Epistolae Ed Decreta

Epistles and Decrees of Pope Sixtus III, with some matters pertaining to the same Pontiff interwoven. (From the edition of the Letters of the Roman Pontiffs by P. Coustant, in Gallandius' Library of the Ancient Fathers, volume IX.) NOTE ON THE TWO FOLLOWING EPISTLES. Those epistles were first brought to light from a Greek exemplar of the Royal Library by Joannes Baptista Cotelerius, rendered into Latin, and published in the first volume of the Greek Monuments. Subsequently, Stephanus Baluzius had them reprinted in his new collection of councils. Both were undoubtedly written in Latin, in the manner of Roman bishops, although only their Greek translation has come down to us. It is clear that each was written immediately after the ordination of Xystus, that is, in the year 432, either around the beginning of May, if the common opinion about the day of this pope's ordination is not false, or around the end of July, if Pagius' view is to be preferred. In both, Xystus undertakes to answer the letters which Cyril and other Eastern bishops had sent to his predecessor Coelestinus through legates, for the purpose of settling the peace of the East. For this reason, perhaps, the first is inscribed not simply with the name of Xystus, but with the name of Xystus, successor of Coelestinus, with the aforementioned Coelestinus mentioned contrary to custom. Although this could have been done by the diligence of an antiquarian, to distinguish our Xystus from other Xysti.

The first letter was written not only to Cyril, but also to other bishops of the East, by whom the legates had been sent, and to whom the legates themselves had requested that letters be written, and it is written in the same terms, although it bears only the name of Cyril; undoubtedly because only the copy inscribed to him has come down to us. Hence no one should be moved by the praises of Cyril, which Xystus would have had to either make or express differently if this letter had not also pertained to others. We believe that the same letter was sent to Acacius of Beroea, and that no other is judged by him in the Synodicon, which Baluze, after Christian Lupus, reprinted in the new collection of councils, chapter, page 757, where he speaks thus: "The bishop who is at Rome wrote one letter to me." And indeed, among those who sided with John or opposed Cyril, that Acacius was preeminent. Whence John himself, with his synod, in the same Baluze, ii. c. page 711, writes to the Emperor Theodosius thus: "But these things (Cyril's chapters), as your imperial majesty has recognized, and our most God-beloved and most holy father and bishop Acacius taught the holy synod by letter, that they agree with the impiety of Apollinarius. Now this man clearly knows, he who completed one hundred and ten years of life, and spent his entire life laboring in evangelical contests, and attended many synods.

Moreover, there was another reason for Xystus to write to Acacius: namely, that when Acacius, summoned to Ephesus, had been unable to be present in person, he sent to Theodosius, to be communicated to the synod, the letter recently mentioned by John, which the emperor himself caused to be conveyed to Ephesus (Lab. tom. III Concil. pag. 722). Theodosius himself mentions this letter of Acacius in the sacred letter he wrote to the synod after the deposition of Nestorius, Cyril, and Memnon. Therefore, since Xystus perceived that Acacius had such great influence not only with John and his associates but also with the emperor, he judged it of the utmost importance that Acacius be brought around first, by proposing suitable conditions for establishing peace. Finally, Gennadius, in his book On Illustrious Men, seems to have wished to note this first letter of Xystus, where he says: "Xystus, the successor of Coelestinus, for the same cause sent opinions both to Nestorius himself and to the bishops of the East for the purpose of cutting down his error." If this is so, he was gravely mistaken when he said that a letter was directed to Nestorius himself, in which Xystus plainly pronounces against him (Num. 4): "Therefore let him alone be the shipwrecked one, whom, in such darkness of his own doctrines, seeing nothing, the waves of impiety dashed against the rock of deposition.

EPISTLE I XYSTUS III, MOST BLESSED POPE OF ROME, SUCCESSOR OF CŒLESTINUS, TO CYRILLUS. He announces to the bishops of the East that his ordination was made with unanimous consent; and he congratulates them that they were present in their legates. The pious petition of Cyrillus concerning the followers of Nestorius is praised and confirmed. i. Having gratitude for the humanity of our God toward us, because at that time when He deigned to call us to the supreme summit of the priesthood, He granted to us, according to His piety, the presence of our holy brothers and fellow bishops Hermogenes and Lampetius; necessarily, through them we have given these letters to your fraternity as witnesses of our ordination. For in them we have believed that all of you, by whom they were sent, were present, since those whom spiritual grace connects are in no way separated by distance. But with what harmony of all, through the dispensation of divine Providence, this ordination of ours was accomplished, when your holiness has learned it both from our letters and from the report of the brothers, it will altogether have gratitude to the Lord, who bestows, for us, most beloved brother, that He, as the guardian of His own gift, deigns to preserve ecclesiastical peace. Our God, who so dispenses all things that pertain to Him that He permits not even one to fail, gave to me a benefit in the opportunity of fraternity.

For through our holy fellow priests Hermogenes and Lampetius, who were present at our ordination, it seemed good to send these letters to your Piety, such as we have also sent to the holy synod, concerning the deceivers of Nestorius. We were, I confess, greatly rejoiced, because it befell us by one and the same opportunity to communicate both what pertains to the faith and what pertains to ourselves. For our ordination had all the brethren present. For who was not seen to be present, when the East was present through its legates, who indeed beheld one heart of all, and recognized one soul in all, and a voice consonant with the divine multitude? Thus the Roman Church preserved one suffrage in the institution of the preacher of the faith, just as it always preserved the same sentence in the preaching of the faith itself. Since, therefore, it suffices to have signified my ordination in few words, it remains for us to speak of those things which our holy brother Cyril, unmindful of his own contumely and labors, demands. For those things which were already written by my predecessor of blessed memory concerning the faith, for which we rejoice triumphing according to the help of Christ our God, in whom the question had been raised, are sufficient.

Nevertheless, since it ought not to be irksome to repeat often what has been wholesomely defined, I have deemed it necessary, now writing to your Fraternity through our holy brothers and fellow bishops Hermogenes and Lampetius, to declare briefly these things which the judgment of the Apostolic See has long since settled with much discourse; and that the hearer may not grow weary, but may gladly hear, because it has prevailed. For if Nestorius, the teacher of impious disputations, published books proclaiming things to be overturned, how much more ought we to appear as guardians of the paternal faith, utterly removing those things which are from the overturned? Moreover, our holy brother and fellow bishop, the prelate of the Church of the Alexandrians, showing how great a care for the faith he bears, and despising the insults which he has gloriously suffered according to the Apostle (2 Cor. 12:9), desires rather to set the Churches in order than to avenge himself. Immediately, he asks that a harbor be opened for those laboring in shipwreck: content with the death of that one alone, who, though he seemed to be a teacher in his inexperience, claimed for himself the helm of the Lord's rudder; but he could not remain in the see who did not know how to teach. Therefore, let that one alone be shipwrecked, whom, in such a fog of his own doctrines, seeing nothing, the waves of impiety dashed against the rock of deposition. Indeed, one storm held all; but, with the one who devised these things submerged, he wishes the rest to be healed. Thus, the same judgment is also in us.

It is better to act piously toward those who have ceased to act impiously toward God. Therefore, let those who wish to return to the right path be received. There is no need to speak at length about them, since these few words suffice. For let them know that the care of the churches occupied by them will be taken away, unless they have taken counsel for themselves and are willing to think the same things that we do. Concerning John of Antioch, however, we hold that what was prescribed in the previously sent letters must be observed, so that he may know that he will be one of the Catholics if, overturning everything that was overturned by the synod, he shows himself to be a Catholic priest. Therefore, most beloved brother, hold firmly to what has been defined both by the synod and by us. For a brother forgives the insults that are useful to him before the common Lord. For an insult of this kind is a victory. Hence he bore with equanimity the wounds of all the barbs; nor did those things sadden him about which he now rejoices, remembering that he fought for the crown. For he knows what rewards await those who have overcome such things. Let everyone who has returned and has conspired in spirit to the same opinion rejoice in the fellowship of this triumph.

These things, however, I wish to be sent to the knowledge of the neighboring brethren through your piety, so that they may learn that in so great a matter, even if everything was once most fully defined, the Apostolic See nevertheless does not cease or grow slack; for it does not permit us to be free from such cares, the solicitude for all Churches. LETTER II. POPE Xystus III to Cyril. He sends him letters testifying to his own ordination, in which he rejoices that he himself was present among the legates. He indicates what has been decreed concerning John of Antioch and the other associates of Nestorius. I rejoiced in those things which were indicated to me by your holiness through your letter concerning my holy fellow bishops, whom brief association and intercourse showed what and how great they were. And perhaps we would have believed less in the letters which you wrote about them, had not the testimony of those letters been overcome by the presence of the men themselves bearing witness to themselves. Truly we have seen priests of the Lord; we have seen men full of spiritual grace, which is granted in the first place by God Himself. But the judgment of God concerning us also made them more pleasing to us. For they were present at our ordination. And adorned with all things that perfect a priest, they exhibited to us the very presence of your holiness, whom we embrace with fraternal affection and not without great merit. For the Church owes as much to you as all are indebted to you, who have certainly surpassed all everywhere.

Therefore, at the insistence and wholesome suggestion of our son Themison the archdeacon, we have given suitable letters to our brothers and fellow bishops, to whom the aforementioned fellow priests had petitioned. Those letters which I had previously sent through the clergy of the Church of Constantinople, and later through the deacons of your Holiness, full of all necessary things, were indeed sufficient. But now, deferring both to the expectation of your Holiness and to our custom, I have not failed to act upon what was wholesomely suggested to me, counting it as a favor and a benefit that it was granted to me from above to convey to your unanimity the same words concerning my ordination and faith. Concerning the Antiochene and the others who wished to become followers of Nestorius along with him, and concerning all those who establish churches contrary to ecclesiastical discipline, we have already defined this to be observed: that if they come to their senses and, together with their leader, reject everything which the holy synod, with our confirmation, rejected, they may return to the assembly of priests. For just as they could not be in our communion while persisting in their former errors, so we wish them, for the sake of the unity and peace of the churches, to be received when they make satisfaction as we have said. They themselves, however, will be found to have pronounced an equitable sentence upon themselves if, remaining outside, they show themselves to be allies and participants with the one who has been deposed and expelled in such great impiety.

A NOTE ON THE FOLLOWING LETTER. i. This letter, which we recall here from the third part of the Council of Ephesus, chapter, is referred by Baronius and others to the year 432, but by Tillemont to the month of March of that year. It certainly preceded the sermon which Cyril delivered to his people on the day of the month of Pharmuthi, that is April, after peace had already been confirmed. Nor do the comings and goings by which this peace was reached permit us to think that it happened earlier than this year. But so that you may not be ignorant of the reason how that peace was begun and concluded, it will be helpful to trace the matter back a little further. i. Maximianus, the bishop of the imperial city, animated by these words of Celestine (Epistle 24), "You shall exercise the glory of both a watchful shepherd and a benign priest, and you shall pour forth the savor of Christian wholesomeness, so that it may be clear that you have been able to do more in repairing than he (Nestorius) was able to do in harming," for the sake of securing peace, summoned the bishops whom he found to be in Constantinople, together with the entire clergy; and by their consent he first of all established that the emperor, at their request, should send letters to John, bishop of Antioch, by which he would promise that every cause of contention would be removed from the midst, if he would subscribe to the deposition of Nestorius and anathematize his doctrine (Council of Ephesus, Part III, ch. 24). Theodosius, assenting to these things, sent letters to John, while he still believed Celestine to be alive, through the tribune Archelaus, and proposed the aforementioned conditions of peace (Ibid.).

Disturbed by these things, John did not yield immediately, however, but for some time, as we learn from a letter of Cyril to Donatus (ibid., ch. 38), where the whole course of events is narrated, he prevaricated. For at first some of those who were with him were themselves the instigators that Acacius, bishop of Beroea, should write to Cyril, and demand that all his writings against Nestorius be suppressed and considered void. And this was done. But then Cyril refused assent to this absurd petition, and replied that it was far more equitable that John himself with his followers should anathematize the blasphemies of Nestorius, subscribe to his deposition, and approve the ordination of Maximian. Then John and his associates sent Paul, bishop of Emesa, to Alexandria, to deliver letters to Cyril (they exist in Baluze’s Synodicon, ch. 80) which indeed gave indications of communion, but which Cyril, because of certain renewed complaints against himself, decided should not be admitted until Paul had sworn that this was written with pure simplicity of mind. Finally, the same Paul, against the will of those who had sent him, presented to Cyril a libellus (it is found in the Council of Ephesus, part III, ch. 28), in which he granted whatever was demanded concerning the conditions of the peace agreements. Yet not even then content with these things, Cyril sent two of his clerics, namely Cassius and Ammonius, with the tribune Aristolaus to Antioch, who demanded that John confirm the same conditions with his subscription.

When John and those who were more distinguished with him had given satisfaction, they immediately sent to Cyril that letter which was awaited for the completion of peace, and which may be seen in part III of the Council of Ephesus, chapter. Moreover, says Cyril (ibid., ch. 38), they sent that same letter which they wrote to me also to the most pious and most holy Xystus of great Rome and to Maximianus, bishops of the holy Church of Constantinople. From these things, therefore, which Cyril narrates both in the aforementioned letter to Donatus and in another to Acacius of Melitene, it follows that after John received the imperial sacred letter from Archelaus, he held a council, and from there sent Beroea to induce Acacius to write to Cyril; then Acacius indeed sent letters to Alexandria, but when they had been rejected by Cyril, Paul of Emesa, bishop, delegated by John and his associates as a mediator of peace, hastened to Alexandria, offered to Cyril new letters of John and also a libellus in the name of the same and his associates, and then at last legates, clerics of Cyril, were sent from Alexandria to Constantinople, to whom our letter was entrusted. Nor is there lacking a conjecture that those homilies of Paul of Emesa to the people of Alexandria, one of which is dated December 25, the other on a day of January, were delivered during that delay in which the return of the soon-to-be-mentioned legates was awaited (Council of Ephesus, part III, chapters and 32).

If this is so, it must be granted that that letter, which they brought back, was written around the beginning of the year. Certainly the sequence of events from the beginning of the peace negotiations does not permit it to be believed that it was written earlier. Therefore, the opinion of Baronius cannot stand, whether he thinks that this letter was written at the council which John convened at Antioch after receiving the sacred decree of Theodosius, or whether he denies that it was given to Cyril. For its inscription declares that it was addressed to him no less than to Xystus and Maximianus, and the very words of Cyril reported above also clearly confirm this. There is indeed another letter pertaining to the same time, found in part III of the Council of Ephesus, chapter, inscribed to Cyril alone; but in a matter of this kind, nothing prevents us from admitting that two letters were written at the same time to one and the same bishop, one common with others, the other private. Nor are examples far to seek, since the two earlier letters of Xystus sent to the same Cyril are witnesses to this practice.

LETTER III. Of John, Bishop of Antioch, and the Others Who Were with Him, to Xystus, Bishop of Rome, Cyril of Alexandria, and Maximian of Constantinople. They declare that they approve the sentence of deposition pronounced by the holy synod against Nestorius, and also anathematize his blasphemous doctrines, and assent to the ordination of Maximian. To the most holy and God-beloved brothers and fellow priests Xystus, Cyril, and Maximian, John and all the rest who are with me, greeting in the Lord. For all who have obtained the priesthood and to whom the divine ministry of the episcopate has been entrusted by the Savior of us all, Christ, this ought to be the zeal and aim: that they excel in the right faith and teach it to the peoples subject to them. Since this is so, in the past year, by decree of the most religious and Christ-loving emperors, on account of the doctrines of Nestorius, a holy synod of the most God-beloved bishops convened in the metropolis of Ephesus. When they, having held a session with the legates sent by Celestine of blessed memory, once bishop of the city of Rome, pronounced the sentence of deposition, they cast out the aforementioned Nestorius as one who used profane doctrine, was a scandal to many, and did not walk rightly in the faith. But when we also had hastened there, finding the matter already concluded, we took it ill.

For this reason, since a dispute had arisen between us and the holy synod, and many things had been said and done on both sides, we returned to our own churches and cities; nor did we at that time agree with the holy synod to the extent of subscribing to the sentence of deposition pronounced against Nestorius. When the churches had fallen into grave discord, at a time when it was most necessary to take care how, with all dissension of minds removed, they might be brought to concord, and since the most religious and God-loving emperors had commanded this to be done, and for that purpose had sent the illustrious tribune and notary Aristolas, we ourselves also, in order that all contention might be removed from the midst and peace be restored to the churches of God, decided to assent to the sentence of the holy synod pronounced against Nestorius, and to consider him as deposed, and to anathematize his blasphemous doctrines: because our churches, just like your holiness, have always held the true and sincere faith, and have always preserved it and handed it down to the peoples. We also assent to the ordination of Maximian, the most holy and most religious bishop of the holy Church of Constantinople, and we communicate with all the most religious bishops of the whole world, whoever hold and preserve the orthodox and immaculate faith.

LETTER IV, From the Most Beloved of God, Eutherius, Bishop of Tyana, and Helladius, Bishop of Tarsus, Written to Xystus, Bishop of Great Rome. Astonished at the change in John of Antioch, they ask Xystus, in the name of several provinces, not to delay in coming to the aid of the world, both in that part which is in error and in that which endures tyranny. 1. The Lord Christ, providing abundant care for the human race at each individual time, has prepared at one time and another different lights to guide those who are of good will, and for the refutation of opponents and the destruction of falsehood, but the confirmation of truth. Just as also under that bitter Pharaoh he prepared the blessed Moses against Jannes and Mambres (2 Tim. 3:8), and just as through Simon Magus he prepared Peter, who conquered well; so also against those who have now risen up, enemies, he has brought forth your holiness, through which we too are of good hope, that the world may be freed from the Egyptian error; you, existing as a new Moses, will indeed strike down every Egyptian heretic, but will save every orthodox Israelite.

Therefore, against the truth, with many thousands of deeds and the most pure pearl of orthodoxy receiving many hostilities—such as no history ever records—from those who have discovered the novelty of these expressions against the ancestral apostolic faith, it is indeed our part, who suffer triple and manifold storms and have almost fallen among pirates, to cry out to the one who has been set forth as helmsman by God, and to instruct him, as far as possible, for the love of truth. But it is for your grace and wisdom not to despise nor idly pass over such a question and such a great cause, but to examine it with the love of labor, and to impose correction with all constancy and God-beloved confidence. And long ago, indeed, already many times, when such heretical tares arose from Alexandria, your apostolic see sufficed throughout that entire time to convict falsehood, to repress impiety, to correct what was necessary, and to fortify the whole world for the glory of Christ, both under that thrice-blessed and among the saints held bishop Damasus, and under several other glorious and admirable ones.

For this reason we also presume to offer these supplications: that you may assist the world, both in that part which errs and in that which endures tyranny, and which is assailed to such an extent that it might give assent to things which are not fitting, because it neither wishes nor judges it expedient to receive the various verbal novelties of the Egyptian chapters. For Cyril of Alexandria, writing, set forth a blasphemous verbal novelty through twice six chapters contrary to the whole divinely inspired Scripture, and anathematizing the legitimate and ancient traditions of the holy Fathers, and especially of those who ascribe the exalted things indeed to the divinity of Christ, the lowly things to his humanity, never to be interrupted by the union of the same; he proposed to him who then ruled the holy see of the city of great name, who from the beginning was proven and known concerning faith, concerning life, concerning the doctrine of the Word and concerning all things, Nestorius, that he either consent to his chapters and subscribe to them and remain bishop, or certainly be endangered in his rank and be driven from the holy Church. But he, preferring the fear of God to the wicked proposition, chose rather to deliver himself to many thousands of dangers unjustly inflicted upon him, than to give consent to heretical deceits and to confirm the error of the whole world.

To this end the synod assembled at Ephesus, and without any correction, nor having been required to give an account, before all those who were being supported could convene, vengeance was exacted, while it encountered the blasphemies of those captives, and it was subjected to every credulity of that which is called condemnation and to certain others, while certainly Cyril did not have the authority of a judge, but the order of one who is to be judged, because they had moved questions against each other. And the presiding one was the defendant, and the one who gave sentence was the prince, who, being supported, was to be subjected to many sentences. After these things were done, to some indeed all that was done seemed worthy of tears, to others ridiculous; so much so that he who held the Church of God at Antioch, coming after these events, subjected both Cyril and Memnon to a common condemnation by a decree of the most God-beloved and most holy bishops, up to twenty-two metropolitans, and of the others who were likewise present, who judged them to be leaders of heresy and sedition and rivals of ecclesiastical sanctions; but the others who had been accomplices to them in all incongruous things, they made alien from communion. But those distinguished ones, against truth and rules alike, granting indulgence to themselves, irreverently immediately presumed the communion of the terrible mysteries; and they perilously caused others to communicate with themselves: so that all are subject to the decree of the divine rule, which utterly condemns those who act in such a manner.

Learning this, the most God-loving and good victorious prince immediately decreed that what had been so disorderly and inconsistently done against one who had been convicted of nothing, but abruptly and furiously condemned, should be annulled; and that the question of doctrine should be taken up anew with love of the truth, through inquiry, response, and demonstration, which would persuade all, not command by tyrannical authority. But to the solution of the canons they also added this, that they would not obey even these pious letters. And refusing to say or hear anything further about the faith, they turned entirely to mere obstinacy. They began to secure consent to their unjust judgment, some by fraud, others by violence, others by bribes. Astonished at these things, we for a long time begged, implored, and with full confidence urged that nothing be done or maintained irrationally; but that concerning the question of the doctrines and the chapters of Cyril, a common discussion and council be proposed, and that whatever pleased all be confirmed by a single sentence; and concerning the one who had so openly endured tyranny, a true and legitimate judgment be made; so that if convicted of corrupting the truth, he would suffer a sentence consistent with all; but if he were proved entirely innocent, he would in writing renounce with us whatever incongruous things certain persons had thrown out, whether in his name or in the name of others, from suspicion or accusation.

But these things displeased those who wished to prevail solely by authority, not, however, either to yield or to be persuaded. They commanded all to anathematize abruptly and to subscribe to the condemnation. Whoever, however, had reserved himself for a more integral deliberation was condemned, was deposed by them, was subjected to calumnies, was called a teacher of evil doctrine. Others were ordained in place of such men, because they were unwilling to consent to praise chapters worthy of condemnation, and to condemn him who, as far as we are aware, said nothing other than what has been clearly handed down by the holy prophets, evangelists, and apostles through the Holy Spirit. For they wished also to accuse the apostles, while they superfluously judged him who preached what was theirs. For they conducted such an action of what are called deeds, that they might bring forth inconsistent and uncertain things against that man, and often reproach things that were irreproachable: "Why," they say, "did Nestorius say that the passion touched not the divinity, but the humanity of Christ?" At other times, however, they would write falsehoods, positing that words had been spoken by him which not even any of the unbelievers, nay, not even rustic demons, would have presumed to utter, that is, that Christ was the Christ of the Lord, like Saul, like David, like the unbelieving Cyrus. In these things it is easy to convict anyone who wishes to calumniate.

ii. As for the deeds concerning John of Antioch, we would prefer to remain silent, if it were possible. So irrational has his changeability among us become, and his manifest transgression, and betrayal of the truth, which was unexpectedly completed or carried out. For he, before we came to Ephesus, discovered the heretical fraud of the chapters, and indicated it to many by letters: through the first Cappadocia and the second, and through various places, warning them to be on guard against them, as if they were in agreement with Eunomius, Arius, and Apollinarius; and he who leaped sharply and fervently into the condemnation of Cyril, and urged everyone to do so. Indeed, he even went to the imperial city itself to resist this impiety; and the same man wrote to us while we were still at Ephesus, first saying, “Because, knowing that he, that is Nestorius, had been dismissed from Ephesus, our souls grieved greatly, since those things which were done without judgment and unjustly seem for the moment to be strengthened”; then, “Because even if Cyril had rejected those blasphemous chapters, we did not promise even then to receive him, by oath, since he himself became the author of the wicked heresy.” Hence we do not know what other heart you will take; he opposed all his own movements, and having become a communicant with Cyril, he did not reject what he had wrongly written, he who had sworn that he would never receive him, even if he had refuted them in writing; and he alone dissolved the bond which he had consequently imposed upon himself with so many, with Cyril and Memnon, who were guilty.

And he procured no security for those who had been offended on behalf of piety. He himself was reconciled to the one whom he had previously noted with such hatred; yet he allowed the churches to be disturbed, and some bishops to remain deposed, while others were still being driven out in manifold ways. He also wrote remarkable letters, in which he said that he held Nestorius condemned, and that he anathematized whatever he impiously said or thought. Thus he failed in accusation and demonstration, so that he did not say, "I anathematize this or that or that sentence," but said, "Whatever has been impiously said by him," when he clearly ought to have spoken out, so that each person might be rendered more cautious regarding that meaning: just as we clearly abominate the chapters of Cyril, and we ask all to guard themselves from the ingrained malignity of that man, proclaiming in advance the blasphemies that are in them, and publishing them clearly to all. We have written these few things out of many, with great brevity, knowing that the excess of these evils is worthy not only of the lamentations of Jeremiah, but has surpassed universal tragedy.

We truly beg, and we prostrate ourselves at the feet of your holiness, that you may extend a saving hand and remove the shipwreck of the world, and order an inquiry into all these matters, and impose a heavenly correction upon these unlawful acts, so that the holy pastors who have been unjustly driven from their flocks may indeed be recalled, and order and ancient harmony be restored to the flocks, and that no longer lamentation and groaning be offered up for you with prayers and psalms, while many are scattered; and that no one may be endangered concerning those things which are principal, while they avoid receiving from heretics either the laver of regeneration or mystical communion, which they are not at all permitted to receive from the orthodox for salvation. Seeing these things in part, and hearing them in part, we would long ago have hastened to your holiness, we who are from various regions, that is from Euphratesia, from both Cilicias, second Cappadocia, Bithynia, Thessaly, and Moesia: so that we might pour forth fountains of tears and publicly bewail the strange and unaccustomed evils of this life, were we not detained by the terror of wolves lying in wait for the flocks for plunder and for error and every adversity. Hence we have been compelled to send in our stead the most religious clerics and monks, who may fill our place.

We ask, therefore, that without delay you rise up, and with fervent zeal erect a great trophy of victory against the ranks of the rivals, having before your eyes the diligence and care of the Good Shepherd for the sheep that had strayed (Luke 15:4). And you should not consider it without peril if anything is done disdainfully concerning so many pastors and sheep; while those indeed stray, and those others endure tyrannical violence. Imitate rather the great herald of piety, Paul, the eye of the world, whom we believe to be a pledge of our familiarity with your holiness. For he, our fellow citizen, with the error of the whole world extinguished, became an ornament of that apostolic see, and from blessed Peter received the right hand of fellowship (Galatians 2:9), so that it might appear that an equal subtlety of doctrines was preserved by both. We also ask that we not be despised by you, we whom so many evils surround. For we do not contend for money or glory or any other temporal thing; but we fight for the possession of piety, for the paternal treasure of faith, for the common hope of the faithful, for the good confession of the apostles, for the immortal struggle of the martyrs, and most of all for the advent and clemency of the Lord; invoking whose invincible power we cry out without ceasing: Spare, Lord, your people, and do not give your inheritance to reproach (Joel 2:17).

Euhierius, bishop of the metropolis of the Tyani, have subscribed, and I ask that you pray for my safety, O most beloved of God and most holy father. Helladius, bishop of the metropolis of Tarsus, have subscribed; and I ask that you pray for my safety, O most beloved of God and most holy father. LETTER V, OF SAINT Xystus the Pope to Cyril of Alexandria, after the peace made between Cyril himself and John. That he had made this known in a gathering of bishops. How great the joy of the Church from this. That the outcome of Cyril’s labors was happy, and that they were approved in all things by him and his council. Xystus, bishop, to Cyril, bishop of Alexandria. We have been filled with great joy and alacrity, after, as we have heard, the East has visited us from on high (Luke 1:78). For behold, while we were anxious, because we wish no one to perish, your holiness has indicated by his letters that the body of the Church has been restored. With its members returning to their proper places, we now see no one wandering outside, because the one faith testifies that all are placed within. We rejoice that the one who accomplished this work has been removed from our midst: he who, not believing now, understands that he alone has harmed himself, who strove against this man, whom we profess has benefited all.

But it is fitting that we pass from sorrows to joys, because the one concerning whom the question had been raised, with the grief of the universal Church removed, has granted us a time of rejoicing. Finally, Christ our God has shown how truly his own cause is at stake, when he deigned to govern matters in such a way that he preserved the judgment of such a great and important matter for the assembly of his priests. The apostles, gathered together, often discussed the faith; now, gathered together, the apostolic men rejoice in his victory. A report worthy of the sender, worthy of the assembly! Such a sign of heavenly joy ought to have such judges. And since the matter and the cause demand it, the place also ought not to be passed over in silence. The whole brotherhood has gathered at the blessed apostle Peter: behold, a venue fitting for the listeners, suitable for what is to be heard. Our fellow bishops had him as a witness to their rejoicing, whom we have as the beginning of our honor; for at the holy and venerable synod, which the Lord, favoring me, had gathered on my birthday—for so it must be believed—he himself presided, since it is proven that he was absent neither in spirit nor in body. He was present for the palm of victory, who was not absent from the contest; he aided the desires of our souls, who sees that the symbol handed down first among the Apostles is being disparaged; he did not allow the wicked head to enjoy comforts, nor did he long permit the purity of that clear spring to be disturbed by a muddy whirlpool. Our brothers have returned to us, to us, I say, who, pursuing the disease with common zeal, have cared for the health of souls.

Our holy brother John did not join himself to your exile, nor was he deceived by his blasphemous preaching; for, as the outcome of events teaches, he suspended his own judgment, he did not deny it. For what else could he judge concerning the author of evils, except that he himself, through his own priests whose case was being tried, is proven to feel what he does? He had certainly decreed this concerning the deserter of our camp, that what the leaders of the faith would urge should be judged as perfidy. He never would have separated himself from our number, to which he was able and did return. Rejoice, dearest brother, and, having gathered the brothers together, rejoice as a victor. The Church was seeking those whom she has now received. For if we wish none of the little ones to perish, how much more must we rejoice at the soundness of the leaders? We read what great joy the return of a single sheep brought (Luke 15:6); and therefore it is to be understood what praise there is in having recalled so many shepherds. Flocks are beheld in individuals; nor is the case of one alone treated here, whenever the health of many is at stake. We rejoice that we have done nothing premature here, when we congratulate ourselves on the fruit of our judgment. We endured the brothers, certain that they would produce not thorns, but grapes (Matthew 7:17). The vintage of our joys is evident, which filled the holy synod with the bounty of rejoicing. That guardian cared for his vineyard, whom the prophet David testifies neither slumbers nor falls asleep in guarding the house of Israel (Psalm 121:4).

That barren shoot of our Christ, bearing no fruit, was consumed by the flame (John 15:6). But just as we see this fitting the condemned man, so it is fitting to say of the brothers who have returned to us that the planting which the Father had planted could not be uprooted by the devil (Matthew 15:13). Therefore, eternal fire claimed him for itself; the vineyard of the eternal owner claimed these, so much so that we now rejoice that a venerable man and lord is called priest of the Antiochene Church by your holiness. And he is rightly called lord, who has acknowledged the common Lord, who confesses with us the mystery of his incarnation in a catholic voice. Your fraternity has briefly and well narrated to us what was done in this same matter; but we were not surprised that we read of an injury of degradation composed against you by those in dissent (Matthew 5:11). We know that truth frequently lies open to calumnies, yet can never be overcome by falsehood. Troubles are always welcome to one who preaches the faith. For by these, a copious reward is prepared in heaven with blessedness (Ibid. 12) for those who are commanded to endure curses, persecutions, and every evil on account of justice. You have suffered falsehood, so that you might make truth victorious; and therefore falsehood must now be trampled upon, because no one could perish for the truth.

We therefore await the clerics of our aforementioned brother John, and we desire that they come; we know that we shall give a response worthy of your honor and labor. You are not, as we have already often written to our brother and fellow bishop Maximian, difficult in opening the door even to those returning, so that truly no one is lost except the son of perdition (John 17:?); and let there be for him a greater cause for mourning, that he alone deserved to be excluded. These things the holy brotherhood with me writes to your reverence, approving and confirming your labors in all things, which, however, could not have been heavy or bitter, because they were devoted to Him whose burden is light and whose yoke we bear sweetly (Matthew 11:30). Given on the Kalends of October, in the consulship of Theodosius for the thirteenth time and Maximus.

Bishop Xystus to John, bishop of Antioch. If your love would deign to consider the glory of the ecclesiastical body, if its integrity, indeed the things themselves speak most clearly, that our sorrow has been turned into joy by the sudden word of the holy brother Cyril. It delights us that we have escaped such great anxiety, after the health of your faith was the penance. Now truly he calls himself an exile, now he feels himself cast out. Thorns abound for him in the desert (Matt. 7:16), because the grape he might gather is lacking. These are the fruits he has, who was unwilling to exercise cultivation toward the vineyard of our Lord. I believe the course and order of events has reached your love, how we wished to succor him with our admonition. We held back one rushing headlong, who was to be sunk into the depths by the weight of his blasphemies. If we weigh the quality of the matter with a just scale, it will seem to no one that Nestorius was condemned too late. That would have been the proper speech for the past. Let us now enjoy the present goods, nor long cling to sad things, in which the Lord has granted us to rejoice.

The whole brotherhood that had gathered for my birthday heard how, for the good of the human race, the apostolic see... me at table. Although these things exceed my merit and I recognize them as beyond me, I nevertheless gratefully accept the beginning of your speech, because you are not to be burdened with controversy, you who confess Christ our Lord for the good of the human race just as He was born. Subsequently you add that the Church is the lucifer and shines everywhere. But now we also, indeed all who bear the sign of that light on our foreheads, confess ourselves to be lucifers. Therefore let all priests preaching the faith of the Lord be lucifers and shine everywhere. And let Nestorius be that lucifer of whom it is written: Lucifer fell, who rose in the morning (Isa. 14:12). He fell, but fell in his pride, but was dashed down when he prepared to ascend into heaven and place his seat above the stars of heaven, and promises that he will be like the Most High. That one was fitting himself to the likeness of the Most High; this one was calling the Most High into his own likeness. For he preached only a man born, removing the mystery of the incarnation and emptying it, indeed attacking it, by which according to the creed both our faith and our salvation subsist. This is no longer a time for contending, with the enemy prostrate: we must pass on from those things which stirred up wars, importunate for victory! to still dispute about battles at this time.

What clearer proof of the matter, what greater reason can there be than the palm? Let us enjoy, with the Lord as our author, honor and joy, because we have begun to dwell together again as brothers (Ps. 132:1). We wish you to preach this holiness which you write about. You have experienced, by the outcome of the present business, what it means to think as we do. Blessed Peter the Apostle, in his successors, handed on what he received. Who would wish to separate himself from the teaching of him whom the Master himself taught first among the apostles? He was not taught through another, nor instructed by a chosen discourse; he was taught, along with others, by the mouth of the Teacher. He did not undergo the questioning of scriptures or of writers; he received an absolute and simple faith, one that had no controversy, which we must always meditate upon and in which we must remain, so that, following the Apostles with a pure mind, we may deserve to be among the apostolic. No small burden, no small labor lies upon us, that the Church of the Lord may be without blemish and without wrinkle (Eph. 5:27).

We must always be solicitous about the King of Heaven, as the care of the most clement and most Christian kings testifies. Behold, dearest brother, how vigilantly they have devoted themselves to the heavenly task. They have known no holidays from thought; nor have they deigned to care for earthly matters, unless they had first obeyed the heavenly. How often has their speech stirred the apostolic see, how often various brothers? They have given themselves over to the business of Him who never denied Himself to their rule. They know that they are lending their solicitude to Him who repays it with great interest. In this matter it befits us to glory, because we see the heavenly King having allied kings of the earth. They understand, as David says, and are learned who judge the earth (Ps. 2:10), when, as he says elsewhere, they themselves and all peoples praise the name of the Lord (Ps. 148:12). Therefore, because, as the Apostle says, faith is one (Eph. 4:6), by which the victor also prevailed, let us believe what must be said, and let us say what must be held. Let nothing further be allowed to novelty, because nothing ought to be added to antiquity. The clear and perspicuous belief of the ancestors should not be disturbed by any admixture of filth.

We have a proven man, our brother and fellow bishop Maximian, priest of the Church of Constantinople, consecrated there by divine judgment, so that the sweetness of simplicity succeeding may overcome the sicknesses and the disease which the poisons of cunning alone had infused; he will be able to preach there nothing other than what we believe, except what he frequently heard from my predecessors when placed with us. Given on the fifteenth day before the Kalends of October, in the consulship of Theodosius for the fourteenth time and Maximus. LETTER VII OF POPE Xystus III TO PERIGENES, BISHOP OF THE CORINTHIANS. That they should revere the dignity of the vicar of the apostolic see granted by ancient custom to Anastasius, the bishop of Thessalonica, and should not attempt to withdraw themselves from his authority. To his most beloved brother Perigenes, Xystus. i. We ought rather to rejoice than to complain about the acts of your fraternity, since the authority of the apostolic see was present to you at the very beginnings of your ordination, which you must always remember. But just as it is ours not to recount these things, so it befits your faith to retain them. Now we have learned that you wished to incite some things: but here, since the matters have been settled through the presence of our representatives, whom we sent to those regions for these reasons, we pass over them.

For you should believe that our holy brothers Martianinus, presbyter, and Lollianus, deacon, acted in such a way as would be consistent both with your interests and with the authority of the Apostolic See; and therefore we have now written to your Fraternity in such terms as to cause you sorrow, because we prefer that what had been attempted be abolished by peaceful correction. Now therefore, dearest brother, admonished by our letters through our brother and fellow bishop Luke, who has come to you summoned solely by the grace of charity, preserve for our holy brother and fellow bishop Anastasius, bishop of the city of Thessalonica, the reverence which the other pontiffs established throughout Illyricum do not refuse to maintain toward the dignity of the aforementioned, since we know that nothing new has been granted to him by us, but that which our predecessors had conferred upon his predecessors, with due consideration of ecclesiastical discipline, was established. For it is in your interest that the greatest deference be shown to this Church, which has conferred so much honor upon you that it fought on your behalf against those who were then your rivals.

LETTER VIII OF POPE XYSTUS III TO THE SYNOD TO BE CONVENED AT THESSALONICA. That he has granted the dignity of vicar throughout Illyricum to Anastasius, bishop of Thessalonica, according to custom. What his authority is, what his duties. That Perigenes, bishop of Corinth, is to be subject to him. To the most beloved brothers, all the bishops to be convened in synod at Thessalonica, XYSTUS. i. If we rendered as much obedience to the divine laws and eternal commands as we do to the laws and constitutions of princes, which are temporal and changeable and are very often abolished, we would surely be partakers of the highest blessedness and would avoid the troubles of worldly vexation, with that Ruler or Bishop who, desiring to come to our aid, cries out with daily voices: "Turn to me, and I will turn to you" (Zech. 1:3)... (Among other things and to the point) We grant to our brother and fellow bishop Anastasius as much as was granted to his predecessors by our predecessors. We follow the judgment of our predecessors in establishing what we know was established by them, because we approve that he is of the same merit as those who deserved such things. Let no one oppose these salutary constitutions, let no one resist these precepts. Let the metropolitans of each province have their own honor, saving the privilege of him whom they, being more honored, ought to honor the more. In their own province they shall have the right of ordaining; but no one shall dare to ordain without the knowledge or against the will of him whom we wish to be consulted concerning all ordinations.

To the bishop of Thessalonica the greater causes shall be referred. A greater care will regard him, that of examining and testing more diligently those who are called to the episcopate. He himself shall choose the most capable and most skillful from your number, whom he may associate with himself as arbiters in affairs; or, without himself, he may appoint those who may settle matters sent for discussion. Let the bishop of Corinth know that the license of free power is by no means to be granted to him, if he should wish to resist this Church, which he knows has been of benefit to him. To whom it is necessary that we also, if he should attempt anything, oppose him; who are mindful of the things that have been granted to him by us in the past and always oppose unlawful usurpations. Concerning the rest, whatever they may be, we wish them to be concluded in our presence: since their entire trust with us is such that whatever they have approved, we believe to have judged and approved equally. Given on the eighth day before the Ides of July, in the consulship of Theodosius for the fifteenth time and Valentinian for the fourth time, Augusti.

LETTER IX OF POPE XYSTUS III TO PROCLUS, BISHOP OF CONSTANTINOPLE That he should receive no priest coming to him from the provinces which pertain to the bishop of Thessalonica without a letter dimissory from that bishop. To his most beloved brother PROCLUS, XYSTUS. I. Although we know that your fraternity, learned in ecclesiastical disciplines, guards with the utmost care all things which pertain to the observance of rules and canons, and we have proven by clear evidence that you neither do anything yourself, nor permit other priests to do anything with your connivance, which overturns the ancient constitutions of the Fathers (for it befits an excellent and most God-worthy priest both to guard with whatever care he can the things pertaining to himself, and not to disturb or violate in any part the things due to his other brothers, preserving his own more moderate honorificence with greater glory, if he allows nothing to be attempted contrary to ancient custom), nevertheless, by our exhortation through the grace of charity, this should especially accrue to your fraternity, that your circumspect sanctity should not provide an opportunity to the incongruous will of some who, by surreption, desire to create scandal and discord for the Churches, wishing to grow through the disturbance of the Churches and to make a place for themselves through the dispensation of priests.

Therefore, what we also observe, we wish your Fraternity, which we know will do this according to its custom, to maintain: that is, if any priest should come to our brother and fellow bishop, the prelate of the city of Thessalonica, from those provinces which pertain to him, without his knowledge, and should attempt to come without his letters and a formed letter, he shall be regarded as a despiser of ecclesiastical discipline and a contemner of the canons, whom we do not suffer to be violated in any part. It is provided to your Reverence in common that you reserve to one another, anticipating each other through the grace of charity, the honors due to each other's dignity; which we do not wish to be done as we read. Let all the priests of that province learn that your Fraternity is of such strictness that you do not permit what it is not lawful for a priest to attempt. We would say more, if we did not know from the mind of your Fraternity that you feel greater things and in this respect, than we can convey in speech in these letters which we send to you. You have a very recent example of the recently held action of our brother Iddua, concerning whom we decreed that the judgment of your Fraternity be preserved; not wishing to do injury to your knowledge, since his most just intention was protected by innocence. The ignorant are to be warned; but if you should wish to instruct one who knows and observes such things for any longer, you would seem not so much to admonish as to reproach ignorance.

Let what we have written suffice, dearest brother, since we trust that your mind and judgment concur with ours in correcting and observing these matters; for, as Scripture says (Acts 4:32), we have one heart and one mind concerning the observance of religion, the keeping of the canons, and the maintenance of ecclesiastical discipline, as we ought and believe. Given on the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Aelius for the second time and Segisvultus. WARNING ON THE FOLLOWING LETTER. To grasp the aim of this letter, it is of no small importance to know what Xystus means by these words: "Nor, dearest brothers, should you believe yourselves bound by those constitutions which the Eastern synod wished to decree beyond our precepts, except for that which it judged concerning the faith with our consent." What that Eastern synod was, and what its constitutions were, by which the Illyrian churches are not bound, is a matter of inquiry. Lucas Holstenius, in his notes on this passage, thinks that these words allude to the affair of Bishop Juvenal, who in the Synod of Ephesus sought to obtain the primacy of the province of Palestine; and on this matter he advises consulting Leo in his letter to Bishop Maximian, that is, what we read in that letter: "It is difficult for the greed of the wicked not to attempt to claim something beyond measure; as also in the Synod of Ephesus Bishop Juvenal believed he could suffice to obtain the primacy of the province of Palestine, and to confirm his insolent audacities through forged writings" (Leo, epistle).

CHAPTER 6). But we are persuaded that Sixtus had no regard for these matters: first, because, with Cyril interceding against the ambition of Juvenal, his efforts came to nothing, so that no decree, indeed not even a word, on that subject exists from the Council of Ephesus; although Sixtus is here speaking of decisions, not such as one bishop, but such as a council wished to decree. Secondly, even if Juvenal had obtained what he was seeking, and had secured its confirmation by some decree, what concern was the usurped primacy of Palestine to the bishops of Illyricum? And what need was there for Sixtus to summon them to a council, where they would be warned that they were in no way bound by such a statute? Tillemont (Vol. XIV, p. 264) writes that it is unclear to what the same words can refer, unless they indicate the decree of the seventh act of the Council of Ephesus, in which not only the freedom of the churches of Cyprus is asserted, but also the rights of the other churches are preserved, and it is decreed: "It pleased the holy and ecumenical council that each province should preserve pure and inviolate the rights which it has had from the beginning, according to ancient custom, and that it be permitted to each metropolitan to take copies of the acts for his own security." But at the same time, this most modest man admits that that decree was established after the legates of the apostolic see had arrived at Ephesus, and yet nowhere is anything read from which we might gather that those legates objected to it. Sixtus, however, speaks of decisions which the apostolic see never approved.

Moreover, who would believe that Xystus either rejected the decrees of a synod which showed the highest reverence for the apostolic see, or wished to diminish its authority? He would certainly have designated the ecumenical council not by the vague name of an Eastern synod, but at least by its own name, the Council of Ephesus. At first glance, this pope’s words seem more in accord with the synod of Constantinople held in the year [381], inasmuch as the Roman pontiffs received its decrees concerning matters of faith in such a way that they utterly refused to approve the other constitutions even long after Xystus’s time. Therefore, when such decrees were greatly vaunted by Anatolius, Leo, writing back to Anatolius himself, contended that they were of no weight in these words: “For the writing of certain bishops made sixty years ago, as you boast, lends no support whatever to your persuasion, and was never transmitted to the notice of your predecessors and of the apostolic see” (Leo, Epistle 97, II.6). But that the definitions concerning faith were sent from that same synod to Damasus is gathered from the synod’s own letter to that pope, and we read that they were never repudiated by any Catholic thereafter. Certainly, the creed of this synod was recited in the Council of Chalcedon with universal applause, and the definitions of that same council were inserted in its entirety with the Nicene Creed. But it is nearly certain that Xystus is here being moved by certain decrees which were more recently established.

We judge, therefore, that a synod is noted by this pope as having been held in his own time, in which certain things were established against the rights of the churches, and specifically of the Thessalonican church, at the instigation of Proclus, or, as Xystus himself more mildly speaks, with his connivance. For this reason, in the earlier letter, Xystus III, correcting Proclus with the greatest moderation and prudence, is wholly intent on exhorting him both to preserve the ancient constitutions of the Fathers and to maintain the due honor of the Thessalonican bishop. Moreover, from the letter of Theodoret to Flavian of Constantinople, we learn that a synod was celebrated under Proclus, in which certain things were established, undoubtedly to the favor of the Constantinopolitan bishop, against the rights of other churches. For thus Theodoret addresses Flavian: Know, my lord, that this ill-will (of Dioscorus, the Alexandrian bishop) towards my insignificance arose from the time when, in your synods held under the blessed memory of Proclus, we, adhering to the rules of the holy Fathers, gave our assent; and concerning this he has reproached us once and again, as if we had betrayed the rights, as he says, both of the Antiochenes and of the Alexandrines. Indeed, in these words of Theodoret there is nothing that is not perfectly consistent with what Xystus has concerning the Eastern synod.

If that is so, concerning the council which Theodoret records as having been held under Proclus, it may be affirmed, first, that it was celebrated not later than that year, and that in it some things were established with the consent of the apostolic see, while others beyond the faith and concerning discipline were set up contrary to the precepts of that same see. Then Xystus clearly teaches that by those constitutions which were enacted contrary to his own precepts, the rights of the Thessalonican bishop were violated. Nor is it less evident from Theodoret that by the same decrees, at least in the judgment of Dioscorus, the privileges of the Alexandrians and Antiochenes were likewise violated, so that Dioscorus regarded Theodoret, because he had approved those decrees by his consent, as a traitor to the rights of the Alexandrians and Antiochenes, and for that reason considered himself justified in pursuing him with just hatred. Hence it may rightly be conjectured that by those constitutions the privileges which had already been attributed in another year to the bishop of the imperial city of Constantinople were either confirmed or even augmented. If Theodoret was not present at the synod under Proclus, but later gave his assent to its decrees, it is then inferred that those constitutions were sent throughout the provinces to be confirmed by the assent and subscription of the bishops.

Hence, Baronius and the editors of the councils who have followed him are to be corrected, for they indeed refer that council under Proclus to that year. And relying solely on the words of Theodoret, they fabricate many things entirely foreign to him. For they imagine that Dioscorus, while still a deacon and acting as apocrisiarius of the Alexandrian Church in Constantinople, contended with the bishop of Antioch for primacy, and that for this reason a synod was gathered and it was defined that whatever had been established on this matter in the Nicene and other councils should remain ratified and firm (Baron. sub finem ann.; Lab. tom. III, pag. 1284), and finally that Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus, applied himself to defending the rights of the bishop of Antioch, and thereby incurred the grave hatred of Dioscorus. But in truth, Theodoret in the aforementioned letter does not say that he stirred up Dioscorus’s hatred because he had fiercely defended the rights of the bishop of Antioch, but because, assenting to the constitutions of the synod held under Proclus, he was judged to have betrayed the rights of the bishop of Antioch no less than those of the Alexandrian. Nor in that synod were the Nicene decrees confirmed, but, as is evident from Xystus, they were derogated from them. As for the altercation of Dioscorus the deacon with the bishop of Antioch, no trace appears in the words of Theodoret, and this smacks of pure fabrication.

Not undeservedly, therefore, do John Garnerius in his Supplement to Theodoret, History of the Same, chapter 7, ii. 7, and following his example, Antonius Paginus at the year 439, number 13, dissent from the opinion of Baronius. But neither do they seem to have grasped Theodoret's meaning much more successfully, when they think that the synodical letters which Proclus wrote to the lord bishop of Antioch in favor of Athanasius, bishop of the Pyrrhi, and which are inserted into the acts of the Council of Chalcedon, are the ones recalled by this writer. That this may be more clearly evident, it must be observed that the letter whose explanation we seek was written by Theodoret with the purpose of winning for himself the help and support of Flavian against the calumnies of Dioscorus. For this reason he urges Flavian to be the guardian of the decrees sanctioned in the general council of Constantinople, and to repress the pride of Dioscorus, who does not wish to be contained within the limits prescribed for him. Then he relates that he incurred the hatred of this bishop because he had assented to the synodical letters made under Proclus, as if by this assent he had betrayed the rights of the Alexandrians and Antiochenes. But what is the consensus of the letters of Proclus written in favor of Athanasius, and of the synodical ones to which Theodoret assented? Without doubt, if Theodoret had only subscribed to the letters written for the bishop of the Pyrrhi, there would have been no reason why he should have been called a betrayer of the rights of the Antiochenes, much less of the Alexandrians, in the eyes of Dioscorus.

First, these letters are purely commendatory, nor does Proclus claim any right for himself in them. Indeed, he expressly declares that the rights of the Antiochene Church are preserved safe and intact throughout this entire matter, when he thus addresses its bishop: "Therefore, let your reverence not suppose that the said God-loving bishop Athanasius came here as if to the injury of the Antiochene see, the greatest city," etc. Then he testifies that those letters were written not only in his own name but also in that of Cyril himself, and says: "Consoling him (Athanasius) with the present letters, I and the most holy bishop and fellow priest Cyril ordered him to be confident." Is Cyril, then, to be thought to have been ignorant of or to have betrayed the rights of his own Church at that time? By a far stronger right we have believed that the synodical letters of Proclus, which Theodoret mentions in his epistle to Flavian, are altogether different from those which the Council of Chalcedon exhibits in its acts. But when we compare the epistle of Xystus with the aforementioned epistle of Theodoret, from the mutual light which they shed upon each other, we easily perceive that the discourse in both is about one and the same synod and about the same decrees.

LETTER X. Pope Xystus III to the Bishops of All Illyricum. He indicates that he has, as is customary, entrusted his responsibilities throughout Illyricum to Anastasius. What that authority is. That they should show reverence to him. Xystus to his most beloved brothers, all the bishops assembled throughout Illyricum. The teacher of the Gentiles, the vessel of election, the firmest foundation of our religion, in all the epistles which he writes to the churches of individual cities, testifies concerning his joy in the Lord over those whom he sees obeying the precepts of the law and dwelling in the fear of our God. If, therefore, there is such great cheerfulness of mind in the Apostle, so learned as he is holy, because he addresses as equals those whom he knows to be advancing both in religion and in the things to which he writes, in single epistles, with how great joy do you think we are filled, since it is given to us to address the common council of your holiness, and to join our speech, containing testimonies of pious affection toward you, with your holiness? For he, as we have said, visits individual churches with his epistles; we believe that we address as many churches at once with our letter as there are of you who have assembled for the holy synod. He speaks with the untaught and with disciples; we speak with colleagues and with the learned. And since it is especially fitting that you obey the precepts of the most blessed Paul, let us not depart from his example; let it not be burdensome to you to be admonished, as if we were present, concerning those things which come to our notice, so that ecclesiastical discipline may be preserved.

Therefore, with you, we confer, for the sake of our solicitude, what we know to be beneficial for the observance of rules and canons, entrusting it to our son, the presbyter Artemius, whose effectiveness in action and moderation have pleased us and earned our love, so that the path handed down by the fathers may be held firm by the steadfast footsteps of your love, and that those things which have been preserved by us for the peace of the Churches may be maintained. All the Illyrican Churches, as we have received from our predecessors and as we ourselves have done, now pertain to the care of the Bishop of Thessalonica; so that, by his solicitude, if any disputes arise among the brethren, as is customary, he may distinguish and define them, and whatever is done by individual priests shall be referred to him. Let there be a council as often as there are causes, as often as he decrees according to the reason of emerging necessities: so that the Apostolic See, informed by his report, may rightly confirm what has been done. Let no one summoned disdain to come, nor deny himself to the holy assembly to which he ought to hasten. An excuse through contumacy shall not be sought: so that, with you all assembling together, it may be possible to decide in common what preserves the peace of the Churches and holds the peoples to salvation.

Nor should you, dearest brothers, consider yourselves bound by those decrees which the Eastern synod wished to establish contrary to our precepts, except for that which it judged concerning faith with the consent of those who agreed. Let none of you depart from the precepts of the canons, nor deviate from those things which, according to the order of the rules, the frequently directed authority of the Apostolic See has decreed to you. If perhaps something arises among brothers, or some action is brought against a brother, or a case occurs there with our brother and fellow bishop Anastasius acting as judge, who is known to exercise the role of the Apostolic See, as his predecessor Rufus of blessed memory did, by our will; or if it cannot be settled there, let the entire matter under dispute come to us for examination, with the same person nevertheless pursuing it through his own letters. There is no body that is not governed by its head. You are indeed holy members, as we know; but it befits you to look to and honor your head: for the honor of the head advances the hope of the whole sanctity; and the body, solicitous, guards with its eyes what seems to it suitable and worthy for each office to serve its purpose. But just as the whole body is ruled by the head, so the head itself, unless it is supported by its own body, loses its firmness and vigor, and does not retain the dignity it once had. Therefore, be, as it befits, priests of the Lord, prelates of the churches, teachers of our religion.

Reserve the reverence which you owe to our brother and fellow bishop, and keep peace and concord among yourselves. Let there be in you, as we believe you have, one heart and one soul (Acts 4:32). Nor should you believe that anything is diminished from you of that reverence toward him to whom both our predecessors and we wished the Illyrian churches to belong according to established custom, and which we wish to be preserved and shown by your love. Given on the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Aetius for the second time and Segisvultus.