講道與書信 第 247 章 第 5/6 段

'We have likewise sent copies of the letters which the Gauls and the Italian bishops sent to us with concordant belief, that it may not be hidden how their faith too is one with ours.' These things indeed were worthy that they should at least lightly be indicated by the deacon Liberatus, who was writing the history of the Eutychianists. And just as he himself could by no means dissemble what had been done by the holy Leo for the abolishing of the Robber-council of Ephesus, for the restraining and condemning of the impiety of Dioscorus and Eutyches, and at length also unfolded the zeal which he had applied to the confirming of the catholic faith in the ecumenical Council of Chalcedon; so likewise it behoved him to describe in few words how great and of what sort were the things which the holy pontiff

had done, both for upholding the decrees of that same council, and for repairing those most grievous evils which, after the death of Marcian, through the nefarious machinations of the Eutychians, were dreadfully harassing Alexandria, Egypt, and the very Church of Constantinople also, with the ruin of the catholic faith. Now indeed let us grant pardon to Liberatus, the Carthaginian deacon, who, although in composing his Breviary on the Nestorian and Eutychian heresy he had at hand the acts of the synods and the letters of the holy Fathers, as he himself asserts in the preface of this little work, nevertheless did not preserve every diligence;

and in the cause of which we are treating he rather intended in his mind to relate that most grievous Alexandrian schism, than to indicate the zeal and most grievous endeavours of the apostolic Roman see to suppress and repair it. 11. For the rest, the things which the holy Leo had done, before and after the death of Proterius, for eluding the nefarious arts of the Alexandrians, and for bringing their Church to perfect tranquillity and peace, could by no means be hidden from Liberatus. For having received from Proterius letters announcing his ordination, he did not delay to write back to him, and beginning with the offices of congratulation, he says: 'The letters of your love have made me glad, which our brother and fellow-bishop Nestorius (Bede has Nectorius) adopted with pious affection.'

'For it behoved that from the prelate of the Alexandrian Church such writings should be sent to the apostolic see, as would show that they had learned this from the beginning, through the blessed Mark his disciple, by the magisterium of the most blessed apostle Peter: that the Egyptians believed what the Romans are known to have believed.' Then in many words the same letter defends his doctrine contained in the letter to Flavian against the calumnies of the heretics; which he desires to be read in frequent assembly, that he may make the Alexandrians more assured of his doctrine. And at length he commands that the testimonies of the Fathers which had been brought forward be publicly compared with his letter, by which it might be made plain that he condemned Nestorius and Eutyches alike.

That the Roman pontiff had always had a special care for the Alexandrian Church, we have already observed for him by various arguments in the course of these Exercises; a care which indeed was increased so much the more, the greater were the necessities by which it was pressed, and for which it behoved the Roman pontiff to provide. 1. By no words could we explain the zeal of the holy pontiff Leo in repairing the disaster of the Alexandrian Church, unless his manner of acting, employed after the death of Proterius, clearly disclosed it. But besides those points which have already been adduced by us in the preceding to show this truth, there yet remain others from which we excellently come to know that the holy

Leo spent the remaining days of his mortal life in eluding, checking, and wearing down all the attempts and machinations of the Eutychians; in defending the Synod of Chalcedon; in upholding the catholic faith, and in delivering from the hardships which they were suffering the orthodox bishops who had been oppressed, and compelled to go into exile by the faction of the seditious. We gather this chiefly from the third letter which he wrote to Leo the august, in which first he congratulates him that he had willed to guard the Council of Chalcedon; and, advancing to the obstinate and insidious contentions of the heretics, he demands that for the welfare and good of the Christian commonwealth and of the empire, he use his royal power to check and bridle them.

'Whose obstinate' (he says) 'and insidious contention will straightway be stilled, if it be bridled by the imperial power.' That the holy pontiff wished to counsel the emperor to drive the Alexandrian heretics into exile, and to punish them with other penalties, the words of the following letter written to the catholic bishops of Egypt indicate; who, after the ordination of Timothy Aelurus, were about to seek solace and protection. And the pontiff consoles them, exiles for the faith, and exhorts them patiently to bear adversities for the mystery of the incarnation, assuring himself: 'That by your patience' (he says) 'the devotion of many may be strengthened, and that with the glory of the venerable prince the Alexandrian Church, the heretics being driven out, may recover its ancient dignity.'

But the pontiff's will did not fully attain its effect — I know not whether on account of the excessive clemency of the emperor, or on account of the sloth of Anatolius — by which it came to pass that even among the clergy of Constantinople there were reckoned some who clung to the Alexandrian robbers, and had imbibed the Eutychian dogmas, with the greatest contempt and injury of the Chalcedonian decrees. And when the holy pontiff had learned of these things, seizing his pen, he first gives letters to Anatolius of Constantinople: he rouses his vigilance against the attempts of the heretics: he reproves him, that 'among your love some are said to be who connive at the depravity of the adversaries, and the vessels of wrath are mingled with the vessels of mercy.'

Then he urges the vigilance of Anatolius, that with fitting severity he restrain and investigate the heretics, so that 'where correction shall not have been able to profit, he spare not amputation.' And finally he recalls to his mind that command of the Gospel: that 'if our eye, or foot, or right hand offend us, it be taken away from the frame of the body; because it is better to lack these in the offices of the Church, than to go with them into eternal punishments.' He sought indeed more forcibly to urge Anatolius and to rouse his vigilance by another letter written to him a little after, whose definite time we cannot by any means determine, since it lacks the consular note. For it is among the Leonine letters as 126. 2. Then the holy

pontiff had recently received letters from Anatolius, in which he had set forth the lamentable state of the Alexandrian Church, though the pages of his letters could not unfold its atrocious crimes. But he affirms that he has learned of it with the greatest grief. But since the very great distance of the places and the onslaught of the Eutychians did not permit Leo to break their unbridled contumacy, since they feared no ecclesiastical laws and penalties at all; therefore he suggests to Anatolius that he cease not to supplicate the emperor, and by frequent suggestions to demand that as soon as possible the Alexandrian Church be freed from its invaders. He moreover affirms that consolation had been brought to him from a report received:

namely, that out of the whole number of bishops who preside over the dioceses of Egypt, only four, long since condemned, could be found, who joined themselves to Timothy both in the impiety of heresy and in the crime of robbery; who can by no means be admitted to demand a synod, even if they were arraigned for heretical error alone. He then testified that he had commended to the emperor the catholic bishops fugitive from Egypt, who had assembled at Constantinople, that they might obtain aid. At length he turns his pen upon Anatolius himself, and vehemently reproves him because he had not repressed the contumacy of Atticus, a presbyter of Constantinople, who had advanced to such insolence that he had dared to dispute in the church against the catholic faith and the Synod of Chalcedon.

'I am compelled' (he says) 'more vehemently to complain of your dissimulation.' And he threatens that he will act according to his authority, if Anatolius decline to cut off from communion that man and Andrew, his associate in impiety. 'Whom we, if it can be done, prefer to be amended rather than to perish.' But what proofs of amendment he prescribes, we understand from what follows. For Leo wills that, from that place whence Atticus disputed much against the catholic faith, he now openly appear as a preacher of that same faith, and pass over nothing of the Eutychian dogma which he does not, by the manifestation of his profession, condemn in the hearing of the Christian people.

That this kind of rebuke, however, gravely displeased Anatolius, as though he cared not for the affairs of his own Church, and dissembled those things which were happening in Constantinople to the ruin of the catholic faith, is made known from his complaints. Yet Leo received Anatolius's complaints with moderation; and he says to him that he had delegated those who should inquire whether the things which rumour was bruiting about concerning Atticus were true. 'Nor in anything' (he adds) 'have I wounded your honour, in committing to those to be examined the things which had been reported to me.'

At length, to exclude all suspicion by which Atticus was traduced in everyone's mouth as a man of wounded faith, he warns and commands that he, not by voice only but by his own subscription, publicly — which is to be recited in the church, with the Christian people present — condemn the Eutychian error, and profess that he adheres to the decrees of the Synod of Chalcedon, confirmed by the authority of the apostolic see. 3. This controversy, however, concerning the presbyter Atticus was not new. For the holy pontiff had already written to the emperor that in the Church of Constantinople there were found clergy of ambiguous faith, whom he asked to be expelled by Anatolius, and he reproved him that he negligently bore that some thought and spoke perversely concerning the faith.

Wherefore he thus addresses the emperor, rousing him to the justice of vengeance, lest the purity of the Church of Constantinople be darkened: 'In which are found certain clergy consonant with the meaning of the heretics, who within the very bowels of the catholics aid the heretics by their assertions; in dislodging whom, if my brother Anatolius, while he too kindly spares them, is found rather sluggish.' Hence therefore the pontiff asks the august one himself that he deign, for his own faith, to afford this medicine also to the Church, that such men be driven not only from the order of the clergy, but even from dwelling in the City, 'lest the holy people of God be any longer polluted by the contagion of perverse men.' The august one assented to Leo's wishes, and impelled Atticus to write to the Roman

pontiff, and by a meditated profession remove all suspicion concerning his doctrine. Atticus performed in appearance what the august one had commanded; he issued and sent to Rome a confession of faith, but very obscure, entangled by an ambiguity of words. When the holy pontiff had surveyed this profession of faith, and had carefully attended to the force and signification of the words, he judged it to be uncertain in such a way that 'it had confirmed rather than dissolved whatever' (he says) 'rumour had brought to us concerning him; whereas, if he had wished to prove his conscience sincere, he ought to have confessed not that Eutyches was odious to him, but that he reproved and condemned his perfidy.'

That, then, was the crafty manner of acting of Atticus: that he professed Eutyches to be odious to him, on whom he did not decline to pronounce anathema, yet without reproving his depraved dogmas. Wherefore the holy pontiff, wishing to elude his cunning, demanded that such a profession of faith be made by him, concerning which it might never be lawful to doubt. Otherwise he commanded that he himself and Andrew, his associate in the same crime, be removed from their order and from all clerical honour.

'But Atticus' (he says) 'and Andrew, whose names I indicated to my brother and fellow-bishop Anatolius by letters sent before, whom I have known to dissent from your laudable faith' (he writes to the presbyters, deacons, and clergy of the Church of Constantinople), 'and most openly to connive at the perfidy of the Eutychians — unless they first condemn the hostile dogmas by their own voice and subscription, and profess, in the church, with the Christian people present, that they will follow the faith confirmed by the Council of Chalcedon, let them be deprived of the honour of their order.' What outcome at length the cause of Atticus and Andrew obtained, we have been able to investigate neither from the holy Leo nor from any other monument of Christian affairs.

But it is by no means to be doubted that either they, all the recited conditions being observed, cast off their perfidy; or they were torn away from the society of the catholics, and deprived of clerical honour, since the most holy pontiff never receded from what was decided. 4. It now at length remains that we see what had been done concerning the Eutychians who were plundering the Alexandrian Church, since the holy pontiff had already, by the frequent suggestions of his letters, sought aid from the emperor, for driving out Timothy Aelurus, the plunderer and invader of that see; and for drawing in another bishop, who should profess the catholic faith. That Leo the august employed his aid and authority, that matters might be brought to a happy issue, is by no means to be doubted.

But he could not easily forestall all the snares of the Eutychians, who, for the settling of the affairs of the Church and the empire, were feigning that a new synod was necessary, whose hope the holy pontiff had frustrated by repeated letters; which being cut off, they at least demand a public colloquy with those whom the holy Leo should prefer. This last petition of the Eutychians indeed seemed fair to those who did not understand their crafty arts; especially since the petition was accompanied by rumours that these men sincerely wished to be taught the truth of the faith, and were not so tenacious of their opinions that they would refuse to amend them if it were demonstrated that they were false.

Through the courtiers, therefore, the Eutychians approached the emperor, that they might persuade him to this conference; and he, circumvented by the counsels of others, writes to the holy Leo, affirming that a synod was sought in vain, since the controversy had been ended by the Synod of Chalcedon, because perfection does not receive increase and addition, nor fulness any further accession. Which words the holy Leo transferred into his own letter, praising the emperor's opinion. With that humanity and promptness of mind which he was wont to use, the holy Leo straightway gave answer to the imperial letters, and, his soul's joy being manifested, he congratulates the emperor: 'When' (he says) 'I recognize the most excellent faith of your clemency to be increased....'

He proclaims the firmness of the faith to be built upon the most firm rock, from which he affirms that all varieties of opinions are to be kept far off, lest we be found ungrateful for the gifts of divine mercy, and, as though those things which we have attained were nothing, rather expect contrary things. For (he adds) 'to seek the things which have been laid open, to retract the things which have been perfected, and to tear apart the things which have been defined — what else is it than to render no thanks for graces obtained, and to extend toward the food of the forbidden tree the wicked appetites of deadly desire?' He moreover denies that he wishes to have communion with heretics, who glory in the cunning of their argumentations, that they may contradict the Gospel of Christ.

But, trusting in all things to the imperial piety, he promises that he will send certain legates, not that they may dispute with the Eutychians, but that they may instruct them, because 'concerning the things defined at Nicaea and at Chalcedon, as it pleased God, we dare to enter upon no discussion.' Toward the end of the letter he commends to him the tottering Alexandrian Church, that, the parricides being cast out of the city, he may at length vindicate it into liberty. The praised foregoing letter of the holy Leo was written in the waning month of March, while Leo and Majorian were holding the consulship, which falls in the year 458. But he did not at once send the legates whom he had promised to send. For from the subsequent letter, which he had written on the sixteenth day before the Kalends of

September of the same year, we understand that he had then only resolved to dispatch the bishops Domitian and Geminian, who, acting the part of the pontiff, should seek the peace of the Church, but not permit things well defined to be recalled to a new discussion. He adds that all disputations whatsoever are utterly to be avoided when the affairs of the faith are being treated, and he brings forward the example of Christ, who committed the doctrine of the Gospel, to be announced to all nations, not to orators and philosophers, but to fishermen and humble men. To which example the Eutychians were repugnant, striving to bring a dogma defined in synod into disputation.

Leo pressed upon the emperor at last that he might be willing to lend kindly ears to the suggestions of the legates whom he had sent — not to debate with the condemned, but only to plead for the firmness of the catholic faith — so that no human remission might be granted to the parricides of Alexandria, who stood in need of every indulgence, since He alone was to be entreated who is able worthily to punish such deeds and alone able by His unspeakable mercy to absolve them. But concerning the Eutychians who clung to the party of Timothy Aelurus, he orders that one ecclesiastical economy and another be observed: namely, he commands that penance not be denied to those who are corrected, but wills that the hardened remain under the synodal sentence. 5.

On the occasion of this legation he wrote another letter to the same emperor, which in Quesnel is numbered 134, but in the older editions is 97. This letter contains, as Quesnel also noted, a fuller and more careful treatment of the mystery of the Incarnation. It sets forth very many and most ample testimonies of the holy Fathers, by which the error of Eutyches, long since condemned, is shown. But at the end of this letter he recalls to the emperor's mind that nothing is more befitting the power of empire than that 'by your constitution you provide for the peace of the Churches of the Lord, and in all who are subject to you defend the gifts of God, nor in any way suffer that, through the envy of the devil, His ministers rage to the ruin of anyone.'

What Leo had long desired he at last obtained. For the emperor, having heard the suggestions of the papal legates, and turning over in his mind those things which the holy pontiff had written to him in one letter after another, wisely resolved no longer to endure the most grievous dissension of the Alexandrians, nor to allow the impious Timothy to retain that see which he had invaded; he joined his own power to the authority of the bishops, by commanding that the already-condemned Timothy should depart from the episcopate. But in what manner the matters fell out does not clearly appear from the records that survive. Quesnel, who never departed from his own system, imagines to himself that an assembly of bishops was held at Constantinople, and perhaps on the occasion of the death of Anatolius and of a new bishop of Constantinople.

A bishop was to be chosen; and that in the presence of the papal legates, the bishops Domitian and Geminian, all the letters of the metropolitans, with the subscriptions of the bishops, that had been sent to the emperor were read, and that Saint Leo's letter 134 to the same emperor, with the appended testimonies of the holy Fathers, was likewise recited, and that by the consent of those present and absent Timothy himself was condemned. Concerning this sentence against Timothy, says the same Quesnel, mention is made in the letter of Saint Leo to Gennadius the successor of Anatolius: 'constrained,' he says, 'by the sentences of all the priests of the Lord.' And again the holy pontiff, wishing to express the joy of the universal Church at the expulsion of the wicked Timothy from the see of Alexandria, writes to the emperor:

'Let your clemency know that all the Churches of God exult together and rejoice with praise to you, because the wicked parricide has been driven from the yoke of the Alexandrian Church.' I confess indeed that all the bishops reprobated the intrusion of Timothy Aelurus into the Alexandrian episcopate, that they shrank from him as a parricide and a heretic, and expressed their grief and the calamity of the Alexandrian Church in so many and so great letters recorded in the encyclical codex, of which we have already made mention. But what then? Is it a conjecture that a conciliar meeting was held at Constantinople, so that a canonical sentence might be passed? Or had not this canonical sentence already been pronounced by Saint Leo the Great;

who, by repeated efforts, even before he sent legates, had asked the emperor that the expulsion of the usurper Timothy be carried into execution, and that a new catholic bishop be chosen by the Alexandrians? Not, therefore, on the ground that all the bishops, both absent and those dwelling at Constantinople, desired and applauded the deposition of Timothy Aelurus, is it to be said that by their sentence he was rightfully condemned and expelled. That alone is what those much-praised words are meant to indicate: 'constrained by the sentences of all the priests of the Lord'; but, attending to the gravity of the crimes, all the bishops with the highest agreement were urging that the sentence of deposition against Timothy Aelurus, pronounced by Saint

the pontiff Leo, be without delay carried into execution. 6. Yet Timothy, expelled from the Alexandrian throne, did not cast away all hope, but flattered himself that he could again obtain it; and by his accustomed arts, having obtained pardon from the emperor, he came to Constantinople and, as though innocent, communicated with the catholics. Saint Leo, warned by Gennadius the new bishop of Constantinople, and having heard (he says) the report of our brothers and fellow-bishops Domitian and Geminian, who had come from the East to Rome, writes back to the same Gennadius, and complains greatly that he was communicating with the catholics, and proves by many arguments that he is not only unworthy of the episcopate, but is even to be shunned on account of the parricide and the sacrileges committed by him.

He therefore charges Gennadius to forbid him not only from the public assembly of the Church, but from the fellowship of the faithful. 'And therefore your charity, by that solicitude in which it shines, ought to strive and labor that no discourse, whether privately or publicly, be exchanged with so wicked a man, nor that, under the appearance of his correction, occasion be given for any gathering about him, lest he take full liberty to return — concerning whom the most Christian prince has already given judgment in his edicts.' Two months at last had passed, when behold, two legates from the Alexandrian Church, namely Daniel the presbyter and Timothy the deacon, with letters of the new bishop of Alexandria duly consecrated.

For the people and the clergy of Alexandria, by common consent and suffrage, duly and solemnly proclaimed Timothy Solophaciolus bishop, and then ordained him. At which thing Saint Leo, exulting with the highest joy, immediately on the same day wrote three letters: one to the new bishop elected and consecrated, congratulating him, and exhorting him that 'those who have to some degree resisted the truth you may earnestly win to be reconciled to God (he says) through the prayers of the Church.'

The second letter he wrote to the presbyters and deacons of the same Alexandrian Church, to whom likewise he gave congratulation concerning the most loyal affection by which, joined to one another, they had preserved the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, having removed from themselves that beast of discord which (as the prophetic psalm sings) was laying waste with singular ferocity the vine of the Lord's planting. He likewise stirs them up to procure the repentance of Christians of every order; namely, that, the Eutychian impiety above all being cast off, they may by an easier way be able to come to the application of the remedies of satisfaction. The third letter at last he wrote to ten bishops of Egypt, which differs from the preceding only in a few words;

with these he shares his gladness, that he was ordained bishop whom no canvassing drew on, whom no sedition impelled, and whom no iniquity incited; but, the holiness of his merits being set in the midst, he did not hesitate to prefer above all the one whom the whole body desired to preside over them. With these matters thus far described, those things wonderfully cohere which Liberatus the deacon handed down in his Breviarium. He, about to show in what manner peace was restored to the Alexandrian Church, relates that the emperor Leo wrote to Stila, the commander of Alexandria, that he should by all means drive Timothy from the episcopate, and should enthrone another by the decree of the people, one who would vindicate the synod (understand: of Chalcedon).

Then, speaking of the newly elected Alexandrian bishop, namely Timothy surnamed Solophaciolus, or Asbus, he says: 'This man lived indeed without sedition, quietly in the Alexandrian Church, all the time of Leo and all the time of Zeno, until Basiliscus seized the tyranny, while Zeno fled into Isauria.' But the catholics could expect no protection from Basiliscus, who long before had at least secretly patronized Timothy Aelurus and the Eutychians.

Therefore it is no wonder if, having tyrannically obtained the empire, he wrote to the whole world his decree, which he called the Encyclical, against the Council of Chalcedon, and caused Timothy Aelurus to return into his episcopate, so that Timothy the catholic lay hidden in the fort of Canopus and in a monastery. This new ruin of the catholic religion Saint Leo the pope did not see, since he had already departed from this light many years before. For Basiliscus, according to the tables of the most learned Dionysius Petavius, tyrannically obtained the summit of empire in the year 476, when Pope Simplicius had already begun to hold the helm of the Church, and Saint Leo had already ceased to live, in the year 461. 7. But what and how great labors for the Church and for Christ Saint

Leo bore, and what fierce battles he underwent against the enemies of the faith, the heresies being vanquished by his writings and words with the triumph of victory, is plainly made known from the things said in these our historical Exercitations. And it is easy to know or to grasp in mind with what prudence he governed the Church, with what constancy he defended the rights of his own apostolic see, ever guarding and preserving the majesty of his office, from which he could never recoil or be turned aside, because of the disturbances of dissenting Churches, the zeal of the Eastern bishops, and the machinations of the heretics. For undaunted he resisted the petitions of princes which were opposed to the Nicene canons and the laws of justice;