Leo the Great, Letters

(g) ‹sive ille› · printed under col 1045

Hujus decreti occasio colligitur ex epistola sequenti c. 6, ob Theodoriti scilicet querelas, quas legati e concilio Chalcedonensi revertentes pontifici significarunt, de quibusdam monachis Orientalibus qui praedicationis officium sibi arrogabant. Forte indicatur Barsumas abbas cum suis asseclis, qui quantum Eutychi faveret, non tam ex pseudosynodo Ephesina liquet, quam ex actione quarta Chalcedonensi, ubi totam Syriam commovisse traditur. Quatenus vero monachi a laicis hic distinguantur, vide not. 6 Quesn.

The occasion of this decree is gathered from the following letter, chapter 6: namely, because of the complaints of Theodoret, which the legates returning from the council of Chalcedon conveyed to the pontiff, about certain Eastern monks who were arrogating to themselves the office of preaching. Perhaps the abbot Barsumas is meant, with his followers; how much he favoured Eutyches is clear not so much from the false synod of Ephesus as from the fourth session of Chalcedon, where he is said to have stirred up all Syria. As to how far monks are here distinguished from laymen, see Quesnel's note 6.

(h) ‹ut quisquam› · printed under col 1045

Cod. Vallicell. collect. 8 et prima editio, extra sacerdotum ordinem; ex mox idem codex cum Vat. ejusdem collect. 8. praedicationis assumat.

The Vallicelliana manuscript of collection 8 and the first edition, extra sacerdotum ordinem; and just after, the same manuscript with the Vatican of the same collection 8, praedicationis assumat.

(i) ‹Data› · printed under col 1045, running over to the head of the notes under col 1046

Ita cum editis ante Quesn. nostri codd. Barb. et Vat. collect. 3, Vat. et Vallicell. collect. 8, Ratisp. collect. 19, exemplar primae editionis, et antiquissimus Veron. 55, qui hujus epistolae postremum caput exhibet. Quesnellus in textu, IV idus; in margine vero: Alias, III idus.

So, with the editions before Quesnel, our manuscripts: the Barberini and the Vatican of collection 3, the Vatican and the Vallicelliana of collection 8, the Regensburg of collection 19, the copy of the first edition, and the very ancient Verona 55, which gives the last chapter of this letter. Quesnel in the text, IV idus; but in the margin: Elsewhere, III idus.

(j) ‹EPISTOLA› (in the heading) · printed under col 1046

Alias 93. Quae autem antea 120 erat, nunc 152. Scripta 11 Junii an. 453.

Elsewhere 93. The one that was 120 before is now 152. Written 11 June in the year 453.

(k) ‹AD THEODORITUM› (call before the address heading) · printed under col 1046

Exstat in mss. collect. 11, 12, 18 et 21, usque ad 24, ac in exemplari Sichardi. Quesnellus laudat etiam codices Thuan. et Trecopithaenum, qui sunt collectionis 5. Sed haec epistola in his codicibus additamentum est ad hanc collectionem nequaquam pertinens, uti monuimus occasione alterius additamenti annot. 4 (Col. 923, n (a)) in epist. 85. Hujus epistolae exempla olim valde rara et non satis vulgata fuisse ex eo cognoscimus quod ejusdem non meminerunt Facundus Hermianensis et alii qui in causa trium Capitulorum Theodoritum vindicarunt, cum tamen haec praeter caetera documenta Theodorito perhonorifica fuisset. Hinc etiam in vetustioribus collectionibus non invenitur. Porro duo peculiaria in hac epistola observamus. Primum stylus secundi ac tertii capitis aliquantulum obscurior, ab usitato Leonis stylo non nihilum discrepat, ut conferenti patebit. Secundum in fine epistolae formula et alia manu earum litterarum propria, quae diversum characterem in clausula exhibent, in nulla alia Leonis epistola reperitur. Quid ex his colligere liceat alii judicent.

It survives in the manuscripts of collections 11, 12, 18 and 21 to 24, and in Sichard's copy. Quesnel also cites the de Thou manuscript and that of Trecopithaeus, which belong to collection 5. But in these manuscripts this letter is an addition in no way belonging to that collection, as we noted on the occasion of another addition, annotation 4 (col. 923, note (a)) to letter 85. That copies of this letter were once very rare and not widely circulated we learn from the fact that Facundus of Hermiane and others who defended Theodoret in the cause of the Three Chapters make no mention of it, although this [letter], above the other documents, would have been most honourable to Theodoret. Hence too it is not found in the older collections. Further, we observe two peculiarities in this letter. First, the style of the second and third chapters, somewhat more obscure, differs not a little from Leo's usual style, as will be plain to one who compares them. Second, the formula at the end of the letter, et alia manu, proper to letters that show a different hand in the closing clause, is found in no other letter of Leo. What may be gathered from these things let others judge.

(l) ‹sed quae› · printed under col 1046, running over to the head of the notes under col 1047

Mss. codd. Thuan. et Trecopith. a Quesnello laudati: Nostrum prius ministerium definierat, universae fraternitatis irretractabilis firmavit assensus. Quesnellus hic postillam affixit: Irretractabili concilii oecumenici assensu firmantur etiam primae sedis judicia, quibus similia alibi saepe in postillis inculcat. Sed non eum sensum Leonis verba praeferunt, ut judicia Romanae sedis, quasi per se non satis firma, concilii oecumenici assensu et confirmatione indigeant. Verbum enim firmavit non efficit ipsa primae sedis judicia, sed ad ea refertur quae ejusdem sedis judicio prius fuerant definita, ita ut irretractabilis sit concilii assensus, cum ea confirmat quae prius ab apostolica sede definita fuerunt. Caeterum alibi jam vidimus Leonem satis firmam et irretractabilem per sese agnovisse suam definitionem editam in epist. 28, ad Flavianum, quae hic indicatur, ita ut nullam concilii necessitatem agnoverit, nec in concilio de fide voluerit quaestionem moveri, ac si duobia et anceps esset doctrina quam in eadem epistola definierat. Vide epist. 82, 90 et 93, c. 2, epist. 94. Quod si sub Theodosio concilium petiit, illud non ob incertitudinem doctrinae jam definitae, quam retractari nolebat, sed ob removenda scandala et ob pacem facilius conciliandam postulasse, fuse ostendemus in observationibus ad diss. 8 Quesnelli. Econtra vero cum ipsi Patres Chalcedonenses, ac dein Marcianus imperator Chalcedonensis definitionis confirmationem a pontifice petierunt, ne dubium haberetur quod in concilio fuerat definitum (vide inter caeteras epist. 98 et 110) concilii judicia ut irretractabilia sint, primae sedis confirmatione indigere professi sunt. Post nonnulla ostenderit in Vat. collect. 24 et apud Sichardum.

The de Thou and Trecopithaeus manuscripts cited by Quesnel: Nostrum prius ministerium definierat, universae fraternitatis irretractabilis firmavit assensus ("our ministry had first defined, the irrevocable assent of the whole brotherhood has confirmed"). Quesnel here attached a marginal gloss: "By the irrevocable assent of an ecumenical council even the judgements of the first see are confirmed"; and he often urges similar things elsewhere in his glosses. But Leo's words do not bear the sense that the judgements of the Roman see, as though not firm enough of themselves, need the assent and confirmation of an ecumenical council. For the word firmavit does not produce the judgements of the first see themselves, but refers to what had first been defined by the judgement of that same see, so that the assent of the council is irrevocable when it confirms what had first been defined by the apostolic see. Besides, we have already seen elsewhere that Leo recognized his definition published in letter 28, to Flavian, which is indicated here, as firm enough and irrevocable of itself, so that he recognized no need of a council, and did not wish a question about the faith to be raised in the council, as if the doctrine he had defined in that letter were doubtful and uncertain. See letters 82, 90 and 93, chapter 2, [and] letter 94. And if under Theodosius he asked for a council, we shall show at length in the observations on Quesnel's dissertation 8 that he asked for it not on account of any uncertainty in the doctrine already defined, which he refused to have reconsidered, but to remove scandals and to bring about peace more easily. On the contrary, when the Fathers of Chalcedon themselves, and afterwards the Emperor Marcian, asked the pontiff for confirmation of the definition of Chalcedon, lest what had been defined in the council should be held doubtful (see, among others, letters 98 and 110), they professed that the judgements of a council need the confirmation of the first see in order to be irrevocable. A little after, ostenderit in the Vatican [manuscript] of collection 24 and in Sichard.

Synopsis. — I. Haereses non sine Ecclesiae utilitate ortas irretractabili judicio comprimi. — II. Christi esse victoriam, quam de haereticis Ecclesia reportat. — III. Dioscori pervicacia etiam adversus Leonem saevientis. — IV. Scribentibus de rebus fidei sua verba esse libranda. — V. Theodoritum ab omni haereseos macula mundum esse demonstratum ab invincibili veritate. — VI. Vigilandum esse etiam post victoriam. Neminem sive monachum, sive laicum, praeter sacerdotes, praedicandi munus arrogare sibi debere.

Synopsis. — I. That heresies, which have arisen not without benefit to the Church, are suppressed by an irrevocable judgement. — II. That the victory which the Church wins over the heretics is Christ's. — III. The obstinacy of Dioscorus, raging even against Leo. — IV. That those who write on matters of faith must weigh their words. — V. That Theodoret has been shown by invincible truth to be clean of every stain of heresy. — VI. That watch must be kept even after victory. That no one, whether monk or layman, apart from priests, ought to arrogate to himself the office of preaching.

(l) continued from col 1046, set in n1046

(a) ‹ostenderet, quod prius› · printed under col 1047

Mss. quatuor Thuan., a prima omnium fide et sede; cui lectioni affinis est cod. Barb. 57, a prima omnium fideliter sede. Mox pro formatum duo codd. Vat., alter collect. 11, alter collect. 21, firmatum. Cecropius episcopus, cum definitionem a Patribus Chalcedonensibus judices quaererent, eo opus non esse insinuans act. 2, pag. 1267 ait: Emerserunt quae ad Eutychem pertinebant: et super iis FORMA data est a sanctissimo archiepiscopo Romanae urbis, et sequimur eum, et epistolae (28, ad Flavianum) omnes sutscripsimus. Nec solus Cecropius ita sensit, sed universum etiam concilium; subditur enim: Reverendissimi episcopi clamaverunt: Ista omnes dicimus; sufficiunt quae exposita sunt: alteram expositionem non licet fieri.

Four manuscripts, the de Thou, a prima omnium fide et sede; akin to this reading is the Barberini manuscript 57, a prima omnium fideliter sede. Just after, for formatum, two Vatican manuscripts, one of collection 11, the other of collection 21, firmatum. Bishop Cecropius, when the judges asked the Fathers of Chalcedon for a definition, suggesting that there was no need of it, says (session 2, page 1267): "The matters concerning Eutyches have come up: and on them a FORM has been given by the most holy archbishop of the city of Rome, and we follow him, and we have all subscribed the letter (28, to Flavian)." Nor did Cecropius alone think so, but the whole council too; for it is added: "The most reverend bishops cried out: We all say these things; what has been set out suffices: it is not lawful for another exposition to be made."

(b) ‹ut in hoc quoque› · printed under col 1047

In relatione concilii Chalcedon. ad Leonem, seu epist. 98, cap. 1, quibus quidem sicut caput membris praecras.

In the report of the council of Chalcedon to Leo, that is letter 98, chapter 1: quibus quidem sicut caput membris praeeras ("over whom you presided as the head over the members").

(c) ‹concordent. In quo› · printed under col 1047

Alias, amplius... et tanto magis Cod. Vat. collect. 24 et Sichardus, amplior nobis in hac re fit gaudendi materia, dum tanto magis, etc.

Elsewhere, amplius... et tanto magis. The Vatican manuscript of collection 24 and Sichard, amplior nobis in hac re fit gaudendi materia, dum tanto magis, etc.

(d) ‹quanto› · printed under col 1047

Ms. Vat. collect. 11, etiam in Christi ministros. Mss. collect. 21 item habent, in Christi ministros.

The Vatican manuscript of collection 11, etiam in Christi ministros. The manuscripts of collection 21 likewise have in Christi ministros.

(e) ‹caeteris omnium Dominus› · printed under col 1047

Tres codd. Vat. collect. 11 et 21, instituit.

Three Vatican manuscripts of collections 11 and 21, instituit.

(f) ‹adversa suspicio;› (call before inventi) · printed under col 1047, running over to the head of the notes under col 1048

Illyriciani scilicet et Palaestini, dum legeretur epist. 28, ad Flavianum, actione 2, dubitationem tribus in locis protulerunt, quam statim Aetius et Theoderitus excludere nisi sunt Vide tom. IV Concil. Ven. editionis pag. 1238. Illyriciani vero, quibus adhuc nonnihilum ambigentibus ac inducias petentibus quinque dies concessi fuerunt, didicere quae ob diversitatem linguae in Leonis epistolam non recte intellexerant; et similiter Palaestini, uti traditur actione 4, pag. 1382 et 1393.

That is, the Illyrians and the Palestinians, when letter 28, to Flavian, was being read in the second session, raised a doubt in three places, which Aetius and Theodoret at once endeavoured to remove. See volume IV of the Venice edition of the Councils, page 1238. The Illyrians, however, to whom, as they were still somewhat in doubt and asked for a delay, five days were granted, learned what they had not rightly understood in Leo's letter because of the difference of language; and the Palestinians likewise, as is related in the fourth session, pages 1382 and 1393.

(g) ‹Et dum nonnulli› · printed under col 1048

Editi ante Quesn., dissensionum incitati auctore, ad contradictionis bella prosiliunt. Mss. codd. tres Quesnelli et totidem nostri ac Surii editio coacti pro incitati. Apud Sichardum, ad dissensiones incitati ab auctore contradictionis, ad insana bella prosiliunt.

The editions before Quesnel, dissensionum incitati auctore, ad contradictionis bella prosiliunt. Three of Quesnel's manuscripts and as many of ours, and Surius's edition, coacti for incitati. In Sichard, ad dissensiones incitati ab auctore contradictionis, ad insana bella prosiliunt.

(f) continued from col 1047, set in n1047

(g) printed under this column; its call is in col 1047, set in n1047

(h) ‹ad majus bonum,› (call before malo) · printed under col 1048

Sic correximus ex mss. codd. Vat. collect. 21 et aliis quatuor a Quesnello allegatis nota 1, inter quos est Grimanicus; quae lectio praeferenda fuit vulgatae ab eodem Quesnello retentae, malum ejus: neque enim impersonale perventum est passivae significationis hoc nominativum patitur. Recipi posset malum ejus, si legeretur provectum est; sed nulli codices huic emendationi suffragantur. Sichardus, malum ejus... proventum (forte, provectum) convertitur.

So we have corrected from the Vatican manuscripts of collection 21 and four others cited by Quesnel in note 1, among which is the Grimani; this reading had to be preferred to the common one retained by the same Quesnel, malum ejus: for the impersonal perventum est, of passive meaning, does not admit this nominative. Malum ejus could be accepted if provectum est were read; but no manuscripts support this emendation. Sichard, malum ejus... proventum (perhaps provectum) convertitur.

(i) ‹quam reddita› · printed under col 1048

Editi ante Quesn. cum ms. Vat. collect. 24, post laborem.

The editions before Quesnel, with the Vatican manuscript of collection 24, post laborem.

(j) ‹quae fides prius› (the call is printed "(l)") · printed under col 1048

Codd. collect. 21, docuerit. Dein erat in editis cum mss. collect. 24, confirmaret. Potior visa est lectio mss. collect. 21, quibus concinit etiam cod. Vat. collect. 11, in quo est confirmaverit.

The manuscripts of collection 21, docuerit. Then the editions, with the manuscripts of collection 24, had confirmaret. The reading of the manuscripts of collection 21 seemed preferable, with which the Vatican manuscript of collection 11 also agrees, in which there is confirmaverit.

(k) ‹servatur auctoritas,› · printed under col 1048

In Vulgatis et in solo cod. Grim. Quesnellus reperit septem voces sequentes, ut in nullo inferiorum putetur imminuta libertas. Nos praeterea invenimus in mss. collect. 12 et 24, ac in exemplari Sichardi. Desiderantur vero in caeteris nostris codd. collect. 11 et 21, sicut etiam in septem a Quesnello memoratis not. 2. In uno Thuan., in Cantabrig et Trecopith., sic per saltum sequitur, ut ad majorem Dei gloriam. Nostra exemplaria collect. 11, pro summorum habent summopere; septem laudati codices Quesnelli summopere, vel summoperum; ex quo omnes ex eodem fonte prodire noscuntur.

In the common editions and in the Grimani manuscript alone Quesnel found the seven following words, ut in nullo inferiorum putetur imminuta libertas. We have found them besides in the manuscripts of collections 12 and 24 and in Sichard's copy. But they are missing in our other manuscripts of collections 11 and 21, as also in the seven mentioned by Quesnel in note 2. In one de Thou manuscript, in the Cambridge and the Trecopithaeus, the text skips and runs on thus: ut ad majorem Dei gloriam. Our copies of collection 11 have summopere for summorum; the seven manuscripts of Quesnel cited, summopere or summoperum; from which all are known to come from the same source.

(l) ‹imminuta› · printed under col 1048, running over to the head of the notes under col 1049

Indicatur libertas examinis a Patribus Chalcedonensibus utiliter adhibita, ut nonnullis episcopis, qui de Leonis definitione ambigebant, difficultates suas in concilio proponentibus, per tractatum ac discussionem catholici dogmatis satisfacerent, eosdemque catholicum sensum, quem minus intelligebant, edocerent, atque confirmarent in fide. Ita fit, ut ipsa veritas et clarius renitescat, et fortius retineatur, dum quae fides prius docuit per pontifices, haec postea examinatio confirmarit; et ad majorem Dei gloriam proficiat finis examinis, quando ad hoc se accipit exerendi (alius, exercendi) fiducia, ut vincatur adversitas, eorum nimirum qui definitis sese opponebant. Cum vero hunc finem tantum ejusmodi libertas, et examen spectent, ut quae definierunt summi pontifices, episcopi confirment, et oppugnantes edoceant, ac ab errore removeant, facile intelligitur quatenus sic summorum servetur auctoritas, ut in nullo inferiorum putetur imminuta libertas. Falluntur nimium qui ex his verbis colligunt Leonem putasse episcopis in Chalcedonensi concilio liberum et licitum fuisse suam definitionem in epistola 28 ad Flavianum expositam ita examini subjicere, ut possent ab ea dissentire, et judicium ei contrarium pronuntiare. Ad eam definitionem et epistolam referuntur illa quae fides prius docuerat, et illa pariter paulo ante praemissa: Quae (Deus) nostro prius ministerio definierat. Num ab iis quae fides docuit, quae Deus definivit, per quodcumque examen recedere cuiquam licet? Quid quod concilii Chalcedonensis tempore agebatur non solum de definitione primae et apostolicae sedis, quam Leo etiam ab initio ita tenendam credidit, ut haereticos declararit qui aliter saperent, cujusque proinde subscriptionem uti omnino debitam requisivit, verum etiam de definitione episcoporum subscriptionibus ab universa Ecclesia recepta, uti traditur epist. 88, c. 1 et 5, ac epist. 91. Quis etiam in liberiori nonullorum systemate definitioni ejusmodi contrarium sentire, aut contrariam sententiam ferre licitum opinetur? Leonem quidem non ita sensisse testes sunt ejusdem epistolae 90 et 93, cap. 2, ubi fidem jam in ea epistola definitam, in concilio retractari ac in disputationem adduci, ac si anceps esset atque dubia, omnino interdixit. Sicut concilium cogi, ita et tractatum in eo haberi consensit, ut qui decepti fuerant, ad unitatem pacis ac fidei compressa omni dissensione revocarentur. Vide epist. 89, ac plura in observationibus ad dissert. 8 Quesnelli. Addemus tandem et aliud. Cum post ipsam Chalcedonensem synodum ad compescendas, seu revincendas injustas Eutychianorum de ejusdem synodi definitione querelas, novum examen Leone imperatore postulante, institutum fuit editaeque episcoporum totius orbis sententiae, quae in Codice encyclio continentur, non alia tributa fuit, nec tribui potuit episcopis novi examinis libertas, nisi ut quae concilium definierat, haec novum examen confirmaret; ac propterea Chalcedonensis concilii auctoritas nihil exinde detrimenti cepit; et qui, ea libertate abusi, Chalcedonensem definitionem repudiarunt, haeretici habiti fuere. Similis libertas hic quoque intelligenda est.

What is meant is the liberty of examination usefully employed by the Fathers of Chalcedon, so that, when some bishops who were in doubt about Leo's definition put forward their difficulties in the council, they satisfied them by treatment and discussion of the Catholic dogma, and taught them the Catholic sense, which they understood less well, and confirmed them in the faith. So it comes about that truth itself both shines out more clearly and is held more firmly, when what faith first taught through the pontiffs, examination afterwards has confirmed; and that the end of the examination serves the greater glory of God, when the confidence of speaking out (another [reads] exercendi) takes itself to this, that adversity be overcome, namely that of those who were opposing what had been defined. But since such liberty and examination look only to this end, that the bishops should confirm what the supreme pontiffs have defined, and should instruct the opponents and remove them from error, it is easily understood how far the authority of the highest is so preserved that the liberty of the lower is not thought to be diminished in anything. Those are much mistaken who gather from these words that Leo thought that the bishops at the council of Chalcedon were free and permitted so to subject his definition, set out in letter 28 to Flavian, to examination that they could dissent from it and pronounce a judgement contrary to it. To that definition and letter refer the words quae fides prius docuerat, and likewise those put a little before: Quae (Deus) nostro prius ministerio definierat. Is anyone permitted, through any examination whatever, to depart from what faith has taught, what God has defined? What of the fact that at the time of the council of Chalcedon the question was not only of the definition of the first and apostolic see, which Leo from the beginning believed was to be held in such a way that he declared those who thought otherwise heretics, and whose subscription he therefore required as altogether due, but also of the definition received by the whole Church through the subscriptions of bishops, as is related in Letter 88, chaps. 1 and 5, and Letter 91. Who, even in the freer system of some, would think it lawful to hold a view contrary to such a definition, or to pronounce a contrary sentence? That Leo at least did not think so is witnessed by his Letters 90 and 93, chap. 2, where he altogether forbade that the faith already defined in that letter should be reconsidered in the council and brought into dispute, as though it were uncertain and doubtful. As he consented that the council be convened, so he consented that discussion be held in it, so that those who had been deceived might be recalled to the unity of peace and faith, all dissension being suppressed. See Letter 89, and more in the observations on Quesnel's Dissertation 8. We shall add, finally, something else. When, after the synod of Chalcedon itself, a new examination was instituted at the request of the emperor Leo to check or refute the unjust complaints of the Eutychians about that synod's definition, and the sentences of the bishops of the whole world were issued which are contained in the Codex encyclius, no other freedom of the new examination was granted, or could be granted, to the bishops than that the new examination should confirm what the council had defined; and therefore the authority of the council of Chalcedon suffered no loss from it; and those who, abusing that freedom, rejected the Chalcedonian definition were held to be heretics. A like freedom is to be understood here too.

(l) continued from col 1048, set in n1048

(a) ‹charissime frater,› · printed under col 1049

Conjunctionem et a Quesnello omissam auctoritate mss. collect. 11 et 12 revocavimus. Dein codd. collect. 11, per se, loco pro se; codd. vero collect. 21 et 24 ac Sichardus utrumque desiderant. Postea pro vicimus editi Leonis ante Quesn. perperam vivimus.

The conjunction et, omitted by Quesnel, we have restored on the authority of the mss. of collections 11 and 12. Then the codices of collection 11 have per se in place of pro se; but the codices of collections 21 and 24 and Sichardus lack both. Next, for vicimus the printed editions of Leo before Quesnel wrongly have vivimus.

(b) ‹ille, cui vicimus.› · printed under col 1049, running over to the head of the notes under col 1050

Pleraeque editiones ante Quesn. cum mss. collect. 21, per quem secunda est.

Most editions before Quesnel, with the mss. of collection 21, have per quem secunda est.

(c) ‹(Marc. XVI, 16).› (call at the start of the next line, before Solis) · printed under col 1050

In margine Concil. ex mss. collect. 21, Sol justitiae subardens per Orientem. Hic error ortus est ex arbitraria emendatione depravatae lectionis, quam invenimus in cod. Vat collect. 11, Solis justitiae subardensis; ubi tamen lectio textui inserta satis emicat.

In the margin of the Councils, from the mss. of collection 21: Sol justitiae subardens per Orientem. This error arose from an arbitrary emendation of a corrupt reading which we found in the Vatican codex of collection 11, Solis justitiae subardensis; where nevertheless the reading set into the text shines out clearly enough.

(d) ‹pure ab Occidente resplenduit,› · printed under col 1050

Vulgati Leonis antiqui cum mss. collect. 24 et Sichardo, ubi commercium in apostolis. Binius, ubi culmen sanctum. Quesnellus ex cod. Grimanico, et cum editione Romana, ubi culmen suum. Praetulimus lectionem sex aliorum mss. Quesnelli, et nostrorum collect. 11, 12 et 21 ac editionis Surii, Labbeus, ubi culmen in apostolis, et summum in margine. Innuitur culmen summum, seu praerogativa Romanae Ecclesiae supra caeteras etiam principales ob apostolos Petrum et Paulum. Nam, ut Deo ait serm. 82, cap. 1, isti sunt qui te ad hanc gloriam provexerunt, ut... per sacram beati Petri sedem caput orbis effecta, latius praesideres religione divina, quam dominatione terrena.

The old printed editions of Leo, with the mss. of collection 24 and Sichardus, have ubi commercium in apostolis. Binius, ubi culmen sanctum. Quesnel, from the Grimani codex and with the Roman edition, ubi culmen suum. We have preferred the reading of six other mss. of Quesnel, and of ours of collections 11, 12 and 21, and of the edition of Surius; Labbe has ubi culmen in apostolis, with summum in the margin. The highest summit is meant, that is, the prerogative of the Roman Church over the others, even the principal ones, on account of the apostles Peter and Paul. For, as Leo [printed Deo] says in Sermon 82, chap. 1: these are they who advanced you to this glory, that... made the head of the world through the sacred see of blessed Peter, you might preside more widely by divine religion than by earthly dominion.

(e) ‹hostis antiquus,› · printed under col 1050

Codd. collect. 11 et 21, per sequentis Pharaonis. Indicatur Dioscorus Aegyptius, qui in latrocinio Ephesino multa in catholicos per vim molitus est, ut Eutychianam haeresim induceret. Qui autem terrore victi ei cesserunt, remota vi ad sanam mentem et Ecclesiam rediere.

The codices of collections 11 and 21: per sequentis Pharaonis. Dioscorus the Egyptian is meant, who at the Ephesine Robbery attempted many things against the catholics by violence, in order to bring in the Eutychian heresy. But those who yielded to him, overcome by terror, returned to a sound mind and to the Church once the violence was removed.

(b) the end of note (b) heads the notes under this column; its call is in col 1049, set in n1049. (c), (d), (e) printed under this column; their calls are in col 1049, set in n1049.

(f) ‹quia et quos sibi› · printed under col 1050

Codd. Vat. collect. 24, conscios. Dein, caedem sociaverat in alio Vat. collect 11.

The Vatican codices of collection 24: conscios. Then, caedem sociaverat in another Vatican [codex] of collection 11.

(g) ‹misericordiae noverat,› · printed under col 1050

Quesnellus in margine: « Codd. Cantabr: et Barb., victor nobiscum non secum fecit esse victores. » Antiquores editiones Leonis pro victores habent victuros.

Quesnel in the margin: "The Cambridge and Barberini codices: victor nobiscum non secum fecit esse victores." The older editions of Leo have victuros for victores.

(h) ‹ut de ipsis› · printed under col 1050

Sic melius ex Vat. collect. 11. Alias, dicta dubitare.

So better, from the Vatican [codex] of collection 11. Elsewhere, dicta dubitare.

(i) ‹Quando loquitur mendacium,› · printed under col 1050

Idem codex, ex suo. Mss. collect. 12, 21 et 24 cum exemplo Sichardi et editis ante Quesn., ex suis propriis loquitur. Binius, ex propriis.

The same codex: ex suo. The mss. of collections 12, 21 and 24, with Sichardus's copy and the editions before Quesnel: ex suis propriis loquitur. Binius: ex propriis.

(j) ‹quasi aut Divinitatis› · printed under col 1050

Nominativum natura a Quesnello omissum, ex caeteris editis omnibusque codicibus restituimus. Dein, crescerem per aetatem in duobus mss. collect 21. Postea, spiritu Dei in plerisque editis ante Quesnellum cum cod. Vat. collect. 24.

The nominative natura, omitted by Quesnel, we have restored from the other editions and all the codices. Then, crescerem per aetatem in two mss. of collection 21. Next, spiritu Dei in most editions before Quesnel, with the Vatican codex of collection 24.

(a) ‹ex quo auctore› · printed under col 1051

Vulg, ante Quesn., cum eodem codice et Sichardo, processerit.

The printed editions before Quesnel, with the same codex and Sichardus: processerit.

(b) ‹Nam qui› · printed under col 1051

Editiones Leonis ante Quesn. et Labbeus cum mss. collect. 11 et 24 ac Sichardo, nos. Retinuimus vos aliis mss. et Binio suffragantibus; hic enim Leo Theodoritum alloquitur, quem Dioscorus persequendo afflixit.

The editions of Leo before Quesnel, and Labbe, with the mss. of collections 11 and 24 and Sichardus: nos. We have kept vos with the support of the other mss. and of Binius; for here Leo is addressing Theodoret, whom Dioscorus afflicted by persecution.

(c) ‹nova et inaudita› · printed under col 1051

Vocem prius a Quesnello restitutam praeferunt nostri codices collect. 11 et 21. Innuitur excommunicatio a Dioscoro lata contra ipsum suum caput Romanum pontificem; quem ausum antea inauditum et incredibilem detestatur synodus Chalcedonensis in epist. 98, ad Leonem. cap. 2. Vide not. 3 Quesnelli. Dein quidam codices omittunt utinam,

The word prius, restored by Quesnel, is shown by our codices of collections 11 and 21. The excommunication pronounced by Dioscorus against his very head, the Roman pontiff, is meant; a deed of daring unheard of before and incredible, which the synod of Chalcedon denounces in Letter 98, to Leo, chap. 2. See Quesnel's note 3. Next, some codices omit utinam,

(d) ‹pollutas› · printed under col 1051

Quid hic Leo respiciat vide apud Quesn. not. 4, qui mox pro abdicata scripsit addicta, et in margine: Ita mss. omnes. Id quidem invenimus in codd. collect. 21. At in aliis collect. 11, 12, 24, ac in exemplo Sichardi cum anterioribus editionibus, abdicata.

For what Leo has in view here, see Quesnel's note 4; soon after, for abdicata he wrote addicta, and in the margin: So all the mss. We have indeed found this in the codices of collection 21. But in the others, of collections 11, 12 and 24, and in Sichardus's copy with the earlier editions: abdicata.

(e) ‹jam fecisse› · printed under col 1051

Ita omnes Quesnelli et plerique nostri codd. atque Sichardus. Alias dictus, vel dictum est. Post pauca vulg. ante Quesn. cum mss. collect. 12, quasi nec audisset illud quod Dominus ait. Idem legitur in cod. Vat. collect. 11, qui solum addit idem ante vocem Dominus Recepimus lectionem Binii et mss. collect. 24, ad quam accedit Quesnellus cum codd. collect. 21, praemittentibus idem ante Dominus non satis apte, cum in antecedenti Scripturae testimonio nulla Christi Domini mentio occurrat.

So all Quesnel's codices and most of ours, and Sichardus. Elsewhere dictus, or dictum est. A little after, the printed editions before Quesnel, with the mss. of collection 12: quasi nec audisset illud quod Dominus ait. The same is read in the Vatican codex of collection 11, which only adds idem before the word Dominus. We have adopted the reading of Binius and of the mss. of collection 24, to which Quesnel comes near with the codices of collection 21, which put idem before Dominus not very fittingly, since in the preceding testimony of Scripture no mention of Christ the Lord occurs.

(f) ‹onus meum leve› · printed under col 1051, running over to the head of the notes under col 1052

Codd. collect. 11 delent est. Postea quia tamquam legitur in antiquis Leonis vulg. et apud Labbeum cum codd. collect. 24 et Sichardo.

The codices of collection 11 delete est. Next, quia tamquam is read in the old printed editions of Leo and in Labbe, with the codices of collection 24 and Sichardus.

(f) the end of note (f) heads the notes under this column; its call is in col 1051, set in n1051.

(g) ‹et vos› · printed under col 1052

Codd. collect. 11 et 24 cum Sichardo et Binio addunt ergo.

The codices of collections 11 and 24, with Sichardus and Binius, add ergo.

(h) ‹vitam praesentis saeculi moliretur auferre,› · printed under col 1052

Cod. Barb., se veritate et duce. Vat. collect. 24 et Sichardus, se serenae vitae luce.

The Barberini codex: se veritate et duce. The Vatican [codex] of collection 24 and Sichardus: se serenae vitae luce.

(i) ‹Dum› (before trahit plurimos) · printed under col 1052

Vat. collect. 11 et duo collect. 21, tradit. Postea idem codex collect. 11, solus ultra omnia ac pro omnibus reus.

The Vatican [codex] of collection 11 and two of collection 21: tradit. Next, the same codex of collection 11: solus ultra omnia ac pro omnibus reus.

(j) ‹illos qui foris sunt› · printed under col 1052

Catecheses indicat quibus instruebantur qui ad baptisma accedebant, vel ad unitatem Ecclesiae revertentes, ab heresi vel schismate purgandi erant.

He means the catecheses by which those were instructed who were coming to baptism, or who, returning to the unity of the Church, were to be cleansed of heresy or schism.

(k) ‹recedentes, inter› · printed under col 1052

Id est inter Eutychianos ac Nestorianos, qui oppositis erroribus catholicam fidem impetentes, maximam loquendi cautionem exigebant, uti S. pontifex explicat capite sequenti. Post pauca pro libremns quaedam editiones cum ms. Vat. collect. 11 et Sichardo, liberemus.

That is, between the Eutychians and the Nestorians, who, assailing the catholic faith with opposite errors, demanded the greatest caution in speaking, as the holy pontiff explains in the following chapter. A little after, for libremus [printed libremns] some editions, with the Vatican ms. of collection 11 and Sichardus, have liberemus.

(l) ‹sed auctoritate› · printed under col 1052

Ita Quesn. ex codd. Trecopith. et Thuan., cum quibus concordant duo nostri collect. 21. Vulgati antiquiores sua cum duobus codd. Quesn. et nostro Vat. collect. 24 atque Sichardo. Mox post verba in apostolicae sedis epistola codices Vat. collect. 11 et 21, ne sex a Quesnello laudati not. 5, qui partim ad easdem collectiones pertinent, partim e simili fonte dimanant, per saltum aliquot periodos transiliunt usque ad illa capitis sequentis: Sed benedictus Deus noster, earumque loco substituunt haec verba: Et caetera quae per ordinem supra posuimus, continuo agit. Sed benedictus Deus. Ipsa formula et caetera omissionem indicat. Integrum vero textum exhibent codices collect. 13, 12 ac 24 et exemplar Sichardi.

So Quesnel from the Pithou (Troyes) and de Thou codices, with which two of ours of collection 21 agree. The older printed editions have sua, with two codices of Quesnel and our Vatican [codex] of collection 24, and Sichardus. Soon after the words in apostolicae sedis epistola, the Vatican codices of collections 11 and 21, and the six cited by Quesnel in note 5 [printed ne], which belong partly to the same collections and partly flow from a similar source, leap over several periods as far as the words of the following chapter: Sed benedictus Deus noster, and in their place substitute these words: Et caetera quae per ordinem supra posuimus, continuo agit. Sed benedictus Deus. The formula et caetera itself indicates the omission. But the complete text is shown by the codices of collections 13, 12 and 24 and by Sichardus's copy.

(a) ‹inferre maluerit,› · printed under col 1053

Vulgati ante Quesn. cum mss. collect. 12 et 24, cum synodalia, ac postea, tot sit. Quesnelli emendationem, forte ex Grimanico ms. contextus exigit.

The printed editions before Quesnel, with the mss. of collections 12 and 24: cum synodalia, and afterwards, tot sit. The context requires Quesnel's emendation, perhaps from the Grimani ms.

(b) ‹vel quibus› · printed under col 1053

Fidei definitio in Chalcedonensi actione quinta formata fuit; litterae autem Leonis ad Flavianum antecedentibus actionibus secunda et quarta, vindicatae ac totius synodi assensu receptae fuere; ac propterea primum de ordine temporis intelligi nequit, vel exactum ordinem Leo secutus non est.

The definition of faith was formed in the fifth session of Chalcedon; but Leo's letter to Flavian was vindicated and received with the assent of the whole synod in the preceding sessions, the second and the fourth; and therefore primum cannot be understood of the order of time, or else Leo did not follow the exact order.

(c) ‹etiam› (before tuae fraternitatis studio) · printed under col 1053

Cum actione secunda Leonis epistola 28 legeretur, cumque adversus quamdam ejusdem epistolae sententiam ab Illyricianis et Palaestinis difficultates ingererentur, Theodoritus simile S. Cyrilli testimonium afferens, eam propugnavit. Vide tom. IV Concil. pag. 1238.

When Leo's Letter 28 was read in the second session, and difficulties were raised by the Illyrians and Palestinians against a certain statement of that letter, Theodoret defended it, bringing forward a similar testimony of St Cyril. See vol. IV of the Councils, p. 1238.

(d) ‹defensae sunt, et› · printed under col 1053

Maxime, inquit, quia in allocutione concilii plura testimonia Patrum recitata fuere.

He says maxime because in the council's address more testimonies of the Fathers were recited.

(e) ‹totius concilii allocutio› · printed under col 1053

Part. III concil. Chalced. n. 1.

Part III of the council of Chalcedon, no. 1.

(f) ‹ut eis› · printed under col 1053

Haec admonitio Theodoritum respicit, qui ob defensum antea Nestorium, et ob impugnatum Cyrillum in Nestorianismi suspicionem venerat; unde in synodo Chalcedonensi, ut se catholicum probaret, Nestorio anathema expresse dixit; quod ne exigentibus Patribus invite fecisse videatur, hic eidem Leo insinuat, ut data occasione non tam Eutychem quam Nestorium cum suis impiis dogmatibus, digno anathemate, promptissime atque evidentissime feriat.

This admonition has Theodoret in view, who, for having earlier defended Nestorius and attacked Cyril, had come under suspicion of Nestorianism; hence in the synod of Chalcedon, to prove himself catholic, he pronounced anathema on Nestorius expressly; and lest he should seem to have done this unwillingly at the demand of the Fathers, Leo here suggests to him that, when occasion is given, he strike not so much Eutyches as Nestorius, with his impious dogmas, with a worthy anathema, most promptly and most plainly.

(g) ‹prudentiam tuam› · printed under col 1053

Ita nostri codices cum Sichardo et editis ante Quesn., apud quem, res ipsae admonere sufficiant. Quod additur, experimenta docuerunt, innuit quae Ephesi et Chalcedone Theodorito contigerunt.

So our codices, with Sichardus and the editions before Quesnel, in whom [we read] res ipsae admonere sufficiant. What is added, experimenta docuerunt, hints at what befell Theodoret at Ephesus and Chalcedon.

(h) ‹mundum te, secundum› · printed under col 1053, running over to the notes under col 1054

Hujus judicii sedis apostolicae testimonium exstat in Chalcedonensi act. 1, ubi judices dixerunt pag. 874: Ingrediatur et reverendissimus episcopus Theodoretus, ut sit particeps synodi, quia et restituit ei episcopatum sanctissimus archiepiscopus Leo; et act. 8, pag. 1523, iidem judices concilii sententiam pro Theodorito postularunt, sicut et sanctissimus Leo archiepiscopus judicavit. Quibus concinens totum concilium dixit: Post Deum Leo judicavit; et legati pontificis pag. 1526: Theodoretum sanctissimus et beatissimus universae Ecclesiae episcopus urbis Romae Leo dudum in communione suscepit ita, sicut litterae ab eo ad nostram humilitatem testantur. Post pauca retribuas in ms. Vat. collect 11.

Testimony of this judgement of the apostolic see is found at Chalcedon, session 1, where the judges said (p. 874): Let the most reverend bishop Theodoret also enter, to take part in the synod, since the most holy archbishop Leo has restored his bishopric to him; and in session 8 (p. 1523) the same judges asked for the council's sentence for Theodoret, as the most holy archbishop Leo also judged. In harmony with them the whole council said: After God, Leo has judged; and the pontiff's legates (p. 1526): The most holy and most blessed Leo, bishop of the universal Church of the city of Rome, long since received Theodoret into communion, as the letter from him to our humility testifies. A little after, retribuas in the Vatican ms. of collection 11.

(h) the rest of note (h) heads the notes under this column; its call is in col 1053, set in n1053.

(i) ‹catholica fide› · printed under col 1054

Sic cum Quesnello et Binio nostri codd. collect. 11 et 21. Alias, laboratis. Paulo post videre in ms. Vat. collect. 11. Dein pro exire quaedam editiones existere.

So, with Quesnel and Binius, our codices of collections 11 and 21. Elsewhere, laboratis. A little after, videre in the Vatican ms. of collection 11. Then, for exire, some editions have existere.

(j) ‹tua relatione currente› · printed under col 1054

Veteres editiones cum mss. collect. 11, 12 et 24, ac exemplo Sichardi, quid apud illos religionis doctrina Dominica proficiat; et postea, illius religionis sacerdotes. Veram lectionem a Quesnello receptam mss. collect. 21 approbant. Deinde in quoscumque usus necessitas exegerit unus cod. Vat. collect. 21.

The old editions, with the mss. of collections 11, 12 and 24 and Sichardus's copy: quid apud illos religionis doctrina Dominica proficiat; and afterwards, illius religionis sacerdotes. The mss. of collection 21 confirm the true reading adopted by Quesnel. Next, in quoscumque usus necessitas exegerit in one Vatican codex of collection 21.

(k) ‹De his vero quae› · printed under col 1054

Alias, in supradicto. Respicitur canon Chalcedonensis pro Constantinopolitanae sedis praerogativa. Confer epistolam praecedentem ad Maximum, quae hic indicatur; ubi etiam monachorum improbitas reprehenditur, de qua vide ibidem annot. 30 (Col. 1045, n. g).

Elsewhere, in supradicto. The canon of Chalcedon on the prerogative of the see of Constantinople is in view. Compare the preceding letter to Maximus, which is meant here; where the wickedness of the monks is also rebuked, on which see there, annotation 30 (col. 1045, note g).

(l) ‹tentata sunt,› · printed under col 1054

Epist. 119.

Letter 119.

(m) ‹scripsimus;› · printed under col 1054

16, qu. 1, Adjicimus illud, c. 19.

16, q. 1, Adjicimus illud, c. 19.

(n) ‹ad omnium› · printed under col 1054

Al., volumus.

Elsewhere, volumus.