by their
   contagion, have been banished into perpetual exile by public judges.
   And all the profane and disgraceful things which are found as well in
   their writings as in their secret traditions, we have disclosed and
   clearly proved to the eyes of the Christian laity [55] that the people
   might know what to shrink from or avoid:  so that he that was called
   their bishop was himself tried by us, and betrayed the criminal views
   which he held in his mystic religion, as the record of our proceedings
   can show you.  For this, too, we have sent you for instruction:  and
   after reading them you will be in a position to understand all the
   discoveries we have made.

   II.  The bishops of Italy must not allow those Manichaeans who have
   quitted the city to escape or lie concealed.

   And because we know that a good many of those who are involved here in
   too close an accusation for them to clear themselves have escaped, we
   have sent this letter to you, beloved, by our acolyth:  that your
   holiness, dear brothers, may be informed of this, and see fit to act
   with diligence and caution, lest the men of the Manichaean error be
   able to find opportunity of hurting your people and of teaching their
   impious doctrines.  For we cannot otherwise rule those entrusted to us
   unless we pursue with the zeal of faith in the Lord those who are
   destroyers and destroyed:  and with what severity we can bring to bear,
   cut them off from intercourse with sound minds, lest this pestilence
   spread much wider.  Wherefore I exhort you, beloved, I beseech and warn
   you to use such watchful diligence as you ought and can employ in
   tracking them out, lest they find opportunity of concealment anywhere.
   For as he will have a due recompense of reward from God, who carries
   out what conduces to the health of the people committed to him; so
   before the Lord's judgment-seat no one will be able to excuse himself
   from a charge of carelessness who has not been willing to guard his
   people against the propagators of an impious misbelief.  Dated 30
   January, in the consulship of the illustrious Theodosius Augustus (18th
   time) and Albinus (444).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [54] Poenitentiam concedendo, i.e. we have not finally excommunicated
   them, but, dealing leniently, we have given them opportunity of
   reinstating themselves in the peace of the Church, by going through a
   due course of penance (satisfactio).  It is important to explain this
   clearly to those who in the present day, are ignorant of the strict
   discipline of the early Church.  And are liable to forget that penance
   was then a valuable means to repentance.

   [55] Plebei.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter VIII.

   The Ordinance of Valentinian III. concerning the Manichaeans.

   (The Manichaeans are to be turned out of the army and the City, and to
   lose all their rights as citizens.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter IX.

   To Dioscorus, Bishop of Alexandria.

   Leo, the bishop, to Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria, greeting.

   I.  The churches of Rome and Alexandria should be at one in everything.

   How much of the divine love we feel for you, beloved, you will be able
   to estimate from this, that we are anxious to establish your beginnings
   on a surer basis, lest anything should seem lacking to the perfection
   of your love, since your meritorious acts of spiritual grace, as we
   have proved, are already in your favour.  Fatherly and brotherly
   conference, therefore, ought to be most grateful to you, holy brother,
   and received by you in the same spirit as you know it is offered by
   us.  For you and we ought to be at one in thought and act, so that as
   we read [56] , in us also there may be proved to be one heart and one
   mind.  For since the most blessed Peter received the headship of the
   Apostles from the Lord, and the church of Rome still abides by His
   institutions, it is wicked to believe that His holy disciple Mark, who
   was the first to govern the church of Alexandria [57] , formed his
   decrees on a different line of tradition:  seeing that without doubt
   both disciple and master drew but one Spirit from the same fount of
   grace, and the ordained could not hand on aught else than what he had
   received from his ordainer.  We do not therefore allow it that we
   should differ in anything, since we confess ourselves to be of one body
   and faith, nor that the institutions of the teacher should seem
   different to those of the taught.

   II.  Fixed days should be observed for ordaining priests and deacons.

   That therefore which we know to have been very carefully observed by
   our fathers, we wish kept by you also, viz. that the ordination of
   priests or deacons should not be performed at random on any day:  but
   after Saturday, the commencement of that night which precedes the dawn
   of the first day of the week should be chosen on which the sacred
   benediction should be bestowed on those who are to be consecrated,
   ordainer and ordained alike fasting.  This observance will not be
   violated, if actually on the morning of the Lord's day it be celebrated
   without breaking the Saturday fast:  for the beginning of the preceding
   night forms part of that period, and undoubtedly belongs to the day of
   resurrection as is clearly laid down with regard to the feast of Easter
   [58] .  For besides the weight of custom which we know rests upon the
   Apostles' teaching, Holy Writ also makes this clear, because when the
   Apostles sent Paul and Barnabas at the bidding of the Holy Ghost to
   preach the gospel to the nations, they laid hands on them fasting and
   praying:  that we may know with what devoutness both giver and receiver
   must be on their guard lest so blessed a sacrament should seem to be
   carelessly performed.  And therefore you will piously and laudably
   follow Apostolic precedents if you yourself also maintain this form of
   ordaining priests throughout the churches over which the Lord has
   called you to preside:  viz. that those who are to be consecrated
   should never receive the blessing except on the day of the Lord's
   resurrection, which is commonly held to begin on the evening of
   Saturday, and which has been so often hallowed in the mysterious
   dispensations of God that all the more notable institutions of the Lord
   were accomplished on that high day.  On it the world took its
   beginning.  On it through the resurrection of Christ death received its
   destruction, and life its commencement.  On it the apostles take from
   the Lord's hands the trumpet of the gospel which is to be preached to
   all nations, and receive the sacrament of regeneration [59] which they
   are to bear to the whole world.  On it, as blessed John the Evangelist
   bears witness when all the disciples were gathered together in one
   place, and when, the doors being shut, the Lord entered to them, He
   breathed on them and said:  ?Receive the Holy Ghost:  whose sins ye
   have remitted they are remitted to them:  and whose ye have retained,
   they shall be retained [60] .?  On it lastly the Holy Spirit that had
   been promised to the Apostles by the Lord came:  and so we know it to
   have been suggested and handed down by a kind of heavenly rule, that on
   that day we ought to celebrate the mysteries of the blessing of priests
   on which all these gracious gifts were conferred.

   III.  The repetition of the Holy Eucharist on the great festivals is
   not undesirable.

   Again, that our usage may coincide at all points, we wish this thing
   also to be observed, viz. that when any of the greater festivals has
   brought together a larger congregation than usual, and too great a
   crowd of the faithful has assembled for one church [61] to hold them
   all at once, there should be no hesitation about repeating the oblation
   of the sacrifice:  lest, if those only are admitted to this service who
   come first, those who flock in afterwards, should seem to be rejected:
   for it is fully in accordance with piety and reason, that as often as a
   fresh congregation has filled the church where service is going on, the
   sacrifice should be offered as a matter of course.  Whereas a certain
   portion of the people must be deprived of their worship, if the custom
   of only one celebration [62] be kept, and only those who come early in
   the day can offer the sacrifice [63] .  We admonish you, therefore,
   beloved, earnestly and affectionately that your carefulness also should
   not neglect what has become a part of our own usage on the pattern of
   our fathers' tradition, so that in all things we may agree together in
   our beliefs and in our performances.  Consequently, we have given this
   letter to our son Possidonius, a presbyter, on his return, that he may
   bear it to you, brother; he has so often taken part in our ceremonials
   and ordinations, and has been sent to us so many times that he knows
   quite well what Apostolic authority we possess in all things.  Dated 21
   June (? 445).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [56] Sc. in Acts iv. 32.

   [57] S. Mark, the evangelist and disciple of S. Peter, is the radional
   founder of the church of Alexandria.

   [58] That is to say, the weekly resurrection festival (Sunday) begins
   with the vespers of the preceding evening:  this is notably the case in
   the yearly festival of Easter, at least in Western use.

   [59] Sacramentum regenerationis:  the reference in the first part of
   the sentence seems to be S. Mark xvi. 15, and here in the latter part
   to S. Matt. xxviii. 19, and both these records seem to refer to the
   same manifestation.  S. Matthew says it was to ?the eleven disciples?
   in Galilee, in ?the mountain where Jesus had appointed them,? that He
   gave the command, if indeed vv. 16-20 of the xxviiith chapter form one
   continuous narrative.  The author of S. Mark xvi. 9-20 says it was to
   the eleven ?as they sat at meat.?  Is it possible that Leo took
   anakeimenois to mean as they were partaking of the Holy Eucharist? if
   not, what countenance is there for his assertion of its being on the
   first day of the week?

   [60] S. John xx. 22, 23.

   [61] Basilica, q.v. in Smith's Dict. of Christian Antiquities.

   [62] Missae.

   [63] It can hardly escape notice that the people here are distinctly
   said ?to offer the sacrifice? in the person of their representative and
   mouthpiece, the priest.  And this is the language and intention of all
   Liturgies (ancient and modern) of the Church.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter X.

   To the Bishops of the Province of Vienne.  In the matter of Hilary,
   Bishop of Arles [64] .

   To the beloved brothers, the whole body of bishops of the province of
   Vienne, Leo, bishop of Rome.

   I.  The solidarity of the Church built upon the rock of S. Peter must
   be everywhere maintained.

   Our Lord Jesus Christ, Saviour of mankind, instituted the observance of
   the Divine religion which He wished by the grace of God to shed its
   brightness upon all nations and all peoples in such a way that the
   Truth, which before was confined to the announcements of the Law and
   the Prophets, might through the Apostles' trumpet blast go out for the
   salvation of all men [65] , as it is written:  ?Their sound has gone
   out into every land, and their words into the ends of the world [66]
   .?  But this mysterious function [67] the Lord wished to be indeed the
   concern of all the apostles, but in such a way that He has placed the
   principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the Apostles [68]
   :  and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the
   body:  so that any one who dares to secede from Peter's solid rock may
   understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery.  For He
   wished him who had been received into partnership in His undivided
   unity to be named what He Himself was, when He said:  ?Thou art Peter,
   and upon this rock I will build My Church [69] :?  that the building of
   the eternal temple by the wondrous gift of God's grace might rest on
   Peter's solid rock:  strengthening His Church so surely that neither
   could human rashness assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against
   it.  But this most holy firmness of the rock, reared, as we have said,
   by the building hand of God, a man must wish to destroy in over-weaning
   wickedness when he tries to break down its power, by favouring his own
   desires, and not following what he received from men of old:  for he
   believes himself subject to no law, and held in check by no rules of
   God's ordinances and breaks away, in his eagerness for novelty, from
   your use and ours, by adopting illegal practices, and letting what he
   ought to keep fall into abeyance.

   II.  Hilary is disturbing the peace of the Church by his
   insubordination.

   But with the approval, as we believe, of God, and retaining towards you
   the fulness of our love which the Apostolic See always, as you
   remember, expends upon you, holy brethren we are striving to correct
   these things by mature counsel, and to share with you the task of
   setting your churches in order, not by innovations but by restoration
   of the old; that we may persevere in the accustomed state which our
   fathers handed down to us, and please our God through the ministry of a
   good work by removing the scandals of disturbances.  And so we would
   have you recollect, brethren, as we do, that the Apostolic See, such is
   the reverence in which it is held, has times out of number been
   referred to and consulted by the priests of your province as well as
   others, and in the various matters of appeal, as the old usage
   demanded, it has reversed or confirmed decisions:  and in this way ?the
   unity of the spirit in the bond of peace [70] ? has been kept, and by
   the interchange of letters, our honourable proceedings have promoted a
   lasting affection:  for ?seeking not our own but the things of Christ
   [71] ,? we have been careful not to do despite to the dignity which God
   has given both to the churches and their priests.  But this path which
   with our fathers has been always so well kept to and wisely maintained,
   Hilary has quitted, and is likely to disturb the position and agreement
   of the priests by his novel arrogance:  desiring to subject you to his
   power in such a way as not to suffer himself to be subject to the
   blessed Apostle Peter, claiming for himself the ordinations of all the
   churches throughout the provinces of Gaul, and transferring to himself
   the dignity which is due to metropolitan priests; he diminishes even
   the reverence that is paid to the blessed Peter himself with his proud
   words:  for not only was the power of loosing and binding given to
   Peter before the others, but also to Peter more especially was
   entrusted the care of feeding the sheep [72] .  Yet any one who holds
   that the headship must be denied to Peter, cannot really diminish his
   dignity:  but is puffed up with the breath of his pride, and plunges
   himself into the lowest depth.

   III.  Celidonius has been restored to his bishopric, the charges
   against him having been found false.

   Accordingly the written record of our proceedings shows what action we
   have taken in the matter of Celidonius [73] , the bishop, and what
   Hilary said in the presence and hearing of the aforesaid bishop.  For
   when Hilary had no reasonable answer to give in the council of the holy
   priests, ?the secrets of his heart [74] ? gave vent to utterances such
   as no layman could make and no priest listen to.  We were grieved, I
   acknowledge, brothers, and endeavoured to appease the tumult of his
   mind by patient treatment.  For we did not wish to exasperate those
   wounds which he was inflicting on his soul by his insolent retorts, and
   strove rather to pacify him whom we had taken up as a brother, although
   it was he who was entangling himself by his replies, than to cause him
   pain by our remarks.  Celidonius, the bishop, was therefore acquitted,
   for he had proved himself wrongfully deposed from the priesthood, by
   the clear replies of his witnesses made in his own presence:  so that
   Hilary, who remained with us, had no opposition to offer.  The
   judgment, therefore, was rescinded, which was brought forward and read
   to the effect that, as the husband of a widow [75] , he could not hold
   the priesthood.  Now this rule we, maintaining the legal constitutions
   [76] , have wished scrupulously adhered to, not only in respect of
   priests but also of clergy of the lower ranks:  that those who have
   contracted such a marriage, or those who are proved not to be the
   husbands of only one wife contrary to the apostle's discipline, should
   not be suffered to enter the sacred service [77] .  But though we
   decree that those, whom their own acts condemn, must either not be
   admitted at all, or, if they have, must be removed, so those who are
   falsely so accused we are bound to clear after examination held, and
   not allow to lose their office.  For the sentence pronounced would have
   remained against him, if the truth of the charge had been proved.  And
   so Celidonius, our fellow-bishop, was restored to his church and to
   that dignity which he ought not to have lost, as the course of our
   proceedings, and the sentence which was pronounced by us after holding
   the inquiry testifies.

   IV.  Hilary's treatment of Projectus does not redound to his credit.

   When this business was so concluded, the complaint of our brother and
   fellow-bishop, Projectus [78] , next came before us:  who addressed us
   in a tearful and piteous letter, about the ordaining of a bishop over
   his head.  A letter was also brought to us from his own
   fellow-citizens, corroborated by a great many individual signatures,
   and full of the most unpleasant complaints against Hilary:  to the
   effect that Projectus, their bishop, was not allowed to be ill, but his
   priesthood had been transferred to another without their knowledge, and
   the heir brought into possession by Hilary, the intruder as if to fill
   up a vacancy, though the possessor was still alive [79] .  We should
   like to hear what you, brothers, think on the point:  although we ought
   not to entertain any doubt about your feelings, when you picture to
   yourselves a brother lying on a sick-bed and tortured, not so much by
   his bodily weakness as by pains of another kind.  What hope in life is
   left a man who is visited with despair about his priesthood whilst
   another is set up in his place?  Hilary gives a clear proof of his
   gentle heart when he believed that the tardiness of a brother's death
   is but a hindrance to his own ambitious designs.  For, as far as in him
   lay, he quenched the light for him; he robbed him of life by setting up
   another in his room, and thus causing him such pain as to hinder his
   recovery.  And supposing that his brother's passage from this world was
   brief, but after the common course of men, what does Hilary seek for
   himself in another's province, and why does he claim that which none of
   his predecessors before Patroclus possessed? whereas that very position
   which seemed to have been temporarily granted to Patroclus by the
   Apostolic See was afterwards withdrawn by a wiser decision [80] .  At
   least the wishes of the citizens should have been waited for, and the
   testimony of the people [81] :  the opinion of those held in honour
   should have been asked, and the choice of the clergy--things which
   those who know the rules of the fathers are wont to observe in the
   ordination of priests:  that the rule of the Apostle's authority might
   in all things be kept, which enjoins that one who is to be the priest
   of a church should be fortified, not only by the attestation of the
   faithful but also by the testimony of ?those who are without [82] ,?
   and that no occasion for offence be left, when, in peace and in
   God-pleasing harmony with the full approval of all, one who will be a
   teacher of peace is ordained.

   V.  Hilary's action was very reprehensible throughout, and we have
   restored Projectus.

   But Hilary came upon them unawares and departed no less suddenly,
   accomplishing many journeys with great speed, as we have ascertained,
   and traversing distant provinces with such haste that he seems to have
   coveted a reputation for the swiftness of a courier rather than for the
   sobriety of a priest [83] .  For these are the words of the citizens in
   the letter that has been addressed to us:--?He departed before we knew
   he had come.?  This is not to return but to flee, not to exercise a
   shepherd's wholesome care, but to employ the violence of a thief and a
   robber, as saith the Lord:  ?he that entereth not by the door into the
   sheep-fold [84] , but climbeth up some other way, is a thief and a
   robber.?  Hilary, therefore, was anxious not so much to consecrate a
   bishop as to kill him who was sick, and to mislead the man whom he set
   over his head by wrongful ordination.  We, however, have done what, as
   God is our Judge, we believe you will approve:  after holding counsel
   with all the brethren we have decreed that the wrongfully ordained man
   should be deposed and the Bishop Projectus abide in his priesthood:
   with the further provision that when any of our brethren in whatsoever
   province shall decease, he who has been agreed upon to be metropolitan
   of that province shall claim for himself the ordination of his
   successor.

   These two matters, as we see, have been settled, though there are many
   other points in them which seem to have violated the principles of the
   Church, and ought to be visited with just censure and judgment.  But we
   cannot linger on them any further, for we are called off to other
   matters on which we must carefully confer with you, holy brethren.

   VI.  Hilary's practice of using armed violence must be suppressed.

   A band of soldiers, as we have learnt, follows the priest through the
   provinces and helps him who relies upon their armed support in
   turbulently invading churches, which have lost their own priests.
   Before this court [85] are dragged for ordination men who are quite
   unknown to the cities over which they are to be set.  For as one who is
   well known and approved is sought out in peace, so must one who is
   unknown, when brought forward, be established by violence.  I beg and
   entreat and beseech you in God's name prevent such things, brethren,
   and remove all occasion for discord from your provinces.  At all events
   we acquit ourselves before God in beseeching you not to allow this to
   proceed further.  In peace and quietness should they be asked for who
   are to be priests.  The consent of the clergy, the testimony of those
   held in honour, the approval of the orders and the laity should be
   required [86] .  He who is to govern all, should be chosen by all [87]
   .  As we said before, each metropolitan should keep in his own hands
   the ordinations that occur in his own province, acting in concert with
   those who precede the rest in seniority of priesthood, a privilege
   restored to him through us.  No man should claim for himself another's
   rights.  Each should keep within his own limits and boundaries, and
   should understand that he cannot pass on to another a privilege that
   belongs to himself.  But if any one neglecting the Apostle's
   prohibitions and paying too much heed to personal favour, wishes to
   give up his precedence, thinking he can pass his rights on to another,
   not he to whom he has yielded, but he who ranks before the rest of the
   priests within the province in episcopal seniority, should claim to
   himself the power of ordaining.  The ordination should be performed not
   at random but on the proper day:  and it should be known that any one
   who has not been ordained on the evening of Saturday, which precedes
   the dawn of the first day of the week [88] , or actually on the Lord's
   day cannot be sure of his status.  For our forefathers judged the day
   of the Lord's resurrection [89] as alone worthy of the honour of being
   the occasion on which those who are to be made priests are given to
   God.

   VII.  Hilary is deposed not only from his usurped jurisdiction, but
   also from what of right belongs to him, and is restricted to his own
   single bishopric.

   Let each province be content with its own councils, and let not Hilary
   dare to summon synodal meetings besides, and by his interference
   disturb the judgments of the Lord's priests.  And let him know that he
   is not only deposed from another's rights, but also deprived of his
   power over the province of Vienne which he had wrongfully assumed.  For
   it is but fair, brethren, that the ordinances of antiquity should be
   restored, seeing that he who claimed for himself the ordinations of a
   province for which he was not responsible, has been shown in a similar
   way in the present case also to have acted so that, as he has on more
   than one occasion brought on himself sentence of condemnation by his
   rash and insolent words, he may now be kept by our command in
   accordance with the clemency of the Apostolic See [90] to the
   priesthood of his own city alone.  He is not to be present then at any
   ordination:  he is not to ordain because, conscious of his deserts,
   when he was required to answer for his action, he trusted to make good
   his escape by disgraceful flight, and has put himself out of Apostolic
   communion, of which he did not deserve to be a partaker [91] :  and we
   believe this was by God's providence, who brought him to our court,
   though we did not expect him, and caused him to retire by stealth in
   the midst of holding the inquiry, that he should not be a partner in
   our communion [92] .

   VIII.  Excommunication should be inflicted only on those who are guilty
   of some great crime, and even then not hastily.

   No Christian should lightly be denied communion [93] , nor should that
   be done at the will of an angry priest which the judge's mind ought to
   a certain extent unwillingly and regretfully to carry out for the
   punishment of a great crime.  For we have ascertained that some have
   been cut off from the grace of communion for trivial deeds and words,
   and that the soul for which Christ's blood was shed has been exposed to
   the devil's attacks and wounded, disarmed, so to say, and stript of all
   defence by the infliction of so savage a punishment as to fall an easy
   prey to him.  Of course if ever a case has arisen of such a kind as in
   due proportion to the nature of the crime committed to deprive a man of
   communion, he only who is involved in the accusation must be subjected
   to punishment:  and he who is not shown to be a partner in its
   commission ought not to share in the penalty.  But what wonder that one
   who is wont to exult over the condemnation of priests, should show
   himself in the same light towards laymen.

   IX.  Leontius is appointed in Hilary's room.

   Wherefore, because our desire seems very different to this (for we are
   anxious that the settled state of all the Churches and the harmony of
   the priests should be maintained,) exhorting you to unity in the bond
   of love, we both entreat, and consistently with our affection admonish
   you, in the interests of your peace and dignity, to keep what has been
   decreed by us at the inspiration of God and the most blessed Apostle
   Peter, after sifting and testing all the matters at issue, being
   assured that what we are known to have decided in this way is not so
   much to our own advantage as to yours.  For we are not keeping in our
   own hands the ordinations of your provinces, as perhaps Hilary, with
   his usual untruthfulness, may suggest in order to mislead your minds,
   holy brethren:  but in our anxiety we are claiming for you that no
   further innovations should be allowed, and that for the future no
   opportunity should be given for the usurper to infringe your
   privileges.  For we acknowledge that it can only redound to our credit,
   if the diligence of the Apostolic See be kept unimpaired among you, and
   if in our maintenance of Apostolic discipline we do not allow what
   belongs to your position to fall to the ground through unscrupulous
   aggressions.  And since seniority is always to be respected, we wish
   Leontius [94] , our brother and fellow-bishop, a priest well approved
   among you, to be promoted to this dignity, if it please you that
   without his consent no further council be summoned by you, holy
   brethren, and that he may be honoured by you all as his age and good
   fame demands, the metropolitans being secured in their own dignity and
   rights.  For it is but fair, and no injury seems to accrue to any of
   the brethren, if those who come first in seniority of the priesthood
   should, as their age deserves, have deference paid to them by the rest
   of the priests in their own provinces.  God keep you safe, beloved
   brethren.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [64] Cf. Introduction p. vi.

   [65] Per Apostolicam tubam in salutem universitatis (Gk. tes
   oikoumenes) exiret, cf. Letter IX. Chap. ii. apostoli a Domino
   praedicandi omnibus gentibus evangelii tubam sumunt.

   [66] Ps. xix. 4.

   [67] Huius muneris sacramentum, his mind is running forward to his
   favourite sacramentum, that of Peter as the rock-man of the Church.

   [68] Cf. Letter XXVIII. chap. v. a principali petra (B. Petrus),
   soliditatem et virtutis traxit et nominis, etc.:  also Cyprian de unit.
   eccl. chapt. iv.

   [69] S. Matt. xvi. 18.

   [70] Eph. iv. 3.

   [71] Phil. ii. 21.

   [72] Cui cum prae (Quesnel conj. pro) caeteris solvendi et ligandi
   tradita sit potestas, pascendarum tamen ovium cura specialius mandata
   est.  Cf. S. John xxi. 15-17.

   [73] Celidonius was probably either bishop of Vienne or of Vesontis
   (Besanc,on):  see Perthel, p. 25.

   [74] Quesnel well refers this phrase to 1 Cor. xiv. 25.

   [75] Cf. Letter IV. chap. iii.

   [76] Servantes legalia constituta, these are taken to be not so much
   the canons of the Church as the provisions of the Mosaic Law, e.g. Lev.
   xxi. 14; Ezek. xliv. 22.

   [77] Militiam (lit. military service).

   [78] Projectus was perhaps a bishop of the province of Gallia
   Narbonensis I.:  Perthel, p. 27.

   [79] Quod Projecto episcopo suo aegrotare liberum non fuisset, eiusque
   sacerdotium in alium praeter suam notitiam esse translatum, et tamquam
   in vacuam possessionem ab Hilario pervasore haeredem viventis
   inductum.  The construction is changed from quod....fuisset, to the
   ordinary accus. and infin.

   [80] Patroclus had been Bishop of Arles circ. 416, and the then Bishop
   of Rome, Zosimus, had granted him metropolitan rights over the
   provinces of S.E. Gaul, which did not gain the acceptance of the other
   chief bishops in the district, and Boniface I. (Ep. 12), in 422, seems
   to have withdrawn the rights granted by Zosimus (Schaff, I, p. 297).

   [81] Civium:  populorum.  The former are apparently called lower down
   fidelium, and the latter, qui foris sunt.

   [82] 1 Tim. iii. 7.

   [83] Gloriam de scurrili velocitate potius quam de sacerdotali
   moderatione captasse.

   [84] In cortem ovium:  the low Latin word (cors) is in the Vulgate
   changed to ovile.

   [85] Ante hoc officium.

   [86] Cf. Cypr. Ep. lv. cap. vii., factus est Cornelius episcopus de Dei
   et Christi eius iudicio, de clericorum paene omnium testimonio, de
   plebis, quae tunc adfuit, suffragio et sacerdotum antiquorum et bonorum
   virorum collegio.

   [87] Quesnel appositely quotes Pliny (Paneg. Traiani) imperaturus
   omnibus eligi debet ex omnibus.

   [88] Quod lucescit in prima sabbati; the phrase is repeated from Letter
   IX., chap. ii., to which refer to the whole passage.

   [89] Viz., Sunday.

   [90] Pro apostolicae sedis pietate, or ?as loyalty to the Apostolic See
   demands.?

   [91] This does not mean that Hilary is excommunicated, but that he is
   to have no share in episcopal privileges as a successor of the
   apostles.

   [92] These words of course refer to Hilary's journey on foot to Rome,
   and his subsequent escape from something very much like prison:  see
   Introduction, p. vi.:  for his degradation, cf. Letter XII., chap. ix.,
   where a similar punishment is enacted.

   [93] Here, no doubt, excommunication pure and simple is meant.  Cf.
   note 4, supr.

   [94] Leontius seems to have had little but his age to recommend him for
   this promotion:  the name of his bishopric is unknown, and the weakness
   of the appointment may, I think, be gathered from Leo's insisting so
   strongly on the principle of seniority both here and in chap vi. above.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XI.

   An Ordinance of Valentinianus III.

   (Confirming Leo's sentence upon Hilary.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XII.

   Leo, bishop of the city of Rome, to all the bishops of Mauritania
   Caesariensis in Africa, greeting the Lord.

   I.  The disorderly appointments of bishops which have been made in the
   province are reprehensible.

   Inasmuch as the frequent accounts of those who visited us made mention
   of certain unlawful practices among you with regard to the ordination
   of priests, the demands of religion required that we should strive to
   arrive at the exact state of the case in accordance with that
   solicitude which by the Divine command we bestow on the whole Church:
   and so we delegated the charge of this to our brother and
   fellow-priest, Potentius, who was setting out from us:  and who,
   according to what we wrote and addressed to you by him, was to make
   inquiry as to the facts about the bishops whose election was said to be
   faulty, and to report everything faithfully to us.  Wherefore, because
   the same Potentius has most fully disclosed all to our knowledge, and
   has by his truthful account made clear to us, under what and what
   manner of governors some of Christ's congregations are placed in
   certain parts of the province of (Mauritania) Caesariensis, we have
   found it necessary to open out the grief wherewith our hearts are vexed
   for the dangers of the Lord's flocks, by sending this letter also to
   you beloved:  for we are surprised that either the over-bearing conduct
   of intriguers or the rioting of the people had so much weight with you
   in a time of disorder, that the chief pastorate and governance of the
   Church was handed over to the unworthiest persons, and such as were
   farthest removed from the priestly standard.  This is not to consult
   but harm the peoples' interests:  and not to enforce discipline but to
   increase differences.  For the integrity of the rulers is the safeguard
   of those who are under them:  and where there is complete obedience,
   there the form of doctrine is sound.  But an appointment which has
   either been made by sedition or seized by intrigue, even though it
   offend not in morals or in practice, is nevertheless pernicious from
   the mere example of its beginning:  and it is hard for things to be
   carried to a good issue which were started with a bad beginning.

   II.  In no case ought bishops to be ordained hastily.

   But if in every grade of the Church great forethought and knowledge has
   to be employed, lest there be any thing disorderly or out of place [95]
   in the house of the Lord:  how much more carefully must we strive to
   prevent mistakes in the election of him who is set over all the
   grades?  For the peace and order of the Lord's whole household will be
   shaken, if what is required in the body be not found in the head.
   Where is that precept of the blessed Apostle Paul uttered through the
   Spirit of God, whereby in the person of Timothy the whole number of
   Christ's priests are instructed, and to each one of us is said:  ?Lay
   hands hastily on no one, and do not share in other men's sins [96] ??
   What is to lay on hands hastily but to confer the priestly dignity on
   unproved men before the proper age [97] , before there has been time to
   test them, before they have deserved it by their obedience, before they
   have been tried by discipline?  And what is to share in other men's
   sins but for the ordainer to become such as is he who ought not to have
   been ordained by him?  For just as a man stores up for himself the
   fruit of his good work, if he maintains a right judgment in choosing a
   priest:  so one who receives an unworthy priest into the number of his
   colleagues, inflicts grievous loss upon himself.  We must not then pass
   over in the case of any one that which is laid down in the general
   ordinances:  nor is that advancement to be reckoned lawful which has
   been made contrary to the precepts of God's law.

   III.  The Apostolic precept about the marriage of the clergy based upon
   the marriage of Christ with the Church of which it is a figure.

   For as the Apostle says that among other rules for election he shall be
   ordained bishop who is known to have been or to be ?the husband of one
   wife,? this command was always held so sacred that the same condition
   was understood as necessary to be observed even in the wife [98] of the
   priest-elect:  lest she should happen to have been married to another
   man before she entered into wedlock with him, even though he himself
   had had no other wife.  Who then would dare to allow this injury to be
   perpetrated upon so great a sacrament [99] , seeing that this great and
   venerable mystery is not without the support of the statutes of God's
   law as well, whereby it is clearly laid down that a priest is to marry
   a virgin, and that she who is to be the wife of a priest [100] is not
   to know another husband?  For even then in the priests was prefigured
   the Spiritual marriage of Christ and His Church:  so that since ?the
   man is the head of the woman [101] ,? the spouse of the Word may learn
   to know no other man but Christ, who did rightly choose her only, loves
   her only, and takes none but her into His alliance.  If then even in
   the Old Testament this kind of marriage among priests is adhered to,
   how much more ought we who are placed under the grace of the Gospel to
   conform to the Apostle's precepts:  so that though a man be found
   endowed with good character, and furnished with holy works, he may
   nevertheless in no wise ascend either to the grade of deacon, or the
   dignity of the presbytery, or to the highest rank of the bishopric, if
   it has been spread abroad either that he himself is not the husband of
   one wife, or that his wife is not the wife of one husband.

   IV.  Premature promotions are to be avoided.

   But when the Apostle warns and says:  ?and let these also first be
   proved, and so let them minister [102] ,? what else do we think must be
   understood but that in these promotions we should consider not only the
   chastity of their marriages, but also the deserts of their labours,
   lest the pastoral office be entrusted to men who are either fresh from
   baptism, or suddenly diverted from worldly pursuits? for through all
   the ranks of the Christian army in the matter of promotions it ought to
   be considered whether a man can manage a greater charge.  Rightly did
   the venerable opinions of the blessed Fathers in speaking of the
   election of priests reckon those men fit for the administration of
   sacred things who had been slowly advanced through the various grades
   of office, and had given such good proof of themselves therein that in
   each one of them the character of their practices bore witness to their
   lives [103] .  For if it is improper to attain to the world's dignities
   without the help of time and without the merit of having toiled, and if
   the seeking of office is branded unless it be supported by proofs of
   uprightness, how diligently and how carefully ought the dispensing of
   divine duties and heavenly dignities to be carried out, lest in aught
   the apostolic and canonical decrees be violated, and the ruling of the
   Lord's Church be committed to men who being ignorant of the lawful
   constitutions and devoid of all humility wish not to rise from the
   lowest grade, but to begin with the highest:  for it is extremely
   unfair and preposterous that the inexpert should be preferred to the
   expert, the young to the old, the raw recruits to those who have seen
   much service.  In a great house, indeed, as the Apostle explains [104]
   , there must needs be divers vessels, some of gold and of silver, and
   some of wood and of earth:  but their purpose varies with the quality
   of their material, and the use of the precious and of the cheap kinds
   is not the same.  For everything will be in disorder if the earthen
   ware be preferred to the golden, or the wooden to the silver.  And as
   the wooden or earthen vessels are a figure of those men who are
   hitherto conspicuous for no virtues; so in the golden or silver vessels
   they no doubt are represented who, having passed through the fire of
   long experience, and through the furnace of protracted toil have
   deserved to be tried gold and pure silver.  And if such men get no
   reward for their devotion, all the discipline of the Church is
   loosened, all order is disturbed, while men who have undergone no
   service obtain undeserved preferment by the wrongful choice of the
   electing body.

   V.  He distinguishes between laymen who have been raised to the
   bishoprics and digamous clerks, forgiving the former and not the
   latter.

   Since then either the eager wishes of the people or the intrigues of
   the ambitious have had so much weight among you that we understand not
   only laymen, but even husbands of second wives or widows have been
   promoted to the pastoral office, are there not the clearest reasons for
   requiring that the churches in which such things have been done should
   be cleansed by a severer judgment than usual, and that not only the
   rulers themselves, but also those who ordained them should receive
   condign punishment?  But there stand on our one hand the gentleness of
   mercy, on our other the strictness of justice.  And because ?all the
   paths of the Lord are loving-kindness and truth [105] ,? we are forced
   according to our loyalty to the Apostolic See so to moderate our
   opinion as to weigh men's misdeeds in the balance (for of course they
   are not all of one measure), and to reckon some as to a certain extent
   [106] pardonable, but others as altogether to be repressed.  For they
   who have either entered into second marriages or joined themselves in
   wedlock with widows are not allowed to hold the priesthood, either by
   the apostolic or legal authority:  and much more is this the case with
   him who, as it was reported to us, is the husband of two wives at once,
   or him who being divorced by his wife is said to have married another,
   that is, supposing these charges are in your judgment proved.  But the
   rest, whose preferment only so far incurs blame that they have been
   chosen to the episcopal function from among the laity, and are not
   culpable in the matter of their wives, we allow to retain the
   priesthood upon which they have entered, without prejudice to the
   statutes of the Apostolic See, and without breaking the rules of the
   blessed Fathers, whose wholesome ordinance it is that no layman,
   whatever amount of support he may receive, shall ascend to the first,
   second, or third rank in the Church until he reach that position by the
   legitimate steps [107] .  For what we now suffer to be to a certain
   extent [108] venial, cannot hereafter pass unpunished, if any one
   perpetrates what we altogether forbid:  because the forgiveness of a
   sin does not grant a licence to do wrong, nor will it be right to
   repeat an offence with impunity which has partly [109] been condoned.

   VI.  Donatus, a converted Novatian, and Maximus, an ex-Donatist, are
   retained in their episcopal office.

   Donatus of Salacia, who, as we learn, has been converted from the
   Novatians [110] with his people, we wish to preside over the Lord's
   flock, on condition that he remembers he must send a certificate of his
   faith to us, in which he not only condemns the error of the Novatian
   dogma, but also unreservedly confesses the catholic truth.  Maximus,
   also, although he was culpably ordained when a layman, yet if he is now
   no longer a Donatist, and has abjured the spirit of schismatic
   depravity, we do not depose from his episcopal dignity, which he has
   obtained irregularly, on condition that he declare himself a catholic
   by drawing up a certificate for us.

   VII.  The case of Aggarus and Tyberianus (ordained with tumult) is
   referred to the bishops.

   But concerning Aggarus and Tyberianus, whose case is different from the
   others who were ordained from among the laity, in this that their
   ordination is reported to have been accompanied by fierce riots and
   savage disturbances, we have entrusted the whole matter to your
   judgment, that relying upon your investigation of the case, we may know
   what to decide about them.

   VIII.  Maidens who have suffered violence are not to compare themselves
   with others.

   Those handmaids of God who have lost their chastity by the violence of
   barbarians, will be more praiseworthy in their humility and
   shame-fastness, if they do not venture to compare themselves to
   undefiled virgins.  For although every sin springs from the desire, and
   the will may have remained unconquered and unpolluted by the fall of
   the flesh, still this will be less to their detriment, if they grieve
   over losing even in the body what they did not lose in spirit.

   IX.  These injunctions to be carried out without contentiousness.

   And so now that you see yourselves, beloved, fully instructed through
   David, our brother and fellow-bishop, who is approved to us both by his
   personal character and his priestly worth, on [nearly] [111] all the
   points which our brother Potentius' account contained, it remains,
   brothers, that you receive our healthful exhortations harmoniously, and
   that doing nothing in rivalry, but acting unanimously with entire
   devotion and zeal, you obey the constitution of God and His Apostles,
   and in nothing suffer the well-considered decrees of the canons to be
   violated.  For what we from the consideration of certain reasons have
   now relaxed must henceforward be guarded by the ancient rules, lest,
   what we have on this occasion with merciful lenity conceded, we may
   hereafter have to visit with condign punishment [112] , acting with
   special and direct vigour against those who in ordaining bishops have
   neglected the statutes of the holy fathers, and have consecrated men
   whom they ought to have rejected.  Wherefore if any bishops have
   consecrated such an one priest as ought not to be, even though in some
   measure they have escaped any loss of their personal dignity, yet they
   shall have no further right of ordination, nor shall ever be present at
   that sacrament which, neglecting the judgment of God, they have
   improperly conferred.

   X.  The appointment of bishops over too small places is inexpedient and
   must be discontinued.

   That of course which pertains to the priestly dignity we wish to be
   observed in common with all the statutes of the canons, viz., that
   bishops be not consecrated in any place nor in any hamlet [113] , nor
   where they have not been consecrated before; for where the flocks are
   small and the congregations small, the care of the presbyters may
   suffice, whereas the episcopal authority ought to preside only over
   larger flocks and more crowded cities, lest contrary to the
   divinely-inspired decrees of the holy Fathers the priestly office be
   assigned over villages and rural estates [114] or obscure and
   thinly-populated townships, and the position of honour, to which only
   the more important charges should be given, be held cheap from the very
   number of these that hold it.  And this bishop Restitutus has reported
   to have been done in his own diocese, and he has with good reason
   requested that when the bishops of those places where they ought not to
   have been ordained die in the natural course, the places themselves
   should revert to the jurisdiction of the same prelate to whom they
   formerly belonged and were attached.  It is indeed useless for the
   priestly dignity to be diminished by the superfluous multiplications of
   the office through the inconsiderate complaisance of the ordainer.

   XI.  Virgins violated against their will are to be treated as somewhat
   different to the others, but not to be denied Communion.

   Now concerning those who, having made a holy vow of virginity [as we
   said above, chap. viii.], have suffered the violence of barbarians, and
   have lost their spotless purity not in spirit but in body, we consider
   such mode ration ought to be observed that they should be neither
   degraded to the rank of widows [115] nor yet reckoned in the number of
   holy and undefiled virgins:  yet, if they persevere in the virgin life,
   and in heart and mind guard the reality of chastity, participation in
   the sacraments is not to be denied them, because it is unfair that they
   should be accused or branded for what their wishes did not surrender,
   but was stolen by the violence of foes.

   XII.  The care of Lupicinus is in part dealt with and in part referred
   to them.

   The case also of bishop Lupicinus [116] we order to be heard there, but
   at his urgent and frequent entreaties we have restored him to communion
   for this reason, that, as he had appealed to our judgment, we saw that
   while the matter was pending he had been undeservedly suspended from
   communion.  Moreover there is this also in addition, that it was
   clearly rash to ordain one over his head who ought not to have been
   ordained until Lupicinus, having been placed before you or convicted,
   or having at least confessed, had opportunity to submit to a just
   sentence, so that, according to the requirements of ecclesiastical
   discipline, he who was consecrated might receive his vacant place.

   XIII.  All disputes to be dealt with on the spot first and then
   referred to the Apostolic See.

   But whenever other cases arise which concern the state of the Church
   and the harmony of priests, we wish them to be first sifted by
   yourselves in the fear of the Lord, and a full account of all matters
   settled or needing settlement sent to us, that those things which have
   been properly and reasonably decided, according to the usage of the
   Church, may receive our corroborative sanction also.  Dated 10th
   August.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [95] Nihil sit inordinatum nihilque praeposterum:  the two words are
   well chosen (as usual), and bearing a distinct meaning:  the former
   expressing ?disorder? in the sense of want of the divine commission,
   the latter ?disorder? in the sense of choosing the younger over the
   old, the inferior over the superior, &c.; the same two epithets occur
   in Lett. XIX., chap. i.

   [96] 1 Tim. v. 22.

   [97] Ante aetatem maturitatis.  The Council of Carthage (a.d. 397), c.
   4, fixed the downward limit for deacons at 25, and for priests at 30:
   and we may presume that that was the general rule in Leo's time, for we
   find the same ages ordained afterwards in the Novellae of Justinian
   (535-565) and elsewhere.

   [98] Cf. Letter IV., chap ii., and elsewhere.

   [99] No one will by this time be surprised to find Leo calling Sacred
   Orders either a sacramentum, as here, or mysterium, as in the next
   sentence:  the two terms are indeed in his usage almost equivalents.

   [100] Lev. xxi. 13.

   [101] Eph. v. 23.

   [102] 1 Tim. iii. 10.

   [103] The shorter edition of this letter, which is extent, gives this
   sentence in a very different form:  the qualifications are much more
   exactly defined, e.g., bishops are to have spent their lives in orders
   a puerilibus exordiis usque ad provectiores annos.  I think Quesnel is
   right in considering this a later version and alteration the better to
   inculcate the usage of the Church.  For although no doubt people were
   often mere boys [Readers (lectores) for instance:  see Bright's note
   46] when they entered minor orders, yet the fact that one was an adult
   layman before taking orders could not ipso facto have precluded a man
   from becoming bishop, however desirable the rule and general principle
   might be:  in fact Cyprian at least is evidence to the contrary.

   [104] Sc. 2 Tim. ii. 20.

   [105] Ps. xxv. 10.

   [106] Utcumque.

   [107] Per legitama augmenta, cf. n. 7 above.  This passage makes it
   clear what is there required is not the puerilia exordia of the shorter
   edition of this letter, but the multum tempus of this longer edition.

   [108] Utcumque again.

   [109] Aliqua ratione.

   [110] In the case of these two noted African schisms it is hardly
   necessary to do more than refer the reader to Smith's or any other
   standard dictionary.

   [111] Fere here added probably to account for the long tail of
   extraneous or repeated matter tacked on to the letter.

   [112] Here the shorter edition of the letter breaks off, and there are
   certainly difficulties in considering that the long coda or repetitions
   and fresh matter here attached formed part of the original draft of the
   letter.  Is it possible that two letters (the one later than the other)
   have been welded into one?

   [113] Castellis.  Cf. Liv. xxi. chaps. 33, 34, where the word is used
   of the Alpine villages.  In the Vulgate it represents the Gk. kome
   (e.g. S. Mark vi. 6; S. Luke v. 17.)

   [114] Possessionibus.

   [115] Cyprian (de hab. Virg.) speaks of women who have lost their
   virginity by their own fault as viduae antequam nuptae, and S. Jerome,
   using the same expression (Lett. to Eustochius on the preservation of
   Virginity), implies that they very often dressed like widows (plerasque
   viduas antequam nuptas infelicem conscientiam mentita tantum veste
   protegere):  this will account for Leo's here providing that these
   unhappy women are not deiici in viduarum gradum.  Ball.

   [116] The case of Lupicinus seems somewhat similar to that of Projectus
   in Lett. X., chap. iv, and was similarly referred to local experts.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XIII.

   To the Metropolitan Bishops in the Provinces of Illyricum.

   Leo congratulates them on accepting the authority of Anastasius over
   them (given in Lett. IV.).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XIV.

   To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica.

   Leo, bishop of the City of Rome, to Anastasius, bishop of Thessalonica.

   I.  Prefatory.

   If with true reasoning you perceived all that has been committed to
   you, brother, by the blessed apostle Peter's authority, and what has
   also been entrusted to you by our favour, and would weigh it fairly, we
   should be able greatly to rejoice at your zealous discharge of the
   responsibility imposed on you [117] .

   II.  Anastasius is taxed with exceeding the limits of his vicariate,
   especially in his violent and unworthy treatment of Atticus.

   Seeing that, as my predecessors acted towards yours, so too I,
   following their example, have delegated my authority to you [118] ,
   beloved:  so that you, imitating our gentleness, might assist us in the
   care which we owe primarily to all the churches by Divine institution,
   and might to a certain extent make up for our personal presence in
   visiting those provinces which are far off from us:  for it would be
   easy for you by regular and well-timed inspection to tell what and in
   what cases you could either, by your own influence, settle or reserve
   for our judgment.  For as it was free for you to suspend the more
   important matters and the harder issues while you awaited our opinion,
   there was no reason nor necessity for you to go out of your way to
   decide what was beyond your powers.  For you have numerous written
   warnings of ours in which we have often instructed you to be temperate
   in all your actions:  that with loving exhortations you might provoke
   the churches of Christ committed to you to healthy obedience.  Because,
   although as a rule there exist among careless or slothful brethren
   things which demand a strong hand in rectifying them; yet the
   correction ought to be so applied as ever to keep love inviolate.
   Wherefore also it is that the blessed Apostle Paul, in instructing
   Timothy upon the ruling of the Church, says:  ?an elder rebuke not, but
   intreat him as a father:  the young men as brethren:  old women as
   mothers:  young women as sisters in all purity [119] .?  And if this
   moderation is due by the Apostle's precept to all and any of the lower
   members, how much more is it to be paid without offence to our brethren
   and fellow-bishops? in order that although things sometimes happen
   which have to be reprimanded in the persons of priests, yet kindness
   may have more effect on those who are to be corrected than severity:
   exhortation than perturbation:  love than power.  But they who ?seek
   their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's [120] ,? easily
   depart from this law, and finding pleasure rather in domineering over
   their subjects than in consulting their interests, are swoln with the
   pride of their position, and thus what was provided to secure harmony
   ministers to mischief.  That we are obliged to speak thus causes us no
   small grief.  For I feel myself in a certain measure drawn into blame,
   on discovering you to have so immoderately departed from the rules
   handed down to you.  If you were careless of your own reputation, you
   ought at least to have spared my good name:  lest what only your own
   mind prompted should seem done with our approval.  Do but read,
   brother, our pages with care, and peruse all the letters sent by
   holders of the Apostolic See to your predecessors, and you will find
   injunctions either from me or from my predecessors on that in which we
   learn you have presumed.

   For there has come to us our brother Atticus, the metropolitan [121]
   bishop of Old Epirus, with the bishops of his province, and with
   tearful pleading has complained of the undeserved contumely he has
   suffered, in the presence of your own deacons who, by giving no
   contradiction to these woeful complaints, showed that what was
   impressed upon us did not want for truth.  We read also in your letter,
   which those same deacons of yours brought, that brother Atticus had
   come to Thessalonica, and that he had also sealed his agreement in a
   written profession, so that we could not but understand concerning him
   that it was of his own will and free devotion that he had come, and
   that he had composed the statement of his promise of obedience,
   although in the very mention of this statement a sign of injury was
   betrayed.  For it was not necessary that he should be bound in writing,
   who was already proving his obedience by the very dutifulness of his
   voluntary coming.  Wherefore these words in your letter bore witness to
   the bewailings of the aforesaid, and through his outspoken account that
   which had been passed over in silence is laid bare, namely that the
   Praefecture of Illyricum had been approached, and the most exalted
   functionary among the potentates of the world [122] had been set in
   motion to expose an innocent prelate:  so that a company was sent to
   carry out the aweful deed who were to enlist all the public servants in
   giving effect to their orders, and from the church's holy sanctuary
   charged with no crime, or at best a false one, was dragged a priest, to
   whom no truce was granted in consideration of his grievous ill-health
   or the cruel winter weather:  but he was forced to take a journey full
   of hardships and dangers through the pathless snows.  And this was a
   task of such toil and peril that some of those who accompanied the
   bishop are said to have succumbed [123] .

   I am quite dumb-founded, beloved brother, yea and I am also sore
   grieved that you brought yourself to be so savagely and violently moved
   against one about whom you had laid no further information than that
   when summoned to appear he put off and excused himself on the grounds
   of illness; especially when, even if he deserved any such treatment,
   you should have waited till I had replied to your consulting letter.
   But, as I perceive, you thought too well of my habits, and most truly
   foresaw how fair-minded [124] an answer I was likely to make to
   preserve harmony among priests:  and therefore you made haste to carry
   out your movements without concealment, lest when you had received the
   letter of our forbearance dictating another course, you should have no
   licence to do that which is done.  Or perhaps some crime had reached
   your ears, and metropolitan [125] bishop that you are, the weight of
   some new charge pressed you hard?  But that this is not consistent with
   the fact, you yourself make certain by laying nothing against him.  Yet
   even if he had committed some grave and intolerable misdemeanour, you
   should have waited for our opinion:  so as to arrive at no decision by
   yourself until you knew our pleasure.  For we made you our deputy,
   beloved, on the understanding that you were engaged to share our
   responsibility, not to take plenary powers on yourself.  Wherefore as
   what you bestow a pious care on delights us much, so your wrongful acts
   grieve us sorely.  And after experience in many cases we must show
   greater foresight, and use more diligent precaution:  to the end that
   through the spirit of love and peace all matter of offence may be
   removed from the Lord's churches, which we have commended to you:  the
   pre-eminence of your bishopric being retained in the provinces, but all
   your usurping excesses being shorn off.

   III.  The rights of the metropolitans under the vicariate of Anastasius
   are to be observed.

   Therefore according to the canons of the holy Fathers, which are framed
   by the spirit of God and hollowed by the whole world's reverence, we
   decree that the metropolitan bishops of each province over which your
   care, brother, extends by our delegacy, shall keep untouched the rights
   of their position which have been handed down to them from olden
   times:  but on condition that they do not depart from the existing
   regulations by any carelessness or arrogance.

   IV.  The negative qualifications of a bishop determined.

   In cities whose governors [126] have died let this form be observed in
   filling up their place:  he, who is to be ordained, even though his
   good life be not attested, shall be not a layman, not a neophyte, nor
   yet the husband of a second wife, or one who, though he has or has had
   but one, married a widow.  For the choosing of priests is of such
   surpassing importance that things which in other members of the Church
   are not blame-worthy, are yet held unlawful in them.

   V.  Continence is required even in sub-deacons.

   For although they who are not within the ranks of the clergy are free
   to take pleasure in the companionship of wedlock and the procreation of
   children, yet for the exhibiting of the purity of complete continence,
   even sub-deacons are not allowed carnal marriage:  that ?both those
   that have, may be as though they had not [127] ,? and those who have
   not, may remain single.  But if in this order, which is the fourth from
   the Head [128] , this is worthy to be observed, how much more is it to
   be kept in the first, or second, or third, lest any one be reckoned fit
   for either the deacon's duties or the presbyter's honourable position,
   or the bishop's pre-eminence, who is discovered not yet to have bridled
   his uxorious desires.

   VI.  The election of a bishop must proceed by the wishes of the clergy
   and people.

   When therefore the choice of the chief priest is taken in hand, let him
   be preferred before all whom the unanimous consent of clergy and people
   demands, but if the votes chance to be divided between two persons, the
   judgment of the metropolitan should prefer him who is supported by the
   preponderance of votes and merits:  only let no one be ordained against
   the express wishes of the place:  lest a city should either despise or
   hate a bishop whom they did not choose, and lamentably fall away from
   religion because they have not been allowed to have whom they wished.

   VII.  Metropolitans are to refer to their Vicar:  the mode of electing
   metropolitans is laid down.

   However the metropolitan bishop should refer to you, brother, about the
   person to be consecrated bishop, and about the consent of the clergy
   and people:  and he should acquaint you with the wishes of the
   province:  that the due celebration of the ordination may be
   strengthened by your authority also.  But to right selections it will
   be your duty to cause no delay or hindrance, lest the Lord's flocks
   should remain too long with their shepherd's care.

   Moreover when a metropolitan is defunct and another has to be elected
   in to his place, the bishops of the province must meet together in the
   metropolitical city:  that after the wishes of all the clerics and all
   the citizens have been sifted, the best man may be chosen from the
   presbyters of that same church or from the deacons, and you are to be
   informed of his name by the priests of the province, who will carry out
   the wishes of his supporters on ascertaining that you agree with their
   choice [129] .  For whilst we desire proper elections to be hampered by
   no delays, we yet allow nothing to be done presumptuously without your
   knowledge.

   VIII.  Bishops are to hold provincial councils twice a year.

   Concerning councils of bishops we give no other instructions than those
   laid down for the Church's health by the holy Fathers [130] :  to wit
   that two meetings should be held a year, in which judgment should be
   passed upon all the complaints which are wont to arise between the
   various ranks of the Church.  But if perchance among the rulers
   themselves a cause arise (which God forbid) concerning one of the
   greater sins, such as cannot be decided by a provincial trial, the
   metropolitan shall take care to inform you, brother, concerning the
   nature of the whole matter, and if, after both parties have come before
   you, the thing be not set at rest even by your judgment, whatever it
   be, let it be transferred to our jurisdiction.

   IX.  Translation from one see to another is to be prohibited.

   If any bishop, despising the insignificance of his city, shall intrigue
   for the government of a more populous place, and transfer himself by
   whatever means to a larger flock, he shall first be driven from the
   chair he has usurped, and also shall be deprived of his own:  so shall
   he preside neither over those whom in his greed he coveted, nor over
   those whom in his arrogance he spurned.  Therefore let each be content
   with his own bounds, and not seek to be raised above the limits of his
   present post.

   X.  Bishops are not to entice or receive the clergy of another diocese.

   A cleric from another diocese let no (bishop) accept or invite against
   the wishes of his own bishop:  but only when giver and receiver agree
   together thereupon by friendly compact.  For a man is guilty of a
   serious injury who ventures either to entice or withhold from a
   brother's church that which is of great use or high value.  And so, if
   such a thing happen within the province, the metropolitan shall force
   the deserting cleric to return to his church:  but if he has withdrawn
   himself still further off, he shall be recalled by your authoritative
   command:  so that no occasion be left for either desire of gain or
   intrigue.

   XI.  When the Vicar shall require a meeting of bishops, two from each
   province will be sufficient.

   In summoning bishops to your presence, we wish you to show great
   forbearance:  lest under a show of much diligence you seem to exult in
   your brethren's injuries.  Wherefore if any greater case arise for
   which it is reasonable and necessary to convene a meeting of brethren,
   it may suffice, brother, that two bishops should attend from each
   province, whom the metropolitans shall think proper to be sent, on the
   understanding that those who answer the summons be not detained longer
   than fifteen days from the time fixed.

   XII.  In case of difference of opinion between the Vicar and the
   bishops, the bishop of Rome must be consulted.  The subordination of
   authorities in the Church expounded.

   But if in that which you believed necessary to be discussed and settled
   with the brethren, their opinion differs from your own wishes, let all
   be referred to us, with the minutes of your proceedings attested, that
   all ambiguities may be removed, and what is pleasing to God decided.
   For to this end we direct all our desires and pains, that what conduces
   to our harmonious unity and to the protection of discipline may be
   marred by no dissension and neglected by no slothfulness.  Therefore,
   dearly beloved brother, you and those our brethren who are offended at
   your extravagant conduct (though the matter of complaint is not the
   same with all), we exhort and warn not to disturb by any wrangling what
   has been rightfully ordained and wisely settled.  Let none ?seek what
   is his own, but what is another's,? as the Apostle says:  ?Let each one
   of you please his neighbour for his good unto edifying [131] .?  For
   the cementing of our unity cannot be firm unless we be bound by the
   bond of love into an inseparable solidity:  because ?as in one body we
   have many members, but all the members have not the same office; so we
   being many are one body in Christ, and all of us members one of another
   [132] .?  The connexion of the whole body makes all alike healthy, all
   alike beautiful:  and this connexion requires the unanimity indeed of
   the whole body, but it especially demands harmony among the priests.
   And though they have a common dignity, yet they have not uniform rank;
   inasmuch as even among the blessed Apostles, notwithstanding the
   similarity of their honourable estate, there was a certain distinction
   of power, and while the election of them all was equal, yet it was
   given to one [133] to take the lead of the rest.  From which model has
   arisen a distinction between bishops also, and by an important
   ordinance it has been provided [134] that every one should not claim
   everything for himself:  but that there should be in each province one
   whose opinion should have the priority among the brethren:  and again
   that certain whose appointment is in the greater cities should
   undertake a fuller responsibility, through whom the care of the
   universal Church should converge towards Peter's one seat, and nothing
   anywhere should be separated from its Head.  Let not him then who knows
   he has been set over certain others take it ill that some one has been
   set over him, but let him himself render the obedience which he demands
   of them:  and as he does not wish to bear a heavy load of baggage, so
   let him not dare to place on another's shoulders a weight that is
   insupportable.  For we are disciples of the humble and gentle Master
   who says:  ?Learn of Me, for I am gentle and humble of heart, and ye
   shall find rest for your souls.  For My yoke is easy and My burden
   light [135] .?  And how shall we experience this, unless this too comes
   to our remembrance which the same Lord says:  ?He that is greater among
   you, shall be your servant.  But he that exalteth himself, shall be
   humbled:  and he that humbleth himself, shall be exalted [136] .?
     __________________________________________________________________

   [117] De iniunctae tibi sollicitudinis devotione (an obscure
   expression).

   [118] See Letter IV., where it will be remembered the appointment of
   Anastasius, as Vicar of Illyricum, was made.

   [119] 1 Tim. v. 1, 2.

   [120] Phil. ii. 21.

   [121] Some for metropolitanus here read Nicopolitanus, Bishop of
   Nicopolis, the metropolitan see of old Epirus.  Quesnel.

   [122] The language is, I think, intentionally exaggerated and
   high-flown:  parturiunt montes nascetur ridiculus mus.

   [123] Anastasius seems to have arraigned Atticus before the civil court
   of the Prefect of Illyricum:  he sent his apparitors, who violently
   dragged him out of the church, and brought him in midwinter across
   country to be tried.

   [124] The word is civilia, in which Brissonius thinks he sees an
   allusion either to the opposition between civil law and praetor's law
   (to which Anastasius had appealed), or else to the technical meaning of
   the word in jurisprudence as equivalent to Legitimate' or fair'.  The
   latter is more likely.

   [125] Quesnel here accepts Nicopolitanum instead of metropolitanum (see
   n. 7 above), but with little reason.

   [126] Rectores.

   [127] 1 Cor. vii. 29.  A reference to this passage will show that S.
   Paul does not limit himself to the clergy in what he says:  for an
   interesting note on the text (written, of course, from the Roman
   standpoint), the reader is referred to Hurter's edition in loc., who
   adduces some valuable illustrations from Epiphanius, Jerome, &c.

   [128] Quartus a Capite, i.e. from Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church,
   or perhaps from the Bishop of Rome, His soi-disant representative on
   earth (cf. chap. xii, below).

   [129] This method of electing the metropolitan will at once strike the
   reader:  the electors apparently are (1) the bishops of the province
   (who are not eligible for the office); (2) the clergy of the diocese
   (who alone are eligible); and (3) the laity of the diocese.  Only if
   one remembers how limited each diocese was in extent, can one realise
   the working of the method.

   [130] The Council of Nicaea (325) fixed two councils a year, one ante
   quadragesimam Paschae (i.e. before Eastertide), the other circa tempus
   autumni.

   [131] Phil. ii. 4, and Rom. xv. 2.

   [132] 1 Cor. xii. 12, &c.:  the quotation is loose, cf. Rom. xii. 5.

   [133] Viz., S. Peter.

   [134] Magna ordinatione provisum est.

   [135] S. Matt. xi. 29, 30.

   [136] Ibid. xxiii. 11, 12.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XV.

   To Turribius, Bishop of Asturia [137] , upon the errors of the
   Priscillianists.

   Leo, bishop, to Turribius, bishop, greeting.

   I.  Introductory.

   Your laudable zeal for the truth of the catholic Faith, and the
   painstaking devotion you expend in the exercise of your pastoral office
   upon the Lord's flock is proved by your letter, brother, which your
   deacon has handed to us, in which you have taken care to bring to our
   knowledge the nature of the disease which has burst forth in your
   district from the remnants of an ancient plague.  For the language of
   your letter, and your detailed statement, and the text of your pamphlet
   [138] , explains clearly that the filthy puddle of the Priscillianists
   again teems with life amongst you [139] .  For there is no dirt which
   has not flowed into this dogma from the notions of all sorts of
   heretics:  since they have scraped together the motley dregs from the
   mire of earthly opinions and made for themselves a mixture [140] which
   they alone may swallow whole, though others have tasted little portions
   of it.

   In fact, if all the heresies which have arisen before the time of
   Priscillian were to be studied carefully, hardly any mistake will be
   discovered with which this impiety has not been infected:  for not
   satisfied with accepting the falsehoods of those who have departed from
   the Gospel under the name of Christ, it has plunged itself also in the
   shades of heathendom, so as to rest their religious faith and their
   moral conduct upon the power of demons and the influences of the stars
   through the blasphemous secrets of the magic arts and the empty lies of
   astrologers.  But if this may be believed and taught, no reward will be
   due for virtues, no punishment for faults, and all the injunctions not
   only of human laws but also of the Divine constitutions will be broken
   down:  because there will be no criterion of good or bad actions
   possible, if a fatal necessity drives the impulses of the mind to
   either side, and all that men do is through the agency not of men but
   of stars.  To this madness belongs that monstrous division of the whole
   human body among the twelve signs of the zodiac, so that each part is
   ruled by a different power:  and the creature, whom God made in His own
   image, is as much under the domination of the stars as his limbs are
   connected one with the other.  Rightly then our fathers, in whose times
   this abominable heresy sprung up, promptly pursued it throughout the
   world, that the blasphemous error might everywhere be driven from the
   Church:  for even the leaders of the world so abhorred this profane
   folly that they laid low its originator, with most of his disciples, by
   the sword of the public laws.  For they saw that all desire for
   honourable conduct was removed, all marriage-ties undone, and the
   Divine and the human law simultaneously undermined, if it were allowed
   for men of this kind to live anywhere under such a creed.  And this
   rigourous treatment was for long a help to the Church's law of
   gentleness which, although it relies upon the priestly judgment, and
   shuns blood-stained vengeance, yet is assisted by the stern decrees of
   Christian princes at times when men, who dread bodily punishment, have
   recourse to merely spiritual correction.  But since many provinces have
   been taken up with the invasions of the enemy [141] , the carrying out
   of the laws also has been suspended by these stormy wars.  And since
   intercourse came to be difficult among God's priests and meetings rare,
   secret treachery was free to act through the general disorder, and was
   roused to the upsetting of many minds by those very ills which ought to
   have counteracted it.  But which of the peoples and how many of them
   are free from the contagion of this plague in a district where, as you
   point out, dear brother, the minds even of certain priests have
   sickened of this deadly disease:  and they who were believed the
   necessary quellers of falsehood and champions of the Truth are the very
   ones through whom the Gospel of God is enthralled to the teaching of
   Priscillian:  so that the fidelity of the holy volumes being distorted
   to profane meanings, under the names of prophets and apostles, is
   proclaimed not that which the Holy Spirit has taught, but what the
   devil's servant has inserted.  Therefore as you, beloved, with all the
   faithful diligence in your power, have dealt under 16 heads with these
   already condemned opinions [142] , we also subject them once more to a
   strict examination; lest any of these blasphemies should be thought
   either bearable or doubtful.

   II.  (1)  The Priscillianists' denial of the Trinity refuted.

   And so under the first head is shown what unholy views they hold about
   the Divine Trinity:  they affirm that the person of the Father, the
   Son, and the Holy Ghost is one and the same, as if the same God were
   named now Father, now Son, and now Holy Ghost:  and as if He who begot
   were not one, He who was begotten, another, and He who proceeded from
   both, yet another; but an undivided unity must be understood, spoken of
   under three names, indeed, but not consisting of three persons.  This
   species of blasphemy they borrowed from Sabellius, whose followers were
   rightly called Patripassians also:  because if the Son is identical
   with the Father, the Son's cross is the Father's passion
   (patris-passio):  and the Father took on Himself all that the Son took
   in the form of a slave, and in obedience to the Father.  Which without
   doubt is contrary to the catholic faith, which acknowledges the Trinity
   of the Godhead to be of one essence (homoousion) in such a way that it
   believes the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost indivisible without
   confusion, eternal without time, equal without difference:  because it
   is not the same person but the same essence which fills the Unity in
   Trinity.

   III.  (2)  Their fancy about virtues proceeding from God refuted.

   Under the second head is displayed their foolish and empty fancy about
   the issue of certain virtues from God which he began to possess, and
   which were posterior to God Himself in His own essence.  In this again
   they support the Arians' mistake, who say that the Father is prior to
   the Son, because there was a time when He was without the Son:  and
   became the Father then when He begot the Son.  But as the catholic
   Church abhors them, so also does it abhor these who think that what is
   of the same essence was ever wanting to God.  For it is as wicked to
   speak of Him as progressing as it is to call Him changeable.  For
   increase implies change as much as does decrease.

   IV.  (3)  Their account of the epithet ?Only Begotten? refuted.

   Again the third head is concerned with these same folk's impious
   assertion that the Son of God is called ?only-begotten? for this reason
   that He alone was born of a virgin.  To be sure they would not have
   dared to say this, had they not drunk the poison of Paul of Samosata
   and Photinus:  who said that our Lord Jesus Christ did not exist till
   He was born of the virgin Mary.  But if they wish something else to be
   understood by their tenet, and do not date Christ's beginning from His
   mother's womb, they must necessarily assert that there is not one Son
   of God, but others also were begotten of the most High Father, of whom
   this one is born of a woman, and therefore called only-begotten,
   because no other of God's sons underwent this condition of being born.
   Therefore, whithersoever they betake themselves, they fall into an
   abyss of great impiety, if they either maintain that Christ the Lord
   took His beginning from His mother, or do not believe Him to be the
   only-begotten of God the Father:  since He who was God was born of a
   mother, and no one was born of the Father except the Word.

   V.  (4)  Their fasting on the Nativity and Sunday disapproved of.

   The fourth head deals with the fact that the Birth-day of Christ, which
   the catholic Church thinks highly of as the occasion of His taking on
   Him true man, because ?the Word became flesh and dwelt in us [143] ,?
   is not truly honoured by these men, though they make a show of
   honouring it, for they fast on that day, as they do also on the Lord's
   day, which is the day of Christ's resurrection.  No doubt they do this,
   because they do not believe that Christ the Lord was born in true man's
   nature, but maintain that by a sort of illusion there was an appearance
   of what was not a reality, following the views of Cerdo and Marcion,
   and being in complete agreement with their kinsfolk, the Manichaeans.
   For as our examination has disclosed and brought home to them, they
   [144] drag out in mournful fasting the Lord's day which for us is
   hallowed by the resurrection of our Saviour:  devoting this abstinence,
   as the explanation goes, to the worship of the sun:  so that they are
   throughout out of harmony with the unity of our faith, and the day
   which by us is spent in gladness is past in self-affliction by them.
   Whence it is fitting that these enemies of Christ's cross and
   resurrection should accept an opinion (like this) which tallies with
   the doctrine they have selected.

   VI.  (5)  Their view that the soul is part of the Divine being refuted.

   The fifth head refers to their assertion that man's soul is part of the
   Divine being [145] , and that the nature of our human state does not
   differ from its Creator's nature.  This impious view has its source in
   the opinions of certain philosophers, and the Manichaeans and the
   catholic Faith condemns it:  knowing that nothing that is made is so
   sublime and so supreme as that its nature should be itself God.  For
   that which is part of Himself is Himself, and none other than the Son
   and Holy Spirit.  And besides this one consubstantial, eternal, and
   unchangeable Godhead of the most high Trinity there is nothing in all
   creation which, in its origin, is not created out of nothing.  Besides
   anything that surpasses its fellow-creatures is not ipso facto God,
   nor, if a thing is great and wonderful, is it identical with Him ?who
   alone doeth great wonders [146] .?  No man is truth, wisdom, justice;
   but many are partakers of truth, wisdom, and justice.  But God alone is
   exempt from any participating:  and anything which is in any degree
   worthily predicated of Him is not an attribute, but His very essence.
   For in the Unchangeable there is nothing added, there is nothing lost:
   because ?to be [147] ? is ever His peculiar property, and that is
   eternity.  Whence abiding in Himself He renews all things [148] , and
   receives nothing which He did not Himself give.  Accordingly they are
   over-proud and stone-blind who, when they say the soul is part of the
   Divine Being, do not understand that they merely assert that God is
   changeable, and Himself suffers anything that may be inflicted upon His
   nature.

   VII.  (6)  Their view that the devil was never good, and is therefore
   not God's creation, refuted.

   The sixth notice points out that they say the devil never was good, and
   that his nature is not God's handiwork, but he came forth out of chaos
   and darkness:  because I suppose he has no instigator, but is himself
   the source and substance of all evil:  whereas the true Faith, which is
   the catholic, acknowledges that the substance of all creatures
   spiritual or corporeal is good, and that evil has no positive existence
   [149] ; because God, who is the Maker of the Universe, made nothing
   that was not good.  Whence the devil also would be good, if he had
   remained as he was made.  But because he made a bad use of his natural
   excellence, and ?stood not in the truth [150] ,? he did not pass into
   the opposite substance, but revolted from the highest good to which he
   owed adherence:  just as they themselves who make such assertions run
   headlong from truth into falsehood, and accuse nature of their own
   spontaneous delinquencies, and are condemned for their voluntary
   perversity:  though of course this evil is in them, but is itself not a
   substance but a penalty inflicted on substance.

   VIII.  (7)  Their rejection of marriage condemned.

   In the seventh place follows their condemnation of marriages and their
   horror of begetting children:  in which, as in almost all points, they
   agree with the Manichaeans' impiety.  But it is for this reason, as
   their own practices prove, that they detest the marriage tie, because
   there is no liberty for lewdness where the chastity of wedlock and of
   offspring is preserved.

   IX.  (8)  Their disbelief in the resurrection of the body has been
   already condemned by the Church.

   Their eighth point is that the formation [151] of men's bodies is the
   device of the devil, and that the seed of conception is shaped by the
   aid of demons in the wombs of women:  and that for this reason the
   resurrection of the flesh is not to be believed because the stuff of
   which the body is made is not consistent with the dignity of the soul.
   This falsehood is without doubt the devil's work, and such monstrous
   opinions are the devices of demons who do not mould men in women's
   bellies, but concoct such errors in heretics' hearts.  This unclean
   poison which flows especially from the fount of the Manichaean
   wickedness has been already [152] arraigned and condemned by the
   catholic Faith.

   X.  (9)  Their notion that ?the children of promise? are conceived by
   the Holy Ghost is utterly unscriptural and uncatholic.

   The ninth notice declares that they say the sons of promise are born
   indeed of women but conceived by the Holy Spirit:  lest that offspring
   which is born of carnal seed should seem to share in God's estate.
   This is repugnant and contrary to the catholic Faith which acknowledges
   every man to be formed by the Maker of the Universe in the substance of
   his body and soul, and to receive the breath of life within his
   mother's womb:  though that taint of sin and liability to die remains
   which passed from the first parent into his descendants; until the
   sacrament of Regeneration comes to succour him, whereby through the
   Holy Spirit we are re-born the sons of promise, not in the fleshly
   womb, but in the power of baptism.  Whence David also, who certainly
   was a son of promise, says to God:  ?Thy hands have made me and
   fashioned me [153] .?  And to Jeremiah says the Lord, ?Before I formed
   thee in the womb I knew thee, and in thy mother's belly I sanctified
   thee [154] .?

   XI.  (10)  Their theory that souls have a previous existence before
   entering man refuted.

   Under the tenth head they are reported as asserting that the souls
   which are placed in men's bodies have previously been without body and
   have sinned in their heavenly habitation, and for this reason having
   fallen from their high estate to a lower one alight upon ruling spirits
   [155] of divers qualities, and after passing through a succession of
   powers of the air and stars, some fiercer, some milder, are enclosed in
   bodies of different sorts and conditions, so that whatever variety and
   inequality is meted out to us in this life, seems the result of
   previous causes.  This blasphemous fable they have woven for themselves
   out of many persons' errors [156] :  but all of them the catholic Faith
   cuts off from union with its body, persistently and truthfully
   proclaiming that men's souls did not exist until they were breathed
   into their bodies, and that they were not there implanted by any other
   than God, who is the creator both of the souls and of the bodies.  And
   because through the transgression of the first man the whole stock of
   the human race was tainted, no one can be set free from the state of
   the old Adam save through Christ's sacrament of baptism, in which there
   are no distinctions between the re-born, as says the Apostle:  ?For as
   many of you as were baptized in Christ did put on Christ:  there is
   neither Jew nor Greek:  there is neither bond nor free:  there is
   neither male nor female:  for ye are all one in Christ Jesus [157] .?
   What then have the course of the stars to do with it, or the devices of
   destiny? what the changing state of mundane things and their restless
   diversity?  Behold how the grace of God makes all these unequals equal,
   who, whatever their labours in this life, if they abide faithful,
   cannot be wretched, for they can say with the Apostle in every trial:
   ?who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or
   distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
   As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long, we are
   accounted as sheep for the slaughter.'  (Ps. xliv. 22.)  But in all
   these things we overcome through Him that loved us [158] .?  And
   therefore the Church, which is the body of Christ, has no fear about
   the inequalities of the world, because she has no desire for temporal
   goods:  nor does she dread being overwhelmed by the empty threats of
   destiny, for she knows she is strengthened by patience in tribulations.

   XII.  (11)  Their astrological notions condemned.

   Their eleventh blasphemy is that in which they suppose that both the
   souls and bodies of men are under the influence of fatal stars:  this
   folly compels them to become entangled in all the errors of the
   heathen, and to strive to attract stars that are as they think
   favourable to them, and to soften those that are against them.  But for
   those who follow such pursuits there is no place in the catholic
   Church; a man who gives himself up to such convictions separates
   himself from the body of Christ altogether.

   XIII.  (12)  Their belief that certain powers rule the soul and the
   stars the body, is unscriptural and preposterous.

   The twelfth of these points is this, that they map out the parts of the
   soul under certain powers, and the limbs of the body under others:  and
   they suggest the characters of the inner powers that rule the soul by
   giving them the names of the patriarchs, and on the contrary they
   attribute the signs of the stars to those under which they put the
   body.  And in all these things they entangle themselves in an
   inextricable maze, not listening to the Apostle when he says, ?See that
   no one deceive you through philosophy and vain deceit after the
   tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after
   Christ; for in Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and in
   Him ye are made full, who is the head of every principality and power
   [159] .?  And again:  ?let no man beguile you by a voluntary humility
   and worshipping of angels, treading on things which he hath not seen,
   vainly puffed up by the senses of his flesh, not holding fast the Head
   from whom all the body, being supplied and knit together through the
   joints and bands, increaseth with the increase of God [160] .?  What
   then is the use of admitting into the heart what the law has not
   taught, prophecy has not sung, the truth of the Gospel has not
   proclaimed, the Apostles' teaching has not handed down?  But these
   things are suited to the minds of those of whom the Apostle speaks,
   ?For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but
   having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own
   lusts:  and will turn away indeed their hearing from the truth, and
   turn aside unto fables [161] .?  And so we can have nothing in common
   with men who dare to teach or believe such things, and strive by any
   means in their power to persuade men that the substance of flesh is
   foreign to the hope of resurrection, and so break down the whole
   mystery of Christ's incarnation:  because it was wrong for Christ to
   take upon Him complete manhood if it was wrong for Him to emancipate
   complete manhood.

   XIV.  (13)  Their fanciful division of the Scriptures rejected.

   In the thirteenth place comes their assertion that the whole body of
   the canonical Scriptures is to be accepted, under the names of the
   patriarchs [162] :  because those twelve virtues which work the
   reformation of the inner man are pointed out in their names, and
   without this knowledge no soul can effect its reformation, and return
   to that substance from which it came forth.  But this wicked delusion
   the Christian wisdom holds in disdain, for it knows that the nature of
   the true Godhead is inviolable and immutable:  but the soul, whether
   living in the body or separated from the body, is subject to many
   passions:  whereas, of course, if it were part of the divine essence,
   no adversity could happen to it.  And therefore there is no comparison
   between them:  One is the Creator, the other is the creature.  For He
   is always the same, and suffers no change:  but the soul is changeable,
   even if not changed, because its power of not changing is a gift, and
   not a property.

   XV.  (14)  Their idea that the Scriptures countenance their subjecting
   of the body to the starry influences denied.

   Under the fourteenth heading their sentiments upon the state of the
   body are stated, viz., that it is, on account of its earthly
   properties, held under the power of stars and constellations, and that
   many things are found in the holy books which have reference to the
   outer man with this object, that in the Scriptures themselves a certain
   opposition may be seen at work between the divine and the earthly
   nature:  and that which the powers that rule the soul claim for
   themselves may be distinguished from that which the fashioners of the
   body claim.  These stories are invented that the soul may be maintained
   to be part of the divine substance, and the flesh believed to belong to
   the bad nature:  since the world itself, with its elements, they hold
   to be not the work of the good God, but the outcome of an evil author:
   and that they might disguise these sacrilegious lies under a fair
   cloak, they have polluted almost all the divine utterances with the
   colouring of their unholy notions.

   XVI.  (15)  Their falsified copies of the Scriptures, and their
   apocryphal books prohibited.

   And on this subject your remarks under the fifteenth head make a
   complaint, and express a well-deserved abhorrence of their devilish
   presumption, for we too have ascertained this from the accounts of
   trustworthy witnesses, and have found many of their copies most
   corrupt, though they are entitled canonical.  For how could they
   deceive the simple-minded unless they sweetened their poisoned cups
   with a little honey, lest what was meant to be deadly should be
   detected by its over-nastiness?  Therefore care must be taken, and the
   priestly diligence exercised to the uttermost, to prevent falsified
   copies that are out of harmony with the pure Truth being used in
   reading.  And the apocryphal scriptures, which, under the names of
   Apostles [163] , form a nursery-ground for many falsehoods, are not
   only to be proscribed, but also taken away altogether and burnt to
   ashes in the fire.  For although there are certain things in them which
   seem to have a show of piety, yet they are never free from poison, and
   through the allurements of their stories they have the secret effect of
   first beguiling men with miraculous narratives, and then catching them
   in the noose of some error.  Wherefore if any bishop has either not
   forbidden the possession of apocryphal writings in men's houses, or
   under the name of being canonical has suffered those copies to be read
   in church which are vitiated with the spurious alterations of
   Priscillian, let him know that he is to be accounted heretic, since he
   who does not reclaim others from error shows that he himself has gone
   astray.

   XVII.  (16)  About the writings of Dictinius [164] .

   Under the last head a just complaint was made that the treatises of
   Dictinius which he wrote in agreement with Priscillian's tenets were
   read by many with veneration:  for if they think any respect is due to
   Dictinius' memory, they ought to admire his restoration rather than his
   fall.  Accordingly it is not Dictinius but Priscillian that they read:
   and they approve of what he wrote in error, not what he preferred after
   recantation.  But let no one venture to do this with impunity, nor let
   any one be reckoned among catholics who makes use of writings that have
   been condemned not by the catholic Church alone but by the author
   himself as well.  Let not those who have gone astray be allowed to make
   a fictitious show, and under the veil of the Christian name shirk the
   provisions of the imperial decrees.  For they attach themselves to the
   catholic Church with all this difference of opinion in their heart,
   with the object of both making such converts as they can, and escaping
   the rigour of the law by passing themselves off as ours.  This is done
   by Priscillianists and Manichaeans alike; for there is such a close
   bond of union between the two that they are distinct only in name, but
   in their blasphemies are found at one:  because although the
   Manichaeans reject the Old Testament which the others pretend to
   accept, yet the purpose of both tends to the same end, seeing that the
   one side corrupts while receiving what the other assails and rejects.

   But in their abominable mysteries, which the more unclean they are, are
   so much the more carefully concealed, their crime is but one, their
   filthy-mindedness one, and their foul conduct similar.  And although we
   blush to speak so plainly, yet we have tracked it out with the most
   painful searches, and exposed it by the confession of Manichaeans who
   have been arrested, and thus brought it to the public knowledge:  lest
   by any means it might seem matter of doubt, although it has been
   disclosed by the mouth of the men themselves, who had performed the
   crime, in our court, which was attended not only by a large gathering
   of priests, but also by men of repute and dignity, and a certain number
   of the senate and the people, even as the missive which we have
   addressed to you, beloved, shows to have been done.  And there has been
   found out and widely published about the immoral practices of the
   Priscillianists just what was also found out about the foul wickedness
   of the Manichaeans.  For they who are throughout on a level of
   depravity in their ideas, cannot be unlike in their religious matters.

   So having run through all that the detailed refutation contains, with
   which the contents of the memorial of their views does not disagree, we
   have, I think, satisfactorily shown what our opinion on the matters
   which you, brother, have referred to us, and how unbearable it is if
   such blasphemous errors find acceptance in the hearts even of some
   priests, or to put it more mildly, are not actively opposed by them.
   With what conscience can they maintain the honourable position which
   has been given them, who do not labour for the souls entrusted to
   them?  Beasts rush in, and they do not close the fold.  Robbers lay
   wait, and they set no watch.  Diseases multiply, and they seek out no
   remedies.  But when in addition they refuse assent to those who act
   more warily, and shrink from anathematizing by their written confession
   blasphemies which the whole world has already condemned, what do they
   wish men to understand except that they are not of the number of the
   brethren, but on the enemy's side?

   XVIII.  The body of Christ really rested in the tomb, and really rose
   again.

   Furthermore in the matter which you placed last in your confidential
   letter, I am surprised that any intelligent Christian should be in
   difficulty as to whether when Christ descended to the realms below, his
   flesh rested in the tomb:  for as it truly died and was buried, so it
   was truly raised the third day.  For this the Lord Himself also had
   announced, saying to the Jews, ?destroy this temple, and in three days
   I will raise it up [165] .?  Where the evangelist adds this comment:
   ?but this He spake of the temple of His body.?  The truth of which the
   prophet David also had predicted, speaking in the person of the Lord
   and Saviour, and saying:  ?Moreover my flesh also shall rest in hope;
   because Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, nor give Thy Holy One to
   see corruption. [166] ?  From these words surely it is clear that the
   Lord's flesh being buried, both truly rested and did not undergo
   corruption:  because it was quickly revived by the return of the soul,
   and rose again.  Not to believe this is blasphemous enough, and is
   undoubtedly of a piece with the doctrine of Manichaeus and Priscillian,
   who with their blasphemous conceptions pretend to confess Christ, but
   only in such a way as to destroy the reality of His incarnation, and
   death, and resurrection.

   Therefore let a council of bishops be held among you, and let the
   priests of neighbouring provinces meet at a place suitable to all:
   that, on the lines of our reply to your request for advice, a full
   inquiry may be made as to whether here are any of the bishops who are
   tainted with the contagion of this heresy:  for they must without doubt
   be cut off from communion, if they refuse to condemn this most
   unrighteous sect with all its wrongful conceptions.  For it can nohow
   be permitted that one who has undertaken the duty of preaching the
   Faith should dare to maintain opinions contrary to Christ's gospel and
   the creed of the universal Church.  What kind of disciples will there
   be in a place where such masters teach?  What will the people's
   religion, or the salvation of the laity be, where against the interests
   of human society the holiness of chastity is uprooted, the
   marriage-bond overthrown, the propagation of children forbidden, the
   nature of the flesh condemned, and, in opposition to the true worship
   of the true God, the Trinity of the Godhead is denied, the
   individuality of the persons confounded, man's soul declared to be the
   Divine essence, and enclosed in flesh at the Devil's will, the Son of
   God proclaimed only-begotten in right of being born of a Virgin, not
   begotten of the Father, and at the same time maintained to be neither
   true offspring of God, nor true child of the virgin:  so that after a
   false passion and an unreal death, even the resurrection of the flesh
   reassumed out of the tomb should be considered fictitious?  But it is
   vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they do not oppose
   these blasphemies:  they must believe them, if they can listen so
   patiently to such words.  And so we have sent a letter to our brethren
   and fellow-bishops of the provinces of Tarraco, Carthago, Lusitania and
   Gallicia, enjoining a meeting of the general synod.  It will be yours,
   beloved, to take order that our authoritative instructions be conveyed
   to the bishops of the aforesaid provinces.  But should anything, which
   God forbid, hinder the coming together of a general council of Gallicia
   [167] , at least let the priests come together, the assembling of whom
   our brothers Idacius and Ceponius shall look to, assisted by your own
   strenuous efforts to hasten the applying of remedies to these serious
   wounds by a provincial synod also.  Dated July 21, in the consulship of
   the illustrious Calipius and Ardaburis (447).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [137] This Turribius was a man of learning and zeal, Bishop of Astoria
   (Astorga) in Spain (province of Gallicia):  canonized by the Roman
   Church and commemorated on April 16 (Hurter).  The date of the letter
   is given as 21 Jul., 447.

   [138] Hurter distinguishes these three documents thus:  (1) epistola,
   the private letter of Turribius to Leo; (2) commonitorium, the detailed
   statement (under 16 heads) of the Priscillianist errors; and (3)
   libellus, Turribius' refutation of each head.  This heresy was of
   Spanish origin, having been broached by Priscillian about 380.  Their
   views will be seen in the sequel.

   [139] Priscillianistarum foetidissimam apud vos recaluisse sentinam.

   [140] Multiplicem sibi foeculentiam miscuerunt.

   [141] He alludes to the invasion of Spain by the German tribes
   (Perthel, p. 38).

   [142] See above n. 6.  Quesnel draws attention to the fact that Leo's
   refutation of the Priscillianist heresy, which here follows, was
   adopted (almost) word for word by the first council of Bracara (Braga,
   in Portugal), held in 563, as a sufficient exposition of their own
   position.

   [143] S. John i. 14.

   [144] Viz. the Manichaeans.

   [145] This Pantheistic view was not, of course, a new one, nor
   pseudo-Christian in its origin, as Leo himself shows.  Cf. Virg.,
   Georg. IV. 219-227, and AEn. vi. 724-727. The philosophi quidam to
   which he makes reference are the Pythagoreans, and following them with
   modifications the Platonists and the Stoics.

   [146] Ps. cxxxvi. 4.

   [147] The reader need hardly be reminded of the recorded revelation of
   the great ?I am? (Jehovah) to Moses (Ex. iii.).

   [148] Cf. Rev. xxi. 5.

   [149] i.e., that evil is not anything positive, but only the negation
   or absence of good which is positive, just as black is not itself a
   colour, but only the absence of colour, whereas white is the presence
   (in due proportion) of all the colours of the spectrum.

   [150] S. John viii. 24.

   [151] Plasmationem, a vile hybrid, being the Greek plasma, with a Latin
   ending (-atio); for which apparently the Low Latin of the Vulgate is
   responsible.  Cf. Ps. cxix. 73, ?et plasmaverunt me? (quoted below,
   chap. x.).

   [152] Olim   Perhaps Leo refers to his own action mentioned in Lett.
   vii. 1.

   [153] Ps. cxix. 73.

   [154] Jer. i. 5.

   [155] In diversae qualitatis principes incidisse, cf. Rom. viii. 38;
   Eph. iii. 10; Col. ii. 10, &c.

   [156] The Pythagorean doctrine of metempsuosis (transmigration of
   souls) which was in a modified form accepted by Plato (Phaedr. et
   alibi), would seem to have been the original source of this view of the
   soul's origin.  It would naturally be palatable doctrine to the
   Gnostics and other philosophizing sects.  In Lett. XXXV., chap. iii.,
   it is attributed to Origen.  For a modem exposition the reader cannot
   do better than refer to Wordsworth's ode on the intimations of
   Immortality in childhood.

   [157] Gal. iii. 27, 28.

   [158] Rom. viii. 35-37.

   [159] Col. ii. 8-10.

   [160] Ibid. 18, 19.

   [161] 2 Tim. iv. 3, 4.

   [162] Leo's commentary on this obscure fancy of the Priscillianist is
   disappointing, as it is merely a repetition or continuation of his
   remarks on the 12th head.  They seem to have divided the scriptures in
   some mystic fashion into portions corresponding to the qualitates
   interiorum praesulum in patriarcharum nominibus (statutae) of chap.
   xiii., and to have insisted on knowledge of the Scriptures as necessary
   to the proper action of those ?ruling principles? on the soul.  Cf. S.
   Aug. Letter CCXXXVII., chap. iii. (Hurter).

   [163] Viz., such writings as the Actus of Thomas, Andrew and John, and
   the Memoria apostolorum, qui totam destruit legem veteris Testamenti,
   according to Turribius's letter to Idacius and Ceponius, chap. v.,
   subjoined to this letter in the Leonine series.

   [164] Dictinius was a bishop who had turned Priscillianist, and
   afterwards, at the synod of Toledo (400), had returned to the fold of
   the Church (Perthel, p. 41)

   [165] S. John ii. 19.

   [166] Ps. xvi. 10.

   [167] The whole district over which Turribius was Vicar is here called
   Gallicia, though, as just above, we find it included the provinces of
   Tarraco, Carthago, and Lusitania, as well as Gallicia.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XVI.

   To the Bishops of Sicily.

   Leo the bishop to all the bishops throughout Sicily greeting in the
   Lord.

   I.  Introductory.

   By God's precepts and the Apostle's admonitions we are incited to keep
   a careful watch over the state of all the churches:  and, if anywhere
   ought is found that needs rebuke, to recall men with speedy care either
   from the stupidity of ignorance or from forwardness and presumption.
   For inasmuch as we are warned by the Lord's own command whereby the
   blessed Apostle Peter had the thrice repeated mystical injunction
   pressed upon him, that he who loves Christ should feed Christ's sheep,
   we are compelled by reverence for that see which, by the abundance of
   the Divine Grace, we hold, to shun the danger of sloth as much as
   possible:  lest the confession of the chief Apostle whereby he
   testified that he loved God be not found in us:  because if he (through
   us) carelessly feed the flock so often commended to him he is proved
   not to love the chief Shepherd.

   II.  Baptism is to be administered at Easter-tide and not on the
   Epiphany.

   Accordingly when it reached my ears on reliable testimony (and I
   already felt a brother's affectionate anxiety about your acts, beloved)
   that in what is one of the chief sacraments of the Church you depart
   from the practice of the Apostles' constitution [168] by administering
   the sacrament of baptism to greater numbers on the feast of the
   Epiphany than at Easter-tide, I was surprised that you or your
   predecessors could have introduced so unreasonable an innovation as to
   confound the mysteries of the two festivals and believe there was no
   difference between the day on which Christ was worshipped by the wise
   men and that on which He rose again from the dead.  You could never
   have fallen into this fault, if you had taken the whole of your
   observances from the source whence you derive your consecration to the
   episcopate; and if the see of the blessed Apostle Peter, which is the
   mother of your priestly dignity, were the recognized teacher of
   church-method.  We could indeed have endured your departure from its
   rules with less equanimity, if you had received any previous rebuke by
   way of warning from us.  But now as we do not despair of correcting
   you, we must show gentleness.  And although an excuse which affects
   ignorance is scarce tolerable in priests, yet we prefer to moderate our
   needful rebuke and to instruct you plainly in the true method of the
   Church.

   III.  One must distinguish one festival from another in respect of
   dignity and occasion.

   The restoration of mankind has indeed ever remained immutably
   fore-ordained in God's eternal counsel:  but the series of events which
   had to be accomplished in time through Jesus Christ our Lord was begun
   at the Incarnation of the Word.  Hence there is one time when at the
   angel's announcement the blessed Virgin Mary believed she was to be
   with child through the Holy Ghost and conceived:  another, when without
   loss of her virgin purity the Boy was born and shown to the shepherds
   by the exulting joy of the heavenly attendants:  another, when the Babe
   was circumcised:  another, when the victim required by the Law is
   offered for him:  another, when the three wise men attracted by the
   brightness of the new star [169] arrive at Bethlehem from the East and
   worship the Infant with the mystic offering of Gifts.

   And again the days are not the same on which by the divinely appointed
   passage into Egypt He was withdrawn from wicked Herod, and on which He
   was recalled from Egypt into Galilee on His pursuer's death.  Among
   these varieties of circumstance must be included His growth of body:
   the Lord increases, as the evangelist bears witness, with the progress
   of age and grace:  at the time of the Passover He comes to the temple
   at Jerusalem with His parents, and when He was absent from the
   returning company, He is found sitting with the elders and disputing
   among the wondering masters and rendering an account of His remaining
   behind:  ?why is it,? He says, ?that ye sought Me? did ye not know that
   I must be in that which is My Father's [170] ,? signifying that He was
   the Son of Him whose temple He was in.  Once more when in later years
   He was to be declared more openly and sought out the baptism of His
   forerunner John, was there any doubt of His being God remaining when
   after the baptism of the Lord Jesus the Holy Spirit in form of a dove
   descended and rested upon Him, and the Father's voice was heard from
   the skies, ?Thou art My beloved Son:  in Thee I am well pleased [171]
   ??  All these things we have alluded to with as much brevity as
   possible for this reason, that you may know, beloved, that though all
   the days of Christ's life were hallowed by many mighty works of His
   [172] , and though in all His actions mysterious sacraments [173] shone
   forth, yet at one time intimations of events were given by signs, and
   at one time fulfilment realized:  and that all the Saviour's works that
   are recorded are not suitable to the time of baptism.  For if we were
   to commemorate with indiscriminate honour these things also which we
   know to have been done by the Lord after His baptism by the blessed
   John, His whole lifetime would have to be observed in a continuous
   succession of festivals, because all His acts were full of miracles.
   But because the Spirit of wisdom and knowledge so instructed the
   Apostles and teachers of the whole Church as to allow nothing
   disordered or confused to exist in our Christian observances, we must
   discern the relative importance of the various solemnities and observe
   a reasonable distinction in all the institutions of our fathers and
   rulers:  for we cannot otherwise ?be one flock and one shepherd [174]
   ,? except as the Apostle teaches us, ?that we all speak the same
   thing:  and that we be perfected in the same mind and in the same
   judgment [175] .?

   IV.  The reason explained why Easter and Whitsuntide are the proper
   seasons for baptism.

   Although, therefore, both these things which are connected with
   Christ's humiliation and those which are connected with His exaltation
   meet in one and the same Person, and all that is in Him of Divine power
   and human weakness conduces to the accomplishment of our restoration:
   yet it is appropriate that the power of baptism should change the old
   into the new creature on the death-day of the Crucified and the
   Resurrection-day of the Dead:  that Christ's death and His resurrection
   may operate in the re-born [176] , as the blessed Apostle says:  ?Are
   ye ignorant that all we who were baptized in Christ Jesus, were
   baptized in His death?  We were buried with Him through baptism into
   death; that as Christ rose from the dead through the glory of the
   Father, so we also should walk in newness of life.  For if we have
   become united with the likeness of His death, we shall be also (with
   the likeness) of His resurrection [177] ,? and the rest which the
   Teacher of the Gentiles discusses further in recommending the sacrament
   of baptism:  that it might be seen from the spirit of this doctrine
   that that is the day, and that the time chosen for regenerating the
   sons of men and adopting them among the sons of God, on which by a
   mystical symbolism and form [178] , what is done in the limbs coincides
   with what was done in the Head Himself, for in the baptismal office
   death ensues through the slaying of sin, and threefold immersion
   imitates the lying in the tomb three days, and the raising out of the
   water is like Him that rose again from the tomb [179] .  The very
   nature, therefore of the act teaches us that that is the recognized day
   for the general reception of the grace [180] , on which the power of
   the gift and the character of the action originated.  And this is
   strongly corroborated by the consideration that the Lord Jesus Christ
   Himself, after He rose from the dead, handed on both the form and power
   of baptizing to His disciples, in whose person all the chiefs of the
   churches received their instructions with these words, ?Go ye and teach
   all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son
   and of the Holy Ghost [181] .?  On which of course He might have
   instructed them even before His passion, had He not especially wished
   it to be understood that the grace of regeneration began with His
   resurrection.  It must be added, indeed, that the solemn season of
   Pentecost, hallowed by the coming of the Holy Ghost is also allowed,
   being as it were, the sequel and completion of the Paschal feast.  And
   while other festivals are held on other days of the week, this festival
   (of Pentecost) always occurs on that day, which is marked by the Lord's
   resurrection:  holding out, so to say, the hand of assisting grace and
   inviting those, who have been cut off from the Easter feast by
   disabling sickness or length of journey or difficulties of sailing, to
   gain the purpose that they long for through the gift of the Holy
   Spirit.  For the Only-begotten of God Himself wished no difference to
   be felt between Himself and the Holy Spirit in the Faith of believers
   and in the efficacy of His works:  because there is no diversity in
   their nature, as He says, ?I will ask the Father and He shall give you
   another Comforter that He may be with you for ever, even the Spirit of
   Truth [182] ;? and again:  ?But the Comforter which is the Holy Ghost,
   whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things and
   bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you [183] ;? and again:
   ?When He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He shall guide you into all the
   Truth [184] .?  And thus, since Christ is the Truth, and the Holy
   Spirit the Spirit of Truth, and the name of ?Comforter? appropriate to
   both, the two festivals are not dissimilar, where the sacrament is the
   same [185] .

   V.  S. Peter's example as an authority for Whitsuntide baptisms.

   And that we do not contend for this on our own conviction but retain it
   on Apostolic authority, we prove by a sufficiently apt example,
   following the blessed Apostle Peter, who, on the very day on which the
   promised coming of the Holy Ghost filled up the number of those that
   believed, dedicated to God in the baptismal font three thousand of the
   people who had been converted by his preaching.  The Holy Scripture,
   which contains the Acts of Apostles [186] , teaches this in its
   faithful narrative, saying, ?Now when they heard this they were pricked
   in the heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the Apostles, what
   shall we do, brethren?  But Peter said unto them, Repent ye and be
   baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, unto the
   remission of your sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy
   Ghost.  For to you is the promise, and to your children and to all that
   are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call unto Him.
   With many other words also he testified and exhorted them saying, Save
   yourselves from this crooked generation.  They then that received his
   word were baptized, and there were added in that day about three
   thousand [187] .?

   VI.  In cases of urgency other times are allowable for baptism.

   Wherefore, as it is quite clear that these two seasons of which we have
   been speaking are the rightful ones for baptizing the chosen in Church,
   we admonish you, beloved, not to add other days to this observance.
   Because, although there are other festivals also to which much
   reverence is due in God's honour, yet we must rationally guard this
   principal and greatest sacrament as a deep mystery and not part of the
   ordinary routine [188] :  not, however, prohibiting the licence to
   succour those who are in danger by administering baptism to them at any
   time.  For whilst we put off the vows of those who are not pressed by
   ill health and live in peaceful security to those two closely connected
   and cognate festivals, we do not at any time refuse this which is the
   only safeguard of true salvation to any one in peril of death, in the
   crisis of a siege, in the distress of persecution, in the terror of
   shipwreck.

   VII.  Our Lord's baptism by John very different to the baptism of
   believers.

   But if any one thinks the feast of the Epiphany, which in proper degree
   is certainly to be held in due honour, claims the privilege of baptism
   because, according to some the Lord came to St. John's baptism on the
   same day, let him know that the grace of that baptism and the reason of
   it were quite different, and is not on an equal footing with the power
   by which they are re-born of the Holy Ghost, of whom it is said, ?which
   were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will
   of man, but of God [189] .?  For the Lord who needed no remission of
   sin and sought not the remedy of being born again, desired to be
   baptized just as He desired to be circumcised, and to have a victim
   offered for His purification:  that He, who had been ?made of a woman
   [190] ,? as the Apostle says, might become also ?under the law? which
   He had come, ?not to destroy but to fulfil [191] ,? and by fulfilling
   to end, as the blessed Apostle proclaims, saying:  ?but Christ is the
   end of the law unto righteousness to every one that believeth [192] .?
   But the sacrament of baptism He founded in His own person [193] ,
   because ?in all things having the pre-eminence [194] ,? He taught that
   He Himself was the Beginning.  And He ratified the power of re-birth on
   that occasion, when from His side flowed out the blood of ransom and
   the water of baptism [195] .  As, therefore, the Old Testament was the
   witness to the new, and ?the law was given by Moses:  but grace and
   truth came through Jesus Christ [196] ;? as the divers sacrifices
   prefigured the one Victim, and the slaughter of many lambs was ended by
   the offering up of Him, of whom it is said, ?Behold the Lamb of God;
   behold Him that taketh away the sin of the world [197] ;? so too John,
   not Christ, but Christ's forerunner, not the bridegroom, but the friend
   of the bridegroom, was so faithful in seeking, ?not His own, but the
   things which are Jesus Christ's [198] ,? as to profess himself unworthy
   to undo the shoes of His feet:  seeing that He Himself indeed baptized
   ?in water unto repentance,? but He who with twofold power should both
   restore life and destroy sins, was about to ?baptize in the Holy Ghost
   and fire [199] .?  As then, beloved brethren, all these distinct proofs
   come before you, whereby to the removal of all doubt you recognize that
   in baptizing the elect who, according to the Apostolic rule have to be
   purged by exorcisms, sanctified by fastings and instructed by frequent
   sermons, two seasons only are to be observed, viz. Easter and
   Whitsuntide:  we charge you, brother, to make no further departure from
   the Apostolic institutions.  Because hereafter no one who thinks the
   Apostolic rules can be set at defiance will go unpunished.

   VIII.  The Sicilian bishops are to send three of their number to each
   of the half-yearly meetings of bishops at Rome.

   Wherefore we require this first and foremost for the keeping of perfect
   harmony, that, according to the wholesome rule of the holy Fathers that
   there should be two meetings of bishops every year [200] , three of you
   should appear without fail each time, on the 29th of September, to join
   in the council of the brethren:  for thus, by the aid of God's grace,
   we shall the easier guard against the rise of offences and errors in
   Christ's Church:  and this council must always meet and deliberate in
   the presence of the blessed Apostle Peter, that all his constitutions
   and canonical decrees may remain inviolate with all the Lord's priests.

   These matters, upon which we thought it necessary to instruct you by
   the inspiration of the Lord, we wish brought to your knowledge by our
   brothers and fellow-bishops, Bacillus and Paschasinus.  May we learn by
   their report that the institutions of the Apostolic See are reverently
   observed by you.  Dated 21 Oct., in the consulship of the illustrious
   Alipius and Ardaburis (447).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [168] From this letter it might be gathered that it was a universal
   practice of the early Church based on the precepts of the apostles, to
   restrict Baptism to the feasts of Easter and Whitsuntide, and exclude
   Epiphany.  Whereas as a matter of fact the restriction was almost
   exclusively Roman; all the Eastern Churches and a good many of the
   Western recognizing the Epiphany as a suitable occasion for the rite.
   Leo is too fond of claiming Apostolic authority for his dictates, and
   none such exists here, as far as we know.

   [169] It will be noticed that Leo's order of events, though probably
   correct, is not that of the modern Kalendar, which places the Epiphany
   (Jan. 6) soon after the Circumcision (Jan. 1), and not after the
   Purification (Feb. 2):  unless it was some little time after, Herod's
   cruelty was unnecessarily great in including children of two years old
   in his massacre (S. Matt. ii. 16).

   [170] S. Luke ii. 49, in his quae Patris mei sunt (Vulgate):  this
   version leaves the expression en tois tou Patros mou in its original
   ambiguity, but Leo's commentary immediately following gives his
   decision in favour of ?in My Father's house.?

   [171] S. Matt. iii. 17.

   [172] Innumeris consecratos fuisse virtutibus, where virtutes, as
   often, corresponds to the Gk. dunameis.

   [173] Sacramentorum mysteria coruscasse:  it is instructive to find the
   two words here conjoined, Leo so often using them apparently as
   equivalents.  No one, moreover, after reading this sentence, can doubt
   what in early times Western Christians meant by sacramentum , see
   Letter XII. chap. 3, &c.

   [174] S. John x. 17.

   [175] 1 Cor. i. 10.

   [176] Renascentibus (pres. part.) here, not renatis (past).

   [177] Rom. vi. 3-5.  Notice the support here given to the marginal
   alternative of the R.V., ?united with,? instead of ?united in? ( Lat.
   complantati similitudini, &c.).

   [178] Per similitudinem et formam mysterii.

   [179] This was a favourite interpretation of the symbolism with the
   fathers.  Cf. Serm. LXX., chap. 4, and Bright's n. 97 thereon.

   [180] Celebrandae generaliter gratiae, where generaliterhas much the
   same sense as the Eng. ?generally? has in the definition of a sacrament
   in the Eng. Ch. Catechism as ?generally necessary to salvation.?

   [181] S. Matt. xxviii. 19.

   [182] S. John xiv. 16.

   [183] Ibid. 26.

   [184] Ibid. xvi. 13.

   [185] It need hardly be pointed out that these words, ?where the
   sacrament is the same,? refer to the sacramentum (in its Leonine
   sense), that has just been explained, viz,, that Christus est veritas
   et spiritus sanctus est spiritus veritatus.

   [186] Leo does not often quote from the Acts, and here he expressly
   includes it in the Canon, and alludes to its authenticity (fideli
   historia docet).

   [187] Acts ii. 37-41.

   [188] Principalis et maximi sacramenti custodienda nobis est mystica et
   rationalis exceptio (another reading being exemplatio (symbolism),
   which Quesnel prefers, thinking that the words have reference to the
   appropriateness of this symbolic rite of Baptism being performed at
   Easter-tide).

   [189] S. John i. 13.

   [190] Gal. iv. 4.

   [191] S. Matt. v. 17.

   [192] Rom. x. 4.

   [193] Baptismi sui in se condidit sacramentum:  the baptism of Christ
   has very generally been associated with the Epiphany:  the record of
   it, for instance, in S. Luke iii. 15-23, is the 2nd morning lesson for
   the Festival in the English Church.  It is, however, not clear who the
   ?some? were whom Leo mentions above as putting Christ's baptism on the
   same day as the Epiphany; perhaps he means the Eastern Church.

   [194] Col. i. 18.

   [195] Cf. Lett. XXVIII. (The Tome), chap. vi., where the same
   explanation of the sacred incident in the Lord's passion is given.

   [196] S. John i. 17.  Cf. Rev. xix. 20, ?for the testimony of Jesus is
   the spirit of prophesy.?

   [197] S. John i. 29.

   [198] Phil. ii. 21.

   [199] S. Matt. iii. 11; S. Luke iii. 16.

   [200] Cf. Lett. XIV., chap. 8, where the same rule is laid down.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XVII [201] .

   To All the Bishops of Sicily.

   (Forbidding the sale of church property except for the advantage of the
   church).

   Leo, the pope [202] , to all the bishops of Sicily.

   The occasion of specific complaints claims our attention as having ?the
   care of all the churches,? that we should make a perpetual decree
   precluding all bishops from adopting as a practice what in two churches
   of your province has been unscrupulously suggested and wrongfully
   carried out.  Upon the clergy of the church in Tauromenium deploring
   the destitution they were in from the bishop having squandered all its
   estates by selling, giving away, and otherwise disposing of them, the
   clergy of Panormus, who have lately had a new bishop, raised a similar
   complaint about the misgovernment of the former bishop in the holy
   synod, at which we were presiding.  Although, therefore, we have
   already given instructions as to what is for the advantage of both
   Churches, yet lest this vicious example of abominable plundering should
   hereafter be taken as a precedent, we wish to make this our formal
   command binding on you, beloved, for ever.  We decree, therefore, that
   no bishop without exception shall dare to give away, or to exchange, or
   to sell any of the property of his church:  unless he foresees an
   advantage likely to accrue from so doing, and after consultation with
   the whole of the clergy, and with their consent he decides upon what
   will undoubtedly profit that church.  For presbyters, or deacons, or
   clerics of any rank who have connived at the churches losses, must know
   that they will be deprived of both rank and communion:  because it is
   absolutely fair, beloved brethren, that not only the bishop, but also
   the whole of the clergy should advance the interests of their church
   and keep the gifts unimpaired of those who have contributed their own
   substance to the churches for the salvation of their souls.  Dated 20
   Oct., in the consulship of the illustrious Calepius (447).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [201] This letter is suspected by Quesnel as being, if not spurious, at
   least the production of some later Leo than our own:  but he would seem
   to have hardly sufficient ground for his conjecture and the document is
   interesting as showing the existence of Church endowments at the time,
   and alas! of their mismanagement.  Two centuries before indeed we have
   Cyprian in Africa uttering a somewhat similar complaint:  e.g. de laps.
   vi., de unit. eccl. xxvi., Lett. XV. 3.  It does not appear, however,
   there that the clergy actually misappropriated Church funds, only that
   they were greedy and intent on worldly gain.

   [202] Papa.  This title, which in later times came throughout the West
   to denote exclusively the Bishop of Rome, was originally in the West no
   less than it is still in the East, the common appellation of all
   priests and spiritual fathers of the Church.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XVIII.

   To Januarius, Bishop of Aquileia [203] .

   Leo, bishop of the city of Rome, to Januarius, bishop of Aquileia.

   Those who renounce heresy and schism and return to the Church must make
   their recantation very clear:  those who are clerics may retain their
   rank but not be promoted.

   On reading your letter, brother, we recognized the vigour of your
   faith, which we already were aware of, and congratulate you on the
   watchful care you bestow as pastor, on the keeping of Christ's flock:
   lest the wolves, that enter in under guise of sheep, should tear the
   simple ones to pieces in their bestial fierce ness, and not only
   themselves run riot without restraint, but also spoil those which are
   sound.  And lest the vipery deceit should effect this, we have thought
   it meet to warn you, beloved, reminding you that it is at the peril of
   his soul, for any one of them who has fallen away from us into a sect
   of heretics and schismatics [204] , and stained himself to whatever
   extent with the pollution of heretical communion, to be received into
   catholic communion on coming to his senses without making legitimate
   and express satisfaction.  For it is most wholesome and full of all the
   benefits of spiritual healing that presbyters or deacons, or
   sub-deacons or clerics of any rank, who wish to appear reformed, and
   entreat to return once more to the catholic Faith which they had long
   ago lost, should first confess without ambiguity that their errors and
   the authors of the errors themselves are condemned by them, that their
   base opinions may be utterly destroyed, and no hope survive of their
   recurrence, and that no member may be harmed by contact with them,
   every point having been met with its proper recantation.  With regard
   to them we also order the observance of this regulation of the canons
   [205] , that they consider it a great indulgence, if they be allowed to
   remain undisturbed in their present rank without any hope of further
   advancement:  but only on consideration of their not being defiled with
   second baptism [206] .  No slight penalty does he incur from the Lord,
   who judges any such person fit to be advanced to Holy Orders.  If
   advancement is granted to those who are without blame, only after full
   examination, how much more ought it to be refused to those who are
   under suspicion.  Accordingly, beloved brother, in whose devotion we
   rejoice, bestow your care on our directions, and take order for the
   circumspect and speedy carrying out of these laudable suggestions and
   wholesome injunctions, which affect the welfare of the whole Church.
   But do not doubt, beloved, that, if what we decree for the observance
   of the canons, and the integrity of the Faith be neglected (which we do
   not anticipate), we shall be strongly moved:  because the faults of the
   lower orders are to be referred to none more than to slothful and
   careless governors, who often foster much disease by refusing to apply
   the needful remedy.  Dated 30 Dec., in the consulship of the
   illustrious Calepius and Ardaburis (447).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [203] The Ballerinii's conjecture is at least very plausible, that this
   Januarius was the successor of that Bishop of Aquileia to whom Letter
   I. was written 5 years previously upon the same subject of the Pelagian
   error.  The text of this letter is almost word for word identical with
   Letter II., written to Septimus, Bishop of Altinum, on the same
   occasion as Lett. I.

   [204] Schismaticorum, considering how easily heresy leads to schism and
   schism to heresy, there is no need with Quesnel to consider that
   Novatians or Donatists are being here attacked.  The Ballerinii say
   with justice:--generalis regula hic indicatur omnibus tum haereticis
   tum schismaticis ad ecclesiam redeuntibus communis.

   [205] What canon is here alluded to is uncertain:  the Ballerinii think
   perhaps the 8th Nicene canon, extending its application from the
   Cathari or Novatians to all heresies and schism.

   [206] Si tamen iterata tinctione non fuerint maculati.  Cf. Can.
   Afric., 27, neque permittendum ut rebaptizati ad clericatus gradum
   promoveantur.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XIX.

   To Dorus, Bishop of Beneventum.

   Leo, bishop, to Dorus his well-beloved brother.

   I.  He rebukes Dorus for allowing a junior presbyter to be promoted
   over the heads of the seniors, and the first and second in seniority
   for acquiescing.

   We grieve that the judgment, which we hoped to entertain of you, has
   been frustrated by our ascertaining that you have done things which by
   their blame-worthy novelty infringe the whole system of Church
   discipline:  although you know full well with what care we wish the
   provisions of the canons to be kept through all the churches of the
   Lord, and the priests of all the peoples to consider it their especial
   duty to prevent the violation of the rules of the holy constitutions by
   any extravagances.  We are surprised, therefore, that you who ought to
   have been a strict observer of the injunctions of the Apostolic See
   have acted so carelessly, or rather so contumaciously, as to show
   yourself not a guardian, but a breaker of the laws handed on to you.
   For from the report of your presbyter, Paul, which is subjoined, we
   have learnt that the order of the presbyterate has been thrown into
   confusion with you by strange intrigues and vile collusion; in such a
   way that one man has been hastily and prematurely promoted, and others
   passed over whose advancement was recommended by their age, and who
   were charged with no fault.  But if the eagerness of an intriguer or
   the ignorant zeal of his supporters demanded that which custom never
   allowed, viz., that a beginner should be preferred to veterans, and a
   mere boy to men of years, it was your duty by diligence and teaching to
   check the improper desires of the petitioners with all reasonable
   authority:  lest he whom you advanced hastily to the priestly rank
   should enter on his office to the detriment of those with whom he
   associated and become demoralized by the growth within him, not of the
   virtue of humility, but of the vice of conceit [207] .  For you were
   not unaware that the Lord had said that ?he that humbleth himself shall
   be exalted:  but he that exalteth himself shall be humbled [208] ,? and
   also had said, ?but ye seek from little to increase, and from the
   greater to be less [209] .?  For both actions are out of order and out
   of place [210] :  and all the fruit of men's labours is lost, all the
   measure of their deserts is rendered void, if the gaining of dignity is
   proportioned to the amount of flattery used:  so that the eagerness to
   be eminent belittles not only the aspirer himself, but also him that
   connives at him.  But if, as is asserted, the first and second
   presbyter were so agreeable to Epicarpius being put over their heads as
   to demand his being honoured to their own disgrace, that which they
   wished ought not to have been granted them when they were voluntarily
   degrading themselves:  because it would have been worthier of you to
   oppose than to yield to such a pitiable wish.  But their base and
   cowardly submission could not be to the prejudice of others whose
   consciences were good, and who had not done despite to God's grace; so
   that, whatever the transaction was whereby they gave up their
   precedence to another, they could not lower the dignity of those that
   came next to them, nor because they had placed the last above
   themselves, could he take precedence of the rest.

   II.  The presbyters, who gave way, to be degraded with the usurper to
   the bottom:  the rest to keep their places.

   The aforesaid presbyters, therefore, who have declared themselves
   unworthy of their proper rank, though they even deserved to be deprived
   of their priesthood; yet, that we may show the gentleness of the
   Apostolic See in sparing them, are to be put last of all the presbyters
   of the Church:  and that they may bear their own sentence, they shall
   be below him also whom they preferred to themselves by their own
   judgment:  all the other presbyters remaining in the order which the
   time of his ordination assigns to each.  And let none except the two
   aforesaid suffer any loss of dignity, but let this disgrace attach to
   those only who chose to put themselves below a junior who had only
   lately been ordained:  that they may feel that that sentence of the
   gospels applies to themselves when it is said:  ?with what judgment ye
   judge, ye shall be judged:  and with what measure ye mete, the same
   shall be measured unto you [211] .?  But let Paul the presbyter retain
   his place from which with praiseworthy firmness he did not budge:  and
   let no further encroachments be made to any one's harm:  so that you,
   beloved, who not undeservedly get the discredit of the whole matter,
   may with all speed take measures to cure it at least by putting these
   our injunctions into effect; lest, if a second time a just complaint be
   lodged with us, we be forced into stronger displeasure:  for we would
   rather restore discipline by correcting what is done wrong, than
   increase the punishment.  Know that we have entrusted the carrying out
   of our commands to our brother and fellow-bishop Julius, that all
   things may straightway be established, as we have ordained.  Dated 8th
   March, in the consulship of the illustrious Postumianus (448).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [207] Ne quem sacerdotali propere provehebas honore, ad iniuriam eorum
   quibis sociabatur, inciperet minorque se fieret:  the text is no doubt
   corrupt, though the general sense is clear:  the emendation minorque se
   for miror quis is made almost certain by the quotations that follow,
   especially the second.

   [208] S. Luke xiv. 11 and xviii. 14.

   [209] Vos autem quaeritis de pusillo crescere et de maiore minores
   esse.  This remarkable addition to S. Matt. xx. 28 is found in Cod. D,
   in some Syriac and many Latin copies:  read Westcott's note in Appendix
   C. 3 to Introduction to Study, &c.

   [210] Inordinatum praeposterum.  Cf. Lett. XII., chap. 2, n. 8.

   [211] S. Matt. vii. 2; S. Mark iv. 24; S. Luke vi. 36.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XX.

   To Eutyches, an Abbot of Constantinople.

   Leo, the bishop, to his dearly-beloved son, Eutyches, presbyter.

   He thanks him for his information about the revival of Nestorianism and
   commends his zeal.

   You have brought to our knowledge, beloved, by your letter that through
   the activity of some [212] the heresy of Nestorius has been again
   reviving.  We reply that your solicitude in this matter has pleased us,
   since the remarks we have received are an indication of your mind.
   Wherefore do not doubt that the Lord, the Founder of the catholic
   Faith, will befriend you in all things.  And when we have been able to
   ascertain more fully by whose wickedness this happens, we must make
   provision with the help of God for the complete uprooting of this
   poisonous growth which has long ago been condemned.  God keep thee
   safe, my beloved son.  Dated 1st June, in the consulship of the
   illustrious Postumianus and Zeno (448).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [212] Quesnel is of opinion that Eutyches' letter had accused Domnus,
   Bishop of Antioch, and Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus (cf. Lett. CXX.,
   chapters iv. and v.), of Nestorianizing, and that he thus had gained
   the approbation of Leo before his own unsoundness had been made known.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXI.

   From Eutyches to Leo [213] .

   I.  He states his account of the proceedings at the Synod.

   God the Word is before all else my witness, being confident of my hope
   and faith in Christ the Lord and God of all, and discerning the proof
   of my holding the truth in these matters:  but I call on your holiness,
   too, to bear witness to my heart and to the reasonableness of my
   opinions and words.  But the wicked devil has exercised his evil
   influence upon my zeal and determination, whereby his power ought to
   have been destroyed.  Whereupon he has exerted all his proper power and
   aroused Eusebius, bishop of the town of Dorylaeum, against me, who
   presented an allegation [214] to the holy bishop of the church in
   Constantinople, Flavian, and to certain others whom he found in the
   same city assembled on various matters of their own:  in this he called
   me heretic, not raising any true accusation but contriving destruction
   for me and disturbance for the churches of God.

   Their holinesses summoned me to reply to his accusation:  but though I
   was delayed by a serious illness besides my advanced age, I came to
   clear myself, knowing well that a faction had been formed against my
   safety.  And, indeed, together with a writ of appeal [215] to which my
   signature was appended, I offered them a statement showing my
   confession upon the holy Faith.  But when the holy Flavian did not
   receive the document, nor order it to be read, yet heard me in reply
   utter word for word that Faith which was put forth at Nicaea by the
   holy Synod, and confirmed at Ephesus, I was required to acknowledge two
   natures, and to anathematize those who denied this.  But I, fearing the
   decision of the synod, and not wishing either to take away or to add
   one word contrary to the Faith put forth by the holy Synod of Nicaea,
   knowing, too, that our holy and blessed fathers and bishops Julius,
   Felix, Athanasius, and Gregorius [216] rejected the phrase ?two
   natures,? and not daring to discuss the nature of God the Word, who
   came into flesh in the last days entering the womb of the holy virgin
   Mary unchangeably as he willed and knew, becoming man in reality, not
   in fancy, nor yet venturing to anathematize our aforesaid Fathers, I
   asked them to let your holiness know these things, that you might judge
   what seemed right to you, undertaking by all means to follow your
   ruling.

   II.  His explanations were allowed no hearing.

   But without listening to any thing which I said, they broke up the
   Synod and published the sentence of my degradation, which they were
   getting ready against me before the inquiry.  So much slander were they
   factiously making up against me that even my safety would have been
   endangered had not the help of God at the intercession of your holiness
   quickly snatched me from the assault of military force.  Then they
   began to force the heads of other monasteries [217] to subscribe to my
   degradation (a thing which was never done either towards those who have
   professed themselves heretics, nor even against Nestorius himself),
   insomuch that when to reassure the people I tried to set forth [218]
   statements of my faith, not only did they, who were plotting the
   aforesaid faction against me, prevent them being heard, but also seized
   them that straightway I might be held a heretic before all.

   III.  He appeals to Leo for protection.

   I take refuge, therefore, with you the defender of religion and
   abhorrer of such factions, bringing in even still nothing strange
   against the faith as it was originally handed down to us, but
   anathematizing Apollinaris, Valentinus, Manes, and Nestorius, and those
   who say that the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour, descended
   from heaven and not from the Holy Ghost and from the holy Virgin, along
   with all heresies down to Simon Magus.  Yet nevertheless I stand in
   jeopardy of my life as a heretic.  I beseech you not to be prejudiced
   against me by their insidious designs about me, but to pronounce the
   sentence which shall seem to you right upon the Faith, and in future
   not to allow any slander to be uttered against me by this faction, nor
   let one be expelled and banished from the number of the orthodox who
   has spent his seventy years of life in continence and all chastity, so
   that at the very end of life he should suffer shipwreck.  I have
   subjoined to this my letter both documents, that which was presented by
   my accuser at the Synod, and that which was brought by me but not
   received, as well as the statement of my faith and those things which
   have been decreed upon the two natures by our holy Fathers [219] .

   Eutyches' Confession of Faith.

   I call upon you before God, who gives life to all things, and Christ
   Jesus, who witnessed that good confession under Pontius Pilate, that
   you do nothing by favour.  For I have held the same as my forefathers
   and from my boyhood have been illuminated by the same Faith as that
   which was laid down by the holy Synod of 318 most blessed bishops who
   were gathered at Nicaea from the whole world, and which was confirmed
   and ratified afresh for sole acceptance by the holy Synod assembled at
   Ephesus:  and I have never thought otherwise than as the right and only
   true orthodox Faith has enjoined.  And I agree to everything that was
   laid down about the same Faith by the same holy Synod:  of which Synod
   the leader and chief was Cyril of blessed memory bishop of the
   Alexandrians, the partner and sharer in the preaching and in the Faith
   of those saints and elect of God, Gregory the greater, and the other
   Gregory [220] , Basil, Athanasius, Atticus and Proclus.  Him and all of
   them I have held orthodox and faithful, and have honoured as saints,
   and have esteemed my masters.  But I utter an anathema on Nestorius,
   Apollinaris, and all heretics down to Simon, and those who say that the
   flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ came down from heaven.  For He who is
   the Word of God came down from heaven without flesh and was made flesh
   in the holy Virgin's womb unchangeably and unalterably as He Himself
   knew and willed.  And He who was always perfect God before the ages,
   was also made perfect man in the end of the days for us and for our
   salvation.  This my full profession may your holiness consider.

   I, Eutyches, presbyter and archimandrite, have subscribed to this
   statement with my own hand.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [213] Contrary to my general plan, I have thought it wiser, in the
   matter of the Eutychian controversy, to include other than Leo's own
   writings, that the reader may fulfil the precept audi alteram partem in
   what was the most important doctrinal discussion of Leo's term of
   office.  This Letter (XXI.) bears the stamp of genuineness upon it,
   though the Gk. original is not found.  It is from a collection of
   documents bearing on Nestorianism published ex ms. Casinensi, first by
   Christianus Lupus (?), and afterwards by Stephanus Baluzius
   (1630-1718).

   [214] See Introduction, p. vii.

   [215] Libelli sc. (appellationis ad Leonem):  this is referred to by
   Flavian (Lett. XXVI., chap. iii.) and denied.

   [216] Of these four worthies, Athanasius is too well known to need
   further notice.  Gregorius is either Greg. Nazianzen, Bishop of
   Constantinople (circ. 380) or Greg. of Nyssa, both great champions of
   the Church against Arianism (not, as the Ball., Greg. Thaumaturgus,
   Bishop of Neo-Caesarea, 244-70):  Julius was a Bishop of Rome
   (337-52):  an excerpt from one of his letters is printed by the Ball.
   at the end of this letter as the passage on which Eutyches based his
   error, though they suspect it (not unnaturally) as being an
   Apollinarian imposition:  Felix is probably no other than the Arian
   Bishop of Rome, Felix II. (355-8) whose appointment is characterized by
   Athanasius as effected ?by antichristian wickedness,? but who is yet a
   canonized saint and martyr of the Roman Church (see Schaff's Hist.,
   vol. ii. p. 371; iii. 635, 6).

   [217] Abbots' signatures are found attached to the condemnation of
   Eutyches by the synod of Constantinople.

   [218] Cf. Letter XXVI., chap. ii., propositiones iniuriarum publice
   ponens et maledictionibus plenas (Gr. prothemeta hubreos kai loioorias
   anamesta) which is Flavian's account of the matter.

   [219] Of these four documents (1) Eusebius' libellus is preserved in
   Act I Chalcedon; (2) is not forthcoming; (3) is appended below; and (4)
   a fragment of the testimony of Julius, which is given, does not seem
   important enough to be added in this edition, especially as its
   genuineness is denied.

   [220] Here we have the two Gregorys mentioned:  cf. n. 7. above.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXII [221] .

   The first from Flavian, Bp. of Constantinople to Pope Leo.

   To the most holy and God-loving father and fellow-bishop, Leo, Flavian
   greeting in theLord.

   I.  The designs of the devil have led Eutyches astray.

   There is nothing which can stay the devil's wickedness, that ?restless
   evil, full of deadly poison [222] .?  Above and below it ?goes about,?
   seeking ?whom it may? strike, dismay, and ?devour [223] .?  Whence to
   watch, to be sober unto prayer, to draw near to God, to eschew foolish
   questionings, to follow the fathers and not to go beyond the eternal
   bounds, this we have learnt from Holy Writ.  And so I give up the
   excess of grief and abundant tears over the capture of one of the
   clergy who are under me, and whom I could not save nor snatch from the
   wolf, although I was ready to lay down my life for him.  How was he
   caught, how did he leap away, hating the voice of the caller and
   turning aside also from the memory of the Fathers and thoroughly
   detesting their paths.  And thus I proceed with my account.

   II.  The seductions of heretics capture the unwary.

   There are some ?in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening
   wolves [224] :?  whom we know by their fruit.  These men seem indeed at
   first to be of us, but they are not of us:  ?for if they had been of
   us, they would no doubt have continued with us [225] .?  But when they
   have spewed out their impiety, throwing out the guile that is in them,
   and seizing the weaker ones, and those who have their senses
   unpractised in the divine utterances, they carry them along with
   themselves to destruction, wresting and doing despite to the Fathers'
   doctrines, just as they do the Holy Scriptures also to their own
   destruction:  whom we must be forewarned of and take heed lest some
   should be misled by their wickedness and shaken in their firmness.
   ?For they have sharpened their tongues like serpents:  adder's poison
   is under their lips [226] ,? as the prophet has cried out about them.

   III.  Eutyches' heresy stated.

   Such a one, therefore, has now shown himself amongst us, Eutyches, for
   many years a presbyter and archimandrite [227] , pretending to hold the
   same belief as ours, and to have the right Faith in him:  indeed he
   resists the blasphemy of Nestorius, and feigns a controversy with him,
   but the exposition of the Faith composed by the 318 holy fathers, and
   the letter that Cyril of holy memory wrote to Nestorius, and one by the
   same author on the same subject to the Easterns, these writings, to
   which all have given their assent, he has tried to upset, and revive
   the old evil dogmas of the blasphemous Valentinus and Apollinaris.  He
   has not feared the warning of the True King:  ?Whoso shall cause one of
   the least of these little ones to stumble, it was better that a
   millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be sunk
   in the depth of the sea. [228] ?  But casting away all shame, and
   shaking off the cloak which covered his error [229] , he openly in our
   holy synod persisted in saying that our Lord Jesus Christ ought not to
   be understood by us as having two natures after His incarnation in one
   substance and in one person:  nor yet that the Lord's flesh was of the
   same substance with us, as if assumed from us and united to God the
   Word hypostatically:  but he said that the Virgin who bare him was
   indeed of the same substance with us according to the flesh, but the
   Lord Himself did not assume from her flesh of the same substance with
   us:  but the Lord's body was not a man's body, although that which
   issued from the Virgin was a human body, resisting all the expositions
   of the holy Fathers.

   IV.  He has sent Leo the minutes of their proceedings that he may see
   all the details.

   But not to make my letter too long by detailing everything, we have
   sent your holiness the proceedings which some time since we took in the
   matter:  therein we deprived him as convicted on these charges, of his
   priesthood, of the management of his monastery and of our communion:
   in order that your holiness also knowing the facts of his case may make
   his wickedness manifest to all the God-loving bishops who are under
   your reverence; lest perchance if they do not know the views which he
   holds, and of which he has been openly convicted, they may be found to
   be in correspondence with him as a fellow-believer by letter or by
   other means.  I and those who are with me give much greeting to you and
   to all the brotherhood in Christ.  The Lord keep you in safety and
   prayer for us, O most God-Loving Father. [230]
     __________________________________________________________________

   [221] There are two Latin versions of the original Gk. of this letter,
   an older and a later:  the later, as being more accurate, is here
   translated, though Canon Bright would seem to be right (n. 139) in
   saying that we must think of Leo as writing the Tome (Lett. XXVIII.)
   with the older Latin version of Flavian's letter before him.

   [222] S. Jam. iii. 8.

   [223] 1 Pet. v. 8.

   [224] S. Matt. vii. 15.

   [225] 1 John ii. 19.

   [226] Ps. cxl. 3.

   [227] Viz., head of a monastery (Gk. mandra) or abbot.

   [228] S. Matt. xviii. 6, but it will be noticed that the quotation is
   confused with xxv. 40, minimis being substituted for qui in me credunt.

   [229] Pudorem (instead of the impudenter of the mss.) omnem abiciens et
   pellem quae eum circumdabat excutiens, the Gk. version of this somewhat
   obscure passage running aido pasan apobalon kai hen periekeito tes
   planes doran apotinaxamenos.

   [230] This was the letter ?which was somewhat unaccountably delayed in
   its transit to Rome? (Bright), which reached Leo after XXIII. was
   written, and to which Leo refers in the Tome, chap. i., litteris, quas
   miramur fuisse tam seras.  Bright's note 139 should be read throughout
   as a clear exposition of the preliminary steps in the controversy.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXIII.

   To Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople.

   To his well-beloved brother Flavian the bishop, Leo the bishop.

   I.  He complains that Flavian has not sent him a full account of
   Eutyches' case.

   Seeing that our most Christian and merciful Emperor, in his holy and
   praiseworthy faith and anxiety for the peace of the Catholic Church,
   has sent us a letter [231] upon the matters which have roused the din
   of disturbance among you, we wonder, brother, that you have been able
   to keep silence to us upon the scandal that has been caused, and that
   you did not rather take measures for our being at once informed by your
   own report, that we might not have any doubt about the truth of the
   case.  For we have received a document from the presbyter Eutyches
   [232] , who complains that on the accusation of bishop Eusebius he has
   been wrongfully deprived of communion, notwithstanding that he says he
   attended your summons and did not refuse his presence:  and moreover
   asserts that he presented a deed of appeal in the very court, which was
   however not accepted:  whereupon he was forced to put forth letters of
   defence [233] in the city of Constantinople.  Pending which matter we
   do not yet know with what justice he has been separated from the
   communion of the Church.  But having regard to the importance of the
   matter, we wish to know the reason of your action and to have the whole
   thing brought to our knowledge:  for we, who desire the judgments of
   the Lord's priests to be deliberate, cannot without information decide
   one way or another, until we have all the proceedings accurately before
   us.

   II.  And now demands it.

   And therefore, brother, signify to us in a full account by the hand of
   the most fit and competent person, what innovation has arisen against
   the ancient faith, which needed to be corrected by so severe a
   sentence.  For both the moderation of the Church and the devout faith
   of our most godly prince insist upon our showing much anxiety for the
   peace of Christendom:  that dissensions may be cleared away and the
   Catholic Faith kept unimpaired, and that those whose faith has been
   proved may be fortified by our authority, when those who maintain what
   is wrong have been recalled from their error.  And no difficulty can
   arise on this side, since the said presbyter has professed himself by
   his own statement, ready to be corrected if anything be found in him
   worthy of rebuke.  For it beseems us in such matters to take every
   precaution that charity be kept and the Truth defended without the din
   of strife.  And therefore because you see, beloved, that we are anxious
   about so great a matter, hasten to inform us of everything in as full
   and clear a manner as possible (for this ought to have been done
   before), lest in the cross-statements of both sides we be misled by
   some uncertainty, and the dissension, which ought to be stifled in its
   infancy, be fostered:  for our heart is impressed by God's inspiration
   with the need of saving from violation by anyone's misinterpretation
   those constitutions of the venerable fathers which have received Divine
   ratification and belong to the groundwork of the Faith.  God keep thee
   safe, dear brother.  Dated 18 February (449), in the consulship of the
   illustrious Asturius and Protogenes.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [231] This letter from Theodosius II. came soon after Eutyches, letter
   (XXI), and ?apparently gave Leo the impression, that Eutyches had been
   badly treated.?  Bright.

   [232] See Letter XXI., above.

   [233] Contestatorios libellos.  See Lett. XXI., chap. ii.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXIV.

   To Theodosius Augustus II.

   Leo the bishop, to Theodosius Augustus.

   I.  He praises the Emperor's piety and mentions Eutyches' appeal.

   How much protection the Lord has vouchsafed His Church through your
   clemency and faith, is shown again by this letter which you have sent
   me:  so that we rejoice at there being not only a kingly, but also a
   priestly mind within you.  Seeing that, besides your imperial and
   public cares, you have a most devout anxiety for the Christian
   religion, lest schisms or heresies or other offences should grow up
   among God's people.  For your realm is then in its best state when men
   serve the eternal and unchangeable Trinity by the confession of one
   Godhead [234] .  What the disturbance was which occurred in the Church
   of Constantinople, and which could have so moved my brother and
   fellow-bishop Flavian, that he deprived Eutyches, the presbyter, of
   communion, I have not yet been able to understand clearly.  For
   although the aforesaid presbyter sent in writing a complaint concerning
   his trouble to the Apostolic See, yet he only briefly touched on some
   points, asserting that he kept the constitutions of the Nicene synod
   and had been vainly blamed for difference of faith.

   II.  He finds fault with Flavian's silence.

   But the statement of bishop Eusebius, his accuser, copies of which the
   said presbyter has sent us, contained nothing clear about his
   objections, and though he charged a presbyter with heresy, he did not
   say expressly what opinion he disapproved of in him:  although the
   bishop himself also professed that he adhered to the decrees of the
   Nicene synod:  for which reason we had no means of learning anything
   more fully.  And because the method of our Faith and the laudable
   anxiety shown by your piety requires the merits of the case to be
   known, there must now be no place allowed for deception, but we must be
   informed of the points on which he considers him unsound, that the
   right judgment may be passed after full information.  I have sent a
   letter to the aforesaid bishop, from which he may gather that I am
   displeased at his still keeping silence upon what has been done in so
   grave a matter, when he ought to have been forward in disclosing all to
   us at the outset:  and we believe that even after the reminder he will
   acquaint us with the whole, in order that, when what now seems obscure,
   has been brought into the light, judgment may be passed agreeably to
   the teaching of the Gospels and the Apostles.  Dated the 18th of
   February [235] , in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and
   Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [234] Is it fanciful to trace an analogy between these words and the
   language of the Collect for Trinity Sunday (out of the Sacramentary of
   Gregory), ?grace by the confession of a true faith to acknowledge the
   glory of the Eternal Trinity, and in the power of the Divine Majesty to
   worship the Unity??

   [235] Quesnel reads the 1st of March as the date.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXV.

   From Peter Chrysologus, Bishop of Ravenna, to Eutyches, the Presbyter.

   [In answer to a letter from Eutyches, he urges him to accept the
   decisions of the Church on the Faith in fear and without too close
   inquiry, and to abide by the ruling of the bishop of Rome.]
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXVI [236] .

   A Second One from Flavian to Leo.

   To the most holy and blessed father and fellow-minister Leo, Flavian
   greeting in the Lord.

   I.  Eutyches' heresy restated.

   Nothing, as you know, most beloved of God, is more precious to priests
   than piety and the right dividing of the word of truth.  For all our
   hope and safety, and the recompense of promised good depend thereon.
   For this reason we must take all pains about the true Faith, and those
   things which have been set forth and decreed by the holy Fathers, that
   always, and in all circumstances, they may be kept and guarded whole
   and uninjured.  And so it was necessary on the present occasion for us,
   who see the orthodox Faith suffering harm, and the heresy of
   Apollinaris and Valentinus being revived by the wicked monk Eutyches,
   not to overlook it, but publicly to disclose it for the people's
   safety.  For this man:  this Eutyches, keeping his diseased and sickly
   opinion hid within him, has dared to attack our gentleness, and
   unblushingly and shamelessly to instil his own blasphemy into many
   minds:  saying that before the Incarnation indeed, our Saviour Jesus
   Christ had two natures, Godhead and manhood:  but that after the union
   they became one nature; not knowing [237] what he says, or on what he
   is speaking so decidedly.  For even the union of the two natures that
   came together in Christ did not, as your piety knows, confuse their
   properties in the process:  but the properties of the two natures
   remain entire even in the union.  And he added another blasphemy also,
   saying that the Lord's body which sprang from Mary was not of our
   substance, nor of human matter:  but, though he calls it human, he
   refuses to say it was consubstantial with us or with her who bare him,
   according to the flesh [238] .

   II.  The means Eutyches has taken to circumvent the Synod.

   And this notwithstanding that the acts of Ephesus [239] , in the letter
   written by the holy and ecumenical synod to the wicked and deposed
   Nestorius, contain these express words:  ?the natures which came
   together to form true unity are indeed different:  and yet from them
   both there is but one Christ and Son.  Not as if the difference between
   the two natures was done away with through the union, but rather that
   these same natures, His Godhead and His Manhood perfected for us one
   Lord Jesus Christ, through an ineffable and incomprehensible meeting
   which resulted in unity.?  And this does not escape your holiness, who
   have no doubt read the record of what was done at Ephesus.  Yet this
   same Eutyches attaching no weight to these words, thinks he is not
   liable to the penalties fixed by that holy and ecumenical synod.  For
   this reason, finding that many of the simpler-minded folk were injured
   in their faith by his contention, upon his being accused by the devout
   Bishop Eusebius, and upon his attending at the holy council, and with
   his own mouth declaring what he thought to the members of the synod, we
   have deposed him for his estrangement from the true Faith, as your
   holiness will learn from the resolutions passed about him:  which we
   have sent with this our letter.  Moreover, it is fair in my opinion
   that you should be told this also that this same Eutyches, after
   suffering just and canonical deposition, instead of making amends for
   his earlier by his later conduct [240] , and appeasing God by careful
   penitence and many tears, and by a true repentance, comforting our
   heart which was greatly saddened at his fall:  not only did not do so,
   but even made every effort to throw the most holy church of this place
   into confusion:  setting up in public placards full of insults and
   maledictions, and beyond this addressing his entreaties to our most
   religious and Christ-loving Emperor, and these too over-flowing with
   arrogance and sauciness, whereby he tried to override the divine canons
   in everything.

   III.  He acknowledges the receipt of Leo's letter.

   But after all this had occurred, your holiness' letter was conveyed to
   us by the most honourable count Pansophius:  and from it we learnt that
   the same Eutyches had sent you a letter full of falsehood and cunning,
   saying that at the time of trial he had presented letters of appeal to
   us, and to the holy synod of bishops who were then present, and had
   appealed to your holiness:  this he certainly never did, but in this
   matter, too, he has been guilty of deceit, like the father of lies,
   thinking to gain your ear.  Therefore, most holy father, being stirred
   by all that he has ventured, and by what has been done, and is being
   done against us and the most holy Church, use your accustomed
   promptitude as becomes the priesthood, and in defending the commonweal
   and peace of the holy churches, consent by your own letter [241] to
   endorse the resolution that has been canonically passed against him,
   and to confirm the faith of our most religious and Christ-loving
   Emperor.  For the matter only requires your weight and support, which
   through your wisdom will at once bring about general peace and
   quietness.  For thus both the heresy which has arisen, and the disorder
   it has excited, will easily be appeased by God's assistance through a
   letter from you:  and the rumoured synod will also be prevented, and so
   the most holy churches throughout the world need not be disturbed.  I
   and all that are with me salute all the brethren that are with you.
   May you be granted to us safe in the Lord, and still praying for us, O
   most God-Loving and Holy Father.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [236] In reading the Tome (Lett. XXVIII.) the reader is warned to
   remember that he must take no account of this letter, which did not
   reach Leo until later, and which is acknowledged in Lett. XXXVI. dated
   a week after the Tome.  Bright (n. 139).  There are two versions of
   this letter also, the ancient one and a modern one by Joannes
   Cotelerius, which latter, as being a more exact reproduction of the Gk.
   original, we have taken as the basis of our English translation.

   [237] Ignarus:  it will be remembered that in the Tome (chap. i.) this
   is the chief fault which Leo also has to find with Eutyches, calling
   him multum imprudens et nimis imperitis, &c.

   [238] So in Lett. XXII., chap. iii., Domini corpus non esse quidem
   corpus hominis, humanum autem corpus esse quod ex Virgine est.

   [239] The date of this Council is 431 b.c.

   [240] Saltem secundis curare priora (Gk. kan tois deuterois iasasthai
   ta protera).

   [241] Cf. Lett. XXVII., n. 7, where the difference between Flavian's
   request here and in Lett. XXII., chap iv., is pointed out.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXVII.

   To Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople.

   Leo to Flavian, bishop of Constantinople.

   An acknowledgment of Flavian's first letter and a promise of a fuller
   reply.

   On the first opportunity we could find, which was the coming of our
   honourable son Rodanus, we acknowledge, beloved, the arrival of your
   packet [242] , which was to give us information about the case which
   has been stirred up to our grief among you by misguided error.  Since
   this man, who has long seemed to be religiously disposed, has expressed
   himself in the Faith otherwise than is right, though he never ought to
   have departed from the catholic tradition, but to have persevered in
   the same belief as is held by all.  But on this matter we are replying
   more fully [243] by him who brought your letter to us, beloved:  that
   we may give you all necessary instructions, beloved, on the whole
   matter.  For we do not allow either him to persist in his perverse
   conviction; or you, beloved, who with such faithful zeal are resisting
   his wrong and foolish error to be long disturbed by the adversary's
   opposition.  Our aforesaid son, by whom we are sending this letter, we
   desire you to receive with the affection he deserves, and to reply when
   he returns to us.  Dated 21st May in the consulship of Asturius and
   Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [242] Epistolas.  This refers to Lett. XXII., and includes the gesta
   (or minutes of the synod's proceedings) which accompanied it.

   [243] This is the Tome (Letter XXVIII.):  it will be noticed that
   Flavian (in Lett. XXII.) had not asked for any instructions, but only
   that Leo should inform the bishops under his jurisdiction of Eutyches'
   deposition (chap. iv.).  Flavian's second letter (XXVI.), however, does
   mention vestras sacras litteras, which he hopes will avoid the
   necessity of a council (chap. iii.).  Leo himself seems to be conscious
   of this:  for in Letter XXXIII., chap. 2, he twice pointedly puts in
   the word ?seems,? as if Flavian had not expressed himself quite
   clearly:  ?the points which he seems to have referred to us,? and ?this
   error which seems to have arisen.?
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXVIII.

   To Flavian commonly called ?the Tome.?

   I.  Eutyches has been driven into his error by presumption and
   ignorance [244] .

   Having read your letter, beloved, at the late arrival of which we are
   surprised [245] , and having perused the detailed account of the
   bishops' acts [246] , we have at last found out what the scandal was
   which had arisen among you against the purity of the Faith:  and what
   before seemed concealed has now been unlocked and laid open to our
   view:  from which it is shown that Eutyches, who used to seem worthy of
   all respect in virtue of his priestly office, is very unwary and
   exceedingly ignorant, so that it is even of him that the prophet has
   said:  ?he refused to understand so as to do well:  he thought upon
   iniquity in his bed [247] .?  But what more iniquitous than to hold
   blasphemous opinions [248] , and not to give way to those who are wiser
   and more learned than ourself.  Now into this unwisdom fall they who,
   finding themselves hindered from knowing the truth by some obscurity,
   have recourse not to the prophets' utterances, not to the Apostles'
   letters, nor to the injunctions of the Gospel but to their own selves:
   and thus they stand out as masters of error because they were never
   disciples of truth.  For what learning has he acquired about the pages
   of the New and Old Testament, who has not even grasped the rudiments of
   the Creed?  And that which, throughout the world, is professed by the
   mouth of every one who is to be born again [249] , is not yet taken in
   by the heart of this old man.

   II.  Concerning the twofold nativity and nature of Christ.

   Not knowing, therefore, what he was bound to think concerning the
   incarnation of the Word of God, and not wishing to gain the light of
   knowledge by researches through the length and breadth of the Holy
   Scriptures, he might at least have listened attentively to that general
   and uniform confession, whereby the whole body of the faithful confess
   that they believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ, His
   only Son [250] , our Lord, who was born of the Holy Spirit and [251]
   the Virgin Mary.  By which three statements the devices of almost all
   heretics are overthrown.  For not only is God believed to be both
   Almighty and the Father, but the Son is shown to be co-eternal with
   Him, differing in nothing from the Father because He is God from God
   [252] , Almighty from Almighty, and being born from the Eternal one is
   co-eternal with Him; not later in point of time, not lower in power,
   not unlike in glory, not divided in essence:  but at the same time the
   only begotten of the eternal Father was born eternal of the Holy Spirit
   and the Virgin Mary.  And this nativity which took place in time took
   nothing from, and added nothing to that divine and eternal birth, but
   expended itself wholly on the restoration of man who had been deceived
   [253] :  in order that he might both vanquish death and overthrow by
   his strength [254] , the Devil who possessed the power of death.  For
   we should not now be able to overcome the author of sin and death
   unless He took our nature on Him and made it His own, whom neither sin
   could pollute nor death retain.  Doubtless then, He was conceived of
   the Holy Spirit within the womb of His Virgin Mother, who brought Him
   forth without the loss of her virginity, even as she conceived Him
   without its loss.

   But if he could not draw a rightful understanding (of the matter) from
   this pure source of the Christian belief, because he had darkened the
   brightness of the clear truth by a veil of blindness peculiar to
   himself, he might have submitted himself to the teaching of the
   Gospels.  And when Matthew speaks of ?the Book of the Generation of
   Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham [255] ,? he might
   have also sought out the instruction afforded by the statements of the
   Apostles.  And reading in the Epistle to the Romans, ?Paul, a servant
   of Jesus Christ, called an Apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God,
   which He had promised before by His prophets in the Holy Scripture
   concerning His son, who was made unto Him [256] of the seed of David
   after the flesh [257] ,? he might have bestowed a loyal carefulness
   upon the pages of the prophets.  And finding the promise of God who
   says to Abraham, ?In thy seed shall all nations be blest [258] ,? to
   avoid all doubt as to the reference of this seed, he might have
   followed the Apostle when He says, ?To Abraham were the promises made
   and to his seed.  He saith not and to seeds, as if in many, but as it
   in one, and to thy seed which is Christ [259] .?  Isaiah's prophecy
   also he might have grasped by a closer attention to what he says,
   ?Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and they shall call His
   name Immanuel,? which is interpreted ?God with us [260] .?  And the
   same prophet's words he might have read faithfully.  ?A child is born
   to us, a Son is given to us, whose power is upon His shoulder, and they
   shall call His name the Angel of the Great Counsel, Wonderful,
   Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Prince of Peace, the Father of the age
   to come [261] .?  And then he would not speak so erroneously as to say
   that the Word became flesh in such a way that Christ, born of the
   Virgin's womb, had the form of man, but had not the reality of His
   mother's body [262] .  Or is it possible that he thought our Lord Jesus
   Christ was not of our nature for this reason, that the angel, who was
   sent to the blessed Mary ever Virgin, says, ?The Holy Ghost shall come
   upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee:  and
   therefore that Holy Thing also that shall be born of thee shall be
   called the Son of God [263] ,? on the supposition that as the
   conception of the Virgin was a Divine act, the flesh of the conceived
   did not partake of the conceiver's nature?  But that birth so uniquely
   wondrous and so wondrously unique, is not to be understood in such wise
   that the properties of His kind were removed through the novelty of His
   creation.  For though the Holy Spirit imparted fertility to the Virgin,
   yet a real body was received from her body; and, ?Wisdom building her a
   house [264] ,? ?the Word became flesh and dwelt in us [265] ,? that is,
   in that flesh which he took from man and which he quickened with the
   breath of a higher life [266] .

   III.  The Faith and counsel of God in regard to the incarnation of the
   Word are set forth.

   Without detriment therefore to the properties of either nature and
   substance which then came together in one person [267] , majesty took
   on humility, strength weakness, eternity mortality:  and for the paying
   off of the debt belonging to our condition inviolable nature was united
   with possible nature, so that, as suited the needs of our case [268] ,
   one and the same Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,
   could both die with the one and not die with the other.  [269] Thus in
   the whole and perfect nature of true man was true God born, complete in
   what was His own, complete in what was ours.  And by ?ours? we mean
   what the Creator formed in us from the beginning and what He undertook
   to repair.  For what the Deceiver brought in and man deceived
   committed, had no trace in the Saviour.  Nor, because He partook of
   man's weaknesses, did He therefore share our faults.  He took the form
   of a slave [270] without stain of sin, increasing the human and not
   diminishing the divine:  because that emptying of Himself whereby the
   Invisible made Himself visible and, Creator and Lord of all things
   though He be, wished to be a mortal, was the bending down [271] of
   pity, not the failing of power.  Accordingly He who while remaining in
   the form of God made man, was also made man in the form of a slave.
   For both natures retain their own proper character without loss:  and
   as the form of God did not do away with the form of a slave, so the
   form of a slave did not impair the form of God.  For inasmuch as the
   Devil used to boast that man had been cheated by his guile into losing
   the divine gifts, and bereft of the boon of immortality had undergone
   sentence of death, and that he had found some solace in his troubles
   from having a partner in delinquency [272] , and that God also at the
   demand of the principle of justice had changed His own purpose towards
   man whom He had created in such honour:  there was need for the issue
   of a secret counsel, that the unchangeable God whose will cannot be
   robbed of its own kindness, might carry out the first design of His
   Fatherly care [273] towards us by a more hidden mystery [274] ; and
   that man who had been driven into his fault by the treacherous cunning
   of the devil might not perish contrary to the purpose of God [275] .

   IV.  The properties of the twofold nativity and nature of Christ are
   weighed one against another.

   There enters then these lower parts of the world the Son of God,
   descending from His heavenly home and yet not quitting His Father's
   glory, begotten in a new order by a new nativity.  In a new order,
   because being invisible in His own nature, He became visible in ours,
   and He whom nothing could contain was content to be contained [276] :
   abiding before all time He began to be in time:  the Lord of all
   things, He obscured His immeasurable majesty and took on Him the form
   of a servant:  being God that cannot suffer, He did not disdain to be
   man that can, and, immortal as He is, to subject Himself to the laws of
   death.  The Lord assumed His mother's nature without her faultiness:
   nor in the Lord Jesus Christ, born of the Virgin's womb, does the
   wonderfulness of His birth make His nature unlike ours.  For He who is
   true God is also true man:  and in this union there is no lie [277] ,
   since the humility of manhood and the loftiness of the Godhead both
   meet there.  For as God is not changed by the showing of pity, so man
   is not swallowed up by the dignity.  For each form does what is proper
   to it with the co-operation of the other [278] ; that is the Word
   performing what appertains to the Word, and the flesh carrying out what
   appertains to the flesh.  One of them sparkles with miracles, the other
   succumbs to injuries.  And as the Word does not cease to be on an
   equality with His Father's glory, so the flesh does not forego the
   nature of our race.  For it must again and again be repeated that one
   and the same is truly Son of God and truly son of man.  God in that ?in
   the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
   God [279] ;? man in that ?the Word became flesh and dwelt in us [280]
   .?  God in that ?all things were made by Him [281] , and without Him
   was nothing made:?  man in that ?He was made of a woman, made under law
   [282] .?  The nativity of the flesh was the manifestation of human
   nature:  the childbearing of a virgin is the proof of Divine power.
   The infancy of a babe is shown in the humbleness of its cradle [283] :
   the greatness of the Most High is proclaimed by the angels' voices
   [284] .  He whom Herod treacherously endeavours to destroy is like
   ourselves in our earliest stage [285] :  but He whom the Magi delight
   to worship on their knees is the Lord of all.  So too when He came to
   the baptism of John, His forerunner, lest He should not be known
   through the veil of flesh which covered His Divinity, the Father's
   voice thundering from the sky, said, ?This is My beloved Son, in whom I
   am well pleased [286] .?  And thus Him whom the devil's craftiness
   attacks as man, the ministries of angels serve as God.  To be hungry
   and thirsty, to be weary, and to sleep, is clearly human:  but to
   satisfy 5,000 men with five loaves, and to bestow on the woman of
   Samaria living water, droughts of which can secure the drinker from
   thirsting any more, to walk upon the surface of the sea with feet that
   do not sink, and to quell the risings of the waves by rebuking the
   winds, is, without any doubt, Divine.  Just as therefore, to pass over
   many other instances, it is not part of the same nature to be moved to
   tears of pity for a dead friend, and when the stone that closed the
   four-days' grave was removed, to raise that same friend to life with a
   voice of command:  or, to hang on the cross, and turning day to night,
   to make all the elements tremble:  or, to be pierced with nails, and
   yet open the gates of paradise to the robber's faith:  so it is not
   part of the same nature to say, ?I and the Father are one,? and to say,
   ?the Father is greater than I [287] .?  For although in the Lord Jesus
   Christ God and man is one person, yet the source of the degradation,
   which is shared by both, is one, and the source of the glory, which is
   shared by both, is another.  For His manhood, which is less than the
   Father, comes from our side:  His Godhead, which is equal to the
   Father, comes from the Father.

   V.  Christ's flesh is proved real from Scripture.

   Therefore in consequence of this unity of person which is to be
   understood in both natures [288] , we read of the Son of Man also
   descending from heaven, when the Son of God took flesh from the Virgin
   who bore Him.  And again the Son of God is said to have been crucified
   and buried, although it was not actually in His Divinity whereby the
   Only-begotten is co-eternal and con-substantial with the Father, but in
   His weak human nature that He suffered these things.  And so it is that
   in the Creed also we all confess that the Only-begotten Son of God was
   crucified and buried, according to that saying of the Apostle:  ?for if
   they had known, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory [289]
   .?  But when our Lord and Saviour Himself would instruct His disciples'
   faith by His questionings, He said, ?Whom do men say that I, the Son of
   Man, am??  And when they had put on record the various opinions of
   other people, He said, ?But ye, whom do ye say that I am??  Me, that
   is, who am the Son of Man, and whom ye see in the form of a slave, and
   in true flesh, whom do ye say that I am?  Whereupon blessed Peter,
   whose divinely inspired confession was destined to profit all nations,
   said, ?Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God [290] .?  And not
   undeservedly was he pronounced blessed by the Lord, drawing from the
   chief corner-stone [291] the solidity of power which his name also
   expresses, he, who, through the revelation of the Father, confessed Him
   to be at once Christ and Son of God:  because the receiving of the one
   of these without the other was of no avail to salvation, and it was
   equally perilous to have believed the Lord Jesus Christ to be either
   only God without man, or only man without God.  But after the Lord's
   resurrection (which, of course, was of His true body, because He was
   raised the same as He had died and been buried), what else was effected
   by the forty days' delay than the cleansing of our faith's purity from
   all darkness?  For to that end He talked with His disciples, and dwelt
   and ate with them, He allowed Himself to be handled with diligent and
   curious touch by those who were affected by doubt, He entered when the
   doors were shut upon the Apostles, and by His breathing upon them gave
   them the Holy Spirit [292] , and bestowing on them the light of
   understanding, opened the secrets of the Holy Scriptures [293] .  So
   again He showed the wound in His side, the marks of the nails, and all
   the signs of His quite recent suffering, saying, ?See My hands and
   feet, that it is I.  Handle Me and see that a spirit hath not flesh and
   bones, as ye see Me have [294] ;? in order that the properties of His
   Divine and human nature might be acknowledged to remain still
   inseparable:  and that we might know the Word not to be different from
   the flesh, in such a sense as also to confess that the one Son of God
   is both the Word and flesh [295] .  Of this mystery of the faith [296]
   your opponent Eutyches must be reckoned to have but little sense if he
   has recognized our nature in the Only-begotten of God neither through
   the humiliation of His having to die, nor through the glory of His
   rising again.  Nor has he any fear of the blessed apostle and
   evangelist John's declaration when he says, ?every spirit which
   confesses Jesus Christ to have come in the flesh, is of God:  and every
   spirit which destroys Jesus is not of God, and this is Antichrist [297]
   .?  But what is ?to destroy Jesus,? except to take away the human
   nature from Him, and to render void the mystery, by which alone we were
   saved, by the most barefaced fictions.  The truth is that being in
   darkness about the nature of Christ's body, he must also be befooled by
   the same blindness in the matter of His sufferings.  For if he does not
   think the cross of the Lord fictitious, and does not doubt that the
   punishment He underwent to save the world is likewise true, let him
   acknowledge the flesh of Him whose death he already believes:  and let
   him not disbelieve Him man with a body like ours, since he acknowledges
   Him to have been able to suffer:  seeing that the denial of His true
   flesh is also the denial of His bodily suffering.  If therefore he
   receives the Christian faith, and does not turn away his ears from the
   preaching of the Gospel:  let him see what was the nature that hung
   pierced with nails on the wooden cross, and, when the side of the
   Crucified was opened by the soldier's spear, let him understand whence
   it was that blood and water flowed, that the Church of God might be
   watered from the font and from the cup [298] .  Let him hear also the
   blessed Apostle Peter, proclaiming that the sanctification of the
   Spirit takes place through the sprinkling of Christ's blood [299] .
   And let him not read cursorily the same Apostle's words when he says,
   ?Knowing that not with corruptible things, such as silver and gold,
   have ye been redeemed from your vain manner of life which is part of
   your fathers' tradition, but with the precious blood of Jesus Christ as
   of a lamb without spot and blemish [300] .?  Let him not resist too the
   witness of the blessed Apostle John, who says:  ?and the blood of Jesus
   the Son of God cleanseth us from all sin [301] .?  And again:  ?this is
   the victory which overcometh the world, our faith.?  And ?who is He
   that overcometh the world save He that believeth that Jesus is the Son
   of God.  This is He that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ:  not by
   water only, but by water and blood.  And it is the Spirit that
   testifieth, because the Spirit is the truth [302] , because there are
   three that bear witness, the Spirit, the water and the blood, and the
   three are one [303] .?  The Spirit, that is, of sanctification, and the
   blood of redemption, and the water of baptism:  because the three are
   one, and remain undivided, and none of them is separated from this
   connection; because the catholic Church lives and progresses by this
   faith, so that in Christ Jesus neither the manhood without the true
   Godhead nor the Godhead without the true manhood is believed in.

   VI.  The wrong and mischievous concession of Eutyches.  The terms on
   which he may be restored to Communion.  The sending of deputies to the
   east.

   But when during your cross-examination Eutyches replied and said, ?I
   confess that our Lord had two natures before the union but after the
   union I confess but one [304] ,? I am surprised that so absurd and
   mistaken a statement of his should not have been criticised and rebuked
   by his judges, and that an utterance which reaches the height of
   stupidity and blasphemy should be allowed to pass as if nothing
   offensive had been heard:  for the impiety of saying that the Son of
   God was of two natures before His incarnation is only equalled by the
   iniquity of asserting that there was but one nature in Him after ?the
   Word became flesh.?  And to the end that Eutyches may not think this a
   right or defensible opinion because it was not contradicted by any
   expression of yourselves, we warn you beloved brother, to take anxious
   care that if ever through the inspiration of God's mercy the case is
   brought to a satisfactory conclusion, his ignorant mind be purged from
   this pernicious idea as well as others.  He was, indeed, just beginning
   to beat a retreat from his erroneous conviction, as the order of
   proceedings shows [305] , in so far as when hemmed in by your
   remonstrances he agreed to say what he had not said before and to
   acquiesce in that belief to which before he had been opposed.  However,
   when he refused to give his consent to the anathematizing of his
   blasphemous dogma, you understood, brother [306] , that he abode by his
   treachery and deserved to receive a verdict of condemnation.  And yet,
   if he grieves over it faithfully and to good purpose, and, late though
   it be, acknowledges how rightly the bishops' authority has been set in
   motion; or if with his own mouth and hand in your presence he recants
   his wrong opinions, no mercy that is shown to him when penitent can be
   found fault with [307] :  because our Lord, that true and ?good
   shepherd? who laid down His life for His sheep [308] and who came to
   save not lose men's souls [309] , wishes us to imitate His kindness
   [310] ; in order that while justice constrains us when we sin, mercy
   may prevent our rejection when we have returned.  For then at last is
   the true Faith most profitably defended when a false belief is
   condemned even by the supporters of it.

   Now for the loyal and faithful execution of the whole matter, we have
   appointed to represent us our brothers Julius [311] Bishop and Renatus
   [312] priest [of the Title of S. Clement], as well as my son Hilary
   [313] , deacon.  And with them we have associated Dulcitius our notary,
   whose faith is well approved:  being sure that the Divine help will be
   given us, so that he who had erred may be saved when the wrongness of
   his view has been condemned.  God keep you safe, beloved brother.

   The 13 June, 449, in the consulship of the most illustrious Asturius
   and Protogenes.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [244] The original word (imperitia) implies that a recluse like
   Eutyches (an archimandrite of a convent) ought never to have entered
   into a nice controversy like the present:  he has not enough savoir
   faire, and his knowledge is not quite up to date, is a little
   old-fashioned.

   [245] The exact reason of the delay is not altogether certain:  we know
   Flavian had written much earlier than the date of arrival warranted:
   it is No. XXII. in the series.

   [246] Viz., the proceedings of the sunodos endemousa summoned by
   Flavian at Constantinople.

   [247] Ps. xxxvi. 4.

   [248] Impia sapere, to think disloyal things against God:  cf. the
   recta sapere, ?to have a right judgment? of the Collect for Whitsunday.

   [249] Knowledge of and belief in the principles of the Faith as
   contained in the Creed (symbolum) have of course always been required
   before Baptism from very early times.  Leo here calls catechumens
   regenerandi, just as those who are being baptized are spoken of as
   renascentes (e.g. Lett. XVII. 8), those who have been baptized as
   renati (passim), and the rite itself as sacramentum regenerationis
   (e.g. Lett. IX. 2).

   [250] The Latin unicus is not so exact as the Greek original
   monogenes:  elsewhere, however, unigenitus is used.

   [251] N.B. et (and) not ex (out of).

   [252] The language of the Nicene Creed.

   [253] I.e. by the Devil:  the allusion is to Adam's fall in Paradise.

   [254] Sua virtute:  in patristic Latin virtus is, as is well known,
   usually the translation of the Greek dunamis and has a much wider
   meaning than moral excellence, our virtue.

   [255] S. Matt. i. 1.

   [256] ei.  So the Vulgate.

   [257] Rom. i. 1-3.

   [258] Gen. xii. 3.

   [259] Gal. iii. 16.

   [260] Is. vii. 14. and S. Matt. i. 23.

   [261] Is. ix. 6.  ?The angel of the great counsel? (magni consilii
   angelus) is a translation of the LXX. (which in the rest of the verse
   either represents a very different original text, or contents itself
   with a loose paraphrase), and is again repeated in the ?Counsellor?
   (Consiliarius), two words farther on (which is also the Vulgate
   reading).

   [262] This was the third dogma of Apollinaris (more fully stated in
   Lett. CXXIV. 2 and CLXV. 2) that our Lord's acts and sufferings as man
   belonged entirely to His Divine nature, and were not really human at
   all.

   [263] S. Luke i. 35.

   [264] Prov. ix. 1.

   [265] In nobis, which he seems from the immediately following words to
   interpret as meaning ?in our flesh,? and not ?amongst us,? as the R.V.
   and others.

   [266] Quam spiritu vitae rationalis (logikou) animavit.

   [267] A famous passage quoted by Hooker, Eccl. Pol. v. 53, 2, and
   Liddon Bampt. Lect., p. 267.  Compare Serm. lxii. 1, quod...in unam
   personam concurrat proprietas utriusque substantiae (Bright), also
   xxii. 2, xxiii. 2.

   [268] Quod nostris remediis congruebat, where remedia must mean the
   disease which needs remedies (a sort of passive use).

   [269] This passage from ?Thus in the whole? to ?not the failing of
   power? is repeated again in Sermon xxiii. 2, almost word for word.

   [270] The reference, of course, is to Phil. ii. 6:  no passage is a
   greater favourite with the Fathers than this.

   [271] Compare S. Aug. ad Catech. S: 6, humilitas Christi quid est?
   manum Deus homini iacenti porrexit:  nos cecidimus, ille descendit:
   nos iacebamus, ille se inclinavit.  Prendamus et surgamus ut non in
   poenam cadamus.

   [272] De praevaricatoris consortio:  praevaricator originally is a
   legal term, signifying ?a shuffler? in a suit, an advocate who plays
   into the hands of the other side.

   [273] Pietas, as in the collect for xvi. S. aft. Trin., where the
   English, ?pity? represents the Latin ?pietas? philologically as well as
   in meaning.  Cf. n. 2 in chap. vi.

   [274] Sacramento, (musterio):  what the ?mystery? was is finely set
   forth by Canon Bright's hymn, No. 172, H. A. and M. (new edition).

   [275] The whole of the end of this chapter from ?For inasmuch as,? and
   the beginning of the next down to ?laws of death,? is repeated word for
   word in Sermon XXII., chaps. i. and ii.

   [276] Incomprehensibilis voluit comprehendi.  Canon Bright's references
   are most apposite:  ?compare Serm. lxviii., idem est qui impiorum
   manibus comprehenditur et qui nullo fine concluditur:  and Serm.
   xxxvii. 1, genetricis gremio continetur qui nullo fine concluditor.
   This antithesis' has been grandly expressed in Milman's, Martyr of
   Antioch.' ?And Thou wast laid within the tomb... Whom heaven could not
   contain, Nor the immeasurable plain Of vast infinity enclose or circle
   round.'?

   [277] I.e. , there is no fancy, no pretending:  each nature is in equal
   reality present, the human as well as the Divine, thus opposing all
   Docetic and Monophysite heresies.

   [278] This passage (which is repeated in Serm. liv., chap. 2, down to
   ?injuries?), was objected to by the Illyrian and Palestinian bishops as
   savouring of the heresy of Nestorius who ?divided the substance:?  but
   it is obvious that the same words might have an orthodox meaning in the
   mouth of one who was orthodox and to the unorthodox would bear an
   unorthodox construction.

   [279] S. John i. l.

   [280] Ibid. 14.

   [281] Ibid. 3, the Latin is per ipsum (Gk. di' autou) (through Him).

   [282] Gal. iv. 4.

   [283] Viz., that it was laid ?in a manger:?  the Gk. version has
   sparganon, ?swaddling clothes,? to represent cunarum and this meaning
   is adopted by Bright [and Heurtley], S. Luke ii. 7.

   [284] Ibid. 13.

   [285] Similis est rudimentis hominum.

   [286] S. Matt. iii. 17.

   [287] S. John xiv. 28; x. 30:  the reconciliation of this class of
   apparently contradictory statements is often undertaken by Leo [e.g.
   Sermon xxiii. 2 and lxxvii. 5; Ep. xxviii. 4 and lix. 3], and by other
   fathers (e.g. by Augustine de Fide et Symbolo, 18).

   [288] This is what theologians call communicatio idiomatum, or in Gk.
   antidosis, the interchange of the properties of the two natures in
   Christ.  The passage from the beginning of the chapter to ?the Lord of
   glory? is somewhat freely adapted from S. Aug., c. Serm. Arian., cap.
   8.

   [289] 1 Cor. ii. 8.

   [290] S. Matt. xvi. 13-16.

   [291] A principali petra.  The Gk. version giving apo tes prototupou
   petras:  others translate it ?from the original (or archetypal) rock,?
   but it seems better to link the passage more closely with Eph. ii. 20;
   1 Pet. ii. 6, &c., although the Greek rendering is against this:  see
   Serm. iv. chap. 2, where Leo is expounding the same favourite text.
   Bright's note 64 is most useful in explaining the Leonine exposition.
   ?Three elements,? he says, combine in the idea; (1) Christ Himself; (2)
   the faith in Christ; and (3) Peter considered as the chief of the
   Apostles and under Christ, the head of the Church.?  Hence petra is
   applied to each of these at different times.

   [292] S. John xx. 22.

   [293] S. Luke xxiv. 27.

   [294] Ibid. 39.

   [295] i.e. not to fall into the Charybdis of Nestorianism in avoiding
   the Scylla of Eutychianism.

   [296] Fidei sacramento.

   [297] John iv. 2, 3:  the Lat. for ?destroys? (or ?dissolves,? Bright)
   is solvit (so also in Lett. CXLIV. 3), which appears to be an
   exclusively Western reading:  for Socrates, ?the only Greek authority
   for luei? (the Gk. equivalent), according to Dr. Westcott, quotes no
   Gk. mss. as giving it, though he unhesitatingly makes use of that
   reading.  The Gk. version here however, gives diairein, which simply
   begs the question (in Leo's favour) as to the original meaning of the
   phrase solvere Jesum, though on the face of it that is not at all
   necessarily obvious.

   [298] Et lavacro rigaretur et poculo:  that is by the two great
   ?generally necessary? sacraments of which he takes the water and the
   blood ?from His riven side which flowed? to be a symbol.

   [299] This refers to 1 Pet. i. 2 (q.v.).

   [300] 1 Pet. i. 18.

   [301] 1 John i. 7.

   [302] Some of the mss. here give Christus for Spiritus (the reading
   adopted also by the Vulgate):  in this case you must translate that
   Christ is the Truth instead of because of the Spirit, &c.:  but see
   Westcott's note in loc.

   [303] 1 John v. 4-8.  The absence of the verse on the ?Heavenly
   witnesses? (distinctly a western insertion) is to be noticed.  On Leo's
   interpretation of this mysterious passage Canon Bright's note 168
   should be consulted.

   [304] This was the only compromise of his views which Eutyches could be
   brought to make at the synod of Constantinople.  Though it was
   rejected, and did not hinder his condemnation, it was never met with a
   direct, categorical refutation.

   [305] Gestorum ordo, as before, in chap. 1.  A report of the
   proceedings had accompanied Flavian's letter.

   [306] Fraternitas vestra:  or, as the Gk. version apparently took it,
   ?you and the rest of the brethren? (he humon adelphotes).

   [307] It will be remembered that he had been degraded from the
   priesthood and deprived of his monastery, as well as excommunicated:
   he might be reinstated in all these privileges, the mercifulness of Leo
   hints, if he recant his errors.

   [308] S. John x. 11 and 15.

   [309] S. Luke ix. 50.

   [310] Pietatis, a beautiful word, expressing now the Father's pitying
   protection, now the children's loyal affection, and here the Elder
   Brother's love for the younger and weaker.  Cf. n. I. on chap. iii.

   [311] Bishop of Puteoli.

   [312] Died at Delos on the way.  The words ?of the title of S. Clement?
   are of doubtful authenticity, and not found in the Gk. version.  The
   parish churches of Rome seem to have been called tituli at their first
   founding about the beginning of the 4th cent. a.d.  Cf. our Eng. term
   ?title,? and refer to Bingham, Bk. viii. S: 1.

   [313] Afterwards Leo's successor in the see of Rome, 461-8.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXIX.

   To Theodosius Augustus.

   To Caesar Theodosius, the most religious and devout Augustus Leo pope
   of the CatholicChurch of the city of Rome [314] .

   He notifies the appointment of his representatives at the Council of
   Ephesus.

   How much God's providence vouchsafes to consult for the interests of
   men is shown by your merciful care which, incited by God's Spirit, is
   unwilling that there should be any disturbance or difference:  since
   the Faith, which is absolutely one, cannot be different from itself in
   any thing.  Hence although Eutyches, as the minutes of the bishops'
   proceeds reveals, has been detected in an ignorant and unwise error,
   and ought to have withdrawn from his conviction which is rightly
   condemned, yet since your piety which loves the Catholic Truth with
   great jealousy for God's honour, has determined on a synodal judgment
   at Ephesus, that that Truth on which he is blind may be brought home to
   the ignorant old man; I have sent my brothers Julius the Bishop,
   Renatus the presbyter, and my son Hilary the deacon to act as my
   representatives as the matter requires, and they shall bring with them
   such a spirit of justice and kindness that while the whole misguided
   error is condemned (for there can be no doubt as to what is the
   integrity of the Christian Faith), yet if he who has gone astray
   repents and entreats for pardon, he may receive the succour of priestly
   indulgence:  seeing that in his appeal [315] which he sent us, he
   reserved to himself the right of earning our forgiveness by promising
   to correct whatever our opinion disapproved of in his opinion.  But
   what the catholic Church universally believes and teaches on the
   mystery of the Lord's Incarnation is contained more fully in the letter
   which I have sent to my brother and fellow-bishop Flavian.  Dated 13th
   June in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes
   (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [314] This is the title retained by Quesnel and the Ballerinii, though
   many mss. exhibit the simpler gloriosissimo et clementissimo Theodosio
   Augusto Leo episcopus, which is favoured by the Gk. version to
   endoxotato kai philanthropotato k.t.l.  Quesnel takes occasion to warn
   us to distinguish between this use of the title papa and that adopted
   later when it was equivalent to oecumenicus et universalis episcopus.

   [315] Viz., Lett. XXI., chaps. i. and iii.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXX.

   To Pulcheria Augusta.

   Much shorter than, but to nearly the same effect as, xxxi., which was
   written on the same day as this.  As xxx. has a Greek translation
   accompanying it and is duly dated, whereas xxxi. has neither, the
   Ballerinii would seem to be correct in thinking that xxx. was
   despatched but did not reach Pulcheria (cf. Lett. xlv. i.) and that
   xxxi. was for some reason never used.  Of the two we have printed xxxi.
   by preference, as being the fuller discussion of the subject.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXI.

   To Pulcheria Augusta [316] .

   Leo to Pulcheria Augusta.

   I.  He reminds Pulcheria of her former services to the Church, and
   suggests her interference in the Eutychian controversy.

   How much protection the Lord has extended to His Church through your
   clemency, we have often tested by many signs.  And whatever stand the
   strenuousness of the priesthood has made in our times against the
   assailers of the catholic Truth, has redounded chiefly to your glory:
   seeing that, as you have learnt from the teaching of the Holy Spirit,
   you submit your authority in all things to Him, by whose favour and
   under whose protection you reign.  Wherefore, because I have
   ascertained from my brother and fellow-bishop Flavian's report, that a
   certain dispute has been raised through the agency of Eutyches in the
   church of Constantinople against the integrity of the Christian faith
   (and the text of the synod's minutes has shown me the exact nature of
   the whole matter), it is worthy of your great name that the error which
   in my opinion proceeds rather from ignorance than ingenuity, should be
   dispelled before, with the pertinacity of wrong-headedness, it gains
   any strength from the support of the unwise.  Because even ignorance
   sometimes falls into serious mistakes, and very frequently the
   simple-minded rush through unwariness into the devil's pit:  and it is
   thus, I believe, that the spirit of falsehood has crept over Eutyches:
   so that, whilst he imagines himself to appreciate the majesty of the
   Son of God more devoutly, by denying in Him the real presence of our
   nature, he came to the conclusion that the whole of that Word which
   ?became flesh? was of one and the same essence.  And greatly as
   Nestorius fell away from the Truth, in asserting that Christ was only
   born man of His mother, this man also departs no less far from the
   catholic path, who does not believe that our substance was brought
   forth from the same Virgin:  wishing it of course to be understood as
   belonging to His Godhead only; so that that which took the form of a
   slave, and was like us and of the same form [317] , was a kind of
   image, not the reality of our nature.

   II.  Man's salvation required the union of the two natures in Christ.

   But it is of no avail to say that our Lord, the Son of the blessed
   Virgin Mary, was true and perfect man, if He is not believed to be Man
   of that stock which is attributed to Him in the Gospel.  For Matthew
   says, ?The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David,
   the son of Abraham [318] :?  and follows the order of His human origin,
   so as to bring the lines of His ancestry down to Joseph to whom the
   Lord's mother was espoused.  Whereas Luke going backwards step by step
   traces His succession to the first of the human race himself, to show
   that the first Adam and the last Adam were of the same nature.  No
   doubt the Almighty Son of God could have appeared for the purpose of
   teaching, and justifying men in exactly the same way that He appeared
   both to patriarchs and prophets in the semblance of flesh [319] ; for
   instance, when He engaged in a struggle, and entered into conversation
   (with Jacob), or when He refused not hospitable entertainment, and even
   partook of the food set before Him.  But these appearances were
   indications of that Man whose reality it was announced by mystic
   predictions would be assumed from the stock of preceding patriarchs.
   And the fulfilment of the mystery of our atonement, which was ordained
   from all eternity, was not assisted by any figures because the Holy
   Spirit had not yet come upon the Virgin, and the power of the Most High
   had not over-shadowed her:  so that ?Wisdom building herself a house
   [320] ? within her undefiled body, ?the Word became flesh;? and the
   form of God and the form of a slave coming together into one person,
   the Creator of times was born in time; and He Himself through whom all
   things were made, was brought forth in the midst of all things.  For if
   the New Man had not been made in the likeness of sinful flesh, and
   taken on Him our old nature, and being consubstantial with the Father,
   had deigned to be consubstantial with His mother also, and being alone
   free from sin, had united our nature to Him the whole human race would
   be held in bondage beneath the Devil's yoke [321] , and we should not
   be able to make use of the Conqueror's victory, if it had been won
   outside our nature.

   III.  From the union of the two natures flows the grace of baptism.  He
   makes a direct appeal to Pulcheria for her help.

   But from Christ's marvellous sharing of the two natures, the mystery of
   regeneration shone upon us that through the self-same spirit, through
   whom Christ was conceived and born, we too, who were born through the
   desire of the flesh, might be born again from a spiritual source:  and
   consequently, the Evangelist speaks of believers as those ?who were
   born not of bloods, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of
   man, but of God [322] .?  And of this unutterable grace no one is a
   partaker, nor can be reckoned among the adopted sons of God, who
   excludes from his faith that which is the chief means of our
   salvation.  Wherefore, I am much vexed and saddened that this man, who
   seemed before so laudably disposed towards humility, dares to make
   these empty and stupid attacks on the one Faith of ourselves and of our
   fathers.  When he saw that his ignorant notion offended the ears of
   catholics, he ought to have withdrawn from his opinion, and not to have
   so disturbed the Church's rulers, as to deserve a sentence of
   condemnation:  which, of course, no one will be able to remit, if he is
   determined to abide by his notion.  For the moderation of the Apostolic
   See uses its leniency in such a way as to deal severely with the
   contumacious, while desiring to offer pardon to those who accept
   correction.  Seeing then that I possess great confidence in your lofty
   faith and piety, I entreat your illustrious clemency, that, as the
   preaching of the catholic Faith has always been aided by your holy
   zeal, so now, also, you will maintain its free action.  Perchance the
   Lord allowed it to be thus assailed for this reason that we might
   discover what sort of persons lurked within the Church.  And clearly,
   we must not neglect to look after such, lest we be afflicted with their
   actual loss.

   IV.  His personal presence at the council must be excused.  The
   question at issue is a very grave one.

   But the most august and Christian Emperor, being anxious that the
   disturbances may be set at rest with all speed, has appointed too short
   and early a date for the council of bishops, which he wishes held at
   Ephesus, in fixing the first of August for the meeting:  for from the
   fifth of May, on which we received His Majesty's letter, most of the
   time remaining has to be spent in making complete arrangements for the
   journey of such priests as are competent to represent me.  For as to
   the necessity of my attending the council also, which his piety
   suggested, even if there were any precedent for the request, it could
   by no means be managed now:  for the very uncertain state of things at
   present would not permit my absence from the people of this great
   city:  and the minds of the riotously-disposed might be driven to
   desperate deeds, if they were to think that I took occasion of
   ecclesiastical business to desert my country [323] and the Apostolic
   See.  As then you recognize that it concerns the public weal that with
   your merciful indulgence I should not deny myself to the affectionate
   prayers of my people, consider that in these my brethren, whom I have
   sent in my stead, I also am present with the rest who appear:  to them
   I have clearly and fully explained what is to be maintained in view of
   the satisfactory exposition of the case which has been given me by the
   detailed report, and by the defendant's own statement to me.  For the
   question is not about some small portion of our Faith on which no very
   distinct declaration has been made:  but the foolish opposition that is
   raised ventures to impugn that which our Lord desired no one of either
   sex in the Church to be ignorant of.  For the short but complete
   confession of the catholic creed which contains the twelve sentences of
   the twelve apostles [324] is so well furnished with the heavenly
   panoply, that all the opinions of heretics can receive their death-blow
   from that one weapon.  And if Eutyches had been content to receive that
   creed in its entirety with a pure and simple heart, he would at no
   point go astray from the decrees of the most sacred council of Nicaea,
   and he would understand that the holy Fathers laid this down, to the
   end that no mental or rhetorical ingenuity should lift itself up
   against the Apostolic Faith which is absolutely one.  Deign then, with
   your accustomed piety to do your best endeavour, that this blasphemous
   and foolish attack upon the one and only sacrament of man's salvation
   may be driven from all men's minds.  And if the man himself, who has
   fallen into this temptation, recover his senses, so as to condemn his
   own error by a written recantation, let him not be denied communion
   with his order [325] .  Your clemency is to know that I have written in
   the same strain to the holy bishop Flavian also:  that loving-kindness
   be not lost sight of, if the error be dispelled.  Dated 13 June in the
   consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [316] This was the Emperor Theodosius the younger's sister, a woman of
   noted zeal in the cause of the Church:  for many years she had
   practically ruled the empire owing to her brother's youthfulness.  When
   the intrigues of Chrysaphius had brought about a quarrel between
   brother and sister, she retired for a time from public life.  But
   becoming the virgin wife of Marcian, she, through him, helped to effect
   the victory of the Catholic cause at the Council of Chalcedon (451).

   [317] Quod nostri similis fuit atque conformis.

   [318] S. Matt. i. 1.

   [319] Gen. xxxii. 24 and xviii 1.  It will be noticed that Leo
   unhesitatingly pronounces these and similar appearances to be
   manifestations of the Second Person in the Trinity.

   [320] Prov. ix. 1.  Cf. Letter XXVIII. (The Tome), chap. ii., towards
   the end.

   [321] Sub iugo diaboli generaliter teneretur humana captivitas:  for
   the word generaliter, cf. Letter XVI., chap. iv., no. 3.

   [322] S. John i. 13.

   [323] Patriam.  I can see very little ground for pressing this quite
   general expression to mean that he was a native of Rome, or even a
   native of Italy.  The most that can be said is that it does not forbid
   the supposition.

   [324] Let the reader beware of accepting the plausible account here
   suggested of the formation of the Apostles' Creed, and still more so of
   accepting the popular derivation of the word symbolum (sumbolon) as the
   twelve Apostles' twelve ?contributions? (one each) to the Church's rule
   of faith.

   [325] Communio sui ordinis.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXII.

   To the Archimandrites of Constantinople [326] .

   To his well-beloved sons Faustus, Martinus, and the rest of the
   archimandrites, Leo the bishop.

   He acknowledges their zeal and refers them to the Tome.

   As on behalf of the faith which Eutyches has tried to disturb, I was
   sending legates de latere [327] to assist the defence of the Truth, I
   thought it fitting that I should address a letter to you also,
   beloved:  whom I know for certain to be so zealous in the cause of
   religion that you can by no means listen calmly to such blasphemous and
   profane utterances:  for the Apostle's command lingers in your hearts,
   in which it is said, ?If any man hath preached unto you any gospel
   other than that which he received, let him be anathema [328] .?  And we
   also decide that the opinion of the said Eutyches is to be rejected,
   which, as we have learnt from perusing the proceedings, has been
   deservedly condemned:  so that, if its foolish maintainer will abide by
   his perverseness, he may have fellowship with those whose error he has
   followed.  For one who says that Christ had not a human, that is our,
   nature, is deservedly put out of Christ's Church.  But, if he be
   corrected through the pity of God's Spirit and acknowledge his wicked
   error, so as to condemn unreservedly what catholics reject, we wish him
   not to be denied mercy, that the Lord's Church may suffer no loss:  for
   the repentant can always be readmitted, it is only error that must be
   shut out.  Upon the mystery of great godliness [329] , whereby through
   the Incarnation of the Word of God comes our justification and
   redemption, what is our opinion, drawn from the tradition of the
   fathers, is now sufficiently explained according to my judgment in the
   letter which I have sent to our brother Flavian the bishop [330] :  so
   that through the declaration of your chief you may know what, according
   to the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, we desire to be fixed in the
   hearts of all the faithful.  Dated 13th June, in the consulship of the
   illustrious Asturius and Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [326] It will be remembered that 23 abbots signed the condemnation of
   Eutyches:  cf. Lett. XXI. chap. 2.

   [327] De latere meo.  This is interesting as an early instance of the
   use of this expression for the legates of the pope (now so familiar):
   even though Quesnel is incorrect in saying for certain that Leo is the
   first Bishop of Rome who employed them.  He himself quotes Concil.
   Sardic., canon 7, where the fathers ask the Roman bishop to send some
   one e latere suo (a.d. 347).

   [328] Gal. i. 9.

   [329] I cannot doubt he has 1 Tim. iii. 27, mega esti to tes eusebeias
   musterion (here sacramentum as usual) in his mind, though the Gk.
   translator apparently did not see it, his version being utterly
   inaccurate (peri de tes hagiotetos tes megales pisteos).

   [330] Viz., Letter XXVIII. (The Tome).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXIII.

   To the Synod of Ephesus [331] .

   Leo, bishop, to the holy Synod which is assembled at Ephesus.

   I.  He commends the Emperor's appeal to the chair of Peter.

   The devout faith of our most clement prince, knowing that it especially
   concerns his glory to prevent any seed of error from springing up
   within the catholic Church, has paid such deference to the Divine
   institutions as to apply to the authority of the Apostolic See for a
   proper settlement:  as if he wished it to be declared by the most
   blessed Peter himself what was praised in his confession, when the Lord
   said, ?whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am [332] ?? and the
   disciples mentioned various people's opinion:  but, when He asked what
   they themselves believed, the chief of the apostles, embracing the
   fulness of the Faith in one short sentence, said, ?Thou art the Christ,
   the son of the living God [333] :?  that is, Thou who truly art Son of
   man art also truly Son of the living God:  Thou, I say, true in
   Godhead, true in flesh and one altogether [334] , the properties of the
   two natures being kept intact.  And if Eutyches had believed this
   intelligently and thoroughly, he would never have retreated from the
   path of this Faith.  For Peter received this answer from the Lord for
   his confession.  ?Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood
   hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven.  And
   I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build
   My Church:  and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it [335]
   .?  But he who both rejects the blessed Peter's confession, and
   gainsays Christ's Gospel, is far removed from union with this building;
   for he shows himself never to have had any zeal for understanding the
   Truth, and to have only the empty appearance of high esteem, who did
   not adorn the hoary hairs of old age with any ripe judgment of the
   heart.

   II.  The heresy of Eutyches is to be condemned, though his full
   repentance may lead to his restitution.

   But because the healing even of such men must not be neglected, and the
   most Christian Emperor has piously and devoutly desired a council of
   bishops to be held, that all error may be destroyed by a fuller
   judgment, I have sent our brothers Julius the bishop, Renatus the
   presbyter, and my son Hilary the deacon, and with them Dulcitius the
   notary, whose faith we have proved, to be present in my stead at your
   holy assembly, brethren, and settle in common with you what is in
   accordance with the Lord's will.  To wit, that the pestilential error
   may be first condemned, and then the restitution of him, who has so
   unwisely erred, discussed, but only if embracing the true doctrine he
   fully and openly with his own voice and signature condemns those
   heretical opinions in which his ignorance has been ensnared:  for this
   he has promised in the appeal which he sent to us, pledging himself to
   follow our judgment in all things [336] .  On receiving our brother and
   fellow-bishop Flavian's letter, we have replied to him at some length
   on the points which he seems to have referred to us [337] :  that when
   this error which seems to have arisen, has been destroyed, there may be
   one Faith and one and the same confession throughout the whole world to
   the praise and glory of God, and that ?in the name of Jesus every knee
   should bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under
   the earth, and that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus
   Christ is in the glory of God the Father [338] .?  Dated 13th June in
   the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [331] This letter has a note prefixed to it in some Gk. and Latin mss.
   to the effect that it was produced but suppressed, and not allowed to
   be read through Dioscorus, Bishop of Alexandria.

   [332] S. Matt. xvi. 13 and 16.

   [333] S. Matt. xvi. 13 and 16.

   [334] Utrumque (Gk. hekateron) unus.

   [335] S. Matt. xvi. 17, 18.

   [336] Cf. Lett. XXI., chaps. i. and ii.

   [337] See Lett. XXVII., n. 7.

   [338] Phil. ii. 10.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXIV.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   Leo, the bishop, to Julian, the bishop, his well-beloved brother.

   I.  Eutyches is now clearly seen to have deviated from the Faith.

   Your letter, beloved, which has just reached me, shows with what
   spiritual love of the Catholic Faith you are inspired:  and it makes me
   very glad that devout hearts all agree in the same opinion, so that
   according to the teaching of the Holy Ghost there may be fulfilled in
   us what the Apostle says:  ?Now I beseech you, brethren, through the
   name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same things, and
   there be no divisions among you:  but that ye be perfect in the same
   mind and in the same judgment [339] .?  But Eutyches has put himself
   quite outside this unity, if he perseveres in his perversity, and still
   does not understand the bonds with which the devil has bound him, and
   thinks any one is to be reckoned among the Lord's priests, who is a
   party to his ignorance and madness.  For some time we were uncertain in
   what he was displeasing to catholics:  and when we received no letter
   from our brother Flavian, and Eutyches himself complained in his letter
   [340] that the Nestorian heresy was being revived, we could not fully
   learn the source or the motive of so crafty an accusation.  But as soon
   as the minutes of the bishops' proceedings reached us, all those things
   which were hidden beneath the veil of his deceitful complaints were
   revealed in their abomination.

   II.  He announces the appointment of legates a latere.

   And because our most clement Emperor in the loving-kindness and
   godliness of his mind wished a more careful judgment to be passed about
   the position of one who hitherto has seemed to be in high esteem, and
   for this purpose has thought fit to convene a council of bishops, by
   the hands of our brothers Julius the bishop, and Renatus the presbyter,
   and also my son Hilary, the deacon whom I have sent ex latere [341] in
   my stead, I have addressed a letter suited to the needs of the case to
   our brother Flavian, from which you also, beloved, and the whole Church
   may know about the ancient and unique Faith, which this unlearned
   opponent has assailed, what we hold as handed down from God and what we
   preach without alteration.  Yet, because we must not forget the duty of
   mercy, we have considered it consonant with our moderation as priests,
   that, if the condemned presbyter corrects himself unreservedly, the
   sentence by which he is bound should be remitted:  if, however, he
   chooses to lie in the mire of his foolishness, let the decree remain,
   and let him have his lot with those whose error he has followed.  Dated
   13th June in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes
   (449) [342] .
     __________________________________________________________________

   [339] 1 Cor. i. 10.

   [340] See Lett. XX., above.

   [341] See Lett. XXXII., n. 9, above.

   [342] This letter (XXXIV.) is written on the same day and subject and
   to the same person as the next letter (XXXV.):  the differences between
   them being (l) the greater length and fuller treatment of the second;
   and (2) that the one is entrusted to Leo's legates, the other to
   Julius' own messenger, Basil the deacon; and (3) that the shorter has
   no Gk. version as the longer has.  I think the Ballerinii are
   undoubtedly right in facing the difficulty boldly, the evidence of the
   mss. being invariable, except that XXXIV. is only found in a few
   collections:  and I would suggest that XXXIV. is a formal, official
   communication, and XXXV. a private, confidential one.  This will
   account for the difference of messengers, and the identity of date,
   subject and person addressed, and is justifiable as a piece of
   necessary diplomatic secrecy.  In XXX. and XXXI. we have another
   instance of two letters to the same person on the same day, one of
   these (XXXI.) being also without a Gk. version, this time the longer
   one:  but here we have adopted the Ballerinii's suggestion that only
   the first was sent.  It should further be noticed that out of the very
   large batch of letters that are dated the 13th of June, which includes
   the Tome (8 in all. XXVIII.-XXXV.), it may well have been convergent to
   delay one and send it by another hand.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXV.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos [343] .

   Leo, bishop of the city of Rome to his well-beloved brother, Julian the
   bishop.

   I.  Eutyches' heresy involves many other heresies.

   Although by the hands of our brothers, whom we have despatched from the
   city on behalf of the Faith, we hare sent a most full refutation of
   Eutyches' excessive heresy to our brother Flavian, yet because we have
   received, through our son Basil, your letter, beloved, which has given
   us much pleasure from the fervour of its catholic spirit, we have added
   this page also which agrees with the other document, that you may offer
   a united and strenuous resistance to those who seek to corrupt the
   gospel of Christ, since the wisdom and the teaching of the Holy Spirit
   is one and the same in you as in us:  and whosoever does not receive
   it, is not a member of Christ's body and cannot glory in that Head in
   which he denies the presence of his own nature.  What advantage is it
   to that most unwise old man under the name of the Nestorian heresy to
   mangle the belief of those, whose most devout faith he cannot tear to
   pieces:  when in declaring the only-begotten Son of God to have been so
   born of the blessed Virgin's womb that He wore the appearance of a
   human body without the reality of human flesh being united to the Word,
   he departs as far from the right path as did Nestorius in separating
   the Godhead of the Word from the substance of His assumed Manhood [344]
   ?  From which prodigious falsehood who does not see what monstrous
   opinions spring? for he who denies the true Manhood of Jesus Christ,
   must needs be filled with many blasphemies, being claimed by
   Apollinaris as his own, seized upon by Valentinus, or held fast by
   Manichaeus:  none of whom believed that there was true human flesh in
   Christ.  But, surely, if that is not accepted, not only is it denied
   that He, who was in the form of God, but yet abode in the form of a
   slave, was born Man according to the flesh and reasonable soul:  but
   also that He was crucified, dead, and buried, and that on the third day
   He rose again, and that, sitting at the right hand of the Father, he
   will come to judge the quick and the dead [345] in that body in which
   He Himself was judged:  because these pledges [346] of our redemption
   are rendered void if Christ is not believed to have the true and whole
   nature of true Manhood.

   II.  The two natures are to be found in Christ.

   Or because the signs of His Godhead were undoubted, shall the proof of
   his having a human body be assumed false, and thus the indications of
   both natures be accepted to prove Him Creator, but not be accepted for
   the salvation of the creature [347] ?  No, for the flesh did not lessen
   what belongs to His Godhead, nor the Godhead destroy what belongs to
   His flesh.  For He is at once both eternal from His Father and temporal
   from His mother, inviolable in His strength, passible in our weakness:
   in the Triune Godhead, of one and the same substance with the Father
   and the Holy Spirit, but in taking Manhood on Himself, not of one
   substance but of one and the same person [so that He was at once rich
   in poverty, almighty in submission, impassible in punishment, immortal
   in death [348] ].  For the Word was not in any part of It turned either
   into flesh or into soul, seeing that the absolute and unchangeable
   nature of the Godhead is ever entire in its Essence, receiving no loss
   nor increase, and so beatifying the nature that It had assumed that
   that nature remained for ever glorified in the person of the
   Glorifier.  [But why should it seem unsuitable or impossible that the
   Word and flesh and soul should be one Jesus Christ, and that the Son of
   God and the Son of Man should be one, if flesh and soul which are of
   different natures make one person even without the Incarnation of the
   Word:  since it is much easier for the power of the Godhead to produce
   this union of Himself and man than for the weakness of manhood by
   itself to effect it in its own substance.]  Therefore neither was the
   Word changed into flesh nor flesh into the Word:  but both remains in
   one and one is in both, not divided by the diversity and not confounded
   by intermixture:  He is not one by His Father and another by His
   mother, but the same, in one way by His Father before every beginning,
   and in another by His mother at the end of the ages:  so that He was
   ?mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus [349] ,? in whom
   dwelt ?the fulness of the Godhead bodily [350] :?  because it was the
   assumed (nature) not the Assuming (nature) which was raised, because
   God ?exalted Him and gave Him the Name which is above every name:  that
   in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and
   things on earth and things under the earth, and that every tongue
   should confess that Jesus Christ the Lord is in the glory of God the
   Father [351] .?

   III.  The soul of Christ and the body of Christ were real in the full
   human sense, though the circumstances of His birth were unique.

   [But as to that which Eutyches dared to say in the court of bishops
   ?that before the Incarnation there were two natures in Christ, but
   after the Incarnation one [352] ,? he ought to have been pressed by the
   frequent and anxious questions of the judges to render an account of
   his acknowledgment, lest it should be passed over as something trivial,
   though it was seen to have issued from the same fount as his other
   poisonous opinions.  For I think that in saying this he was convinced
   that the soul, which the Saviour assumed, had had its abode in the
   heavens before He was born of the Virgin Mary, and that the Word joined
   it to Himself in the womb.  But this is intolerable to catholic minds
   and ears:  because the Lord who came down from heaven brought with Him
   nothing that belonged to our state:  for He did not receive either a
   soul which had existed before nor a flesh which was not of his mother's
   body.  Undoubtedly our nature was not assumed in such a way that it was
   created first and then assumed, but it was created by the very
   assumption.  And hence that which was deservedly condemned in Origen
   must be punished in Eutyches also, unless he prefers to give up his
   opinion, viz. the assertion that souls have had not only a life but
   also different actions before they were inserted in men's bodies [353]
   ].  For although the Lord's nativity according to the flesh has certain
   characteristics wherein it transcends the ordinary beginnings of man's
   being, both because He alone was conceived and born without
   concupiscence of a pure Virgin, and because He was so brought forth of
   His mother's womb that her fecundity bare Him without loss of
   virginity:  yet His flesh was not of another nature to ours:  nor was
   the soul breathed into Him from another source to that of all other
   men, and it excelled others not in difference of kind but in
   superiority of power.  For He had no opposition in His flesh [nor did
   the strife of desires give rise to a conflict of wishes [354] ].  His
   bodily senses were active without the law of sin, and the reality of
   His emotions being under the control of His Godhead and His mind, was
   neither assaulted by temptations nor yielded to injurious influences.
   But true Man was united to God and was not brought down from heaven as
   regards a pre-existing soul, nor created out of nothing as regards the
   flesh:  it wore the same person in the Godhead of the Word and
   possessed a nature in common with us in its body and soul.  For He
   would not be ?the mediator between God and man,? unless God and man had
   co-existed in both natures forming one true Person.  The magnitude of
   the subject urges us to a lengthy discussion:  but with one of your
   learning there is no need for such copious dissertations, especially as
   we have already sent a sufficient letter to our brother Flavian by our
   delegates for the confirmation of the minds, not only of priests but
   also of the laity.  The mercy of God will, we believe, provide that
   without the loss of one soul the sound may be defended against the
   devil's wiles, and the wounded healed.  Dated 13th June in the
   consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [343] See Lett. XXXIV., chap. ii. n. 5.

   [344] The Gk. version here adds and ?from the very conception of the
   Virgin,? but this is probably only a repetition of the words ?of the
   Virgin's womb,? just above.

   [345] It can escape no one that he is here, and frequently throughout
   this letter, quoting from the Creed.

   [346] Sacramenta.

   [347] i.e. shall the signs of His being God, which are undoubted, and
   the signs that He had a body of some sort be allowed to prove Him one
   with the Creator of the world, but not go so far as to show that that
   body which He had was a fully human one?

   [348] So that--in death, bracketed by the editors as not being
   translated in the Gk. version, and perhaps here we have a gloss to
   explain the somewhat obscure words that precede it:  but throughout
   this letter large portions are so bracketed, in each case the Gk.
   version omitting them.

   [349] 1 Tim. ii. 5.

   [350] Col. ii. 9.

   [351] Phil. ii. 9-11.

   [352] Cf. the Tome, Lett. XXVIII., chap. vi., n. 5.

   [353] Cf. Lett. XV., chap. xi., n. 6.

   [354] Here again the second clause (in brackets) seems a gloss on the
   first, see n. 2, above:  what is meant will be seen by comparing S.
   Paul's famous disquisition (Rom. vii.).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXVI.

   To Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople.

   (He acknowledges the receipt of Flavian's second letter (xxvi.) and
   protests against the necessity for a general council, though at the
   same time he acquiesces in it.  Dated 21 June, a week after the Tome).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXVII [355] .

   To Theodosius Augustus.

   Leo to Theodosius Augustus.

   Unity of Faith is essential but the point at issue hardly required a
   general council, it is so clear.

   On receiving your clemency's letter, I perceived that the universal
   Church has much cause for joy, that you will have the Christian Faith,
   whereby the Divine Trinity is honoured and worshipped, to be different
   or out of harmony with itself in nothing.  For what more effectual
   support can be given to human affairs in calling upon God's mercy than
   when one thanksgiving, and the sacrifice of one confession is offered
   to His majesty by all.  Wherein the devotions of the priests and all
   the faithful will reach at last their completeness, if in what was done
   for our redemption by God the Word, the only Son of God, nothing else
   be believed than what He Himself ordered to be preached and believed.
   Wherefore although every consideration prevents my attendance on the
   day which your piety has fixed for the councils of bishops [356] :  for
   there are no precedents for such a thing, and the needs of the times do
   not allow me to leave the city, especially as the point of Faith at
   issue is so clear, that it would have been more reasonable to abstain
   from proclaiming a synod:  yet as far as the Lord vouchsafes to help
   me, I have bestowed my zeal upon obeying your clemency's commands, by
   appointing my brethren who are competent to act as the case requires in
   removing offences, and who can represent me:  because no question has
   arisen on which there can or ought to be any doubt.  Dated 21st of
   June, in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes,
   (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [355] This letter is on the same subject as Lett. XXIX. above, but as
   the wording of it contains some interesting matter, it is here given in
   full.  There is no Gk. version extant, and how there came to be two
   letters within a week of one another on the same topic is not clear.

   [356] Cf. Lett. XXIX. above, and especially XXXI., chap. iv., where the
   reasons are given rather more fully.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXVIII [357] .

   To Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople.

   Leo to Flavian, bishop of Constantinople.

   He acknowledges the receipt of a letter and advises mercy if Eutyches
   will recant.

   When our brethren had already started whom we despatched to you in the
   cause of the Faith, we received your letter, beloved, by our son Basil
   the deacon, in which you rightly said very little on the subject of our
   common anxiety, both because the accounts which had already arrived had
   given us full information on every thing, and because for purposes of
   private inquiry it was easy to converse with the aforesaid Basil, by
   whom now through the grace of God, in whom we trust, we exhort you,
   beloved, in reply, using the Apostle's words, and saying:  ?Be ye in
   nothing affrighted by the adversaries; which is for them a cause of
   perdition, but to you of salvation [358] .?  For what is so calamitous
   as to wish to destroy all hope of man's salvation by denying the
   reality of Christ's Incarnation, and to contradict the Apostle who says
   distinctly:  ?great is the mystery of Godliness which was manifest in
   the flesh [359] ??  What so glorious as to fight for the Faith of the
   gospel against the enemies of Christ's nativity and cross?  About whose
   most pure light and unconquered power we have already disclosed what
   was in our heart, in the letter which has been sent to you beloved
   [360] :  lest anything might seem doubtful between us on those things
   which we have learnt, and teach in accordance with the catholic
   doctrine.  But seeing that the testimonies to the Truth are so clear
   and strong that a man must be reckoned thoroughly blind and stubborn,
   who does not at once shake himself free from the mists of falsehood in
   the bright light of reason; we desire you to use the remedy of
   long-suffering in curing the madness of ignorance that through your
   fatherly admonitions they who though old in years are infants in mind,
   may learn to obey their elders.  And if they give up the vain conceits
   of their ignorance and come to their senses, and if they condemn all
   their errors and receive the one true Faith, do not deny them the
   mercifulness of a bishop's kind heart:  although your judgment must
   remain, if their impiety which you have deservedly condemned persists
   in its depravity.  Dated 23 July in the consulship of the illustrious
   Asturius and Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [357] If we are right in thinking that Lett. XXXVI. is Leo's
   acknowledgment of Flavian's second letter (XXVI.), this (which again
   has no Gk. version) must be an acknowledgment of yet a third, not
   extant, sent by the hand of one Basil, the deacon who is probably the
   same as Julian's messenger (XXXV., chap. i ).

   [358] Phil. i. 28.

   [359] 1 Tim. iii. 16:  the reading here is quod manifestum est in
   carne, in agreement with the general Western usage.

   [360] Sc. the Tome (XXVIII.).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XXXIX.

   To Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople.

   Leo, the bishop, to Flavian, the bishop.

   He rebukes Flavian for not answering his repeated letters.

   Our anxiety is increased by your silence, for it is long now since we
   received a letter from you, beloved:  while we who bear a chief share
   in your cares [361] , through our anxiety for the defence of the Faith,
   have several times [362] , as occasion served, sent letters to you:
   that we might aid you with the comfort of our exhortations not to yield
   to the assaults of your adversaries in defence of the Faith, but to
   feel that we were the sharers in your labour.  Some time since we
   believe our messengers have reached you, brother, through whom you find
   yourself fully instructed by our writings and injunctions, and we have
   ourselves sent back Basil to you as you desired [363] .  Now, lest you
   should think we had omitted any opportunity of communicating with you,
   we have sent this note by our son Eupsychius, a man whom we hold in
   great honour and affection, asking you to reply to our letter with all
   speed, and inform us at once about your own actions and those of our
   representatives, and about the completion of the whole matter:  so that
   we may allay the anxiety which we now feel in defence of the Faith, by
   happier tidings.  Dated 11th August in the consulship of the
   illustrious Asturius and Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [361] Curarum tuarum principes.

   [362] Frequenter, four times in all ( Letters XXVII., XXVIII., XXXVI.
   and XXXVIII.).

   [363] This must be in the third lost letter to which we have assumed
   Lett. XXXVIII. to be an answer.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XL.

   To the Bishops of the Province of Arles in Gaul.

   To his well-beloved brethren Constantinus Audentius, Rusticus,
   Auspicius, Nicetas, Nectarius, Florus, Asclepius, Justus, Augustalis,
   Ynantius, and Chrysaphius [364] , Leo the pope.

   He approves of their having unanimously elected Ravennius, Bishop of
   Arles.

   We have just and reasonable reason for rejoicing, when we learn that
   the Lord's priests have done what is agreeable both to the rules of the
   Father's canons and to the Apostles' institutions.  For the whole body
   of the Church must needs increase with a healthy growth, if the
   governing members excel in the strength of their authority, and in
   peaceful management.  Accordingly, we ratify with our sanction your
   good deed, brethren, in unanimously, on the death of Hilary [365] of
   holy memory, consecrating our brother Ravennius, a man well approved by
   us, in the city of Arles, in accordance with the wishes of the clergy,
   the leading citizens, and the laity.  Because a peace-making and
   harmonious election, where neither personal merits nor the good will of
   the congregation are wanting, is we believe the expression not only of
   man's choice, but of God's inspiration.  So dearly beloved brethren,
   let the said priest use God's gift, and understand what self-devotion
   is expected of him, that by diligently and prudently carrying out the
   office entrusted to him, he may prove himself equal to your testimony,
   and fully worthy of our favour.  God keep you safe, beloved brethren.
   Dated 22 August in the consulship of Asturius and Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [364] These twelve bishops do not include the Bishop of Vienne,
   according to Perthel (p. 29), following apparently Quesnel, whose
   wish-fathered thought, though possibly right, has little evidence to go
   upon.  Cf. Letters LXV. and LXVI. below.

   [365] It will be noticed that Leo speaks of Hilary not only with
   respect, but as if he acquiesced in his sentence (passed against Hilary
   in Lett. X. above) not having been carried out.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLI.

   To Ravennius, Bishop of Arles.

   (He congratulates him on his appointment, exhorts him to firm but
   gentle government, and advises him frequently to consult the Apostolic
   See.  Undated, but no doubt sent about the same time as XL.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLII.

   To Ravennius, Bishop of Arles.

   Leo the Pope to his well-beloved brother Ravennius.

   He asks him to deal with the imposture of a certain Petronianus.

   We wish you to be circumspect and careful lest any blameworthy
   presumption should put forth undue claims:  for, when it once finds an
   entrance by crafty stealth, it spreads itself into greater rashness in
   the name of the dignity it has assumed.  We have learnt, on the
   trustworthy evidence of your clergy, that a certain wandering and
   vagabond Petronianus has boasted himself throughout the provinces of
   Gaul as our deacon, and under cover of this office is going about the
   various churches of that country.  We desire you, beloved brother, so
   to check his abominable effrontery, as to disclose his imposture, by
   warning the bishops of the whole district, and to expel him from
   communion with all the Churches, lest he continue his claim.  The Lord
   keep you safe, dearly beloved brother.  Dated 26th, August, in the
   consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLIII [366] .

   To Theodosius Augustus.

   To the most glorious and serene Emperor Theodosius, Leo the bishop.

   I.  He complains of the conduct of Dioscorus at the Council of Ephesus.

   Already and from the beginning, in the synods which have been held, we
   have received such freedom of speech from the most holy Peter, chief of
   the Apostles, as to have the power both to maintain the Truth in the
   cause of peace, and to allow no one to disturb it in its firm position,
   but at once to repel the mischief.  Since then the council of bishops
   which you ordered to be held in the city of Ephesus on account of
   Flavian, does mischief to the Faith itself and inflicts wounds on all
   the churches---- [367] ; and this has been brought to our knowledge not
   by some untrustworthy messenger, but by the most reverend bishops [368]
   themselves who were sent by us and by the most trusty Hilarus our
   deacon, who have narrated to us what took place.  And the occurrences
   are to be put down to the fault of those who met, not having, as is
   customary, with a pure conscience and right judgment made a definite
   statement about the faith and those who erred therefrom.  For we have
   learnt that all did not come together in the conference who ought, some
   being ejected and others received:  who were ensnared into an ungodly
   act of subscription by the designs of the aforesaid priest [369] .  For
   the declaration effected by him is of such a nature as to injure all
   the churches.  For when those who were sent by us saw how exceedingly
   impious and hostile to the Faith it was, they notified it to us.

   II.  He asks him to restore the ancient catholic doctrine.

   Wherefore, most peace-loving prince, vouchsafe for the Faith's sake to
   avert this danger from your Godly conscience, and let not man's
   presumption use violence upon Christ's Gospel.  In my sincere desire,
   which is shared by the bishops that are with me, that you, most
   Christian and revered prince, should before all things please God, to
   whom the prayers of the whole Church are poured with one accord for
   your empire, I give you counsel, for fear lest, if we keep silence on
   so great a matter, we incur punishment before the tribunal of Christ.
   I entreat you therefore before the undivided Trinity of the one
   Godhead, which is injured by these evil doings, and which is the
   guardian of your kingdom, and before Christ's holy angels that all
   things remain intact as they were before the judgment, and that they
   await the weightier decision of the Synod at which the whole number of
   the bishops in the whole world is gathered together:  and do not allow
   yourselves to bear the weight of others' misdoing.  We are constrained
   to say this plainly by the fear of a constraining necessity [370] .
   But keep before your eyes the blessed Peter's glory, and the crowns
   which all the Apostles have in common with him, and the joys of the
   martyrs who had no other incentive to suffering but the confession of
   the true Godhead and the perfect continuance in Christ [371] .

   III.  And asks for another Synod to be summoned.

   And now that this confession is being godlessly impugned by some few
   men, all the churches of our parts and all the priests implore your
   clemency with tears in accordance with the request which Flavian makes
   in his appeal, to command the assembling together of a special Synod in
   Italy, in order that all opposition may be expelled or pacified, and
   that there may be no deviation from or ambiguity in the Faith:  and to
   it should also come the bishops of all the Eastern provinces, that, if
   any have wandered out of the way of Truth, they may be recalled to
   their allegiance by wholesome remedies, and they who are under a more
   grievous charge may either be reduced to submission by counsel or cut
   off from the one Church.  So that we are bound to preserve both what
   the Nicene canon enjoins and what the definitions of the bishops of the
   whole world enjoin according to the custom of the catholic Church, and
   also (to maintain) the freedom of our fathers' Faith, on which your
   tranquillity rests.  For we pray that when those who harm the Church
   are driven out, and your provinces enjoy the possession of justice, and
   vengeance has been executed on these heretics your royal power also may
   be defended by Christ's right hand.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [366] No satisfactory conclusion can be reached about this letter as it
   has come down to us, the Ballerinii not thinking that the Latin version
   extant is the original on which the Gk. version is based.  On the whole
   I have thought it safer to make my translation chiefly from the Gk.,
   though I am not at all sure that there is sufficient ground for the
   Ballerinii's suspicion of the Latin.

   [367] A lacuna is here visible in the sense though not in the mss.

   [368] The Gk. and the Lat. both read plural here episkopon (episcopis)
   which the Ballerinii alter to the singular.  As far as we know, Julius
   was the only bishop in the party, but the greater includes the less.

   [369] Viz., Dioscorus, who must have been mentioned in the lacuna
   above, if anywhere.

   [370] The old Lat. version has here something very different quia quod
   necesse est nos dicere, veremur ne cuius religio dissipatur, indignatio
   provocetur (for we are bound to say we fear lest He whose religion is
   being undermined, should have His wrath aroused).

   [371] he en Christo teleia diamone:  here again the Latin Version
   diverges, reading verae humanitatis (sc. confessio) in Christo.  So too
   the next sentence begins with cui sacramento, instead of the Gk. es
   tinos homologias, and elsewhere.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLIV.

   To Theodosius Augustus.

   Leo, the bishop, and the holy Synod which is assembled at Rome to
   Theodosius Augustus.

   I.  He exposes the unscrupulous nature of the proceedings at Ephesus.

   From your clemency's letter, which in your love of the catholic Faith
   you sent sometime ago to the see of the blessed Apostle Peter, we drew
   such confidence in your defence of truth and peace that we thought
   nothing harmful could happen in so plain and well-ordered a matter;
   especially when those who were sent to the episcopal council, which you
   ordered to be held at Ephesus, were so fully instructed that, if the
   bishop of Alexandria had allowed the letters, which they brought either
   to the holy synod or to Flavian the bishop, to be read in the ears of
   the bishops, by the declaration of the most pure Faith, which being
   Divinely inspired we both have received and hold, all noise of
   disputings would have been so completely hushed that neither ignorance
   could any longer disport itself, nor jealousy find occasion to do
   mischief.  But because private interests are consulted under cover of
   religion, the disloyalty of a few has wrought that which must wound the
   whole Church.  For not from some untrustworthy messenger, but from a
   most faithful narrator of the things which have been done, Hilary, our
   deacon, who, lest he should be compelled by force to subscribe to their
   proceedings, with great difficulty made his escape, we have learnt that
   a great many priests came together at the synod, whose numbers would
   doubtless have assisted the debate and decision, if he who claimed for
   himself the chief place had consented to maintain priestly moderation,
   in order that, according to custom, when all had freely expressed their
   opinion, after quiet and fair deliberation, that might be ordained
   which was both agreeable to the Faith and helpful to those in error.
   But we have been told that all who had come were not present at the
   actual decision:  for we have learnt that some were rejected while
   others were admitted, who at the aforesaid priest's requisition
   surrendered themselves to an unrighteous subscription, knowing they
   would suffer harm unless they obeyed his commands, and that such a
   resolution was brought forward by him that in attacking one man he
   might wreak his fury of the whole Church.  Which our delegates from the
   Apostolic See saw to be so blasphemous and opposed to the catholic
   Faith that no pressure could force them to assent; for in the same
   synod they stoutly protested, as they ought, that the Apostolic See
   would never receive what was being passed:  since the whole mystery of
   the Christian Faith is absolutely destroyed (which Heaven forfend in
   your Grace's reign), unless this abominable wickedness, which exceeds
   all former blasphemies, be abolished.

   II.  And entreats the Emperor to help in reversing their decision.

   But because the devil with wicked subtlety deceives the unwary, and so
   mocks the imprudence of some by a show of piety as to persuade them to
   things harmful instead of profitable, we pray your Grace, renounce all
   complicity in this endangering of religion and Faith, and afford in the
   treatment of Divine things that which is granted in worldly matters by
   the equity of your laws, that human presumption may not do violence to
   Christ's Gospel.  Behold, I, O most Christian and honoured Emperor,
   with my fellow-priests [372] fulfilling towards your revered clemency
   the offices of sincere love, and desiring you in all things to please
   God, to whom prayers are offered for you by the Church, lest before the
   Lord Christ's tribunal we be judged guilty for our silence,--we beseech
   you in the presence of the Undivided Trinity of the One Godhead, Whom
   such an act wrongs (for He is Himself the Guardian and the Author of
   your empire), and in the presence of Christ's holy angels, order
   everything to be in the position in which they were before the decision
   until a larger number of priests be assembled from the whole world.
   Suffer not yourself to be weighted with another's sin because (and we
   must say it) we are afraid lest He, Whose religion is being destroyed,
   be provoked to wrath.  Keep before your eyes, and with all your mental
   vision gaze reverently upon the blessed Peter's glory, and the crowns
   which all the Apostles have in common with him and the palms of all the
   martyrs, who had no other reason for suffering than the confession of
   the true Godhead and the true Manhood in Christ.

   III.  He asks for a Council in Italy.

   And because this mystery is now being impiously opposed by a few
   ignorant persons, all the churches of our parts, and all the priests
   entreat your clemency, with groans and tears seeing that our delegates
   faithfully protested, and bishop Flavian gave them an appeal in
   writing, to order a general synod to be held in Italy, which shall
   either dismiss or appease all disputes in such a way that there be
   nothing any longer either doubtful in the Faith or divided in love, and
   to it, of course, the bishops of the Eastern provinces must come, and
   if any of them were overcome by threats and injury, and deviated from
   the path of truth, they may be fully restored by health-giving
   measures, and they themselves, whose case is harder, if they acquiesce
   in wiser counsels, may not fall from the unity of the Church.  And how
   necessary this request is after the lodging of an appeal is witnessed
   by the canonical decrees passed at Nicaea by the bishops of the whole
   world, which are added below [373] .  Show favour to the catholics
   after your own and your parents' custom.  Give us such liberty to
   defend the catholic Faith as no violence, no fear of the world, while
   your revered clemency is safe, shall be able to take away.  For it is
   the cause not only of the Church but of your Kingdom and prosperity
   that we plead, that you may enjoy the peaceful sway of your provinces.
   Defend the Church in unshaken peace against the heretics, that your
   empire also may be defended by Christ's right hand.  Dated the 13th of
   October, in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes
   (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [372] Cum consacerdotibus meis.  The Gk. version here reads the
   singular (meta tou sulleitourgou mou).  This, if intentional and not a
   slip, is, I suppose, Flavian, of whose death Leo was not yet apprized.

   [373] Both Quesnel and the Ball. agree that the Canon here quoted by
   Leo really belongs not to the Nicene collection, but to that of Sardica
   (about 344), in which it stands as no. 4.  (Exactly the same mistake is
   made in Letter LVI., where Galla Placidia Augusta quotes Canon 5 of
   Sardica to Theodosius as secundum definitiones Nicoeni concilii).  Cf.
   Gore's Leo, pp. 113, 114.  The wording of this fourth Canon is as
   follows:  ?Gaudentius, the bishop said, If it please you to add to this
   admirable declaration which you have passed, I propose that whensoever
   one bishop has been deposed by the judgment of other bishops, and
   appeals for his case to be heard in Civitas Novorum, the other bishop
   cannot by any means be considered confirmed in the same See after the
   appeal of the one who appears to be deposed, until he receive the
   decision of the judges there.?  In applying this to the present case,
   Leo no doubt proposed to substitute Urbs Roma for Civitas Novorum ,
   though this was hardly the same thing.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLV.

   To Pulcheria Augusta.

   Leo, the bishop, and the holy Synod which is assembled in the City of
   Rome to Pulcheria Augusta.

   I.  He sends a copy of the former letter which failed to reach her.

   If the letters respecting the Faith which were despatched to your Grace
   by the hands of our clergy had reached you, it is certain you would
   have been able, the Lord helping you, to provide a remedy for these
   things which have been done against the Faith.  For when have you
   failed either the priests or the religion or the Faith of Christ?  But
   when those who were sent were so completely hindered from reaching your
   clemency that only one of them, namely Hilary our deacon, with
   difficulty fled and returned, we thought it necessary to rewrite our
   letter:  and that our prayers may deserve to receive more weight, we
   have subjoined a copy of the very document which did not reach your
   clemency, entreating you even more earnestly than before to take under
   protection that religion in which you excel which will win you the
   greater glory in proportion to the heinousness of the crimes against
   which your royal faith requires you to proceed, lest the integrity of
   the Christian Faith be violated by any plot of man's devising.  For the
   things which were believed to require setting at rest and healing by
   the meeting of a Synod at Ephesus, have not only resulted in still
   greater disturbances of peace but, which is the more to be regretted,
   even in the overthrow of the very Faith whereby we are Christians.

   II.  He also sends a copy of his letter to the Emperor and explains its
   contents.

   And they indeed, who were sent, and one of whom, escaping the violence
   of the bishop of Alexandria who claims everything for himself,
   faithfully reported to us what took place in the Synod, opposed, as it
   became them, what I will call the frenzy not the judgment of one man,
   protesting that those things which were being carried through by
   violence and fear could not reverse the mysteries of the Church and the
   Creed itself composed by the Apostles, and that no injuries could sever
   them from that Faith which they had brought fully set forth and
   expounded from the See of the blessed Apostle Peter to the holy synod.
   And since this statement was not allowed to be read out at the bishop's
   request, in order forsooth that by the rejection of that Faith which
   has crowned patriarchs, prophets, apostles and martyrs, the birth
   according to the flesh of Jesus Christ our Lord and the confession of
   His true Death and Resurrection (we shudder to say it) might be
   overthrown, we have written [374] on this matter according to our
   ability, to our most glorious and (what is far greater) our Christian
   Prince, and at the same time have subjoined a copy of the letter to you
   to the end that he may not allow the Faith, in which he was re-born and
   reigns through God's grace, to be corrupted by any innovation, since
   Bishop Flavian continues in communion with us all, and that which has
   been done without regard to justice and contrary to all the teaching of
   the canons can, under no consideration, be held valid.  And because the
   Synod of Ephesus has not removed but increased the scandal of
   disagreement (I have asked him) to appoint a place and time for holding
   a council within Italy, all quarrels and prejudices on both sides being
   suspended, that everything which has engendered offence may be the more
   diligently reconsidered and without wounding the Faith, without
   injuring religion those priests may return into the peace of Christ,
   who through irresolution were forced to subscribe, and only their
   errors be removed.

   III.  He asks her to assist his petition with the Emperor.

   And that we may be worthy to obtain this, let your well-tried faith and
   protection, which has always helped the Church in her labours, deign to
   advance our petition with our most clement Prince, under a special
   commission so to act from the blessed Apostle Peter; so that before
   this civil and destructive war gains strength within the Church, he may
   grant opportunity of restoring unity by God's aid, knowing that the
   strength of his empire will be increased by every extension of catholic
   freedom that his kindly will affects.

   Dated 13th of October in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and
   Protogenes (449).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [374] This is, of course, Letter XLIV.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLVI.

   From Hilary, then Deacon (afterwards Bishop of Rome) to Pulcheria
   Augusta.

   (Describing his ill-treatment, as Leo's delegate, by Dioscorus.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLVII.

   To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica.

   (Congratulating him on being present at the synod of Ephesus.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLVIII.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   (Consoling him after the riots at Ephesus and exhorting him to stand
   firm.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XLIX.

   To Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople.

   (Whose death he is unaware of, promising him all the support in his
   power.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter L.

   To the people of Constantinople, by the hand of Epiphanius and
   Dionysius, Notary of the Church of Rome.

   (Exhorting them to stand firm and consoling them for Flavian's
   deposition.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LI.

   To Faustus and other Presbyters and Archimandrites in Constantinople.

   (With the same purport as the last.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LII.

   From Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus, to Leo. (See vol. iii. of this Series,
   p. 293.)

   To Leo, bishop of Rome.

   I.  If Paul appealed to Peter how much more must ordinary folk have
   recourse to his successor.

   If Paul, the herald of the Truth, the trumpet of the Holy Ghost, had
   recourse to the great Peter, in order to obtain a decision from him for
   those at Antioch who were disputing about living by the Law, much more
   do we small and humble folk run to the Apostolic See to get healing
   from you for the sores of the churches.  For it is fitting that you
   should in all things have the pre-eminence, seeing that your See
   possesses many peculiar privileges.  For other cities get a name for
   size or beauty or population, and some that are devoid of these
   advantages are compensated by certain spiritual gifts:  but your city
   has the fullest abundance of good things from the Giver of all good.
   For she is of all cities the greatest and most famous, the mistress of
   the world and teeming with population.  And besides this she has
   created an empire which is still predominant and has imposed her own
   name upon her subjects.  But her chief decoration is her Faith, to
   which the Divine Apostle is a sure witness when he exclaims ?your faith
   is proclaimed in all the world [375] ;? and if immediately after
   receiving the seeds of the saving Gospel she bore such a weight of
   wondrous fruit, what words are sufficient to express the piety which is
   now found in her?  She has, too, the tombs of our common fathers and
   teachers of the Truth, Peter and Paul [376] , to illumine the souls of
   the faithful.  And this blessed and divine pair arose indeed in the
   East, and shed its rays in all directions, but voluntarily underwent
   the sunset of life in the West, from whence now it illumines the whole
   world.  These have rendered your See so glorious:  this is the chief of
   all your goods.  And their See is still blest by the light of their
   God's presence, seeing that therein He has placed your Holiness to shed
   abroad the rays of the one true Faith.

   II.  He commends Leo's zeal against the Manichees, and latterly against
   Eutychianism, as evidenced especially in the Tome.

   Of which thing indeed, though there are many other proofs to be found,
   your zeal against the ill-famed Manichaeans is proof enough, that zeal
   which your holiness has of late years displayed [377] , thereby
   revealing the intensity of your devotion to God in things Divine.
   Proof enough, too, of your Apostolic character is what you have now
   written.  For we have met with what your holiness has written about the
   Incarnation of our God and Saviour, and have admired the careful
   diligence of the work [378] .  For it has proved both points equally
   well, viz., the Eternal Godhead of the Only-begotten of the Eternal
   Father, and at the same time His manhood of the seed of Abraham and
   David, and His assumption of a nature in all things like ours, except
   in this one thing, that He remained free from all sin:  for sin is
   engendered not of nature, but of free will [379] .  This also was
   contained in your letter, that the only-begotten Son of God is One and
   His Godhead impassible, irreversible, unchangeable even as the Father
   who begat Him and the All-holy Spirit.  And since the Divine nature
   could not suffer, He took the nature that could suffer to this end,
   that by the suffering of His own Flesh He might give exemption from
   suffering to those that believed on Him.  These points, and all that is
   akin thereto, the letter contained.  And we, admiring your spiritual
   wisdom, extolled the grace of the Holy Ghost which spoke through you,
   and ask and pray, and beg and beseech your holiness to come to the
   rescue of the churches of God that are now tempest tossed.

   III.  He complains of Dioscorus' ill-treatment of himself.

   For when we expected a stilling of the waves through those who were
   sent to Ephesus from your holiness, we have fallen into yet worse
   storm.  For the most righteous [380] prelate of Alexandria was not
   satisfied with the illegal and most unrighteous deposition of the
   Lord's most holy and God-loving bishop of Constantinople, Flavian, nor
   was his wrath appeased by the slaughter of the other bishops likewise.
   But me, too, he murdered with his pen in my absence, without calling me
   to judgment, without passing judgment on me in person, without
   questioning me on what I hold about the Incarnation of our God and
   Saviour.  But even murderers, tomb-breakers, and ravishers of other
   men's beds, those who sit in judgment do not condemn until they either
   themselves corroborate the accusations by their confessions, or are
   clearly convicted by others.  But us, when five and thirty days'
   journey distant, he, though brought up on Divine laws, has condemned at
   his will.  And not now only has he done this, but also last year, after
   that two persons infected with the Apollinarian disorder had come
   hither and laid false information against us, he rose up in church and
   anathematized us, and that when I had written to him and expressed what
   I hold in a letter.

   IV.  This ill-treatment has come after 20 years' good work in his
   diocese of Cyrus.

   I bemoan the distress of the Church and yearn after its peace.  For
   having ruled through your prayers the church committed to me by the God
   of the universe for 20 years, neither in the time of the blessed
   Theodotus, president of the East, nor in the time of those who have
   succeeded him in the See of Antioch, have I received the slightest
   blame, but, the Divine Grace working with me, have freed more than
   1,000 souls from the disease of Marcion, and have won over many others
   from the company of Arius and Eunomius to the Master, Christ.  And 800
   churches have I had to shepherd:  for that is the number of parishes in
   Cyrus, in which not a single tare through your prayers has lingered.
   But our flock has been freed from every heretical error.  He that sees
   all things knows how I have been stoned by the ill-famed heretics that
   have been sent against me, and what struggles I have had in many cities
   of the East against Greeks, Jews, and every heretical error.  And after
   all these toils and troubles, I have been condemned without a hearing.

   V.  He appeals to the Apostolic See with confidence.

   I however await the verdict of your Apostolic See, and beg and pray
   your Holiness to succour me when I appeal to your upright and just
   tribunal, and bid me come to you and show that my teaching follows in
   the track of the Apostles.  For there are writings of mine some 20
   years ago, some 18, some 15, and some 12, some again against the Arians
   and Eunomians, some against the Jews and Greeks some against the Magi
   in Persia, some also about the universal Providence, others about the
   nature of God and about the Divine Incarnation.  I have interpreted,
   through the Divine grace, both the Apostolic writings and the prophetic
   utterances, and it is easy therefrom to gather whether I have kept
   unswervingly the standard of the Faith, or have turned aside from its
   straight path.  And I beg you not to spurn my petition, nor to overlook
   the insults heaped on my poor white hairs.

   VI.  Ought he to acquiesce in his deposition?

   First of all, I beg you to tell me, whether I ought to acquiesce in
   this unrighteous deposition or not.  For I await your verdict and, if
   you bid me abide by my condemnation, I will abide by it, and will
   trouble no one hereafter, but await the unerring verdict of our God and
   Saviour.  I indeed, the Master God is my witness, care nought for
   honour and glory, but only for the stumbling-block that is put in men's
   way:  because many of the simpler folk, and especially those who have
   been rescued by us from divers heresies, will give credence to those
   who have condemned us, and perchance reckon us heretics, not being able
   to discern the exact truth of the dogma, and because, after my long
   episcopate, I have acquired neither house, nor land, nor obol, nor
   tomb, only a voluntary poverty, having straightway distributed even
   what came to me from my fathers after their death, as all know who live
   in the East.

   VII.  Being prevented himself, he has sent delegates to plead his
   cause.

   And before all things I entreat you, holy and God-loved brother, render
   assistance to my prayers.  These things I have brought to your
   Holiness' knowledge, by the most religious and God-beloved presbyters,
   Hypatius and Abramius the chorepiscopi [381] , and Alypius,
   superintendent [382] of the monks in our district:  seeing that I was
   hindered from coming to you myself by the Emperor's restraining letter,
   and likewise the others.  And I entreat your holiness both to look on
   them with fatherly regard, and to lend them your ears in sincere
   kindness, and also to deem my slandered and falsely attacked position
   worthy of your protection, and above all to defend with all your might
   the Faith that is now plotted against, and to keep the heritage of the
   fathers intact for the churches, so shall your holiness receive from
   the Bountiful Master a full reward.  (Date about the end of 449.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   [375] Rom. i. 8.

   [376] It is sufficient here to quote Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. ii. 25) as
   one of the earliest (before 340) maintainers of this tradition.  In
   this passage he again quotes Gaius of Rome (3rd cent.) and Dionysius of
   Corinth (2nd cent.) as corroborative authorities.  Eusebius's own words
   are these:  ?Paul is recorded to have been beheaded in Rome itself, and
   Peter likewise to have been impaled.  And this statement is supported
   by their names, which remain to this day inscribed in the cemeteries
   there.?

   [377] Viz., in 444:  cf. Letter VII. supra, together with the Emperor's
   decree (Lett. VIII.).

   [378] This is, of course, the Tome (Lett. XXVIII.).

   [379] Here nature' must mean man's original nature before the Fall,'
   when it was still in the image of Him who so created it, to which
   nature Christ's manhood was a triumphant return.  Otherwise it's hard
   to see how Theodoret escapes the pitfall of Pelagianism.

   [380] The epithet is shown by the context to be bitterly sarcastic.

   [381] Chorepiscopi (country bishops) were a kind of suffragan bishop to
   assist the town bishops in the remoter parts of their diocese.  They
   continued in use from the end of the 3rd till the 9th century, when
   they were abolished.

   [382] Exarchus.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LIII.

   A fragment of a letter from Anatolius, Bishop of Constantinople, to Leo
   (about his consecration).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LIV.

   To Theodosius Augustus (asking for a synod in Italy).>
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letters LV. to LVIII.

   A series of Letters.

   (1)  From Valentinian the Emperor to Theodosius Augustus.

   (2)  From Galla Placidia Augusta to Theodosius Augustus.

   (3)  From Licinia Eudoxia Augusta to Theodosius Augustus.

   (4)  From Galla Placidia Augusta to Pulcheria Augusta, all graphically
   describing how Leo had appealed to them in public to press his suit
   with Theodosius.  Of these, LVI. is subjoined as perhaps the most
   interesting specimen.

   Letter LVI.

   (From Galla Placidia Augusta to Theodosius).

   To the Lord Theodosius, Conqueror and Emperor, her ever august son,
   Galla Placidia, most pious and prosperous, perpetual Augusta and
   mother.

   When on our very arrival in the ancient city, we were engaged in paying
   our devotion to the most blessed Apostle Peter, at the martyr's very
   altar, the most reverend Bishop Leo waiting behind awhile after the
   service uttered laments over the catholic Faith to us, and taking to
   witness the chief of the Apostles himself likewise, whom we had just
   approached, and surrounded by a number of bishops whom he had brought
   together from numerous cities in Italy by the authority and dignity of
   his position, adding also tears to his words, called upon us to join
   our moans to his own.  For no slight harm has arisen from those
   occurrences, whereby the standard of the catholic Faith so long guarded
   since the days of our most Divine father Constantine, who was the first
   in the palace to stand out as a Christian, has been recently disturbed
   by the assumption of one man, who in the synod held at Ephesus is
   alleged to have rather stirred up hatred and contention, intimidating
   by the presence of soldiers, Flavianus, the bishop of Constantinople,
   because he had sent an appeal to the Apostolic See, and to all the
   bishops of these parts by the hands of those who had been deputed to
   attend the Synod by the most reverend Bishop of Rome, who have been
   always wont so to attend, most sacred Lord and Son and adored King, in
   accordance with the provisions of the Nicene Synod [383] .  For this
   cause we pray your clemency to oppose such disturbances with the Truth,
   and to order the Faith of the catholic religion to be preserved without
   spot, in order that according to the standard and decision of the
   Apostolic See, which we likewise revere as pre-eminent, Flavianus may
   remain altogether uninjured in his priestly office, and the matter be
   referred to the Synod of the Apostolic See, wherein assuredly he first
   adorned the primacy, who was deemed worthy to receive the keys of
   heaven:  for it becomes us in all things to maintain the respect due to
   this great city, which is the mistress of all the earth; and this too
   we must most carefully provide that what in former times our house
   guarded seem not in our day to be infringed, and that by the present
   example schisms be not advanced either between the bishops or the most
   holy churches.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [383] See no. 9a to Lett. XLIV., 3, where it is shown that this is a
   mistake, willful or otherwise, on Leo's part.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LIX.

   To the Clergy and People of the City of Constantinople.

   Leo the bishop to the clergy, dignitaries, and people, residing at
   Constantinople.

   I.  He congratulates them on their outspoken resistance to error.

   Though we are greatly grieved at the things reported to have been done
   recently in the council of priests at Ephesus, because, as is
   consistently rumoured, and also demonstrated by results, neither due
   moderation nor the strictness of the Faith was there observed, yet we
   rejoice in your devoted piety and in the acclamations of the holy
   people [384] , instances of which have been brought to our notice, we
   have approved of the right feeling of you all; because there lives and
   abides in good sons due affection for their excellent Father, and
   because you suffer the fulness of catholic teaching to be in no part
   corrupted.  For undoubtedly, as the Holy Spirit has unfolded to you,
   they are leagued with the Manichaeans' error, who deny that the
   only-begotten Son of God took our nature's true Manhood, and maintain
   that all His bodily actions were the actions of a false apparition.
   And lest you should in aught give your assent to this blasphemy, we
   have now sent you, beloved, by my son Epiphanius and Dionysius, notary
   of the Roman Church, letters of exhortation wherein we have of our own
   accord rendered you the assistance which you sought, that you may not
   doubt of our bestowing all a father's care on you, and labouring in
   every way, by the help of God's mercy, to destroy all the
   stumbling-blocks which ignorant and foolish men have raised.  And let
   no one venture to parade his priestly dignity who can be convicted of
   holding such detestably blasphemous opinions.  For if ignorance seems
   hardly tolerable in laymen, how much less excusable or pardonable is it
   in those who govern; especially when they dare even to defend their
   mendacious and perverse views, and persuade the unsteadfast to agree
   with them either by intimidation or by cajoling.

   II.  They are to be rejected who deny the truth of Christ's flesh, a
   truth repeated by every recipient at the Holy Eucharist.

   Let such men be rejected by the holy members of Christ's Body, and let
   not catholic liberty suffer the yoke of the unfaithful to be laid upon
   it.  For they are to be reckoned outside the Divine grace, and outside
   the mystery of man's salvation, who, denying the nature of our flesh in
   Christ, gainsay the Gospel and oppose the Creed.  Nor do they perceive
   that their blindness leads them into such an abyss that they have no
   sure footing in the reality either of the Lord's Passion or His
   Resurrection:  because both are discredited in the Saviour, if our
   fleshly nature is not believed in Him.  In what density of ignorance,
   in what utter sloth must they hitherto have lain, not to have learnt
   from hearing, nor understood from reading, that which in God's Church
   is so constantly in men's mouths, that even the tongues of infants do
   not keep silence upon the truth of Christ's Body and Blood at the rite
   of Holy Communion [385] ?  For in that mystic distribution of spiritual
   nourishment, that which is given and taken is of such a kind that
   receiving the virtue of the celestial food we pass into the flesh of
   Him, Who became our flesh [386] .  Hence to confirm you, beloved, in
   your laudably faithful resistance to the foes of Truth, I shall fully
   and opportunely use the language and sentiments of the Apostle, and
   say:  ?Therefore I also hearing of your faith, which is in the Lord
   Jesus, and love towards all saints, do not cease to give thanks for
   you, making mention of you in my prayers that the God of our Lord Jesus
   Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the spirit of wisdom and
   revelation in the knowledge of Him, the eyes of your hearts being
   enlightened that you may know what is the hope of His calling, and what
   the riches of the glory of His inheritance among the saints, and what
   is the exceeding greatness of His power in us, who believed according
   to the working of His mighty power which he has wrought in Christ,
   raising Him from the dead, and setting Him at His right hand in
   heavenly places above every principality, and power, and strength, and
   dominion, and every name which is named not only in this age, but also
   in that which is to come:  and hath put all things under His feet, and
   given Him to be the head over all the Church which is His body, and the
   fulness of Him Who filleth all in all [387] .?

   III.  Perfect God and perfect Man were united in Christ.

   In this passage let the adversaries of the Truth say when or according
   to what nature did the Almighty Father exalt His Son above all things,
   or to what substance did He subject all things.  For the Godhead of the
   Word is equal in all things, and consubstantial with the Father, and
   the power of the Begetter and the Begotten is one and the same always
   and eternally.  Certainly, the Creator of all natures, since ?through
   Him all things were made, and without Him was nothing made [388] ,? is
   above all things which He created, nor were the things which He made
   ever not subject to their Creator, Whose eternal property it is, to be
   from none other than the Father, and in no way different to the
   Father.  If greater power, grander dignity, more exalted loftiness was
   granted Him, then was He that was so increased less than He that
   promoted Him, and possessed not the full riches of His nature from
   Whose fulness He received.  But one who thinks thus is hurried off into
   the society of Arius, whose heresy is much assisted by this blasphemy
   which denies the existence of human nature in the Word of God, so that,
   in rejecting the combination of humility with majesty in God, it either
   asserts a false phantom-body in Christ, or says that all His bodily
   actions and passions belonged to the Godhead rather than to the flesh.
   But everything he ventures to uphold is absolutely foolish:  because
   neither our religious belief nor the scope of the mystery admits either
   of the Godhead suffering anything or of the Truth belying Itself in
   anything.  The impassible Son of God, therefore, whose perpetually it
   is with the Father and with the Holy Spirit to be what He is in the one
   essence of the Unchangeable Trinity, when the fullness of time had come
   which had been fore-ordained by an eternal purpose, and promised by the
   prophetic significance of words and deeds, became man not by conversion
   of His substance but by assumption of our nature, and ?came to seek and
   to save that which was lost [389] .?  But He came not by local approach
   nor by bodily motion, as if to be present where He had been absent, or
   to depart where He had come:  but He came to be manifested to onlookers
   by that which was visible and common to others, receiving, that is to
   say, human flesh and soul in the Virgin mother's womb, so that, abiding
   in the form of God, He united to Himself the form of a slave, and the
   likeness of sinful flesh, whereby He did not lessen the Divine by the
   human, but increased the human by the Divine.

   IV.  The Sacrament of Baptism typifies and realizes this union to each
   individual believer.

   For such was the state of all mortals resulting from our first
   ancestors that, after the transmission of original sin to their
   descendants, no one would have escaped the punishment of condemnation,
   had not the Word become flesh and dwelt in us, that is to say, in that
   nature which belonged to our blood and race.  And accordingly, the
   Apostle says:  ?As by one man's sin (judgment passed) upon all to
   condemnation, so also by one man's righteousness (it) passed upon all
   to justification of life.  For as by one man's disobedience many were
   made sinners, so also by one man's obedience shall many be made
   righteous [390] ;? and again, ?For because by man (came) death, by man
   also (came) the resurrection of the dead.  And as in Adam all die, so
   also in Christ shall all be made alive [391] .?  All they to wit who
   though they be born in Adam, yet are found reborn in Christ, having a
   sure testimony both to their justification by grace, and to Christ's
   sharing in their nature [392] ; for he who does not believe that God's
   only-begotten Son did assume our nature in the womb of the
   Virgin-daughter of David, is without share in the Mystery of the
   Christian religion, and, as he neither recognizes the Bridegroom nor
   knows the Bride, can have no place at the wedding-banquet.  For the
   flesh of Christ is the veil of the Word, wherewith every one is clothed
   who confesses Him unreservedly.  But he that is ashamed of it and
   rejects it as unworthy, shall have no adornment from Him, and though he
   present himself at the Royal feast, and unseasonably join in the sacred
   banquet, yet the intruder will not be able to escape the King's
   discernment, but, as the Lord Himself asserted, will be taken, and with
   hands and feet bound, be cast into outer darkness; where will be
   weeping and gnashing of teeth [393] .  Hence whosoever confesses not
   the human body in Christ, must know that he is unworthy of the mystery
   of the Incarnation, and has no share in that sacred union of which the
   Apostle speaks, saying, ?For we are His members, of His flesh and of
   His bones.  For this cause a man shall leave father and mother and
   shall cleave to his wife, and there shall be two in one flesh [394] .?
   And explaining what was meant by this, he added, ?This mystery is
   great, but I speak in respect of Christ and the Church.?  Therefore,
   from the very commencement of the human race, Christ is announced to
   all men as coming in the flesh.  In which, as was said, ?there shall be
   two in one flesh,? there are undoubtedly two, God and man, Christ and
   the Church, which issued from the Bridegroom's flesh, when it received
   the mystery of redemption and regeneration, water and blood flowing
   from the side of the Crucified.  For the very condition of a new
   creature which at baptism puts off not the covering of true flesh but
   the taint of the old condemnation, is this, that a man is made the body
   of Christ, because Christ also is the body of a man [395] .

   V.  The true doctrine of the Incarnation restated and commended to
   their keeping.

   Wherefore we call Christ not God only, as the Manichaean heretics, nor
   Man only, as the Photinian [396] heretics, nor man in such a way that
   anything should be wanting in Him which certainly belongs to human
   nature, whether soul or reasonable mind or flesh which was not derived
   from woman, but made from the Word turned and changed into flesh; which
   three false and empty propositions have been variously advanced by the
   three sections of the Apollinarian heretics [397] .  Nor do we say that
   the blessed Virgin Mary conceived a Man without Godhead, Who was
   created by the Holy Ghost and afterwards assumed by the Word, which we
   deservedly and properly condemned Nestorius for preaching:  but we call
   Christ the Son of God, true God, born of God the Father without any
   beginning in time, and likewise true Man, born of a human Mother, at
   the ordained fulness of time, and we say that His Manhood, whereby the
   Father is the greater, does not in anything lessen that nature whereby
   He is equal with the Father.  But these two natures form one Christ,
   Who has said most truly both according to His Godhead:  ?I and the
   Father are one [398] ,? and according to His manhood ?the Father is
   greater than I [399] .?  This true and indestructible Faith,
   dearly-beloved, which alone makes us true Christians, and which, as we
   hear with approval, you are defending with loyal zeal and praiseworthy
   affection, hold fast and maintain boldly.  And since, besides God's
   aid, you must win the favour of catholic Princes also, humbly and
   wisely make request that the most clement Emperor be pleased to grant
   our petition, wherein we have asked for a plenary synod to be convened;
   that by the aid of God's mercy the sound may be increased in courage,
   and the sick, if they consent to be treated, have the remedy applied.
   (Dated October 15, in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and
   Protogenes, 449.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   [384] Sanctae plebis acclamationibus.  It seems that the people had
   openly expressed their disapproval of the maltreatment to which Flavian
   had been subjected.

   [385] Two things are here to be noticed:  (1) that the allusion appears
   to be to the formula of reception then in use at the Eucharist, the
   priest saying Corpus Christi, and the recipient answering Amen.  Cf.
   Serm. xci. 3, sic sacrae mensae communicare debetis ut nihil prorsus de
   veritate corporis Christi et sanguinis ambigatis.  Hoc enim ore sumitar
   quod fide creditur:  et frustra ab illis Amen respondetur a quibus
   contra id quod accipitur disputatur; (2) that infant communion is
   implied as regular:  this we know to have been the case in much earlier
   days.  Cf. Apost. Const. viii. 13, Cyprian de Lapsis, ix. and xxv. &c.,
   also Bingham's Antiq. xv. chap. iv. S: 7.

   [386] Cf. Sermon LXIII. 7, where much the same language is used.

   [387] Ephes. i. 15-23.

   [388] S. John i. 3.

   [389] S. Luke xix. 10.

   [390] Rom. v. 18, 19.

   [391] 1 Cor. xv. 21, 22.

   [392] Habentes fidei testimonium et de justificatione gratiae et ae
   communione naturae.

   [393] The reference is to S. Matt. xxii. 11-13.

   [394] Eph. v. 30, 31, 32.

   [395] Ipsa est enim novae condiiio creaturae quae in baptismate non
   indumento verae carnis sed contagio damnatae vetustatis exuitur ut
   efficiatur homo corpus Christi, quia et Christus corpus est hominis.
   The most crabbed of the several crabbed passages in this letter.  The
   mystical transmutation of the believer's body into the body of Christ
   is here referred to the sacrament of Baptism, while earlier in the
   letter (chap. ii.) it is described as one of the effects of Holy
   Communion.

   [396] The followers of Photinus, Bishop of Sirmium (circ. 410 a.d.):
   for an account of his heretical opinions see Schaff's History of the
   Christian Church, in loc.  Cf. Letter XV. 4.

   [397] Apollinaristarum tres partes; see Sermon xxviii. chap. 4 (end)
   with Bright's n. 32 on Apollinarianism generally.

   [398] S. John x. 30; xiv. 28.

   [399] S. John x. 30; xiv. 28.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LX.

   To Pulcheria Augusta.

   (He hopes for her intercession to procure the condemnation of
   Eutyches.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXI.

   To Martinus and Faustus, Presbyters.

   (Reminding them of a former letter he has written to them, viz. Lett.
   LI.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   (Letters LXII., LXIII., LXIV., are the Emperor Theodosius' answers (a)
   to Valentinian, (b) to Galla Placidia, and (c) to Licinia Eudoxia
   (assuring them of his orthodoxy and care for the Faith.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXV.

   From the Bishops of the Province of Arles.

   (Asking Leo to confirm the privileges of that city, which they allege
   date from the mission of Trophimus, by S. Peter, and more recently
   ratified by the Emperor Constantine.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXVI.

   Leo's Reply to Letter LXV.

   Leo, the pope, to the dearly-beloved brethren Constantinus,
   Armentarius, Audientius, Severianus, Valerianus, Ursus, Stephanus,
   Nectarius, Constantius, Maximus, Asclepius, Theodorus, Justus Ingenuus,
   Augustalis, Superventor, Ynantius, Fonteius, and Palladius.

   I.  The Bishop of Vienne has anticipated their appeal.  He proposes to
   arbitrate with impartiality.

   When we read your letter, beloved, which was brought to us by our sons
   Petronius the presbyter and Regulus the deacon, we recognized how
   affectionate is the regard in which you hold our brother and
   fellow-bishop, Ravennius:  for your request is that what his
   predecessor [400] deservedly lost for his excessive presumption may be
   restored to him.  But your petition, brothers, was forestalled by the
   bishop of Vienne, who sent a letter and legates with the complaint that
   the bishop of Arles had unlawfully claimed the ordination of the bishop
   of Vasa.  Accordingly, as we had to show such respect both for the
   canons of the fathers and for your good opinion of us, that in the
   matter of the churches' privileges we should allow no infringement or
   deprivation, it were incumbent on us to preserve the peace within the
   province of Vienne by employing such righteous moderation as should
   disregard neither ancient usage nor your desires.

   II.  The bishop of Vienne is to retain jurisdiction over four
   neighbouring cities:  the rest to belong to Arles.

   For after considering the arguments advanced by the clergy present on
   either side, we find that the cities of Vienne and Arles within your
   province have always been so famous, that in certain matters of
   ecclesiastical privilege, now one, now the other, has alternately taken
   precedence, though the national tradition is that formerly they had
   community of rights.  And hence we suffer not the city of Vienne to be
   altogether without honour, so far as concerns ecclesiastical
   jurisdiction, especially as it already possesses the authority of our
   decree for the enjoyment of its privilege:  to wit the power which,
   when taken away from Hilary, we thought proper to confer on the bishop
   of Vienne.  And that he seem not suddenly and unduly lowered, he shall
   hold rule over the four neighbouring towns, that is, Valentia,
   Tarantasia, Genava and Gratianopolis, with Vienne herself for the
   fifth, to the bishop of which shall belong the care of all the said
   churches.  But the other churches of the same province shall be placed
   under the authority and management of the bishop of Arles, who from his
   temperate moderation we believe will be so anxious for love and peace
   as by no means to consider himself deprived of that which he sees
   conceded to his brother.  Dated 5th of May, in the consulship of
   Valentinianus Augustus (7th time), and the most famous Avienus (450.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   [400] This, it will be remembered, was Hillary:  see Letter X. above.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXVII [401] .

   To Ravennius, Bishop of Arles.

   To his dearly-beloved brother Ravennius, Leo the pope.

   We have kept our sons Petronius the presbyter, and Regulus the deacon,
   long in the City, both because they deserved this from their favour in
   our eyes, and because the needs of the Faith, which is now being
   assailed by the error of some, demanded it.  For we wished them to be
   present when we discussed the matter, and to ascertain everything which
   we desire through you, beloved, should reach the knowledge of all our
   brethren and fellow-bishops, specially deputing this to you, dear
   brother, that through your watchful diligence our letter, which we have
   issued to the East in defence of the Faith, or else [402] that of Cyril
   of blessed memory, which agrees throughout with our views, may become
   known to all the brethren; in order that being furnished with arguments
   they may fortify themselves with spiritual strength against those who
   think fit to insult the Lord's Incarnation with their misbeliefs.  You
   have a favourable opportunity, beloved brother, of recommending the
   commencement of your episcopacy to all the churches and to our God, if
   you will carry out these things in the way we have charged and enjoined
   you.  But the matters which were not to be committed to paper, in
   reliance on God's aid, you shall carry out effectually, as we have
   said, and laudably, when you have learnt about them from the mouths of
   our aforesaid sons.  God keep you safe, dearest brother.  Dated 5th of
   May, in the consulship of the most glorious Valentinianus (for the 7th
   time) and of the famous Avienus (450).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [401] This letter, together with Letters XL., LXV. and LXVI., are found
   only in the Collection of Arles (numbered XV. by the Ballerinii).

   [402] Vel can hardly equal et as the Ball. would wish.  So that here
   Leo recommends either his own Tome or Cyril's second letter to
   Nestorius.  Cf. Letter LXIX., chap. i. below; also Letter LXX.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXVIII.

   From Three Gallic Bishops to St. Leo.

   Ceretius, Salonius and Veranus to the holy Lord, most blessed father,
   and pope most worthy of the Apostolic See, Leo.

   I.  They congratulate and thank Leo for the Tome.

   Having perused your Excellency's letter, which you composed for
   instruction in the Faith, and sent to the bishop of Constantinople, we
   thought it our duty, being enriched with so great a wealth of doctrine,
   to pay our debt of thanks by at least inditing you a letter.  For we
   appreciate your fatherly solicitude on our behalf, and confess that we
   are the more indebted to your preventing care because we now have the
   benefit of the remedy before experiencing the evils.  For knowing that
   those remedies are well-nigh too late which are applied after the
   infliction of the wounds, you admonish us with the voice of loving
   forethought to arm ourselves with those Apostolic means of defence.  We
   acknowledge frankly, most blessed pope [403] , with what singular
   loving-kindness you have imparted to us the innermost thoughts of your
   breast, by the efficacy of which you secure the safety of others:  and
   while you extract the old Serpent's infused poison from the hearts of
   others, standing as it were on the watch-tower of Love, with Apostolic
   care and watchfulness you cry aloud, lest the enemy come on us unawares
   and off our guard, lest careless security expose us to attack, O holy
   Lord, most blessed father and pope, most worthy of the Apostolic See.
   Moreover we, who specially belong to you [404] , are filled with a
   great and unspeakable delight, because this special statement of your
   teaching is so highly regarded wherever the Churches meet together,
   that the unanimous opinion is expressed that the primacy of the
   Apostolic See is rightfully there assigned, from whence the oracles of
   the Apostolic Spirit still receive their interpretations.

   II.  They ask him to correct or add to their copy of the Tome.

   Therefore, if you deem it worth while, we entreat your holiness to run
   through and correct any mistake of the copyist in this work, so
   valuable both now and in the future, which we have had committed to
   parchment [405] , in our desire to preserve it, or if you have devised
   anything further in your zeal, which will profit all who read, give
   orders in your loving care that it be added to this copy, so that not
   only many holy bishops our brethren throughout the provinces of Gaul,
   but also many of your sons among the laity, who greatly desire to see
   this letter for the revelation of the Truth, may be permitted, when it
   is sent back to us, corrected by your holy hand, to transcribe, read
   and keep it.  If you think fit, we are anxious that our messengers
   should return soon, in order that we may the speedier have an account
   of your good health over which to rejoice:  for your well-being is our
   joy and health.

   May Christ the Lord long keep your eminence mindful of our humility, O
   holy Lord, most blessed father and pope most worthy of the Apostolic
   See.

   I, Ceretius, your adopted (son?), salute your apostleship, commending
   me to your prayers.

   I, Salonius, your adorer, salute your apostleship, entreating the aid
   of your prayers.

   I, Veranus, the worshipper of your apostleship, salute your
   blessedness, and beseech you to pray for me.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [403] Cf. Lett. XVII. n. 2^a.

   [404] Peculiares tui.  So in each one's autograph subscription at the
   end of the letter Ceretius calls himself susceptus vester, Salonius
   venerator vester, and Veranus cultor vestri apostolatus.

   [405] Foliis.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXIX.

   (To Theodosius Augustus.)

   Leo, the bishop, to Theodosius ever Augustus.

   I.  He suspends his opinion on the appointment of Anatolius till he has
   made open confession of the catholic Faith.

   In all your piously expressed letters amid the anxieties, which we
   suffer for the Faith, you have afforded us hope of security by
   supporting the Council of Nicaea so loyally as not to allow the priests
   of the Lord to budge from it, as you have often written us already.
   But lest I should seem to have done anything prejudicial to the
   catholic defence, I thought nothing rash on either side ought meanwhile
   to be written back on the ordination of him who has begun to preside
   over the church of Constantinople, and this not through want of loving
   interest, but waiting for the catholic Truth to be made clear.  And I
   beg your clemency to bear this with equanimity that when he has proved
   himself such as we desire towards the catholic Faith, we may the more
   fully and safely rejoice over his sincerity.  But that no evil
   suspicion may assail him about our disposition towards him, I remove
   all occasion of difficulty, and demand nothing which may seem either
   hard or controvertible but make an invitation which no catholic would
   decline.  For they are well known and renowned throughout the world,
   who before our time have shone in preaching the catholic Truth whether
   in the Greek or the Latin tongue, to whose learning and teaching some
   even of our own day have recourse, and from whose writings a uniform
   and manifold statement of doctrine is produced:  which, as it has
   pulled down the heresy of Nestorius, so has it cut off this error too
   which is now sprouting out again.  Let him then read again what is the
   belief on the Lord's Incarnation which the holy fathers guarded and has
   always been similarly preached, and when he has perceived that the
   letter of Cyril of holy memory, bishop of Alexandria, agrees with the
   view of those who preceded him [wherein he wished to correct and cure
   Nestorius, refuting his wrong statements and setting out more clearly
   the Faith as defined at Nicaea, and which was sent by him and placed in
   the library of the Apostolic See [406] ], let him further reconsider
   the proceedings of the Ephesian Synod [407] wherein the testimonies of
   catholic priests on the Lord's Incarnation are inserted and maintained
   by Cyril of holy memory.  Let him not scorn also to read my letter
   [408] over, which he will find to agree throughout with the pious
   belief of the fathers.  And when he has realized that that is required
   and desired from him which shall serve the same good end, let him give
   his hearty assent to the judgment of the catholics, so that in the
   presence of all the clergy and the whole people he may without any
   reservation declare his sincere acknowledgment of the common Faith, to
   be communicated to the Apostolic See and all the Lord's priests and
   churches, and thus the world being at peace through the one Faith, we
   may all be able to say what the angels sang at the Saviour's birth of
   the Virgin Mary, ?Glory in the highest to God and on earth peace to men
   of good will [409] .?

   II.  He promises to accept Anatolius on making this confession, and
   asks for a council in Italy to finally define the Faith.

   But because both we and our blessed fathers, whose teaching we revere
   and follow, are in concord on the one Faith, as the bishops of all the
   provinces attest, let your clemency's most devout faith see to it that
   such a document as is due may reach us as soon as may be from the
   bishop of Constantinople, as from an approved and catholic priest, that
   is, openly and distinctly affirming that he will separate from his
   communion any one who believes or maintains any other view about the
   Incarnation of the Word of God than my statement and that of all
   catholics lays down, that we may fairly be able to bestow on him
   brotherly love in Christ.  And that swifter and fuller effect, God
   aiding us, may be given through your clemency's faith to our wholesome
   desires, I have sent to your piety my brethren and fellow-bishops
   Abundius and Asterius, together with Basilius and Senator presbyters,
   whose devotion is well proved to me, through whom, when they have
   displayed the instructions which we have sent, you may be able properly
   to apprehend what is the standard of our faith, so that, if the bishop
   of Constantinople gives his hearty assent to the same confession, we
   may securely, as is due, rejoice over the peace of the Church and no
   ambiguity may seem to lurk behind which may trouble us with perhaps
   ungrounded suspicions.  But if any dissent from the purity of our Faith
   and from the authority of the Fathers, the Synod which has met at Rome
   for that purpose joins with me in asking your clemency to permit a
   universal council within the limits of Italy; so that, if all those
   come together in one place who have fallen either through ignorance or
   through fear, measures may be taken to correct and cure them, and no
   one any longer may be allowed to quote the Synod of Nicaea in a way
   which shall prove him opposed to its Faith; since it will be of
   advantage both to the whole Church and to your rule, if one God, one
   Faith and one mystery of man's Salvation, be held by the one confession
   of the whole world.

   Dated 17th July in the consulship of the illustrious Valentinianus for
   the seventh time) and Avienus (450).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [406] Wherein--see, probably a gloss by way of identifying the letter:
   it is the second letter to Nestorius.  See Letter LXVII above.

   [407] Viz., the third Ecumenical Council held at Ephesus 431, in which
   Nestorius was condemned.

   [408] Viz., XXVIII (The Tome).

   [409] S. Luke ii. 14.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXX.

   To Pulcheria Augusta.

   (In which he again says he is waiting for Anatolius' acceptance of
   Cyril's and his own statement of the Faith, and looks forward to a
   Synod in Italy.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXI.

   To the Archimandrites of Constantinople.

   (Complaining of Anatolius' silence.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXII.

   To Faustus, One of the Archimandrites at Constantinople.

   (Commending his faith and exhorting him to steadfastness.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXIII.

   From Valentinian and Marcian.

   (Announcing their election as Emperors [410] (a.d. 450), and asking his
   prayers that (per celebrandam synodum, te auctore), peace may be
   restored to the Church.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   [410] Valentinian III. had been nominally Emperor of the West since
   425, but his mother's (Galla Placidia) death this year compelled him to
   rule as well as have the name of ruler:  almost simultaneously in the
   East the death of Theodisius II. brought to the front his sister
   Pulcheria and her soldier husband Marcian.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXIV.

   To Martinus, Another of the Archimandrites at Constantinople.

   (Commending his steadfastness in the Faith.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXV.

   To Faustus and Martinus Together.

   (Condemning the Latrocinium and maintaining that Eutyches equally with
   Nestorius promotes the cause of Antichrist.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXVI.

   From Marcianus Augustus to Leo.

   (Proposing that he should either attend a Synod at Constantinople or
   help in arranging some other more convenient place of meeting.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXVII.

   From Pulcheria Augusta to Leo.

   (In which she expresses her assurance that Anatolius is orthodox, and
   begs him to assist her husband in arranging for the Synod, and
   announces that Flavian's body has been buried in the Basilica of the
   Apostles at Constantinople and the exiled bishops restored.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXVIII.

   Leo's Answer to Marcianus.

   (Briefly thanking him.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXIX.

   To Pulcheria Augusta.

   Leo, bishop of the city of Rome to Pulcheria Augusta.

   I.  He rejoices at Pulcheria's zeal both against Nestorius and
   Eutyches.

   That which we have always anticipated concerning your Grace's holy
   purposes, we have now proved fully true, viz. that, however varied may
   be the attacks of wicked men upon the Christian Faith, yet when you are
   present and prepared by the Lord for its defence, it cannot be
   disturbed.  For God will not forsake either the mystery of His mercy or
   the deserts of your labours, whereby you long ago repelled the crafty
   foe of our holy religion from the very vitals of the Church:  when the
   impiety of Nestorius failed to maintain his heresy because it did not
   escape you the handmaid and pupil of the Truth, how much poison was
   instilled into simple folk by the coloured falsehoods of that glib
   fellow.  And the sequel to that mighty struggle was that through your
   vigilance the things which the devil contrived by means of Eutyches,
   did not escape detection, and they who had chosen to themselves one
   side in the twofold heresy, were overthrown by the one and undivided
   power of the catholic Faith.  This then is your second victory over the
   destruction of Eutyches' error:  and, if he had had any soundness of
   mind, that error having been once and long ago routed and put to
   confusion in the person of his instigators, he would easily have been
   able to avoid the attempt to rekindle into life the smouldering ashes,
   and thus only share the lot of those, whose example he had followed,
   most glorious Augusta.  We desire, therefore, to leap for joy and to
   pay due vows for your clemency's prosperity to God, who has already
   bestowed on you a double palm and crown through all the parts of the
   world, in which the Lord's Gospel is proclaimed.

   II.  He thanks her for her aid to the catholic cause, and explains his
   wishes about the restoration of the lapsed bishops.

   Your clemency must know, therefore, that the whole church of Rome is
   highly grateful for all your faithful deeds, whether that you have with
   pious zeal helped our representatives throughout and brought back the
   catholic priests, who had been expelled from their churches by an
   unjust sentence, or that you have procured the restoration with due
   honour of the remains of that innocent and holy priest, Flavian, of
   holy memory, to the church, which he ruled so well.  In all which
   things assuredly your glory is increased manifold, so long as you
   venerate the saints according to their deserts, and are anxious that
   the thorns and weeds should be removed from the Lord's field.  But we
   learn as well from the account of our deputies as from that of my
   brother and fellow-bishop, Anatolius, whom you graciously recommend to
   me, that certain bishops crave reconciliation for those who seem to
   have given their consent to matters of heresy, and desire catholic
   communion for them:  to whose request we grant effect on condition that
   the boon of peace should not be vouchsafed them till, our deputies
   acting in concert with the aforesaid bishop, they are corrected, and
   with their own hand condemn their evil doings; because our Christian
   religion requires both that true justice should constrain the
   obstinate, and love not reject the penitent.

   III.  He commends certain bishops and churches to her care.

   And because we know how much pious care your Grace deigns to bestow on
   catholic priests, we have ordered that you should be informed that my
   brother and fellow-bishop, Eusebius, is living with us, and sharing our
   communion, whose church we commend to you; for he that is improperly
   asserted to have been elected in his place, is said to be ravaging it.
   And this too we ask of your Grace, which we doubt not you will do of
   your own free will, to extend the favour which is due as well to my
   brother and fellow-bishop, Julian, as to the clergy of Constantinople,
   who clung to the holy Flavian with faithful loyalty.  On all things we
   have instructed your Grace by our deputies as to what ought to be done
   or arranged.  Dated April 13, in the consulship of the illustrious
   Adelfius (451).
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXX.

   (To Anatolius, Bishop of Constantinople.)

   Leo, the bishop, to Anatolius, the bishop.

   I.  He rejoices at Anatolius having proved himself orthodox.

   We rejoice in the Lord and glory in the gift of His Grace, Who has
   shown you a follower of Gospel-teaching as we have found from your
   letter, beloved, and our brothers' account whom we sent to
   Constantinople:  for now through the approved faith of the priest, we
   are justifying in presuming that the whole church committed to him will
   have no wrinkle nor spot of error, as says the Apostle, ?for I have
   espoused you to one husband to present you a pure virgin to Christ
   [411] .?  For that virgin is the Church, the spouse of one husband
   Christ, who suffers herself to be corrupted by no error, so that
   through the whole world we have one entire and pure communion in which
   we now welcome you as a fellow, beloved, and give our approval to the
   order of proceedings which we have received, ratified, as was proper,
   with the necessary signatures.  In order, therefore, that your spirit
   in turn, beloved, might be strengthened by words of ours, we sent back
   after the Easter festival with our letters, our sons, Casterius, the
   Presbyter, and Patricius and Asclepias, the Deacons, who brought your
   writings to us, informing you, as we said above, that we rejoice at the
   peace of the church of Constantinople, on which we have ever spent such
   care that we wish it to be polluted by no heretical deceit.

   II.  The penitents among the backsliding bishops are to be received
   back into full communion upon some plan to be settled by Anatolius and
   Leo's delegates.

   But concerning the brethren whom we learn from your letters, and from
   our delegates' account, to be desirous of communion with us, on the
   ground of their sorrow that they did not remain constant against
   violence and intimidation, but gave their assent to another's crime
   when terror had so bewildered them, that with hasty acquiescence they
   ministered to the condemnation of the catholic and guiltless bishop
   (Flavian), and to the acceptance of the detestable heresy (of
   Eutyches), we approve of that which was determined upon in the presence
   and with the co-operation of our delegates, viz., that they should be
   content meanwhile with the communion of their own churches, but we wish
   our delegates whom we have sent to consult with you, and come to some
   arrangement whereby those who condemn their ill-doings with full
   assurances of penitence, and choose rather to accuse than to defend
   themselves, may be gladdened by being at peace and in communion with
   us; on condition that what has been received against the catholic Faith
   is first condemned with complete anathema.  For otherwise in the Church
   of God, which is Christ's Body, there are neither valid priesthoods nor
   true sacrifices, unless in the reality of our nature the true High
   Priest makes atonement for us, and the true Blood of the spotless Lamb
   makes us clean.  For although He be set on the Father's right hand, yet
   in the same flesh which He took from the Virgin, he carries on the
   mystery of propitiation, as says the Apostle, ?Christ Jesus Who died,
   yea, Who also rose, Who is on the right hand of God, Who also maketh
   intercession for us [412] .?  For our kindness cannot be blamed in any
   case where we receive those who give assurance of penitence, and at
   whose deception we were grieved.  The boon of communion with us,
   therefore, must neither harshly be withheld nor rashly granted, because
   as it is fully consistent with our religion to treat the oppressed with
   a Christlike charity, so it is fair to lay the full blame upon the
   authors of the disturbance.

   III.  The Names of Dioscorus, Juvenal, and Eustathius are not to be
   read aloud at the holy altar.

   Concerning the reading out of the names of Dioscorus, Juvenal, and
   Eustathius [413] at the holy altar, it beseems you, beloved, to observe
   that which our friends who were there present said ought to be done,
   and which is consistent with the honourable memory of S. Flavian, and
   will not turn the minds of the laity away from you.  For it is very
   wrong and unbecoming that those who have harassed innocent catholics
   with their attacks, should be mingled indiscriminately with the names
   of the saints, seeing that by not forsaking their condemned heresy,
   they condemn themselves by their perversity:  such men should either be
   chastised for their unfaithfulness; or strive hard after forgiveness.

   IV.  One or two instructions about individuals.

   But our brother and fellow-bishop, Julian, and the clergy who adhered
   to Flavian of holy memory, rendering him faithful service, we wish to
   adhere to you also beloved, that they may know him who we are sure
   lives by the merits of his faith with our God to be present with them
   in you.  We wish you to know this too, beloved, that our brother and
   fellow-bishop Eusebius [414] , who for the Faith's sake endured many
   dangers and toils, is at present staying with us and continuing in our
   communion; whose church we would that your care should protect, that
   nothing may be destroyed in his absence, and no one may venture to
   injure him in anything until he come to you bearing a letter from us.
   And that our or rather all Christian people's affection for you may be
   stirred up in greater measure, we wish this that we have written to
   you, beloved, to come to all men's knowledge, that they who serve our
   God may give thanks for the consummation of the peace of the Apostolic
   See with you.  But on other matters and persons you will be more fully
   instructed, beloved, by the letter you will have received through our
   delegates.  Dated 13 April, in the consulship of the illustrious
   Adelfius (451).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [411] 2 Cor. xi. 2.

   [412] Rom. viii. 34.

   [413] Juvenal (Bishop of Jerusalem), and Eustathius (Bishop of
   Berytus), had been two of the principal abettors of Dioscorus in the
   Latrocinium.  The ?reading out of their names at the altar? alludes to
   the practice in the early Church of keeping registers (called
   ?diptychs?) of the members (alive and dead) of the Church, from which
   one or two of the more prominent names (clerical and lay) were read out
   at the celebration of the Holy mysteries:  cf. the modern ?Bidding?
   prayer, &c.

   [414] This is the Bishop of Dorylaeum in Phrygia, Eutyches former
   friend, but more recently his relentless accuser of heresy.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXI.

   To Bishop Julian.

   (Warning him to be circumspect in receiving the lapsed.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXII.

   To Marcian Augustus.

   I.  After congratulating the Emperor on his noble conduct, he
   deprecates random inquiries into the tenets of the Faith.

   Although I have replied [415] already to your Grace by the hand of the
   Constantinopolitan clergy, yet on receiving your clemency's mercy
   through the illustrious prefect of the city, my son Tatian, I found
   still greater cause for congratulation, because I have learnt your
   strong eagerness for the Church's peace.  And this holy desire as in
   fairness it deserves, secures for your empire the same happy condition
   as you seek for religion.  For when the Spirit of God establishes
   harmony among Christian princes, a twofold confidence is produced
   throughout the world, because the progress of love and faith makes the
   power of their arms in both directions unconquerable, so that God being
   propitiated by one confession, the falseness of heretics and the enmity
   of barbarians are simultaneously overthrown, most glorious Emperor.
   The hope, therefore, of heavenly aid being increased through the
   Emperor's friendship, I venture with the greater confidence to appeal
   to your Grace on behalf of the mystery of man's salvation, not to allow
   any one in vain and presumptuous craftiness to inquire what must be
   held, as if it were uncertain.  And although we may not in a single
   word dissent from the teaching of the Gospels and Apostles, nor
   entertain any opinion on the Divine Scriptures different to what the
   blessed Apostles and our Fathers learnt and taught, now in these latter
   days unlearned and blasphemous inquiries are set on foot, which of old
   the Holy Spirit crushed by the disciples of the Truth, so soon as the
   devil aroused them in hearts which were suited to his purpose.

   II.  The points to be settled are only which of the lapsed shall be
   restored, and on what terms.

   But it is most inopportune that through the foolishness of a few we
   should be brought once more into hazardous opinions, and to the warfare
   of carnal disputes, as if the wrangle was to be revived, and we had to
   settle whether Eutyches held blasphemous views, and whether Dioscorus
   gave wrong judgment, who in condemning Flavian of holy memory struck
   his own death-blow, and involved the simpler folk in the same
   destruction.  And now that many, as we have ascertained, have betaken
   themselves to the means of amendment, and entreat forgiveness for their
   weak hastiness, we have to determine not the character of the Faith,
   but whose prayers we shall receive, and on what terms.  And hence that
   most religious anxiety which you deign to feel for the proclamation of
   a Synod, shall have fully and timely put before it all that I judge
   pertinent to the needs of the case, by means of the deputies who will
   with all speed, if God permit, reach your Grace.  Dated the 23rd of
   April in the consulship of the illustrious Adelfius (451).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [415] i.e. Lett. LXXVIII. of the series.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXIII.

   To the Same Marcian.

   (Congratulating him on his benefits to the Church, and deprecating a
   Synod as inopportune.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXIV.

   To Pulcheria Augusta.

   (Announcing the despatch of his legates to deal with the lapsed, and
   asking that Eutyches should be superseded in his monastery by a
   catholic, and dismissed from Constantinople.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXV.

   To Anatolius, Bishop of Constantinople.

   Leo, the bishop, to the bishop Anatolius.

   I.  Anatolius with Leo's delegates is to settle the question of the
   receiving back of those who had temporarily gone astray after Eutyches.

   Although I hope, beloved, you are devoted to every good work, yet that
   your activity may be rendered the more effective, it was needful and
   fitting to despatch my brothers Lucentius the bishop and Basil the
   presbyter, as we [416] promised, to ally themselves with you, beloved,
   that nothing may be done either indecisively or lazily in matters,
   which concern the welfare of the universal Church; for as long as you
   are on the spot, to whom we have entrusted the carrying out of our
   will, all things can be conducted with such moderation that the claims
   of neither kindness nor justice may be neglected, but without the
   accepting of persons, the Divine judgment may be considered in
   everything.  But that this may be properly observed and guarded, the
   integrity of the catholic Faith must first of all be preserved, and,
   because in all cases ?narrow? and steep ?is the way that leadeth unto
   life [417] ,? there must be no deviation from its track, either to the
   right hand or to the left.  And because the evangelical and Apostolic
   Faith has to combat all errors, on the one side casting down Nestorius,
   on the other crushing Eutyches and his accomplices, remember the need
   of observing this rule, that all those who in that synod [418] , which
   cannot, and does not deserve to have the name of Synod, and in which
   Dioscorus displayed his bad feeling, and Juvenal [419] his ignorance,
   grieve as we learn from your account, beloved, that they were conquered
   by fear, and being overcome with terror, were able to be forced to
   assent to that iniquitous judgment, and who now desire to obtain
   catholic communion, are to receive the peace of the brethren after due
   assurance of repentance, on condition that in no doubtful terms they
   anathematize, execrate and condemn Eutyches and his dogma and his
   adherents.

   II.  The case of the more serious offenders must be reserved for the
   present.

   But concerning those who have sinned more gravely in this matter, and
   claimed for themselves a higher place in the same unhappy synod, in
   order to irritate the simple minds of their lowlier brethren by their
   pernicious arrogance, if they return to their right mind, and ceasing
   to defend their action, turn themselves to the condemnation of their
   particular error, if these men give such assurance of penitence as
   shall seem indisputable, let their case be reserved for the maturer
   deliberations of the Apostolic See, that when all things have been
   sifted and weighed, the right conclusion may be arrived at about their
   real actions.  And in the Church over which the Lord has willed you to
   rule, let none such as we have already written [420] have their names
   read at the altar until the course of events shows what ought to be
   determined concerning them.

   III.  Anatolius is requested to co-operate loyally with Leo's
   delegates.

   But concerning the address [421] presented to us by your clergy,
   beloved, there is no need to put my sentiments into a letter:  it is
   sufficient to entrust all to my delegates, whose words shall carefully
   instruct you on every point.  And so, dearest brother, do you endeavour
   with these brethren whom we have chosen as suitable agents in so great
   a matter faithfully and effectually to carry out what is agreeable to
   the Church of God:  especially as the very nature of the case, and the
   promise of Divine aid incite you, and our most gracious princes show
   such holy faith, such religious devotion, that we find in them not only
   the general sympathy of Christians, but even that of the priesthood.
   Who assuredly in accordance with that piety, whereby they boast
   themselves to be servants of God, will receive all your suggestions for
   the benefit of the catholic Faith in a worthy spirit, so that by their
   aid also the peace of Christendom can be restored and wicked error
   destroyed.  And if on any points more advice is needed, let word be
   quickly sent to us, that after investigating the nature of the case, we
   may carefully prescribe the rightful measures.  Dated 9th of June in
   the consulship of the illustrious Adelfius (451).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [416] Viz., in Letter LXXX., chap, iv.:  see also chap. iii.

   [417] S. Matt. vii. 14.

   [418] Sc. the so-called Latrocinium.

   [419] See n. 8 to Letter LXXX., chap. iii.

   [420] Viz., in Letter LXXX., chap. iii., where see note.

   [421] Commonitorium.  Nothing further seems known of this.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXVI.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   (Begging him for friendship's and the Church's sake to assist his
   legates in quelling the remnants of heresy.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXVII.

   To Anatolius, Bishop of Constantinople.

   (Commending to him two presbyters, Basil and John, who being accused of
   heresy had come to Rome, and quite convinced Leo of their orthodoxy.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXVIII.

   To Paschasinus, Bishop of Lilybaeum.

   Leo, the bishop, to Paschasinus, bishop of Lilybaeum.

   I.  He sends a copy of the Tome and still further explains the
   heterodoxy of Eutyches.

   Although I doubt not all the sources of scandal are fully known to you,
   brother, which have arisen in the churches of the East about the
   Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, yet, lest anything might have
   chanced to escape your care, I have despatched for your attentive
   perusal and study our letter [422] , which deals with this matter in
   the fullest way, which we sent to Flavian of holy memory, and which the
   universal Church has accepted; in order that, understanding how
   completely this whole blasphemous error has with God's aid been
   destroyed, you yourself also in your love towards God may show the same
   spirit, and know that they are utterly to be abhorred, who, following
   the blasphemy and madness of Eutyches, have dared to say there are not
   two natures, i.e. perfect Godhead and perfect manhood, in our Lord, the
   only-begotten Son of God, who took upon Himself to restore mankind; and
   think they can deceive our wariness by saying they believe the one
   nature of the Word to be Incarnate, whereas the Word of God in the
   Godhead of the Father, and of Himself, and of the Holy Spirit has
   indeed one nature; but when He took on Him the reality of our flesh,
   our nature also was united to His unchangeable substance:  for even
   Incarnation could not be spoken of, unless the Word took on Him the
   flesh.  And this taking on of flesh forms so complete a union, that not
   only in the blessed Virgin's child-bearing, but also in her conception,
   no division must be imagined between the Godhead and the life-endowed
   flesh [423] , since in the unity of person the Godhead and the manhood
   came together both in the conception and in the childbearing of the
   Virgin.

   II.  Eutyches might have been warned by the fate of former heretics.

   A like blasphemy, therefore, is to be abhorred in Eutyches, as was once
   condemned and overthrown by the Fathers in former heretics:  and their
   example ought to have benefited this foolish fellow, in putting him on
   his guard against that which he could not grasp by his own sense, lest
   he should render void the peerless mystery of our salvation by denying
   the reality of human flesh in our Lord Jesus Christ.  For, if there is
   not in Him true and perfect human nature, there is no taking of us upon
   Him, and the whole of our belief and teaching according to his heresy
   is emptiness and lying.  But because the Truth does not lie and the
   Godhead is not passible, there abides in God the Word both substances
   in one Person, and the Church confesses her Saviour in such a way as to
   acknowledge Him both impassible in Godhead and passible in flesh, as
   says the Apostle, ?although He was crucified through (our) weakness,
   yet He lives by the power of God [424] .?

   III.  He sends quotations from the Fathers, and announces that the
   churches of the East have accepted the Tome.

   And in order that you may be the fuller instructed in all things,
   beloved, I have sent you certain quotations from our holy Fathers, that
   you may clearly gather what they felt and what they preached to the
   churches about the mystery of the Lord's Incarnation, which quotations
   our deputies produced at Constantinople also together with our
   epistle.  And you must understand that the whole church of
   Constantinople, with all the monasteries and many bishops, have given
   their assent to it, and by their subscription have anathematized
   Nestorius and Eutyches with their dogmas.  You must also understand
   that I have recently received the bishop of Constantinople's letter,
   which states that the bishop of Antioch has sent instructions to all
   the bishops throughout his provinces, and gained their assent to my
   epistle, and their condemnation of Nestorius and Eutyches in like
   manner.

   IV.  He asks him to settle the discrepancy between the Alexandrine and
   the Roman calculation of Easter for 455, by consulting the proper
   authority.

   This also we think necessary to enjoin upon your care that you should
   diligently inquire in those quarters where you are sure of information
   concerning that point in the reckoning of Easter, which we have found
   in the table [425] of Theophilus, and which greatly exercises us, and
   that you should discuss with those who are learned in such
   calculations, as to the date, when the day of the Lord's resurrection
   should be held four years hence.  For, whereas the next Easter is to be
   held by God's goodness on March 23rd, the year after on April 12th, the
   year after that on April 4th, Theophilus of holy memory has fixed April
   24th to be observed in 455, which we find to be quite contrary to the
   rule of the Church; but in our Easter cycles [426] as you know very
   well, Easter that year is set down to be kept on April 17th.  And
   therefore, that all our doubts may be removed, we beg you carefully to
   discuss this point with the best authorities, that for the future we
   may avoid this kind of mistake.  Dated June 24th in the consulship of
   the illustrious Adelfius (451).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [422] Sc. Letter XXVIII. (Tome).

   [423] Caro animata.

   [424] 2 Cor. xiii. 4.

   [425] His Laterculum Pashale is meant, in which he calculated Easter
   for 100 years from 375.  A similar dispute had ocurred in 444, in which
   we have S. Cyril's and Paschasinus' Letters (II and III. of series) to
   Leo, but not Leo's answers.

   [426] The Latin Easter cycles were calculated for 84 years.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter LXXXIX.

   To Marcian Augustus.

   (Appointing Paschasinus the bishop and Boniface a presbyter, and Julian
   the bishop, his representatives at the Synod, as the Emperor is
   determined it should be held at once.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XC.

   To Marcian Augustus.

   (Assenting perforce to the meeting of the Synod, but begging him to see
   that the Faith be not discussed as doubtful.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCI.

   To Anatolius, Bishop of Constantinople.

   (Telling him that he has appointed Paschasinus, Boniface, and Julian,
   bishop of Cos, to represent him at the Synod.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCII.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   (Asking him to act as one of his representatives at the Synod.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCIII.

   To the Synod of Chalcedon.

   Leo, the bishop of the city of Rome, to the holy Synod, assembled at
   Nicaea [427] .

   I.  He excuses his absence from the Synod, and introduces his
   representatives.

   I had indeed prayed, dearly beloved, on behalf of my dear colleagues
   that all the Lord's priests would persist in united devotion to the
   catholic Faith, and that no one would be misled by favour or fear of
   secular powers into departure from the way of Truth; but because many
   things often occur to produce penitence and God's mercy transcends the
   faults of delinquents, and vengeance is postponed in order that
   reformation may have place, we must make much of our most merciful
   prince's piously intentioned Council, in which he has desired your holy
   brotherhood to assemble for the purpose of destroying the snares of the
   devil and restoring the peace of the Church, so far respecting the
   rights and dignity of the most blessed Apostle Peter as to invite us
   too by letter to vouchsafe our presence at your venerable Synod.  That
   indeed is not permitted either by the needs of the times or by any
   precedent.  Yet in these brethren, that is Paschasinus and Lucentius,
   bishops, Boniface and Basil, presbyters, who have been deputed by the
   Apostolic See, let your brotherhood reckon that I am presiding [428] at
   the Synod; for my presence is not withdrawn from you, who am now
   represented by my vicars, and have this long time been really with you
   in the proclaiming of the catholic Faith:  so that you who cannot help
   knowing what we believe in accordance with ancient tradition, cannot
   doubt what we desire.

   II.  He entreats them to re-State the Faith as laid down in the Tome.

   Wherefore, brethren most dear, let all attempts at impugning the
   Divinely-inspired Faith be entirely put down, and the vain unbelief of
   heretics be laid to rest:  and let not that be defended which may not
   be believed:  since in accordance with the authoritative statements of
   the Gospel, in accordance with the utterances of the prophets, and the
   teaching of the Apostles, with the greatest fulness and clearness in
   the letter which we sent to bishop Flavian of happy memory, it has been
   laid down what is the loyal and pure confession upon the mystery of our
   Lord Jesus Christ's Incarnation.

   III.  The ejected bishops must be restored, and the Nestorian canons
   retain their force.

   But because we know full well that through evil jealousies the state of
   many churches has been disturbed, and a large number of bishops have
   been driven from their Sees for not receiving the heresy and conveyed
   into exile, while others have been put into their places though yet
   alive, to these wounds first of all must the healing of justice be
   applied, nor must any one be deprived of his own possession that some
   one else may enjoy it:  for if, as we desire, all forsake their error,
   no one need lose his present rank, and those who have laboured for the
   Faith ought to have their rights restored with every privilege.  Let
   the decrees specially directed against Nestorius of the former Synod of
   Ephesus, at which bishop Cyril of holy memory presided, still retain
   their force, lest the heresy then condemned flatter itself in aught
   because Eutyches is visited with condign execration.  For the purity of
   the Faith and doctrine which we proclaim in the same spirit as our holy
   Fathers, equally condemns and impugns the Nestorian and the Eutychian
   misbelief with its supporters.  Farewell in the Lord, brethren most
   dear.  Dated 26th [429] of June, in the consulship of the illustrious
   Adelfius (451).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [427] In accordance with instructions, the bishops, to the number of
   529, first met at Nicaea, in Bithynia, the scene of the famous First
   General Council:  but the Emperor Marcian was afraid to go so far from
   Constantinople, and so they were summoned to Chalcedon, which was much
   nearer, on the eastern shore of the Bosporus.  There the Council opened
   on Oct. 8, 451.

   [428] The right of presiding, which he here virtually claims for his
   delegates, seems actually to have been accorded to them by the council.

   [429] The Ball. think the date should be the 27th.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCIV.

   To Marcian Augustus.

   (Commending his legates to him and praying for the full success of the
   Synod, if it adhere to the Faith once delivered to the saints.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCV.

   To Pulcheria Augusta by the Hand of Theoctistus the Magistrian [430] .

   Leo, the bishop to Pulcheria Augusta.

   I.  He informs the Empress that he has loyally recognized the Council
   ordered by her, and sent representatives with letters to it.

   Your clemency's religious care which you unceasingly bestow on the
   catholic Faith, I recognize in everything, and give God thanks at
   seeing you take such interest in the universal Church, that I can
   confidently suggest what I think agreeable to justice and kindness, and
   so what thus far your pious zeal through the mercy of Christ has
   irreproachably accomplished, may the more speedily be brought to an
   issue which we shall be thankful for, O most noble Augusta.  Your
   clemency's command, therefore, that a Synod should be held at Nicaea
   [431] , and your gently expressed refusal of my request that it should
   be held in Italy, so that all the bishops in our parts might be
   summoned and assemble, if the state of affairs had permitted them, I
   have received in a spirit so far removed from scorn as to nominate two
   of my fellow-bishops and fellow-presbyters respectively to represent
   me, sending also to the venerable synod an appropriate missive from
   which the brotherhood therein assembled might learn the standard
   necessary to be maintained in their decision, lest any rashness should
   do detriment either to the rules of the Faith, or to the provisions of
   the canons, or to the remedies required by the spirit of loving
   kindness.

   II.  In the settlement of this matter that moderation must be observed
   which was entirely absent at Ephesus.

   For, as I have very often stated in letters from the beginning of this
   matter, I have desired that such moderation should be observed in the
   midst of discordant views and carnal jealousies that, whilst nothing
   should be allowed to be wrested from or added to the purity of the
   Faith, yet the remedy of pardon should be granted to those who return
   to unity and peace.  Because the works of the devil are then more
   effectually destroyed when men's hearts are recalled to the love of God
   and their neighbours.  But how contrary to my warnings and entreaties
   were their actions then, it is a long story to explain, nor is the need
   to put down in the pages of a letter all that was allowed to be
   perpetrated in that meeting, not of judges but of robbers, at Ephesus;
   where the chief men of the synod spared neither those brethren who
   opposed them nor those who assented to them, seeing that for the
   breaking down of the catholic Faith and the strengthening of execrable
   heresy, they stripped some of their rightful rank and tainted others
   with complicity in guilt; and surely their cruelty was worse to those
   whom by persuasion they divorced from innocence, than to those whom by
   persecution they made blessed confessors.

   III.  Those who recant their error must be treated with forbearance.

   And yet because such men have harmed themselves most by their
   wrong-doing, and because the greater the wounds, the more careful must
   be the application of the remedy, I have never in any letter maintained
   that pardon must be withheld even from them if they came to their right
   mind.  And although we unchangeably abhor their heresy, which is the
   greatest enemy of Christian religion, yet the men themselves, if they
   without any doubt amend their ways and clear themselves by full
   assurances of repentance, we do not judge to be outcasts from the
   unspeakable mercy of God:  but rather we lament with those that lament,
   ?we weep with those that weep [432] ,? and obey the requirements of
   justice in deposing without neglecting the remedies of
   loving-kindness:  and this, as your piety knows, is not a mere
   word-promise, but is also borne out by our actions, inasmuch as nearly
   all who had been either misled or forced into assenting to the
   presiding bishops, by rescinding what they had decreed and by
   condemning what they had written, have obtained complete acquittal from
   guilt and the boon of Apostolic peace.

   IV.  Even the authors of the mischief may find room for forgiveness by
   repentance.

   If, therefore, your clemency deigns to reflect upon my motives, it will
   be satisfied that I have acted throughout with the design of bringing
   about the abolition of the heresy without the loss of one soul; and
   that in the case of the authors of these cruel disturbances I have
   modified my practice somewhat in order that their slow minds might be
   aroused by some feelings of compunction to ask for lenient treatment.
   For although since their decision, which is no less blasphemous than
   unjust, they cannot be held in such honour by the catholic brotherhood
   as they once were, yet they still retain their sees and their rank as
   bishops, with the prospect either of receiving the peace of the whole
   Church, after true and necessary signs of repentance or, if (which God
   forbid) they persist in their heresy, of reaping the reward of their
   misbelief.  Dated 20th of July, in the consulship of the illustrious
   Adelfius (451).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [430] The Magistriani were what would now be called King's Messengers:
   another name for them was agentes in rebus. and they were under the
   direction of the Imperial Magister Officiorum.

   [431] See n. 4 on Letter XCIII. i.

   [432] Rom. xii. 15.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCVI.

   To Ravennius, Bishop of Arles.

   (Requesting him to keep Easter on March 23 in 452.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCVII.

   From Eusebius, Bishop of Milan, to Leo.

   (Informing him that the Tome has been approved by the Synod of Milan,
   and containing the subscriptions of the bishops there assembled.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCVIII.

   From the Synod of Chalcedon to Leo.

   The great and holy and universal Synod, which by the grace of God and
   the sanction of our most pious and Christ-loving Emperors has been
   gathered together in the metropolis of Chalcedon in the province of
   Bithynia, to the most holy and blessed archbishop of Rome, Leo.

   I.  They congratulate Leo on taking the foremost part in maintaining
   the Faith.

   ?Our mouth was filled with joy and our tongue with exultation [433] .?
   This prophecy grace has fitly appropriated to us for whom the security
   of religion is ensured.  For what is a greater incentive to
   cheerfulness than the Faith? what better inducement to exultation than
   the Divine knowledge which the Saviour Himself gave us from above for
   salvation, saying, ?go ye and make disciples of all the nations,
   baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
   Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things that I have enjoined
   you [434] .?  And this golden chain leading down from the Author of the
   command to us, you yourself have stedfastly preserved, being set as the
   mouthpiece unto all of the blessed Peter, and imparting the blessedness
   of his Faith unto all.  Whence we too, wisely taking you as our guide
   in all that is good, have shown to the sons of the Church their
   inheritance of Truth, not giving our instruction each singly and in
   secret, but making known our confession of the Faith in conceit, with
   one consent and agreement.  And we were all delighted, revelling, as at
   an imperial banquet, in the spiritual food, which Christ supplied to us
   through your letter:  and we seemed to see the Heavenly Bridegroom
   actually present with us.  For if ?where two or three are gathered
   together in His name,? He has said that ?there He is in the midst of
   them [435] ,? must He not have been much more particularly present with
   520 priests, who preferred the spread of knowledge concerning Him to
   their country and their ease?  Of whom you were chief, as the head to
   the members, showing your goodwill [436] in the person of those who
   represented you; whilst our religious Emperors presided to the
   furtherance of due order, inviting us to restore the doctrinal fabric
   of the Church, even as Zerubbabel invited Joshua to rebuild Jerusalem
   [437] .

   II.  They detail Dioscorus' wicked acts.

   And the adversary would have been like a wild beast outside the fold,
   roaring to himself and unable to seize any one, had not the late bishop
   of Alexandria thrown himself for a prey to him, who, though he had done
   many terrible things before, eclipsed the former by the latter deeds;
   for contrary to all the injunctions of the canons, he deposed that
   blessed shepherd of the saints at Constantinople, Flavian, who
   displayed such Apostolic faith, and the most pious bishop Eusebius, and
   acquitted by his terror-won votes Eutyches, who had been condemned for
   heresy, and restored to him the dignity which your holiness had taken
   away from him as unworthy of it, and like the strangest of wild beasts,
   falling upon the vine which he found in the finest condition, he
   uprooted it and brought in that which had been cast away as unfruitful,
   and those who acted like true shepherds he cut off, and set over the
   flocks those who had shown themselves wolves:  and besides all this he
   stretched forth his fury even against him who had been charged with the
   custody of the vine by the Saviour, we mean of course your holiness,
   and purposed excommunication against one who had at heart the unifying
   of the Church.  And instead of showing penitence for this, instead of
   begging mercy with tears, he exulted as if over virtuous actions,
   rejecting your holiness' letter and resisting all the dogmas of the
   Truth.

   III.  We have deposed Eutyches, treating him as mercifully as we could.

   And we ought to have left him in the position where he had placed
   himself:  but, since we profess the teaching of the Saviour ?who wishes
   all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the Truth [438] ,? as
   a fact we took pains to carry out this merciful policy towards him, and
   called him in brotherly fashion to judgment, not as if trying to cut
   him off but affording him room for defence and healing; and we prayed
   that he might be victorious over the many charges they had brought
   against him, in order that we might conclude our meeting in peace and
   happiness and Satan might gain no advantage over us.  But he, being
   absolutely convicted by his own conscience [439] , by shirking the
   trial gave countenance to the accusations and rejected the three lawful
   summonses he received.  In consequence of which, we ratified with such
   moderation as we could the vote which he had passed against himself by
   his blunders, stripping the wolf of his shepherd's skin, which he had
   long been convicted of wearing for a pretence.  Thereupon our troubles
   ceased and straightway a time of welcome happiness set in:  and having
   pulled up one tare, we filled the whole world to our delight with pure
   grain:  and having received, as it were, full power to root up and to
   plant, we limited the up-rooting to one and carefully plant a crop of
   good fruit.  For it was God who worked, and the triumphant Euphemia who
   crowned the meeting as for a bridal [440] , and who, taking our
   definition of the Faith as her own confession, presented it to her
   Bridegroom by our most religious Emperor and Christ-loving Empress,
   appeasing all the tumult of opponents and establishing our confession
   of the Truth as acceptable to Him, and with hand and tongue setting her
   seal [441] to the votes of us all in proclamation thereof.  These are
   the things we have done, with you present in the spirit and known to
   approve of us as brethren, and all but visible to us through the wisdom
   of your representatives.

   IV.  They announce their decision that Constantinople should take
   precedence next to Rome, and ask Leo's consent to it.

   And we further inform you that we have decided on other things also for
   the good management and stability of church matters, being persuaded
   that your holiness will accept and ratify them, when you are told.  The
   long prevailing custom, which the holy Church of God at Constantinople
   had of ordaining metropolitans for the provinces of Asia, Pontus and
   Thrace, we have now ratified by the votes of the Synod, not so much by
   way of conferring a privilege on the See of Constantinople as to
   provide for the good government of those cities, because of the
   frequent disorders that arise on the death of their bishops, both
   clergy and laity being then without a leader and disturbing church
   order.  And this has not escaped your holiness, particularly in the
   case of Ephesus, which has often caused you annoyance [442] .  We have
   ratified also the canon of the 150 holy Fathers who met at
   Constantinople in the time of the great Theodosius of holy memory,
   which ordains that after your most holy and Apostolic See, the See of
   Constantinople shall take precedence, being placed second:  for we are
   persuaded that with your usual care for others you have often extended
   that Apostolic prestige which belongs to you, to the church in
   Constantinople also, by virtue of your great disinterestedness in
   sharing all your own good things with your spiritual kinsfolk.
   Accordingly vouchsafe most holy and blessed father to accept as your
   own wish, and as conducing to good government the things which we have
   resolved on for the removal of all confusion and the confirmation of
   church order.  For your holiness' delegates, the most pious bishops
   Paschasinus and Lucentius, and with them the right Godly presbyter
   Boniface, attempted vehemently to resist these decisions, from a strong
   desire that this good work also should start from your foresight, in
   order that the establishment of good order as well as of the Faith
   should be put to your account.  For we duly regarding our most devout
   and Christ loving Emperors, who delight therein, and the illustrious
   senate and, so to say, the whole imperial city, considered it opportune
   to use the meeting of this ecumenical Synod for the ratification of
   your honour, and confidently corroborated this decision as if it were
   initiated by you with your customary fostering zeal, knowing that every
   success of the children rebounds to the parent's glory.  Accordingly,
   we entreat you, honour our decision by your assent, and as we have
   yielded to the head our agreement on things honourable, so may the head
   also fulfil for the children what is fitting.  For thus will our pious
   Emperors be treated with due regard, who have ratified your holiness'
   judgment as law, and the See of Constantinople will receive its
   recompense for having always displayed such loyalty on matters of
   religion towards you, and for having so zealously linked itself to you
   in full agreement.  But that you may know that we have done nothing for
   favour or in hatred, but as being guided by the Divine Will, we have
   made known to you the whole scope of our proceedings to strengthen our
   position and to ratify and establish what we have done [443] .
     __________________________________________________________________

   [433] Ps. cxxvi. 2.

   [434] S. Matt. xxviii. 19, 20.

   [435] Ibid. xviii. 20.

   [436] eunoian:  others read euboulian (good advice).

   [437] The reference is to Ezra iii. 2.

   [438] 1 Tim. ii. 4.

   [439] en heauto akraton tou suneidotos echon ton elenchon.  There
   seems, however, some grounds, but no actual necessity for the reading
   engraphon = written (instead of akraton) adopted by the Ball.

   [440] he ton sullogon to numphoni (lit. bride-chamber) stephanousa
   kallinikos Euphemia; this obscure passage is to a certain extent
   elucidated by Letter CI., chap. iii. (q.v.).  The martyr, Euphemia,
   seems to have been a sort of patron saint of Chalcedon.

   [441] episphragisasa; others epipsephisasa, which seems meaningless
   here.

   [442] The reference (acc. to Ball.) is to the dispute about the
   bishopric between Bassian and Stephen, in which Leo interfered, though
   the letter is not extant.

   [443] One of the Latin versions adds the names and titles of the
   subscribing bishops here.  For the subject matter of Chap. iv., see
   Introduction, p. viii.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter XCIX.

   From Ravennus and Other Gallic Bishops.

   (Announcing that the Tome has been accepted in Gaul also as a
   definitive statement of the Faith, with the bishops' subscriptions.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter C.

   From the Emperor Marcian.

   (Dealing much more briefly with the same subjects as Letter XCVIII.
   above.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CI.

   From Anatolius, Bishop of Constantinople, to Leo.

   (Dealing with much the same subjects as Letter XCVIII. from Anatolius'
   own standpoint:  Chap. iii. is translated in extenso as illustrating
   XCVIII., chap. iii.)

   III.  He describes the circumstances under which the doctrine of the
   Incarnation had been formulated by the Synod.

   But since after passing judgment upon him we had to come to an
   agreement with prayers and tears upon a definition of the right Faith;
   for that was the chief reason for the Emperor's summoning the holy
   Synod, at which your holiness was present in the spirit with us, and
   wrought with us by the God-fearing men who were sent from you; we,
   having the protection of the most holy and beautiful martyr Euphemia,
   have all given ourselves to this important matter with all
   deliberateness.  And as the occasion demanded that all the assembled
   holy bishops should publish a unanimous decision for clearness and for
   an explicit statement of the Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ the Lord
   God who is found and revealed even to those who seek Him not, yes, even
   to those who ask not for Him [444] , in spite of some attempts to
   resist at first, nevertheless showed us His Truth, and ordained that it
   should be written down and proclaimed by all unanimously and without
   gainsaying, which thus confirmed the souls of the strong, and invited
   into the way of Truth all who were swerving therefrom.  And, indeed,
   after unanimously setting our names to this document, we who have
   assembled in this ecumenical Synod in the name of the Faith of the same
   most holy and triumphant martyr, Euphemia, and of our most religious
   and Christ-loving Emperor Marcian, and our most religious and in all
   things most faithful daughter the Empress Pulcheria Augusta, with
   prayer and joy and happiness, having laid on the holy altar the
   definition written in accordance with your holy epistle for the
   confirmation of our Fathers' Faith, presented it to their pious care;
   for thus they had asked to receive it, and, having received it, they
   glorified with us their Master Christ, who had driven away all the mist
   of heresy and had graciously made clear the word of Truth.  And in this
   way was simultaneously established the peace of the Church and the
   agreement of the priests concerning the pure Faith by the Saviour's
   mercy.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [444] Cf. Is. lxv. 1.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CII.

   To the Gallic Bishops.

   (Thanking them for their letter (viz. XCIX.) to him, and announcing the
   result of the Synod of Chalcedon.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CIII.

   To the Gallic Bishops.

   (Written later:  enclosing a copy of the sentence against Eutyches and
   Dioscorus.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CIV.

   Leo, the Bishop, to Marcian Augustus.

   (To Marcian Augustus, about the presumption of Anatolius, by the hand
   of Lucian the bishop and Basil the deacon.)

   I.  He congratulates the Emperor on his share in the triumph of the
   catholic Faith.

   By the great bounty of God's mercy the joys of the whole catholic
   Church were multiplied when through your clemency's holy and glorious
   zeal the most pestilential error was abolished among us; so that our
   labours the more speedily reached their desired end, because your
   God-serving Majesty had so faithfully and powerfully assisted them.
   For although the liberty of the Gospel had to be defended against
   certain dissentients in the power of the Holy Ghost, and through the
   instrumentality of the Apostolic See, yet God's grace has shown itself
   more manifestly (than we could have hoped) by vouchsafing to the world
   that in the victory of the Truth only the authors of the violation of
   the Faith should perish [445] and the Church restored to her
   soundness.  Accordingly the war which the enemy of our peace had
   stirred up, was so happily ended, the Lord's right hand fighting for
   us, that when Christ triumphed all His priests shared in the one
   victory, and when the light of Truth shone forth, only the shades of
   error, with its champions, were dispelled.  For as in believing the
   Lord's own resurrection, with a view to strengthen the beginnings of
   Faith, confidence was much increased by the fact that certain Apostles
   doubted of the bodily reality of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by
   examining the prints of the nails and the wound of the spear with sight
   and touch removed the doubts of all by doubting; so now, too, while the
   misbelief of some is refuted, the hearts of all hesitaters are
   strengthened, and that which caused blindness to some few avails for
   the enlightenment of the whole body.  In which work your clemency duly
   and rightly rejoices, having faithfully and properly provided that the
   devil's snares should do no hurt to the Eastern churches, but that to
   propitiate God everywhere more acceptable holocausts should be offered;
   seeing that through the mediator between God and man, the Man Christ
   Jesus, one and the self-same creed is held by people, priests, and
   princes, O most glorious son and most clement Augustus.

   II.  Considering all the circumstances Anatolius might have been
   expected to show more modesty.

   But now that these things, about which so great a concourse of priests
   assembled, have been brought to a good and desirable conclusion, I am
   surprised and grieved that the peace of the universal Church which had
   been divinely restored is again being disturbed by a spirit of
   self-seeking.  For although my brother Anatolius seems necessarily to
   have consulted his own interest in forsaking the error of those who
   ordained him, and with salutary change of mind accepting the catholic
   Faith, yet he ought to have taken care not to mar by any depravity of
   desire that which he is known to have obtained through your means [446]
   .  For we, having regard to your faith and intervention, though his
   antecedents were suspicious on account of those who consecrated him
   [447] , wished to be kind rather than just towards him, that by the use
   of healing measures we might assuage all disturbances which through the
   operations of the devil had been excited; and this ought to have made
   him modest rather than the opposite.  For even if he had been lawfully
   and regularly ordained for conspicuous merit, and by the wisest
   selection yet without respect to the canons of the Fathers, the
   ordinances of the Holy Ghost, and the precedents of antiquity, no votes
   could have availed in his favour.  I speak before a Christian and a
   truly religious, truly orthodox prince (when I say that) Anatolius the
   bishop detracts greatly from his proper merits in desiring undue
   aggrandizement.

   III.  The city of Constantinople, royal though it be, can never be
   raised to Apostolic rank.

   Let the city of Constantinople have, as we desire, its high rank, and
   under the protection of God's right hand, long enjoy your clemency's
   rule.  Yet things secular stand on a different basis from things
   divine:  and there can be no sure building save on that rock which the
   Lord has laid for a foundation.  He that covets what is not his due,
   loses what is his own.  Let it be enough for Anatolius that by the aid
   of your piety and by my favour and approval he has obtained the
   bishopric of so great a city.  Let him not disdain a city which is
   royal, though he cannot make it an Apostolic See [448] ; and let him on
   no account hope that he can rise by doing injury to others.  For the
   privileges of the churches determined by the canons of the holy
   Fathers, and fixed by the decrees of the Nicene Synod, cannot be
   overthrown by any unscrupulous act, nor disturbed by any innovation.
   And in the faithful execution of this task by the aid of Christ I am
   bound to display an unflinching devotion; for it is a charge entrusted
   to me, and it tends to my condemnation if the rules sanctioned by the
   Fathers and drawn up under the guidance of God's Spirit at the Synod of
   Nicaea for the government of the whole Church are violated with my
   connivance (which God forbid), and if the wishes of a single brother
   have more weight with me than the common good of the Lord's whole
   house.

   IV.  He asks the Emperor to express his disapproval of Anatolius'
   self-seeking spirit.

   And therefore knowing that your glorious clemency is anxious for the
   peace of the Church and extends its protection and approval to those
   measures which conduce to pacific unity, I pray and beseech you with
   earnest entreaty to refuse all sanction and protection to these
   unscrupulous attempts against Christian unity and peace, and put a
   salutary check upon my brother Anatolius' desires, which will only
   injure himself, if he persists:  that he may not desire things which
   are opposed to your glory and the needs of the times, and wish to be
   greater than his predecessors, and that it may be free for him to be as
   pre-eminent as he can in virtues, in which he will be partaker only if
   he prefer to be adorned with love rather than puffed up with ambition.
   The conception of this unwarrantable wish he ought indeed never to have
   received within the secret of his heart, but when my brothers and
   fellow-bishops who were there to represent me withstood him, he might
   at least have desisted from his unlawful self-seeking at their
   wholesome opposition.  For both your gracious Majesty and his own
   letter affirm that the legates of the Apostolic See opposed him as they
   ought with the most justifiable resistance, so that his presumption was
   the less excusable in that not even when rebuked did it restrain
   itself.

   V.  And to try to bring him to a right mind.

   And hence, because it becomes your glorious faith that, as heresy was
   overthrown, God acting through you, so now all self-seeking should be
   defeated, do that which beseems both your Christian and your kingly
   goodness, so that the said bishop may obey the Fathers, further the
   cause of peace, and not think he had any right to ordain a bishop [449]
   for the Church of Antioch, as he presumed to do without any precedent
   and contrary to the provisions of the canons:  an act which from a
   longing to re-establish the Faith and in the interests of peace we have
   determined not to cancel.  Let him abstain therefore from doing despite
   to the rules of the Church and shun unlawful excesses, lest in
   attempting things unfavourable to peace he cut himself off from the
   universal Church.  I had much liefer love him for acting blamelessly
   than find him persist in this presumptuous frame of mind which may
   separate him from us all.  My brother and fellow-bishop, Lucian, who
   with my son, Basil the deacon, brought your clemency's letter to me,
   has fulfilled the duties he undertook as legate with all devotion:  for
   he must not be reckoned to have failed in his mission, the course of
   events having rather failed him.  Dated the 22nd of May in the
   consulship of the illustrious Herculanus (452).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [445] Perish spiritually he means, as the sequel shows, for at least
   one great and good man on the catholic side, Flavian perished
   corporeally.

   [446] Viz., the See of Constantinople.

   [447] Dioscorus in particular.

   [448] The chief Apostolicae sedes were Rome and Antioch, according to
   tradition founded by S. Peter, and Alexandria founded by his disciple
   S. Mark, and the See of Constantinople could not exercise jurisdiction
   over them.

   [449] One Maximus by name.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CV.

   (To Pulcheria Augusta about the self-seeking of Anatolius.)

   Leo the bishop to Pulcheria Augusta.

   I.  He congratulates the Empress on the triumph of the Faith, but
   regrets the introduction of a new controversy into the Church.

   We rejoice ineffably with your Grace that the catholic Faith has been
   defended against heretics and peace restored to the whole Church
   through your clemency's holy and God-pleasing zeal:  giving thanks to
   the Merciful and Almighty God that He has suffered none save those who
   loved darkness rather than light to be defrauded of the gospel-truth:
   so that by the removal of the mists of error the purest light might
   arise in the hearts of all, and that darkness-loving foe might not
   triumph over certain weak souls, whom not only those who stood unhurt
   but also those whom he had made to totter have overcome, and that by
   the abolition of error the true Faith might reign throughout the world,
   and ?every tongue might confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the
   glory of God the Father [450] .?  But when the whole world had been
   confirmed in the unity of the Gospel, and the hearts of all priests had
   been guided into the same belief, it had been better that besides those
   matters for which the holy Synod was assembled, and which were brought
   to a satisfactory agreement through your Grace's zeal, nothing should
   be introduced to counteract so great an advantage, and that a council
   of bishops should not be made an occasion for the inopportune advancing
   of an illegitimate desire.

   II.  The Nicene canons are unalterable and binding universally.

   For my brother and fellow-bishop Anatolius not sufficiently considering
   your Grace's kindness and the favour of my assent, whereby he gained
   the priesthood of the church of Constantinople, instead of rejoicing at
   what he has gained, has been inflamed with undue desires beyond the
   measure of his rank, believing that his intemperate self-seeking could
   be advanced by the assertion that certain persons had signified their
   assent thereto by an extorted signature:  notwithstanding that my
   brethren and fellow-bishops, who represented me, faithfully and
   laudably expressed their dissent from these attempts which are doomed
   to speedy failure.  For no one may venture upon anything in opposition
   to the enactments of the Fathers' canons which many long years ago in
   the city of Nicaea were founded upon the decrees of the Spirit, so that
   any one who wishes to pass any different decree injures himself rather
   than impairs them.  And if all pontiffs will but keep them inviolate as
   they should, there will be perfect peace and complete harmony through
   all the churches:  there will be no disagreements about rank, no
   disputes about ordinations, no controversies about privileges, no
   strifes about taking that which is another's; but by the fair law of
   love a reasonable order will be kept both in conduct and in office, and
   he will be truly great who is found free from all self-seeking, as the
   Lord says, ?Whosoever will become greater among you, let him be your
   minister, and whosoever will be first among you shall be your slave;
   even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto but to minister
   [451] .?  And yet these precepts were at the time given to men who
   wished to rise from a mean estate and to pass from the lowest to the
   highest things; but what more does the ruler of the church of
   Constantinople covet than he has gained? or what will satisfy him, if
   the magnificence and renown of so great a city is not enough?  It is
   too arrogant and intemperate thus to step beyond all proper bounds and
   trampling on ancient custom to wish to seize another's right:  to
   increase one man's dignity at the expense of so many metropolitans'
   primacy, and to carry a new war of confusion into peaceful provinces
   which were long ago set at rest by the enactments of the holy Nicene
   Synod:  to break through the venerable Fathers' decrees by alleging the
   consent of certain bishops, which even the course of so many years has
   not rendered effective.  For it is boasted that this has been winked at
   for almost 60 years now, and the said bishop thinks that he is assisted
   thereby; but it is vain for him to look for assistance from that which,
   even if a man dared to wish for it, yet he could never obtain.

   III. Only by imitating his predecessor will he regain Leo's
   confidence:  the assent of the bishops is declared null and void.

   Let him realize what a man he has succeeded, and expelling all the
   spirit of pride let him imitate Flavian's faith, Flavian's modesty,
   Flavian's humility, which has raised him right to a confessor's glory.
   If he will shine with his virtues, he will merit all praise, and in all
   quarters he will win an abundance of love not by seeking human
   advancement but by deserving Divine favour.  And by this careful course
   I promise he will bind my heart also to him, and the love of the
   Apostolic See, which we have ever bestowed on the church of
   Constantinople, shall never be violated by any change.  Because if
   sometimes rulers fall into errors through want of moderation, yet the
   churches of Christ do not lose their purity.  But the bishops' assents,
   which are opposed to the regulations of the holy canons composed at
   Nicaea in conjunction with your faithful Grace, we do not recognize,
   and by the blessed Apostle Peter's authority we absolutely dis-annul in
   comprehensive terms, in all ecclesiastical cases obeying those laws
   which the Holy Ghost set forth by the 318 bishops for the pacific
   observance of all priests in such sort that even if a much greater
   number were to pass a different decree to theirs, whatever was opposed
   to their constitution would have to be held in no respect.

   IV.  He requests the Empress to give his letter her favourable
   consideration.

   And so I request your Grace to receive in a worthy spirit this lengthy
   letter, in which I had to explain my views, at the hands of my brother
   and fellow-bishop Lucianus, who, as far as in him lies, has faithfully
   executed the anxious duties of his undertaking as my delegate, and of
   my son Basil, the deacon.  And because it is your habit to labour for
   the peace and unity of the Church, for his soul's health keep my
   brother Anatolius the bishop, to whom I have extended my love by your
   advice, within those limits which shall be profitable to him, that as
   your clemency's glory is magnified already for the restoration of the
   Faith, so it may be published abroad for the restraint of
   self-seeking.  Dated the 22nd of May, in the consulship of the
   illustrious Herculanus (452).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [450] Phil. i. 11.

   [451] S. Matt. xx. 26-28.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CVI.

   To Anatolius, Bishop of Constantinople, in rebuke of his self-seeking.

   Leo, the bishop, to Anatolius, the bishop.

   I.  He commends Anatolius for his orthodoxy, but condemns him for his
   presumption.

   Now that the light of Gospel Truth has been manifested, as we wished,
   through God's grace, and the night of most pestilential error has been
   dispelled from the universal Church, we are unspeakably glad in the
   Lord, because the difficult charge entrusted to us has been brought to
   the desired conclusion, even as the text of your letter announces, so
   that, according to the Apostle's teaching, ?we all speak the same
   thing, and that there be no schisms among us:  but that we be perfect
   in the same mind and in the same knowledge [452] .?  In devotion to
   which work we commend you, beloved, for taking part:  for thus you
   benefited those who needed correction by your activity, and purged
   yourself from all complicity with the transgressors.  For when your
   predecessor Flavian, of happy memory, was deposed for his defence of
   catholic Truth, not unjustly it was believed that your ordainers seemed
   to have consecrated one like themselves, contrary to the provision of
   the holy canons.  But God's mercy was present in this, directing and
   confirming you, that you might make good use of bad beginnings, and
   show that you were promoted not by men's judgment, but by God's
   loving-kindness:  and this may be accepted as true, on condition that
   you lose not the grace of this Divine gift by another cause of
   offence.  For the catholic, and especially the Lord's priest, must not
   only be entangled in no error, but also be corrupted by no
   covetousness; for, as says the Holy Scripture, ?Go not after thy lusts,
   and decline from thy desire. [453] ?  Many enticements of this world,
   many vanities must be resisted, that the perfection of true
   self-discipline may be attained the first blemish of which is pride,
   the beginning of transgression and the origin of sin.  For the mind
   greedy of power knows not either how to abstain from things forbidden
   nor to enjoy things permitted, so long as transgressions go unpunished
   and run into undisciplined and wicked excesses, and wrong doings are
   multiplied, which were only endured in our zeal for the restoration of
   the Faith and love of harmony [454] .

   II.  Nothing can cancel or modify the Nicene canons.

   And so after the not irreproachable beginning of your ordination, after
   the consecration of the bishop of Antioch, which you claimed for
   yourself contrary to the regulations of the canons, I grieve, beloved,
   that you have fallen into this too, that you should try to break down
   the most sacred constitutions of the Nicene canons [455] :  as if this
   opportunity had expressly offered itself to you for the See of
   Alexandria to lose its privilege of second place, and the church of
   Antioch to forego its right to being third in dignity, in order that
   when these places had been subjected to your jurisdiction, all
   metropolitan bishops might be deprived of their proper honour.  By
   which unheard of and never before attempted excesses you went so far
   beyond yourself as to drag into an occasion of self-seeking, and force
   connivance from that holy Synod which the zeal of our most Christian
   prince had convened, solely to extinguish heresy and to confirm the
   catholic Faith:  as if the unlawful wishes of a multitude could not be
   rejected, and that state of things which was truly ordained by the Holy
   Spirit in the canon of Nicaea could in any part be overruled by any
   one.  Let no synodal councils flatter themselves upon the size of their
   assemblies, and let not any number of priests, however much larger,
   dare either to compare or to prefer themselves to those 318 bishops,
   seeing that the Synod of Nicaea is hallowed by God with such privilege,
   that whether by fewer or by more ecclesiastical judgments are
   supported, whatever is opposed to their authority is utterly destitute
   of all authority.

   III.  The Synod of Chalcedon, which met for one purpose, ought never to
   have been used for another.

   Accordingly these things which are found to be contrary to those most
   holy canons are exceedingly unprincipled and misguided.  This haughty
   arrogance tends to the disturbance of the whole Church, which has
   purposed so to misuse a synodal council, as by wicked arguments to
   over-persuade, or by intimidation to compel, the brethren to agree with
   it, when they had been summoned simply on a matter of Faith, and had
   come to a decision on the subject which was to engage their care.  For
   it was on this ground that our brothers sent by the Apostolic see, who
   presided in our stead at the synod with commendable firmness, withstood
   their illegal attempts, openly protesting against the introduction of
   any reprehensible innovation contrary to the enactments of the Council
   of Nicaea.  And there can be no doubt about their opposition, seeing
   that you yourself in your epistle complain of their wish to contravene
   your attempts.  And therein indeed you greatly commend them to me by
   thus writing, whereas you accuse yourself in refusing to obey them
   concerning your unlawful designs, vainly seeking what cannot be
   granted, and craving what is bad for your soul's health, and can never
   win our consent.  For may I never be guilty of assisting so wrong a
   desire, which ought rather to be subverted by my aid, and that of all
   who think not high things, but agree with the lowly.

   IV.  The Nicene Canons are for universal application and not to be
   wrested to private interpretations.

   These holy and venerable fathers who in the city of Nicaea, after
   condemning the blasphemous Arius with his impiety, laid down a code of
   canons for the Church to last till the end of the world, survive not
   only with us but with the whole of mankind in their constitutions; and,
   if anywhere men venture upon what is contrary to their decrees, it is
   ipso facto null and void; so that what is universally laid down for our
   perpetual advantage can never be modified by any change, nor can the
   things which were destined for the common good be perverted to private
   interests; and thus so long as the limits remain, which the Fathers
   fixed, no one may invade another's right but each must exercise himself
   within the proper and lawful bounds, to the extent of his power, in the
   breadth of love; of which the bishop of Constantinople may reap the
   fruits richly enough, if he rather relies on the virtue of humility
   than is puffed up with the spirit of self-seeking.

   V.  The sanction alleged to have been accorded 60 years ago to the
   supremacy of Constantinople over Alexandria and Antioch is worthless.

   ?Be not highminded,? brother, ?but fear [456] ,? and cease to disquiet
   with unwarrantable demands the pious ears of Christian princes, who I
   am sure will be better pleased by your modesty than by your pride.  For
   your purpose is in no way whatever supported by the written assent of
   certain bishops given, as you allege, 60 years ago [457] , and never
   brought to the knowledge of the Apostolic See by your predecessors; and
   this transaction, which from its outset was doomed to fall through and
   has now long done so, you now wish to bolster up by means that are too
   late and useless, viz., by extracting from the brethren an appearance
   of consent which their modesty from very weariness yielded to their own
   injury.  Remember what the Lord threatens him with, who shall have
   caused one of the little ones to stumble, and get wisdom to understand
   what a judgment of God he will have to endure who has not feared to
   give occasion of stumbling to so many churches and so many priests.
   For I confess I am so fast bound by love of the whole brotherhood that
   I will not agree with any one in demands which are against his own
   interests, and thus you may clearly perceive that my opposition to you,
   beloved, proceeds from the kindly intention to restrain you from
   disturbing the universal Church by sounder counsel.  The rights of
   provincial primates may not be overthrown nor metropolitan bishops be
   defrauded of privileges based on antiquity.  The See of Alexandria may
   not lose any of that dignity which it merited through S. Mark, the
   evangelist and disciple of the blessed Peter, nor may the splendour of
   so great a church be obscured by another's clouds, Dioscorus having
   fallen through his persistence in impiety.  The church of Antioch too,
   in which first at the preaching of the blessed Apostle Peter the
   Christian name arose [458] , must continue in the position assigned it
   by the Fathers, and being set in the third place must never be lowered
   therefrom.  For the See is on a different footing to the holders of it;
   and each individual's chief honour is his own integrity.  And since
   that does not lose its proper worth in any place, how much more
   glorious must it be when placed in the magnificence of the city of
   Constantinople, where many priests may find both a defence of the
   Fathers' canons and an example of uprightness in observing you?

   VI.  Christian love demands self-denial not self-seeking.

   In thus writing to you, brother, I exhort and admonish you in the Lord,
   laying aside all ambitious desires to cherish rather a spirit of love
   and to adorn yourself to your profit with the virtues of love,
   according to the Apostle's teaching.  For love ?is patient and kind,
   and envies not, acts not iniquitously, is not puffed up, is not
   ambitious, seeks not its own [459] .?  Hence if love seeks not its own,
   how greatly does he sin who covets another's?  From which I desire you
   to keep yourself altogether, and to remember that sentence which says,
   ?Hold what thou hast, that no other take thy crown [460] .?  For if you
   seek what is not permitted, you will deprive yourself by your own
   action and judgment of the peace of the universal Church.  Our brother
   and fellow-bishop Lucian and our son Basil the deacon, attended to your
   injunctions with all the zeal they possessed, but justice refused to
   give effect to their pleadings.  Dated the 22nd of May in the
   consulship of the illustrious Herculanus (452).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [452] 1 Cor. i. 10.

   [453] Ecclesiasticus xviii. 30.  The application of the description
   ?Holy Scripture? to an Apocryphal book will not escape notice.

   [454] Cf. Letter CIV., chap. v.

   [455] The wording of Canon 6 is as follows:  mos antiquus perduret, in
   AEgypto vel Libya et Pentapoli, ut Alexandrinus episcopus horum omnium
   habeat potestatem, quoniam quidem et episcopo Romano parilis mos est.
   Similiter autem et apud Antiochiam ceterasque provincias (eparchias)
   honor suus unicuique servetur ecclesiae:  where, it will be noticed, no
   mention is made of Constantinople at all, so that its position is not
   explicitly defined either way.

   [456] Rom. xi. 20.

   [457] Cf. Letter CV., chap. ii. (end).

   [458] Acts xi. 26.

   [459] 1 Cor. xiii. 4.

   [460] Revel. iii. 11.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CVII.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   (Expostulating with him for putting personal considerations before the
   good of the Church in the matter of the precedence of the See of
   Constantinople.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CVIII.

   To Theodore, Bishop of Forum Julii.

   Leo, the bishop, to Theodore, bishop of Forum Julii.

   I.   Theodorus should not have approached him except through his
   metropolitan.

   Your first proceeding, when anxious, should have been to have consulted
   your metropolitan on the point which seemed to need inquiry, and if he
   too was unable to help you, beloved, you should both have asked to be
   instructed (by us); for in matters, which concern all the Lord's
   priests as a whole, no inquiry ought to be made without the primates.
   But in order that the consulter's doubts may in any case be set at
   rest, I will not keep back the Church's rules about the state of
   penitents.

   II.  The grace of penitence is for those who fall after baptism.

   The manifold mercy of God so assists men when they fall, that not only
   by the grace of baptism but also by the remedy of penitence is the hope
   of eternal life revived, in order that they who have violated the gifts
   of the second birth, condemning themselves by their own judgment, may
   attain to remission of their crimes, the provisions of the Divine
   Goodness having so ordained that God's indulgence cannot be obtained
   without the supplications of priests.  For the Mediator between God and
   men, the Man Christ Jesus, has transmitted this power to those that are
   set over the Church that they should both grant a course of penitence
   [461] to those who confess, and, when they are cleansed by wholesome
   correction admit them through the door of reconciliation to communion
   in the sacraments.  In which work assuredly the Saviour Himself
   unceasingly takes part and is never absent from those things, the
   carrying out of which He has committed to His ministers, saying:  ?Lo,
   I am with you all the days even to the completion of the age [462] :?
   so that whatever is accomplished through our service in due order and
   with satisfactory results we doubt not to have been vouchsafed through
   the Holy Spirit.

   III.  Penitence is sure only in this life.

   But if any one of those for whom we entreat God be hindered by some
   obstacle and lose the benefit of immediate absolution, and before he
   attain to the remedies appointed, end his days in the course of nature,
   he will not be able when stripped of the flesh to gain that which when
   yet in the body he did not receive.  And there will be no need for us
   to weigh the merits and acts of those who have thus died, seeing that
   the Lord our God, whose judgments cannot be found out, has reserved for
   His own decision that which our priestly ministry could not complete:
   for He wishes His power to be so feared that this fear may benefit all,
   and every one may dread that which happens to the lukewarm or
   careless.  For it is most expedient and essential that the guilt of
   sins should be loosed by priestly supplication before the last day of
   life.

   IV.  And yet penitence and reconciliation must not be refused to men in
   extremis.

   But to those who in time of need and in urgent danger implore the aid
   first of penitence, then of reconciliation, must neither means of
   amendment nor reconciliation be forbidden:  because we cannot place
   limits to God's mercy nor fix times for Him with whom true conversion
   suffers no delay of forgiveness, as says God's Spirit by the prophet,
   ?when thou hast turned and lamented, then shalt thou be saved [463] ;?
   and elsewhere, ?Declare thou thy iniquities beforehand, that thou
   may'st be justified [464] ;? and again, ?For with the Lord there is
   mercy, and with Him is plenteous redemption [465] .?  And so in
   dispensing God's gifts we must not be hard, nor neglect the tears and
   groans of self-accusers, seeing that we believe the very feeling of
   penitence springs from the inspiration of God, as says the Apostle,
   ?lest perchance God will give them repentance that they may recover
   themselves from the snares of the devil, by whom they are held captive
   at his will [466] .?

   V.  Hazardous as deathbed repentance is, the grace of absolution must
   not be refused even when it can be asked for only by signs.

   Hence it behoves each individual Christian to listen to the judgment of
   his own conscience, lest he put off the turning to God from day to day
   and fix the time of his amendment at the end of his life; for it is
   most perilous for human frailty and ignorance to confine itself to such
   conditions as to be reduced to the uncertainty of a few hours, and
   instead of winning indulgence by fuller amendment, to choose the narrow
   limits of that time when space is scarcely found even for the
   penitent's confession or the priest's absolution.  But, as I have said,
   even such men's needs must be so assisted that the free action of
   penitence and the grace of communion be not denied them, if they demand
   it even when their voice is gone, by the signs of a still clear
   intellect.  And if they be so overcome by the stress of their malady
   that they cannot signify in the priest's presence what just before they
   were asking for, the testimony of believers standing by must prevail
   for them, that they may obtain the benefit of penitence and
   reconciliation simultaneously, so long as the regulations of the
   Fathers' canons be observed in reference to those persons who have
   sinned against God by forsaking the Faith.

   VI.  He is to bring this letter to the notice of the metropolitan.

   These answers, brother, which I have given to your questions in order
   that nothing different be done under the excuse of ignorance, you shall
   bring to the notice of your metropolitan; that if there chance to be
   any of the brethren who before now have thought there was any doubt
   about these points, they may be instructed by him concerning what I
   have written to you.  Dated June 11th in the consulship of the
   illustrious Herculanus (452).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [461] Actionem (others not so well sanctionem) poeitentioe.

   [462] S. Matt. xxviii. 20.

   [463] Is. xxx. 15 (LXX.).

   [464] Is. xliii. 26 (LXX).

   [465] Ps. cxxx. 7.

   [466] 2 Tim. ii. 25, 26.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CIX.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   Leo, the pope, to Julian, the bishop.

   I.  He laments over the recent rioting in Palestine.

   The information which you give, brother, about the riotous doings of
   the false monks [467] is serious and to no slight degree lamentable;
   for they are due to the war which the wicked Eutyches by the madness of
   deceivers is waging against the preaching of the Gospel and the
   Apostles, though it will end in his own destruction and that of his
   followers:  but this is delayed by the long-suffering of God, in order
   that it may appear how greatly the enemies of the cross of Christ are
   enslaved to the devil; because heretical depravity, breaking through
   its ancient veil of pretence can no longer restrain itself within the
   limits of its hypocrisy, and has poured forth all its long-concealed
   poison, raging against the disciples of the Truth not only with pen but
   also with deeds of violence [468] , in order to wrest consent from
   unlearned simplicity or from panic-stricken faith.  But the sons of
   light ought not to be so afraid of the sons of darkness, as being sane
   to acquiesce in the ideas of madmen or to think that any respect should
   be shown to men of this kind; for, if they would rather perish than
   recover their senses, provision must be made lest their escape from
   punishment should do wider harm, and long toleration of them should
   lead to the destruction of many.

   II.  The ringleaders must be removed to a distance.

   I am not unaware what love and favour is due to our sons, those holy
   and true monks, who forsake not the moderation of their profession, and
   carry into practice what they promised by their vows.  But these
   insolent disturbers, who boast of their insults and injuries to priests
   [469] , are to be held not the slaves of Christ, but the soldiers of
   Antichrist, and must be chiefly humiliated in the person of their
   leaders, who incite the ignorant mob to uphold their insubordination.
   And hence, seeing that our most merciful Prince loves the catholic
   Faith with all the devotion of a religious heart, and is greatly
   offended at the effrontery of these rebel heretics, as is everywhere
   reported, we must appeal to his clemency that the instigators of these
   seditions be removed from their mad congregations; and not only
   Eutyches and Dioscorus but also any who have been forward in aiding
   their wrongheaded madness, be placed where they can hold no intercourse
   with their partners in blasphemy:  for the simpleness of some may
   chance to be healed by this method, and men will be more easily
   recalled to soundness of mind, if they be set free from the incitements
   of pestilential teachers.

   III.  He sends a letter of S. Athanasius to show that the present
   heresy is only a revival of former exploded heresies.

   But lest the instruction necessary for the confirmation of faithful
   spirits or the refutation of heretics should be wanting or not
   expressed, I have sent the letter of bishop Athanasius of holy memory
   addressed to bishop Epictetus [470] , whose testimony Cyril of holy
   memory made use of at the Synod of Ephesus against Nestorius, because
   it has so clearly and carefully set forth the Incarnation of the Word,
   as to overthrow both Nestorius and Eutyches by anticipation in the
   heresies of those times.  Let the followers of Eutyches and Dioscorus
   dare to accuse such an authority as this of ignorance or of heresy, who
   assert that our preaching goes astray from the teaching and the
   knowledge of the Fathers.  But it ought to avail for the confirmation
   of the minds of all the Lord's priests, who, having been already
   detected and condemned of heresy in respect of the authorities they
   followed, now begin more openly to set forth their blasphemous dogma,
   lest, if their meaning were hid beneath the cloke of silence it might
   still be doubtful whether the triple error of Apollinaris [471] , and
   the mad notion of the Manichees was really revived in them.  And as
   they no longer seek to hide themselves but rise boldly against the
   churches of Christ, must we not take care to destroy all the strength
   of their attempts, observing, as I have said, such discrimination as to
   separate the incorrigible from the more docile spirits:  for ?evil
   conversations corrupt good manners [472] ,? and ?the wise man will be
   sharper than the pestilent person who is chastised [473] ;? in order
   that in whatever way the society of the wicked is broken up, some
   vessels may be snatched from the devil's hand?  For we ought not to be
   so offended at scurrilous and empty words as to have no care for their
   correction.

   IV.  He expresses a hope that Juvenal's timely acknowledgment of error
   will be imitated by the rest.

   But bishop Juvenal, whose injuries are to be lamented, joined himself
   too rashly to those blasphemous heretics, and by embracing Eutyches and
   Dioscorus, drove many ignorant folk headlong by his example, albeit he
   afterwards corrected himself by wiser counsels.  These men, however,
   who drank in more greedily the wicked poison, have become the enemies
   of him, whose disciples they had been before, so that the very food he
   had supplied them was turned to his own ruin:  and yet it is to be
   hoped they will imitate him in amending his ways, if only the holy
   associations of the neighbourhood in which they dwell will help them to
   recover their senses.  But the character of him [474] who has usurped
   the place of a bishop still living cannot be doubted from the character
   of his actions, nor is it to be disputed that he who is loved by the
   assailants of the Faith must be a misbeliever.  Meanwhile, brother, do
   not hesitate to continue with anxious care to keep me acquainted with
   the course of events by more frequent letters.  Dated November 25th in
   the consulship of Herculanus (452).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [467] These were the monks of Palestine who immediately on Theodosius'
   return from the Synod stirred up great riots first in Jerusalem and
   then throughout Palestine.

   [468] Letters of the Emperor Marcion (quoted by Ball.) speak (1) of a
   letter written by Theodosius quas solus poterat fingere diabolus; and
   (2) of cruelties, tortures, and insults committed particularly in
   mulieres honestas et nobiles, whereby the rioters had not hesitated to
   force many to acquiesce in their wicked teaching.

   [469] They had slain Severian, Bishop of Scythopolis, and would also
   have slain Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, if he had not taken refuge in
   flight (Ball.).

   [470] A portion of this letter is among the quotations added at the end
   of Letter CLXV.  See also Vol. IV. p. 570.

   [471] What this triple error was will be found in Lett. LIX., chap. v.
   (q.v.):  cf. also Lett. CXXIV. and CLXVII.

   [472] 1 Cor. xv. 33.

   [473] Prov. xxi. 11, LXX

   [474] Sc. Theodosius
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CX.

   From Marcian Augustus.

   (Expressing surprise that Leo has not by now confirmed the acts of the
   Synod, and asking for a speedy confirmation.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXI.

   To Marcian Augustus.

   (About Anatolius' mistake in deposing Actions from the office of
   archdeacon and putting in Andrew instead.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXII.

   To Pulcheria Augusta.

   (On the same subject more briefly.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXIII.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   Leo, bishop of Rome, to Julian, bishop of Cos.

   I.  After thanks for Julian's sympathy he complains of the deposition
   of Aetius from the archdeaconry.

   I acknowledge in your letter, beloved, the feelings of brotherly love,
   in that you sympathize with us in true grief at the many grievous evils
   we have borne.  But we pray that these things which the Lord has either
   allowed or wished us to suffer, may avail to the correction of those
   who live through them [475] , and that adversities may cease through
   the cessation of offences.  Both which results will follow through the
   mercy of God, if only He remove the scourge and turn the hearts of His
   people to Himself.  But as you, brother, are saddened by the
   hostilities which have raged around us, so I am made anxious because,
   as your letter indicates, the treacherous attacks of heretics are not
   set at rest in the church of Constantinople, and men seek occasion to
   persecute those who have been the defenders of the catholic Faith.  For
   so long as Aetius is removed from his office of archdeacon under
   pretence of promotion [476] and Andrew is taken into his place, who had
   been cast off for associating with heretics; so long as respect is
   shown to the accusers of Flavian of holy memory, and the partners or
   disciples of that most pious confessor are put down, it is only too
   clearly shown what pleases the bishop of the church itself.  Towards
   whom I put off taking action till I hear the merits of the case and
   await his own dealing with me in the letter our son Aetius tells me he
   will send, giving opportunity for voluntary correction, whereby I
   desire my vexation to be appeased.  Nevertheless, I have written to our
   most clement Prince and the most pious Augusta about these things which
   concern the peace of the Church; and I do not doubt they will in the
   devoutness of their faith take heed lest a heresy already condemned
   should succeed in springing up again to the detriment of their own
   glorious work.

   II.  He asks Julian to act for him as Anatolius is deficient in vigour.

   See then, beloved brother, that you bestow the necessary thought on the
   cares of the Apostolic See, which by her rights as your mother commends
   to you, who were nourished at her breast, the defence of the catholic
   Truth against Nestorians and Eutychians, in order that, supported by
   the Divine help, you may not cease to watch the interests of the city
   of Constantinople, lest at any time the storms of error arise within
   her.  And because the faith of our glorious Princes is so great that
   you may confidently suggest what is necessary to them, use their piety
   for the benefit of the universal Church.  But if ever you consult me,
   beloved, on things which you think doubtful, my reply shall not fail to
   supply instruction, so that, apart from cases which ought to be decided
   by the inquiries of the bishops of each particular church, you may act
   as my legate and undertake the special charge of preventing the
   Nestorian or Eutychian heresy reviving in any quarter; because the
   bishop of Constantinople does not possess catholic vigour, and is not
   very jealous either for the mystery of man's salvation or for his own
   reputation:  whereas if he had any spiritual activity, he ought to have
   considered by whom he was ordained, and whom he succeeded in such a way
   as to follow the blessed Flavian rather than the instruments of his
   promotion.  And, therefore, when our most religious Princes deign in
   accordance with my entreaties to reprimand our brother Anatolius on
   those matters, which deservedly come under blame, join your diligence
   to theirs, beloved, that all causes of offences may be removed by the
   application of the fullest correction and he cease from injuring our
   son Aetius.  For with a catholic-minded bishop even though there was
   something which seemed calculated to annoy in his archdeacon, it ought
   to have been passed over from regard for the Faith, rather than that
   the most worthless heretic should take the place of a catholic.  And so
   when I have learnt the rest of the story, I shall then more clearly
   gather what ought to be done.  For, meanwhile, I have thought better to
   restrain my vexation and to exercise patience that there might be room
   for forgiveness.

   III.  He asks for further information about the rioting in Palestine
   and in Egypt.

   But with regard to the monks of Palestine, who are said this long time
   to be in a state of mutiny, I know not by what spirit they are at
   present moved.  Nor has any one yet explained to me what reasons they
   seem to bring forward for their discontent:  whether for instance, they
   wish to serve the Eutychian heresy by such madness, or whether they are
   irreconcilably vexed that their bishop could have been misled into that
   blasphemy, whereby, in spite of the very associations of the holy
   spots, from which issued instruction for the whole world, he has
   alienated himself from the Truth of the Lord's Incarnation, and in
   their opinion that cannot be venial in him which in others had to be
   wiped out by absolution.  And therefore I desire to be more fully
   informed about these things that proper means may be taken for their
   correction; because it is one thing to arm oneself wickedly against the
   Faith, and another thing to be immoderately disturbed on behalf of it.
   You must know, too, that the documents which Aetius the presbyter told
   me before had been dispatched, and the epitome of the Faith which you
   say you have sent, have not yet arrived.  Hence, if an opportunity
   offers itself of a more expeditious messenger, I shall be glad for any
   information that may seem expedient to be sent me as soon as possible.
   I am anxious to know about the monks of Egypt [477] , whether they have
   regained their peacefulness and their faith, and about the church of
   Alexandria, what trustworthy tidings reaches you:  I wish you to know
   what I wrote to its bishop or his ordainers, or the clergy, and have
   therefore sent you a copy of the letter.  You will learn also what I
   have said to our most clement Prince and our most religious Empress
   from the copies sent.

   IV.  He asks for a Latin translation of the acts of Chalcedon.

   I wish to know whether my letter [478] has been delivered to you,
   brother, which I sent you by Basil the deacon, upon the Faith of the
   Lord's Incarnation, while Flavian of holy memory was still alive; for I
   fancy you have never made any comment on its contents.  We have no very
   clear information about the acts of the Synod, which were drawn up at
   the time of the council at Chalcedon, on account of the difference of
   language [479] .  And therefore I specially enjoin upon you, brother,
   that you have the whole collected into one volume, accurately
   translated of course into Latin, that we may not be in doubt on any
   portion of the proceedings, and that there may be no manner of
   uncertainty after you have taken pains to bring it fully within my
   understanding.  Dated March 11th, in the consulship of the illustrious
   Opilio (453).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [475] Servatorum.  I am not sure whether this is the right sense;
   others read multorum.

   [476] In Lett. CXI., chap. ii., he is said to have been coemeterio
   deputatis, and, according to Quesnel, when the cemeteries (or
   catacombs) had no longer to be used as refuges for the persecuted
   Christians, the custom had grown up of putting priests in charge to
   perpetuate the memory of the martyrs therein buried; in process of
   time, when love grew cold, this was looked upon as a sort of exile, and
   an onerous duty in consequence.

   [477] There had been riots among the monks of Egypt about the
   appointment of Proterius as bishop, instead of Dioscorus, deposed.

   [478] This is Letter XXXV. (q.v.).

   [479] It is, of course, well known that Leo knew no Greek whatever.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXIV.

   To the Bishops Assembled in Synod at Chalcedon.

   (In answer to their Letter (XCVIII.), approving of their acts in the
   general so long as nothing is contrary to the canons of Nicaea.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXV.

   To Marcian Augustus.

   (Congratulating him upon the restoration of peace to the Church, and
   the suppression of the riotous monks; giving his consent also, as a
   liege subject of the Emperor's, to the acts of Chalcedon, and asking
   him to make this known to the Synod.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXVI.

   To Pulcheria Augusta.

   (Commending her pious zeal and informing her of his assent to the acts
   of Chalcedon.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXVII.

   To Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   Leo to Julian the bishop.

   I.  He wishes his assent to the acts of Chalcedon to be widely known.

   How watchfully and how devotedly you guard the catholic Faith, brother,
   the tenor of your letter shows, and my anxiety is greatly relieved by
   the information it contains; supplemented as it is by the most
   religious piety of our religious Emperor, which is clearly shown to be
   prepared by the Lord for the confirmation of the whole Church; so that,
   whilst Christian princes act for the Faith with holy zeal, the priests
   of the Lord may confidently pray for their realm.

   What therefore our most clement Emperor deemed needful I have willingly
   complied with, by sending letters to all the brethren who were present
   at the Synod of Chalcedon, in which to show that I approved of what was
   resolved upon by our holy brethren about the Rule of Faith; on their
   account to wit, who in order to cloke their own treachery, pretend to
   consider invalid or doubtful such conciliar ordinances as are not
   ratified by my assent:  albeit, after the return of the brethren whom I
   had sent in my stead, I dispatched a letter to the bishop of
   Constantinople; so that, if he had been minded to publish it, abundant
   proof might have been furnished thereby how gladly I approved of what
   the synod had passed concerning the Faith.  But, because it contained
   such an answer as would have run counter to his self-seeking, he
   preferred my acceptance of the brethren's resolutions to remain
   unknown, lest at the same time my reply should become known on the
   absolute authority of the Nicene canons.  Wherefore take heed, beloved,
   that you warn our most gracious prince by frequent reminders that he
   add his words to ours and order the letter of the Apostolic See to be
   sent round to the priests of each single province, that hereafter no
   enemy of the Truth may venture to excuse himself under cover of my
   silence.

   II.  He expresses his thanks for the zeal shown by the Emperor and the
   Empress.

   And as to the edict of the most Christian Emperor, in which he has
   shown what the ignorant folly of certain monks deserved and as to the
   reply of the most gracious Augusta, in which she rebuked the heads of
   the monasteries, I wish my great rejoicing to be known, being assured
   that this fervour of faith is bestowed upon them by Divine inspiration,
   in order that all men may acknowledge their superiority to rest not
   only on their royal state but also on their priestly holiness:  whom
   both now and formerly I have asked to treat you with full confidence,
   being assured of their good will, and that they will not refuse to give
   ear to necessary suggestions.

   III.  He wishes to know the effect of his letter to the Empress
   Eudocia.

   And, because the most clement Emperor has been pleased to charge me
   secretly by our son Paulus with the task of admonishing our daughter
   the most clement Augusta Eudocia [480] , I have done what he wished, in
   order that from my letter she may learn how profitable it will be to
   her if she espouses the cause of the catholic Faith, and have managed
   that she should further be admonished by a letter from that most
   clement prince her son; nothing doubting that she herself, too, will
   set to work with pious zeal to bring the leaders of sedition to a
   knowledge of the consequences of their action, and, if they understand
   not the utterances of those who teach them, to make them at least
   afraid of the powers of those who will punish them.  And so what effect
   this care of ours produces, I wish to know at once by a letter from
   you, beloved, and whether their ignorant contumacy has at length
   subsided:  as to which if they think there is any doubt about our
   teaching, let them at least not reject the writings of such holy
   priests as Athanasius, Theophilus and Cyril of Alexandria, with whom
   our statement of the Faith so completely harmonizes that any one who
   professes consent to them disagrees in nothing with us.

   IV.  Aetius must be content at present with the Emperor's favour.

   With our son Aetius [481] the presbyter we sympathize in his sorrow;
   and, as one has been put into his place who had previously been judged
   worthy of censure, there is no doubt that this change tends to the
   injury of catholics.  But these things must be borne patiently
   meanwhile, lest we should be thought to exceed the measure of our usual
   moderation, and for the present Aetius must be content with the
   encouragement of our most clement prince's favour, to whom I have but
   lately so commended him by letter that I doubt not his good repute has
   been increased in their most religious minds.

   V.  Anatolius shows no contrition in his subsequent acts.

   This too we would have you know, that bishop Anatolius after our
   prohibition so persisted in his rash presumption as to call upon the
   bishops of Illyricum to subscribe their names:  this news was brought
   us by the bishop who was sent by the bishop of Thessalonica [482] to
   announce his consecration.  We have declined to write to Anatolius
   about this, although you might have expected us to do so, because we
   perceived he did not wish to be reformed.  I have made two versions of
   my letter to the Synod, one with a copy of my letter to Anatolius
   subjoined, one without it; leaving it to your judgment to deliver the
   one which you think ought to be given to our most clement prince and to
   keep the other.  Dated 21st March, in the consulship of the illustrious
   Opilio (453).
     __________________________________________________________________

   [480] This is Eudocia, the widow of Theodosius II., and the Prince, her
   son, mentioned below, is Valentinianus III., who had married her
   daughter Eudoxia.  The letter of Leo here mentioned is probably not
   Letter CXXIII. below.  For a graphic sketch of the elder lady see
   Gore's Life of Leo, pp. 131, 2.

   [481] Cf. Letter CXIII. above.

   [482] This is Euxitheus, the successor of Anastasius:  Letter CL. is
   addressed to him.
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXVIII.

   To the Same Julian, Bishop of Cos.

   (In which, after speaking of his own efforts for the Faith, he objects
   to monks being permitted to preach, especially if heretically inclined,
   and asks Julian to stir up the Emperor's zeal for the Faith.)
     __________________________________________________________________

   Letter CXIX.

   To Maximus, Bishop of Antioch, by the hand of Marian the Presbyter, and
   Olympius the Deacon.

   Leo to Maximus of Antioch.

   I.  The Faith is the mean between the two extremes of Eutyches and
   Nestorius.

   How much, beloved, you have at heart the most sacred unity of our
   common Faith and the tranquil harmony of the Church's peace, the
   substance of your letter shows, which was brought me by our sons,
   Marian the presbyter and Olympius the deacon, and which was the more
   welcome to us because thereby we can join as it were in conversation,
   and thus the grace of God becomes more and more known and greater joy
   is felt through the whole world over the revelation of catholic Truth.
   And yet we are sore grieved at some who still (so your messengers
   indicate) love their darkness; and though the brightness of day has
   arisen everywhere, even still delight in the obscurity of their
   blindness, and abandoning the Faith, remain Christians in only the
   empty name, without knowledge to discern one error from another, and to
   distinguish the blasphemy of Nestorius from the impiety of Eutyches.
   For no delusion of theirs can appear excusable, because they contradict
   themselves in their perverseness.  For, though Eutyches' disciples
   abhor Nestorius, and the followers of Nestorius anathematize Eutyches,
   yet in the judgment of catholics both sides are condemned and both
   heresies alike are cut away from the body of the Church:  because
   neither falsehood can be in unison with us.  Nor does it matter in
   which direction of blasphemy they disagree with the truth of the Lord's
   Incarnation, since their erroneous opinions hold neither with the
   authority of the Gospel nor with the significance of th