Epistolae

The Works of Saint Damasus. Letters. First Letter. A Copy of the Synod Held at Rome of Ninety-Three Bishops, from the Imperial Rescript. Note. Sarazanius received this from Theodoret and rendered it in his own translation; I, however, use the Latin edition of Holstenius, as if it were the original pride of Damasus, as I said in chapter 5. But why it is inscribed to the Illyrians in Sozomen and Theodoret, while in Holstenius it is addressed to the bishops established throughout the East, see chapter 7. Moreover, the manuscript codex from which it was taken, transferred from Bobbio to the Vatican Library by Scipione, Cardinal of Saint Susanna, the librarian, had been examined long before Holstenius, and Father Ludovicus Capellas promised to publish it in his later dissertation on the Succession of Roman Bishops, chapter 5; it also exists in the Vallicellian codex 23, page 107, copied from an old Tridentine manuscript, that is, a book brought to that city at the time of the council. Letter. Damasus, Valerianus, Vitalianus, Aufidius, Pacianus, Victor, Priscus, Innocentius, Abundius, Theodulus, and the others who assembled in the city of Rome to hear the case of Auxentius and to set forth the faith, to the Catholic Bishops established throughout the East, greeting in the Lord. We indeed trust that Your Holiness, founded on the instruction of the Apostles, holds that faith and imparts it to the people, which in no way dissents from the institutions of the forefathers. For it is not fitting for priests, whose part it is to instruct others, to think otherwise concerning God.

But from the report of the Gallic and Venetian brothers we have learned that some, not from zeal for heresy—for such a great evil cannot fall upon God's bishops—but from ignorance or from a certain simplicity, agitated by twisted interpretations, do not sufficiently discern which opinion of our fathers ought rather to be held, when diverse counsels are thrust into their ears. Finally, they prescribe that Auxentius of Milan was condemned for this very reason. It is therefore fitting that all teachers of the law throughout the Roman world should think alike about the law, and not violate the Lord's faith with diverse teachings. For when the poison of heretics, as it has now begun to creep in again, and especially the blasphemy of the Arians began to sprout, our elders, 318 bishops, and the most holy bishops of the city of Rome sent from the city, having completed the council at Nicaea, established this wall against diabolical arms, and with this antidote repelled deadly potions: that it is necessary to believe the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit to be of one Deity, one form, one substance, judging anyone who thinks otherwise to be alien to our fellowship. This salutary definition some later attempted to pervert and violate with other treatises.

But even at the very beginning, by those same persons who were being compelled to reconsider this matter at Ariminum, it has been corrected up to this point, so that they confessed that it had been surreptitiously imposed upon them by another disputation, because they had not understood that the fathers' judgment at Nicaea had been formed against the contrary. For no prejudice could arise from the number of those who assembled at Ariminum, since it is established that neither the Roman bishop, whose opinion ought to have been sought before all others, nor Vincentius, who preserved the priesthood blameless for so many years, nor others of this kind gave any consent to such decrees; especially since, as we have said, those same persons who seemed to have yielded under pressure declared, with better counsel, that they were displeased with themselves. Hence your sincerity perceives that this alone is the faith, which was established at Nicaea by the authority of the Apostles, and must be retained with perpetual firmness; with this faith both the Easterners who recognize themselves as Catholics and the Westerners rejoice; and we believe that it cannot be long before those who think otherwise, although by this very effort they may be excluded from our communion, and their peoples, freed from errors, may breathe again. For how will they be able to correct the errors of the people, if error has taken hold of them? Let the judgment of your charity, therefore, be in harmony with all the priests of God; in which judgment, as we believe you are fixed and confirmed, so also we ought to think rightly with you, and to approve this by the reciprocal letters of your Holiness.

I, Sabinus, deacon of Milan, as legate, have given this from the authentic copy. LETTERS II, FRAGMENTS. OR, AN EXPOSITION OF THE FAITH ISSUED IN THE ROMAN SYNOD UNDER POPE DAMASUS AND SENT TO THE EAST. NOTE. These two fragments pertain to other synods under Damasus, as I have already said. Coustant also saw this, as did the distinguished Father Joseph Mansi, Supplement to the Councils, vol. I, p. 234; but we do not share the same method of reckoning the time of those synods. For he considers the one I judge to be the very first, and which I think was gathered in the year 369, to have been collected in the year 370, in agreement with Pagius. Then, as for the one I consider twofold, with one in the year 374 and the other in the following year, based on this twofold fragment, he considers it a single synod, and says that these very fragments pertain to it, gathered in the year 376. But although the authority of that most learned man is of the greatest weight with me, as it ought to be, I have nevertheless judged that nothing among what I had already written should be changed. For since the Easterners, to whom the letters from those Roman councils had already been brought, could not convene their own synods during those harsh and turbulent times under Valens, as soon as it was permitted after his death, they gathered together, namely in the year 379, and read all those synodical letters in a crowded assembly, embraced the dogmas defined in them, and inserted into the acts of that council those things excerpted from them which seemed necessary (see ch. 14); and this is the reason why I have not thought fit to separate these same fragments, even though they were written at different times.

FRAGMENT ONE. LIKEWISE FROM THE DECREE. I. By that grace, brothers, that Jericho (??), which is a figure of worldly pleasures, fell with a great shout and does not rise again; because we all with one voice declare the divinity to be of one power, one majesty, one divinity, one ousia: so that we assert there are three persons with inseparable power, yet they do not return into themselves or diminish, as many blaspheme, but always remain; and there are no certain degrees of power or separate times of origin; nor is it a process of emanation, so that you remove generation from him; nor is he imperfect, so that the nature of the Father or the fullness of divinity was lacking for his person; nor is the Son unlike in work, nor unlike in power, nor unlike in all respects; nor does he subsist from elsewhere, but is born from God, nor is he false from the true God, but is generated as true God from true God, true light from true light; let him not be thought diminished or different: that the only-begotten has the splendor of eternal light because, by the order of nature, neither is there light without splendor, nor can splendor exist without light; also the image of the Father, so that he who has seen him has also seen the Father. The same, for the sake of our redemption, proceeded from the Virgin; so that a perfect man would be born for the perfect man who had sinned. Therefore, brothers, let us assert that the Son of God also took on a perfect man, and let us confess the Holy Spirit, uncreated and of one majesty, one ousia, one power with God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ.

For the one who was sent out to create is not worthy of injury to the creature, as the holy prophet established, saying: "Send forth your Spirit, and they will be created." Then another likewise set down: "The divine Spirit who made me," who is connected in operation and in the remission of sins. This, most beloved brothers, is our faith; whoever follows it is a participant with us. A discolored body deforms its members. We give communion to those who approve our sentence or that one in all things. Far be it that pure faith be stitched together with various colors. Moreover, we warn that care must be taken lest the canonical order be neglected in the ordinations of priests or clerics, or that communion be easily granted to its transgressors, thereby providing incentives for sinning in other matters. These things, therefore, were to be communicated from our judgment. As for the rest, which pertains to removing the injuries to your belovedness, neither our brother Dorotheus the presbyter explains, omitting everything vividly, nor have our efforts, as he himself is witness, been lacking.

FRAGMENT II. LIKEWISE FROM PART OF A DECREE. We are certainly amazed that some among our number are said, although they seem to have a pious understanding concerning the Trinity, yet, being ignorant of the powers and the Scriptures of the sacrament of our salvation, they do not think rightly. For they assert that our Lord and Savior, from the Virgin Mary, assumed an imperfect man, that is, one without sense. Alas! How great will be their proximity to the Arians in such a view! They declare an imperfect divinity in the Son of God; these falsely claim an imperfect humanity in the Son of Man. But if an imperfect man was indeed assumed, then the gift of God is imperfect, our salvation is imperfect; because the whole man is not saved. And where will that saying of the Lord be, "The Son of Man came to save what had wholly perished"? that is, in soul and in body, in sense and in the entire substance of his nature. If, therefore, the whole man had perished, it was necessary that what had perished be saved. But if he was saved without sense, then, contrary to the faith of the Gospel, it will be found that not everything which had perished was saved: since in another place the Savior himself says, "Be angry with me, because I have made the whole man whole." What of the fact that the sum of the principal offense itself and of the entire perdition consists in the sense of man? For if the sense of man for choosing good and evil had not perished first, he would not die.

How, then, could it be presumed that he who is known to have sinned before all others should least of all have been saved in the end? But we, who know ourselves to be saved whole and perfect, according to the profession of the Catholic Church, profess that a perfect God assumed a perfect man. Therefore, take care that the understanding of sound doctrine may also save the senses of those who do not yet believe that sense has been saved. LIKEWISE FROM PART OF A DECREE. We have no capacity to provide you, by our effort, even a small relief, although, most blessed ones, you may derive great solace from this, if, knowing the integrity of our faith, you glory in agreeing in one sense; and you presume, sufficiently and abundantly, as is fitting, that we are concerned for the members. For, as we retain the inviolable faith of the Council of Nicaea in all things, without pretense of words or corrupted sense, we in no way separate the Holy Spirit; but we worship him as perfect in all things—power, honor, majesty, divinity—together with the Father and the Son. And thus we also confess that the fullness of the Word of God, not a word of utterance but begotten, not remaining in the Father so as not to exist, but subsisting from eternity to eternity, perfect, that is, assumed a whole man and saved him.

Here ends this letter, or exposition of the Roman synod held under Pope Damasus, and transmitted to the East; in which the whole Eastern Church, having held a synod at Antioch, believing with harmonious faith, and all thus consenting to the same above-set-forth faith, each confirms by his own subscription. Meletius, bishop of Antioch, I consent to all things written above, so believing and thinking: and if anyone thinks otherwise, let him be anathema. Eusebius, bishop of Samosata, I consent to all things written above, so believing and thinking: and if anyone thinks otherwise, let him be anathema. Pelagius, bishop of Laodicea, I consent to all things written above, so thinking and believing: and if anyone thinks otherwise, let him be anathema. Zeno, bishop of Tyre, as above I believe and have subscribed. Eulogius, bishop of Edessa, likewise I believe and have subscribed. Bematius, from the city of Mallus, likewise I believe and have subscribed.

Diodorus, bishop of Tarsus, as above, have also subscribed. Similarly, the other 146 Eastern bishops subscribed, whose subscription is held today in the authentic copy in the archives of the Roman Church. Here ends the Roman and Antiochene synod. LETTER III. POPE DAMASUS OF THE CITY OF ROME TO PAULINUS, BISHOP OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH. NOTE. Why I have separated this letter from the other letter of Damasus to Paulinus, contrary to what Holstenius, Quesnellus, and Constantius did, I have already stated, and I shall not say again. Holstenius, however, determined nothing on this matter, but published it as he saw it described in his copy: Quesnellus, on the other hand, regarded the Holstenian copy, although disordered and confused, as authoritative, and was the first to judge that both should be printed together as one joined to the other. But besides the authority of the Holstenian copy and his own codex, he adduces this as the strongest reason: that since Damasus, when writing to Paulinus, sends a creed sent by himself, he must have indicated a creed entirely different from that which is contained in the same letter, that is, a creed separate from that same letter: but what other creed can we understand in this place, besides that which is immediately appended to the same letter?

But how slight this reasoning is, the reading of the letter itself openly proves: for since it expresses those dogmas by which it commands Vitalis and his flock to subscribe, and accordingly, since it lacks nothing for the complete overthrow of the Apollinarian heresy, which was then the only matter at issue, there is also no need for us to say that another formula was appended to it, which was not at all necessary and, moreover, seemed entirely foreign to that cause. I shall seek no other witness for this opinion than Damasus himself, who, after expressing in that same letter all the conditions by which Vitalis and others could be received into communion, finally says that those who subscribed to this letter without any ambiguity would be received: for from this it is most clearly evident, unless I am mistaken, that no other conditions were either appended by him or desired, beyond those which he had set forth in that same letter. I have also consulted, for this question, manuscript codices, and two that are older than the rest: one of the Dionysian collection, granted by the then most religious and learned abbot, now cardinal penitentiary of the Holy Roman Church, Besozzio, from the monastery of Santa Croce in the Sessorian field, marked no. 225; the other in the Vallicellana, written in the age of Nicholas I, marked A. V.

From these I have discovered two things: first, that this letter concerning Vitalis is entirely solitary, separated, that is, from the other, which is called Damasus's confession: for the earlier codex contains it as the only one among all Damasus's letters, which is then followed by Siricius's decretal to Himerius; the Vallicellanus codex, however, first reports the same anathematisms under this title: "Confession of the Catholic Faith, which Pope Damasus sent to Paulinus, Bishop of Antioch"; then, in another and later place, it recites this letter, which concerns Vitalis, under this inscription: "Here begins the rescript of Pope Damasus to the request of Jerome to Paulinus, Bishop," and other similar codices could be produced. The second thing I have observed from the same is that each codex is more complete than the printed books, namely with that entire period in which the "Dominican man," whom Rufinus mentions, is expressed, and which is missing in the editions. Therefore, I have followed these codices, and also Isidore Mercator, Baronius, and Sarazanius, and I have published this letter separated from that which is called Damasus's confession or rule of faith. But other reasons have also impelled me to this, which, since I have brought them forth in chapters 14 and 15, where there was occasion to treat of the occasion and time of their writing, I will not repeat here, except to add some things in the notes.

LETTER. To the Most Beloved Brother Paulinus, Damasus. Through my son Vitalis I had sent writings to you, leaving everything to your will and judgment; and through the presbyter Petronius I had briefly indicated that I was, at the moment of his departure, somewhat disturbed. Lest, therefore, either a scruple remain with you, and those perhaps wishing to be joined to the Church should have their caution deferred from being approved, we have sent the creed—not so much to you, who share in the communion of the same faith, as to those who, by subscribing to it, may wish to be joined to you, that is, to us through you, most beloved brother. Wherefore, if my aforementioned son Vitalis and those who are with him wish to be aggregated to you, they must first subscribe to that exposition of the faith which was confirmed at Nicaea by the pious will of the fathers. Then, since no one can apply medicine to future wounds, that heresy which is said to have later sprouted in the East must be rooted out—that is, it must be confessed that Wisdom itself, the Word, the Son of God, assumed a human body, a soul, a mind—that is, the whole Adam, and, to speak more explicitly, the whole of our old man without sin. For just as, when confessing that He assumed a human body, we do not immediately attribute to Him also the human passions of vices, so too, when saying that He assumed both a human soul and a mind, we do not immediately say that He was subject to the sin of human thoughts.

If anyone says that the Word, according to human understanding, was changed in the Lord's flesh, the Catholic Church anathematizes him; and also those who confess two Sons in the Savior, that is, one before the Incarnation and another after the assumption of flesh from the Virgin, and do not confess the same Son of God both before and after. Whoever wishes to take exception to this letter, yet so that he has previously subscribed to the ecclesiastical canons, which you know very well, and to the Nicene faith, you ought to receive him without any hesitation. Not that these things which we write could not be proposed by you for the reception of converts; but that our agreement gives you a free example in receiving. LETTER IV. CONFESSION OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH WHICH POPE DAMASUS SENT TO PAULINUS, BISHOP OF ANTIOCH. NOTE. This is the other letter of Damasus from those which exist addressed to Paulinus of Antioch, the reasons for separating which from the former I have already given. However, it pleases me to note this again. Theodoret, namely, having rendered it into Greek, attached it to his History, and having separated it from the former, related it in Book V, chapter 11. But why did he not recite it in full, if Damasus had joined the two so that one was an inseparable part of the other? Or perhaps he thought that nothing which was written concerning the name of Vitalis could pertain to the history of the Church? Who would even suspect this? Or rather, did he think it necessary to spare this man? But he by no means conceals that man's heresy in Book V, chapter 4.

Therefore, it remains that it came to him already mutilated and torn apart. But to what end this laceration and corruption of the entire letter, especially in such proximity of time and abundance of copies? Let it therefore be established and certain that there were not one sect divided into two parts, but two letters of Damasus to Paulinus, separate from each other. Moreover, we gather that this particular letter, with which we are dealing, was perpetually celebrated and received with the highest acclaim from the writers who mention it and hold it as law—namely, Celestine and Vigilius, Ambrose, the ancient author of the Sermon on the Seasons 429, once attributed to Augustine, now relegated to the appendix, volume V, Sermon 233, where several of its anathemas are recited; Arnobius the Younger, Isidore in the Code of Canons of the Spanish Church, Paulinus of Aquileia, the Council of Troyes, and others thereafter. From the Greek writers, to pass over more recent ones, besides Theodoret, the Council of Constantinople, as I indeed think, and Nazianzus. Since, therefore, it was often transcribed for that reason, it could not but happen that the reading of the manuscripts now varies, whether by chance or rashly, and according to each one's judgment; of which, besides what I have observed, Peter Constantius brought forth not one example from the codices that he inspected with his exquisite diligence.

I have therefore followed its exemplar in this edition, both because it more closely approaches the Greek text transmitted to us by Theodoret, and also the Quesnellian text, which two streams are, in my judgment, the nearest to the source of all, and for that reason easily purer: for if anyone wishes to consider and compare all the manuscript codices—since their number is immense—he must either endure a laborious and unnecessary task, or be uncertain in his judgment as to which to choose, although I have sometimes used the Vallicellanus codex, because it was at hand. CONFESSION OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH After the Council of Nicaea, a council was gathered in the city of Rome by the Catholic bishops, and they added concerning the Holy Spirit. And because afterwards this error grew strong, that some with sacrilegious mouth dared to say that the Holy Spirit was made through the Son. I. We anathematize those who do not proclaim with full freedom that [the Holy Spirit] is of one power and one substance with the Father and the Son.

II. We also anathematize those who follow the error of Sabellius, asserting that the Father is the same as the Son. III. We anathematize Arius and Eunomius, who with equal impiety, though in different language, assert that the Son and the Holy Spirit are creatures. IV. We anathematize the Macedonians, who, springing from the stock of Arius, changed not their perfidy but their name. V. We anathematize Photinus, who, reviving the heresy of Ebion, confesses the Lord Jesus Christ only from Mary. VI. We anathematize those who assert two Sons, one before the ages and another after the assumption of flesh from the Virgin. VII. We anathematize those who, instead of a rational and intelligent human soul, say that the Word of God was present in human flesh, whereas the Son Himself is the Word of God, and He was not in His own body in place of a rational and intelligent soul, but He assumed and saved our soul, that is, an intelligent soul without sin.

VIII. We anathematize those who contend that the Word, the Son of God, is subject to extension or contraction, and is separated from the Father, insubstantial, and destined to have an end. IX. We also hold those who have migrated from one church to another as alien from our communion for as long as they have not returned to the cities in which they were first established. But if another has been ordained in the place of a living person who has migrated, let him who deserted his own city be deprived of the dignity of the priesthood until his successor rests in peace. X. If anyone does not say that the Son and the Holy Spirit always exist, let him be anathema. XI. If anyone does not say that the Son was born from the Father, that is, from the divine substance of the Father himself, let him be anathema. XII. If anyone does not say that the Word of the Lord, the Son of God, is God, just as his Father is God, and that he is all-powerful, all-knowing, and equal to the Father, let him be anathema. XIII. If anyone says that the Son of God, while he was on earth in the flesh, was not in the heavens with the Father, let him be anathema.

XIV. If anyone says that in the passion of the cross the Son of God, God, suffered pain, and not the flesh with the soul, which he put on as the form of a servant, which he took for himself, as Scripture says, let him be anathema. XV. If anyone does not say that in the flesh which he assumed, he sits at the right hand of the Father, in which he will come to judge the living and the dead, let him be anathema. XVI. If anyone does not say that the Holy Spirit is from the Father truly and properly, as the Son is from the divine substance, and is true God, let him be anathema. XVII. If anyone does not say that the Holy Spirit can do all things, knows all things, and is everywhere, as the Son and the Father are, let him be anathema. XVIII. If anyone says that the Holy Spirit is a creature, or was made through the Son, let him be anathema. XIX. If anyone does not say that the Father made all things through the Son and the Holy Spirit, that is, visible and invisible, let him be anathema. XX. If anyone does not say that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit have one divinity, power, majesty, might, one glory, dominion, one kingdom, and one will and truth, let him be anathema.

XXI. If anyone does not say that the three persons of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are true, equal, always living, containing all things visible and invisible, all-powerful, all-judging, all-vivifying, all-making, saving all things that are to be saved, let him be anathema. XXII. If anyone does not say that the Holy Spirit is to be adored by every creature, as the Son and the Father are, let him be anathema. XXIII. If anyone has thought rightly about the Father and the Son, but has not held rightly about the Holy Spirit, he is a heretic: for all heretics who think ill of the Son of God and the Holy Spirit are found in the perfidy of the Jews and the Gentiles. XXIV. But if anyone, in saying God the Father, and God his Son, and God the Holy Spirit, should allow them to be called Gods, and not God on account of the one divinity and power which we believe and know to be of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit—subtracting, however, the Son or the Holy Spirit, so that he thinks that only the Father is God, or that he alone is called or believed to be one God—let him be anathema. For the name of gods has been imposed and bestowed by God upon angels and all saints; but concerning the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, on account of their one equal divinity, not the name of gods, but of God is shown and indicated to us: so that we believe that we are baptized only in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and not in the names of archangels or angels, as heretics, or Jews, or even demented Gentiles do.

This, therefore, is the salvation of Christians: that, believing in the Trinity, that is, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, we without doubt believe in it the true and sole one divinity, and the same power and majesty and substance, so that we may merit to attain eternal life. LETTER V. POPE DAMASUS TO ACHOLIUS AND THE OTHER BISHOPS OF MACEDONIA. The ordination of Maximus the Cynic having been condemned, Damasus exhorts the Macedonians that in the synod soon to be celebrated at Constantinople a worthy bishop be set over that city, and that the statutes of the elders concerning the translation of bishops be preserved. To the most beloved brothers Acholius, Eurydicus, Severus, Uranius, Philippus, and John, Damasus. Having read through the letter of your love, most dear brothers, I am sufficiently saddened; at that time, when, with God's help, the heretics had been cast out, I know not who, coming from Egypt, in a petition against the rule of ecclesiastical discipline, wished to call a Cynic, alien to our profession, to the priesthood in the city of Constantinople. What that ardor of spirit was, how foul the presumption, we cannot know. Hence it appears that restless men, when they presume many things, do not know what they ought to do. They had not read the Apostle writing: "But if a man lets his hair grow long, it is a disgrace to him." They did not know that the habit of philosophers does not suit the gait of a Christian.

They had not heard the warning Apostle, that through philosophy and empty seduction, in which they had long believed, they would be stripped of the garment of sound faith. How great this haste was, I know not, that since this manner of living displeased Christians, everything that was not fitting was done so insolently? But what else ought the wickedness of the most frivolous men to do, than, having been expelled from the Church, to ordain within the walls of others a restless man, as far as can be understood, who was roaming about? But these are understood to be the contrivances of the enemy, who supplies heretics with material for detraction. What the Gospel word had said is fulfilled: "Every planting," it says, "that my heavenly Father has not planted, will be rooted out." This is what I have often warned your love, lest anything be done inconsiderately. Does your sincerity not know that in secular wars, a greater care of soldiers keeps watch where the enemy presses? If, therefore, we must always resist with episcopal arms, we ought to act diligently, lest—which God forbid—we leave the flock of Christ to rapacious wolves. Philosophy, the friend of secular wisdom, is the enemy of faith, a certain poison of hope, the gravest war against charity. What agreement, therefore, between the temple of God and idols? What participation between Christ and Belial?

But perhaps some will say: He was a Christian. To this man, who walks about in the garb of an idol, the name of Christian is never to be ascribed: because it is impossible that one who desires to please the Gentiles in this way can have any fellowship with us in the integrity of the faith. And not undeservedly, those who had come from Egypt, condemned by all, departed, condemning their own error: so that after his hair was cut off, he who had not been rightly ordained would suffer the loss of his head, and could not be what he had aspired to be. Therefore it was rightly done that what had been badly begun was destroyed by public authority. For the rest, I admonish your holiness, that since I have learned that a council is arranged to be held at Constantinople, your sincerity should take care that a bishop of the aforementioned city be elected who has no reproach: so that, with God’s favor, when the full peace of catholic priests has been confirmed, no dissensions may thereafter arise in the Church: so that, with God’s help, what we have long desired may be able to endure in perpetual peace with catholic priests.

Moreover, I urge your belovedness not to allow anyone, contrary to the statutes of our predecessors, to be transferred from one city to another, abandoning the people entrusted to him, and to pass over to another population through ambition. For then contentions arise, then schisms become more grievous; when those who have lost a priest cannot be without grief of spirit, and those who have received a bishop from another city, even if they rejoice, understand that it will be invidious for them to be under a foreign priest. EPISTLE VI. POPE DAMASUS TO ACHOLIUS, BISHOP OF THESSALONICA. Rusticus Gratiani, a Silentiarius, is commended, and it is confirmed what was commanded in the previous letter concerning the ordination of Maximus and concerning the election of another. To his most beloved brother Acholius, Damasus. Nothing more can be added to the merit of my son Rusticus, honorable lord brother. For he, having the prerogative of his office, being a Silentiarius of our son, the Augustus Gratian, and in addition, he obtained the grace of God in Rome, so that he wished to come, fortified, sent to those parts. Hence, therefore, in all things for the convenience of your honorability, deign to receive him as your own pledge: so that, with God propitious, while on pilgrimage, he may understand that he is both loved and honored by the fellow priests of God.

I have replied fully to the letters of your holiness, that it did not please me that certain persons wished to ordain as bishop of Constantinople some Maximus coming from Egypt with long hair, especially since his habit, according to the Apostle, was shameful. Therefore your holiness will have acted more rightly if you take care that henceforth a catholic be appointed, with whom, God willing, lasting peace may endure. LETTER VII. DAMASUS TO THE BISHOPS GOVERNING THE EAST. That your charity renders due reverence to the apostolic see, most honored sons, is also a very great honor to yourselves. For although the holy Church, in which the blessed Apostle sitting taught us how the governance which we have undertaken is to be handled, assigns to us the first role, nevertheless we confess that we are far inferior to that degree of dignity. But for this reason we labor in every way, so that we may at last, by some means, attain to the glory of his blessedness. I wish you to know, brothers, that we have long since repudiated that profane Timothy, the disciple of the heretic Apollinaris, together with his impious doctrines; and for that reason we believe that his remnants will have no further significance.

If that ancient serpent, struck once and again, has revived to increase its own punishment, and, cast out of the Church, does not cease even now to drag some of the faithful into exile with its deadly poisons, with which it attempts to tempt them, do you avoid this cunning of it as a kind of plague, and diligently recall both the faith handed down by the apostles and especially this faith which was set forth in writing by the holy Fathers in the Council of Nicaea; and, fixing your step firmly in it, remain immovable; and do not allow hereafter that either your clergy or laity should hear empty speeches and obscure questions. We have already issued the formula more than once, that whoever professes himself a Christian should hold to that which has been handed down by the apostles; for the divine Paul speaks thus: If anyone evangelizes you beyond what you have received, let him be anathema. For Christ, the Son of God, our Lord, restored to the human race the fullest salvation through his passion, so that he might free the whole man, entangled in sins, from every sin. If anyone says that he had either imperfect humanity or imperfect divinity, filled with the spirit of the devil, he shows himself a son of Gehenna. Therefore, why do you again demand from me the condemnation of Timothy, who was condemned here by the judgment of the apostolic see, with Peter also, bishop of Alexandria, present, together with his master Apollinaris, who likewise will pay the due penalties and torments on the day of judgment.

If that man, who has exchanged true hope in Christ together with the confession of faith, retaining some kind of hope of salvation, should lead certain others, who are more fickle, to his own opinion, let them know that they will accordingly perish along with him, because they have acted in opposition to the canon of the Church. May God, my sons, keep you safe, though you will likewise perish, since your spirit was at one time most dishonorable. LETTER VIII. POPE DAMASUS TO JEROME. He asks that the meaning of "Hosanna" among the Hebrews be clearly explained to him. To his most beloved son Jerome, Bishop Damasus sends greetings in the Lord. When I read commentaries, in both Greek and Latin, on the interpretation of the Gospels written by our own, that is, by orthodox men, both long ago and recently, concerning the passage that reads: "Hosanna to the Son of David," they set forth not only diverse but even contradictory opinions. It is for your affection to set forth, with that ardent keenness of your talent, having cut away opinions and silenced ambiguities, what the meaning is among the Hebrews, writing with living understanding, so that concerning this, as concerning many things, they may render thanks to you for our care in Christ Jesus.

LETTER IX. POPE DAMASUS TO JEROME. With what great eagerness he reads Jerome's writings. Why he does not read Lactantius' books with equal zeal. That Jerome should resolve the attached questions for him in a few words. To his most beloved son Jerome, Damasus. I have decided to rouse you, sleeping and for a long time now more given to reading than to writing, by sending these little questions to you: not that you ought not to read; for this, like daily bread, nourishes and fattens one's speech; but that the fruit of reading is this, if you write. Therefore, since yesterday, when the courier was sent back to me, you said you had no letters at all now, except those which you once dictated in the desert, and which I read and copied with the greatest eagerness; and you voluntarily promised that you could, if I wished, dictate some by the stealthy work of the nights; I gladly accept from the offerer what I had wished to ask for, even if you had refused. Nor indeed do I think there will be any more worthy conversation for our discussion than if we converse among ourselves about the Scriptures; that is, that I should ask, and you should answer. I think there is nothing more delightful in this life than that; no food for the soul surpasses all honey. "How sweet," says the Prophet, "are your words to my throat, sweeter than honey to my mouth." For since, as the foremost orator says, we differ from beasts because we can speak: how worthy of praise is he who surpasses others in that very thing in which men excel beasts?

Therefore, bestir yourself and expound the matters I have subjoined, preserving moderation in both respects, so that the questions posed may not lack a solution, nor the letter brevity. For I confess to you that I do not willingly read the books of Lactantius which you gave me some time ago, because very many of his letters extend to as many as a thousand lines in length, and they rarely discuss our doctrine. The result is that their length generates weariness in the reader, and if any are brief, they are more suited to scholars than to us, debating meters, the location of regions, and philosophers. I. What does it mean that it is written in Genesis: "Whoever kills Cain will pay sevenfold vengeance"? II. If God made all things very good, why did Noah give commands about clean and unclean animals, since nothing unclean can be good? And in the New Testament, after the vision that had been shown to Peter, when he said, "Far be it from me, Lord, for common and unclean has never entered my mouth," a voice from heaven replied, "What God has cleansed, do not call common"?

III. Why does God speak to Abraham that the children of Israel would return from Egypt in the fourth generation, and later Moses writes: “But in the fifth generation the children of Israel went out from the land of Egypt”? Unless this is explained, it certainly seems contradictory. IV. Why did Abraham receive the sign of his faith in circumcision? V. Why did Isaac, a just man and dear to God, bless not the one he wished, but the one he did not wish, deceived by error?