Latin original · 2 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss · long chapter, split into parts; this part covers 232:78–232:79 (79 verses in all)
232:78
Si judices crebris non urgeant interrogationibus reos, vel de criminibus postulatos, minime sufficienter in veritatis cognitionem venire possunt, nec crimina rite et canonice probari aut contestari, quemadmodum in fidei inquisitionibus necessarium esse semper judicatum fuit. Igitur labat etiam et cadit illud Quesnellianum assertum, qnod in concilii Cunstantinopolitani Actis nihil prorsus occurreret quod rite et canonice non esset gestum. Cum unum offendamus qnod ab apostolica sede fuit proscriptum, et intelligamus judices ipsos, et Flavianum ipsum merito fuisse reprehensum, cujus causa novum crat inStituendum judicium, juxta regulas ab eodem S.
If judges do not press the accused, or those charged with crimes, with frequent interrogations, they can by no means sufficiently come to the knowledge of the truth, nor can crimes be duly and canonically proved or attested, as in inquiries concerning the faith it has always been judged necessary. Therefore that Quesnellian assertion also totters and falls, namely that in the Acts of the Council of Constantinople nothing at all occurred that was not done duly and canonically. Since we find one thing that was proscribed by the Apostolic See, and understand that the judges themselves, and Flavian himself, were deservedly reproved, for whose cause a new judgment had to be instituted according to the rules prescribed by the same St. Leo...
倘若審判者不以頻繁的訊問催逼被告或被控犯罪之人，他們斷不能充分達至真理的認識，罪行也不能依法依教規適當地被證實或作證，正如在關乎信德的查究中，向來被判定為必要的那樣。因此，克內爾那一斷言也站不住腳、隨之崩塌，即：在君士坦丁堡會議的紀錄中，全然沒有任何不依法不合教規而行之事。既然我們找到了一件被使徒座所禁絕之事，並明白那些審判者本身、以及弗拉維安本人，都理當受到責備，為此事必須依照同一位聖良所定的規則另立新的審判……
232:79
Leone in utraque epistola mox laudatis præscriptas. Jam Vero de Eutychetisappellatione sermonem instituamus.
...as prescribed by Leo in both letters just now praised. Now indeed let us take up discourse concerning the appeal of Eutyches.
……即良在方才所讚的兩封信中所規定的。如今我們且就歐迪克斯的上訴展開論述。