PL 54 · cols. 1146–1154

Leo the Great, Letters

Letters CLXIII–CLXIV

et sicut simpliciores non spernimus, ita a rebellibus haereticis abstinemus: memores praecepti Domini, dicentis: Nolite dare sanctum canibus, neque miseritis margaritas vestras ante porcos (Matth. VII, 6). Nimis quippe indignum nimisque injustum est eos ad libertatem disceptationis admitti, quos significat Spiritus sanctus per prophetam, dicens: Filii alieni mentiti sunt mihi (Ps. XVII, 46). Qui etiamsi Evangelio non resisterent, de illis tamen se esse monstrarent, de quibus scriptum est: Deum se profitentur scire, factis autem negant (Tit. I, 16): clamante adhuc justi Abel sanguine adversum impium Cain, qui increpatus a Domino (Genes. IV, 10), non quievit ad poenitudinem, sed exarsit ad caedem. Cujus vindictam sic Domini judicio volumus reservari, ut improbus praedo et parricida crudelis in seipsum recidat, et nostra non teneat. Neque sanctae Ecclesiae Alexandrinae lamentabilem captivitatem patiamini ulterius prolongari cui oportet fidei vestrae justitiaeque praesidio suam restitui libertatem, ut per omnes Aegypti urbes dignitas Patrum et jus sacerdotale reparetur.

[…] and just as we do not spurn the simpler, so we keep away from rebellious heretics, mindful of the Lord's precept, Who says: Do not give what is holy to dogs, nor cast your pearls before swine (Matt. 7:6). For it is exceedingly unworthy and exceedingly unjust that those should be admitted to freedom of disputation whom the Holy Spirit signifies through the prophet, saying: The strange children have lied to me (Ps. 17:46). Even if they did not resist the Gospel, they would still show themselves to be of those of whom it is written: They profess that they know God, but in their deeds they deny Him (Titus 1:16); while the blood of just Abel still cries out against impious Cain, who, rebuked by the Lord (Gen. 4:10), did not come to repentance, but blazed up to murder. Its vengeance we wish to be so reserved to the judgement of the Lord that the wicked robber and cruel parricide may fall back upon himself, and not hold what is ours. Nor suffer the lamentable captivity of the holy Church of Alexandria to be prolonged any further, whose liberty ought to be restored to it by the protection of your faith and justice, so that through all the cities of Egypt the dignity of the Fathers and the priestly right may be restored.

Datum duodecimo kalendas Aprilis Leone et Majoriano Augustis consulibus.

Given on the twelfth day before the kalends of April, Leo and Majorian Augusti being consuls.

EPISTOLA CLXIII.

LETTER CLXIII.

AD ANATOLIUM EPISCOPUM CONSTANTINOPOLITANUM

TO ANATOLIUS, BISHOP OF CONSTANTINOPLE

Per PATRITIUM diaconem.

By Patritius, deacon.

LEO episcopus ANATOLIO episcopo.

Leo, bishop, to Anatolius, bishop.

Lectis dilectionis tuae litteris, quas per filium nostrum Patritium diaconem direxisti, intellexi tibi studium meae sollicitudinis displicere, qua secundum dominicam charitatem, quam tibi a nobis impendi experimentis plurimis approbasti, de cavendis his qui communis fidei adversarii dicerentur admonui, ne ad negligentiam rectoris referretur, si quisquam in Ecclesia catholica ea praedicare praesumeret

Having read the letter of your love, which you sent through our son the deacon Patritius, I understood that the zeal of my solicitude displeases you, by which, in accordance with the Lord's charity, which you have proved by very many experiences to be bestowed on you by us, I admonished you about guarding against those who were said to be adversaries of the common faith, lest it be laid to the negligence of the ruler if anyone in the catholic Church should presume to preach those things […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1146

Footnotes

(f) ‹sunt mihi (Ps. XVII, 46).› · printed under col 1145

Antiqui vulg. cum codd. collect. 12 addunt, filii alieni inveterati.

The old editions, with the manuscripts of collection 12, add filii alieni inveterati.

(g) ‹(Genes. IV, 10),› · printed under col 1145

Idem vulg. cum quibusdam codd., non requievit.

The same editions, with certain manuscripts, have non requievit.

(h) ‹Datum› · printed under cols 1145–1146

Quesnellus cum aliis vulg., XI kal., et in marg., XII kal. Hanc notam praetulimus, non solum quia plures et potiores nostri codd. Vindebon. collect. 5, Vat. collect. 11 et mss. collect. 21 et 24 eam probant, verum etiam quia concordat cum die signato in duabus antecedentibus epistolis per eumdem Philoxenum Constantinopolim transmissis. In mss. collect. 11, 21 et 24, Leonis nomen in consulari nota omittitur. Duo Vat. collect. 21, Glorioso Majoriano Aug. cons. In alio Vat. collect. 24, Calipio pro Glorioso scriptum legitur. Id ex ea sigla GLP. profectum videtur, quam Majoriani nomini aliquibus in mss. praefixam animadvertimus annot. 31 (Col. 1140. n. (g) in epist. 159. Hanc auctor collectionis 24 vel librarius aliquis perperam interpretatus est Calipio.

Quesnel, with other editions, has XI kal., and in the margin XII kal. We have preferred this date, not only because more and better manuscripts of ours, the Vienna of collection 5, the Vatican of collection 11 and the manuscripts of collections 21 and 24, confirm it, but also because it agrees with the day marked in the two preceding letters sent to Constantinople by the same Philoxenus. In the manuscripts of collections 11, 21 and 24 Leo's name is omitted in the consular date. Two Vatican manuscripts of collection 21 have Glorioso Majoriano Aug. cons. In another Vatican manuscript of collection 24, Calipio is read written for Glorioso. This seems to have arisen from that siglum GLP., which we noted prefixed to Majorian's name in some manuscripts in annotation 31 (col. 1140, n. (g)) on letter 159. This the author of collection 24, or some copyist, wrongly interpreted as Calipio.

(i) ‹EPISTOLA› · printed under col 1146

Alias 128. Scripta 23 Martii an. 458.

Formerly 128. Written 23 March in the year 458.

(j) ‹CONSTANTINOPOLITANUM› (call printed before the address line AD ANATOLIUM) · printed under col 1146

Exstat in mss. collect. 5, 11, 12, 13 et 20 usque ad 24.

It is extant in the manuscripts of collections 5, 11, 12, 13, and 20 to 24.

(k) ‹SYNOPSIS› (call printed before the synopsis) · printed under col 1146

In tabula mss. collect. 5 hic titulus legitur cap. 95: Ad Anatolium episcopum de Attico presbytero, ut susceptionem Eutychiani erroris a se presbyter compellatur excludere.

In the table of the manuscripts of collection 5 this title is read, ch. 95: To Bishop Anatolius concerning the priest Atticus, that the priest be compelled to exclude from himself the acceptance of the Eutychian error.

(l) ‹de cavendis his qui› · printed under col 1146

Vat. collect. 11, communi fidei adversari dicerentur.

The Vatican manuscript of collection 11 has communi fidei adversari dicerentur.

(m) ‹adversarii dicerentur› · printed under col 1146

Epist. 157, c. 4.

Letter 157, ch. 4.

Editors' prose

SYNOPSIS. — Quod sua monita Anatolio displicuerant expostulat monetque ut Atticus presbyter propria subscriptione publice recitanda Eutychianum damnet errorem, si catholicus videri velit.

SYNOPSIS. — He complains that his admonitions had displeased Anatolius, and advises that the priest Atticus condemn the Eutychian error by his own subscription, to be read out publicly, if he wishes to be seen as a catholic.

Page

running head: …OLAE CLXIII. 1146 (continuing "1145 EPISTOLAE C…" over col 1145)
marginal letters: A ‹mus; et sicut›; B ‹recidat, et nostra›; C ‹LEO episcopus ANATOLIO›; D ‹Aug. cons. In alio› (in note h)
old-edition numerals: 1342 before dicens
signature: none
other: none

PL 54:1147

quae haereticorum sensibus convenirent. Quod utrum veraciter fama jactaret, dilectionis tuae inquirendum judicio delegavi. Neque in aliquo honorem tuum laesi, cui discutienda ea quae ad me erant perlata commisi: ut scilicet Atticus presbyter, quem talia audere cognoveram, nisi perfecta se satisfactione purgasset, et non solum voce haereticos, sed etiam propriae manus subscriptione damnasset, a communionis gratia esset alienus. Qui scripta mittendo dubiae fidei et professionis incertae, confirmavit magis quam diluit, quidquid ad nos de eo fama pertulerat; cum si conscientiam suam voluisset probare sinceram, non Eutychen sibi odiosum fuisse, sed quod perfidiam ipsius reprobaret atque damnaret, debuerat confiteri: quia aliud sunt humanae etiam inter catholicos simultates; aliud diabolici, quos fides catholica damnat, errores.

[…] which agreed with the notions of the heretics. Whether rumour spread this truthfully, I delegated to the judgement of your love to be inquired into. Nor did I injure your honour in anything, you to whom I committed the matters brought to me for examination: namely, that the priest Atticus, whom I had learned was daring such things, unless he cleared himself by a perfect satisfaction, and condemned the heretics not only by voice but also by the subscription of his own hand, should be estranged from the grace of communion. By sending writings of doubtful faith and uncertain profession he confirmed rather than washed away whatever rumour had brought to us about him; whereas, if he had wished to prove his conscience sincere, he ought to have confessed, not that Eutyches had been hateful to him, but that he reproved and condemned his perfidy: because human enmities, even among catholics, are one thing; diabolical errors, which the catholic faith condemns, are another.

Et ideo, frater charissime, in nullo debes de nostra dilectione dubitare, si prophetae exemplum sequaris et dicas: Nonne qui te oderant, Domine, oderam illos, et super inimicos tuos tabescebam (Ps. CXXXVIII, 21)? Per omnia enim volo te esse certissimum quod sicut meam existimationem illaesam cupio permanere, ita opto te quoque in omnibus irreprehensibilem reperiri. Praedictus autem Atticus, ut ab omni suspicione contraria liber appareat quid in Eutyche anathematizet ac damnet, evidenter ostendat, et in damationem erroris expressi, remota omni dubitatione, subscribat: ita ut Chalcedonensis synodi definitionem de fide, cui etiam dilectio tua subscribendo consensit, et quam apostolicae sedis firmavit auctoritas, profiteatur se per omnia servatum, adjecta subscriptione propriae manus, quae in Ecclesia Christiano populo praesente recitetur: ut pro catholica fide neque nos negligentes, neque ipse ultra suspectus

And therefore, most dear brother, you ought in no respect to doubt of our love, if you follow the example of the prophet and say: Did I not hate those who hated Thee, O Lord, and pine away over Thine enemies (Ps. 138:21)? For I wish you to be most certain in all things that, just as I desire my own reputation to remain unimpaired, so I wish you too to be found irreproachable in all things. But let the aforesaid Atticus, so that he may appear free from every contrary suspicion, plainly show what he anathematizes and condemns in Eutyches, and subscribe, all doubt removed, to the condemnation of the error expressed: so that he profess that he will keep in all things the definition of faith of the synod of Chalcedon, to which your love also consented by subscribing, and which the authority of the apostolic see confirmed, with the subscription of his own hand added, to be read out in the church in the presence of the Christian people: so that, in the matter of the catholic faith, neither we negligent, nor he any longer suspected […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1147

Footnotes

(a) ‹honorem tuum laesi,› · printed under col 1147

Idem codex, cum discutienda.

The same manuscript has cum discutienda.

(b) ‹erant perlata› · printed under col 1147

Epist. 151.

Letter 151.

Vat. 546 collect. 21, confirmat.

The Vatican manuscript 546 of collection 21 has confirmat.

(d) ‹atque damnaret,› · printed under col 1147

Vulg. ante Quesn., debuit.

The editions before Quesnel have debuit.

(e) ‹Domine, oderam› · printed under col 1147

Vindebon. collect. 5, eos. Porro tabescebam habent omnes nostri codd. et editi ante Quesn., apud quem forte errore librarii vel typographi, tabescam.

The Vienna manuscript of collection 5 has eos. Further, tabescebam is in all our manuscripts and in the editions before Quesnel; in his, perhaps by an error of copyist or printer, tabescam.

(f) ‹Praedictus autem› · printed under col 1147

Idem Vindebon. cum mss. collect. 11 et 24 omittit Atticus.

The same Vienna manuscript, with the manuscripts of collections 11 and 24, omits Atticus.

(g) ‹ita ut Chalcedonensis› · printed under col 1147

Plures vulg. ante Quesn., symboli, male: novum enim symbolum Chalcedonenses Patres non condidere, sed contra Eutychianos errores fidei definitionem protulerunt. Synodi habent nostri codices, et duo a Quesnello laudati Barb. et Trecopith., nec non Pelagius II, in epist. 3, ad Eliam et caeteros episcopos Istriae c. 3, ubi ex his litteris testimonium recitat. Hujus professionis formula exhibetur in collect. 5 cap. 55, quam tomo tertio edemus: eamque ad Constantinopolitanam Ecclesiam praesertim pertinuisse discimus ex mss. collect. 8, in quibus haec eadem formula inscribitur tit. 125: Confessio presbyterorum seu diaconorum Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae; et incipit: Ego ille Constantinopolitanae Ecclesiae diaconus vel presbyter hac scriptura, etc. Haec formula ex Leonis quidem mente scripta, vel Roma Constantinopolim missa fuit, vel Constantinopoli ad Leonem transmissa atque ab eodem probata, ac Latine reddita in laudatas collectiones transivit.

Several editions before Quesnel have symboli, wrongly: for the Chalcedonian Fathers did not compose a new creed, but put forth a definition of faith against the Eutychian errors. Synodi is in our manuscripts, and in the two praised by Quesnel, the Barberini and Trecopith., and also in Pelagius II, in letter 3, to Elias and the other bishops of Istria, ch. 3, where he quotes a testimony from this letter. The formula of this profession is given in collection 5, ch. 55, which we shall publish in the third volume; and that it belonged especially to the Church of Constantinople we learn from the manuscripts of collection 8, in which this same formula is headed, title 125: Confession of the priests or deacons of the Church of Constantinople; and it begins: I, N., deacon or priest of the Church of Constantinople, by this writing, etc. This formula, written indeed according to Leo's mind, was either sent from Rome to Constantinople, or sent from Constantinople to Leo and approved by him, and, rendered in Latin, passed into the collections mentioned.

(h) ‹apostolicae sedis› · printed under col 1147

Vat. 546 collect. 21, confirmavit.

The Vatican manuscript 546 of collection 21 has confirmavit.

(j) printed under this column (its mark printed (j), answering call (i) in col 1148), running on into the foot of col 1148; set in n1148

Page

running head: 1147 S. LEONIS MAGNI (continued "MAGNI EPISTOLAE. 1148" over col 1148)
marginal letters: A ‹quae haereticorum sensibus›; B ‹quos fides catholica›; C ‹tas, profiteatur›; D ‹nem protulerunt› (in note g)
old-edition numerals: 1343 before Quod utrum
signature: none
other: a stray mark is printed between tuum and laesi (line 4); the text ends with suspe- hyphenated; the word (suspectus) is set whole at the end of this column

PL 54:1148

habeatur. Qui si in eadem pravitate perdurans, praeceptis salubribus parere noluerit, sententiam synodi Chalcedonensis, cujus definitionibus resultat, excipiat.

[…] may be held. But if he, persisting in the same depravity, refuses to obey salutary precepts, let him receive the sentence of the synod of Chalcedon, against whose definitions he rebels.

Data quinto kalendas Aprilis, Leone et Majoriano Augustis consulibus.

Given on the fifth day before the kalends of April, Leo and Majorian Augusti being consuls.

EPISTOLA CLXIV.

LETTER CLXIV.

AD LEONEM AUGUSTUM

TO LEO AUGUSTUS

LEO episcopus LEONI Augusto.

Leo, bishop, to Leo Augustus.

CAP. I. — Multis manifestisque documentis probatum mihi esse gaudens, quanto universali Ecclesiae consulatis affectu, praeceptis pietatis vestrae, ubi primum licuit, parere non distuli; dirigens Domitianum et Geminianum fratres et coepiscopos meos, qui apud vos preces meae sollicitudinis exsequentes, pro quiete vobis doctrinae evangelicae supplicarent, et libertatem fidei, in qua secundum eruditionem Spiritus sancti ipse praecipue emines, obtinerent, repulsis procul hostibus Christi, qui etiamsi voluissent furorem suum tegere, non laterent, quia alia est Dominici gregis sancta simplicitas, alia sub vestitu ovium simulatio latentium bestiarum; nec possunt jam per hypocrisim irrepere, quos tantae furor manifestavit insaniae. Agnosce igitur, auguste

Chap. I. Rejoicing that it has been proved to me by many and manifest evidences with what affection you care for the universal Church, I did not delay, as soon as it was possible, to obey the commands of your piety, sending my brothers and fellow bishops Domitian and Geminian, who, carrying out with you the prayers of my solicitude, might make supplication to you for the peace of the evangelical doctrine, and might obtain the freedom of the faith, in which, according to the teaching of the Holy Spirit, you yourself especially excel, the enemies of Christ being driven far off; who, even if they had wished to cover their fury, would not lie hidden, because the holy simplicity of the Lord's flock is one thing, the pretence of beasts lurking under the clothing of sheep another; nor can those now creep in through hypocrisy whom the fury of so great a madness has made manifest. Recognize therefore, Augustus, […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1148

Footnotes

(i) ‹perdurans,› · printed under cols 1147–1148; its mark is printed (j)

Cod. Florent. S. Marci collect. 13, praecepto salubri. Dein pro excipiat, ms. Cantabrig., incurrat.

The Florence manuscript of St Mark, collection 13, has praecepto salubri. Then, for excipiat, the Cambridge manuscript has incurrat.

(j) ‹Data› · printed under col 1148

Vat. cum mss. collect. 12, 21 et 24, XV kal. Aprilis. Praetulimus potiores codices Vindebon. collect. 5, Vat. collect. 11 et Florent. collect. 13, quibus tres alii a Quesnello in margine allegati astipulantur. In mss. collect. 11, 13, 21 et 24 omittitur Leonis nomen, et solius Majoriani consulatus memoratur. At caeteri codices ac praesertim Vindebon. collect. 5 utrumque consulem signant, ut pariter in omnibus litteris hoc anno in Orientem missis notatur. Solae duae epistolae ad Occidentales missae 159 et 166 unum Majorianum consulem memorant.

The Vatican manuscript, with the manuscripts of collections 12, 21 and 24, has XV kal. Aprilis. We have preferred the better manuscripts, the Vienna of collection 5, the Vatican of collection 11 and the Florentine of collection 13, with which three others cited by Quesnel in the margin agree. In the manuscripts of collections 11, 13, 21 and 24 Leo's name is omitted, and the consulship of Majorian alone is mentioned. But the other manuscripts, and especially the Vienna of collection 5, mark both consuls, as is likewise noted in all the letters sent to the East in this year. Only the two letters sent to Westerners, 159 and 166, mention Majorian alone as consul.

(k) ‹EPISTOLA› (call printed (h)) · printed under col 1148

Alias 133. Scripta 17 August. an. 458.

Formerly 133. Written 17 August in the year 458.

(l) ‹AD LEONEM AUGUSTUM› (call printed before the address line) · printed under col 1148

Celebrem hanc epistolam, ex qua nonnulla fragmenta supererant apud Vigilium, Pelagium atque Facundum, cujusque dimidiam fere partem descripsit Prudentius Tricassinus in lib. de Praedest., integram edidit Quesnellus ex ms. Grimanico. Eamdem in nostro Ratisponensi invenimus. Vide Quesnelli notam.

This celebrated letter, of which some fragments survived in Vigilius, Pelagius and Facundus, and almost half of which Prudentius of Troyes copied in his book on predestination, Quesnel published entire from the Grimani manuscript. We have found the same in our Regensburg manuscript. See Quesnel's note.

(m) ‹LEO› · printed under col 1148

Vocem episcopus a nobis ex Ratisp. additam Prudentius etiam confirmat.

The word episcopus, added by us from the Regensburg manuscript, Prudentius also confirms.

(n) ‹dirigens› · printed under col 1148

In Ratisp. et apud Prudentium, Donatianum. Retinuimus Domitianum, quia sic legitur in epist. 170, quae horum legatorum nomina repetit.

In the Regensburg manuscript and in Prudentius, Donatianum. We have kept Domitianum, because it is so read in letter 170, which repeats the names of these legates.

(o) ‹qui apud vos› · printed under col 1148

Quesn. in marg.: Legendum forte, vices. At preces habet etiam Ratisp.

Quesnel in the margin: perhaps read vices. But the Regensburg manuscript too has preces.

(p) ‹quos› · printed under col 1148

Ratisp. delet tantae, et post pauca ignorat auguste et.

The Regensburg manuscript deletes tantae, and a little after lacks auguste et.

(q) ‹insaniae.› · printed under col 1148

Sequentia habet Facundus p. 87.

Facundus has what follows, p. 87.

Editors' prose

SYNOPSIS. — I. Legatos mittit vice sua pro Ecclesiae libertate acturos, rogatque ne bene definita ad novum tractatum revocentur. — II. Semper disputationi locum fore, si humano ratiocinio et Rhetorum loquacitate expendi mysteria sinantur. — III. Quam Evangelio et humanae saluti inimicum sit Eutychianorum dogma a synodo proscriptum; cui nulla disputatione derogari debet. — IV. Parricidas Alexandrinos omni indulgentia indignos esse; quibus tamen, si resipiscant, de misericordia non desperandum. — V. Legatos commendat, quos mittit non disceptaturos, sed supplicaturos; quaenam pro pace Ecclesiae sint agenda; correctis poenitentiam non negandam, obduratis sub synodali sententia remanentibus.

SYNOPSIS. — I. He sends legates in his stead to act for the freedom of the Church, and asks that things well defined be not called back to a new discussion. — II. That there will always be room for disputation if the mysteries are allowed to be weighed by human reasoning and the loquacity of rhetoricians. — III. How hostile to the Gospel and to human salvation is the dogma of the Eutychians proscribed by the synod, from which no disputation ought to detract. — IV. That the parricides of Alexandria are unworthy of all indulgence; yet, if they come to their senses, mercy is not to be despaired of for them. — V. He commends the legates, whom he sends not to dispute but to make supplication; what is to be done for the peace of the Church; that penance is not to be denied to the corrected, while the obdurate remain under the synod's sentence.

Page

running head: MAGNI EPISTOLAE. 1148 (continuing "S. LEONIS" over col 1147)
marginal letters: A ‹ctus habeatur›; B ‹disceptaturos, sed supplicaturos› (in the synopsis); C ‹alia est Dominici gregis›; D ‹menta supererant› (in note l)
old-edition numerals: 1344 after ctus (first line); 1345 before qui apud vos
signature: none
other: call marks not matching their notes: the call at "perdurans" is printed (i) and its note (j); the call at EPISTOLA CLXIV is printed (h) and answers note (k). The text ends with "auguste", no hyphen; no note called here runs into col 1149

PL 54:1149

et venerabilis imperator, in quantum totius mundi praesidium divina sis providentia praeparatus, et quid auxilii matri tuae Ecclesiae debeas, quae te filio maxime gloriatur, intellige. Non sinantur contra dexterae omnipotentis triumphos redivivis assurgere motibus exstincta certamina; praesertim cum id damnatis jamdudum haereticorum ausibus omnino non liceat, et hic fructus piis laboribus debeatur, ut omnis Ecclesiae plenitudo in suae unitatis soliditate secura permaneat, nihilque prorsus de bene compositis retractetur: quia post legitimas et divinitus inspiratas constitutiones velle confligere non pacifici est animi, sed rebellis, dicente Apostolo: Verbis enim contendere, ad nihil est utile, nisi ad subversionem audientium (II Tim. II, 24).

[…] and venerable emperor, understand to what extent you have been prepared by divine providence as the defence of the whole world, and what help you owe to your mother the Church, which glories above all in you as her son. Let not conflicts that have been extinguished be allowed to rise up again with revived movements against the triumphs of the Almighty's right hand; especially since this is wholly unlawful for the long-condemned ventures of the heretics, and this fruit is owed to pious labours, that the whole fullness of the Church should remain secure in the solidity of its unity, and that nothing at all of what has been well settled should be reopened: because to wish to contend after lawful and divinely inspired constitutions belongs not to a peaceable mind but to a rebellious one, as the Apostle says: For to contend with words is useful for nothing, except for the subversion of the hearers (2 Tim. 2:24).

CAP. II. — Nam si humanis persuasionibus semper disceptare sit liberum, numquam deesse poterunt qui veritati audeant resultare, et de mundanae sapientiae loquacitate confidere: cum hanc nocentissimam vanitatem quantum debeat fides et sapientia Christiana vitare ex ipsa Domini nostri Jesu Christi institutione cognoscat; qui omnes nationes ad illuminationem fidei vocaturus, non de philosophis aut de oratoribus, qui praedicando Evangelio famularentur, elegit; sed de humilibus et piscatoribus per quos se manifestaret, assumpsit, ne doctrina coelestis, quae erat plena virtutum, auxilio videretur indigere verborum. Unde Apostolus protestatur et dicit: Non enim misit me Christus baptizare, sed evangelizare; non in sapientia verbi, ne evacuetur crux Christi: verbum enim crucis pereuntibus quidem stultitia est, his autem qui salvi fiunt virtus Dei

CHAP. II. — For if it were free always to dispute by human persuasions, there could never be lacking those who would dare to resist the truth and to trust in the loquacity of worldly wisdom: whereas faith and Christian wisdom know from the very institution of our Lord Jesus Christ how much they ought to avoid this most harmful vanity; for He, when He was about to call all nations to the illumination of faith, did not choose from among philosophers or orators those who should serve in preaching the Gospel, but took from among the humble and fishermen those through whom He would manifest Himself, lest the heavenly doctrine, which was full of powers, should seem to need the help of words. Hence the Apostle protests and says: For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel; not in wisdom of speech, lest the cross of Christ be made void: for the word of the cross is indeed foolishness to those who perish, but to those who are being saved it is the power of God […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1149

Footnotes

(a) ‹gloriatur, intellige.› · printed under col 1149

Non sinas legitur in Constituto Vigilii papae, et in epistola Pelagii II, ad Eliam Aquileiensem, ubi haec referuntur; et postea apud utrosque exsurgere pro assurgere.

"Non sinas" is read in the Constitutum of Pope Vigilius and in the letter of Pelagius II to Elias of Aquileia, where these words are quoted; and afterwards in both "exsurgere" for "assurgere".

(b) ‹de bene› · printed under col 1149

Apud Vigilium, constitutis. Mox apud eumdem Vigilium et Prudentium, quia legitimas et divinitus inspiratas constitutiones velle movere, non, etc.

In Vigilius, "constitutis". Shortly after, in the same Vigilius and in Prudentius, "quia legitimas et divinitus inspiratas constitutiones velle movere, non", etc.

Pelagius, hominis.

Pelagius, "hominis".

(d) ‹et de› · printed under col 1149

Quesn., humanae. Praetulimus cum Ratisp. mundanae; similiter enim legitur etiam apud Vigilium atque Facundum.

Quesnel, "humanae". We have preferred "mundanae" with the Regensburg manuscript; for it is read likewise also in Vigilius and Facundus.

(e) ‹loquacitate confidere› · printed under col 1149

Hucusque Facundus.

Facundus [quotes] as far as this.

(f) ‹debeat fides› · printed under col 1149

Et sapientia delet Prudentius. Mox nostri in Ratisp. desideratur.

Prudentius deletes "et sapientia". Shortly after, "nostri" is lacking in the Regensburg manuscript.

(g) ‹per quos› · printed under col 1149

Quesnellus cum Grim., sancta manifestaret; et in margine: sancta delet Prudentius. Lectio nostri Ratisp. magis placuit, ex quo etiam mox virtutum pro virtutibus praetulimus.

Quesnel with Grimani, "sancta manifestaret"; and in the margin: "Prudentius deletes sancta". The reading of our Regensburg manuscript pleased us more, from which we have also preferred shortly after "virtutum" to "virtutibus".

Page

running head: 1149 EPISTOLA CLXIV. 1150 (across the page)
marginal letters: A ‹et venerabilis imperator›; B ‹per disceptare sit liberum›; C ‹quidem stultitia est›; D in the footnote area ‹tri Ratisp. magis placuit›
old-edition numerals: 1346 after ‹elegit;›
signature: none
other: none

PL 54:1150

est; scriptum est enim: Perdam sapientiam sapientium, et prudentiam prudentium reprobabo. Ubi sapiens? ubi scriba? ubi inquisitor hujus saeculi? Nonne stultam fecit Deus sapientiam hujus mundi (I). Cor (I, 17-20)? Argumenta enim rhetorica et institutae ab hominibus versutiae disputandi in eo praecipue gloriantur, si in rebus incertis et opinionum varietate confusis, ad hoc audientium trahant sensum, quod asserendum ingenio atque eloquio suo quisque delegerit; et ita fit ut quod majore facundia defenditur, verius aestimetur. Sed Christi Evangelium hac arte non indiget, in quo doctrina veritatis sua luce manifestata est; nec quaeritur quid auribus placeat, ubi verae fidei sufficit scire quis doceat.

[…] for it is written: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the prudence of the prudent I will reject. Where is the wise man? where is the scribe? where is the inquirer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world (1 Cor. 1:17–20)? For rhetorical arguments and the cunning tricks of disputing devised by men glory chiefly in this, if in matters uncertain and confused by variety of opinions they draw the mind of the hearers to that which each has chosen to assert by his own talent and eloquence; and so it comes about that what is defended with greater fluency is reckoned the truer. But the Gospel of Christ does not need this art, in which the doctrine of truth has been manifested by its own light; nor is it asked what pleases the ears, where for true faith it suffices to know Who is teaching.

CAP. III. — Hos autem qui suis decipiuntur inventis nihil magis ab evangelica luce dissociat, quam quod incarnationis Dominicae veritatem non putant ad humanam, id est nostram, pertinere naturam: tamquam indignum fuerit gloria Dei, ut majestas Verbi impassibilis veritatem mortalis carnis assumpserit; cum aliter salus hominum reparari non posset, nisi qui est in forma Dei, formam suscipere dignaretur et servi. Unde cum sancta synodus Chalcedonensis, quae ab universis Romani orbis provinciis cum totius mundi est celebrata consensu, et a sacratissimi concilii Nicaeni est indivisa decretis, omnem Eutychiani dogmatis impietatem a corpore catholicae communionis absciderit, quomodo erit cuiquam lapsorum ad ecclesiasticam pacem recursus, nisi perfecta fuerit satisfactione purgatus? Nam quae istis tribui potest licentia disserendi, qui justo sanctoque judicio meruere damnari? ut verissime

CHAP. III. — But nothing separates from the light of the Gospel those who are deceived by their own inventions more than this, that they do not think that the truth of the Lord's incarnation pertains to human nature, that is, to ours: as though it were unworthy of the glory of God that the majesty of the impassible Word should have assumed the reality of mortal flesh; whereas the salvation of men could not otherwise be restored, unless He Who is in the form of God should deign to take up the form also of a servant. Hence, since the holy synod of Chalcedon, which was celebrated by all the provinces of the Roman world with the consent of the whole world, and is undivided from the decrees of the most sacred council of Nicaea, has cut off all the impiety of the Eutychian dogma from the body of the catholic communion, how shall any of the lapsed have a return to the peace of the Church, unless he has been cleansed by a complete satisfaction? For what licence of discussion can be granted to those who have deserved to be condemned by a just and holy judgement? so that most truly […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1150

Footnotes

(h) ‹Argumenta enim› · printed under col 1149

Sic ex Ratisp. atque Prudentio. Quesn. cum Grim., rhetoricae institutae.

So from the Regensburg manuscript and Prudentius. Quesnel with Grimani, "rhetoricae institutae".

(i) ‹opinionum varietate› · printed under col 1149

Ita Quesn. cum Prudentio; et in margine: Cod. Grimanicus, confisis; minus recte. Noster Ratisp. cum Prudentio concordat.

So Quesnel with Prudentius; and in the margin: "the Grimani codex, confisis"; less correctly. Our Regensburg manuscript agrees with Prudentius.

(j) ‹et ita› · printed under col 1149

Sic Quesn. cum eodem Prudentio, cui Ratisp. suffragatur. Cod. Grim., fieri.

So Quesnel with the same Prudentius, whom the Regensburg manuscript supports. The Grimani codex, "fieri".

(k) ‹sua luce› · printed under col 1149

Ratisp., manifesta. Mox, nec sequitur pro nec quaeritur, male in ms. Grim. Emendationem Quesn. ex Prudentio noster Ratisp. confirmat. Post pauca, quis doceat idem Prudentius et Ratisp. praeferunt. In Grim. corrupte quod doceat.

The Regensburg manuscript, "manifesta". Shortly after, "nec sequitur" for "nec quaeritur", wrongly, in the Grimani manuscript. Our Regensburg manuscript confirms Quesnel's emendation from Prudentius. A little after, the same Prudentius and the Regensburg manuscript offer "quis doceat". In Grimani, corruptly, "quod doceat".

(l) ‹ab evangelica› · printed under col 1149

Ita ex Ratisp., uti paulo ante, sua luce. Quesn. cum Grim., voce.

So from the Regensburg manuscript, as a little before, "sua luce". Quesnel with Grimani, "voce".

(m) ‹quod incarnationis› · printed under col 1149, ending under col 1150

Ratisp., divinae et post pauca, indignum fuerit gloriae.

The Regensburg manuscript, "divinae", and a little after, "indignum fuerit gloriae".

(n) ‹cum aliter salus› · printed under col 1150

Idem Ratisp., hominis.

The same Regensburg manuscript, "hominis".

(o) ‹synodus Chalcedonensis,› · printed under col 1150

His verbis Quesnellus postillam affixit: Concilii oecumenici characteres duo: 1° ex omnibus provinciis; 2° totius orbis consensus. Leo hic Chalcedonensis concilii, quod a tota Ecclesia receptum fuerat, praerogativas attingere voluit, ut illud multo magis irretractabile ostenderet, non vero voluit characteres generali synodo necessarias proponere, ut Quesnelli postilla videtur innuere. Convocatio quidem generalis requiritur, ut, quod ait noster Auctor epist. 89, evocatis de cunctis provinciis sacerdotibus VERE possit esse universale concilium. VERE, inquit, seu stricte generale. Si tamen generali convocatione praemissa ad concilium non accedant omnes ex cunctis provinciis vel accedere nequeant, ut ipsi synodo Chalcedonensi accidit, ad quam ob temporis praefiniti augustias vix legati apostolicae sedis ex toto Occidente dirigi potuere, num idcirco generale esse non poterit? Immo praxis Ecclesiae ostendit, generalia habita fuisse concilia Orientis, cum plures Orientales episcopi cum quibusdam Occidentalibus a Romana sede praesertim directis convenerunt. Id vero quod his synodis praerogativam generalium conciliorum praecipue asseruit, nimirum obligandi vim, fuit Romanae sedis confirmatio, et assensus, quam unam ipsi Patres Chalcedonenses a Leone petierunt uti necessariam, aliorum quoque episcoporum totius orbis assensum petituri, si hunc aeque necessarium judicassent. Vide ipsius synodi Chalcedonensis epistolam inter Leoninas 98, item Anatolii epist. 101, et imperatoris Marciani epist. 110.

To these words Quesnel attached a marginal note: "Two marks of an ecumenical council: 1st, from all the provinces; 2nd, the consent of the whole world." Leo here meant to touch on the prerogatives of the council of Chalcedon, which had been received by the whole Church, so as to show it to be all the more irrevocable; he did not mean to set out the marks necessary to a general synod, as Quesnel's note seems to hint. A general convocation is indeed required, so that, as our Author says in letter 89, when bishops have been summoned from all the provinces there may TRULY be a universal council. "TRULY", he says, that is, general in the strict sense. If, however, after a general convocation has been issued, not all from all the provinces come to the council, or they are unable to come, as happened to the synod of Chalcedon itself, to which, because of the narrowness of the time fixed, barely the legates of the apostolic see could be sent from the whole West, will it for that reason be unable to be general? On the contrary, the practice of the Church shows that councils of the East were held to be general when many Eastern bishops met together with some Westerners, chiefly those sent by the Roman see. But what chiefly secured for these synods the prerogative of general councils, namely binding force, was the confirmation and assent of the Roman see, which alone the Fathers of Chalcedon themselves asked of Leo as necessary, whereas they would also have asked the assent of the other bishops of the whole world had they judged it equally necessary. See the letter of the synod of Chalcedon itself among Leo's, no. 98, also Anatolius's letter 101, and the emperor Marcian's letter 110.

Page

running head: 1149 EPISTOLA CLXIV. 1150 (across the page)
marginal letters: A ‹est; scriptum est enim›; B ‹tis nihil magis ab evangelica›; C ‹justo sanctoque judicio›; D in the footnote area ‹vel accedere nequeant›
old-edition numerals: 1347 after ‹sacratissimi concilii›
signature: none
other: notes (h)-(m) are printed in the left footnote column, under col 1149

PL 54:1151

illam sententiam beati apostoli Joannis exciperent, qua inter ipsa nascentis Ecclesiae exordia inimicos crucis Christi perculit dicens: Omnis spiritus qui confitetur Jesum Christum in carne venisse ex Deo est, et omnis spiritus qui solvit Jesum ex Deo non est, sed hic est Antichristi (I Joan. IV, 2, 3). Qua sancti Spiritus praecurrente doctrina, pie nobis et constanter utendum est, ne, dum talium disceptatio admittitur, his quae divinitus definita sunt auctoritas derogetur, cum per omnes regni vestri partes, et in universis finibus terrae ea quae apud Chalcedonam firmata est fides, fundatissima pace servetur; nec Christiano sit dignus nomine qui se a consortio nostrae unitatis abrumpit. De quo Apostolus dicit: Haereticum hominem post unam et secundam correptionem devita, sciens quia hujusmodi perversus est, et proprio judicio sit damnatus (Tit. III, 10).

[…] they might receive that sentence of the blessed apostle John, with which, amid the very beginnings of the newborn Church, he struck the enemies of the cross of Christ, saying: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that dissolves Jesus is not of God, but this is of Antichrist (1 John 4:2, 3). This teaching of the Holy Spirit going before us, we must use piously and constantly, lest, while the disputing of such men is admitted, authority should be taken away from the things that have been divinely defined, whereas throughout all parts of your realm, and in all the ends of the earth, the faith that was confirmed at Chalcedon is preserved in a most firmly founded peace; nor let him be worthy of the Christian name who breaks himself away from the fellowship of our unity. Of whom the Apostle says: A heretical man, after one and a second rebuke, avoid, knowing that such a one is perverted and is condemned by his own judgement (Titus 3:10).

CAP. IV. — Quod ergo in sanctae Ecclesiae pervasione et in praesulis ipsius crudelissima caede impius parricida commisit, non potest humanis remissionibus expiari, nisi ille exoretur qui talia et solus potest digne plectere, et solus ineffabili misericordia relaxare. Nos vero non ultionum sumus cupidi, sed ministris diaboli non possumus ulla ex parte sociari. Quos si a perversis discedere, ab errore resipiscere, et ab armis discordiae ad poenitentiae cognoscamus lamenta converti, possumus etiam nos pro illis, ne in aeternum pereant, supplicare: ut pietatis Domini utamur exemplo, qui pro persecutoribus suis ligno crucis affixus orabat, dicens: Pater ignosce illis, quia nesciunt quid faciunt (Luc. XXIII, 34). Quod ut fructuose pro inimicis suis charitas faciat Christiana, relinquant impii semper religiosam semperque devotam Ecclesiam Dei lacessere; neque simplicis populi animas haeretica audeant conturbare fallacia: ut ubi omnibus retro temporibus sincerissima

CHAP. IV. — What, therefore, the impious parricide committed in the invasion of the holy Church and in the most cruel slaughter of its very bishop cannot be expiated by human remissions, unless He be prevailed upon Who alone can worthily punish such things and alone can release them by His ineffable mercy. We, however, are not desirous of vengeance, but we cannot in any way be associated with the ministers of the devil. If we learn that they are departing from perverse men, coming to their senses from error, and turning from the arms of discord to the laments of penitence, we too can make supplication for them, lest they perish for ever: so that we may follow the example of the Lord's loving-kindness, Who, fastened to the wood of the cross, prayed for His persecutors, saying: Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do (Luke 23:34). That Christian charity may do this fruitfully for its enemies, let the impious cease to harass the Church of God, ever religious and ever devoted; and let them not dare to disturb the souls of the simple people with heretical deceit: so that where in all past times the most sincere […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 1151

Footnotes

(a) ‹Antichristi (I Joan. IV, 2, 3).› · printed under col 1151

Haec habent Vigilius et Pelagius, hicque epistolae ad Basilium tribuit.

Vigilius and Pelagius have these words, and the latter attributes them to the letter to Basil.

(b) ‹sancti Spiritus› · printed under col 1151

Ita ex Ratisp. Quesnellus cum Grim., percurrente, minus recte.

So from the Regensburg manuscript. Quesnel with Grimani, "percurrente", less correctly.

Apud Vigil, videndum, vel vivendum, vel vitantum. Mox apud eumdem Vigil cum Pelagio et in Ratisp., disputatio pro disceptatio: ac dein in solo Pelagio, eorum.... auctoritati.

In Vigilius, "videndum", or "vivendum", or "vitantum". Shortly after, in the same Vigilius with Pelagius and in the Regensburg manuscript, "disputatio" for "disceptatio"; and then in Pelagius alone, "eorum.... auctoritati".

(d) ‹auctoritas derogetur› · printed under col 1151

Ratisp. addit siglam GL, quae, ucum in eodem ms. alibi notatur, in aliis codd. redditur gloriosissime imperator. Mox ex eodem ms. scripsimus, cum per omnes, melius quam apud Quesn., dum.

The Regensburg manuscript adds the abbreviation GL, which, where it is noted elsewhere in the same manuscript, is rendered in other codices "gloriosissime imperator". Shortly after, from the same manuscript, we have written "cum per omnes", better than "dum" in Quesnel.

(e) ‹apud Chalcedonam› · printed under col 1151

Ita idem Ratisp. Al., confirmata.

So the same Regensburg manuscript. Others, "confirmata".

(f) ‹consortio nostrae› · printed under col 1151

Quesn., veritatis. Correximus ex Ratisp.

Quesnel, "veritatis". We have corrected from the Regensburg manuscript.

(g) ‹sanctae Ecclesiae› · printed under col 1151

Ratisp., persuasionem, legendum pervasionem, et dein, crudelissimam caedem.

The Regensburg manuscript, "persuasionem", to be read "pervasionem", and then "crudelissimam caedem".

(h) ‹sociari.› (at the head of "Quos si a perversis") · printed under col 1151

Idem Ratisp., Quod si a persuasis.

The same Regensburg manuscript, "Quod si a persuasis".

(i) ‹Ecclesiam Dei› · printed under col 1151, ending under col 1152

Verbum lacessere ex Ratisp. supplevimus: ac proinde non est necessaria explicatio a Quesnello addita in margine: Id est, Alexandrinam quam invaserant. Intelliguntur autem Eutychianorum ac Timothei maledicta contra Chalcedonensem synodum, contra Leonis epistolam, et contra catholicos, quos veluti Nestorianos traduxerant. Dein, simplices populi animos in eodem Ratisp.

We have supplied the word "lacessere" from the Regensburg manuscript: and therefore the explanation added by Quesnel in the margin is not necessary: "That is, the Alexandrian [Church], which they had invaded." What is meant, however, is the abuse of the Eutychians and of Timothy against the synod of Chalcedon, against Leo's letter, and against the catholics, whom they had denounced as Nestorians. Then, "simplices populi animos" in the same Regensburg manuscript.

Page

running head: 1151 S. LEONIS MAGNI EPISTOLAE. 1152 (across the page)
marginal letters: A ‹sime illam sententiam›; B ‹reptionem devita›; C ‹fructuose pro inimicis›
old-edition numerals: 1348 before ‹devotam Ecclesiam›
signature: none
other: the first word, "illam", follows "verissime", hyphenated from col 1150 and set whole there

PL 54:1152

fides floruit, nunc quoque evangelica et apostolica possit vigere doctrina. Quia et nos divinam misericordiam, in quantum valemus, imitantes, nullum justitia plecti, sed omnes cupimus misericordia liberari.

[…] faith has flourished, the evangelical and apostolic doctrine may now also thrive. For we too, imitating the divine mercy as far as we are able, desire that no one be punished by justice, but that all be set free by mercy.

CAP. V. — Utatur, obsecro, clementia tua praedictorum fratrum meorum suggestionibus; quos, sicut jamdudum in praemissa epistola sum locutus, non disceptaturos cum damnatis, sed supplicaturos vobis pro catholicae tantum fidei stabilitate direxi. Et praecipue illud pietas vestra pro fide sua et divinae majestatis contemplatione concedat, ut haereticorum contentionibus prorsus amotis misericordem curam his qui infeliciter prolapsi sunt dignetur impendere, et libertate Alexandrinae Ecclesiae in statum pristinum revocata, antistes illic Chalcedonensis synodi statuta custodiens, et concordans evangelicis disciplinis, qui conturbatam plebem pacificare valeat, ordinetur.

CHAP. V. — Let your clemency, I beseech, make use of the suggestions of my aforesaid brethren; whom, as I said long ago in the preceding letter, I have sent not to dispute with the condemned, but to make supplication to you solely for the stability of the catholic faith. And above all let your piety, for its faith and in contemplation of the divine majesty, grant this, that, the contentions of the heretics being wholly removed, it may deign to bestow merciful care on those who have unhappily fallen, and that, the liberty of the Church of Alexandria being restored to its former state, a bishop be ordained there who keeps the statutes of the synod of Chalcedon and agrees with the evangelical disciplines, and who is able to pacify the disturbed people.

Hi etiam episcopi vel clerici, quos de ecclesiis suis depulit impius parricida, pietatis tuae praeceptione revocentur; caeteris quoque, quos similis malignitas habitationibus propriis fecit extorres, in statum pristinum restitutis, quatenus plene atque perfecte de gratia Dei et fidei vestrae merito sine ullo jam concertationum strepitu gaudeamus. Nam si quis ita Christianae spei ac propriae salutis oblitus est, ut ad convulsionem sacratissimi concilii Nicaeni sanctae Chalcedonensis synodi evangelicum apostolicumque decretum violare aliqua disputatione praesumat, hunc cum omnibus haereticis, qui de incarnatione Domini nostri Jesu Christi impia et detestanda senserunt, simili anathemate parique exsecratione damnamus: ut et legitima satisfactione correctis poenitentiae remedium non negetur, et in resultantes sententia synodalis, quae veritatis est plena, permaneat. Data dcimo sexto kalendas Septembris, Leone et Majoriano Augustis consulibus.

Let also those bishops or clerics whom the impious parricide drove from their churches be recalled by the command of your piety; the others too, whom a like malice has made exiles from their own dwellings, being restored to their former state, so that we may rejoice fully and perfectly in the grace of God and the merit of your faith, now without any din of contentions. For if anyone is so forgetful of Christian hope and of his own salvation that, to the overthrow of the most sacred council of Nicaea, he presumes by any disputation to violate the evangelical and apostolic decree of the holy synod of Chalcedon, him we condemn, together with all the heretics who have held impious and detestable opinions concerning the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, with a like anathema and an equal execration: so that the remedy of penance may not be denied to those corrected by a lawful satisfaction, and the synodal sentence, which is full of truth, may stand against those who resist. Given on the sixteenth day before the Kalends of September, the Augusti Leo and Majorian being consuls.

Editors' notes and page, col. 1152

Footnotes

(j) ‹CAP. V. —› · printed under col 1152

Haec habet Prudentius.

Prudentius has these words.

(k) ‹in praemissa› · printed under col 1152

Epist. 162.

Letter 162.

(l) ‹non disceptaturos› · printed under col 1152

Ratisp., cum condemnatis.

The Regensburg manuscript, "cum condemnatis".

(m) ‹conturbatam plebem› · printed under col 1152

Idem cod., placare; et post pauca, pietatis vestrae.

The same codex, "placare"; and a little after, "pietatis vestrae".

(n) ‹ut ad› · printed under col 1152

Idem Ratisp., compulsionem.

The same Regensburg manuscript, "compulsionem".

(o) ‹Data› · printed under col 1152

Ratisp., kal. Sept. Melius in Quesnello ex Grim., cum eodem die xxvi kal. Sept. data sit sequens epistola, quae jamdiu ante promissa, per eosdem legatos, qui hanc detulere, missa videtur.

The Regensburg manuscript, "kal. Sept.". Better in Quesnel from Grimani, since the following letter is dated on the same day, the 26th [as printed] before the Kalends of September, which, promised long before, seems to have been sent by the same envoys who brought this one.

Editors' prose

ADMONITIO IN EPISTOLAM SEQUENTEM.

ADMONITION ON THE FOLLOWING LETTER.

1. Inter omnes Leonis epistolas duae prae caeteris et apud Latinos et apud Graecos maxime celebres inveniuntur, epistola 28, ad Flavianum, et sequens ad Leonem Augustum: quippe quae plenius catholicum dogma adversus Eutychianam haeresim explicant atque propugnant. Hinc cum S. Leonis epistolae pro fide editae laudantur, harum praesertim duarum expressa fit mentio: et cum epistola 28, ad Flavianum, vocaretur tomus primus, tum vero haec, ad Leonem Augustum, secundus tomus appellatur a Martino I in concilio Lateranensi his verbis: Beati Leonis Romani pontificis de secundo volumine ad Leonem imperatorem directo. Hinc in professionibus fidei nonnumquam utriusque epistolae doctrina aeque ac doctrina conciliorum recepta

1. Among all Leo's letters two are found most celebrated above the rest, both among the Latins and among the Greeks: letter 28, to Flavian, and the following one, to Leo Augustus; for they set out and defend the catholic dogma against the Eutychian heresy more fully. Hence, when the letters of St Leo issued for the faith are praised, express mention is made of these two especially: and whereas letter 28, to Flavian, was called the first tome, this one, to Leo Augustus, is called the second tome by Martin I in the Lateran council, in these words: "Of blessed Leo, the Roman pontiff, from the second volume addressed to the emperor Leo". Hence in professions of faith the doctrine of both letters, equally with the doctrine of the councils, [is] sometimes received […]

Page

running head: 1151 S. LEONIS MAGNI EPISTOLAE. 1152 (across the page)
marginal letters: A ‹fides floruit›; B ‹statuta custodiens›; C ‹cratione damnamus›
old-edition numerals: none
signature: none
other: footnote (i), called in col 1151, ends at the head of this column's footnotes and is set in n1151. The admonition "ADMONITIO IN EPISTOLAM SEQUENTEM" is printed full width at the foot of the page, below both columns' footnotes; its part on this page is set here (the rule for an admonition running full width over a page break), and it continues on the next page, in n1153.

PL 54:1153

Editors' notes and page, col. 1153

Editors' prose

declaratur; et Simplicius papa epist. 5, ad Acacium, de hac scripsit: Nota namque et omnibus illic potestatibus celebrata, quae S. memoriae praedecessor meus Leo ad consultationem Augustae recordationis Leonis scripserit, et quam veneranter accepta sint, recognoscunt. Hinc in Lectionariis antiquis haec quoque epistola inserta legitur, uti videre est in cod. Vallicellano XXVI, eademque descripta invenitur in mss. collectionis 2 Sermonum S. Leonis, quae ex Lectionariis originem ducit. Confer mss. Basilicae Vat. 210 et Barber. 88. Graeca etiam ejusdem interpretatio exhibetur in aliquot Graecis codicibus, eamque nos proferemus ex Miscellaneis Gerardi Vossii praepositi Tungrensis, qui codice Graeco olim card. Sirleti, postea vero card. Columnae usus fuit. Quasdam vero emendationes secundis curis sumpsimus ex codice Graeco Vat. 1341, quem P. Cacciarius in novissima Romana editione adhibuit. Neque moveat, si non reperitur in collectione Chalcedonensi; quippe haec collectio, ut in praefatione ostendimus, vivente Valentiniano, id est antequam haec epistola scriberetur, concinnata fuit. Hac epistola cum praeclaro encomio usus est S. Ephraemius Antiochenus apud Photium cod. 228.

[…] is declared; and Pope Simplicius, in letter 5, to Acacius, wrote of this one: "For what my predecessor Leo of holy memory wrote in answer to the consultation of Leo of august remembrance is known and celebrated among all the powers there, and they acknowledge how reverently it was received." Hence this letter too is read inserted in the ancient Lectionaries, as may be seen in the Vallicelliana codex XXVI, and the same is found copied in the manuscripts of the second collection of the Sermons of St Leo, which takes its origin from the Lectionaries. Compare the manuscripts Vatican Basilica 210 and Barberini 88. A Greek translation of it is also given in some Greek codices, and we shall bring it forward from the Miscellanies of Gerard Vossius, provost of Tongeren, who used a Greek codex formerly of Cardinal Sirleto, and afterwards of Cardinal Colonna. Some emendations, however, we took on second thoughts from the Greek codex Vatican 1341, which Father Cacciari used in the latest Roman edition. Nor should it trouble anyone that it is not found in the Chalcedonian collection; for this collection, as we showed in the preface, was compiled while Valentinian was living, that is, before this letter was written. St Ephraem of Antioch made use of this letter with a splendid encomium, in Photius, codex 228.

2. Ut tempus constituatur, quod a nonnullis vocatur in dubium, epistolae scribendae occasio commemoranda est. Leo Augustus an. 457, ad retundendam Eutychianorum audaciam, qui, adversus Chalcedonensem definitionem turbas et dubitationes excitantes, totam Aegyptum commoverant, novumque examen ac novum judicium petebant, encyclicis litteris ad omnes metropolitanos ac praesertim ad S. Leonem directis postulavit inter caetera, ut quisque coacta suae cujusque provinciae synodo, quid de Chalcedonensi concilio sentirent, epistolis exponerent. S. Pontifex statim, id est kal. Decembris ejusdem anni rescripsit epistola 156, et simul pleniores litteras c. 6 promisit his verbis: Ac ne hujus epistolae pagina in nimiam longitudinem tenderetur, aliis litteris, quae assertioni catholicae fidei congruunt, comprehendi, ut licet ea, quae a sede apostolica sunt praedicata sufficerent, insidias tamen haereticorum etiam haec quae sunt adjecta reserarent. Huic promissioni satisfecisse epistola sequenti ex initio ejusdem manifestum est. Tillemontius not 70 in Leonem in eam sententiam inclinat, hanc epistolam datam fuisse vel iisdem kal. Decembris an. 457, quibus data fuit epistola 156, vel paulo post: inverisimile enim ipsi videtur, pontificem in octo menses et amplius distulisse litteras, quas in recitato testimonio jam paratas indicavit. Hinc chronicam notationem huic epistolae subjectam rejiciendam putat: idque ex eo confirmat, quod ea notatio chronica in plerisque mss. desideretur. Cum porro ad hanc epistolam referenda existimet, quae Leo scripsit epist. 157, ad Anatolium, c. 1: Ego sane, quantum potui, piissimum principem precatus sum, ut... haereticorum assertiones in magna vergere ignorantiae caecitate cognosceret; hanc, una cum epistola 156, kal. Decembris traditam fuisse probabilius affirmat. At nec una cum epistola 156, nec paulo post hanc epistolam datam fuisse palam faciunt verba: Promisisse me MEMINI; quae promissum jamdiu ante factum manifestant. Verbum autem praeteriti temporis comprehendi quod in testimonio epist. 156 has litteras jam paratas et scriptas indicare videtur, nihil moveat, quominus hoc promissum tamdiu dilatum credatur. Leoni enim familiare fuisse praeteritum tempus usurpare de re, uti credebatur, mox futura, licet postea in longius tempus differretur, aliis exemplis alibi demonstravimus.

2. In order that the date, which some call into doubt, may be established, the occasion of writing the letter must be recalled. Leo Augustus, in the year 457, to beat back the audacity of the Eutychians, who, stirring up disturbances and doubts against the Chalcedonian definition, had set all Egypt in commotion and were demanding a new examination and a new judgement, asked among other things, in encyclical letters addressed to all the metropolitans and especially to St Leo, that each of them, having assembled a synod of his own province, should set out in letters what they thought of the council of Chalcedon. The holy Pontiff at once, that is, on the Kalends of December of the same year, replied with letter 156, and at the same time promised a fuller letter, in chapter 6, in these words: "And lest the page of this letter should stretch to excessive length, I have included in another letter the things that accord with the assertion of the catholic faith, so that, although what has been preached by the apostolic see would suffice, these additions too might lay open the snares of the heretics." That he fulfilled this promise with the following letter is plain from its beginning. Tillemont, in note 70 on Leo, inclines to the opinion that this letter was issued either on the same Kalends of December of the year 457 on which letter 156 was issued, or shortly after: for it seems unlikely to him that the pontiff put off for eight months and more a letter which, in the testimony quoted, he indicated was already prepared. Hence he thinks the chronological notice subjoined to this letter must be rejected; and he confirms this from the fact that this chronological notice is lacking in most manuscripts. Further, since he judges that what Leo wrote in letter 157, to Anatolius, chapter 1, must be referred to this letter: "I for my part, as far as I could, besought the most pious prince that... he might recognize that the assertions of the heretics tend towards great blindness of ignorance", he affirms that it is more probable that this letter was delivered together with letter 156, on the Kalends of December. But that this letter was issued neither together with letter 156 nor shortly after is made plain by the words "I REMEMBER that I promised", which show that the promise had been made long before. And let the past-tense verb "comprehendi", which in the testimony of letter 156 seems to indicate that this letter was already prepared and written, not prevent the belief that this promise was so long delayed. For we have shown elsewhere with other examples that it was customary for Leo to use the past tense of a thing that, as was believed, would soon come about, even though it was afterwards put off for a longer time.

Page

running head: 1153 ADMONITIO IN EPISTOLAM SEQUENTEM. 1154 (across the page)
marginal letters: none
old-edition numerals: none
signature: none
other: the whole page (cols 1153-1154) is printed in full-width lines of small type, all editors' prose continuing the admonition begun at the foot of col 1152 (n1152). By the full-width rule, the upper half of the page (to "alibi demonstravimus.") is set here, the lower half in n1154. The parts of cols 1153 and 1154 are rail-only.

PL 54:1154

Editors' notes and page, col. 1154

Editors' prose

Illa etiam verba hujus epistolae cap. 1, fideli occasione persolvo, aliquam occasionem innuunt, quae post promissionem factam kal. Decembris occurrit. Porro prima post eas kalendas occasio incidit in diem 21 Martii anni 458, cum per Philoxenum agentem in rebus misit epistolas 160, 161 et 162. Poterat his hanc quoque epistolam annectere. Cum vero per eumdem Philoxenum imperator petiisset, ut S. Leo aliquos de suis fratribus optime instructos dirigeret, quos quidem dirigendos pollicetur ep. 162, c. 3, in hoc tempus harum litterarum transmissionem differendam censuit: et Domitianus ac Geminianus legati, sunt ea fidelis occasio cujus initio epistolae meminit. Cum vero hi legati discesserint cum praecedentibus litteris signatis die XVI kal. Septembris; hanc eamdem diem ex Leonis more huic quoque epistolae jure affixam agnoscimus. Hinc ex duobus diebus XIII vel XVI kal. Septembris, quorum alterum habent duo codices Trecopith. et Oxon. Quesnelli ac editiones Josiae Simleri, Surii, etc., alterum vero codex Theodoricianus ejusdem Quesnelli et noster praestantissimus Ratisponensis; hunc postremum cum antecedentibus litteris concinnentem praetulimus: facile autem fuit librariorum lapsu notam VI, disjunctis lateribus convertere in III, et scribere XIII pro XVI kal. Septemb. Neque moveat plerosque codices et collectiones omni chronica notatione carere: aliae enim insignes epistolae in omnibus mss. notam chronicam desiderant; quam si in aliquo codice inveniremus, non idcirco expungendam quispiam crederet, nisi forte historiae repugnaret. In praesenti autem epistola praeter fidem aliquot codicum diversae originis, inter quos praesertim Ratisponensis maximam fidem facit, non solum nihil repugnat, sed omnia potius ex antea dictis concordant.

The words of chapter 1 of this letter, "I discharge by a faithful opportunity", also hint at some opportunity that arose after the promise made on the Kalends of December. Now the first opportunity after those Kalends fell on 21 March of the year 458, when he sent letters 160, 161 and 162 by Philoxenus, agens in rebus. He could have attached this letter too to them. But since the emperor, through the same Philoxenus, had asked St Leo to send some well-instructed men from among his brethren, whom indeed he promises to send in letter 162, chapter 3, he judged that the dispatch of this letter should be put off to that time: and the envoys Domitian and Geminian are that faithful opportunity which he mentions at the beginning of the letter. And since these envoys departed with the preceding letter, dated the 16th day before the Kalends of September, we recognize that, according to Leo's custom, this same day has rightly been attached to this letter too. Hence, of the two days, the 13th or the 16th before the Kalends of September, of which the one is found in two codices, the Troyes codex of Pithou and Quesnel's Oxford codex, and in the editions of Josias Simler, Surius, etc., and the other in Quesnel's Theodorician codex and our most excellent Regensburg manuscript, we have preferred this latter, which agrees with the preceding letter: for it was easy, by a slip of the copyists, to turn the numeral VI, its sides disjoined, into III, and to write XIII for XVI kal. Septemb. Nor should it trouble anyone that most codices and collections lack any chronological notice: for other notable letters lack the chronological notice in all the manuscripts; and if we found it in some codex, no one would think it should for that reason be struck out, unless perhaps it conflicted with history. In the present letter, however, besides the authority of several codices of different origin, among which the Regensburg one especially carries the greatest authority, not only does nothing conflict, but rather everything agrees with what has been said before.

3. De testimoniis huic epistolae subjectis aliquid hic tandem praemonendum est. S. Leo haec post pseudosynodum Ephesinam primum collegerat, ac in Orientem per legatos miserat, ut doctrinam suae epistolae 28, ad Flavianum, Latinorum ac Graecorum Patrum doctrinae cohaerentem ostenderet. Quae autem tunc misit testimonia, licet a Leone scripta fuerint Latine, Graeca tamen eorum versio tantum superest, quae in editionibus Conciliorum subjecta legitur epistolae ad Flavianum Chalcedonensis concilii act. 2, de quo plura diximus in fine admonitionis ad epist. 28. Eadem vero testimonia rursus huic epistolae subjecit, eaque Latine scripta inveniuntur tum in editis, tum in codicibus Leonis post eamdem epistolam ad Leonem Augustum; ac praeterea haec separatim inveniuntur inserta in antiquissimis collectionibus 3 et 5, nec non in ms. Capituli Veronensis 58. In his autem testimoniis aliquot sunt quae in editionibus Conciliorum nequaquam leguntur actione 2. Id autem ex eo proficisci credimus, quod S. pontifex ad Leonem Augustum scripturus, majori diligentia usus, nova testimonia quaesivit et adjecit. Porro animadvertendum maxime est, ex Latinis Patribus tres tantum allegari, Hilarium, Ambrosium, et Augustinum; eorumque testimonia ex ipsis Latinis fontibus sumpta fuisse, Plura sunt testimonia Patrum Graecorum, eaque ex illis versionibus derivata fuerunt, quae Leonis aetate prodierant. Sic testimonium Athanasii manifeste est ex ea interpretatione epistolae ad Epictetum, qua eadem epistola integra profertur in collectione 5, cap. 52, et in mss. collect. 12. Testimonia Theophili ex duabus epistolis paschalibus versionem Hieronymi palam exhibent: testimonium Cyrilli ex epistola ad Nestorium iisdem verbis describitur in laudata collect. 5, cap. 56, et inter Leonis epistolas in collect. 12.

3. Something must finally be said here in advance about the testimonies subjoined to this letter. St Leo had first collected them after the pseudo-synod of Ephesus, and had sent them to the East by his envoys, to show that the doctrine of his letter 28, to Flavian, agreed with the doctrine of the Latin and Greek Fathers. Although the testimonies he then sent were written by Leo in Latin, only their Greek version survives, which in the editions of the Councils is read subjoined to the letter to Flavian in session 2 of the council of Chalcedon, about which we said more at the end of the admonition to letter 28. He subjoined the same testimonies again to this letter, and they are found written in Latin both in the printed editions and in the codices of Leo after this same letter to Leo Augustus; and moreover they are found inserted separately in the very ancient collections 3 and 5, and also in manuscript 58 of the Chapter of Verona. Among these testimonies, however, there are several which are by no means read in session 2 in the editions of the Councils. We believe this arose from the fact that the holy pontiff, when about to write to Leo Augustus, used greater diligence and sought out and added new testimonies. Further, it must be noted above all that of the Latin Fathers only three are cited, Hilary, Ambrose and Augustine, and that their testimonies were taken from the Latin sources themselves. The testimonies of the Greek Fathers are more numerous, and they were derived from those versions which had appeared in Leo's time. Thus the testimony of Athanasius is plainly from that translation of the letter to Epictetus in which the same letter is given entire in collection 5, chapter 52, and in the manuscripts of collection 12. The testimonies of Theophilus from two paschal letters plainly show Jerome's version: the testimony of Cyril from the letter to Nestorius is copied in the same words in the cited collection 5, chapter 56, and among Leo's letters in collection 12.