But this is wondrous, that after they had carried out the condemnation of these men, they should say that they were consulting the Roman Church and awaiting the sentence of Vigilius its prelate; whom, as far as it lay with them, they did not permit to judge what he had judged, having beforehand determined that if anyone does not anathematize Theodore of Mopsuestia, together with his dogmas, and the letter of the venerable Ibas, let him be anathema. But behold, now coming from his journey, he proclaimed what seemed good to him, and enjoined upon the author of this deed the correction of his disorderly transgression; and he foretold that, unless what had been wrongly done were quickly removed, he would even take vengeance, protesting and saying with the Apostle to Timothy:
«Lest perhaps, when I come, I should not find you such as I wish, and I should be found by you such as you do not wish» (II Cor. XII, 20). For this reason he asks also of your clemency, with the highest entreaties and the utmost humility, through his legates, as the various provinces have attested as he came, that you not suffer to stand what has been done. For he judged the crime of this very deed to be such that he reckoned it must be censured by that testimony of the teacher of the Gentiles, which, writing to his disciple Timothy, he speaks: «Guard the deposit, avoiding profane novelties of words, and the oppositions of knowledge falsely so called, which some professing have erred concerning the faith» (1 Tim. VI, 20).
Why, then, is it still asked whether what we deplore was done against the faith and the synod of Chalcedon, when he whose sentence was said to be awaited had judged that the profane novelties of words and the oppositions of knowledge falsely so called—which some professing have erred concerning the faith—were to be censured in the very authors of this deed?
Finally, blessed Datius, bishop of Milan, whom he declared he had seen here, returned to Sicily, and his other fellow-priests, and also Stephen, deacon of venerable memory, whom he had as his representative for the Roman Church, over which by the grace of God he presides, and approved through many sons of the Church—namely that for this cause he had suspended himself from communion with Mennas of venerable memory, bishop of this royal city, and had received under due satisfaction those who had communicated with him. Which he would not do, unless he judged, like the others, that what was done is contrary to the synod of Chalcedon.
But he showed that not only the holy and venerable men whom we have mentioned judged this together with him, when he did not pass over in silence that the whole Roman community too—at his departure as at his coming—and Africa as well, and Sardinia, although he did not pass through them, yet through his own counsellor assailed him with a public protestation, as did the provinces of Hellas and Illyricum through which he came, that he should in no wise acquiesce in the novelty which had been perpetrated.
Therefore this is not to be believed a civil cause, nor such as ought to be borne for the peace of the Churches, but one which is rightly judged to have been stirred up against the very state of the catholic faith by the underhand dealing of heretics—a cause for which the greatest part of the Christian world, as far as it could, assailed with a public protestation the first priest among the foremost Christians. And indeed the Roman community and Africa, before we had received the letter of the Roman bishop himself, we had already learned by no small token what they felt about the novelty of this deed.
For the venerable Pelagius and Anatolius, Roman deacons, exercising the solicitude due to their office and station on behalf of the Church of God, wrote to Ferrandus, deacon of Carthage, of laudable memory in Christ, that, after a diligent discussion of this cause had been held, together with the most reverend bishop of that same Church of Carthage, or with others whom he knew to have both zeal for the faith and a knowledge of the divine Scripture, they should reply, by way of counsel, what seemed fit to be observed in common by all.
In the very letter of consultation it is not passed over in silence that these things had been set in motion, by the introduction of the Acephali—whom, as we have said, we may more significantly call Semi-Eutychians—against the council of Chalcedon and the decrees of Pope Leo, through those who under a catholic name lend their zeal to the party of these men. But he too who had been consulted, writing back to those who questioned him, taught that the letter which the universal synod had approved was not to be reconsidered: since, if this were done, not only its own statutes but those of all the councils would be brought into doubt.