PL 54 · cols. 1060–1067

Leo the Great, Letters

Letters CXXIII–CXXIV

aliqua, aut transgressione peccetur. Quiquid autem de hac re diligentior sollicitudo repererit, cito ad notitiam meam gloriosissimus imperator jubeat pervenire: quia et ad ipsius et ad omnium salutem pertinet ut Dei cultus nullo errore laedatur.

[…] any dissension or through transgression. And whatever a more diligent care may find out about this matter, let the most glorious emperor order it to reach my notice quickly: for it concerns both his own salvation and that of all that the worship of God be harmed by no error.

Data XVII kalendas Julii, Opilione viro clarissimo consule.

Given on the seventeenth day before the Kalends of July, in the consulship of Opilio, a man of clarissimus rank.

EPISTOLA CXXIII.

LETTER CXXIII.

AD EUDOCIAM AUGUSTAM.

TO EUDOCIA AUGUSTA.

De monachis Palestinis.

On the monks of Palestine.

Leo episcopus Eudociae Augustae.

Leo, bishop, to Eudocia Augusta.

CAP. I. — Quanta mihi catholicae cura sit fidei, et qua sollicitudine, in quantum Dominus adjuvat, debeam praecavere ne umquam ab imperitis aut impiis veritatis Evangelio resistatur, pietatem vestram scire non dubito. Et ideo cum salutationis officio, quo semper mihi est vestra honoranda clementia, obsecro Dominum ut me de tua incolumitate laetificet, et causam fidei, in qua quorumdam intra provinciam Palaestinam monachorum fuerant corda turbata, magis magisque per vos faciat adjuvari: ut quantum pietatis tuae studio fieri potest, haereticae perversitati omnis fiducia subtrahatur. Quos enim nec ratio sacramentorum nec auctoritas Scripturarum, nec ipsa sacratorum locorum testimonia commovebant, quid eis nisi abruptum periculum timeretur? Prosit ergo Ecclesiis, sicut favente Deo prodest, et generi ipsi prosit humano in Verbi

CHAP. I. — How great is my care for the Catholic faith, and with what solicitude, so far as the Lord helps me, I must guard against the Gospel of truth ever being resisted by the ignorant or the impious, I do not doubt your Piety knows. And therefore, with the duty of greeting by which your Clemency is always to be honoured by me, I beseech the Lord that He may gladden me with news of your well-being, and may cause the cause of the faith, in which the hearts of certain monks within the province of Palestine had been troubled, to be helped more and more through you: so that, as far as it can be done by the zeal of your piety, all confidence may be taken away from heretical perversity. For those whom neither the reason of the sacraments nor the authority of the Scriptures nor the very testimonies of the holy places moved, what was to be feared for them but headlong peril? Let it profit the Churches, then, as by God's favour it does profit, and let it profit the human race itself, taken up in the […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1060

Footnotes

(j) ‹de hac re› · printed under col 1059

Editi antiqui cum aliquot codd., diligentius investigare sollicitudo tua (Al., vestra) potuerit. Quesnelli lectionem in Grimanico inventam confirmat noster cod. Ratisp.

The old editions with some manuscripts, diligentius investigare sollicitudo tua (elsewhere, vestra) potuerit. Quesnel's reading, found in the Grimani manuscript, is confirmed by our Ratisbon manuscript.

(k) ‹errore laedatur.› · printed under col 1059

Ita cod. Ratisp. Caeteri codd. et editi, data XVI kal. Julii.

So the Ratisbon manuscript. The other manuscripts and the editions, data XVI kal. Julii.

(l) ‹EPISTOLA› · printed under col 1059

Alias 96. Quae autem antea 123 erat, nunc 154. Scripta 15 Junii an. 453.

Formerly 96. The one that was formerly 123 is now 154. Written 15 June in the year 453.

(m) ‹AD EUDOCIAM AUGUSTAM› · printed under col 1059, running on under col 1060

Exstat in mss. collect. 12, 18, 19 et 24, ac in exemplo Sichardi. Vulgati Leonis inscribunt, Ad Liciniam Eudochiam; Quesnellus, ad Liciniam Eudoxiam, notans legi Eudoxiam in ms. Grim, Perperam. Liciniae Eudoxiae nomen non uxori Theodosii Junioris, ad quam hic Leo scribit, sed Valentiniani uxori hujus filiae convenit. Ratisp. hic habet Eudochiam, at in epist. 117 Eudociam praefert, ut in aliis codd. et editis concil. hoc nomen scribitur. Confer annot. 6 in epist. 117 (Col. 1037, n. h), ex qua harum litterarum causam seu impulsum discimus.

It is extant in the manuscripts of collections 12, 18, 19 and 24, and in Sichard's copy. The common editions of Leo give the heading Ad Liciniam Eudochiam; Quesnel, ad Liciniam Eudoxiam, noting that Eudoxiam is read in the Grimani manuscript. Wrongly. The name Licinia Eudoxia belongs not to the wife of Theodosius the Younger, to whom Leo writes here, but to the wife of Valentinian, the daughter of this man. The Ratisbon has Eudochiam here, but in letter 117 prefers Eudociam, as this name is written in other manuscripts and in the editions of the councils. Compare note 6 on letter 117 (Col. 1037, n. h), from which we learn the cause or occasion of this letter.

(n) ‹Dominus adjuvat,› · printed under col 1060

Vulg. cum mss. collect. 12 et 24 atque Sichardo, debeat praecaveri. Emendationem Quesn. ex Grimanico noster Ratisp. confirmat. Mox et impiis in codd. collect. 12 et antiquis editis: apud Sichardum, et inimicis veritatis.

The common editions, with the manuscripts of collections 12 and 24 and Sichard, debeat praecaveri. Quesnel's emendation from the Grimani manuscript is confirmed by our Ratisbon. Next, et impiis in the manuscripts of collection 12 and the old editions; in Sichard, et inimicis veritatis.

(o) ‹mihi est vestra› · printed under col 1060

Iidem vulg. cum iisdem codd. atque Sichardo corrupte, oranda clementia, obsecro Dominum, ut me tuam incolumitatem in causa fidei... magis magisque faciat adjuvare, ut tantum quod pietatis tuae, etc. Ratisp. et Grim. in emendatione semper consentiunt.

The same common editions, with the same manuscripts and Sichard, corruptly: oranda clementia, obsecro Dominum, ut me tuam incolumitatem in causa fidei... magis magisque faciat adjuvare, ut tantum quod pietatis tuae, etc. The Ratisbon and the Grimani always agree in the emendation.

(p) ‹nec auctoritas› · printed under col 1060

Ita melius Ratisp. quam in vulgatis et aliis etiam Quesnelli codicibus, Scriptorum. Mox, commonebant in Ratisp. et mss. collect. 12.

So, better, the Ratisbon, rather than what stands in the common editions and also in Quesnel's other manuscripts, Scriptorum. Next, commonebant in the Ratisbon and the manuscripts of collection 12.

(q) ‹favente Deo› · printed under col 1060, running on under col 1061

Editi, et prodest, et prosit generi humano. Ratisponensis codicis lectio melior. Cum Leo ad hanc Augustam alias litteras scripserit, quibus eam ab Eutychianorum patrocinio revocare, et ad favendum catholicis permovere studuit, ut vidimus annot. 7 in epist. 117 (Col. 1038, n. i), has litteras effectum obtinuisse praesumit, ut sic facilius ex praesumpta de ea fiducia eamdem impelleret. Dici etiam potest verbum prodest indicare alia ejusdem Augustae pia opera, quibus aliquot in Palaestina ecclesias, hospitalia et monasteria aedificavit, largiterque ditavit, ut narrant Evagrius lib. I cap. 21 et 22, et auctor Vitae S. Euthymii. Idem praeterea codex Ratisponensis sequentium emendationem a Quesnello inductam approbat, cum in anterioribus vulg. sicut et in aliarum collectionum mss. legatur: In verbis Dei vestram ibi esse voluntatem, ubi Domini nostri Jesu Christi vobis sicut verum Deum, etc.

The editions, et prodest, et prosit generi humano. The reading of the Ratisbon manuscript is better. Since Leo had written another letter to this Augusta, in which he strove to recall her from her patronage of the Eutychians and to move her to favour the Catholics, as we saw in note 7 on letter 117 (Col. 1038, n. i), he presumes that that letter has had its effect, so that by the confidence thus presumed in her he might the more easily urge her on. It can also be said that the word prodest points to other pious works of the same Augusta, by which she built several churches, hospices and monasteries in Palestine and endowed them generously, as Evagrius relates, book 1, chapters 21 and 22, and the author of the Life of St Euthymius. The same Ratisbon manuscript moreover approves the emendation of what follows introduced by Quesnel, whereas in the earlier common editions, as also in the manuscripts of the other collections, one reads: In verbis Dei vestram ibi esse voluntatem, ubi Domini nostri Jesu Christi vobis sicut verum Deum, etc.

Editors' prose

Synopsis. — I. Rogat ut curam suam reducendis ad fidem et quietem monachis Palaestinis impendat. — II. Recepta Chalcedonensi synodo tam Eutychen quam Nestorium exsecrentur, si catholici videri volunt. Quid autem profecerit exhortatio Eudociae, ipsius litteris instrui cupit.

Synopsis. — I. He asks her to devote her care to bringing the monks of Palestine back to the faith and to quiet. — II. Having accepted the synod of Chalcedon, let them execrate Eutyches as well as Nestorius, if they wish to be seen as Catholics. He wishes to be informed by her own letter what Eudocia's exhortation has achieved.

Page

running head: 1059 S. LEONIS MAGNI EPISTOLÆ. 1060 (across the page; this column carries "EPISTOLÆ. 1060")
marginal letters: A ‹aliqua, aut transgressione›; B ‹Leo episcopus Eudociae›; C ‹bant, quid eis›; D in the gutter beside footnote (p), within the footnote band
old-edition numerals: 1234 before ‹EPISTOLA (l) CXXIII›; 1235 after ‹et generi ipsi›
signature: none
other: none

PL 54:1061

Dei incarnatione suscepto, quod domicilium habitationis vestrae ibi esse voluistis, ubi vobis Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum sicut verum Deum, ita et verum hominem, in unitate personae, et mirabilium indicia, et passionum documenta loquuntur.

[…] incarnation of the Word of God, that you have willed the dwelling-place of your abode to be there where both the tokens of the miracles and the evidences of the sufferings speak to you of our Lord Jesus Christ, as true God, so also true man, in unity of person.

CAP. II. — Si ergo praedicti nomen catholicum venerantur et diligunt, et inter Domini corporis volunt membra numerari, pravos errores, quos temere admiserant, detestentur, et agant poenitentiam impiarum blasphemiarum, cruentorumque factorum. Succumbant pro salute animarum suarum synodalibus, quae in civitate Chalcedonensi sunt confirmata, decretis. Et quia ad intelligendum sacramentum salutis humanae, nisi fides vera et humilitas quieta non pervenit, credant quod legunt in Evangelio, quod confitentur in symbolo, nec impiis dogmatibus misceantur. Fides enim catholica sicut damnat Nestorium, qui in uno Domino nostro Jesu Christo duas ausus est praedicare personas, ita damnat etiam Eutychen cum Dioscoro, qui ab unigenito Deo Verbo negant in utero Virginis matris veritatem carnis humanae susceptam. Si quid autem erga praedictorum conversionem exhortatio vestra profecerit, quod gloriam vobis praestabit aeternam, peto hoc mihi clementiae vestrae litteris indicetis; ut et vos boni operis fructum cepisse, et illos gaudeam misericordia Domini non periisse.

CHAP. II. — If, then, the aforesaid venerate and love the Catholic name, and wish to be numbered among the members of the Lord's body, let them detest the depraved errors which they had rashly admitted, and do penance for their impious blasphemies and bloody deeds. Let them submit, for the salvation of their souls, to the synodal decrees which were confirmed in the city of Chalcedon. And since nothing but true faith and quiet humility attains to the understanding of the mystery of human salvation, let them believe what they read in the Gospel and what they confess in the creed, and not be mingled with impious doctrines. For the Catholic faith, just as it condemns Nestorius, who dared to preach two persons in our one Lord Jesus Christ, so condemns also Eutyches with Dioscorus, who deny that the reality of human flesh was taken by the only-begotten God the Word in the womb of the Virgin mother. And if your exhortation has made any progress towards the conversion of the aforesaid, which will win you eternal glory, I ask you to make it known to me by a letter of your Clemency, so that I may rejoice both that you have reaped the fruit of a good work and that they, by the Lord's mercy, have not perished.

Data decimo septimo kalendas Julii, Opilione viro clarissimo consule.

Given on the seventeenth day before the Kalends of July, in the consulship of Opilio, a man of clarissimus rank.

EPISTOLA CXXIV.

LETTER CXXIV.

AD MONACHOS PALAESTINOS.

TO THE MONKS OF PALESTINE.

Editors' notes and page, col. 1061

Footnotes

(q) continued from col 1060, set in n1060.

(a) ‹et diligunt,› · printed under col 1061

Antiquae editiones cum mss. collect. 12 et 24, inter Domini corpus se volunt membra nominari. Quesnellus ex Grimanico: Intra Domini corpus volunt membra numerari. Lectio Ratisp. praeferenda fuit.

The old editions with the manuscripts of collections 12 and 24, inter Domini corpus se volunt membra nominari. Quesnel from the Grimani manuscript: Intra Domini corpus volunt membra numerari. The Ratisbon reading had to be preferred.

(b) ‹Deo Verbo› · printed under col 1061

Vulgati, negat. Ex cunctis nostris codd. atque Sichardo et Binio emendavimus.

The common editions, negat. We have corrected it from all our manuscripts and from Sichard and Binius.

Ita cum Grim. noster Ratisp. Alii codices cum vulg. ante Quesn., ut et in vobis boni operis fructum, et in illis gaudeam misericordiam Domini non periisse.

So our Ratisbon with the Grimani. Other manuscripts with the common editions before Quesnel, ut et in vobis boni operis fructum, et in illis gaudeam misericordiam Domini non periisse.

(d) ‹periisse. Data› · printed under col 1061

Omnes editi, septimo kal. Correximus ex optimo codice Ratisp., sic enim haec epistola eodem die quo duae praecedentes signantur, idque ex Leonis more, cum omnes eadem occasione simul transmissae videantur.

All the editions, septimo kal. We have corrected it from the excellent Ratisbon manuscript, for thus this letter is dated on the same day as the two preceding ones, and that in keeping with Leo's practice, since all seem to have been sent together on the same occasion.

(e) ‹EPISTOLA› · printed under col 1061

Alias 97. Quae autem erat 124, nunc 155. Scripta sub idem tempus quo praecedens.

Formerly 97. The one that was 124 is now 155. Written at about the same time as the preceding one.

(f) ‹AD MONACHOS PALAESTINOS› · printed under col 1061, running on under col 1062

Invenitur haec epistola in mss. collect. 5, 11, 12, 13 et 20 usque ad 24, et in exemplo Sichardi. Licet autem haec epistola chronica nota careat, certe tamen scripta hoc anno, et probabiliter una cum antecedenti in Palaestinam missa fuit. Leo enim monachorum Palaestinorum tumultus primum audivit ante diem 25 Novembris anni 452, ex epist. 109; sed quo animo moverentur, ignorabat: unde pleniorem instructionem petiit epist. 113, c. 3. Paulo post hanc instructionem accepit, cum Julianus ad eum transmisit Marciani et Pulcheriae scripta ad eosdem monachos, in quibus eorum ausus ac turbae describuntur, ut patet ex epist. 115, 116 et 117, datis die 21 Martii anni 453. Sicuti vero hac de causa ad Eudociam in Palaestina degentem, eorumque monachorum patronam antecedentes litteras dedit, ita etiam hanc epistolam ad ipsos monachos eum scripsisse probabilissimum est. Cum vero horum monachorum tumultus jam sopitos Leo acceperit ante diem † Januarii anni sequentis ex epist. 126 et 127, hae procul dubio litterae ad Palaestinos in annum sequentem differri non possunt.

This letter is found in the manuscripts of collections 5, 11, 12, 13 and 20 to 24, and in Sichard's copy. Although this letter lacks a date, it was certainly written in this year, and was probably sent to Palestine together with the preceding one. For Leo first heard of the disturbances of the Palestinian monks before 25 November of the year 452, from letter 109; but with what intent they were moved he did not know: hence he asked for fuller information in letter 113, ch. 3. A little later he received this information, when Julian sent him the letters of Marcian and Pulcheria to these same monks, in which their outrages and disturbances are described, as is plain from letters 115, 116 and 117, dated 21 March of the year 453. And just as for this reason he sent the preceding letter to Eudocia, who was living in Palestine and was the patroness of those monks, so it is most probable that he also wrote this letter to the monks themselves. But since Leo learned that the disturbances of these monks had already been quieted before † January of the following year, from letters 126 and 127, this letter to the Palestinians can without doubt not be put off to the following year.

(g) ‹SYNOPSIS› · printed under col 1062

In tabula collect. 5 hic titulus legitur c. 81: Ad Palaestinos super mobilitate fidei ipsorum in Eutychianum haeresim devolutos correctio.

In the table of collection 5 this title is read, ch. 81: A correction to the Palestinians, who through the fickleness of their faith had slid into the Eutychian heresy.

Editors' prose

Synopsis. — I. Ex perversa epistolae S. Leonis ad Flavianum interpretatione impositum esse Palaestinis. — II. Tam Eutychen, qui naturas confundit in Christo, quam Nestorium, qui personas geminat, esse detestandos. — III. Christi non esse participem, qui

Synopsis. — I. That the Palestinians were imposed upon by a perverse interpretation of St Leo's letter to Flavian. — II. That both Eutyches, who confounds the natures in Christ, and Nestorius, who doubles the persons, are to be detested. — III. That he is not a partaker of Christ who […]

Page

running head: 1061 EPISTOLA CXXIV. 1062 (across the page; this column carries "1061 EPISTOLA")
marginal letters: A ‹Dei incarnatione suscepto›; B ‹sceantur. Fides enim›; C ‹(g) Synopsis›; D in the gutter beside footnote (d) (‹duae praecedentes signantur›), within the footnote band
old-edition numerals: 1236 before ‹EPISTOLA (e) CXXIV›
signature: none
other: in note (f) the day before "Januarii" is not printed legibly (a colon-like mark stands in its place): daggered

PL 54:1062

Leo episcopus universis Monachis per Palaestinam constitutis.

Leo, bishop, to all the Monks established throughout Palestine.

CAP. I. — Sollicitudini meae, quam universali Ecclesiae omnibusque ejus filiis debeo, multorum relatione patefactum est dilectionis vestrae animis quiddam offensionis illatum, dum aut imperiti, ut apparet, interpretes, aut maligni, quaedam vos aliter intelligere, quam a me sunt praedicata, fecerunt, non valentes in Graecum eloquium apte et proprie Latina transferre, cum in rebus subtilibus et difficilibus explicandis, vix sibi etiam in sua lingua disputator quisque sufficiat. Quod tamen apud me eo profecit, ut, dum ea quae catholica fides respuit improbatis, intelligamus vos veris amiciores esse quam falsis; et id merito refutare, quod ex antiquae institutione doctrinae etiam ipse detestor.

CHAP. I. — It has been made known to my solicitude, which I owe to the universal Church and to all her sons, by the report of many, that some offence has been brought upon the minds of your Charity, since interpreters, either unskilled, as it appears, or malicious, have made you understand certain things otherwise than they were preached by me, not being able to render the Latin into Greek speech aptly and properly, since in explaining subtle and difficult matters scarcely any disputant is equal to the task even in his own language. Yet this has had this benefit in my eyes, that, while you reject what the Catholic faith spurns, we understand that you are friendlier to the true than to the false, and that you rightly refute what I myself too detest, by the instruction of the ancient doctrine.

Quamvis enim epistola mea ad sanctae memoriae Flavianum episcopum data, satis sibi ad manifestationem sui ipsa sufficiat, neque in aliquo aut purgationis aut expositionis indigeat; et alia tamen cum eadem mea scripta concordant, in quibus similiter praedicationis meae sensus in aperto est. Necessitatem enim habens contra haereticos, qui multos Christi populos conturbaverant, disserendi, et clementissimis principibus, et sancto concilio synodali, et Constantinopolitanae Ecclesiae, quid de incarnatione Verbi, secundum evangelicam apostolicamque doctrinam, deberemus

For although my letter given to Flavian, bishop of holy memory, is quite sufficient of itself to make its own meaning plain, and in nothing needs either vindication or explanation, yet other writings of mine also agree with it, in which the sense of my preaching is likewise in the open. For, being under the necessity of disputing against the heretics who had thrown many peoples of Christ into confusion, I made plain both to the most clement emperors and to the holy synodal council and to the Church of Constantinople what, concerning the incarnation of the Word, according to the evangelical and apostolic doctrine, we ought […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1062

Footnotes

(f) runs on under this column; its call is in col 1061, set in n1061. (g) printed under this column; its call is in col 1061, set in n1061.

(h) ‹Leo episcopus universis› · printed under col 1062

Vulgati ante Quesn. cum mss. collect. 13 et 21, perperam, episcopis; cum ex contextu ad monachos in Palaestina tumultuantes haec epistola scripta fuerit. Hinc jure Quesnellus Binium secutus monachis pro episcopis substituit. Confer notam ejus 1. Caeterum mss. collect. 5, 11 et 12 inscriptione carent, et solum titulum praeferunt. Epistola Leonis papae ad Palaestinos, vel ad Palaestinum. Codices vero collect. 24 hanc inscriptionem exhibent, Leo episcopus Palaestinis.

The common editions before Quesnel, with the manuscripts of collections 13 and 21, wrongly have episcopis; whereas from the context this letter was written to the monks causing disturbances in Palestine. Hence Quesnel, following Binius, rightly substituted monachis for episcopis. Compare his note 1. Moreover the manuscripts of collections 5, 11 and 12 lack the address and carry only the title Epistola Leonis papae ad Palaestinos, or ad Palaestinum. But the manuscripts of collection 24 show this address: Leo episcopus Palaestinis.

(i) ‹quam a me sunt› · printed under col 1062

Vulg. Leonis antiqui, cum Vat. collect. 24 et Sichardo, praedicta.

The old common editions of Leo, with the Vatican manuscript of collection 24 and Sichard, praedicta.

(j) ‹apud me eo› · printed under col 1062

Vat. collect. 11, proficit. In margine Concil., profuit. Dein in editorum margine notatum fuit ex mss. collect. 24 et Sichardo, etiam ipse Eutyches detestatur.

The Vatican manuscript of collection 11, proficit. In the margin of the Councils, profuit. Then in the margin of the editions there was noted, from the manuscripts of collection 24 and Sichard, etiam ipse Eutyches detestatur.

(k) ‹expositionis indigeat;› · printed under col 1062

Particulam et sumptam pro etiam, quam delevit Quesnellus, revocavimus ex Vindebon. collect. 5, Vat. collect. 11 ac 24 atque exemplo Sichardi.

The particle et, taken for etiam, which Quesnel deleted, we have restored from the Vienna manuscript of collection 5, the Vatican manuscripts of collections 11 and 24, and Sichard's copy.

Editors' prose

nostram in eo naturam non confitetur. — IV. Illos solum Christi sanguine mundari, in quorum corpore oblatus, passus et mortuus triumphavit. — V. Utriusque ejus naturae proprietates ex operum qualitate declarari. — VI. Utramque inconfuse in una persona convenire. — VII. Nihil Filio Dei accessisse de novo nisi in forma servi. — VIII. Cum iisdem monachis de scandalis ipsorum furore ortis expostulat. — IX. Ut resipiscant et fidem communem amplectantur, exhortatur.

[…] does not confess our nature in Him. — IV. That those alone are cleansed by the blood of Christ in whose body He was offered, suffered and died, and triumphed. — V. That the properties of each of His natures are shown by the character of the works. — VI. That both come together without confusion in one person. — VII. That nothing new accrued to the Son of God except in the form of a servant. — VIII. He remonstrates with these monks over the scandals that arose from their fury. — IX. He exhorts them to come to their senses and embrace the common faith.

Page

running head: 1061 EPISTOLA CXXIV. 1062 (across the page; this column carries "CXXIV. 1062")
marginal letters: A ‹nostram in eo naturam›; B ‹1237 intelligere›; C ‹conturbaverant, disserendi›; D in the gutter beside footnote (h) (‹perperam, episcopis›), within the footnote band
old-edition numerals: 1237 before ‹intelligere›
signature: none
other: the synopsis of Letter CXXIV, begun in col 1061, runs on at the head of this column

PL 54:1063

sapere ac sentire, patefeci, et in nullo a sanctorum Patrum confessione discessi: quia una est, vera, singularis, catholica fides, cui nihil addi, nec minui potest; quam Nestorius prius, et nunc Eutyches, diversa quidem assertione, sed simili impietate impugnare conati sunt, et Ecclesiae Dei duas haereses sibimet contrarias inferre tentarunt, ut uterque a discipulis veritatis merito damnaretur: quia insanum nimis et sacrilegum fuit, quod varia falsitate ambo senserunt.

[…] to think and to hold, and I departed in nothing from the confession of the holy Fathers: because the Catholic faith is one, true and unique, to which nothing can be added and from which nothing can be taken away; which Nestorius formerly, and now Eutyches, have tried to assail, with differing assertions indeed but with like impiety, and have tried to bring upon the Church of God two heresies contrary to each other, so that each was deservedly condemned by the disciples of the truth: because what both held, in their differing falsehood, was exceedingly mad and sacrilegious.

CAP. II. — Anathematizetur ergo Nestorius, qui beatam virginem Mariam hominis tantummodo credidit genitricem, ut aliam personam carnis, aliam faceret Deitatis, nec unum Christum in Verbo Dei et carne sentiret, sed separatim atque sejunctim, alium filium Dei, alium hominis praedicaret: cum, manente illa incommutabili Verbi essentia, quae ei cum Patre et Spiritu sancto intemporalis atque coaeterna est, ita intra virginea viscera Verbum caro sit factum, ut uno conceptu unoque partu eadem virgo, secundum unionem utriusque substantiae, et ancilla Domini esset et mater. Quod etiam Elisabet, sicut Lucas evangelista declarat, intellexit et dixit: Unde hoc mihi, ut veniat mater Domini mei ad me (Luc. I, 43)?

CHAP. II. — Let Nestorius, then, be anathematized, who believed the blessed Virgin Mary to be the mother of a man only, so that he made one person of the flesh and another of the Godhead, and did not hold one Christ in the Word of God and the flesh, but preached, separately and apart, one the son of God and another the son of man: whereas, while that unchangeable essence of the Word remained, which He has timeless and coeternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit, the Word was so made flesh within the virgin's womb that by one conception and one birth the same virgin, according to the union of both substances, was both the handmaid of the Lord and His mother. This Elizabeth too, as the evangelist Luke declares, understood and said: Whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? (Luke 1:43)

Eutyches quoque eodem percellatur anathemate, qui per impios veterum haereticorum volutatus errores, tertium Apolinaris dogma delegit; ut negata humanae carnis atque animae veritate, totum Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum unius asserat esse naturae, tamquam verbi Deitas ipsa se in carnem animamque converterit; et concipi et nasci, nutriri et crescere, crucifigi ac mori, sepeliri ac resurgere, et ascendere in coelum et in Patris dextera, unde ad judicandos vivos et mortuos veniet, consedere, ejus tantum essentiae fuerit, quae nihil horum in se sine carnis recipit veritate: quoniam natura Unigeniti, natura est Patris, natura est Spiritus sancti, simulque impassibilis, simul est incommutabilis, sempiternae Trinitatis indivisa unitas et consubstantialis aequalitas. Unde si ab Apollinaris perversitate haereticus iste desciscit, ne convincatur Deitatem passibilem sentire atque mortalem; et tamen Verbi incarnati, id est, Verbi et carnis unam audet pronuntiare naturam, non dubie in Manichaei et Marcionis transit insaniam, et mediatorem Dei et hominum, hominem Jesum Christum simulatorie omnia credit egisse, nec humanum in ipso corpus, sed phantasticam corporis speciem oculis apparuisse cernentium.

Let Eutyches also be struck with the same anathema, who, wallowing in the impious errors of the old heretics, has chosen the third dogma of Apollinaris: so that, denying the reality of human flesh and soul, he asserts that our whole Lord Jesus Christ is of one nature, as though the Godhead of the Word had itself turned itself into flesh and soul; and that to be conceived and born, to be nourished and grow, to be crucified and die, to be buried and rise again, and to ascend into heaven and sit at the right hand of the Father, whence He will come to judge the living and the dead, belonged to that essence alone which admits none of these things in itself without the reality of the flesh: since the nature of the Only-begotten is the nature of the Father, is the nature of the Holy Spirit, at once impassible, at once unchangeable, the undivided unity and consubstantial equality of the everlasting Trinity. Hence, if this heretic departs from the perversity of Apollinaris, so as not to be convicted of holding the Godhead to be passible and mortal, and yet dares to pronounce one nature of the Word incarnate, that is, of the Word and the flesh, he undoubtedly passes over into the madness of Manichaeus and Marcion, and believes that the mediator of God and men, the man Jesus Christ, did all things in pretence, and that there was no human body in Him, but that a phantom appearance of a body appeared to the eyes of those who beheld Him.

Editors' notes and page, col. 1063

Footnotes

(a) ‹vera, singularis,› · printed under col 1063

Editiones ante Quesn. cum Sichardo addunt perfecta inviolabilis: desunt in mss. undecim Quesnelli, et in nostri collect. 5, 11, 21 et 24. Postea nihil minui in codd. collect. 11, 21 et 24.

The editions before Quesnel, with Sichard, add perfecta inviolabilis: the words are missing in eleven manuscripts of Quesnel and in ours of collections 5, 11, 21 and 24. Next, nihil minui in the manuscripts of collections 11, 21 and 24.

(b) ‹CAP. II.—› · printed under col 1063

Ab hoc c. 2 usque ad cap. 8 eadem leguntur in ep. 165, al. 97, ad Leonem Augustum.

From this ch. 2 as far as ch. 8 the same words are read in letter 165, formerly 97, to Leo Augustus.

Duo codd. Vat. collect. 21, ne unum. Mox ex Verbo Dei in Vat. collect. 11. Dein in iisdem codd. collect. 21, separatum atque sejunctum. Postea incommutabili legitur in ep. 165, cap. 2.

Two Vatican manuscripts of collection 21, ne unum. Next, ex Verbo Dei in the Vatican manuscript of collection 11. Then in the same manuscripts of collection 21, separatum atque sejunctum. Later, incommutabili is read in letter 165, ch. 2.

(d) ‹Quod etiam› · printed under col 1063

Codd. collect. 21, Elisabet Lucas evangelista declarat intellexisse cum dicit.

The manuscripts of collection 21, Elisabet Lucas evangelista declarat intellexisse cum dicit.

(e) ‹veniet, consedere,› · printed under col 1063, running on under col 1064

Vulgati addunt divinae, et habent considere. Secuti sumus codd. Vindebon. collect. 5, Vat. collect. 11, 21 et 24, atque Sichardum. Idem Quesnellus, licet vocem divinae retinuerit, monuit tamen in margine hanc vocem in quatuor suis mss. desiderari.

The common editions add divinae, and have considere. We have followed the Vienna manuscript of collection 5, the Vatican manuscripts of collections 11, 21 and 24, and Sichard. Quesnel himself, although he kept the word divinae, nevertheless noted in the margin that this word is missing in four of his manuscripts.

Page

running head: 1063 S. LEONIS MAGNI EPISTOLÆ. 1064 (across the page; this column carries "1063 S. LEONIS MAGNI")
marginal letters: A ‹remus sapere ac sentire›; B ‹alium filium Dei, alium hominis›; C ‹nutriri et crescere›; D ‹egisse, nec humanum›
old-edition numerals: 1238 after ‹esset et mater.›
signature: none
other: the column opens with "remus", the tail of "debe-remus" hyphenated from col 1062 (set whole there)

PL 54:1064

CAP. III. — Quae impietatis mendacia quoniam olim fides catholica detestatur, et talium sacrilegia concordibus per totum mundum beatorum Patrum sunt damnata sententiis, quicumque illi sunt ita obcaecati et a lumine veritatis alieni, ut Verbo Dei a tempore incarnationis humanam, id est nostram, negent inesse naturam, ostendant in quo sibi Christianum nomen usurpent, et cum Evangelio veritatis qua ratione concordent, si per beatae Virginis partum, aut caro sine Deitate, aut Deitas est orta sine carne. Sicut enim negari non potest, quod Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis (Joan. I, 14); ita negari non potest, quod Deus erat in Christo, mundum reconcilians sibi (II. Cor. V, 19). Quae autem reconciliatio esse potest, qua humano generi propitiaretur Deus, nisi omnium causam mediator Dei hominumque susciperet? Qua vero ratione veritatem mediatoris impleret, nisi qui in forma Dei aequalis erat Patri, in forma servi particeps esset et nostri: ut per unum novum hominem fieret renovatio vetustatis; et mortis vinculum unius praevaricatione contractum, unius morte, qui solus morti nihil debuit, solveretur? Effusio enim pro injustis sanguinis justi tam potens fuit ad privilegium, tam dives ad pretium, ut si universitas captivorum in redemptorem suum crederet, nullum tyrannica vincula retinerent: quoniam, sicut Apostolus ait, ubi abundavit peccatum, superbundavit et gratia (Rom. V, 20). Et cum sub peccati praejudicio nati potestatem acceperint ad justitiam renascendi, validius factum est donum libertatis, quam debitum servitutis.

CHAP. III. — Since the Catholic faith has long detested these lies of impiety, and the sacrileges of such men have been condemned by the concordant judgements of the blessed Fathers throughout the whole world, whoever they are that are so blinded and estranged from the light of truth as to deny that a human, that is our, nature has been present in the Word of God from the time of the incarnation, let them show on what ground they claim the Christian name for themselves, and in what way they agree with the Gospel of truth, if through the childbearing of the blessed Virgin either flesh arose without Godhead or Godhead without flesh. For as it cannot be denied that the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us (John 1:14), so it cannot be denied that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself (2 Cor. 5:19). But what reconciliation can there be, by which God might be propitiated towards the human race, unless the mediator of God and men took up the cause of all? And how could He fulfil the reality of a mediator, unless He Who in the form of God was equal to the Father were in the form of a servant a sharer of ours as well: so that through the one new man the renewal of the old might come about, and the bond of death, contracted by the transgression of one, might be loosed by the death of One Who alone owed nothing to death? For the outpouring of the blood of the Just One for the unjust was so powerful in its privilege, so rich in its price, that if the whole multitude of captives believed in their Redeemer, no tyrant's chains would hold them: since, as the Apostle says, where sin abounded, grace also superabounded (Rom. 5:20). And since those born under the prior sentence of sin have received the power to be reborn to righteousness, the gift of freedom has been made stronger than the debt of servitude.

CAP. IV. — Quam itaque sibi in hujus sacramenti praesidio spem relinquunt qui in Salvatoris nostri corpore negant humanae substantiae veritatem? Dicant quo sacrificio reconciliati, dicant quo sanguine sint redempti? Quis est qui tradidit semetipsum pro nobis oblationem et hostiam Deo in odorem suavitatis (Ephes. V, 2)? aut quod umquam sacrificium sacratius fuit, quam quod verus pontifex altari crucis per immolationem suae carnis imposuit? Quamvis enim multorum sanctorum in conspectu Domini pretiosa mors fuerit (Ps. CXV, 15), nullius tamen insontis occisio, propitiatio fuit mundi. Acceperunt justi, non dederunt coronas; et de fortitudine fidelium exempla nata sunt patientiae, non dona justitiae. Singulares quippe in singulis mortes fuerunt, nec alterius quisquam debitum suo fine persolvit: cum inter filios hominum unus solus Dominus noster Jesus Christus

CHAP. IV. — What hope, then, do they leave themselves in the protection of this mystery, who deny the reality of human substance in the body of our Saviour? Let them say by what sacrifice they have been reconciled, let them say by what blood they have been redeemed. Who is it that gave Himself up for us, an offering and a victim to God for an odour of sweetness (Eph. 5:2)? Or what sacrifice was ever holier than that which the true High Priest laid upon the altar of the cross by the immolation of His own flesh? For although the death of many saints has been precious in the sight of the Lord (Ps. 115:15), yet the slaying of no innocent man was the propitiation of the world. The just received crowns, they did not give them; and from the fortitude of the faithful have come examples of patience, not gifts of righteousness. For their deaths were individual, each in each, and none by his own end paid the debt of another: since among the sons of men our Lord Jesus Christ alone […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1064

Footnotes

(e) runs on under this column; its call is in col 1063, set in n1063.

(f) ‹qua ratione concordent,› · printed under col 1064

Vindebon. collect. 5 et Vat. Collect, 11, si beatae Virginis partus. Melius in duobus Vat. collect. 21, si beatae Virginis partu, et similiter in ep. 165, c. 4.

The Vienna manuscript of collection 5 and the Vatican of collection 11, si beatae Virginis partus. Better in two Vatican manuscripts of collection 21, si beatae Virginis partu, and likewise in letter 165, ch. 4.

(g) ‹Deus, nisi› · printed under col 1064

Ita anteriores editiones cum nostris codd. Vindebon. collect. 5, Vat. collect. 24, atque Sichardo melius quam apud Quesnellum cum mss. collect. 21, hominum; nam et in epistola 165, c. 4, omnium pariter legitur.

So the earlier editions, with our Vienna manuscript of collection 5, the Vatican of collection 24, and Sichard, better than in Quesnel with the manuscripts of collection 21, hominum; for in letter 165, ch. 4, omnium is likewise read.

(h) ‹solveretur?› · printed under col 1064

Habentur hanc in ep. 105, ut dictum est, et insuper in serm. 64, c. 3.

These words are found in letter 105 [sic; probably 165], as has been said, and in addition in sermon 64, ch. 3.

Page

running head: 1063 S. LEONIS MAGNI EPISTOLÆ. 1064 (across the page; this column carries "EPISTOLÆ. 1064")
marginal letters: A ‹CAP. III. — Quae impietatis›; B ‹Deus, nisi 1239›; C ‹CAP. IV.—Quam itaque›; D ‹quisquam debitum suo fine›
old-edition numerals: 1239 after ‹Deus, nisi›
signature: none
other: none

PL 54:1065

exstiterit, in quo omnes crucifixi, omnes mortui, omnes sepulti, omnes sunt etiam suscitati. De quibus ipse dicebat: Cum exaltatus fuero a terra, omnia traham ad me (Joan. XII, 42). Fides etiam vera justificans impios, et creans justos ad humanitatis suae tracta participem, in illo acquirit salutem, in quo solo homo se invenit innocentem; liberum habens per gratiam Dei de ejus potentia gloriari, qui contra hostem superbum in carnis nostrae humilitate congressus, his victoriam suam tribuit, in quorum corpore triumphavit.

[…] has stood forth, in Whom all were crucified, all died, all were buried, and all were also raised up. Of them He Himself said: When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all things to Myself (John 12:42 [recte 12:32]). The true faith too, which justifies the ungodly and creates the just, drawn to be a partaker of His humanity, gains salvation in Him in Whom alone man finds himself innocent, having freedom, through the grace of God, to glory in the power of Him Who, joining battle against the proud enemy in the lowliness of our flesh, gave His victory to those in whose body He triumphed.

CAP. V. — Quamvis ergo in uno Domino nostro Jesu Christo, vero Dei atque hominis Filio, Verbi et carnis una persona sit, et utraque essentia communes habeat actiones; intelligendae tamen sunt ipsorum operum qualitates, et sincerae fidei contemplatione cernendum est, ad quae provehatur humilitas infirmitatis, et ad quae inclinetur altitudo virtutis: quid sit quod caro sine Verbo non agit, et quid sit quod Verbum sine carne non efficit. Sine Verbi enim potentia nec conciperet Virgo, nec pareret (Luc. I, 31): et sine veritate carnis obvoluta pannis infantia non jaceret (Luc. II, 7). Sine Verbi potentia non adorarent magi puerum novo sidere declaratum (Matth. II, 11): et sine veritate carnis non juberetur transferri in Aegyptum puer, et ab Herodis persecutione subduci: sine Verbi potentia non diceret vox Patris missa de coelo. Hic est filius meus dilectus, in quo mihi complacui (Matth. III, 17): et sine veritate carnis non prostestaretur Joannes: Ecce Agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi (Joan. I, 29). Sine Verbi potentia non fieret redintegratio debilium, et vivificatio mortuorum: et sine veritate carnis, nec cibus jejuno, nec somnus esset necessarius fatigato. Postremo, sine Verbi potentia non se Dominus Patri profiteretur aequalem, et sine veritate carnis non idem diceret Patrem se esse majorem: cum catholica fides utrumque suscipiat, utrumque defendat, quae secundum proprietatem divinae humanaeque substantiae unum Dei Filium, et hominem credit et Verbum.

CHAP. V. — Although, then, in our one Lord Jesus Christ, the true Son of God and of man, there is one person of the Word and the flesh, and both essences have their actions in common, yet the characters of the works themselves must be understood, and by the contemplation of sincere faith it must be discerned to what the lowliness of weakness is raised, and to what the loftiness of power stoops: what it is that the flesh does not do without the Word, and what it is that the Word does not effect without the flesh. For without the power of the Word the Virgin would neither conceive nor bear (Luke 1:31); and without the reality of the flesh the infant wrapped in swaddling clothes would not lie there (Luke 2:7). Without the power of the Word the magi would not adore the child made known by a new star (Matt. 2:11); and without the reality of the flesh the child would not be ordered to be carried into Egypt and withdrawn from the persecution of Herod. Without the power of the Word the voice of the Father sent from heaven would not say: This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased (Matt. 3:17); and without the reality of the flesh John would not testify: Behold the Lamb of God, behold Him Who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Without the power of the Word there would be no restoring of the infirm and no bringing to life of the dead; and without the reality of the flesh neither food would be needed by Him when fasting nor sleep when wearied. Lastly, without the power of the Word the Lord would not profess Himself equal to the Father, and without the reality of the flesh the same Lord would not say that the Father is greater than He: since the Catholic faith accepts both and defends both, believing, according to the property of the divine and the human substance, the one Son of God to be both man and Word.

CAP. VI. — Quamvis ergo ab illo initio, quo in utero virginis Verbum caro factum est (Joan. I, 14), nihil umquam inter divinam humanamque substantiam divisionis exstiterit, et per omnia incrementa corporea, unius personae fuerint totius temporis actiones; ea ipsa tamen, quae inseparabiliter facta sunt, nulla permixtione confundimus; sed quid cujus formae sit, ex operum qualitate sentimus. Nec divina enim humanis praejudicant, nec humana divinis, cum ita in idipsum utraque concurrant, ut in eis nec proprietas absumatur, nec persona geminetur. Dicant igitur isti phantasmatici Christiani, quae substantia

CHAP. VI. — Although, then, from that beginning at which the Word was made flesh in the virgin's womb (John 1:14), there has never been any division between the divine and the human substance, and through all the growth of the body the actions of the whole time were those of one person, yet those very things that were done inseparably we do not confuse by any mingling, but we perceive from the character of the works what belongs to which form. For neither do the divine things prejudice the human, nor the human the divine, since both so concur in one that in them neither is the property destroyed nor the person doubled. Let these phantasmal Christians say, then, what substance […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1065

Footnotes

(a) ‹Cum exaltatus fuero› · printed under col 1065

Vindebon. collect. 5 et Vat. collect. 24, cum Sichardo, delent a terra.

The Vienna manuscript of collection 5 and the Vatican of collection 24, with Sichard, delete a terra.

(b) ‹in quo mihi› · printed under col 1065

Codd. collect. 21 addunt bene.

The manuscripts of collection 21 add bene.

Pronomen se deest id Vindebon. collect. 5, in Vat. coll. 24, atque Sichardo.

The pronoun se is missing in the Vienna manuscript of collection 5, in the Vatican of collection 24, and in Sichard.

(d) ‹CAP. VI. —› · printed under col 1065

Habentur haec in serm. 65, c, 1.

These words are found in sermon 65, ch. 1.

(e) ‹persona geminetur.› · printed under col 1065

Haec habentur eodem sermone 65, c. 4.

These words are found in the same sermon 65, ch. 4.

Page

running head: 1065 EPISTOLA CXXIV. 1066 (across the page; this column carries "1065 EPISTOLA")
marginal letters: A ‹exstiterit, in quo›; B ‹1240 cernendum est›; C ‹Verbi potentia non fieret›; D ‹actiones; ea ipsa tamen›
old-edition numerals: 1240 before ‹cernendum est›
signature: PATROL. LIV. (under the footnotes of this column)
other: none

PL 54:1066

Salvatoris affixa sit ligno, quae jacuerit in sepulcro, et revoluto monumenti lapide, quae tertio die caro surrexerit; vel quale corpus Jesus discipulorum visui, clausis ad eos otiis ingressus intulerit: cum ad abigendam cernentium diffidentiam, inspici oculis digitisque tractari patentes adhuc fixuras clavorum, et recens compuncti lateris vulnus exigeret (Joan. XX). At si in tanta luce veritatis tenebras suas haeretica obduratio non relinquit, ostendant unde sibi spem vitae polliceantur aeternae, ad quam nisi per mediatorem Dei et hominum, hominem Jesum Christum, non potest perveniri. Non enim est aliud nomen datum hominibus sub coelo, in quo oporteat salvos fieri (Act. IV, 12): nec est redemptio captivitatis humanae, nisi in sanguine ejus, qui dedit semetipsum redemptionem pro omnibus (I Tim. II, 6). Qui, sicut praedicat beatus apostolus, cum in forma Dei esset, non rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo; sed semetipsum exinanivit, formam servi accipiens, in similitudinem hominum factus, et habitu inventus ut homo. Humiliavit semetipsum, factus obediens usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis. Propter quod et Deus illum exaltavit, et donavit illi nomen quod est super omne nomen; ut in nomine Jesu omne genu flectatur, coelestium, terrestrium et infernorum, et omnis lingua confiteatur quia Dominus Jesus Christus in gloria est Dei Patris (Philipp. II, 6-11).

[…] of the Saviour was fastened to the wood, what lay in the tomb, and what flesh rose on the third day when the stone of the tomb had been rolled away; or what kind of body Jesus brought before the sight of the disciples when He came in to them with the doors shut: when, to drive away the distrust of those who saw Him, He required that the prints of the nails, still open, and the wound of the side lately pierced, be looked on with their eyes and handled with their fingers (John 20). But if in so great a light of truth heretical obstinacy does not forsake its darkness, let them show whence they promise themselves the hope of eternal life, which cannot be reached except through the mediator of God and men, the man Jesus Christ. For there is no other name given to men under heaven by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12); nor is there any redemption of human captivity except in the blood of Him Who gave Himself as a redemption for all (1 Tim. 2:6). Who, as the blessed Apostle preaches, being in the form of God, did not think it robbery to be equal to God; but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man. He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. For which reason God also exalted Him, and gave Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father (Phil. 2:6–11).

CAP. VII. — Quamvis ergo unus sit Dominus Jesus Christus, et verae Deitatis veraeque humanitatis in ipso una prorsus eademque persona, neque hujus unitioni soliditas ulla possit divisione sejungi, exaltationem tamen, qua illum exaltavit Deus, et donavit illi nomen quod super omne nomen excellit, ad eam intelligimus pertinere formam, quae ditanda erat tantae glorificationis augmento. In forma quippe Dei aequalis erat Filius Patri, et inter Genitorem atque Unigenitum nulla erat in essentia discretio, nulla in majestate diversitas; nec per incarnationis mysterium aliquid decesserat Verbo, quod ei Patris munere redderetur. Forma autem servi, per quam impassibilis Deitas sacramentum magnae pietatis implevit, humana humilitas est, quae in gloriam divinae potestatis evecta est, in tantam unitatem ab ipso conceptu Virginis Deitate et humanitate connexa, ut nec sine homine divina, nec sine Deo agerentur humana. Propter quod sicut Dominus majestatis dicitur crucifixus, ita qui ex sempiternitate aequalis est Deo, dicitur exaltatus. Nec interest ex qua Christus substantia nominetur, cum inseparabiliter, manente unitate personae, idem sit et totus hominis filius propter carnem, et totus Dei Filius propter unam cum Patre Deitatem. Quidquid ergo in tempore accepit

CHAP. VII. — Although, then, the Lord Jesus Christ is one, and in Him there is altogether one and the same person of true Godhead and true humanity, and the solidity of this union can be severed by no division, yet we understand that the exaltation by which God exalted Him, and gave Him the name which excels above every name, belongs to that form which was to be enriched by the increase of so great a glorification. For in the form of God the Son was equal to the Father, and between the Begetter and the Only-begotten there was no distinction in essence, no diversity in majesty; nor through the mystery of the incarnation had anything been lost to the Word that should be given back to Him by the Father's gift. But the form of a servant, through which the impassible Godhead fulfilled the mystery of great piety, is human lowliness, which was raised up into the glory of divine power, the Godhead and the humanity being joined from the Virgin's very conception in so great a unity that neither were divine things done without the man nor human things without God. Wherefore, as the Lord of majesty is said to have been crucified, so He Who from eternity is equal to God is said to have been exalted. Nor does it matter from which substance Christ is named, since inseparably, the unity of the person remaining, the same is both wholly son of man by reason of the flesh and wholly Son of God by reason of the one Godhead with the Father. Whatever, then, […] received in time […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1066

Footnotes

(f) ‹lateris vulnus› · printed under col 1066

Unus Vat. collect. 21, exegerit: alius, ab ipsis discipulis exegerit. Mox ac si in Vindebon. collect. 5, ac Vat. collect. 24, atque Sichardo.

One Vatican manuscript of collection 21, exegerit; another, ab ipsis discipulis exegerit. Next, ac si in the Vienna manuscript of collection 5, and the Vatican of collection 24, and in Sichard.

(g) ‹(I Tim. II, 6). Qui› · printed under col 1066

Codd. collect. 21, et qui.

The manuscripts of collection 21, et qui.

(h) ‹neque hujus unitioni› · printed under col 1066

Quesnellus in marg.: Alias, unionis.

Quesnel in the margin: Elsewhere, unionis.

(i) ‹quod ei Patris› · printed under col 1066

Dei Patris in mss. collect. 21.

Dei Patris in the manuscripts of collection 21.

(j) ‹aequalis est Deo› · printed under col 1066

Idem codices, Deo Patri.

The same manuscripts, Deo Patri.

Page

running head: 1065 EPISTOLA CXXIV. 1066 (across the page; this column carries "CXXIV. 1066")
marginal letters: A ‹Salvatoris affixa sit ligno›; B ‹semetipsum redemptionem pro omnibus›; C ‹tationem tamen, qua illum›; D ‹tur crucifixus, ita qui›
old-edition numerals: 1241 before ‹salvos fieri›
signature: 34 (under the footnotes of this column)
other: the column ends with "ac-", completed as "accepit" from the head of col 1067 and set whole here

PL 54:1067

Christus, secundum hominem accepit, cui quae non habuit conferuntur. Nam secundum potentiam Verbi, indifferenter omnia quae habet Pater etiam Filius habet, et quae in forma servi a Patre accepit, eadem in forma Patris etiam ipse donavit. Est idem ipse et dives et pauper (II Cor. VIII, 9). Dives, quia in principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Hoc erat in principio apud Deum. Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil (Joan. I, 1-3). Pauper vero, quia Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis (Ibid., 14). Quae autem est ejus exinanitio, quaeve paupertas, nisi formae servilis acceptio, per quam, Verbi majestate velata, dispensatio humanae redemptionis impleta est? Nam quia captivitatis nostrae resolvi originalia vincula non poterant, nisi existeret homo ostri generis nostraeque naturae, quem veteris debiti praejudicia non tenerent, et qui immaculato sanguine suo chirographum lethale dilueret (Coloss. II, 14). sicut ab initio erat divinitus praeordinatum ita est in plenitudine praefiniti temporis factum, ut multis modis significata promissio in diu exspectatum veniret effectum; nec posset esse ambiguum quod continuis testificationibus semper fuerat nuntiatum.

[…] Christ received, He received according to the man, on whom are conferred the things he did not have. For according to the power of the Word the Son too has, without difference, all things that the Father has, and what He received from the Father in the form of a servant, the same He Himself also gave in the form of the Father. The same One is both rich and poor (2 Cor. 8:9). Rich, because in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made (John 1:1–3). But poor, because the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us (ibid., 14). And what is His emptying, or what His poverty, but the taking of the form of a servant, through which, the majesty of the Word being veiled, the dispensation of human redemption was accomplished? For since the original bonds of our captivity could not be loosed unless there came to be a man of our race and of our nature, whom the prior claims of the old debt did not hold, and who with His own spotless blood should wash out the deadly bond (Col. 2:14), as it had from the beginning been divinely preordained, so it was done in the fullness of the time fixed beforehand, that the promise signified in many ways should come to its long-awaited fulfilment; nor could that be doubtful which had always been announced by continual testimonies.

CAP. VIII. — Destructis itaque tot haeresibus, quae per sanctam devotionem praesidentium Patrum a corpore sunt catholicae unitatis abscissae, quaeque ideo extorres a Christo esse meruerunt, quia Verbi incarnationem, quae singularis est recte credentium salus, fecerunt sibi lapidem offensionis et petram scandali. (I Petr. II, 8); miror dilectionem vestram in discernendo veritatis lumine laborare. Et cum multis manifestationibus declaratum sit quam recte et Nestorium et Eutychen cum Dioscoro fides Christiana damnaverit, nec Christianus possit vocari qui vel illius vel horum impietati praebet assensum, doleo vos evangelicae et apostolicae doctrinae, ut audio, resultare exagitando seditionibus civitates, conturbando Ecclesias, nec solum injurias, sed etiam caedes presbyteris atque episcopis inferendo: ut prae furore et saevitia, propositi vestri et professionis sitis immemores. Ubi est regula mansuetudinis et quietis? ubi longanimitas patientiae? ubi tranquillitas pacis? ubi firmamentum dilectionis et tolerantiae fortitudo? Quae vos ab Evangelio Christi aut persuasio abduxit, aut persecutio separavit? Vel quae tanta exstitit decipientis astutia, ut obliti prophetarum et apostolorum,

CHAP. VIII. — So many heresies, then, having been destroyed, which through the holy devotion of the presiding Fathers have been cut off from the body of Catholic unity, and which have therefore deserved to be exiles from Christ, because they made the incarnation of the Word, which is the unique salvation of those who believe rightly, a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence for themselves (1 Pet. 2:8), I wonder that your Charity should labour in discerning the light of truth. And since it has been declared by many demonstrations how rightly the Christian faith has condemned both Nestorius and Eutyches with Dioscorus, and that no one can be called a Christian who gives assent to the impiety either of the one or of the others, I grieve that you, as I hear, are setting yourselves against the evangelical and apostolic doctrine, stirring up cities with seditions, throwing Churches into confusion, and inflicting not only injuries but even murders on presbyters and bishops, so that in your fury and savagery you are unmindful of your purpose and profession. Where is the rule of meekness and quiet? Where the long-suffering of patience? Where the tranquillity of peace? Where the firm ground of love and the fortitude of forbearance? What persuasion has led you away from the Gospel of Christ, or what persecution has separated you from it? Or what cunning of a deceiver has arisen so great that, forgetting the prophets and apostles, […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1067

Footnotes

(a) ‹accepit, cui› · printed under col 1067

Exemplar Sichardi; quod non habuit confertur. In epist. 165, c. 8. aliquot codices habent conferrentur: alii tamen, conferuntur.

Sichard's copy: quod non habuit confertur. In letter 165, ch. 8, some manuscripts have conferrentur; others, however, conferuntur.

(b) ‹etiam ipse donavit.› · printed under col 1067

Vindebon. collect. 5: Et idem ipse est et dives: cui lectioni affinis est Sichardus, qui solum omittit est. Concinit epist 165. c. 8.

The Vienna manuscript of collection 5: Et idem ipse est et dives; close to this reading is Sichard, who only omits est. Letter 165, ch. 8, agrees.

Vulgati antiqui cum exemplo Sichardi addunt, et ab hostis imperio relaxari. Desunt tum in nostris tum in Quesnelli codd., nec non in epist 165, c. 9.

The old common editions, with Sichard's copy, add et ab hostis imperio relaxari. The words are missing both in our manuscripts and in Quesnel's, and also in letter 165, ch. 9.

(d) ‹divinitus praeordinatum› · printed under col 1067

Iidem vulgati et Sichardus, non vero codices, addunt, et prophetarum oraculis praenuntiatum.

The same common editions and Sichard, but not the manuscripts, add et prophetarum oraculis praenuntiatum.

(e) ‹quod continuis› · printed under col 1067

Unus Vat. collect. 21 cum iisdem vulgatis, significationibus.

One Vatican manuscript of collection 21, with the same common editions, significationibus.

(f) ‹prae furore et saevitia,› · printed under col 1067, running on under col 1068

Haec indicant sermonem esse cum monachis. Quesnellus not. 1 Carosum et Dorotheum duces monachorum intelligit. At hi Constantinopolitani, non vero Palaestini fuerunt. Respicit S. Leo Palaestinos monachos, qui duce Theodosio totam Palaestinam bello et caedibus perturbarunt, ut pluribus narrant Marcianus in epistola Chalcedonensibus gestis subjecta, et Evagrius lib. II c. 5. Confer annot. 1 (Col. 1014, n. o) in epist. 109.

These words show that he is speaking with monks. Quesnel, note 1, understands Carosus and Dorotheus, leaders of monks. But these were monks of Constantinople, not of Palestine. St Leo has in view the Palestinian monks who, led by Theodosius, threw the whole of Palestine into turmoil with war and slaughter, as Marcian relates at length in the letter appended to the acts of Chalcedon, and Evagrius, book 2, ch. 5. Compare note 1 (Col. 1014, n. o) on letter 109.