Sermons & Letters 186

Anatolius, bishop of Constantinople, the new Rome, having received the letter of St. Leo the Pope for the confirmation of the catholic faith against the madness of the heretics, gathered a council of all the bishops, archimandrites, presbyters, and deacons; and before the sight of all the letter of St. Leo the Pope was read, which the blessed Abundius presented in the presence of all:

With the concordant testimonies of the Roman and the Greek Fathers, Anatolius, bishop of Constantinople, with full devotion consented and subscribed to this letter of St. Leo the Pope, which contains the truth of the catholic faith — the testimonies of the Fathers decreed by the same Apostolic See likewise concurring — pronouncing anathema upon Eutyches and Nestorius, and upon their very doctrine together with their followers. The same did all the bishops, presbyters, archimandrites, and deacons who were present. Presently the holy Abundius, Asterius the bishop, Basil and Senator the presbyters said: Thanks be to Almighty God:

for we have come to know the professions of the reverend bishops, presbyters, archimandrites, deacons, and of the whole clergy, that they profess the right faith handed down by the Fathers, as their subscription inserted in the present acts declares. Therefore we too, since we have found that all demand and expect this, according to the assertion of the venerable man Eusebius, bishop of Dorylaeum, and the sentence of Flavian, bishop of holy memory, and the assent of Pope Leo, who sent us from Rome to make known to all the catholic faith, pronounce anathema upon Eutyches, and upon all who follow his perfidy and say that in Christ there were two natures before the incarnation, but after the incarnation only one nature:

whereas the catholic faith confesses that before the incarnation there was only one nature of the Word, and after the incarnation two — that is, of the Word and of the perfect man — remaining as natures in one person, in the unconfused propriety of each. We pronounce anathema also upon Nestorius, who long ago (as it is read) spread abroad an insane doctrine, saying that the Lord Jesus Christ was born of the Virgin Mary as man only, and not also as God; and likewise upon his followers who persist in this kind of perversity. On which account it is fitting, for the confirmation of the subscription, that the holy fraternity here present should likewise pronounce anathema upon the same men, and upon all who follow their teaching. 1. The Greek codices of the Council of Chalcedon of the Venetian library of St.

Mark, numbers 164 and 555, are more full than those which the Roman editors used. The lacunae in the Greek, marked with dots at the beginning of the fourth session, are supplied in these same codices, so that in the third lacuna noted in vol. IV of the Venetian edition of the Councils, p. 1357, the names of the bishops fill whole pages — names which are lacking in the ancient Latin version itself. The names of the bishops are supplied also at the beginning of the sixth session, which are lacking in the common Greek text and are read only in the ancient Latin translation; and for that reason those words 'and to the rest of the most holy and most religious bishops' are omitted, which, once the complete catalogue of bishops has been recited, have no place. In the fourteenth session, concerning Sabinian, bishop of the Perrhaeans, which in the

Venetian codices is the fifteenth, the published Greek text presents only certain names which are entirely lacking in the ancient version; but the same codices add more, and only by the leap of the ancient copyist were certain intermediate names omitted. The same thing happens in the session which in the printed editions is the sixteenth, but in these same manuscripts the seventeenth; for the names which are exhibited in the ancient translation, and are lacking in the common Greek, may be drawn from the praised codices, as also others which will become apparent to those who compare them. 2. But what is chiefly found among these is the sixteenth session, hitherto unknown, in which Leo's letter 93 was read.

This above all confirms that opinion, that not all the sessions were collected in the Greek codices of the Council of Chalcedon, and that from the fact that some session is missing in one or several Greek codices, it cannot be rejected. Thus the session concerning Domnus is not read in our Greek codices, nor in the Roman ones, and it was lacking also in that exemplar from which the ancient version came forth; but in the manuscript of Patricia Julia it was found by Rusticus. The session concerning Photius, bishop of Tyre, which was absent from the exemplars of the ancient translator and of Rusticus, is found in the Greek Roman and in our codices at the end of the other sessions, just as it was in the codex which Balsamon praises. So too the Greek codices, which are known, of the Council of Ephesus

lack several sessions, which, since they survive from the ancient version, were found in some ancient Greek codex. Why this happened is best explained by Baluze in his preface to the ancient version of the synod of Chalcedon, numbers 40 and 41. That this unedited session, which the Venetian codices alone have furnished, cannot be called into suspicion, is manifest — besides the authority of the manuscripts — from the fact that, according to the custom of all councils, the letters of the supreme pontiff to the council were always read. This session, therefore, which pertains most especially to our St. Leo, shall close the appendix. 3. But since mention has here fallen upon the usefulness of the Greek manuscripts of St.

Mark, we think another observation will be welcome, which we have drawn from another Greek codex of the same Venetian library, marked number 165. In this codex, which contains part of the Chalcedonian acts, the twenty-seven canons of the same council are written out, each canon having a number affixed — 1, 2, 3, etc., up to 27 — because these canons were established in one and the same session.

Then, after the last canon, a line is drawn which marks the end of the canons; and after a certain interval there are appended, without any numeral mark, three other additional canons, which are set forth only in the Greek collections of canons together with the rest, and together they all make up thirty canons, as they have been edited from the Greek collections and collectors of canons in vol. IV of the Councils, p. 1691. The first canon, which in the printed editions is the twenty-eighth, decrees the privileges of the see of Constantinople, and is expressed in the same words as in the printed editions, and is taken from the last session. But the two other canons are more full than in the printed editions. For the canon which in the printed editions is the twenty-ninth, excerpted from the session on behalf of Photius, metropolitan of Tyre, begins from the words of the same session, p.

1440, D., etc., up to the point where the petition of the judges, necessary for understanding the canon, is expressed. Then are subjoined the interlocutions of the legates of the Apostolic See and of Anatolius, out of which the printed canon was compacted. Finally the approbation of the synod from the same session, p. 1449, C; but the canon which in the printed editions is the thirtieth, badly digested from the fourth session, in our codex begins from the interlocution of the judges and senate, p. 1407, D., and, with the interlocution of Paschasinus, legate of the Apostolic See, subjoined, the sentence of the same judges and senate concludes it up to p. 1410, A. The same things concerning these canons are read in the Greek collection of canons, which is contained in the ancient codex XIX of the monks of St. Basil at Rome, p. 54.

From these it is known what these three additional canons are, and whence they come.