Letter 183: Part of the papal correspondence surrounding the Acacian Schism (484-519), the major breach between Rome and...

1. It is true that there are no spiritual joys so great that they can be wholly separated from tribulation. We rejoice over the unity of the church of Constantinople, which has been brought about with the Apostolic See; we are glad that daily the petitions of various bishops are offered to us in token of their submission. A small scandal occurred in the city of Ephesus, where the synod of Chalcedon was held in contempt and treated with injury. The most merciful emperor has been called upon to correct this, which he hopes to accomplish with God's help. Now, although after much labor and after many efforts, the church of Antioch has been provided with its order; a certain man named Paulus, a presbyter of the church of Constantinople, has been chosen, a man whom the testimony of the emperor has approved as most fitting for this honor. They wished and attempted to ordain him here [at Constantinople]. I, not unmindful of your command, opposed it, saying: Our lord the most blessed pope has commanded that he be ordained bishop there [at Antioch], according to ancient custom. This has prevailed, as you directed. Pray that God, through the prayers of the apostle Peter, may make that very city also receive its elected priest in peace. 2. And because these things are being accomplished, and in them the Catholic Church daily makes progress, the ancient plotter has stirred up monks from Scythia, who are from the household of Vitalian, the master of soldiers, adversaries of the prayers of all Christians, whose disturbance has generated no small delays for the unity of the churches, and especially concerning the ordination of the aforesaid church of Antioch. These monks, among whom is Leontius, who says that he is a kinsman of the master of soldiers, are hastening to Rome, hoping that certain articles will be confirmed by your beatitude. Among them, among other matters, is this: that they wish to say that one of the Trinity was crucified - which has neither been stated in the holy synods, nor in the letters of the holy pope Leo, nor in ecclesiastical custom. And if this is permitted to happen, it seems to me that dissensions or no small scandals will arise among the churches. This the emperor Anastasius greatly hastened to impose upon the Catholics; and this also the disciples of Eutyches proposed in the synod of Chalcedon. For whenever the fathers disputed concerning the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, they called the Son of God the Word, consubstantial with the Father, of one substance [homoousion] with the Father. But that expression [one of the Trinity was crucified] was for this reason never introduced into the synods by the fathers, because without doubt it could in no way be in agreement with the Catholic faith. 3. And as for the intent of this expression, if it be examined subtly - to how many heresies it lies open, and what evils through it could be introduced into ecclesiastical disputations - since it is a long matter, we shall be able to set it forth through the present bearers. Whence it seems to me sound and useful and conducive to the peace of the churches to give no other answer except this: The holy council of Chalcedon suffices, in which the other synods also are contained; the letters of pope Leo suffice, which the synod confirmed; we neither wish nor ought to introduce novelty into the Church. There is in their proposal something crafty, and they say even this: We have accepted the synod of Chalcedon; this we hope, that you will order it to be expounded for us, because it does not suffice as it is, in the way it has been set forth, against the Nestorian heresy - not as if they did not understand it, but as men endeavoring through subtlety to lead us to this, that the synod of Chalcedon be disputed. And if this be done, it is shown to be doubtful and weak, and it lies open to the error of all heretics. Among other things, if after the synod of Chalcedon, if after the letters of pope Leo, if after the petitions which the bishops have given and do give, and through which they have given satisfaction to the Apostolic See, something new be again added, so it seems to me, that whatever has been done is destroyed. Given on the third day before the Kalends of June [30 May], at Constantinople.

seu 30 Mai Suggestio Dioscori diaconi ad Hormisdam papam. Quotidie a diversis episcopis libeUos satisfactionis offerri; ad scandalum in Epkf- sina dvitate removendum imperatorem invocatum; Antiochiae Patdum quemdam episcopum ordinatum {n. 1). Novos tumultus excitari a Scythis monachis unum de Trinitnte crucifixum dici volentibus; in qua sententia virus haereticum latere explicat (n. 2^/3). ]. Verum est, nulla esse gaudia magnopere spiritualia, a qui- bus ex toto tribuUitio possit esse separata. Gaudemus de unitate Constantinopolitanae ecclesiae, quae facta est cum sede apostoUca: laetamur quotidie diversorum episcoporum libellos nobis satisfadio- nis oflFerri. Modicum in Ephesina clvitate contigit scandalum, ulri conterapta est et injuriata synodus Calchedonensis. Est invocatus clementissimus imperator hoc corrigere, quod et sperat cum Dei ad- jutorio fieri. Nuuc, etsi post labores, etsi post intentiones plures, Antiochena ecclesia ordinata est; electus est quidam Pauhis*) nomine presbyter Constantinopolitanae ecclesiae, quem huic honori aptisgi- 75 ') Qui nimiruiu rocipiendis peregrinis, ut Theophanes pag. 141 (e^. Bom. •255) auctor est, in Plubuloruni donio praepositus erat. Jastini auctoritate e!e- ctus m opistola sequenti n. 2 narratur, quum prius Severus, qni hanc in seclfiB invasorat, Antiochia fugiaset. Hunc quippe, ut Evagrius IV, 4 tradit, imperft* tor comprehendi, immo ot poscente Vitaliano ahscissione linguae plecti JDtsertt* ojusquo rei oxsecutionem demandarat Irenaoo, qui tum comes Orientis Antio- chiao residobat. EPISTOLAE 74. 75. 869 num imperatoris testimouio comprobatum est. Volueruut et ten- a. 519. averuut hic^) eum ordinare. Ego jussionis vestrae non immemor lontradixi, dicens: Jussit dominus noster beatissimus papa secundum mtiquam consxietuditiem ibi eum episcopum ordinari. Hoc obtinuit, |uod praecepistis. Orate, ut Deus precibus apostoli Petri et ipsam livitatem cum pace faciat electum suscipere sacerdotem. 2. Et quia ista aguntur et in his quotidie proficit Ecclesia ^tholica^ insidiator antiquus suscitavit monachos de Scythia, qui de lomo magistri militum Vitaliani sunt, omliium Christianorum votis idversarios, quorum inquietudo non parvas moras generavit unitati jcclesiarum et magnopere de praedictae ecclesiae Antiochenae ordi- latione. Isti monachi, inter quos est Leontius, qui se dicit esse larentem^) magistri militum, Romam festinant, sperantes aliquanta lapitula a beatitudine vestra confirmari. Est in ipsis inter cetera, ibi volimt dicere unum de Trinitate crucifixum: quod est nec in anctis synodis dictum nec in epistolis sancti papae Loonis nec in onsuetudine ecclesiastica. Quod si permittitur fieri, mihi videtur lissensiones aut scandala non mediocria nasci inter ecclesias. Istud Inastasius^) imperator magnopere catholicis imponere festinavit: Ivagrium HI, 14 legere est: Trinitas semper mansit Trinitas^ etiam dum unus ex 'rinitate Dcus Verbum incarnatus cst {■aal aaQncjd^ivtog xov ivog t^g tgiddog ^sov Aoyov), vel ut latine reddidit Liberatus c. 18: Mansit enim Trinitas, et in- imato uno de Trinitate Deo Verho. Quae quidem verba praedicti monaclii in pistola ad Afros cap. 4 exscribere atfectant in hunc modum: Trinitas etiam post icarnationis mysterium Trinitas mansit: quia idem Deus Verhum ctiam cum propria jrne unus est ex Trinilate. Vel propter hanc igitur sententiae hujus cum heno- co affinitatem ab ea admittenda Dioscorum primum abhorruisse, minime mirum it. Sed et eadem favebat impietati Petri FuUonirf, qui quum Antiochiam in- ressus Trisagio addidisset Rcx Christe qui pro nohis crucifixus cs^ subinde Theo- hane pag. 115 (ed. Bonn. 207) teste, sublato rex C/triste, raorteni Trinitati ad- ;ripsit. Et quidem Anastasius henotici primum assertor ad suscipiendum Ful- ►nifl additameutum non sine gravi populi scandalo paulatim inductus est. Ut lim memoriae prodidit Evagrius III, 44, quum imperator Anastasius in hymno 'risagio has voces adjicere voluissct „qui crucifixus es pro nobis'% gravissima sedi- 9 exorta est, perinde quasi Christiana religio everteretur. Deterrebat praeterea iosconmi novitas vocum eo tempore, quo haeretici, ut fidem everterent Cal- ledoueusem, nova excogitarc non desistebaut. His etiam suffragabantur illi a. 519. istud et Eutychetis discipuli^) in synodo Calchedonensi proposueruut. Quia quotiescunque patres de Dei Filio Domino nostro Jesu Christo disputaverunt, Filium Dei Verbum, consubstantialem Patri, homo- usion Patri dixenmt. Iste autem sermo ideo nunquam est in syno- dis a patribus introductus, quia procul dubio catholicae fideiminime poterat convenire. 3. Cujus sermonis si subtiliter attendatur intentio, ad quantas haereses pateat et quae mahi per eum possint disputationibus eccle- siasticis introduci, quoniam longimi est, per praesentes^) insinuare poterimus. Unde sanum mihi videtur et utile et ad pacem ecclesia- rum conveniens, nihil aliud responsum dare nisi: Sufftcit sanctum Calchedonense concilitm, in quo ct aliae synodi continentur; sufficiml cpistolae papae Lconis, quas synodus confirmavit; novitatem in Ecdt- siam introducere nec volumus nec debemus, Est in propositione eorum callida, et haec dicere: Nos synodum Calchedonensem suscepimus; hoc speramus, ut jubeatis nobis eam exponere, quia non sufftcit sic, qm- modo est exposita, contra haeresim Nestorianam: non^) quasi non in- telligentes, nisi conantes per subtilitatem ad hoc nos adducere, ut disputetur de synodo Calchedonensi. Quod si factum fuerit, dubi» et infirma ostcnditur, et haereticorum omnium patuit errori. Inter iilia si post synodum Calchedonensem , si post epistolas papae Leo- nis, si post UbeUos, quos dederunt et dant episcopi, et per ipsos satisfecerunt sedi apostolicae, iteinmi aliquid novum addatur, sic mODachi, quatenus iiclcm Calchedonc expositam contra NeBtorianam haeresim non Bufficcrc jactitabant. Quamquam nec neprandus cst Dioscorua prae novitatb intompcstivae horroro malum exaggcnisse , quum scntcntiam praedictam calho- licac fidei minimo convenire posse asserit. Non enim ei repugnat, ChristoiiL, qui crucifixus cst, unum cx Trinitatc praedicare. Yerum huc spectat Ferrandi diaconi in ex)istola ad Anatolium, quam de duabus in Ckristo naiuris, et fvW uuus de Trinitate natus passusque dici possit inscripsit, cap. 16 pmdenB monitnm: \eo movere quemquam dehet, si vere hanc sententiam (scil. unus de TWniftfltf etc.\ sicut a quibusdam dicitur, Eutychetis protulit apocrisarius in Calchedonensi caneilh. Saepe etiam per ignorantes loquitur veritas. Patres autem in concHio posiH, loquentist non verba consideranles y nec illum propter sententiam caihoKcam, mee { sententiam catholicis tunc inserere definitionibus voluerunt, ne mderentur initUeetm loquentis (supple magis) approbasse, quam veiba. Tum subdit, se aHqwmdo In- plicem intellexisse causam , quae dubitare quosdam de hac senteniia cogerei (oonf. oet in loco ipso). ') Videlicct, ut mox a Ferrando audivimus, ejus apocrisiarius , nisi foite hic notcntur Eutychetis discipuli Carosus et Dorotheus, qoi in Calchedoneni synodo act. 4 (Hard. II, 430) unum de Trinitate esse passum profitentur. EPISTOLAE 75. 76. 871 milii videtur, quia quidquid factum est destruitur. Data 111 Caleu- a. ni9. das Junias^) Constantiuopoli.