PL 54 · cols. 1073–1077

Leo the Great, Letters

Letters CXXVIII–CXXIX

synodum datam praesentibus episcopis et clericis lectam fuisse tuis epistolis retulisti; sed usque ad illud capitulum, quo ea quae de fide acta sunt meus videtur firmasse consensus. Unde miratus sum quod reliqua quae secuta fuerunt non pariter in notitiam eorum quibus sunt lecta prolata sint; cum maxime omnibus innotescere debuisset, improbum a nobis ambitum notatum fuisse, et novis usurpationibus obviatum: ut vestutas, quae est canonibus constituta, inviolata, ut semper scripsimus, servaretur. Actium vero presbyterum, quem asseris fuisse discussum, gratulamur, cogitione habita, in omnibus fuisse purgatum. Epistolam quoque ad Christianissimum principem noveris me misisse, in qua illi gratias egi, quia curam mihi suam, tam pro fidei causa quam pro securitate reipublicae dignatus est indicare. Aliam quoque ad nos epistolam dedit, interveniens pro Anatolio episcopo, ut nostri illi animi gratia praebeatur, quoniam correctionem ejus promittit, et in omnibus se satisfacturum esse quae ad fidei observantiam pertinent pollicetur.

[…] synod was read in the presence of the bishops and clergy, you reported in your letter; but only as far as that chapter in which my assent appears to have confirmed what was done concerning the faith. Hence I wondered that the rest which followed was not likewise brought to the knowledge of those to whom it was read; especially since it ought to have become known to all that unscrupulous ambition had been censured by us and new usurpations resisted, so that antiquity, which is established by the canons, might be kept inviolate, as we have always written. As for the presbyter Actius, who you say was examined, we rejoice that, after an inquiry was held, he has been cleared in every respect. You should know also that I have sent a letter to the most Christian prince, in which I thanked him for deigning to show me his care both for the cause of the faith and for the security of the commonwealth. He also sent us another letter, interceding for Bishop Anatolius, that the favour of our goodwill may be shown to him, since he promises his amendment, and pledges that he will give satisfaction in all things that pertain to the observance of the faith.

Data quinto idus Januarii, Aetio et Studio viris clarissimis consulibus.

Given on the fifth day before the Ides of January, in the consulship of Aetius and Studius, most distinguished men.

EPISTOLA CXXVIII.

LETTER CXXVIII.

AD MARCIANUM AUGUSTUM.

To Marcian Augustus.

Leo Marciano Augusto.

Leo to Marcian Augustus.

Si quantum vestra clementia pro evangelicae fidei intergritate sollicita est, tantum Constantinopolitanae urbis episcopus in custodiendis ecclesiasticis regulis vellet esse devotus, omnia compressis dissensionum scandalis ad statum proprium jam rediissent, nec quidquam sibi, vobis in imperio constitutis, qui omnia justa defenditis, et erroribus obviatis, eorum adhuc pravitas vindicaret, qui curationem sibi non patiuntur adhiberi. Sed vestrae mansuetudini haec palma

If the bishop of the city of Constantinople were willing to be as devoted in guarding the ecclesiastical rules as your clemency is solicitous for the integrity of the evangelical faith, all things, the scandals of dissension having been suppressed, would already have returned to their proper state; nor, while you are established in the empire, you who defend all that is just and resist errors, would the depravity of those who do not allow a cure to be applied to them still claim anything for itself. But for your gentleness this palm […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1073

Footnotes

(i) continued from col 1072, set in n1072.

(a) ‹innotescere debuisset,› · printed under col 1073

Ita Ratisp. cum Grimanico concinens Quesnellianae emendationi suffragatur; cum in editis erronee legeretur: Innotescere debuisset, improbum a vobis ambitum notatum fuisse, ne novis usurpationibus constituta, inviolata (ut semper scripsimus) servarentur.

So the Regensburg ms., agreeing with the Grimani, supports Quesnel's correction; whereas in the editions it was wrongly read: Innotescere debuisset, improbum a vobis ambitum notatum fuisse, ne novis usurpationibus constituta, inviolata (ut semper scripsimus) servarentur.

(b) ‹Actium› · printed under col 1073

Particulam vero ex Ratisp. adjecimus.

We have added the particle vero from the Regensburg ms.

Epist. 126.

Letter 126.

(d) ‹EPISTOLA› (heading of Letter CXXVIII) · printed under col 1073, running over under col 1074

Alias 101. Quae autem antea 128 erat, nunc 163. Scripta 9 Martii an. 454.

Formerly 101. The one that was formerly 128 is now 163. Written 9 March in the year 454.

(e) ‹AD MARCIANUM AUGUSTUM› · printed under col 1074

In solo codice Grimanico collect. 18 hactenus inventa et a Quesnello edita fuit.

It has so far been found only in the Grimani codex of collection 18, and was published by Quesnel.

Editors' prose

Synopsis. — Laudata principis fide ac religione testatur se libenter Anatolium in gratiam suam recepturum, modo satisfaciat canonibus, et sacerdotum jura non convellat.

Synopsis. — Having praised the prince's faith and religion, he declares that he will gladly receive Anatolius into his favour, provided he satisfies the canons and does not overturn the rights of the priests.

Page

running head: 1073 EPISTOLA CXXVIII. 1074 (printed across the page with col 1074)
marginal letters: A ‹nensem synodum datam› (first line); B ‹fidei causa quam pro securitate›; C ‹Si quantum vestra clementia›; D beside the footnotes, at note (a) ‹lianae emendationi suffragatur›
old-edition numerals: 1249 after ‹omnibus› (before ‹innotescere debuisset›)
signature: none
other: the column opens with "nensem", the end of "Chalcedonensem", set whole at the end of col 1072; the text ends about two-thirds down; below it the run-over of note (i) of col 1072 and notes (a)-(d); a rule, and below it the full-width ADMONITIO (set in n1074).

PL 54:1074

servatur, ut vobis omnium, qui ad Christum Dominum nostrum per catholicam fidem revocantur aut redeunt, sanitas debeatur. Sicut itaque gloriamur in vobis, ita constristamur in eos quibus carnali aemulatione praeoccupatis vos pro statu Ecclesiarum et pace omnium sacerdotum, spiritu tam Christiano quam regio in tantum videmus esse sollicitos, ut interventionum vestrarum pro his quos deviare cognoscitis commodetis adhortando me vestris epistolis, ut coepiscopo meo Anatolio animi mei gratiam fraterna charitate restituam, quam illi et amabiliter, ut memistis, impendi, et praebere semper opto; si tamen, ut hortatus ante sum, ab ea quae illum praegravavit ambitione descisceret, et eos qui ipsum obfuscabant in suo consortio non haberet.

[…] is reserved, that to you should be owed the healing of all who are recalled or return to Christ our Lord through the catholic faith. And so, just as we glory in you, so we are grieved over those, taken up with carnal rivalry, for whose sake we see you, with a spirit as Christian as it is royal, so solicitous for the state of the Churches and the peace of all the priests that you lend [the support] of your interventions on behalf of those whom you know to be going astray, exhorting me by your letter to restore with fraternal charity the favour of my goodwill to my fellow bishop Anatolius; which I both lovingly bestowed on him, as you remember, and always wish to show him; provided, however, as I urged before, that he should withdraw from the ambition that weighed him down, and should not keep in his fellowship those who were darkening him.

Sed ad epistolas meas pia affectione transmissas hactenus respondere nihil voluit, et cum de persona Aetii, vel Andreae, qui illi fuerat substitutus, ea secuta sint quae debeant improbari, non otiosum est quod de his quae maxime fuerant curanda reticetur. Praeceptioni itaque pietatis vestrae parere volueram, et litteras dare ad episcopum supradictum, si priores, quas ad illum direxi, vel effectu rerum, vel scriptis ipsius proficere aliquid probavissem. At cum nihil de ambitionis poenitudine voluerit profiteri, nihilque ad haec respondere quae a me sunt scripta curaverit, colloquia quidem mea ab illo suspendi, sed animum, quo illum corrigi et meliorem esse desidero, non mutavi. Proinde, si placet vestrae clementiae, immo, quia id vobis placere cognosco, satisfaciat canonibus, et omnium gratiam sacerdotum pacifica humilitate servaturum se esse rescribat, ambitumque culpabilem se abjecisse significet; ego me illum in eam gratiam spondeo recepturum, ut in omnibus quae sunt Domino placitura consortium ejus amplectar: quoniam illa pax vera, illa charitas erit firma, in qua simul studebimus et catholicam fidem et Nicaenorum canonum decreta servare.

But to my letters, sent with loving affection, he has so far been unwilling to reply at all; and since, concerning the person of Aetius, or of Andrew, who had been put in his place, things have followed which must be disapproved, it is not without significance that he keeps silent about the matters which most needed attention. I had therefore wished to obey the injunction of your piety and to send a letter to the aforesaid bishop, if I had found that the earlier letters I sent him had achieved anything, either by the outcome of events or by his own writings. But since he has been unwilling to profess any repentance for his ambition, and has not troubled to reply to what I wrote, I have indeed withdrawn my correspondence from him, but I have not changed the disposition with which I desire him to be corrected and to be better. Therefore, if it pleases your clemency, or rather, since I know that it does please you, let him satisfy the canons, and write back that he will keep the goodwill of all the priests with peaceable humility, and signify that he has cast off his culpable ambition; I pledge that I will receive him into that favour, so as to embrace fellowship with him in all things that will be pleasing to the Lord: for that peace will be true, and that charity firm, in which we shall be zealous together to keep both the catholic faith and the decrees of the Nicene canons.

Data septimo idus Martii, Aetio et Studio viris clarissimis consulibus.

Given on the seventh day before the Ides of March, in the consulship of Aetius and Studius, most distinguished men.

Editors' notes and page, col. 1074

Footnotes

(d) its run-over is printed under this column; its call is in col 1073, set in n1073. (e) printed under this column; its call is in col 1073, set in n1073.

(f) ‹pro his quos deviare cognoscitis commodetis› · printed under col 1074

Quesnellus in margine: Suipple, favorem, vel quid simile.

Quesnel in the margin: Supply favorem, or something similar.

(g) ‹vestris› · printed under col 1074

Has Marciani litteras Leo jam acceperat V idus Januarii, ut patet ex epistola praecedenti cap. 3.

Leo had already received this letter of Marcian on the 5th before the Ides of January, as is clear from the preceding letter, ch. 3.

(h) ‹ab ea quae illum› · printed under col 1074

Correximus ex ms. Grim. cujus apographum P. Cacciarius adhibuit.

We have corrected this from the Grim. ms., a transcript of which Fr. Cacciari used.

(i) ‹et› (before eos qui ipsum) · printed under col 1074

Confer epist. 111, c. 3.

Compare Letter 111, ch. 3.

(j) ‹de persona Aetii,› · printed under col 1074

Quesnellus, et Andreae. Lectionem Grimanici codicis, ex quo haec epistola edita fuit, a P. Cacciario notatam praetulimus: ubi vel pro et usurpatur, ut aliis exemplis Leonis animadvertimus not. 5 (Col. 886, n. g) in epist. 67.

Quesnel, et Andreae. We have preferred the reading of the Grimani codex, from which this letter was published, as noted by Fr. Cacciari: in it vel is used for et, as we have observed from other examples in Leo, note 5 (Col. 886, n. g) on Letter 67.

Editors' prose

ADMONITIO IN TRES EPISTOLAS SEQUENTES.

ADMONITION ON THE THREE FOLLOWING LETTERS.

1. Cur in edendis tribus sequentibus epistolis alium a Quesnelliano ordinem secuti simus, paucis dicendum est. Quesnellus primum ediderat epistolam hac in editione 131 ad Julianum cum data VII idus Martii; tum epist. 129, ad Proterium, cum data VI idus; ac tandem post insertam Proterii epistolam 133, ad Leonem, subjecit epist. 130, ad Marcianum, cum data V idus ejusdem mensis, rejecto in marginem VI idus. Hae datae diversae hunc ordinem exigebant. At cum in epist. 131, ad Julianum, c. 1, S. pontifex testetur se ad ipsum

1. Why in publishing the three following letters we have followed an order different from Quesnel's must be explained in a few words. Quesnel had first published the letter to Julian which in this edition is 131, with the date VII Ides of March; then Letter 129, to Proterius, with the date VI Ides; and finally, after inserting Proterius's letter to Leo, 133, he placed Letter 130, to Marcian, with the date V Ides of the same month, relegating VI Ides to the margin. These differing dates required this order. But since in Letter 131, to Julian, ch. 1, the holy pontiff testifies that he […]

Page

running head: 1073 EPISTOLA CXXVIII. 1074 (printed across the page with col 1073)
marginal letters: A ‹servatur, ut vobis omnium› (first line); B ‹haberet. Sed ad epistolas›; C ‹tum pacifica humilitate›; D beside the footnotes, at note (h) ‹Correximus ex ms. Grim.›
old-edition numerals: 1250 after ‹per catholicam fidem›
signature: none
other: Letter CXXVIII ends about two-thirds down the column; below it the run-over of note (d), notes (e)-(j), and a rule. Below the rule the ADMONITIO on Letters CXXIX-CXXXI begins, printed across the full width of the page; its first part (heading and the first five lines of section 1) is set here, the rest continues full width at the head of col 1075 (set in n1075), per the E29 ruling.

PL 54:1075

EPISTOLA CXXIX.

LETTER CXXIX.

AD PROTERIUM EPISCOPUM ALEXANDRINUM.

To Proterius, Bishop of Alexandria.

Leo Proterio episcopo Alexandrino.

Leo to Proterius, bishop of Alexandria.

CAP. I. — Laetificaverunt me litterae dilectionis tuae, quas frater et coepiscopus noster Nestorius pio apportavit officio. Oportebat enim ut ab Alexandrinae Ecclesiae praesule talia scripta ad sedem apostolicam mitterentur, quae ostenderent magisterio beatissimi Petri apostoli hoc ab initio per beatum Marcum ejus discipulum didicisse Aegyptios, quod constat credidisse Romanos: quoniam praeter Dominum Jesum Christum non est aliud nomen datum hominibus sub coelo, in quo oporteat nos salvos fieri (Act. IV, 12).

CHAP. I. — The letter of your love, which our brother and fellow bishop Nestorius brought with dutiful devotion, has gladdened me. For it was fitting that such writings should be sent to the apostolic see by the prelate of the Church of Alexandria, showing that the Egyptians learned from the beginning, by the teaching of the most blessed apostle Peter through the blessed Mark his disciple, that which it is certain the Romans have believed: since besides the Lord Jesus Christ there is no other name given to men under heaven in which we must be saved (Acts 4:12).

Sed quia non omnium est fides, et insidiosus ille tentator nullis magis corda hominum gaudet sauciare vulneribus, quam ut incautas mentes his inficiat erroribus, qui sint evangelicae veritatis inimici, magna sancti Spiritus eruditione nitendum est ut diabolicis falsitatibus nequeat intelligentia Christiana violari. Contra quod periculum praecipue convenit vigilare Ecclesiarum rectores, et, quadam verisimilitudine colorata mendacia ab animis simplicis plebis avertere. Augusta enim et ardua via est quae ducit ad vitam (Matth. VII, 14). Nec tantum laqueorum in actionum observantia, quantum inter discrimina sensuum latet, dum vis sententiarum brevissima adjectione aut commutatione corrumpitur et confessio, quae operabatur salutem, subtii nonnumquam transitu vergit in mortem. Cum

But since not all have faith, and that insidious tempter delights to wound the hearts of men with no wounds more than by infecting unwary minds with those errors which are enemies of the evangelical truth, we must strive, with the great instruction of the Holy Spirit, that Christian understanding may not be violated by diabolical falsehoods. Against this danger it especially befits the rulers of the Churches to be watchful, and to turn away from the minds of the simple people lies coloured with a certain likeness of truth. For narrow [printed Augusta, for Angusta] and steep is the way that leads to life (Matt. 7:14). Nor do so many snares lie hidden in the observance of actions as among the distinctions of meanings, when the force of statements is corrupted by the briefest addition or alteration, and a confession which was working salvation sometimes turns, by a subtle shift, towards death. When […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1075

Footnotes

(a) ‹EPISTOLA› (heading of Letter CXXIX) · printed under col 1075

Alias 103. Quae autem antea 129 erat, nunc 159. Scripta 10 Martii an. 454.

Formerly 103. The one that was formerly 129 is now 159. Written 10 March in the year 454.

(b) ‹AD PROTERIUM EPISCOPUM ALEXANDRINUM› · printed under col 1075

Hanc epistolam ex cod. Grimanico a Quesnello editam in Ratisponensi invenimus, ac ex eo emendavimus.

This letter, published by Quesnel from the Grimani cod., we have found in the Regensburg ms., and have corrected it from that.

Hujus epistolae fragmentum Beda inseruit cap. 42, de Ratione temporum; at erravit existimans Leonem hac epistola respondisse Proterii litteris de Paschate, quas Leo posterius accepit, ut patebit ex epist. 137. Vide Quesnelli not. 1. Haec autem reddita fuit aliis anterioribus Proterii litteris, quae desiderantur. Primum is ad pontificem scripserat de sua fide, cum ad Alexandrinam cathedram evectus fuit, et huic epistolae ille rescripsit, nec non ad ordinatores ejus et plebem, ut indicatur epsit. 113, cap. 3. Pleniorem vero fidei declarationem ab eodem Leo desideravit, uti significatur epist. 127, c. 1. Huic autem pleniori declarationi nunc respondet.

Bede inserted a fragment of this letter in ch. 42 of De ratione temporum; but he erred in thinking that Leo in this letter replied to Proterius's letter on Easter, which Leo received later, as will be clear from Letter 137. See Quesnel's note 1. This letter, rather, was a reply to other, earlier letters of Proterius, which are lost. He had first written to the pontiff about his faith when he was raised to the see of Alexandria, and Leo replied to that letter, and also to those who ordained him and to the people, as is indicated in Letter 113, ch. 3. But Leo desired a fuller declaration of the faith from him, as is signified in Letter 127, ch. 1. It is to this fuller declaration that he now replies.

(d) ‹coepiscopus noster› · printed under col 1075, running over under col 1076

Apud Bedam Nectarius, male. Nestorius etiam vocatur in codice Ratisp., et fuit unus ex illis quatuor Aegyptiis qui Dioscorum deseruere et Proterii ordinationi interfuerunt. Vide Liberatum cap. 14.

In Bede, Nectarius, wrongly. He is called Nestorius in the Regensburg codex too, and he was one of those four Egyptians who deserted Dioscorus and took part in the ordination of Proterius. See Liberatus, ch. 14.

(e) ‹credidisse Romanos› · printed under col 1076

Initium hujus epistolae ad haec usque verba refert Beda lib. de Ratione Temporum c. 42.

Bede, in the book De ratione temporum, ch. 42, quotes the beginning of this letter up to these words.

(f) ‹in quo oporteat› · printed under col 1076

Addidimus nos ex ms. Ratisp.

We have added nos from the Regensburg ms.

(g) ‹verisimilitudine colorata› · printed under col 1076

Eutychianorum dolum perstringit, quo omnibus et verbis insidiantes et syllabis epistolae 28, ad Flavianum, eam Nestoriano sensui congruere mentiebantur, uti traditur cap. 2, et apertius epistola sequenti c. 3: Quorumdam haereticorum versuta nequitia ad conturbandam nostrorum simplicitatem, epistolam meam.... falsasse perhibetur, ut commutatis quibusdam verbis vel syllabis receptorem me Nestoriani erroris assererent. Hinc paulo post sententiarum vim neque adjectione neque communitatione corrumpendam monet.

He censures the guile of the Eutychians, who, lying in wait for all the words and syllables of Letter 28, to Flavian, falsely claimed that it agreed with the Nestorian sense, as is related in ch. 2, and more openly in the following letter, ch. 3: "The cunning wickedness of certain heretics, in order to disturb the simplicity of our people, is said to have falsified my letter ..., so that, by changing certain words or syllables, they might assert that I was a receiver of the Nestorian error." Hence a little further on he warns that the force of statements must not be corrupted either by addition or by alteration.

Editors' prose

mittere exempla litterarum quas ad clementissimum imperatorem vel ad ipsum Alexandrinae urbis episcopum (id est Proterium) direxerat, quibus duas ad Marcianum et Proterium traditas epistolas respicit, haec jam scriptae noscuntur antequam ad Julianum litteras exararet, ac proinde chronicarum notationum quas Quesnellus praetulit manifestus error agnoscitur, quod ad eum ordinem statuendum adductus fuit. Melius igitur ex nostro Ratisponensi notas chronicas emendavimus, ex quibus colligitur omnes has epistolas eodem die VI idus Martias signatas fuisse.

[…] send copies of the letters which he had addressed to the most clement emperor or to the bishop of the city of Alexandria himself (that is, Proterius), by which he refers to the two letters delivered to Marcian and Proterius, these are known to have been written already before he wrote his letter to Julian; and consequently the plain error of the chronological notes which Quesnel preferred is recognized, by which he was led to establish that order. We have therefore corrected the chronological notes, more soundly, from our Regensburg ms., from which it is gathered that all these letters were dated on the same day, the 6th before the Ides of March.

2. Quoad ordinem vero, cum ex laudato testimonio epistolae 131 liquet S. pontificem scripsisse litteras ad Marcianum et Proterium antequam ad Julianum scriberet, tum vero ex initio cap. 2 epistolae 130, ad Marcianum, ubi Leo se Proterio rescripsisse testatur, palam fit litteras ad Proterium epistolae ad Marcianum praecessisse. Itaque licet omnes hae epistolae eodem die notentur, ex ipsarum tamen contextu Leo scripsit primum ad Proterium, dein ad Marcianum ac tandem ad Julianum, et hunc ordinem in editione servabimus.

2. As for the order: since from the cited testimony of Letter 131 it is clear that the holy pontiff wrote letters to Marcian and Proterius before he wrote to Julian, and, further, from the beginning of ch. 2 of Letter 130, to Marcian, where Leo testifies that he has replied to Proterius, it becomes plain that the letter to Proterius preceded the letter to Marcian. And so, although all these letters are marked with the same day, yet from their context Leo wrote first to Proterius, then to Marcian, and finally to Julian; and we shall keep this order in the edition.

Synopsis. — I. Episcoporum esse vigilare ne fidei unitas violetur, quod vel litterulae immutatione fieri potest. — II. Ex traditione SS. PP. et suam epistolam catholicam, et docendos esse populos, asserit. — III. Fidem, disciplinam et privilegia Ecclesiarum ex norma vetustatis esse servanda.

Synopsis. — I. That it is the bishops' part to keep watch lest the unity of the faith be violated, which can happen even by the change of a single small letter. — II. He asserts, from the tradition of the holy Fathers, both that his letter is catholic and that the peoples must be taught. — III. That the faith, discipline and privileges of the Churches must be kept according to the norm of antiquity.

Page

running head: 1075 S. LEONIS MAGNI EPISTOLAE. 1076 (printed across the page with col 1076)
marginal letters: A beside the head of col 1076 (level with the heading ‹EPISTOLA (a) CXXIX.› in this column); B ‹constat credidisse Romanos›; C ‹crimina sensuum latet›; D beside the footnotes, at note (c) ‹epistolae ille rescripsit›
old-edition numerals: 1253 before ‹EPISTOLA (a) CXXIX.›; 1254 after ‹latet› (before ‹dum vis sententiarum›)
signature: none
other: the page opens with the end of the ADMONITIO (begun at the foot of col 1074) printed across the full width, about nine lines; by the E29 ruling it is set here, in the left column's notes. Below it the left column holds the heading and synopsis of Letter CXXIX and its text to "Cum"; the text continues at the head of col 1076. Footnotes (a)-(d) under this column; (d) runs over and (e)-(g) are printed under col 1076.

PL 54:1076

autem dicat Apostolus: Oportet haereses esse, ut probati manifesti fiant in vobis (I Cor. XI, 19), ad totius Ecclesiae tendit profectum, quoties contrariorum sensuum se prodit impietas, ne quae sunt noxia sint occulta et aliorum laedant incolumitatem, quae revocari non poterunt ad salutem. Unde sibi imputent ruinas et obcaecationes suas, qui imprudenti pertinacia jacere in reatu suo, quam oblatum remedium sumere, maluerunt. Quorum merito fraternitati tuae diplicet obduratio, et laudabiliter eam doctrinam, quae a beati apostolis et sancti Patribus in nos manavit, amplecteris.

[…] the Apostle says: There must be heresies, that those who are approved may be made manifest among you (1 Cor. 11:19), it serves the progress of the whole Church whenever the impiety of contrary opinions betrays itself, lest harmful things, which will not be able to be recalled to soundness, remain hidden and injure the well-being of others. Hence let those impute their ruin and blindness to themselves who, with imprudent obstinacy, have preferred to lie in their guilt rather than to take the remedy offered. Their obduracy rightly displeases your fraternity, and you commendably embrace that doctrine which has flowed down to us from the blessed apostles and the holy Fathers.

CAP. II. — Non enim novae praedicationis est epistola mea, qua ad relationem sanctae memoriae Flaviani contra Eutychen de Domini nostri Jesu Christi incarnatione respondi, in nullo discedens ab ejus fidei regula, quae evidenter a nostris vestrisque est defensa majoribus. Quos si Dioscorus sequi imitarique voluisset, in Christi corpore permaneret, habens et in beatae memoriae Athanasii opusculis unde instrueretur, et in sanctae recordationis Theophili et Cyrilli sermonibus, unde damnato olim dogmati laudabiliter contrairet, potius quam consortium Eutychianae impietatis eligeret. Hoc igitur, frater charissime, pro sollicitudine fidei communis admoneo, ut quia inimici crucis Christi omnibus et verbis nostris insidiantur et syllabis, nullam illis vel tenuem occasionem demus, qua Nestoriano nos sensui congruere mentiantur. Plebem autem et clerum, omnemque fraternitatem ita debet diligentia tua ad profectum fidei cohortari, ut nihil te novum docere demonstres, sed ea omnium insinuare pectoribus quae venerandae memoriae Patres consona praedicatione docuerunt, cum quibus nostra in omnibus concordat epistola. Hoc autem non solum tuis verbis,

CHAP. II. — For my letter, in which I replied to the report of Flavian of holy memory against Eutyches concerning the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, is not of a new preaching, since it departs in nothing from the rule of that faith which has manifestly been defended by our forebears and yours. Had Dioscorus been willing to follow and imitate them, he would have remained in the body of Christ, having both in the works of Athanasius of blessed memory the means of being instructed, and in the discourses of Theophilus and Cyril of holy remembrance the means by which he might laudably have opposed the dogma once condemned, rather than choosing the fellowship of the Eutychian impiety. This, therefore, dearest brother, I urge out of solicitude for our common faith: since the enemies of the cross of Christ lie in wait for all our words and syllables, let us give them no occasion, however slight, to allege falsely that we agree with the Nestorian sense. Your diligence ought so to exhort the people and the clergy and the whole brotherhood to progress in the faith that you show that you teach nothing new, but instil into the hearts of all those things which the Fathers of venerable memory taught with harmonious preaching, with whom our letter agrees in all things. And this not only by your words, […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1076

Footnotes

(d) its run-over is printed under this column; its call is in col 1075, set in n1075. (e) printed under this column; its call is in col 1075, set in n1075. (f) printed under this column; its call is in col 1075, set in n1075. (g) printed under this column; its call is in col 1075, set in n1075.

(h) ‹ut quia› · printed under col 1076

Haec usque ad seq. periodum habet S. Thomas 212, qu. 11, art. 2, ad 2.

St Thomas has this passage, up to the next period, in 2-2 [printed 212], q. 11, art. 2, ad 2.

Page

running head: 1075 S. LEONIS MAGNI EPISTOLAE. 1076 (printed across the page with col 1075)
marginal letters: A ‹autem dicat Apostolus› (first line of this column's text); B ‹incarnatione respondi›; C ‹demonstres, sed ea omnium›; D beside the footnotes, at note (g) ‹dam verbis vel syllabis›
old-edition numerals: none
signature: none
other: the column's text begins below the full-width end of the ADMONITIO (set in n1075), level with the heading of Letter CXXIX in col 1075; it continues Letter CXXIX from the foot of col 1075 and ends at "tuis verbis," about two-thirds down; the rest is footnotes.

PL 54:1077

sed et ipsa praecedentium expositionum recitatione monstrandum est: ut plebs Dei noverit ea sibi praesenti doctrina insinuari, quae Patres et acceperunt a praecedentibus suis, et posteris tradiderunt. Unde lectis primitus praedictorum sacerdotum assertionibus, tunc demum mea quoque scripta recitentur: ut aures fidelium probent non aliud nos quam quod a majoribus accipimus praedicare. Et quia ad haec discernenda minus exercitatos habent sensus ex Patrum saltem litteris discant quam antiquum hoc malum sit, quod nunc a nobis tam in Nestorio quam in Eutyche, qui erubuerunt Evangelium Christi secundum ipsius Domini doctrinam praedicare, damnatur.

[…] but it must be shown also by the very reading aloud of the earlier expositions, so that the people of God may know that by the present teaching those things are being instilled into them which the Fathers both received from their predecessors and handed on to those after them. Hence, when the assertions of the aforesaid priests have first been read, then at last let my writings also be read aloud, so that the ears of the faithful may confirm that we preach nothing other than what we receive from our forebears. And since they have senses little trained for discerning these things, let them learn at least from the letters of the Fathers how ancient is this evil which is now condemned by us both in Nestorius and in Eutyches, who were ashamed to preach the Gospel of Christ according to the teaching of the Lord Himself.

CAP. III. — Per omnia igitur et in fidei regula, et in observantia disciplinae, vetustatis norma servetur, et dilectio tua constantiam providi rectoris exerceat; ut prosit Alexandrinae Ecclesiae, quod improbae quorumdam ambitioni, servato veterum privilegiorum jure, sollicitus obviavi, et metropolitanis omnibus illaesam manere volui dignitatem, sicut ex epistolarum mearum, quas ad sanctam synodum, vel ad Christianissimum principem, sive ad Constantinopolitanum episcopum misi, tenore cognosces; manifesteque perspicies hoc speciale esse sollicitudinis meae, ut neque a fidei regula in Ecclesiis Domini devietur, neque in privilegiis aliquid cujusquam improbitate minuatur. Quae cum ita sint, teneat fraternitas tua suorum consuetudinem decessorum, et comprovinciales suos episcopos, qui Alexandrinae sedi ex antiqua constitutione subjecti sunt, congrua sibi auctoritate contineat: ut mori ecclesiastico non resultent, sed vel statutis temporibus, vel cum ratio causae alicujus exegerit, ad charitatem tuam convenire non differant; et si quid, quod Ecclesiae sit utilitatibus profuturum, ex communi collatione tractandum est, collecta in unum fraternitate unanimiter ordinetur. Non enim ulla causa est quae

CHAP. III. — In all things, therefore, both in the rule of faith and in the observance of discipline, let the norm of antiquity be kept, and let your love exercise the constancy of a provident ruler; so that the Church of Alexandria may profit from the fact that I have solicitously resisted the wicked ambition of certain men, preserving the right of the ancient privileges, and have willed that the dignity of all the metropolitans should remain unimpaired, as you will learn from the tenor of my letters which I sent to the holy synod, or to the most Christian prince, or to the bishop of Constantinople; and you will clearly perceive that it is the special concern of my solicitude that there be no deviation from the rule of faith in the Churches of the Lord, and that nothing in their privileges be diminished by anyone's wickedness. Since this is so, let your fraternity hold to the custom of its predecessors, and restrain with the authority proper to it its fellow-provincial bishops, who by ancient constitution are subject to the see of Alexandria, so that they may not resist ecclesiastical custom, but may not delay to assemble with your love either at the appointed times or when the reason of some case requires it; and if anything that will serve the interests of the Church is to be dealt with by common deliberation, let it be ordered unanimously, with the brotherhood gathered together. For there is no cause which […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1077

Footnotes

(a) ‹sed et ipsa praecedentium› · printed under col 1077

Quesnellus, expositione et recitatione. Ratisponensis lectionem praetulimus. Praecedentes expositiones, Patrum paulo ante memoratorum, qui Alexandrinam sedem obtinuerunt, testimonia significant, quae quidem aliquanto post in Ecclesia legi jubet; quod item repetit epistola sequenti, cap. 3.

Quesnel, expositione et recitatione. We have preferred the reading of the Regensburg ms. The praecedentes expositiones signify the testimonies of the Fathers mentioned a little before, who held the see of Alexandria, which he indeed orders a little further on to be read in church; and he repeats the same in the following letter, ch. 3.

(b) ‹Unde› · printed under col 1077

Vide not. Quesnelli.

See Quesnel's note.

Sic ms. Ratisp. Quesnellus, accipimus.

So the Regensburg ms. Quesnel, accipimus.

(d) ‹quod nunc› · printed under col 1077

Ratisp. delet a nobis, sed postea habet damnavimus.

The Regensburg ms. deletes a nobis, but afterwards has damnavimus.

(e) ‹servato› · printed under col 1077

Quesnellus, verorum. Ex Ratisp. emendavimus.

Quesnel, verorum. We have corrected it from the Regensburg ms.

(f) ‹et› (before metropolitanis) · printed under col 1077

Metropolitanorum nomine ipsum Alexandrinae Ecclesiae episcopum comprehendit, et videtur respicere Nicaenum canonem sextum, in quo sola metropolitanorum nuncupatio legitur. Hinc etiam totius Aegypti episcopos paulo post comprovinciales vocat, eo quod pro una provincia tota Aegyptus haberetur.

Under the name of metropolitans he includes the bishop of the Church of Alexandria himself, and he seems to have in view the sixth Nicene canon, in which the designation of metropolitans alone is read. Hence too a little further on he calls the bishops of all Egypt comprovinciales, because the whole of Egypt was regarded as one province.

(g) ‹sicut› · printed under col 1077

Quesnellus, et epistolarum. Correctionem suppeditavit codex Ratisp., qui mox omittit mearum. Dein vero habet, sed et Constantinopolitanum, ac postea, sollicitudini meae, ut neque a fide in Ecclesiis Domini, etc.

Quesnel, et epistolarum. The correction was supplied by the Regensburg codex, which just after omits mearum. Then it has sed et Constantinopolitanum, and afterwards sollicitudini meae, ut neque a fide in Ecclesiis Domini, etc.

(h) ‹Alexandrinae sedi› · printed under col 1077

Propositionem ex idem codex Ratisp. suggessit.

The same Regensburg codex supplied the preposition ex.

(i) ‹ad charitatem tuam› · printed under col 1077

Ita ex eodem codice. Alias, venire.

So from the same codex. Elsewhere, venire.

(j) printed under this column; its call is in col 1078 (heading of Letter CXXX), set in n1078.