EPISTOLAE ET DECRETA

• 463D

To his most beloved brother ANYSIUS, INNOCENT.

Since our God Christ has deigned to call to himself the man of holy memory, Bishop Anastasius, albeit swiftly, 464Dreckoning his merits to be so great and of such a kind that they already exceeded the fellowship of human conversation, and that age, by reason of the purity of his life and the abundance of his teaching, with which he ruled the people of God with the whole rigour of ecclesiastical authority: lest his Church should remain even a little while without the helm of a ruler, at once, according to his mercy, with the consent of the holy priests and of all the clergy and people, with the peace which God, returning to heaven, 465Adeigned to bestow on his Church, it was fitting to recognize me ordained in his place, dearest brother ( f. te cognoscere); and to announce my first-fruits swiftly to none but a man The same Anysius is honoured by Palladius, in the Dialogue on the Life of Chrysostom, ch. 3, with the encomium of an excellent old man, τοῦ χαλογήρου. There it is also recorded that he entrusted his own letter as well to Eulysius, bishop of Apamea in Bithynia, who was carrying to Rome the letters of fifteen bishops in support of Chrysostom. most excellent and ever faithfully labouring in God (V. epist. 2 Nicolai I). To whom also my predecessors in the episcopate before me, men so great and of such a kind, that is, Damasus of holy memory, Siricius, and the man mentioned above, so deferred, that they committed to thy holiness, which is full of justice, the cognizance of all things that were done in those parts; it becomes thee to recognize that my littleness also holds this judgment and has the same will. For it was not right either that I should attempt to go against the judgment of men so great and so good, into whose place I am known to have succeeded, or that anything should seem to be taken away from thy merit, on which illustrious men 465Bare seen to have conferred so great a favour of this authority. I therefore openly declare that I acknowledge this very thing to be reserved to my littleness also: that with equal judgment and in like form I grant, both to the good alike and to thy charity, that which thou deservest.

The things in it copied from Siricius do not make its authenticity doubtful. --Many things in this letter are copied from Letter 4 of Siricius. But, as Tillemont observed, this ought not to seem at all surprising, since Innocent, asked by Victricius to hand on to him the rules customarily kept in the Roman Church, could not have done this more happily than by copying out the decrees of his predecessors. Hence, therefore, no fit reason is found why either the aforesaid letter should be taken away from Siricius, or this one from Innocent. Nor are the grounds lighter which assign this one 465Cto Innocent than were those which assign that one to Siricius. It is cited under his name by the Second Council of Tours, c. 20, by Cresconius in the Breviarium canonum passim, and by Pope Zacharias in Sirmond, tome I of the Concilia Galliae, Epistle 9, cc. 14 and 20. Moreover, of the old collections, of which we have examined a great many, in none is it lacking, in none is it not presented inscribed to Innocent. It is ascribed to him by the Corbie exemplar copied in the times of Pope Vigilius, by the Colbert one written in Lombardic capital letters, by the old Codex of canons published by Quesnel, by the exemplars of the Dionysian and Hadrianic collections, and also by the Spanish collection, the Isidorian, and many others.

That it is not to be put back to the year 405. --In all these collections (if you except the Dionysian, in which the consular date is omitted) the ending of the letter is entirely the same, and with the greatest agreement it is dated Honorio aug. VI et Aristeneto conss. Hence no room is left for the conjecture of a learned man, by which he suspects that this consular date was added to this letter of Innocent 465Dby another hand, or at any rate that post consulatum Honorii, etc., should be read. For though we grant him that the words post consulatum, which copyists are accustomed to express by the first letters P. C., could easily have fallen out; in that case surely Honorii et Aristeneti, not Honorio et Aristeneto, would have been retained in at least some old codex, nor ought the word conss. to have been added in any. Nor shall we be any more compelled to yield to that conjecture if we weigh what cause there may be why he thinks this letter written in the year 405 rather than 404. He is moved, namely, solely by the words of no. 5, in which Innocent mentions what he had endured on account of the curials, with the emperor present, and with Victricius placed beside him. From which he also thinks it follows that this letter was written not only after the emperor had come into the City, 466Abut also after Victricius had returned from Rome to Rouen. And yet, he says, the Emperor Honorius came to Rome only in the year 403, in the month of December, and had not come there before, as is gathered from Claudian's poem: and Victricius, in so small an interval as runs from the emperor's arrival in the City to the 15th day of February of the year 404, could not return from Rome to Rouen, and send a letter thence to Innocent, so that it was delivered to him before that day. From which he concludes that this letter was dated not in the consulship of Honorius Augustus, but after the consulship of Honorius Augustus, that is, in the year 405, not 404. But if, on account of a fact of which no certain knowledge is had, it be lawful to deny credit to titles so many, so diverse and so ancient, what will be certain in history? Let it be, then, that Honorius came to Rome at the close of the year 403, and that Victricius was in the City at that time: what compels us to agree at the same time that the same bishop had returned to Rouen before he received this letter of Innocent? Innocent mentions no one sent to him in Victricius's name, no 466Bletter of his delivered to him. But, says the learned man, the word misi, which Innocent uses in the opening, implies one who is absent. But if it implies one absent, it certainly does not signify one returned to Rouen, not one gone out of Rome. For what prevents Victricius, about to depart asbcessurus from Rome, from having asked of him a book of the ecclesiastical rules while he was bidding Innocent farewell, and him, not having the book at hand at that time, from having taken care that it should be put together as soon as possible and delivered to Victricius before his departure from the City. Nor indeed is it necessary that those to whom we are said to send something should be far from us. Friends daily send one another little gifts, books, letters, etc., even when contained within the walls of the same city. Let Damasus and Jerome be an example of this, above, p. 579 and following.

It is called the book of rules. The division of the chapters. --Further, the book of rules mentioned does not seem to be reckoned anything other than this very letter, inasmuch as in it Innocent, after a brief preface, sets out several chapters of discipline 466Cby which Churches are to be ruled. These chapters, moreover, are presented summarily in most manuscripts, though not in all, with titles set before them. But neither in those is this division or summary of the chapters one and the same; rather it varies according to the bent and judgment of those who collected the pontifical letters. More ample than the rest, however, is the one which the exemplars of the Codex published by Quesnel present. Wherefore we should have held it enough to represent that one alone here, were it not worth the labour to add to it the other, from the collection of Dionysius Exiguus, with which the Spanish collection too, from which the Isidorian was copied, agrees in nearly everything. For since Cresconius and other collectors of canons are accustomed to cite the decrees of the Roman pontiffs according to the division into titles arranged by Dionysius, it is necessary, in order that their citations may be found, to know beforehand what that division is. Now Dionysius Exiguus comprised in twenty-nine titles all the decrees which he collected from Innocent, among which the first place is held by this pope's letter to Decentius, divided into eight 466Dtitles. Then this one to Victricius follows it, which he divides into twelve titles. Wherefore the first decree of this letter is called title 9 in Dionysius, and the last title 20, as is to be seen below.

The laws which forbade curials to move out of the curia. --In those decrees, moreover, that which is said in cap. 11 about the curials must be explained here somewhat more fully than is permitted in the annotations, because mention of the same matter will occur again and again in other letters of other pontiffs as well. Those were called curials, or decurions, who discharged the municipal magistracies and offices. Of them the Emperor Majorian, at the beginning of Novel 1, speaks thus: « No one is unaware that the curials are the sinews 467Aof the commonwealth and the vitals of the cities: whose body antiquity rightly called the lesser Senate. » But, as the same emperor observes, the judges or governors of the provinces reduced many by their unjust exactions to such a point that they deserted their native place. To the curials belonged the charge of taxes, of buildings, of public shows or games, etc. For this reason the laws of the emperors were severe, by which no one was permitted to be freed from the curia unless he had discharged all the offices of his curia. The Emperor Constantine ordained (Cod. Th. lib. XII, tit. 1, leg. 11): « Let no judge attempt to grant to any curial exemption from civil duties, or free anyone from the curia at his own discretion: » Of those too who, leaving their curias, take refuge in the garrisons of the army, he orders (Leg. 1) « all who are not yet found liable to the primipilate to be released from the army and to return to the curia. » Likewise he laid down (Leg. 12), as the interpreter Anianus puts it, « that whatever curial wishes to pass from the city in which he was born to another, may in no way 467B. . . nor by any plea of necessity escape the condition owed to the curia, or the services of his own city, on the ground that he wished to change his city. » By another law too (Leg. 20) he commands « that no curial, unless all the offices of the curia have been performed in order (Anianus adds, which are owed to the native place), ought to undertake the office of curator or defensor. » Nor was the indulgence of the emperors any greater towards those who migrated from the curia to the clergy. Ambrose, Epistle 41, to the Emperor Theodosius, n. 29, thought he must remonstrate with him on this matter in this manner: « How shall I excuse myself before the bishops, who now lament grievously because certain men who have discharged the rank of presbyter, or ministers of the Church, through thirty and innumerable years, are dragged back from the sacred office and assigned to the curia? » And that remonstrance was all the more just because Constantine had earlier (Leg. 13) wished the curias to be admonished that henceforth « they should drag back to the curia only those whom they found, within twenty years' service in the offices, either to have fled their origin, 467Cor to have spurned nomination and thrust themselves into the service. » Indeed Julian had afterwards decreed (Leg. 56): Those who, born of curial origin, have loved the military office, when the service of ten years has been completed, shall by the authority of our commands be exempt from the curia.

On what condition curials were permitted to give their names to the clergy. --Curials were not so removed from the clergy that every approach to it was closed to them. Valentinian and Valens permit them to give their names to the clergy on a certain condition, which they explain thus in a law given in the year 364, on the 10th day of September (Leg. 59): « He who chooses the part of the Church, let him either, by conferring his own goods on a kinsman, make him a curial in his stead, or cede his means to the curia which he has left, he who has done neither being of necessity recalled: » that is, so that he who did not cede his goods either to a kinsman or to his curia is by all means to be recalled to the curia. On the same matter there is also this constitution of Theodosius, dated the year 384, on the 7th day of November (Leg. 104): « Curials who prefer to serve the churches rather than the curias, if they wish 467Dto be what they feign, let them despise those things which they withdraw. For we free them on no other terms than that their patrimonies be despised. » Ambrose had this in view when he wrote in Epistle 18, to Valentinian, n. 13: « If a priest seek the privilege of declining the curial burden, he must give up the possession of his paternal and ancestral property and of all his means. » Constantius had been somewhat more indulgent: for in the year 361, on the 29th day of August, he first decreed in favour of the bishops (Leg. 49): « Let no one compel a bishop only to make over his means to the curia, as had formerly been laid down. » Then he wills that those should enjoy the same privilege « who have attained the ranks of presbyters, and of deacons also, or subdeacons and the rest, with the curia assisting, and giving its consent under the eye of the judge . . . above all if they are asked for by the voices of the whole people. » Otherwise he orders 468Athat two portions of their substance be handed over, either to their kinsmen substituted for the curial duties, or to the curia; but reserves the third to themselves. And of those who had failed of the conditions set out above, what is added at the end of the same constitution seems to have been said: « If the superintendents of the granaries, and those who are about to undertake a magistracy, the superintendents of the peace also, or the receivers of the various kinds of goods, have thought they should aspire to the Church (that is, to the ministry of the Church), after they have entered upon the offices of the charge or honour laid on them; it will be fitting for the prelates of the heavenly law first to resist them, and, they themselves being the first to strive for it, for these to be recalled to the same duties: or if they neglect this, they are to be dragged back by the curials, with the judgment of the office supporting. » Indeed Arcadius, derogating from his father's law, issued a constitution dated the year 398, on the 27th day of July, and reported in the Codex Justinianus, book I, tit. 3, law 12, by which he orders that a curial, if he has been ordained a cleric, be restored at once upon prior summons: « For we do not suffer, he says, that law to profit clerics any longer which, upon cession of patrimony having followed, did not forbid decurions to be clerics. » That this, however, was said of the minor 468Bclerics alone is proved by what the same emperor laid down at the close of the year 399 (Leg. 163): « If any, from our father's second consulship, leaving the curia, have made themselves over to the fellowship of the clergy, if they have already been found worthy to be bishops, or presbyters, or deacons, let them indeed persevere in the sacred and more secret mysteries; but let them be compelled either to offer substitutes to the curia, or, according to the law long since passed, to hand over their means to the curia. All the rest, readers, subdeacons, or clerics to whom the privileges of clerics are not owed, are to be presented forthwith to the duties owed to their native place. » With laws so many and so diverse, therefore, the judges did not lack an occasion by which to reclaim importunately curials admitted into the clergy, and thereby to make trouble for the prelates of the churches.

That no one of the bishops dare to ordain without the knowledge of the metropolitan 468Cbishop. --II. That he who has chosen to have the belt of military service after the remission of sins be not admitted to the clergy. --III. That all contentions or causes arising among clerics of any order be ended before the provincials, that is, their own bishops. That the greater causes be referred to the apostolic see after the episcopal judgment. -- IV. That a cleric take a virgin to wife. --V. That a layman who has taken a widow to wife, whether before baptism or after baptism, be not admitted to the clergy. --VI. That he who has married a second wife ought not to be ordained a cleric, even if he obtained (such) a marriage before baptism. --VII. That no one presume to ordain a cleric from another's church. --VIII. That those baptized who come from the Novatians or the Montenses be received by 468Dthe imposition of hands only. --IX. That priests and levites do not come together with their wives. --X. That a monk, if he wishes to strive for the order of the clergy, ought not to turn aside from the prior purpose which he bore as a monk. --XI. That he who, being corrupted, wishes to come to the clergy, promise not to take a wife, according to the rule of the ancients. --XII. That curials, or those occupied with any public functions whatever, be not made clerics. --XIII. That handmaids of God who have been veiled, if they have given themselves up to corruption, whether publicly by marrying or secretly, be not admitted to penance, unless he to whom they had joined themselves has departed from the world. --XIV. That handmaids of God not yet consecrated, if afterwards they have wished to marry, be received to penance.

469AFrom the old codices of the collection of Dionysius Exiguus. IX. That a bishop be not ordained without the knowledge of the metropolitan. --X. In the Spanish collection and in Isidore: II: On those who after baptism have taken up the belt of secular military service, that they ought not to be admitted to the order of the clergy (cleritatus). III: On the causes of clerics which are not justly ended in the province, that they be terminated by the apostolic see. In the very old Corb. exemplar: IV: On those who after the remission of sins have had the belt of secular military service. V: That it be not lawful for anyone to summon to another Church. Who may not be received into the clergy. And that the causes of clerics be ended by their own bishops. --XI The Isidorian collection, with the Spanish collection: IV: On the wives of clerics, that they be joined to virgins, and do not take a second wife. Corb. manuscript: VI: On clerics, that they do not take women as wives. VII: On those who take women as wives: that being understood under the name woman who is not a virgin. In which sense we have seen the same word used by Siricius, Epistle 1. That a cleric do not take a widow to wife. --XII. That if a layman has married a widow, he be not made a cleric. --XIII. He who has had a second wife, let him not be a cleric. -- XIV. That no bishop presume to ordain another's cleric. --XV. That those who come to the Church from the Novatians or the Montenses be not rebaptized. -- XVI. That priests and levites ought not to come together with women. --XVII. That a monk, if he has been made a cleric, So the pure Royal exemplar of Dionysius. But others, augmented later, with which the Isidorian and Spanish collections agree: propositum suum servare debeat. do not take a wife. --XVIII. That a cleric be not made from curials, on account of the pleasures, invented by the devil, which he is compelled to exhibit. --XIX. On 469Bvirgins In the Spanish collection and the Isidorian: De virginibus sacratis, si lapsae fuerint. In the very old Corb. manuscript: De puellis sanctimonialibus, qualiter debeant velari. who have been veiled, if they have gone astray. --XX. On virgins not veiled, if they have gone astray.

INNOCENT In some manuscripts, Victorio; in certain ones, as in Merlin, Victorico; in others, Victoricio; in Reg., Victoritio; in the rest, Victricio. Of what merit this Victricius was, Paulinus, bishop of Nola, has committed to memory in two letters written to him. to VICTRICIUS, bishop of Rouen, greeting.

Although, dearest brother, by reason of the merit and honour of the priesthood in which thou art most powerful, all things of living and teaching One Colb. codex and another Fossat., with the Roman edition and Quesnel, as in Crabbe's margin: secundum ecclesiasticas regulas, against more than twenty other manuscripts. And this is what it means: Although all the precepts of teaching and living which are contained in the ecclesiastical rule are known to thee. of the ecclesiastical rule are known to thee, and there is nothing which may seem to have been less gathered by thee from the sacred readings; yet, because thou hast greatly asked for the norm In the very old Corb. manuscript, and from it Sirmond and Labbe: normam ad auctoritatem; a reading not to be despised, in much the same sense as that in which the Council of Carthage, below, Epistle 26, n. 1, writes to Innocent himself that it refers its statutes to him, so that the authority of the apostolic see also may be applied to them. and authority of the Roman Church, in full compliance with thy wish I have sent, attached to my letter, the disciplines of life and of approved conduct, set in order, by which the peoples of the Churches 469Cof your region may observe The Corb. codex with Fossat.: quibus et regulis; one Colb.: quibus regulis, rebus being omitted. by what things and rules the life of Christians ought to be held within the profession of each, and what discipline is kept in the churches of the city of Rome. It will be for thy love diligently to bring this book of rules, as a teacher and a monitor, to the notice of the neighbouring peoples and of our fellow priests who in those 470Aregions preside over their own churches; so that they may be able both to know our ways, and by diligence in teaching to form the conduct of those who flock to the faith. For either they will recognize their own practice from this our consonant reading, or, if anything is still wanting, they will easily be able to supply it by good imitation.

The beginning of the apostolate and of the episcopate from Peter. --Let us begin, then, Merlin, Crabbe and the Roman edition, with only the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections: adjuvante Deo et sancto Dei apostolo. What Innocent teaches here Caesarius of Arles, holding it for certain, writes thus to Pope Symmachus, Epistle 14, n. 2: As the episcopate took its beginning from the person of blessed Peter the apostle, so it is necessary that your holiness, by fitting disciplines, show plainly to the several churches what they ought to observe. with the help of the holy apostle Peter, through whom both the apostolate and the episcopate took their beginning in Christ, so that, since many causes have often arisen which in some cases were not causes but crimes, there may henceforth be a concern for every priest to have a care of this kind in his own Church, 470Bas the apostle Paul preaches (Ephes. V, 27), that such a Church is to be presented to God, not having spot or wrinkle, lest our conscience be violated, defiled by the breath of some diseased sheep. On account of those, therefore, who through ignorance or sloth do not hold to the ecclesiastical discipline, and presume many things not to be presumed, thou hast rightly asked that in those parts a form of this kind, which the Roman church holds, be observed. Not that any new precepts be commanded, but that we desire those things to be observed by all which have been neglected through the sloth of some, which things nevertheless have been established by apostolic tradition and that of the fathers. For it is written The older manuscripts, Colb., Fossat. and Corb.: ad Timotheum; but in this last ad Thessalonicenses has been restored by a second revision. In the early editions of the Councils, as in the manuscripts of the Hadrianic and Spanish collections, is read ad Thessalonicenses II, et ad Timotheum. Shortly after, the old editions of the Councils, with the Roman edition, have tradidimus for tradidi, against the manuscripts. to the Thessalonians, with Paul warning (II Thess. II, 14): Stand, and hold our traditions, which I delivered to you, whether by word, or by epistle. [Vulg. quas didicistis, "which you have learned"] 470CThat thought, assuredly, ought to rouse thy mind more vehemently, that thou mayest be found secure before the sight of God, free from every stain of this world. For to whom much is entrusted, more is required of him (Luc. XII, 48), These words, usura poenarum, are lacking in the manuscripts, Colb., the Dionysian, the Hadrianic, the Spanish, the Isidorian, and also in most editions, as also in Siricius. They are found, however, in Sirmond, Labbe and Quesnel, as in the older manuscripts, two Colb., one Corb. and Fossat., and also, by a second revision, in the Coislin. manuscript of the Spanish collection. an interest of penalties. Since, therefore, not for ourselves only, 471Abut for the people of Christ In Siricius, populo credito, which is preferred in the Roman edition after Crabbe, against the other books. we are compelled to render account, So the old Corb. codex with Fossat.. But in two Corb. manuscripts, disciplinam dominicam. Another Colb. likewise, with the Reg. manuscript of the Dionysian collection and the Roman edition, disciplina deifica. In Crabbe, idcirco disciplinam Dei deificam. In the manuscripts of the Hadrianic collection, disciplina sanctifica, corruptly. Hence in Corb. disciplina sanctificare has been substituted by a second revision, which also prevailed in the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections. Hence it is plain that this reading of Merlin, which Quesnel also seized on, is not genuine: Idcirco disciplina Dei sanctificare populum et erudire debemus. we ought to instruct the people in the divine discipline. So Sirmond and Labbe, following the Dionysian, the Hadrianic and the better manuscripts. But the old editions of the Councils, and also the Roman edition and Quesnel, with the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections: Quosdam enim asseris exstitisse; how this reading, even were it not to be rejected, would confirm what the learned man wishes, namely that Innocent is replying not to what Victricius, present at Rome, had said to him, but to what he had written after his departure from the City, altogether escapes us. For since it shows asseris, not scribis, it signifies of itself not things written and sent from afar, but rather things said face to face. But since it lacks the authority of the older manuscripts, it may rightly be believed to have been added to Innocent. For there have been some who, not holding to the statutes of the elders, would violate the chastity of the Church by their presumption, following the favour of the people and not fearing the judgment of God. Therefore, lest by our silence we be thought to give consent to these, since the Lord says In the Corb. manuscript of the Hadrianic collection per prophetam has been added by an old hand, which afterwards prevailed in the Spanish and Isidorian collections, and also in Merlin, Crabbe and Quesnel. (Psal. XLIX, 18): Thou sawest a thief and didst run with him; these are the things which it is expedient that every catholic bishop henceforth keep, with regard to the divine judgment.

First, that no one dare to ordain without the knowledge of the metropolitan bishop In the Roman edition, and also in the Councils and Quesnel, following the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections, episcopum is added here, a word which is absent from the Dionysian and Hadrianic collections and other older ones, as also in Siricius. Only in one of those old manuscripts do we read metropolitani episcopum in place of metropolitani episcopi. We have already observed that Innocent so borrows the words of Siricius as to adapt them to the discipline to be kept in the Gauls; nor does he likewise enjoin on the Gauls what the former had prescribed for the Italians, that no one dare to ordain without the knowledge of the apostolic see. (Dist. LXIV, c. 5); for that judgment is sound which is confirmed by the opinions of many: Sirmond, Quesnel and some manuscripts: Ne unus. Then other editions also: episcopus ordinare praesumat episcopum. This last word is absent from most and from the better manuscripts. But here, as just before, it is understood. The twofold part of this decree is shaped to the norm of the fourth canon of Nicaea. let not one bishop 472Apresume to ordain; lest a stolen favour seem to have been bestowed. For this too was established and defined in the synod of Nicaea.

Likewise (Dist. LVI, c. 61), if anyone after the remission of sins In the Colb. codex written in Lombardic letters there is written in the margin, opposite this decree, De poenitentibus. He who set it there, thinking that the discourse here is not of the remission of sins which is received through baptism but of that which is granted when penance has been completed, interpreted this decree as concerning not the baptized but those who have done penance. That it is to be understood otherwise, however, was observed above on Epistle 5 of Siricius, p. 654, note d (in our Patrologia, tome XIII, col. 1158, note d). More rightly, therefore, in the Spanish collection this decree is rendered in summary thus: On those who after baptism have taken up the belt of secular military service. has had the belt of secular military service, he ought by no means to be admitted to the clergy.

But if any causes or contentions have arisen among clerics The old editions of the Councils, and only the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections, add here vel inter laicos. That the discourse here is of clerics alone, however, what follows immediately shows. The fifth canon of the Council of Nicaea gave occasion for this addition. And indeed Pierre de Marca, book I De Concordia, ch. 6, n. 10, thinks that this fifth canon and the sixth are explained throughout this passage. Hincmar, Opuscule 47, or the letter to John VIII, ch. 12, p. 773, so supports him as to judge that by this exception, sine praejudicio tamen Rom. ecclesiae, etc., the seventh decree of the Council of Sardica is recalled. Paschasius Quesnel, however, in his notes on Leo's Epistle 5, n. 4, judges that the canons of the Council of Sardica alone are regarded here. Yet in those canons nothing is laid down about the causes of clerics of the lower order, except in can. 16, where they are permitted to appeal to the neighbouring bishops. Nor is it obscure that the canon recalled here by Innocent is the one which the Africans, to whom the synod of Sardica was unknown, note in their Epistle 3 to Celestine in these words: The decrees of Nicaea have most plainly committed both the clerics of lower rank and the bishops themselves to their metropolitans. Wherefore of those three opinions the truer seems the one which Hincmar sets out in the place cited, inasmuch as he teaches that Innocent, in saying that, according to the synod of Nicaea, judgment on causes that have arisen is to be ended by the bishops of the same province gathered together, explains a chapter (5) of the Council of Nicaea: and in forbidding anyone of the ecclesiastical order to fly off to other provinces, explains another chapter (namely 6) of the Council of Nicaea, which commands that in the several provinces their privileges be preserved to the Churches. Certainly those words, secundum Nicaenam synodum, which are omitted in the Colb. Langob. manuscript, refer not to the exception enclosed in the parenthesis, but only to what precedes. of the higher order as well as of the lower (3, q. 6, c. 14), that, according to the synod of Nicaea, the quarrel be ended by the bishops of the same province gathered together, and that it be not lawful for anyone (without prejudice, however, to the Roman Church, These words, cui in omnibus causis debet (or, as in the manuscripts, debetur) reverentia custodiri, Nicholas I, Epistle 40 in another numbering, does not read. They are lacking also in the manuscripts of the Dionysian and Hadrianic collections and in many other old codices: moved by whose authority Quesnel expunged them, although they were not wanting to the Oxford exemplar of the Codex published by him. The same learned man tries to persuade, Dissertation 12, ch. 4, n. 5, that they were added by the editors of the Roman Codex (that is, of the one which he published). But two exemplars of the same Codex, which he calls the Roman, older than the Oxford one, namely the Pithou and the Colbert, in which they are not found, ought to have prevented him from persuading himself of this. They are found, however, in the Colb. Langob. manuscript and in another Colbert, no. 3368, containing an ancient collection of canons, and also in the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections, as also in Hincmar, Opuscule 45, ch. 12, and in the book of 55 chapters, ch. 28. I pass over Gratian and others. Finally, in the very old Corb. exemplar they have been added by an old hand, and indeed the same hand that is accustomed to supply omitted words. But whether they are judged to be Innocent's or another's, everyone ought to be persuaded that the mind of this pope is not rashly explained by them, inasmuch as they rest on the words of Hosius in the synod of Sardica, can. 4, saying: If it please you, let us honour the memory of the holy apostle Peter, etc.; and also on what Gaudentius, ibid., can. 5, subjoins about a bishop who, deposed by the judgment of the neighbouring bishops, has cried out that his case must be tried in the city of Rome. to which reverence ought to be kept in all causes), to leave these priests who in the same province govern the Church of God 473Aby divine will, and fly off to other provinces. And if anyone should perchance presume to do so, let him both be removed from the office of the clergy and be judged by all guilty of wrongs.

If greater causes have been brought into the midst, let them be referred to the apostolic see, So the Roman edition and the old editions of the Councils, with the Oxon. manuscript and others of the Spanish and Isidorian collections, and also Hincmar, Opuscule 45, ch. 12. But in the Dionysian codices and in almost all our other manuscripts, which Sirmond, Labbe and Quesnel followed, beata consuetudo exigit is lacking. On the other hand, in the Colb., Langob. manuscript and in another, no. 3368, is found sicut vetus consuetudo exigit, and the preceding words, synodus statuit, etc., are omitted. This reading is favoured by what Innocent writes, whether in Epistle 29, to the Council of Carthage, n. 1: Keeping the examples of ancient tradition, and mindful of ecclesiastical discipline, you have strengthened with true reason the vigour of our religion no less now in consulting than before when you pronounced, you who have shown your approval that the judgment should be referred to us; or in Epistle 30, to the Council of Milevis, n. 2: Diligently and fittingly do you consult the secret counsels of the apostolic honour . . . concerning anxious matters, what judgment is to be held, following, that is, the ancient rule, which you know has always been kept with me throughout the whole world. The same is supported both by Cyril to Celestine, Epistle 8, n. 1, speaking thus: The old custom of the Churches urges that matters of this kind be communicated to thy holiness; and by Leo, Epistle 5, n. 5, where he asks that the greater causes be referred to him for the tradition of the ancient institution and the reverence owed to the apostolic see. Isidore Mercator, in the letter which he forged in the name of Pelagius, copying out this passage of Innocent, alters it thus: But let the greater and difficult questions, as the holy synod has laid down and blessed custom requires, always be referred to the apostolic see. Further, by the words ut sancta synodus statuit we judge that there are denoted, not the canons 3, 4 or 7 of the Council of Sardica, by which it is permitted to appeal to the Roman bishop, but the letter of the same synod to Julius, in which the synod declares that it is best and exceedingly most fitting, if the priests of the Lord refer to the see of the apostle Peter from each and every province. Nor indeed does Innocent in this place reserve to himself the judgment of the greater causes; rather he requires that a report of those causes, judged by an episcopal council, be sent according to custom to the apostolic see. Wherefore that interpretation of Hincmar, tome II, p. 774, does not please us: that if greater causes, one of which is concerning the appeal of a bishop who has been judged, have been brought into the midst, they be referred to the apostolic see after the episcopal judgment, as the synod, namely that of Sardica, laid down, and old custom requires. For there it is not a question of the appeal of a bishop who has been judged; but only this is commanded, that what the bishops have judged concerning graver matters be referred to the apostolic see. On this matter, recall what we have set out more fully in the general preface. as the synod laid down and blessed custom requires, after the episcopal judgment.

That a cleric do The Roman edition, following Dionysius: ut viduam. Quesnel, following the earlier editions of the Councils and the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections: ut mulierem viduam. We prefer, with Sirmond, Labbe and the other old books, ut mulierem. So also wrote Siricius, Epistle 5. So too in the synodal decree of Hilary, after his Epistle 14, n. 14, Tiberius, bishop of Sabina, speaks: If in my Church I shall have caught any one of the clerics . . . . either to have married a woman. not take a woman to wife; because it is written (Levit. XXI, 13, 14; Ezech. XLIV, 22), Let the priest take a virgin to wife, not a widow, One of the Colb. manuscripts, with the old Corb.: nec relictam. not one put away. Certainly he who by his own labour and uprightness of life strives towards the priesthood ought to take care lest, hindered by this impediment, he may not be able to attain it.

That he who So Sirmond and Labbe, with the better manuscripts. But others, with the Dionysian, Spanish and Isidorian collections: viduam, which word Siricius also uses here. has taken a woman to wife, though a layman, 474Awhether before baptism or after baptism, be not admitted to the clergy (Dist. 34, c. 13); because he is seen to be excluded by the same fault. For in baptism crimes are remitted; the partnership of a wife taken is not dissolved.

That he who has married a second wife be not made a cleric: because it is written (I Tim. III, 2), The husband of one wife. In the Langob. manuscript and another Colb.: Unius uxoris virum. Ac ne ab aliquibus, what lies between being omitted. They seem to have been suppressed deliberately by some studious person, who believed them additions the more readily because he did not come upon the testimonies cited in the sacred writings, and indeed read in Jerome, Epistle 83, to Oceanus: As by the Law it had been granted to the people to scatter children among many wives, so to the priests themselves also the free use of this licence lay open. Yet the testimonies which Innocent adduces here Tertullian also expressly cites as from the Law: the first in the book On Monogamy, ch. 7, where he says: Meanwhile, as regards the Law . . . it forbids the same priests to marry again; the other in the book Exhortation to Chastity, ch. 7, where he not only says: It is laid down in Leviticus, Let my priests not marry more, but also adds: I can say that even that is more which is not once. And again: Let my priests marry once. And elsewhere (Tit. I, 6): My priests shall not marry more. And lest The Roman edition: Etsi ab aliquibus, which Crabbe noted in the margin, and below, satis errant: against all the other books. it be thought by some that if perchance anyone took a wife before baptism and, she departing from the world, has married another, this is remitted in baptism, he strays far from the rule So the old Corb. codex with one Colb.. But others: quia in baptismo peccata remittuntur, non. In this and the foregoing decree Innocent so copies out the words of Siricius as to have judged it necessary to define for himself, in both, what is to be thought about wives married before baptism, of whom Siricius had said nothing. A recent controversy on that matter required it. Carterius, namely, a bishop of Spain, against whom, says Jerome, Epistle 83, to Oceanus, near the end, nothing else could be objected by his rivals beyond the conjugal bond, and that before baptism, had, his first wife being dead, married another after the laver. Oceanus judged that he had been ordained against the precept of the Apostle. Jerome, on the contrary, keenly defends his ordination as lawful in the aforesaid Epistle 83, and that the whole world is full of ordinations of this kind. Before he wrote it, however, he does not keep silent that he had met at Rome a most eloquent man who opposed his own opinion. He met others too not long afterwards. Certainly Rufinus, while Siricius was still living, cast this opinion in his teeth. Jerome, answering him at the end of book I of the Apology, when Siricius had not yet been taken from among the living, so tempers his earlier opinion as no longer to say that the world is full of ordinations of this kind, but that there are some priests of this sort in the Church; and he testifies that he is not bound by this question, but permits each to abound in his own sense. Questioned by the brethren, he says, we answered what seemed good to us, prejudging no one to follow what he wishes, nor overturning another's decree by our opinion. The first Council of Valence, held in the year 374, can. 1, had already defined that after this synod, by which help is brought to such unlawful things even though late, no one of the digamists or of the husbands of women married a second time can be ordained a cleric. Nor is it to be asked whether they defiled themselves by this necessity of an unhappy lot when initiated in the divine sacraments or as gentiles, since the form of the divine precept is chaste. The same opinion is approved by Ambrose, book I On the Duties, ch. 50, n. 2, and Epistle 63, to the Church of Vercelli, n. 63; by Augustine, in the book On the Good of Marriage, ch. 18, where he also explains the mystical reason of this discipline; and by Leo, Epistle 45. who thinks that in baptism 475Athis is remitted: sins are remitted; the number of wives taken is not abolished: since indeed a wife is married by the precept of the law, to such a degree that even in paradise, when the parents of the human race were joined, they were blessed by the Lord himself (Gen. I, 28); and Solomon says (Prov. XIX, 14), By God a wife shall be prepared for a man. That all priests also keep this form, the very practice of the Church shows. For it is quite absurd for anyone to believe that a wife taken before baptism is not counted after baptism; since the blessing which is laid by the priest upon those who marry is taught not to have given matter for sinning, but to have kept the form of the law instituted by God of old. But if (Dist. 34, c. 13) she is not thought to be counted a wife who was married before baptism, then 475Bneither will the children who were begotten before baptism be held So the Royal exemplar of Dionysius. But the old Corb. manuscript with Fossat. and two Colb.: haberentur. Quesnel: habendi sunt. The rest, printed and written: et habentur. for children.

That no one presume to ordain a cleric from another's Church (Dist. 71, c. 2), unless his bishop, In the Corb. manuscript and another Colb., precibus is lacking. In the Council of Nicaea, can. 16, and in that of Sardica, can. 19, it is forbidden that another's cleric be ordained without the consent and without the will of his own bishop. In the Codex canonum Ecclesiae Africanae, c. 54, Bishop Epigonius, having first said that it was laid down in many councils that no bishop snatch another's cleric for himself without the judgment of him whose cleric he was, remonstrates with Julian because he had usurped his own cleric for himself and ordained him deacon without consulting him. To whom Bishop Numidius says: If Julian appears to have done this without thy good pleasure being asked or consulted, we all judge it done unjustly and unworthily; then he decrees that he be separated, unless he make satisfaction by returning the cleric. won over by prayers, has been willing to grant it. This too the synod of Nicaea laid down (Can. 17), that one church should not receive a cleric cast off by another.

That those who come from the Novatians or the Montenses be received by the imposition of hands only; because, although by heretics, they were nevertheless baptized in the name of Christ: except those who, if perchance passing over from us to them, In Quesnel, baptizati; which the Corb. manuscript and another Colb. also have here. But the same manuscripts, in Epistle 5 of Siricius, to whose words Innocent keeps close, show rebaptizati; which the other codices also retain here, and the very context of the sentence demands. On the same passage of Siricius we have explained who are called Montenses, and at the same time proved that the practice of rebaptizing was familiar to them, as also to the Novatians. have been rebaptized. These, if, coming to their senses and considering their ruin, they wish to return, are to be admitted under a long In two manuscripts the word poenitentiae is lacking. The first Council of Valence, c. 3, so lays down that the approach to satisfaction be not denied to those who after the one and holy laver have polluted themselves with an unchaste washing, as to wish them to do penance up to the day of death. satisfaction of penance 475C.

Moreover, what is worthy and chaste and honourable, the Church ought by every means to hold, 476Athat priests and levites do not come together with their wives The Colb. Langob. codex: non misceantur: quia ministeriis quotidianis. Ministeriis quotidianis is not displeasing; above all since in Siricius one may read quotidianis necessitatibus.; because they are occupied with the necessities of their daily ministry. For it is written (Levit. XI, 14), Be ye holy, for I also am holy, the Lord your God. For if in former times the priests did not depart from the temple of God in the year of their course (Levit. XXI, 12), as we read of Zachary, nor touched their houses at all, to whom certainly the use of a wife had been allowed on account of the succession of offspring, because from another tribe, and apart from Crabbe added quam here in a smaller type; which the other editions retained thereafter, against Merlin and the manuscripts. Shortly after, with two Corb. and one Colb., we restore nulli fuerat praeceptum, where in other books it is nullus fuerat praeceptus. the seed of Aaron, it had been commanded to none to approach the priesthood (Num. XVIII, 7): how much more shall these priests or levites be bound to keep chastity from the day of their ordination, whose priesthood or ministry is without succession, and no day passes on which they are free either from the divine sacrifices or from 476Bthe office of baptism! For if Paul writes to the Corinthians (I Cor. VII, 5), saying, Abstain ye for a time, that ye may give yourselves to prayer, and this he certainly commands to laymen: much more shall priests, for whom there is a continual office of praying and of sacrificing, be bound always to abstain from a union of this kind. If such a one has been defiled by carnal concupiscence, with what shame will he presume to sacrifice? or with what conscience, or by what merit, does he believe that he is heard The Colb. Langob. manuscript, with the Roman edition and the later ones: exaudiri posse. Posse is absent from the other manuscripts, as also from the old editions of the Councils., since it is said (Tit. I, 15): All things are clean to the clean, but to the defiled and to unbelievers nothing is clean? But perhaps he believes this lawful because it is written (I Tim. III, 2; Tit. I, 6), The husband of one wife: Quesnel: non de remanente. Labbe, in the margin: non propter manendum. The Roman edition, after Merlin and Crabbe: non permanenti. The Fossat. manuscript: non permanente. As in the letter of Siricius, so here too the other manuscripts, which we follow, are consistent with themselves. Ambrose, Epistle 63, to the Church of Vercelli, n. 62, observes that by the words adduced the marriage is not indeed dissolved, but neither is the conjugal use permitted, and a repeated marriage is forbidden. he did not speak of one remaining in the concupiscence of begetting, but on account of the continence to come. For he did not refuse those whole in body, who says (I Cor. VII, 7): 476CBut I would that all men were even as I myself. And he declares it more openly, saying thus (Rom. VIII, 8): But they that 477Aare in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are now not nom in the flesh, but in the spirit.

Of monks (16, q. 1, c. 3) who, having long dwelt in monasteries, if afterwards they have attained Quesnel, with one Colb. manuscript: pervenire nituntur. Shortly after, in the Colb. Langob. manuscript: aut enim sit, ut in monasterio fuit, a reading not to be despised. Innocent here takes care that a monk advanced to those orders of the clergy in which marrying a wife is not forbidden should not think it lawful for himself to fall away from his former purpose of celibacy. Hence Dionysius, following the Royal exemplar, rendered this chapter in summary thus in the index of titles: Quod monachus, si clericus factus fuerit, uxorem non ducat. to the order of the clergy, that they ought not to turn aside from their former purpose. For either, as he was in the monastery, what he long kept he ought not to lose when placed in a better rank: or if, corrupted, afterwards baptized, In two Colb. manuscripts: baptizatus, monasterium deserens, et ad. Nothing else will this reading of two Corb. manuscripts signify either, baptizatus, et monasterio sedens, if cedens be read for sedens. The Royal exemplar of the Dionysian collection shows et in monasterium sedens, perhaps for secedens. and sitting in the monastery, he has wished to approach the order of the clergy, he will by no means be able to have a wife; because he cannot be blessed with a bride, being already Some editions and manuscripts: jam ante corruptus. The practice of the rule mentioned here by Innocent is confirmed by Caesarius of Arles, in Augustine, appendix, tome V, sermon 289, in these words: He who desires to take a wife, just as he wishes to find her a virgin, so let him himself be a virgin until the wedding: because if he has not been, he will not deserve to receive the blessing with his bride. Hence also is had the reason of the old rule, which commanded that he who, corrupted before baptism, wished afterwards to become a cleric, should promise that he would by no means take a wife: that is, lest the disgrace for which he was judged unworthy of the nuptial blessing should return into the very order of the clergy. And if any cleric whatever is held back by this impediment from taking a wife, how much more a monk! For the same reason Siricius, Epistle 1, n. 13, willed that a cleric to be advanced to a higher rank should be content with one only, and her whom he received a virgin with the common blessing through the priest. corrupted. Which form is kept in the case of clerics, above all since the old rule has this, that whoever, corrupted, being baptized, wished to be a cleric, should promise that he would by no means take a wife.

Moreover, certain of our brethren 477Bfrequently strive to make clerics of curials (Dist. 51, c. 3), or of those occupied with any 478Apublic functions In two manuscripts aut honoribus is added here. Shortly after, in Quesnel, as in the Roman edition, de adscitis, where in all the manuscripts de adscito. Worse, in Crabbe, de accito. In what is subjoined, moreover, about the pleasures invented by the devil, which curials were often compelled to exhibit, is found the reason why many Christians too declined those duties: against whom Julian, the apostate emperor, Codex Theodosianus, book XII, tit. 1, law 50, decrees: Let the decurions who decline their duties as Christians be recalled. whatever; for whom afterwards a greater sadness arises, when something is commanded by the emperor about recalling them, than favour arises from the one admitted. For it is agreed that they, in those very duties, also exhibit pleasures which without doubt were invented by the devil, and either preside over or take part in the apparatus of games or of shows. Let the solicitude and sadness of the brethren certainly serve as an example, which we have often endured with the emperor present, when we more often entreated for these, as thou, placed with us That Victricius came to Rome, Paulinus of Nola recalls, Epistle 37, n. 1, to Victricius himself, in this manner: Hence, being saddened, we had drawn bitterness, that thou, who hadst come to the City across such great spaces of lands, dost not hold on from the City to us, as we hoped. Then he hints that he had come there for this reason, that he might clear himself of some crime laid on him by calumny, in these words: But thy holiness holds glory not only from the misuse of lawful things . . . but, as I have learned, also from the multitude of adversaries, from the endurance of temptations: since unjust witnesses have risen up against thee, and iniquity hath lied to itself. But a knot in a bulrush and a blemish in the light could not be found. thyself, learned, for whom a huge vexation was pressing, that not only inferior clerics from the curials, but also those already set in the priesthood should be surrendered So Sirmond, Labbe and Quesnel, with the old Corb. manuscript and also the Fossat. and two Colb. But the others have instabat, in no other sense. The wording of this whole chapter is somewhat perplexed, by which Innocent wishes to persuade that curials be not ordained. And of this matter the principal reason is that which he touches as if in passing: For it is agreed that they, in those very duties, also exhibit pleasures, etc. But not dwelling on this, he quickly returns to the other, which he had set first, namely that for the bishops who ordain them a greater sadness arises from it. Which he also proves by his own example, of which Victricius was witness, adding: Si certe in exemplum sollicitudo, etc. Whence the last words, quibus . . . . . ingens ut redderentur molestia imminebat, are to be understood thus: while they were pressing on me with huge vexation, that those who had been ordained from the curials, not only the inferior clerics, whom the law of Arcadius adduced in the Monitum commanded to be recalled, but also those set in the priesthood, should be surrendered..

Likewise (27, q. 1, c. 10; Ivo, p. 7, c. 18) 478Bthose who have been married spiritually to Christ In the early editions of the Councils, as in the exemplars of the Dionysian, Hadrianic, Spanish and Isidorian collections: nubunt et a sacerdote velantur. In Epistle 10 of Siricius, n. 3, we read that that virgin is called veiled who, having professed her integrity by public testimony, has received the veil of blessing, the priest having poured forth prayer. Ambrose, in book III On Virgins, ch. 1, inserted the sermon which Pope Liberius delivered when Ambrose's own sister Marcellina, on the Saviour's birthday, at the apostle Peter's, was marking her profession of virginity also by the change of garment, many girls of God also standing by, and others. And thus begins this pope's sermon to Marcellina: A good marriage, daughter, hast thou desired. Thou seest how great a people has come together for the birthday of thy bridegroom, and none goes away unfed. The canons, moreover, wished girls to be veiled or consecrated only at a mature age. In the year 381 the Council of Saragossa, can. 8, laid down that virgins who have vowed themselves to God are not to be veiled, except at the proven age of forty years. The same afterwards both the Emperor Majorian and the Council of Agde, can. 19, confirmed. But in the year 397 the Third Council of Carthage, which the Second of Arles, can. 52, also seems to support, can. 4, ordained that neither deacons be ordained, nor virgins consecrated, before twenty-five years of age. Afterwards also it pleased the Second Council of Milevis, which was held in the year 416, can. 26, or Codex canonum Ecclesiae Africanae, c. 126, that whatever bishop, through the necessity of chastity in peril . . . . , has veiled a virgin, or shall have veiled one, within twenty-five years, the council (of Carthage) by which it was laid down about that number of years shall not stand against him. And the aforesaid constitution of the Council of Carthage, with the exception of Milevis, the capitularies of our kings hold ratified, that of Aachen, in the year 789, c. 45, and that of Frankfurt, in the year 794, c. 14. It is to be noted, however, that these things were provided only for the solemn profession, since before that too girls were permitted to take up the purpose of virginity. and have deserved to be veiled by the priest, 479Aif afterwards they have either married publicly or The old editions of the Councils: si postea nupserint; and then vel publice vel occulte corruptae fuerint, the words vel publice being moved from their place against the testimony of the manuscripts. In the Colb. Lang., as in others of the Spanish and Isidorian collections, is found vel fuerint occulte corruptae. Quesnel prefers vel clangulo corruptae fuerint, and thence conjectures that clangulo was once said as if clam in angulo. But in the exemplars of the Codex published by him, Thuan. or Colb., Pith., etc., as in the Dionysian and Hadrianic and in the manuscripts Corb., Fossat., etc., we read vel se clanculo corruperint. Whence that conjecture seems to have no authority. have corrupted themselves secretly, they are not to be admitted to do penance, unless he to whom they Most and the better manuscripts: se junxerat, following which Quesnel supplied certain words of his own. Then the Dionysian and Hadrianic: de mundo recesserit; the Colb. Langob. codex, with others of the Spanish and Isidorian collections and also the early editions of the Councils: de hac vita decesserit, or dicesserit. We judge that this double reading was substituted for the genuine one from a marginal note. For since this de saeculo recesserit seemed ambiguous, and it could be interpreted either of withdrawal from the world into a monastery or of departure out of this world and mortal life, the ambiguity was removed by a marginal scholion, by which we are advised that saeculo is the same as hac vita. And indeed what is subjoined about the woman who has married another while her husband lives favours this annotation. But how those are helped by it who think that the marriages of consecrated virgins are indeed disapproved by Innocent but not dissolved, is hidden from us. Or at any rate they must prove that the same pope, and the framers of the canons older than he, judged that for a woman who has married another while her former husband lives, this latter marriage is not to be dissolved. The mind of Innocent is illustrated by the First Council of Toledo, celebrated in the year 400. For can. 16 sets down first that a devoted woman who sins is not to be received in the Church, unless she has ceased to sin, and, ceasing, has done fitting penance for ten years: and then adds: But she who has taken a husband, let her not be admitted to penance, unless, while that husband is still living, she has begun to live chastely, or after he himself has died. But how could she be proved to live chastely, unless by withdrawing from the adulterer? The fathers of the same council explain this more openly in can. 19, where, concerning the daughter of a bishop or presbyter or deacon, if she has been devoted to God, and has sinned, and has taken a husband, they lay down that she be not admitted to communion, unless, her husband being dead, she has done penance; but if, while he lives, she has withdrawn, and repented . . . . . , let her receive penance when failing at the last. Certainly the Second Council of Tours, can. 20, understood that the dissolution of a marriage of this kind is commanded by Innocent. For it first copies out his words, then professes that it is not lawful for it to depart from his decrees. And at last, having added to them the canon 52 of the Second Council of Arles and some others, it decrees concerning a consecrated virgin who has married, and concerning him whom she has married: They are to be slain with the sword of the mouth, and deprived of communion, if they have been unwilling to observe the decrees of the elders left to them, and have disdained to hear their pastor, and have been unwilling to be separated. Those therefore who have wished to endure in this obstinacy, and to remain in the wallowing-place of evil conversation rather than to separate themselves from the forbidden marriage, let them be condemned by perpetual excommunication. For if by decrees of the elders it there means, above all, the words of Innocent adduced, which cannot be denied, since it judges that they are despised by those who have been unwilling to separate themselves from the forbidden marriage; it remains that it judged Innocent to have commanded the dissolution of a marriage of this kind. So the Fifth Council of Orleans, can. 19, with which the First of Mâcon, can. 12, agrees, permits the same persons to be recalled to the grace of communion only on this condition, if they have healed the fault by separation. And indeed that marriage, which by the judgment of the Council of Mâcon is rather a debauchery than a marriage, is by the sentence of Siricius, Epistle 10, n. 3, incest, and on the adulterer nothing but the false name of husband can be laid. Innocent also, with the same pope, judges consecrated virgins to be truly married, inasmuch as they had joined themselves to an immortal bridegroom. Whence it follows that, since their bridegroom never ceases to live, neither can the law of the marriage entered into with him ever be dissolved. The Second Council of Tours praises the law 2 of the Codex Theodosianus, tit. 25, by which the Emperor Jovian decrees: If anyone shall have dared, I will not say to carry off, but even to make an attempt on consecrated virgins for the sake of joining marriage, even unwilling ones, he shall be struck with capital sentence. had joined themselves has departed from the world. For if this principle is kept in the case of all, that whatever woman has married another while her husband is living is held an adulteress, and leave to do penance is not granted her unless one of them has died: how much more is it to be held in the case of her who had before joined herself to an immortal bridegroom, and afterwards has passed over Merlin and Crabbe, with the Colb. Langob. manuscript and also other codices of the Spanish and Isidorian collections: transire elegit. to human nuptials!

But those (27, q. 1, c. 9; Ivo, p. 7, c. 17) who, not yet covered with the sacred veil In two manuscripts, consecratae: which word Leo uses, Epistle 5, to Rusticus, c. 15, where the discourse is of the same girls. Our reading is confirmed by that verse of Prudentius, book II against Symmachus: Our virgins too have fairest rewards, both modesty and the face covered with the holy veil., have nevertheless 480Apromised The old editions of the Councils, with the manuscripts of the Dionysian, Hadrianic, Spanish and Isidorian collections: semper se simulaverunt permanere. Quesnel, with the old Corb. manuscript and one Colb.: se permanere simulaverant. Fossat.: semper manere simulaverant. Sirmond and Labbe: semper manere promiserant. The Roman edition: semper se permanere promiserant. That we should prefer, with two Colb. manuscripts, se promiserant permanere, what is joined after persuaded us, where the sponsio of the same girls, the pacta pollicitatio, and the prior promissio are mentioned. Certainly the discourse here is of girls who had bound themselves to God to keep virginity, and who are therefore said by Siricius, Epistle 10, n. 3, not to have kept the precept of the heavenly marriage; but who lacked the solemn consecration. to remain in the virginal purpose, although they have not been veiled, if perchance they have married, these must do penance for some time; because her pledge Crabbe and the later editions of the Councils: sponsio earum. But Merlin and all the manuscripts: sponsio ejus; supply quae hujusmodi est. Below, the same Crabbe and the Roman edition: pepigerunt; where Sirmond, restoring pepigit from the manuscripts, added virgo of his own, which thenceforth Labbe and Quesnel retained. was held by God. For if among men a contract of good faith is wont to be dissolved on no account: how much more ought this promise, which she has made with God, not In the exemplars of the Dionysian, Hadrianic, Spanish and Isidorian collections, as in the early editions of the Councils: non poterit. to be dissolved without punishment! For if the apostle Paul said that those who departed from the purpose of widowhood have damnation, because they have made void their first faith (I Tim. V, 12): how much more virgins, who The Roman edition, with the Colb. Langob. manuscript: quae pactionis suae fidem minime servarerunt. Merlin and Crabbe, following the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections: quae prioris promissionis fidem minime servaverunt. The Dionysian and Hadrianic: quae priori promissioni fidem frangere sunt conatae. In Quesnel, as in one Colb. exemplar and another Pith.: quae prioris promissionis fidem frangere sunt nisae. In place of the word nisae, Sirmond and Labbe substituted visae. We follow the old Corb. manuscript and the Fossat. will break faith with their prior promise! 481A

This rule, therefore, What follows from here seems to a learned man, who prepared the latest edition of the works of St Paulinus of Nola, dissertation 4, at the end of ch. 4, to be excerpted from some other writings, and not to cohere with what precedes. But what he subjoins next, unless the whole letter is understood of this rule, shows on how light a foundation his opinion rests. For it is not ambiguous that here by the name rule is understood the body of decrees which the whole letter comprises; and that what at the beginning had been called the book of rules is now more simply called the rule. Wherefore it is manifest that this clause too coheres most fittingly with the opening and the rest of the letter. He who in the opening praised Victricius, greatly asking for the norm and authority of the Roman Church, and who promised him a book of rules, by which he might be able to learn what discipline is kept in the churches of the city of Rome, having set out that discipline most amply, fittingly concludes that by the diligent observance of the same rule or discipline peace and concord are guarded in the Church, and thus schisms and heresies, etc., are guarded against. Finally, since among all the codices, written as well as printed, there is none that presents this letter without this clause, the general consensus attributes to it a holy and undoubted authority. dearest brother, if it has been observed with full vigilance by all the priests of God, ambition will cease, dissension will be quieted, heresies and schisms will not emerge, the devil will not find room to rage, unanimity will abide, iniquity, overcome, will be trodden underfoot, truth will blaze with spiritual fervour, peace preached with the lips will accord with the will of the soul. There will be fulfilled also the saying of the Apostle (Philip. II, 2 et 3), that, unanimous, of one mind, we may remain in Christ, claiming nothing for ourselves through contention nor through vainglory; pleasing not men, but God our Saviour, to whom is honour and glory for ages of ages. Amen. Given on the fifteenth day before the Kalends of March (Februar. 15, ann. 404), Honorius Augustus for the sixth time and Merlin and Crabbe, following the Spanish and Isidorian collections: Aristo. Crabbe added in the margin Aristoneto, which the Roman editor seized on. The old Corb. manuscript and one Colb. show Aristineto. Another Colb., with Pith.: Aristhineto. Another Colb. likewise: Aristinio. In Sirmond and Labbe: Aristaeneto viro clarissimo. These last two words, in place of which in the Roman edition there stands viris clarissimis, are absent from all the manuscripts, as also from the old editions of the Councils. But the whole consular or chronological note is lacking only in the collection of Dionysius, whether pure or later augmented, as we have said beforehand. Aristenetus being consuls.

• 481B

This letter is shorter in some books, fuller in others. Who cut it down. --Some books present this letter shorter, others fuller. In the shorter form it was first published by Jacques Merlin, and was then reprinted in the same manner both in the collection of pontifical letters and in various editions of the councils, until Jacques Sermondus, having found it entire in old books, judged that it should be published for the public good. In the exemplars of the Spanish collection, such as the libraries of the Churches of Laon, Noyon and Beauvais preserve, as in all the exemplars of Isidore Mercator, it is had only mutilated. Hence we suspected that it was first truncated by the one who put together the Spanish collection of canons. But that suspicion was then removed by the Colbert codex 408, On the Institution of Clerics, written 700 years ago, and another like it and no more recent, the Coislin, which, although they are composed of the monuments of the Spanish collection alone, 481Cnevertheless retain those chapters of this letter which are lacking in the shorter copy. Finally, when we learned that sound and genuine exemplars of the Spanish collection still exist in the Churches of Urgel, Gerona and Ripoll, in which this letter is read entire, we were fully persuaded that it had been truncated not by him who arranged that collection, but by some other. And since in all the exemplars of Isidore Mercator without exception it is had only mutilated and cut down, who would think another author of this deed should be sought? Nor is it surprising that a man who made no scruple of forging many things, interpolating others, altering more in various ways, did not fear to suppress some things as well. Content, namely, to have copied out Innocent's general decrees, he withdrew the rest, which pertain to special persons or causes, as more foreign to his purpose. Nor do the aforesaid books of Laon, Noyon and Beauvais stand in the way of this opinion. For although 482Athey were copied from the Spanish collection, yet it is clear, expressly from the letter of Pope Vigilius to Profuturus, that he by whom they were written or dictated also had the collection of Isidore by him, and sometimes, although rarely, preferred it to the Spanish. Further, this letter of Innocent is preserved entire not only in the genuine exemplars of the Spanish collection but also in the very old one of Corbie, and in that of Saint-Maur-des-Fossés, now Colbert's. Since these things are so, that nothing remains for the reader to desire, we now present it entire from the fidelity of the sounder codices, in such a way that we also indicate, at its end, how it was published by Mercator.

That it is inscribed to the bishops of the synod of Toledo, not of Toulouse. --In both kinds of exemplars a false inscription is prefixed to it. And in the preliminary index of the Corbie codex, indeed, it is given this title: Epistola Innocentii papae ad universos episcopos ecclesiae Tolosanae de universis herisebus (leg. haeresibus) vel de ordinationibus episcoporum, et caetera in epistola requirenda: 482Bbut at the head of the letter itself this superscription is set before it: Innocentius episcopis universis in Tolosana synodo constitutis. The same is read also in the one of Saint-Maur-des-Fossés, except that in this one diversis has been substituted for universis. In most exemplars too, of the Spanish as well as of the Isidorian collection, it is likewise inscribed universis episcopis in Tolosana synodo constitutis. Nor did Merlin change this inscription. Indeed Jacques Sirmond also retained the same, and on that account gave this letter a place among the very councils of Gaul. « On which matter, he says in the preliminary Monitum, although I understood that it could with good reason be doubted, yet it seemed better that it should stand here entire, even in another's place, especially since it had hitherto been mutilated, than perhaps be missed in its own. » Afterwards, however, he added in the notes that it did not seem doubtful to him « that it was written to the bishops of Spain after the synod of Toledo indeed, but concerning the things done in it, or that followed afterwards. Wherefore, he says, I judge that the ancient inscription of the letter should be restored, 482Cso that in Toletana synodo is read. » Further, he calls it ancient because, having already been restored by Crabbe, it was retained by those who reprinted either the councils or the letters of the Roman pontiffs. Before that too it prevailed at least in some manuscripts. We ourselves, among the various codices of Isidore's collection, have come upon one of Navarre written at least 600 years ago, and another of the monastery of St Martin of Champs, which show in Toletana synodo. Nor is the soundness of this reading to be doubted, as what we are about to subjoin will confirm. And whence the other crept in may be conjectured from various manuscripts compared with one another.

How it came about that it was inscribed TO THE SYNOD OF TOULOUSE. --Although in the Noyon exemplar this letter is inscribed universis episcopis in Tolosana civitate constitutis, yet in the general index of the same it is headed ad universos Tolotanos episcopos. That Tolotanos was written there for Toletanos, not for Tolosanos, is proved by the codex of Saint-Germain, no. 424, 483Acontaining a collection of canons put together 800 years ago, in which, as often as any synod of Toledo is cited, it is constantly called Tolotana. Since, therefore, here too the scribes had written Tolotana for Toletana, the copyists judged the more readily that Tolosana ought to be restored, because they both saw a letter of Innocent ad Exsuperium Tolosanum, and in the text of this letter, n. 3, read corruptly Galliarum or Galliorum, in place of Galliciorum or Gallaecorum. Moreover, since below, n. 6, where from the testimony of the Colbert exemplar we read that Rufinus in Toletano concilio erroris tui veniam postulasse, the Corbie one shows Tolosano for Toletano, no one will fail to agree that the same fault could have crept into the inscription with equal ease.

That it was written to the fathers of the First Council of Toledo. --What that synod is to which Innocent now writes, and when it was held, is disputed. Baronius, in the earlier edition of the Annals, had laid down two things as certain: first, that this letter of Innocent was written to the First Council of Toledo; the other, that this council 483Bwas celebrated in the last consulship of Stilicho, that is, in the year of Christ 405. But in the latest edition he changed his opinion, and, persuaded that the First Council of Toledo is to be dated to the first consulship of Stilicho, and thus to the year of Christ 400, he thought that this letter pertains to some later synod of Toledo. To this opinion many subscribe, and by name Antoine Pagi. And the former opinion, by which the First Council of Toledo was put off to the second consulship of Stilicho, can by no means be defended. But neither does there seem to be any reason why we should distinguish the council, to whose bishops Innocent now writes, from the First of Toledo. That this may become more evident, it will be worth the labour to weigh what has been published under the name of the First Council of Toledo.

The three parts patres of the First Council of Toledo as published. --In this council three parts are to be distinguished. The first consists of the preface, 20 canons, and the subscriptions of the bishops. The second contains the rule of faith and 483Ceighteen chapters against the heresies, with this inscription: Here begins the rule of the catholic faith against all heresies, and most especially against the Priscillians, which the bishops of Tarragona, Carthagena, Lusitania and Baetica made, and with the precept of Leo, pope of the city of Rome, transmitted to Balconius, bishop of Gallicia. The last is marked with this title: Here begin the exemplars of the professions in the council of Toledo against the sect of Priscillian, era 438. Then follows the preface: « After the council was held on the Kalends of September, on the third day before the Nones of September, after various hearings then held, on the eighth day before the Ides of September there were excerpted from the full acts the professions of the lord Symphosius and the lord Dictinius, bishops of holy memory, and of the lord Comasius of holy memory, then a presbyter, which among the rest they made in the council of Toledo concerning the condemnation of Priscillian or of his sect, in this manner: After some things, and among some things done at the same time, Bishop Dictinius said, » etc., that is, the rest 483Dof Dictinius's profession, after which, set down, is subjoined the profession of Comasius, with this preface or interlocution placed first: « In the era as above, on the third day before the Ides of September, the professions of the lord Simphosius and the lord Dictinius, bishops of holy memory, and of Comasius of holy memory, then a presbyter. Comasius said. » Finally this profession of Comasius is followed by « the exemplar of the definitive sentence, transferred from the acts. On the day as above the bishops said: Let the sentence be read. And he read, » etc.

They present a council celebrated in the year 447. --But how those three parts cohere among themselves, or can be referred to one and the same council, no one, as far as I know, has hitherto explained. Only this is agreed among the learned, that the middle part belongs to that council which Leo, writing to Turibius in the year 447, commanded to be gathered; and thus that it is foreign to the First Council of Toledo. Hence, after Baronius, Binius notes that it was inserted among the other two by the error of the collector. But neither can the last 484Abe more fittingly referred to the First Council of Toledo. For the bishops who speak in it indicate that they are holding a synod when Symphosius, Dictinius and Comasius were already dead, who, it is agreed, were still living at the time of the First Council of Toledo, and indeed, present at that very council, condemned the heresy of Priscillian. But those three parts will cohere with one another most aptly if they are referred to the general council of the Spains which was gathered by order of Pope Leo: so that in it first the 20 canons of the First Council of Toledo were read out and confirmed, then the rule of faith was composed, 18 new canons were added, and lastly some excerpts from the full acts of the First Synod of Toledo were recited. What therefore has been published as the First Council of Toledo would more aptly be inscribed: The council of the Spains which the bishops of Tarragona, Carthagena, Lusitania and Baetica celebrated by the precept of Leo, in the year 447, on the Kalends of September: to which are prefixed the 20 canons of the First Council of Toledo, celebrated in the year 400, and certain excerpts of the same council, copied from 484Bits full acts, are subjoined.

That a council was held at Toledo in the year 400. -- But we have so restored that council to the year 447 as not to deny that another was held at Toledo in the year 400, but rather to assert it plainly from that very fact. Of this council of Toledo Idatius speaks thus in his Chronicle, at the year 400: « In the province of Carthagena, in the city of Toledo, a synod of bishops is gathered, in which, as is contained in the acts, Symphosius and Dictinius and other bishops of the province of Gallaecia with them, followers of Priscillian, condemn his most blasphemous heresy, together with its very author, by the subscription of their profession. Certain things also are laid down to be observed concerning the discipline of the Church, Bishop Ortygius, who had been ordained at Celenae, taking part in the same council. » Now the council held by the order of Leo in the year 447 first reviews the canons pertaining to discipline which the synod of Toledo issued Stilichone consule, that is, in the year 400: and afterwards, from the 484Cacts of the same synod, dated according to Spanish custom era 438, for the year 400, it presents not only the professions of Symphosius, Dictinius and others condemning the heresy of Priscillian together with its author himself, but also the sentence of the same council, by which their honour is preserved to them, and which is closed, in Ortygius's favour, with these words: « But to our brother Ortygius we pronounce that the churches from which he had been driven are to be restored. » Whence the agreement of those acts with the Chronicle of Idatius is manifest. Moreover, in the sentence of the synod of Toledo just mentioned Simplician is recorded as the one who then ruled the Church of Milan. But Simplician succeeded Ambrose only in the year 397, and he himself, before the sixteenth day before the Kalends of July of the year 401, had Venerius as successor, as is clear from the Council of Carthage inserted in the Codex canonum Ecclesiae Africanae, c. 56. And hence, therefore, the time at which the synod of Toledo was celebrated is confirmed.

In what sense the following 484Dletter can be said to have been written to this synod. --These things being laid down, since it is ascertained and beyond doubt that that synod of Toledo, whose canons and acts are reported in the aforesaid council of the Spains, was celebrated in the year 400, no controversy now seems to remain but that the following letter of Innocent was inscribed to this synod of Toledo. For first, in it, as may be read at nos. 6 and 7, the acts and decrees of this synod are praised more than once. Next, Innocent, at no. 10, notes that he is addressing the bishops « who decreed by their sentence that ordinations are to be made according to the Nicene rules. » And indeed the prelates of the First Council of Toledo, when in the very preface they had decreed « that the constitutions of the Nicene council are first of all to be kept in perpetuity, and that there must be no departing from them », proceed to lay down what ought to be observed in ordinations. Not, however, that Innocent is to be understood as writing to the synod of Toledo as though still assembled, but rather to those bishops who had come together in it. Unless one prefer 485Athat here by the name of the synod of Toledo the bishops belonging to the synod of Toledo are understood. Certainly the praised pope speaks of the First Council of Toledo, no. 6, as celebrated long since. Nor does that Patruinus of venerable memory, in whose place he records, no. 9, that Gregory was substituted, seem other than the one who is read to have subscribed first to the canons of the First Council of Toledo. Finally, Innocent's zeal in this letter aims chiefly at this, that he may suppress and settle the schism which arose from Symphosius, Dictinius and others having been received with their honours at the synod of Toledo, and which was spreading more widely day by day. Wherefore it is manifest that some interval came between this letter and that synod. But how much came between cannot be defined with certainty. We may only conjecture that this letter was written before Spain was thrown into disorder by the tumults of war, and thus before the year 408, in which Constantine snatched that province from Honorius. But whether the letter is later than the preceding one or not, although we do not know, yet on account of the affinity of the matters defined in both concerning the ordinations of clerics, 485Bit will be pleasing and convenient to the reader to have both next to one another. Nor is it now of much concern to him to have ascertained the time at which it was written, since he holds to whom, on what occasion, and with what design it was written. Here perhaps someone will wonder how the same pontiff now so earnestly praises and approves the indulgence of the synod of Toledo towards the followers of Priscillian, who afterwards so constantly refused that clerics ordained by Bonosus should keep their honours. But a wise priest ought to discern between leprosy and leprosy, and to search out when the severity of discipline is either to be retained or relaxed. For although the holy leaders of the churches are animated by the same spirit, yet at different times they have laid down different things concerning clerics returning to the Church from heresy or schism. The Nicene fathers, can. 8, willed the Novatians to remain in the clergy. On the testimony of the Africans, a council beyond the sea, in the times of Siricius and Ambrose, forbade that clerics coming from heresy 485Cshould keep their honours. But the Council of Toledo, in the year 400, judged that this was to be granted to the followers of Priscillian, and Innocent now approves its sentence for the purpose of unity, who in the year 414 will sharply vindicate the severity of ecclesiastical discipline in the case of the Bonosians. The Council of Carthage, however, held in the year 401, judged that this moderation should be used: that for clerics returning, where by their return some compensation of unity is made, their honours should be preserved, and where there is no compensation of this kind, they should be refused (Cod. can. eccl. Afr., c. 68).

That some bishops wrongly dissent from others on account of converts received from heresy. --II. On bishops 486Aordained by Rufinus and Minicius in other men's churches against the canons. --III. That the cause of Bishop John be examined, and of the others who were shunning the fellowship of communion. --IV. On the faulty ordinations of many, that what has been usurped hitherto be so passed over that it be forbidden for the future. --V. That the complaint of Gregory, bishop of Merida, be examined. --VI. Whom it is lawful to admit to the order of the clergy: and of what sort they are to be who are chosen. And that she too makes a man a bigamist who was his wife before baptism.

INNOCENT to all the bishops assembled in the synod of Toledo, most beloved brethren, greeting in the Lord.

A schism in Spain. And contempt of the canons. -- Though an excessive care has often held me anxious concerning Already before the First Council of Toledo a certain dissension had prevailed among the Spaniards concerning the ordinations of clerics. Wherefore Bishop Patruinus, in the preface of this council, speaks first thus: Since we have each begun to do different things in our churches, and from this there are such great scandals, which reach even to schism, if it please you, let us decree by common counsel what is to be followed by all the bishops in ordaining clerics. But after the council just mentioned, to this cause of schism was added another, when some admitted, and others contended should be rejected, those converted from the heresy of Priscillian to catholic communion whom the same synod had received in their honours. Innocent now tries to heal that twofold cause of so great an evil. 486Bthe dissension and schism of the Churches, which report declares to be creeping more widely day by day through the Spains, and to be advancing at a quicker pace, the necessary time has come in which so great an amendment could not be put off, and a fitting medicine ought to be provided. For our brethren, our fellow bishop Among those who subscribed the First Council of Toledo, Hilarius is read in the fourth place. Hilarius and the presbyter Elpidius, partly moved by love of unity, partly roused, as was fitting, by the ruin with which the province labours, have come to the apostolic see, and with grief and groaning have set forth that in the very bosom of the faith the peace within the province has been violated, the order of discipline confounded, and many things committed against the canons of the fathers, order being despised and the rules neglected, in the usurpation of churches, and that the concord in which the whole stability of our faith consists cannot be retained: which things 486Care kept in the record of acts drawn up in the session That is, of the Roman clergy, this name being taken from the more worthy rank. To the same session, above all in causes of this kind, the bishops who were staying at Rome were also accustomed to be summoned. of the presbytery, and can be shown to you by reading.

The bishops of Baetica separate themselves from the rest on account of the Gallaecians who were received. --First, then, as regards the faith itself, a dissension has arisen because the bishops of Baetica or of Carthagena, on account of communion with the Gallicians, have withdrawn So the Corb. and Colb. manuscripts. But in Sirmond, dissederunt. Discesserunt would rather have to be restored. Earlier, in the Corb. manuscript, Galliarum; in the Colb., Galliorum; perhaps in place of Gallicorum or Gallaeorum. For, as we heard above from the Chronicle of Idatius, the bishops of Gallaecia were Symphosius, Dictinius and others, who at the synod of Toledo condemned the heresy of Priscillian, together with its very author, by their subscription; that the Baetici and Carthaginians took ill their being received into peace, and therefore fell away from the communion of the rest, is not at all surprising. Gregory, bishop of Elvira in the province of Baetica, had sown deep the seeds of the Luciferian error. Nor is it astonishing that they propagated an unhappy fruit down to the times of Innocent. from the peace of all: which is not only not diminished, but is even increased day by day by the zeal of contention, since, each one purposing to obtain what he wished, they have made out of such animosity an eternal round of evil and a kind of circle: when surely for every good man it is better in matters of this kind to be overcome than by an evil habit to obtain a perverse 487Apurpose which has once pleased him. For what other cause, in former times too, was there of that Lucifer, besides obstinacy, which drew him back from concord In the manuscripts, cum illorum. The sentence would be more complete in this manner: cum illorum qui Arianorum haeresim prudenti conversione damnaverant, tum illorum qui satisfactionem eorum susceperant. On the same matter Sulpicius speaks thus, book II: Lucifer so condemned those who had been at Ariminum that he separated himself even from the communion of those who had received them under satisfaction or penance. And to whom, says Augustine, Epistle 185, n. 47, an indulgence of this kind was displeasing, he fell into the darkness of schism, the light of charity being lost. Since in these places Innocent, Sulpicius and Augustine reproach Lucifer with schism only, the error by which they dared to repeat baptism seems to be attributed to his disciples alone, not to himself. with those who had condemned the heresy of the Arians by a prudent conversion? With the same zeal, Sirmond and Labbe: post Priscilliani detestabilem sectam omnium detestatione damnatam. The preposition post is absent from the manuscripts, in which moreover consensione is found, more elegantly than detestatione. To this refers what Jerome writes to Ctesiphon, that Priscillian was condemned by the authority of the whole world. the detestable sect of Priscillian having been condemned by the deserved consent of all, we have learned that some took it very ill that those were received into the catholic faith who were converted by sounder counsel: to whom a useful deed, and the very peace of the churches, is discovered to have been displeasing. For when, for the purpose of unity, The Colb. manuscript: Symposius. That Symposius is not to be believed the one who subscribed the synod of Saragossa held against the Priscillianists in the year 380. How Symphosius, Dictinius and their companions, having confessed their error and professed the faith, were admitted to catholic communion is explained in the council which was held under Pope Leo, from the acts of the council of Toledo, tome II of the Concilia of Labbe, p. 1229 and following. In the sentence, however, which the fathers of Toledo pass on them, it is to be noted that, permitting Paternus to hold the church in which he had been established, they add: about to receive (him) also into our communion, when the apostolic see shall have written back; and, decreeing the same of the remaining bishops of Gallaecia who had always persisted in the communion of Symphosius, they wish them too at the same time to await, by a like example, what the pope who now is, what St Simplician, bishop of Milan, and the other priests of the churches write back. Where by the way it may be observed that the Roman bishop is designated by the simple name of pope. The fathers of Toledo continue: But let Symphosius, an aged religious man, who did what we have written above, remain in his church . . . thence (that is, from the pope and from the bishop of Milan) he will await communion, whence he had before received the hope of future peace. Which we have decreed is to be observed also for Dictinius and Anterius. Then there follows next: But we have laid down that, before communion is restored to them through the pope (see again the name of pope for the Roman pontiff) or through St Simplician, neither bishops nor presbyters nor deacons are to be ordained by them. Why do they pass sentence on all those bishops in such a way as to wish it to be awaited until communion is restored to the same by letters of the apostolic see and of the bishop of Milan? Light is thrown on this question by similar decrees both of the Council of Carthage held in the year 401, on the 18th day of June, and of another celebrated in the same year on the 13th day of September, by which, as may be seen in the Codex canonum Ecclesiae Africanae, c. 65, the Africans resolve that it should be sent to Anastasius the Roman pontiff and to Venerius bishop of Milan, that it might be lawful for them through these both to promote to the clergy infants baptized by the Donatists, and to receive in their honours clerics who wished to pass over from the Donatists to catholic unity, where this seemed to profit Christian peace. For they subjoin the reason of this matter, because this had been forbidden from these sees. Nor do the fathers of Toledo teach obscurely that they had determined that the aforesaid bishops should await the communion of the Roman and Milanese prelates for this reason, that some kind of judgment concerning them too had already gone before from those sees, inasmuch as Ambrose and Siricius had prescribed to them by letters certain conditions of peace. Whence the sentence of the Spaniards concerning Vegetinus is more absolute, in this manner: But Vegetinus, against whom no sentence had been specially pronounced before, having given the profession which the synod accepted, we decree is to be restored to our communion. Symphosius himself also and That Dictinius had not only followed the tenets of Priscillian, but had also asserted them in books. Afterwards, however, in the Council of Toledo, detesting whatever he had either thought or written amiss, he said: All my presumption in my writings I censure and condemn. And soon after: Again I repeat, whatever I wrote in my former comprehension and in the beginnings of my conversion, I reject all with my whole heart. . . . Except the name of God, I anathematize all . . . All things that are found against the faith I condemn together with their very author. Yet his writings could not be suppressed so carefully but that down to the times of Pope Leo they were read by many with veneration, to whom indeed that pope, Epistle 17, n. 19, counsels that they ought rather to love his restoration than his fall. Dictinius, condemning the depraved heresy, were received, so that, such persons being cut off, the inbred dissension might be utterly extinguished; there were found some to whom the very correction rightly made (Mss. facit) was displeasing. And now 487Bthe churches are at variance, which with no small animosity dissemble from one another ( Or disagree and go off into enmities). But if the correction had been kept by the priests with sounder counsel, both the state of the catholic faith would 488Ahave remained entire, and no scandal would have corrupted the concord useful in all things.

That some bear with an unjust mind the honours kept for them. --For I ask why they should have grieved that Symphosius and Dictinius, and the others who condemned the detestable heresy, were then received into the catholic faith? Is it Sirmond, with the Corc. and Colb. manuscripts: Numquidnam aliquid. The codex of Bonneval: Num quod non aliquid. By recalling num from the first two and quod non from the last, the reading is now had entire and clear. The very examples by which Innocent now proves that clerics may lawfully have their honours kept for them after penance, Augustine too employs for the same cause, Epistle 185, n. 45: For holy David also, he says, did penance for deadly crimes, and yet he remained in his honour: and blessed Peter, when he shed most bitter tears, certainly repented of having denied the Lord, and yet he remained an apostle. that they did not lose anything of the honours which they held? But if this pricks or goads any, let them read that Peter the apostle was, after his tears, what he had been; let them consider that Thomas, after that doubting of his, lost nothing of his former merits; and finally that David, the eminent prophet, after his open confession, was not deprived of the merits of his prophecy. But if the amendment of conversion both cuts off the errors themselves and retains the dignities; what evil reason 488Bis it, out of a purpose of obstinacy, to be unwilling to hold to the way of right and the road which leads to salvation?

The force of unity, and the ruin of schism. --Wherefore your charity must apply itself, and good priests 489Amust strive, that, with teaching going before By which, namely, both the perversity of schism or heresy and the rightness of the catholic faith may be proved, so that the light of truth may drive out the darkness of error, says Augustine, Epistle 93, n. 5, and the Church may be seen to receive men corrected rather than perverse., all who have been scattered may be gathered into the unity of the catholic faith; and there may begin to be one impregnable body, which, if it be separated into parts, will lie open to every injury of laceration, and will suffer an internal plague from itself, when the frame itself fights against itself. But let all the priests receive these things, written in general concerning the restoration of unity, as though written to each. Thereafter let your charity turn its mind in detail to all the things which shall be proposed.

Rufinus and Minicius usurped ordinations in other men's churches. --For it could not lie hidden that Rufinus and Minicius, bishops, usurped the ordaining of bishops in other men's churches, against the Nicene canons. That (Nicaen. can. 4, 6 et 16) no one 489Bmay dare to claim this for himself, provision must now at least be made by us wholesomely: lest the dissimulation by improper It would be said more clearly: ne improba usurpatio dissimulatione. usurpation grow stronger for the worse, and a rule be made of custom which does not come from the very discipline that has been committed to writing. In which matter let the complaint of Hilary, our brother and fellow priest, be heard first, who asserted that Rufinus had been engaged with every kind of assault against the peace of the churches, and had some while ago asked pardon for his error in the council So the Colb. manuscript, where the Corb. has Tholosano. Here it must be recalled that the acts of the synod of Toledo have by no means come down to us full and entire, but only fragments of them, recited in a later council as then suited the purpose; and that nothing was recited in that council except what concerned the Priscillianists. Rufinus, however, was rather one of those bishops of whom Patruinus complains in the preface of the first council of Toledo, namely those who, having undertaken illegitimate ordinations, stirred up such scandals as went as far as schism, not one of those who had been devoted to Priscillian. The same is to be thought of Minicius also. Whence also that part of the acts of the council of Toledo which concerned them was passed over in the aforesaid council. of Toledo, and now, although the prerogative of ordaining Sirmond and Labbe: sacerdotis. More correctly the manuscripts: sacerdotes. The council of Laodicea, can. 12, the Nicene, can. 4 and 6, and that of Antioch, can. 19, forbid the bishops of each province to be ordained without the consent of the metropolitan. See also Ferrandus, Breviatio canonum, c. 4. And the creation of a bishop in out-of-the-way places is contrary to canon 6 of the council of Sardica. priests was owed to the metropolitan bishop, had ordained a bishop in out-of-the-way places, against the will of the people and the reason of discipline, and had embroiled the churches in scandals. Thereafter the cause of the bishops of Tarragona must be treated, who have complained that Minicius in like manner 489Cordained a bishop in the church of Gerona; and sentence must be passed on such usurpation according to the Nicene That he who has been so ordained ought not to be a bishop, the Nicene synod declares in can. 6. And the council of Antioch, confirming this in can. 13, further decrees the penalty of deposition against the authors of the usurped ordination. canons. Let there be a full examination also of those bishops who were ordained by Rufinus or by Minicius 490Aagainst the rules: so that, since they were made wrongly, they may understand that they cannot any longer hold what they obtained from a faulty beginning.

That John be cut off, if he does not cease to resist the decree on receiving those who return to the Church, to which he had subscribed. --Concerning JOHN also, the bishop, whose consent was given through legates in the synod of Toledo to the reception of SYMPHOSIUS and DICTINIUS, and to whom that correction seemed approvable, let the things which followed afterwards be examined. And, above all, concerning all those whose communion has come into doubt on account of withdrawal, let a full inquiry be made, so that, according to the decree of the synod of Toledo, they may either be joined in the fellowship of communion for the abolishing of the suspicion of schism, or, 490Bif any be found who The Corb. manuscript: qui abnegant. refuse concord and the constitutions of what was agreed, they may be cut off from the communion of the catholic faith by the sentences of your charity: so that what is shunned may now be, not an internal evil, which does not cease In Labbe and Sirmond: non desinit serpere, where the manuscripts have non desinit semper, perhaps for non se sinit semper. For Innocent, unwilling that anyone be shunned on any suspicion of internal evil, but only where his profession of it is manifest, gives an apt reason: that internal evil does not always allow itself to be kept silent or held within, but is wont at length to break out and betray itself by words or deeds. And in this way he guards against a grave harm into which the Ithacian schismatics had fallen, or those who at their urging had been sent into the Spains by the emperor Maximus to search out the Priscillianists, of whom Sulpicius committed this to writing: Nor was there any doubt that that storm would have laid waste the greatest part of the saints, with little distinction between the kinds of men. For then judgment was made by the eyes alone, when a man was reckoned a heretic by his pallor or his dress rather than by his faith. always silent, but the manifest profession and contagion of the schismatics.

Certain ordinations against the canons to be tolerated for the sake of peace. But that henceforth they be void, and their authors to be deposed. --For concerning the ordinations which we learn that the bishops of Spain celebrate through the fault of a depraved custom, something was to have been decreed according to the tradition of the elders, had we not weighed it, lest we should stir up very many disturbances So the Corb. manuscript, with which the Colb., retaining quam plurimas, also adds ecclesias. But Sirmond substitutes quam plurimis ecclesiis. Augustine, animated by the same Spirit as Innocent, writes in Book III against the Letter of Parmenianus, n. 14: When the same disease has seized very many, nothing else remains for the good but grief and groaning. For then, he says a little after, counsels of separation are both vain and pernicious and sacrilegious; because they become both impious and proud, and they disturb the weak good more than they correct the bold bad. Wherefore both thereafter in n. 16, and in the epistle formerly 64, now 22, n. 5, he explains how circumspectly a multitude is to be rebuked. Which, although said properly of the multitude of the people, is aptly accommodated to every multitude of offenders. in the churches. Whose deed we so reprehend that, on account of the number of those to be corrected, we do not call into doubt the things which have been done in whatever 490Cmanner, but rather leave them to the judgment of God. For how many of those who, after receiving The word baptismi, which is added here in Sirmond and Labbe, stands indeed in the curtailed exemplars of this letter, but in the entire ones it is passed over in silence. As in the preceding letter, n. 5, after the remission of sins, so now after receiving grace means the same as after receiving baptism. Leo likewise designates baptism by the name of grace, Epistle 18, n. 4, where he writes: The very quality of the work therefore teaches that the lawful day for celebrating grace generally (in place of celebrating baptism) is that on which Christ, having been buried, rose again. Again, below, Innocent in n. 11, as also Cyprian, Epistle 76, to Magnus, and Damasus, Epistle 9, n. 1, call baptism the grace of God. It is familiar to others, and indeed to Innocent himself, to call the same sacrament the grace of Christ and the sacrament of Christian grace. grace, were engaged in the exercise of the courts 491A, and took up an obstinacy in winning Here advocates of causes seem to be noted, who, although they sometimes take up unjust causes, strive nevertheless to win them by the force of eloquence and obstinate zeal., we find to have been admitted to the priesthood! of whose number Rufinus and Gregory are said to be; how many from some military service, who, while they obeyed the powers, In some exemplars severa is added here; it is absent from the purer ones. For the same reason it is now said praecepta sunt exsecuti, as presently quae sibi sunt imperata fecerunt. In either place it is signified that those bound to military service and to the curia are wont to be compelled to do things which keep them from the clergy. In Gratian, dist. 51, c. 4, canon 8 of the first council of Toledo is exhibited, interpolated thus: If anyone after baptism has served as a soldier, and has taken up the cloak or the belt for killing the faithful (the last three words do not stand in the codices of the council of Toledo), even if he has not committed graver things, if he has been admitted to the clergy, let him not receive the dignity of deacon. And the same prejudiced opinion which gave occasion to the interpolation of this canon seems also to have been the cause of the word severa being added here. of necessity carried out commands! how many from the curials, who, while they obey the powers, did what was commanded them! how many who celebrated pleasures and shows editiotiones From the preceding letter, n. 15, supply ludorum vel munerum. for the people, have come to the honour of the highest priesthood! of all whom it had behoved none to come even to the fellowship of the order of clerics. If we should order these to be examined one by one, we shall bring upon the provinces of Spain, which we desire to heal, no small commotions and scandals out of zeal for amendment. Therefore we think these things should rather be remitted. But lest like things be committed henceforth, 491Bthe maturity of your charity will have to provide that a necessary end be put at least now to so great a usurpation: this, namely, being established, In the exemplars of the Isidorian collection there is added here ut quicumque tales ordinati fuerint, cum ordinatoribus suis deponantur: which is a mere marginal scholion, or a summary heading of Innocent explaining the text. In the same books, presently, ordinatoribus has been substituted for creatoribus. that if any after this shall attempt to come, against the forms of the canons, either to the ecclesiastical order or to the priesthood itself, they be deprived, together with their creators, of the very order and honour in which they have been found.

That the complaint of Gregory of Merida be heard. --Of GREGORY also, bishop of Merida, who was ordained in the place of PATRUINUS Those who judged that Patruinus, whose name is read in the preface of the first council of Toledo, and who subscribed first to it, was bishop of Toledo, are corrected at this place. Gregory, for his part, seems to have had as successor Antoninus, who, as Idacius relates in his Chronicle, olymp. 306, n. 21, ruled the church of Merida at the time when Turibius ruled that of Astorga, that is, in the age of Leo. of venerable memory, let the complaint, if there be any, be heard: and if he has suffered injury against his desert, let him be avenged upon those envious of another's honour: and henceforth let not the spirit of faction rise up against any one of the good.

That the Nicene rules be kept in ordinations 492A. Who are to be kept from orders. --And although the Nicene rules are known to your charity, dearest brethren, according to which you decree by sentence Namely, as we observed after Sirmond in the Notice, with Patruinus speaking first, in the preface of the council of Toledo itself. that ordinations are to be made; yet I have thought fit to insert some part which has been provided concerning ordinations, The sequence of the discourse here requires et secundum. And indeed for copyists ut for et, and in turn et for ut, frequently slips out. The slip here is old; wishing to repair it, Isidore Mercator after the word celebrandas added esse sciamus. From his exemplars the same addition was carried over into the Noyon codex of the Spanish collection, not into the Laon exemplar of the same collection. that according to this ordinations may be celebrated hereafter, lest free choice to interpret otherwise be left to anyone. And first the things which are forbidden are set out. That no one who has served as a soldier after baptism ought to be admitted to the order of the clergy; nor those who have pleaded causes after receiving baptism; or who after receiving the grace of God have held administration: nor that any of the curials can come to the ecclesiastical order, who after baptism either have been crowned Namely in those solemnities which flowed from gentile rite, and in which the magistrates were compelled to represent a priesthood dedicated to the worship of demons. To which that of Tertullian looks, in the book On the Crown, c. 10: You have the crowns of all the priestly colleges in Claudius; whose book On Crowns, namely, as is recalled in the same place, chap. 7, was extant, teaching both the origins and the causes and the kinds and the solemnities of them., or have sustained the priesthood, as it is called, 492Band have celebrated public shows. For this also is to be guarded against in the case of curials, lest those same who have been of the curials be at some time demanded back by their curias, which we see frequently happen. All which things, reasonably forbidden, ought to be guarded in every way.

Who are to be chosen. That the baptism of wives is not abolished. --But what sort of men ought to be chosen into the order of the clergy, a clear form declares: that is, those who have been baptized from their earliest age, and Labbe: et electorum officio deputati: it is corrected from other books. And their reading is confirmed here by Siricius, Epistle 1, n. 13: Whoever has vowed himself to the services of the Church from his infancy... ought to be JOINED to the office of LECTORS; and n. 14: But he who is already advanced in age... at the time when he is baptized, let him at once be JOINED to the number of lectors or of exorcists. joined to the office of lectors; or, if they be older, when they have obtained the grace of God, have at once bound themselves to the ecclesiastical orders. And if they have had wives, it must be asked whether they took a virgin wife: because it is written in the old Testament, Let the priest take a virgin wife (Levit. XXI, 13); 493Aand elsewhere, Let my priests marry once. Nor he who has had two wives (Vide epistolam superiorem. n. 9), because Paul the apostle says, The husband of one wife (I Tim. III, 2). Nor that ought to be admitted which some oppose and assert in defence of a depraved error, that a wife taken before baptism ought not to be imputed, because in baptism all things are forgiven; not understanding in this matter that in baptism only sins are forgiven, and the number of wives is not abolished. For if by God, as it is written, a wife is prepared for a man (Prov. XIX, 14), and what God has joined, let man not put asunder (Matth. XIX, 6; Gen. I, 28); and the very authors of the human race are blessed by the Lord in the beginning: how are these believed to be able to be forgiven among sins? But if what they believe who believe so is true; then 493Ball righteousness which has been wrought by catechumens before baptism will be taken away through baptism. Let no one therefore think or admit any such thing against the Apostle: but let him faithfully understand that the husband of one wife was named whether before baptism or after baptism. For if a wife taken before baptism is not counted in the number, neither will the sons begotten of her be able to be numbered among sons. How absurd and foreign this is, your prudence will judge better. Whence let it be lawful for no one to interpret the divine Scriptures otherwise than as right reason permits: lest, while In the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections quidam is added here. they prepare unjust remedies for themselves as an excuse, they be judged both to have corrupted the law and to have overturned the rules. But those things are to be held which both the course of the divine Scriptures contains and have been instituted by priests with useful reason. 493CAnd in another hand. Farewell, dearest brethren.

In the curtailed form in which it stands in the old exemplars of Isidore Mercator, as also in the Noyon, Laon 494Aand Beauvais exemplars of the Spanish collection, and such as it is in the Roman edition of the pontifical letters and in the old common editions of the councils.

On the repression of the Spaniards ( for reprehensione) who ordain clerics disorderly. --II. That pleaders, or curials, or men given to secular military service be not admitted to the clergy. --III. That whoever have been so ordained be deposed together with their ordainers. -- IV. What sort of men are to be chosen into the order of the clergy. -- V. That he who had a wife before baptism, and another after baptism, be not made a cleric.

INNOCENT to all the bishops assembled in the synod of Toledo ( plures mss. Tolosana), his most beloved brethren in the Lord, greeting.

Since care has often and exceedingly held me anxious 494Bover the schism of dissension among the churches, which evil report follows up as advancing more widely day by day through the Spains by degrees of separation; a time has arisen in which so great an amendment cannot be put off, and a fitting medicine ought to be provided. For concerning the ordinations which through the fault of a depraved custom the Spaniards, and the rest thereafter as in the preceding exemplar, from n. 8 to the end, except that the contents of n. 9 are also passed over here: so that, only the general decrees being retained, the other things which pertain to particular causes or persons have been suppressed.

• 494

How unjustly he was driven from his city and church by the faction of Theophilus 494C, and how great evils were perpetrated whether then or afterwards.

(Haec epistola proprius habetur inter caeteras S. Chrysostomi, ubi videsis tom. III operum S. Doctoris.)

Brother Theophilus, we hold both thee and our brother John as communicating with us, as we also made our mind manifest in our former letters These letters are not extant.. And not even now departing from the same purpose, we write the same things to thee again, and as often as thou shalt write back to us, namely that it cannot be that, unless a fitting 495Ajudgment follow upon the things which have been done in mockery, we should withdraw without reason from the communion of John. Do thou therefore, if thou art confident of the judgment, present thyself at the synod which shall have been Bigot, preferring cogitur, seems to follow the reading of George of Alexandria in the life of Chrysostom, which exhibits γενομένη for γεγενημένη. Ambrose of Camaldoli translates: hasten to the synod to be celebrated shortly in Christ: which is a sign that he read γενουμένη. Tillemont thinks that Innocent speaks of the future synod as certain, because Honorius, who was then at Rome, had promised that he would ask it of Arcadius. But if this pope ever had that hope as certain, he did not have it long. For about the month of May of this year 404 he wrote back to John and his companions that the powerful in evil were hindering him from being able to bring them help more quickly. Wherefore we understand that Innocent means nothing else here than to summon Theophilus to a lawful synod, saying that another irreprehensible synod of Westerners and Easterners ought to be assembled, as Palladius speaks, p. 23. according to Christ, and there, the accusations having been set forth under Ambrose of Camaldoli renders this thus: and there contend according to the Nicene canons and decrees. For others. By these words, as will be more fittingly expounded at Epistle 7, Innocent warns Theophilus beforehand that he strives in vain with the canons of Antioch. the Nicene canons as witnesses (for the Roman church admits no other canon), thou shalt have a security free of contradiction.

Brother Theophilus, we know both thee and our brother John to be in communion, as we also made our mind manifest in our first letters; and now too, not departing from the same purpose, we write the same things to thee again, and as often as thou shalt send, that unless a due judgment follow upon the things done in mockery, it is impossible 496Athat we should withdraw without reason from the communion of John. So then, if thou art confident in the tribunal, come to meet the synod which has been held according to Christ, and there, having set out the charges under the canons of Nicaea as witnesses, for the church of the Romans does not admit another canon, thou shalt have a security that cannot be gainsaid.

• 495A

On the incontinence We have copied these titles from Dionysius Exiguus; yet so that what is first for us is XXI for him, and what is seventh for us is XXVII for him. In the old exemplar of the Colbertine library this letter is inscribed: of Pope Innocent to Exsuperius, bishop of Toulouse, by which he set out to him in six titles the causes of his questions and the decrees of his answer: where he added a summary of the divine books of the old and new Testament. of priests or levites. -- II. On last The edition of the councils, and the Spanish and Isidorian collections, after the old Corb. codex: De iis, qui post baptismum omni tempore incontinentiae dediti, in ultimo poenitentiam poscunt. penance. --III. The Corb. manuscript with the Isidorian collection: De iis, qui post baptismum omni tempore administraverunt, et saeva tormenta exercuerunt. In the early editions of the councils: De administratoribus vel judicibus saecularibus. On administrators. --IV. That husbands do not come together with adulterous wives 495B. --V. That those who dictate petitions or criminal ones be held immune. --VI. That those who, a repudiation intervening, have undergone divorce, if they have joined themselves in other marriages, be shown to be adulterers. --VII. What books are received in the canon.

INNOCENT So most manuscripts, not, as in the printed editions, Exuperio. Presently several of good note omit salutem; a word which seems to have been first added by Dionysius. Jerome praises the merits of Exsuperius in more than one place. Of him he writes to Ageruchia, Epistle 11: I cannot without tears make mention of Toulouse, which the merits of the holy bishop Exsuperius have ensured has not fallen down to this day: and at the end of Epistle 4, to Rusticus, among other things: Nothing is richer than he who carries the body of the Lord in a wicker basket, the blood in glass. to EXSUPERIUS, bishop of Toulouse, greeting.

To thee, dearest brother, who consulted me as to what I thought on each proposed case, I have answered, according to the capacity of my understanding, what things seemed good: what either The Colb. Langob. codex and another manuscript: vel lucidior ratio. docile reason would persuade to be followed, or the authority of reading would show, or the observed series of the times would demonstrate. And indeed thy charity, following the practice of the prudent, has chosen rather to refer to the apostolic see what 495Cit ought to keep in doubtful matters, than by presumed usurpation to hold 496Awhat seemed good to itself on each point. For why should we think it more shameful to learn something than to be wholly ignorant? To me myself also docility accrues from the conference, while The older manuscripts: praescrutatis; and below: qui postulatur docere. having searched out the reasons I am compelled to answer the things proposed: and thus it comes about that he always learns something who is asked to 496Bteach. I shall propose, therefore, each thing, and subjoin the answer.

Thou hast proposed what ought to be observed concerning those whom, placed in the ministries of the diaconate or in the office of the presbyterate, sons begotten have revealed to be or to have been incontinent (Dist. 82, c. 2; Ivo p. 6, c. 57; Agathense concil. c. 9). Concerning these, both the discipline of the divine laws is manifest, and the admonitions of Siricius, bishop, a man of blessed memory (Epist. 1 c. 7, et epist. 5, n. 3), have gone forth plainly, that the incontinent placed in such offices be deprived of every ecclesiastical honour, and not be admitted to approach the In Merlin and Crabbe, as in the manuscripts of the Dionysian, Spanish and Isidorian collections: tale ministerium. Better, tale is absent from the other books. ministry which it behoves to be fulfilled by continence alone. For there is a very old authority of the sacred law, kept from the beginning, that Six ancient manuscripts: in templis. Then four: anno vicissitudinis suae. the priests were commanded to dwell in the temple in the year of their 496Cturn (Luc. I); so that, serving the sacred oblations, pure and 497Acleansed from every stain, they might claim for themselves the divine Merlin, Crabbe and most manuscripts: mysteria. We retain ministeria with the Pith. manuscript and with the Roman edition and others. Siricius indeed, Epistle 1, n. 11, enacts that priests and levites who are incontinent can never handle the divine mysteria: but there he speaks of the priests and levites of the new law. And when Gratian, dist. 31, c. 6, cites what follows thus, that it be lawful for those to be admitted to the sacrifices who do not exercise the carnal office even with a wife, he is rightly arraigned for adulterating Innocent's sentence. He himself reports it more faithfully at dist. 82, c. 2. ministries (I Paralip. XXIV): and that it be not lawful for those to be admitted to the sacrifices who exercise carnal intercourse even with a wife, because it is written: Be ye holy, because I also am holy, the Lord your God (Levit. XI, 44, et XX, 7). To whom certainly, on account of the succession of offspring, In the Roman edition, following Merlin and Crabbe, propterea is suppressed here, and presently, after the words ex alia tribu, there is added praeter (Crabbe, in smaller letters, quam, which in the Roman edition is expressed without any distinction) ex semine Aaron: against the manuscripts. the use of wives had therefore been relaxed, because no one from another tribe had been commanded to approach the priesthood; how much more ought these priests or levites to keep chastity from the day of their ordination (Confer. concil. Turon. I, an. 461, c. 1), for whom the priesthood or the ministry is without succession, and no day passes on which they are free either from the divine sacrifices or from the office of baptism! For if Paul writes to the Corinthians, saying, Abstain for a time, that you may give yourselves to prayer (I Corint. 497BVII, 5); and this certainly he commanded to lay people; much more shall priests, for whom there is a perpetual office both of praying and of sacrificing, always have to abstain from intercourse of this kind. Who, if he has been defiled by carnal concupiscence, with what shame will he usurp to sacrifice, or with what conscience or by what merit does he believe himself heard, when it has been said: All things are clean to the clean, but to the defiled and unbelieving nothing is clean (Tit. I, 15)?

But perhaps he believes this lawful, because it is written, the husband of one wife (I Tim. III, 2). Not Crabbe and the Roman edition: ad permanentem. Labbe: de permanente. Quesnel: propter manendum. One Colb. manuscript: propter permanentem. The Noyon and Laon manuscripts, with Merlin: permanenti. The others, more than twelve, and those the older: permanentem: and that it is so to be read the following note will confirm. remaining in the concupiscence of begetting did he say this, but on account of the continence to come. For neither did he not admit those whole in body, who says, But I would that all were so, as I myself am (I Cor. VII, 7): and he declares more openly, 497Csaying, But they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not now in the flesh, but in the 498Aspirit (Rom. VIII, 9): and Again the Roman edition, after Crabbe: et ad habentem, the preposition ad wrongly added. Ambrose, Epistle 63, to the church of Vercelli, n. 22, illustrates the same sentence with the same words of the Apostle in this manner: for he said having sons, not making them. Before that, the same editions, after Merlin: Quod et apertius, with quod added against the faith of the manuscripts. having sons (I Tim. III, 4), not begetting, did he say.

But the sentence is plainly unlike and divided The Roman edition and the later editions of the councils: diversa: which we have found in one Pith. manuscript only. From the other books we recall divisa, that is, into two parts, of which one pertains to those who sinned in ignorance of the decrees of Siricius sent to the provinces, the other to those who knowing:. For if the form of ecclesiastical life and likewise of discipline which went forth from bishop Siricius to the provinces shall not be proved to have reached some, to these the pardon of ignorance shall be remitted, so that they begin wholly to abstain for the rest. And so let them keep their grades in which they have been found, in such a way that it be not lawful for them to ascend to higher ones. To whom it ought to be a benefit that they do not lose this very place which they hold. But if any shall be discovered to have known the form of living sent by Siricius, and not to have at once cast away the desires of lust; these are in every way to be removed, The printed editions, except Quesnel: quia post: against the manuscripts. who after the admonition was known judged pleasure 498Bto be preferred.

And this was asked, what ought to be observed concerning those who, having been given over at every time after baptism to the pleasures of incontinence, at the extreme end of their life ask at once for penance and for the reconciliation of communion (23, q. 4, c. 45).

Concerning these the earlier observance was harsher; the later, mercy intervening, more inclined to mildness. For the earlier custom held that penance be granted, but communion denied. For since in those times persecutions were frequent, lest the facility of communion, once granted, should not recall men, secure of reconciliation, from lapsing, communion was rightly denied; penance was granted, lest all be wholly denied: and the reason of the time made the remission harsher. But after our Lord 498Crestored peace to his Churches, the terror being now driven off, it was decided that communion be given to those departing So Labbe, Sirmond and several and better manuscripts. Other printed editions, however: obeuntibus; and below, with Dionysius and the Isidorian collection, subsequi for sequi. That harsher discipline, recalled by Innocent, prevails chiefly in the council of Elvira, can. 6, 7, 8, etc. It had prevailed before in Africa also, but only among certain bishops, who indeed did not think peace should be given to adulterers in such a way, and shut the place of penance against adulteries altogether, and yet did not withdraw from the college of their fellow bishops who thought otherwise and granted them peace, as Cyprian relates, Epistle 52, to Antonianus. There is besides a certain example of this severity in the common book of Ambrose on the Fall of a consecrated virgin, to whom, c. 8, n. 58, this speech is addressed: Cling to penance until the end of life, and do not presume that pardon is given thee by a human day; for he deceives thee who would promise thee this. For since thou hast sinned properly against the Lord, it befits thee to await the remedy from him alone in the day of judgment. And although Cyprian, in the letter cited, proves at length that neither penance nor indulgence is to be denied to the lapsed; yet toward its end he decrees this: Those not doing penance, nor testifying the grief of their offences with their whole heart and with a manifest profession of their lamentation, we have judged are to be wholly kept from the hope of communion and peace, if in sickness and in danger they have begun to beg: because it is not repentance for the offence but the warning of impending death that drives them to ask; nor is he worthy to receive comfort in death who did not think that he was to die. Which sentence indeed, if with Pamelius it is to be judged somewhat harsher, the same will have to be said also of this canon 22 of the first synod of Arles: Concerning those who apostatize and never present themselves at the church, nor even seek to do penance, and afterwards, seized by sickness, ask for communion, it has pleased that communion is not to be given them, unless they recover and bring forth worthy fruits of penance. But this so seemed good to them, not because they greatly distrusted the clemency of God, but the truth of penance of this kind. And indeed Cyprian, toward the end of the book to Demetrianus, teaches that no penance is late for one still remaining in this world, and that no one ought to be deterred from it either by sins or by years; that pardon is given to him who confesses, and that one passes to immortality under death itself. Which, although he says it chiefly of the grace of baptism, there is yet no doubt that he thinks the same of every penance undertaken after baptism, provided it be true. Hence, as is to be seen in his Epistles 13, 14, 15, etc., he always took great care that there should not be lacking one who would impart peace and communion to the lapsed, after the exomologesis had been made, if they had begun to be pressed by some sickness and danger. What Innocent now defines, Celestine afterwards, Epistle 4, to the bishops of the province of Vienne and Narbonne, n. 3, and Leo, Epistle 100, to Theodore, n. 5, expressly confirm, and before them the Roman clergy, in Cyprian, Epistle 3, to the clergy of Carthage, had prescribed in these words: If those who have fallen into this temptation begin to be seized by sickness, and do penance for their deed, and desire communion, they certainly ought to be helped. Jerome, above, p. 550, notes that the example of the thief was set before us, lest anyone should at any time think conversion late. But there he asks for conversion and change., 499Aboth on account of the mercy of the Lord, as a viaticum for those setting out, and lest we seem to follow the harshness and severity of the Novatian heretic who denies pardon. Communion therefore shall be granted, with penance, at the last: so that men of this kind, even at their very end, by the permission of our Saviour, may be delivered from perpetual destruction.

It was asked also concerning those who after baptism have held administration, and have either exercised tortures The Pith. manuscript: tormenta sua. More truly the others: sola, namely those by which death is not inflicted on the accused. To what end this question is set on foot may be supplied and explained from Epistle 25 of Ambrose, to Studius. For he had likewise asked whether anyone, after a capital sentence had been passed, ought to abstain from the communion of the sacraments. To whom Ambrose, n. 2, answers: There are some, outside the Church however, who do not call into the communion of the heavenly sacraments those who have judged that a capital sentence should be passed on any. And straightway he adds: Many also abstain of their own accord; and they are praised indeed; nor can we ourselves not commend them, we who observe the authority of the Apostle so far as not to dare to deny them communion. Lastly, what seemed good to the elders on this matter he discloses in n. 9 in these words: And therefore our elders preferred to be more indulgent toward judges, so that, while their sword is feared, the fury of crimes might be checked, and not provoked: for if communion were denied, the punishment of criminals would seem to be avenged. Our forebears therefore preferred that it should be in the will of the one abstaining rather than in the necessity of the law. only, or have also pronounced capital sentence.

Concerning these we read nothing defined by the elders. For they remembered that these powers had been granted by God, and that the sword had been permitted for the punishment of the guilty, and that the minister of God had been given as an avenger in matters of this kind 499B(Rom. XIII, 1, 4). How then should they reprehend a deed which they saw had been granted with God as its author? Concerning these, therefore, we hold thus, as has been observed hitherto, lest we should seem either to overturn discipline or to come against the authority of the Lord. But for them, in the rendering of account, all their deeds will be kept.

And this was desired to be known, why husbands who communicate do not come together with adulterous wives, when on the contrary wives are seen to remain in the fellowship of adulterous husbands.

Concerning this (32, q. 6, c. 23; Ivo p. 8, c. 214) the Christian religion condemns adultery in both sexes with equal reason. But women do not easily accuse their husbands of adultery, and hidden 500Asins do not have punishment. Husbands, however, have been accustomed more freely to report adulterous wives before the priests: and therefore to the women, their crime being disclosed, communion is denied. But of the husbands, the offence lying hidden, no one is easily kept away on suspicions. Who certainly will be removed, if his shameful deed be detected. Since then the cause is equal, sometimes, when proof is lacking, the reason for punishment is at rest.

This also (23, q. 4, c. 46; Ivo p. 10, c. 94) thou hast wished to inquire In the margin of the Colb. Langob. manuscript this summary of the chapter is noted: On advocates, who bring forth sentences according to the crime. But the question is rather about those who demand capital sentences, or rather who dictate petitions for those demanding them, than about those who bring forth sentences of this kind. And this, as also what was proposed in chap. 3, makes plain how greatly the Church shrinks from blood. And so Innocent does not deny communion to those who after baptism have either held administration or dictated petitions for those demanding a capital sentence, in such a way that he nevertheless teaches, Epistle 37, n. 5, that they are to be kept from the clergy., whether it be freely granted to those who dictate petitions, namely after the regeneration of baptism, to ask of princes the death of anyone, or blood on account of guilt. A thing which princes never grant without inquiry; but they always send back the very matters committed, or the crimes, to the judges, that, The early editions of the councils and several manuscripts: causae cognitae. The Royal exemplar of the Dionysian collection, with the Colb. Langob.: causa cognita vindicetur. According to our reading, which the other books exhibit, before vindicentur the word crimina is understood. See the Theodosian Code, book II, tit. 18, law 1, and book XIX, tit. 40, law 1. the cause 500Bhaving been examined, they may be punished. And when these have been delegated to the investigator, either acquittal or condemnation is pronounced according to the nature of the business. And while the authority of the laws is exercised against the wicked, the one who dictated will be immune.

Thy charity has also inquired concerning those who, a repudiation intervening, have joined themselves to another in marriage. Whom it is manifest are adulterers on both sides. But those who, while the wife is still living, although the marriage seems to have been dissolved, have hastened to another union, cannot but seem adulterers, so much so that even these persons with whom such are joined seem themselves also to have committed adultery, according to that which we read in the Gospel: Whoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, In the old Corb. manuscript and another Colb. moechatur does not stand here. The integrity of the sentence would be safe if they had afterwards added moechantur. commits adultery; likewise he also who marries her who is put away commits adultery 501A(Matth. XIX, 9). And therefore In the early editions tales is added here: which is absent from the manuscripts. Then six manuscripts of good note subjoin omnes a communione abstinendos. After the word abstinendos, however, esse manifestum est, which Innocent expressed at the beginning of this answer, is understood. Wherefore there is no reason why, with Quesnel, abstinendi should be substituted against the faith of the manuscripts. all are to be kept from the communion of the faithful. But concerning their parents, or their relations, nothing of the kind can be decreed, unless they be discovered to have been instigators of the unlawful union.

But what books are received in the canon, Dionysius added here scripturarum. Before which word the author of the Spanish collection thereupon put sanctarum. The Isidorian collection seized on both, but the other manuscripts have neither. Further, the noun brevis here means a catalogue. The same sacred books, though not in the same order, are recounted among the canonical Scriptures in canon 47 of the third council of Carthage, in the year 397. And the cited canon of this council is read inserted in the Code of canons of the African church, c. 24, with this addition: Let this also be made known to our brother and fellow priest Boniface, or to other bishops of those parts, for the confirming of this canon: because we have received from the fathers that these are to be read in church. Whence there is a conjecture that the decree of the third council of Carthage on the sacred books was recited in another council of Carthage, which was held in the year 419 when Boniface was Roman pontiff, and confirmed with the clause just mentioned. the list annexed shows. These are the things which thou didst wish to be told in word, as desired: the five books of Moses, that is, of Genesis, of Exodus, of Leviticus, of Numbers, of Deuteronomy, and of Jesus Nave, of Judges one, four books of Kingdoms, together also with Ruth, sixteen books of the Prophets, five books of Solomon, the Psalter. Likewise of histories, one book of Job, one book of Tobit, Esther one, Judith one, of the Maccabees two, of Esdras two, 502Atwo books of Paralipomenon. Likewise of the new Testament: four books of the Gospels, fourteen epistles of Paul the apostle, three epistles of John, two epistles of Peter, the epistle of Jude, the epistle of James, the Acts of the Apostles, The fourth council of Toledo, held in the year 633, seems to have looked to this when it said in can. 13: The authority of many councils and the synodal decrees of the holy Roman prelates prescribe that the book of the Apocalypse is John the evangelist's, and to be received among the divine books. Whence too it may be gathered that this letter was synodal. the Apocalypse of John. But the rest, which were written either under the name of Matthias or of James the less, or under the name of Peter and John, which were written by a certain Leucius What is enclosed in brackets Quesnel omits, and it stands only in the exemplars of the Dionysian, Spanish and Isidorian collections. Presently the same Quesnel, with one Colb. manuscript and another Pith., prefers et si qua sunt talia, where in the other books alia is read. [or under the name of Andrew, which were written by Nexocharis and Leonidas the philosophers], or under the name of Thomas, and if there are any others, know that they are not only to be rejected, but also to be condemned. Given on the tenth day before the Kalends of March February 20, year 405. In Merlin and Quesnel, as in the two manuscripts just mentioned, secundo is lacking; that it is rightly expressed in the others the name of his colleague Anthemius added confirms., Stilicho for the second time and Anthemius, most illustrious men, being consuls.

501BINNOCENT, bishop, to the presbyters and deacons, and to all the clergy and people of the church of Constantinople, who are under John the bishop, beloved brethren, greeting.

For what they suffer there is one consolation, that of patience. From the letters of your charity which you sent by This Germanus seems to be no other than the one whom Chrysostom mentions above, Epistle 4, n. 3. Nor is there doubt that Cassian is the author of the Conferences, in which Germanus frequently speaks in dialogue as his companion. Germanus the presbyter and Cassian the deacon, I have learned with anxious solicitude the scene of evils which you have set before our eyes: and by reading them over again and again I have perceived with how great calamities and hardships the faith labours. Which thing indeed the consolation of patience alone can heal. For our God will shortly give an end to such great tribulations, and it will help to have endured these things. 503ATruly, this very consolation, necessary as it is, set in the beginning of the letter of your charity, we have recognized, praising your purpose, as confirmed by many testimonies exhorting to patience. For the consolation which we owed you through our letters, you yourselves have anticipated by your letters. For this patience our Lord is wont to supply to those who labour: that the servants of Christ, even in tribulations, may console themselves, reckoning with themselves that the things which they themselves suffer have already before befallen the saints. But we too can borrow consolation for ourselves out of your very letters. For we are not strangers to the fellowship of your grief; since we are afflicted in you.

How unjustly a bishop has been substituted for John while he lives. 503B--For who could bear the things which are committed by those Namely by Acacius, bishop of Beroea, Theophilus of Alexandria, Antiochus of Ptolemais, and Severian of Gabala, whom the people of Constantinople by their letters signified by name to be the authors of the hardships which they were suffering. whom it befitted above others to be zealous for tranquillity and peace and concord? But now, in a preposterous manner, innocent priests are driven out of the seats of their own churches. Which indeed our brother and fellow priest John, your bishop, first unjustly suffered, when he had by no reason been heard. No charge is brought, nor is it heard. And what is this abandoned counsel? That there may not be, or be sought, any form of judgment, others are substituted in the place of living priests: as though those who have made their beginning from a crime of this kind could be judged to have or to have done anything right. For we have never found that such things were done by our fathers, but rather Namely by the council of Sardica, can. 4, where, in favour of a bishop who has appealed to the Roman see, it is enacted: Let another bishop by no means be ordained in his see, after the appeal of him who seems to have been deposed, unless the cause has been determined in the judgment of the Roman bishop. But John was cast out even while appealing to a synod, as he himself testifies above, Epistle 4, n. 3. That canon, in somewhat different words, is cited by Ignatius the patriarch in his letter to the pope and the Roman council, in Baronius at the year 861. This very thing, which the synod of Sardica expressly forbids, may be seen to be prohibited also by the Nicene canon 9, by which it is provided that two bishops be not approved to exist in one city. forbidden; since licence has been given 503Cto no one to ordain another in the place of one living. For a reprobate ordination cannot take away the honour of a priest: since he who is unjustly substituted cannot be a bishop at all.

What canons are to be received or repudiated. --But as to what pertains to the observance of the canons Namely, so that the judgment, however unjustly pronounced, might prevail against John, and no place of defence might be given him, Theophilus had sent to Constantinople the canons of the council of Antioch, framed long before chiefly against Athanasius, among which the enemies of John made much above all of the fourth, reported thus by Palladius, cap. 8, p. 78: If any bishop or presbyter, deposed rightly or wrongly, return of himself without a synod, let such a one have no longer any place of defence, but let him be expelled absolutely. The very words of the council of Antioch are these: Εἴ τις ἐπίσκοπος ὑπὸ συνόδου καθαιρεθείς, ἢ πρεσβύτερος ἢ διάκονος ὑπὸ τοῦ ἰδίου ἐπισκόπου, τολμήσειέν τι πρᾶξαι τῆς λειτουργίας, etc.; and while Gentian Hervet turns them into Latin thus, If any bishop deposed by a synod, or presbyter or deacon by his own bishop, shall have dared to celebrate the sacred rite, he seems not to have rendered accurately enough the words τολμήσειέν τι πρᾶξαι λειτουργίας. For it is not a deacon's part to celebrate the sacred rite: and it is plain that a deposed bishop, presbyter and deacon are forbidden by this canon not only to celebrate the sacred rite, but to touch anything of the ministry from which they have been cast down. Wherefore Theodoret, book V of the History, c. 34, relates that the adversaries of John exacted punishment of him no longer for false crimes, but ἀλλὰ τῆς μετὰ τὴν καθαίρεσιν λειτουργίας, but for the ministry discharged after deposition. Then a controversy arose about the authority of the canons objected against John, some, says Palladius, p. 79, contending that they were of the orthodox, others showing that they were of the Arians. On which occasion Elpidius, ibid., p. 80, is said to have said wittily to the emperor: Let our brothers Acacius and Antiochus subscribe that they are of the same faith as those who put forth the canons which they propose as put forth by orthodox men, and the controversy is solved. This same controversy, brought before him, Innocent now decides, and teaches that those canons are of heretics, not because orthodox men were altogether lacking in the council of Antioch, but because it is admitted that the Arians, the adversaries of Athanasius, held the first place in it: and a witness of this is the canon cited, which had been put forth on purpose to take away from Athanasius all hope of restoration., we say that those alone are to be obeyed 505Awhich were defined at Nicaea; which alone Besides those, says Paschasius Quesnel, Dissertation 12 at the end of the works of Leo, c. 2, Innocent received the Sardican ones also, but held as Nicene, and adorned and clothed with their name. And indeed from this, that the pontiff next subjoins about the synod of Sardica condemning the Antiochene canons, it is plain that what was done at Sardica is received by him. But since he praises those things under the proper name of the Sardican synod; it is no less manifest that the Sardican canons were received by him as distinct from the Nicene, not as held for Nicene and clothed with their name. Wherefore we understand Innocent to proclaim that the Nicene canons alone are to be followed in such a way, not that those should be rejected or spurned which agree with them, but only those which disagree: Since, says Leo also, Epistle 96, to Pulcheria, n. 2, against the statutes of the paternal canons, which were founded by spiritual decrees in the city of Nicaea many ages ago, nothing may ever be dared; so that if anyone wishes to decree something different, he rather diminishes himself than corrupts those. Certainly the Sardican may be reckoned as it were an appendix of the Nicene synod, inasmuch as Hosius presided over it, who at Nicaea had sat either as chief or among the foremost prelates, and in which the same faith was established and the same heresy overthrown. In the time of pope Damasus, as we observed above, p. 591, n. 3, following Athanasius, lest the Arians, who devised various names of synods, should impose upon anyone, various councils were held at Rome and in other places, in which it was enacted that no synod should henceforth be named in the catholic Church except the one of Nicaea. How much it concerned Athanasius that the authority of the synod of Sardica should by no means be lightened is unknown to no one. the catholic Church ought to follow and to acknowledge. But if others are brought forward by certain men, which disagree with the Nicene canons, and are proved to have been composed by heretics, these are rejected by the catholic bishops. For the things which have been devised by heretics, these it is not lawful to join to the catholic rules. For they, by contrary and unlawful decisions, perpetually aim at this, to undermine the judgment of the Nicene fathers. We say, therefore, that these canons are not only not to be followed, but are also to be condemned together with heretical and schismatic dogmas, as they have already been condemned in the synod of Sardica Not indeed by opposed canons or decrees, but by contrary acts, when they received Athanasius and other bishops into communion, no account being taken of the aforesaid canons, and restored them to their sees. This explanation we do not devise ourselves out of our own, but Palladius supplies it, p. 78, where, having cited canon 4 of the council of Antioch, he adds: And this canon, as impious and put forth by the impious, was abrogated in the council of Sardica by the Romans, Italians, Illyrians, Macedonians and Greeks, when Liberius or Julius (Julius was then over the church) in the principate of Constans admitted into communion Athanasius and Marcellus the Galatian, on whose account this canon also had been made. by the bishops who went before us. For it would be better that the things which It seems that in the Greek κακῶς or οὐ καλῶς should be read: and so here there should be restored quae male, or non recte acta sunt. have been rightly done should be condemned, 505Bthan that those things which have been done against the canons should obtain any firmness, dearest brethren.

That the evils can be healed by one ecumenical synod. --But what are we to do at present against these things? There is need of the examination of a synod, which we said long since ought to be assembled. For it alone is that which can calm the motions of storms of this kind. And that we may obtain it, it will be useful meanwhile to await the medicine of these evils from the will of the great God and of Christ himself our Lord. All things which have now been thrown into confusion through the envy of the devil, for the proving of the faithful, will be pacified. There is nothing that we ought not to hope for from the Lord through firmness of faith. For we too have long and much been considering by what means an ecumenical synod may be assembled, so that the turbulent motions may at length, by the 505Cnod of God, come to rest. Let us bear up, then, for a little while; and, fortified with the rampart of patience, let us hope that all things will be restored by the help of our God. Moreover, all the things which you have said you endure, we had already learned before, by careful questioning, from our fellow bishops who fled to Rome, although at different The different times at which those bishops fled to Rome Palladius notes, pp. 10 and 26: whence also we have assigned above the time of this letter. times 507A, that is, from Demetrius, Cyriacus, Eulysius and Palladius, who are with us.

502BInnocent, bishop, to the presbyters and deacons and all the clergy and the people of the church of Constantinople, who are under John the bishop, beloved brethren, greeting.

502BFrom the letters of your charity, which you sent by Germanus the presbyter and Cassian the deacon, I learned with anxious care the scene of evils which you set before our eyes, and by reading them over many times I perceived with how many hardships and labours the faith is afflicted. Which thing the consolation of patience alone heals. For our God will shortly give an end to such great afflictions, and it will be of profit to have borne these things. But indeed this very necessary 504Aconsolation, set at the beginning of the letter of our charity, we have recognized, praising your purpose, as containing many testimonies toward endurance. For the consolation of ours which we owed to send to you, you anticipated by your letters. For our Master is wont to supply this endurance to those who labour: that the servants of Christ, even when they are in afflictions, may comfort themselves, reckoning within themselves that the things which they suffer happened before to the saints also. And we too can bring consolation to ourselves out of your very letters. For we are not strangers to suffering with you, since we too are chastised in you.

For who will be able to bear the offences committed by 504Bthose whom it most behoved to be zealous for calm, for peace, and for concord itself? Now, in an inverted manner, guiltless priests are thrust from the presidency of their own churches. Which indeed our brother and fellow minister John, your bishop, was the first to suffer unjustly, having obtained no hearing. No charge is brought, nor is it heard; and what is this forbidden device? That no pretext of judgment may arise, or be sought, others are installed in the places of living priests, as though those who start out from such an offence could be judged by anyone to hold or to have done anything rightly. For we have never known such things to have been dared by our fathers, but rather to have been forbidden, in that authority has been given to no one to ordain another in the place of one living. For an unapproved ordination cannot take away 504Cthe honour of the priest, since neither can he be a bishop who is unjustly put in his place.

And concerning the observance of the canons, we write that those ought to be followed which were defined at Nicaea, 506Awhich alone the catholic Church ought to follow, and these to acknowledge. But if others are brought forward by some, which disagree with those of Nicaea, and are proved to have been composed by heretics, these are rejected by the catholic bishops. For the things found out by the heretics, these it is not lawful to attach to the catholic canons. For always through contrary and lawless things they wish to lessen the counsel of those at Nicaea. We say, therefore, not only that these ought not to be followed, but rather that they are to be condemned together with the heretical and schismatic dogmas, as also happened before in the synod of Sardica at the hands of the bishops before us. For it were more fitting that things rightly done be condemned, than that things done directly against the canons should have any firmness, most honoured brethren. 506B

But what shall we now do at present against such men? There is need of a synodal examination, which we said long ago was to be assembled. For it alone is that which can calm the motions of such tempests. And that we may obtain it, it is useful meanwhile to commit the healing to the will of the great God and of the Christ of them, our Lord. All the things which have now been thrown into confusion through the envy of the devil, for the proving of the faithful, will be made gentle [Lab. παραμυθήσεται]. We ought to despair of nothing from the Lord through the firmness of the faith. For we too are considering much in what way the ecumenical synod may be assembled, so that by the will of God the 506Cturbulent motions may cease. Let us bear up, then, for a while, and, fortified by the wall of endurance, let us hope that all things will be restored by the help of our God. And all the things which you have said you undergo, we had learned before by complete questioning, from those who ran together to us, although indeed at different times, that is, from Demetrius, 508ACyriacus, Eulysius and Palladius, who are with us

507BAlthough, concerning Namely the silver statue of the augusta Eudoxia, set up on a column of porphyry, and placed toward the southern side of the church of St Sophia, with only a square set between, not without popular games, as count Marcellinus in his Chronicle, Socrates, book VI, c. 18, and Sozomen, book VIII, c. 20, have committed to memory; Baronius thinks this deed took place in the year 404, Pagi, however, vol. II, p. 60, about the end of the year 310. a woman's image, by a new precedent, the report of detractors, carried about While Baronius refers the word circumlata to the image, he so interprets this place that the statue of Eudoxia was not only exposed to veneration at Constantinople, but was also carried about through the provinces, just as of old the heathen were wont to carry about the image of Cybele, and that this is the truer cause why John was so greatly moved against Eudoxia. But against this understanding stands not only the silence of the ancient writers about so profane a rite, but also the fact that they proclaim that woman's image set up, placed and dedicated, not carried about. And the natural understanding of these words is that the report of the detractors about this matter was carried about through the provinces and spread through the whole world. through the provinces and spread through the whole world, I admonished you by other letters, that by repentance of such a deed and by the discontinuance of the purpose the envious rumour might grow old, and the public tongue might not have what to carp at in the morals of the times: although also, concerning the destruction of perishing Illyricum, we have declared among you with pious affection that it is a grief to us, why you The sequence of the discourse requires nos, not vos. For Honorius remonstrates with Arcadius that he wished the losses of the commonwealth to be hidden from him, about which he did not deign to write him anything. have been unwilling to acknowledge these losses of the commonwealth, and they have been announced by other informers rather than by the letters of your piety: yet it is not lawful for us to dissemble with your serenity even this, that report, ever the swift announcer of evils, has not been silent about what has very lately happened in divine matters, not without fear of public danger; and, as the nature of men bears, 507Cwhich is ever roused by new chances to detraction, an occasion of carping being offered, it exercises its malice 508Aagainst the times with the zeal of savage loquacity. For it has lately been published (Vid. Pallad. pag. 82 et 83), that at Constantinople, on the most sacred and venerable day of Easter, when religion had gathered almost all the peoples of the neighbouring cities into the same place, the rite being to be celebrated more strictly under the presence of the princes, the catholic churches were suddenly closed, the priests thrust into custody, so that, namely, at the very time at which by princely indulgence In Sirmond, appendix to the Theodosian Code, pp. 17 and 19, there is a double constitution of Theodosius, by which for the Paschal festival, except those whom the enormity of the five crimes by no means allows to be released, he frees the rest from the custody of prison and restores them to their former state. And this clemency he proclaims in the same place, p. 19, as enjoined and handed down by our forebears. the gloomy prisons of the guilty are unbarred, a savage prison should shut in the ministers of the pious law and of peace, and all the mysteries were thrown into confusion in the manner of war, some slain in the very sanctuaries of the church, and such violence raged about the altars that both 508Bvenerable bishops were thrust into exile, and human blood, what is impious to say, drenched the heavenly sacraments. On suddenly learning these things, I confess that we were disturbed. For who, in so bloody a crime, would not fear the offence of almighty God? or how [ Supply, quis] would think it to lie outside the highest peril of the Roman world and of all mortals? when God almighty himself, the author of our Empire and the governor of the commonwealth which he has entrusted to us, was believed to be angered by the exceedingly deadly and execrable deeds committed, holy lord brother and nephew, venerable augusti; when, if anything were being treated between the prelates concerning the cause of religion, the judgment ought Ambrose, Epistle 21, to Valentinian the younger, n. 2, praises the edict of Valentinian I, by which he enacted that in a cause of faith or of any ecclesiastical order he ought to judge who is neither unequal in office nor unlike in right; that is, says Ambrose, he willed that priests should judge concerning priests. Indeed, if a bishop were accused on other grounds also, and a cause of morals were to be examined, he willed that this too should pertain to the episcopal judgment. to have been episcopal. For to them belongs the interpretation of divine things, to us awaits [ By the ancient usage for spectat] the obedience of religion. 508CBut let it be granted that the princely care presumed something further to itself concerning mystical and catholic questions: 509Aought indignation, once roused, to have gone so far as to the exiles of priests, so far as to the slaughter of men; that where chaste prayers, where sincere vows, where unblemished sacrifices are offered, there the sword, not easily to be drawn even against the throat of the guilty, should thrust itself forth?

By the very events, in short, it is taught what the divine majesty has thought about these things. The first judgment Baronius would prefer indicium. Yet judicium is to be retained, that is, the punishment and vengeance of God the judge. of the present commotion indeed was this, and would that it were the only one! for human trepidation, conscious of so great a thing perpetrated, makes us fear, after the proofs of a terrible vengeance, something graver, which may almighty God avert. I hear (Pallad. pag. 91 et 93) that the most holy church, set out with the wealth of so many emperors [ Perhaps expolitam], noble in its precious adornments, most august through the prayer 509Bof so many supplicating princes, has burned, and that that unique light of the city of Constantinople [ Baronius adds ecclesiae] has smoked, fallen into ashes, God not forbidding (for he seems to execrate the defiled mysteries, and to have turned away his eyes from that place which blood had now stained, lest anyone should be able to entreat the heavenly mercy beneath bloody altars); that the sacred buildings also That is, the most ample house of the senate, which, says Palladius, although many paces distant, opposite the church to the south, that fire, passing over the multitude of people between as though over a bridge, consumed. Zosimus bewails its loss. That fire happened on the twelfth day before the Kalends of July, Honorius for the sixth time and Aristaenetus being consuls, as Socrates relates, book VI, chap. 18, and, as the Alexandrian Chronicle adds, on the second weekday, at the sixth hour., noble with no less splendour, were consumed by the violence of the raging fire as the flame poured itself out more widely, and that the ornaments wrought by our forebears, which adorned the public face, were burned up as though at a kind of funeral of the city.

Although I, provoked by frequent injuries, ought to have kept silent about these things, and not so faithfully to admonish a most closely joined brother and the partners of the realm [Baron. consortem], 509Cyet, putting the tie of blood before the goad of silent grief, I exhort and urge that these things, if it can be done, be corrected by amended morals for the future, and that the divine wrath, so far as by the event it is disclosed to have been roused, be appeased by the diligence of vows. Receive from me the highest proof In the Roman edition, judicium. Better here, with Baronius, indicium. of simplicity. For this reason I thought that this should be intimated to your clemency, lest silence itself should make me suspect with anyone as of a hidden rejoicing, or lest anyone should believe that I give 510Aconsent to such deeds, and that I, who often admonished that they should not happen, did not grieve after they had been committed.

For who could be without grief, who remembers that he is a Christian, that so great a disturbance of religion has suddenly been brought in, that the whole state of the catholic faith must needs waver? There was among the bishops a cause which ought to have been resolved by counsel brought together Baronius: contractoque concilio. The preceding word collato suggests, and in the Roman edition there rightly follows, tractatoque consilio. and treated. Legates Here too Baronius substitutes missis,.... legatis. Legates were sent to Rome, as Palladius witnesses, pp. 9, 23, etc., from both parties: first, from the party of Theophilus, an Alexandrian lector bearing his letter, then a presbyter of the same Theophilus, Peter by name, with Martyrius, deacon of the church of Constantinople, who delivered other letters of Theophilus together with certain acts to pope Innocent; and lastly Paternus, who called himself a presbyter of the church of Constantinople, bearing letters of the bishops Acacius, Paul, Antiochus, Severian and certain others, in which they slandered John, as though he had set fire to the church of St Sophia. From the party of John, however, to pass over others who afterwards came in great number, there first betook themselves to Rome four bishops, Pansophius, Pappus, Demetrius and Eugenius, and they delivered three letters, one of John, another of 40 bishops concerning communion with him, the third of his clergy. And by name, concerning the letter of John to Innocent, Palladius testifies, p. 22, that it was written also to Venerius of Milan and Chromatius of Aquileia, bishops. Hence Honorius could say that those legates had been sent to the priests of the eternal City and of Italy. were sent from both parties to the priests of the eternal city and of Italy: a sentence was awaited from the authority of all, which was to shape the rule of discipline (for all ought to have been kept intact, and nothing innovated, while a deliberate definition proceeded), when meanwhile a certain wonderful headlong haste blazed up, so that, the letters of the priests who had been consulted by the mutual embassy of the parties not being awaited, the matters not 510Bexamined, the prelates were thrust into exile, delivered over to punishment before they had experienced the sentence of an episcopal judgment. In short, how premature that condemnation was the event has proved. For these What the emperor here attributes to several, Palladius ascribes to Innocent alone, and says, p. 22: Upon this the blessed pope Innocent sent letters of communion to both parties, disapproving the judgment which had been made by Theophilus. And indeed his Epistles 4 and 5 are witnesses of the communion granted by Innocent to both parties. But who would persuade himself that he accomplished a thing of such moment without a synod? especially since we read that Innocent, tenacious of the custom of the elders, prescribed, Epistle 3, n. 1, that the Spanish bishops, who laid something before him, should be heard in the session of the presbytery. whose authority was awaited, having permitted to John the bishop a peaceful communion [Baron. praemissa], judged that concord should be ratified, and thought that no one should be repelled from fellowship before judgment.

What now remains but that schisms, dissociated in divers directions, should tear the catholic faith apart, that heresies, ever hostile to communion, should be born from so great a variety of things done, so that it can now scarcely be imputed to the people if perhaps they depart into dissonant parties by the diversity of sects; since from public authority the matter of discords has been sent before, 510Cand a certain tinder of nourishing sedition has been kindled. That this may not break out afresh into some great ruin of the human race, vows must be made, that God, patient toward human lapses, may prosper and further a thing ill done. For so far as it rests with us, we can fear what has been done; so far as it rests with the mercy of God, ever placable, impunity will be granted not to merit, but to pardon.

OF THE EMPEROR HONORIUS TO ARCADIUS AUGUSTUS.

That he order a synod to be assembled at Thessalonica, and Theophilus to betake himself thither. 511

511AI write now for the third time to thy mildness, asking that the things which have been done by compact against John, bishop of Constantinople, be amended: and, as it seems, it has not yet been accomplished. Wherefore I have written again by these bishops and presbyters, being very solicitous for the peace of the Church, through which our empire also obtains peace; that thou wouldst deign to order the bishops of the East to come together at Thessalonica. For our bishops of the West, having chosen men who know not how to turn aside to evil and falsehood, have sent five bishops, two presbyters, and one deacon of the great Roman church, whom I would have thee deem worthy of every honour; so that, if they are persuaded that John was expelled by right, they may teach me to withdraw from his communion; or, if they convict the bishops of the East The Greek word ἐθελοχακοῦντας, which is said properly of soldiers who on purpose do not put forth their strength, so that the adversary may win, is rightly applied to those bishops who, when they could have opposed the canons to Theophilus, yielded of their own accord, so that he might be able to oppress John unjustly. 511Bof being driven by a depraved will of mind, they may turn thee away from their communion. For what the judgment of the Westerners about John the bishop is [that thou mayest have it ascertained], from all the letters which have been written What is enclosed in brackets I have judged must be supplied, lest the sentence hang in doubt. It is not more complete in Ambrose of Camaldoli, who here subjoins: From almost all the letters which they have frequently given me, of these I have subjoined two containing the same thing as the rest. Palladius, p. 28, relates that Innocent, when he had received various letters, wrote to Honorius, ὑποτάξαντα κατὰ μέρος τῶν γραμμάτων δύναμιν, and subjoined one by one what those letters contained, where he intimates that only the force, or the sum, of the several letters was expressed. But from this place it is gathered that not only the sum of the several letters, but also the very letters themselves, or copies of them, were sent to him at the same time. to me, I have subjoined Palladius writes, p. 31, that not only the letters of the emperor Honorius, of Innocent, Roman bishop, and of Chromatius of Aquileia, but also those of Venerius of Milan and of others, were delivered to the same legates at the same time. But Honorius was content to mention the writings of Innocent and Chromatius sent to him some while before, not those which they were sending afresh to Arcadius, or which he himself was dispatching in his own name, not those which others had joined to them as occasion offered. two, containing that which the rest contain, one of the Roman, the other of the bishop of Aquileia. Further, before all things I beseech thy clemency that thou order Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, who is said to be the author of all the evils, to present himself even against his will: so that nothing may hinder the synod of the bishops who shall have come from ratifying a peace befitting our times.

OF HONORIUS THE EMPEROR TO ARCADIUS THE KING. 512A

For the third time I write to thy gentleness, asking that the things done in the conspiracy against John, bishop of Constantinople, may obtain correction; and, as it seems, it has not been accomplished. Wherefore I have sent again by the bishops and presbyters, being very careful for the peace of the Church, through which our kingdom also is at peace, that thou deign to command the bishops of the East to come together at Thessalonica. For the bishops of our West too, having chosen men not inclined to wickedness and falsehood, have sent five bishops, two presbyters, and one deacon of the greatest church of the Romans, whom deign to care for with every kind of honour, so that, if they are persuaded that John the bishop has been justly cast out, they may teach me to withdraw from their communion; or, having convicted the bishops of the East of wilful baseness, 512Bthey may turn thee away from their communion. For what the Westerners think about John the bishop, out of all the bishoprics which wrote to me I have subjoined two equivalent to them all, the letter of the bishop of Rome and of Aquileia. And this I beseech thy gentleness before all things: deem it right that Theophilus of Alexandria present himself even against his will, through whom above all all the evils are said to have come about; so that the synod of the bishops who have come, hindered in nothing, may award the peace befitting our times.

• 511C

512CINNOCENT to AURELIUS and AUGUSTINE, bishops.

The return of Germanus, our fellow presbyter, most welcome to me, ought not to be empty of our duty. For to greet those most dear through those dear seems to us in a manner natural and fitting. We desire, therefore, that your brotherhood, most loving ones, rejoice in the Lord, 513Aand we pray that you repay Reg.: respondere. equal vows to God for us: because, as you well know, we accomplish more by common and mutual prayers than by single or private ones.

To his beloved brother JOHN, INNOCENT.

Although the innocent man ought to expect all prosperous things and to ask mercy of God, yet from us also, who counsel patience, fitting letters have been sent by The same Cyriacus, with Paul, likewise a deacon, had already in the year 404 been sent to Rome by John to deliver his earlier Epistle 4 to Innocent, as is declared in the same letter, n. 1. Cyriacus the deacon, lest 513Binsult avail more to crush than a good conscience to raise up to hope. For neither art thou to be taught, the teacher and pastor of so many peoples, that all the best men are always and constantly tried, whether they abide in the vigour of patience, and do not give way to any labour and trouble. And truly conscience is a firm defence against all things that happen unjustly: which unless one has overcome by patience, he offers an argument of evil suspicion against himself. For he ought to bear all things who relies on trust first in God, and then in his conscience. For a good and upright man can indeed be exercised toward patience, but cannot be overcome; since the divine Scriptures fortify and guard his mind. For the sacred readings which we hand on to the peoples abound in examples, which testify that almost all the 513Csaints were vexed in various ways, and proved as by a kind of examination, and so came to the crown of patience. Let conscience itself, then, console thy charity, brother greatly to be revered, Valesius rendered this into Latin thus: which in calamities is wont to be the consolation of virtue. We cleave to the Greek wording, in which it is not conscience that is proclaimed the consolation of virtue, but rather virtue the consolation of conscience. Innocent asserts more surely what the Orator had declared somewhat more timidly: Punishments which are undergone through virtue have some consolation in themselves. And by the name of virtue Innocent chiefly understands patience, of which in Epistle 7, to the clergy and people of Constantinople, having set out their calamity, he writes in n. 1: Which thing indeed the consolation of patience alone can heal. which in calamities has the consolation of virtue. For under the eyes of the Lord Christ a pure conscience stands in the haven of peace.

To the beloved brother John, Innocent. 514A

Although the blameless man ought to expect all good things, and to ask mercy from God, nevertheless from us also, who counsel forbearance, the fitting letters have been sent by Cyriacus the deacon; so that insult may not be able to do more 514Bin crushing, [Add. ἢ] the good conscience in hoping. For thou oughtest not to be taught, thou the teacher and shepherd of so many peoples, that the best men are always and often tried, whether they abide in the vigour of endurance, and fall under no labour of suffering. And conscience is in truth a sure thing against all that befall unjustly; which unless one overcome by enduring, he brings forth a proof of a base suspicion. For he ought to endure all things who trusts first in God, and then also in his own conscience. Whereas the good and noble man can above all be exercised toward endurance, but not be conquered; since the divine writings guard his understanding. And the divine readings which we hand on to the peoples abound in examples, which have assured that almost all the saints were worn down in divers ways 514Cand continually, and tried as in a kind of examination, and so came to the crown of endurance. Let conscience itself console thy charity, most honoured brother, which in afflictions has the consolation of virtue. For while the Master Christ looks on, the conscience, having been cleansed, will stand in the haven of peace.

To his most beloved brother RUFUS, INNOCENT.

To the most choice and most glorious Moses, in the freeing and ruling of Israel, the Lord so committed all things that he commanded him, in a manifest report, that the counsel of his father-in-law Jothor was to be followed (Exod. XVIII): namely that he should constitute men nearly equal in the rank of judicial dignity, who should settle the multitudes of causes among the peoples according to the place entrusted to them, he himself being free chiefly, or even, for divine Having found by experience that in old books, where the sequence of the discourse requires the word consultationis, the word consolationis is not rarely, indeed for the most part, wont to be read, we suspect the same fault here also, and think there should be restored ipso maximis vel etiam divinis consultationibus vacaturo. For Innocent looks to these words of Exodus XVIII, 19 and 22: Be thou to the people in those things which pertain to God, to refer what is said to him... But whatever is greater, let them refer to thee, and let them judge the least things themselves. consolations. Nor was the form of the Apostles promulgated otherwise (Act. VI, 2 et 3) than 515Bthat they themselves, constituted princes of the Gospel, should commit to their disciples the causes and needs of other matters, to be cared for and attended to. So, in short, Paul, wonderful in all compassion, committed to Titus what he should care for in Crete (Tit. I, 5), to Timothy what he should dispose throughout Asia (I Tim. I), as we learn from the reading of the sacred epistles.

Divinely, therefore, this grace running forward, let it learn so to take counsel for the churches separated from me by long intervals, that they may judge that to thy prudence and gravity That those at whose suggestion Justinian wrote in Novel 11 that only in the times of Attila, that is after the year 440, was the dignity of vicar through Illyricum attributed to the bishop of Thessalonica, imposed upon this emperor, is manifest from this. are to be committed the care and the causes, if any arise throughout the churches of Achaia, Thessaly, Old Epirus, New Epirus, and Crete, Dacia Mediterranea, Dacia Ripensis, Moesia, Dardania and Praevalis, with Christ 516Athe Lord assenting (Ad hunc locum respicit Nicolaus I epist. 2). For truly, by his most sacred admonitions, we enjoin this solicitude upon the providence and virtue of thy most choice sincerity; not establishing these things so for the first time, but imitating our apostolic predecessors, who willed that these things be enjoined upon the most blessed That this charge was enjoined upon Acholius at least from the year 380, against the opinion of Haller, we observed in the Notice on the 8th letter of Damasus. Acholius and Anysius according to their merits. For it is most just that those who have deserved well be so adorned with honours, as it seems necessary that the arrogant be beaten down. It pleases, therefore, that there be reward for the good, and for the less good Censio commonly signifies a mark of censure from the censor. Presently by the name primatum are understood the metropolitans of the provinces named before. censure: for so both the one is corrected, and the other is ennobled.

Take up, therefore, most beloved brother, in our stead, the care throughout the churches written above, saving their primacy: and first among the primates themselves, whatever 516Bit shall be necessary for them to send to us, let them not ask without thy judgment. For so either through thy experience whatever it is will be finished; or we direct that by thy counsel it is to be brought as far as us. Know, moreover, that it is lawful and permitted to thy fraternity by the favour of the apostolic see that, when any ecclesiastical question is to be treated and examined either in thy province or in the provinces mentioned, thou mayest take with thee whom thou wilt of the bishops as associates from whatever Churches, by whose faith and moderation thou mayest direct, as the best arbiter, whatever necessity or cause shall have demanded, and mayest settle it as the chief mediator, as one chosen by us. The whole preparation of the documents in the cause So Holstenius, not, as Tillemont reads, Achivorum. That the discourse here is of archives, as of documents, both what precedes and what follows persuade. For it appears that the truth of the documents by which the office of vicar was delegated to the prelate of Thessalonica was then called into doubt by some. Wherefore Innocent, although he had said to Rufus just before, as one chosen by us, which sounds as though the power was conferred on him not so much by the prerogative of his see as by the gift of the one choosing him, yet does not deny that it was supported by custom: and therefore he urges the same man to review both his own former letter and others of his predecessors given on that account. of the archives we have ordered to be made with the presbyter In the edition of the Councils, 11. The one which was 14 is now 25. By that very man, perhaps, who by Siricius, Epistle 9, n. 5, is said to have been given to Bassus, bishop, into partnership in ruling the church. Senecio, a man very 517Amature. And so, from our former Written not, as it seems to me at least, to Rufus himself, but to his predecessor Anysius, and which holds the first place above. And hence again it is confirmed that the word archivorum was to be retained, and not changed. letter, and from these documents, reviewing well what thou oughtest to do, take cognizance of it. For we have made this our will sufficiently manifest by letters, as was fitting, throughout each province. Given on the fifteenth day before the Kalends of July (Junii 17 ann. 412), Honorius for the ninth time and Theodosius for the fifth time, augusti, being consuls.

INNOCENT TO AURELIUS.

The duty of our charity The genuine Royal exemplar of the Dionysian collection: Charitatis tuae, perhaps in place of charitatis mutuae. The Coislin manuscript of the Spanish collection: Charitatis vestrae. is broken off by no interval, even if the paper carries no letters. For the spiritual grace lives in hearts turn by turn, and the priestly fellowship itself cherishes our love. So we emend by the help of the aforesaid Royal exemplar, in which there stands Curatio ut dignum est. With which agrees this of the Coislin: Cura ergo ut dignum est. But in other books there is had Cur ergo indignum est; and presently, in the printed editions only, custodiri. Then in the Coislin: idque omnes... fratres carissimi. Take care, as is fitting, to guard the unity of the Church; 517Band let us all alike both think and pronounce the same thing, dearest brother. These letters, therefore, concerning the Paschal reckoning of the other By the word alterius one must understand the year either other than that in which the day of Easter is to be celebrated, or other than that in which it is to be made public. If this latter is admitted, this letter will have to be assigned to the year 412; but if the former is preferred, it will have to be put off to the year 413. Although he himself signifies below not obscurely that he writes in the year other than that in which the day of Easter was to be made public. (I mean, the coming) year I have written beforehand. For since on the eleventh day before the Kalends of April the moon is reckoned almost at the 16th (for it is somewhat less), In the manuscripts of the Hadrianic collection itemque, without the added cum, which is likewise omitted in the Royal exemplar of the Dionysian collection, the sense unharmed. and likewise since on the fourth day before the same Kalends the twenty-third comes: I have judged that the Paschal feast is to be celebrated on the eleventh day before the said Kalends; since on the twenty-third moon 518Awe know that no Easter has ever So the Royal exemplar. But the manuscripts of the Hadrianic collection: ante Paschu. The printed editions, however: ante hoc Paschu. been kept before this. I have set out and declared the tenor of my opinion. Now it will be for thy prudence, In the Coislin manuscript: concors mihi. my partner and brother, to reconsider In the common editions after Crabbe, tractare. But in all the manuscripts, as in Merlin, retractare, which is to review. this very matter with our fellow priests of one mind in a most religious synod: so that, if nothing conflicts with our disposition, thou mayest write back to us most fully and openly, whereby we may prescribe in its own time the Paschal day, deliberated upon, to be kept, by letters beforehand, as That it was the custom that the Roman pontiff should direct letters to all about the day of Easter, the first synod of Arles, held in the year 514, is witness, and Leo, Epistle 88, to Ravennius, confirms its practice. And this whole passage of Innocent breathes this, that the time at which that custom had to be satisfied was not yet imminent. is the custom. Although I know that thou wilt receive our fellow presbyter Archidamus most gladly and in thy accustomed manner, yet All the manuscripts: ex abundantibus. out of abundance I ask that thou deign to hold him among thine own.

518BThat the amplitude of thy religion stands forth a singular member of the Church, and is most reverently honoured by us, is sufficiently manifest to all. For on the very summit of nobility thou bestowest a far nobler devotion upon the Church, and, rejoicing the more in the knowledge of Christ, thou obeyest his precepts, and exultest in faith rather than boastest of the flower of so great a lineage. It is of the highest virtue to have overcome the glory of the flesh: and it is of the great grace of Christ 519ABaronius observes that this was said not without cause, but in order that by it, as by an antidote, the poison lurking in these words of Pelagius to Demetrias might be shaken out, words which so greatly displeased Alypius and Augustine: Spiritual riches no one besides thyself will be able to confer on himself: in these thou art rightly to be praised, in these deservedly to be preferred to others, which cannot be except from thee and in thee. Nor is the close of the letter less opposed to them, in which Innocent does not say that thou mayest render thyself more illustrious through the ages to him to whom thou hast shown thyself distinguished, but refers the whole of this to the gift of God. Certainly, if this letter preceded the aforesaid little work of Pelagius, it is not to be denied that Innocent, not without the nod of God, so aptly forestalled the mind of Juliana against his pestilent doctrine., to have surpassed nobility by morals, lady daughter, deservedly illustrious. Being, then, secure, most beloved, strive to make illustrious with eternal and divine offices whatever spans of this life there are: that he who made thee distinguished may render thee more illustrious to himself through the ages.

INNOCENT TO MARCIANUS, BISHOP So most manuscripts. But some, as in Merlin: Naisitano. The Roman edition, after Crabbe: Naxitano. Crabbe likewise wrote in the margin Naresitano, which was preferred in the later editions of the councils. In the pure Royal exemplar of the Dionysian collection this whole inscription is wanting. OF NAISSUS.

At an earlier time, if indeed I rightly The manuscripts of the collections of Dionysius and Hadrian: reor. remember, I recall that I sent letters of this kind, both to thy love and to our brethren and fellow bishops Rufus and the rest, concerning the clerics Merlin: Naisensibus. Crabbe and the Roman edition: Naxensibus. The later editions of the councils, from Crabbe's margin: Naresiensibus. The Navarre manuscript: Naisitensibus. The rest: Naissensibus. Those who will have it that Bonosus was bishop of Naissus rest on this passage, reckoning that clerics of Naissus could not have been ordained by him unless he had presided over the Church of Naissus. Their opinion would certainly not be one to reject, if it were established that this heretic had kept himself within the rules of ecclesiastical discipline. But, as is shown in the following letter, n. 12, he made unlawful ordinations everywhere and without any examination. Nothing therefore prevents us from holding to the authority of Marius Mercator, who calls Bonosus bishop of Sardica. of Naissus, namely those who asserted that before the condemnation of Bonosus they had been ordained by him, as presbyters as well as deacons: that if, having abandoned and condemned his error, they wished 519Bto be joined to the Church, they should be gladly received, lest perhaps those who were worthy of recovering salvation should perish in the same In the printed editions errore is added here, which is absent from the manuscripts and is rightly understood.. But now, while I am stationed in the city of Ravenna because of the very frequent necessities of the Roman people, The Roman edition alone: Germanus. Merlin and Crabbe: Germanum, and next Lupentinum; where the more recent editions of the councils preferred Lupentinus, setting aside in the margin Lupentius, which is the reading of the manuscripts. Germanio, who asserts that he is a presbyter, 520Aand Lupentius, who says that he is a deacon, having taken up a kind of embassy on behalf of many such men, pouring out prayer, were eager to express their own griefs, The word asserentes, omitted in Crabbe and thereafter in the printed editions, is recalled from Merlin and the manuscripts. What the clerics ordained by Bonosus were then asserting, namely that Marcianus had allowed them to keep their churches on such terms that he denied them his communion, is illustrated by the acts of the first council of Toledo, Labbe vol. ii, p. 1251, where certain men departing from the sect of the Priscillianists are permitted their churches, and communion is not granted until it should have been restored to them by the Roman prelate. Moreover, these clerics who were permitted to keep their churches had not received a repeated ordination: and so the bishops of Macedonia were not persuaded that the Bonosians, if they were to be permitted to remain in the clergy, could be granted this only by a repeated ordination. Let this be observed in the meantime against the opinion of Paschasius Quesnel, of which we shall have to treat in the Monitum on the following letter. asserting that they did indeed keep churches set in the parishes of thy love, but had not been able to merit thy communion, for this reason, namely, that a certain man, Rusticius by name, had received the presbyterate by a repeated ordination. And it becomes no light hindrance, while either they grieve that a man of this kind is retained in the Church, or he judges that others ought to be sinned against in the same way In our manuscripts, as in the printed editions, peccare stands: but what is joined after, esse peccatum, necessarily demands peccari here. Nor are those unaware who have any practice in wearing through old books how frequent is the change of i into e and back again. Next, the editions after Crabbe, as in the Royal manuscript, have debere in alio; where the other books have better debere in alios, supply: those ordained by Bonosus. Then the copies of the collections of Dionysius and Hadrian subjoin arbitretur quem in se, not quemadmodum in se: which is held more correctly in the manuscripts of the Spanish collection and of the Isidorian. as he acknowledges that a sin was committed in his own case. And although my letters which I mentioned above contain more fully on the same matter, yet even now we have thought that thy fraternity should be admonished that, if it is truly established that some who were ordained by the same man before the condemnation of Bonosus 520Bafterwards wished, or now wish, to return, we judge that they are to be received; especially since the men mentioned assert that they were ordained at so much earlier a time that the man of holy memory Cornelius, bishop of the city of Sirmium, and also our brother This Nicetas is thought to be the one called by Gennadius, On Illustrious Men, bishop of Romatiana; a city which the geographers place in inland Dacia, or in Upper Moesia, between Naissus and Sardica. Nicetas, and some others were present, 521Awhen they were increased with the honours which they record that they hold The editions after Crabbe: faterentur; in the Royal manuscript nihil agerentur: corruptly. In the rest: augerentur. Innocent speaks of the ordained as honoribus auctos, "increased with honours," by that manner of speaking by which Hilary, On the Trinity, book x, n. 11, says that those who have received Christ are in filios Dei aucti, "increased into sons of God": because, clearly, as for those who come to be sons of God, so for those who are ordained there is no light accession of dignity.. Wherefore, dearest brother, if their assertion obtains the credit of truth, thou oughtest not to doubt that those are to be received whom thou hast suffered so long to keep the churches entrusted to them.

In the Corbie exemplar, written about the middle of the sixth century, in the Colbert one written out in Lombardic letters, and also in the old copies of the Code published by Quesnel, and of the collections of Dionysius, Hadrian, the Spanish, Isidore, etc., this letter is presented. Dionysius divided it into seven chapters, which he placed among the decrees of Innocent in such a way that the first of these chapters is called by him Innocent's decree LI, and the last LVIII. In the Corbie codex, however, it is divided into twelve titles, which we have thought fit to set out at the head of the letter itself. A shorter title is prefixed to the same letter in the ancient copies of Quesnel's Code 521Bin this manner: « Rescript of Pope Innocent to the Macedonian bishops upon the inquiry concerning three titles. I. That he who takes a widow to wife be not admitted to the clergy. II. That he who had a wife before baptism, if, she having died, he has married another after baptism, be held a digamist, and not to be admitted to the clergy. III. That those who, departing from the Catholic Church, receive ordination to the priesthood from heretics, be not reckoned until they wish to return. » And indeed it is chiefly of that threefold question that this letter treats. Looking to the first two, Innocent says, num. I: « Of which things I remember having written long since; now the redoubled inquiry of your report compels me to repeat the form with more evident arguments: » because, clearly, of the first he had written both in epist. 2, to Victricius, c. 5, and in epist. 3, to the synod of Toledo, c. 6, and in epist. 6, to Exsuperius, c. 1, and of the second in the cited letters to Victricius and to the synod of Toledo. Nor is it an obstacle that those letters are by no means general. For when 521Cthe Roman pontiffs wrote back to the questions of particular bishops or churches something that could be of use to other churches, they had commonly been accustomed to communicate it to them. But when Innocent comes to the third question, he so confesses that it demands a longer disputation for its difficulty as to indicate plainly enough that it was new and not yet handled by him.

That new question arose on the occasion of those whom Bonosus had ordained after his condemnation. For concerning those who had been ordained by the same man before his condemnation there was no difficulty. These, indeed, the synod of Capua had judged were to be received in their honours. Approving that judgment, Innocent had written to Rufus himself and the other Macedonians by name concerning the clerics of Naissus, « who asserted that before the condemnation of Bonosus they had been ordained by him, as presbyters as well as deacons, » « that if, having abandoned and condemned his error, they wished to be joined to the Church, they should be gladly received » (Epist. 17, 1). So the dispute was only about those 521Dclerics whom Bonosus, already condemned, had ordained. When that question had been carried to Innocent, he observes that a distinction must be drawn between those who, baptized in heresy, come to the Church, and those who go from the Catholic Church to heresy, and thence return to the very Catholic Church from which they had gone out. For the former were at once joined to the faithful by the imposition of the hand alone. But the others were admitted to communion only after a long penance. « Whence, he says (Num. 11), it is established that those who passed over from the Catholic Church to the condemned Bonosus, and suffered or desired to be ordained by him, ought not to have received the dignity of ecclesiastical ordination: » since indeed 522A« not even after penance do the canons themselves by their authority permit one to become a cleric. » Wherefore he remonstrates with the Macedonians (Num. 8) that « those who passed over from the Catholic Church to heresy not only do not do penance among them, but are even heaped with honour ( of the clerical state ). » But concerning the others Innocent notes that « there were ancient rules, handed down by the Apostles or apostolic men, which the Roman church guards and commands to be guarded by those who have heard her, » by which it is prescribed (Ibid.) « to grant to those coming from the heretics, who were baptized there, only lay communion through the imposition of the hand, and not to put any of them in the place of even the least honour of the clerical state. »

But he readily confesses that the necessity of the Church sometimes counselled a departure from this last law. For this cause the Nicene synod had judged that the Novatians were to be received in their honours. Such afterwards was the judgment of Anysius and his associates concerning those who had been ordained by Bonosus before his condemnation. To those also who had received ordination from the followers of Priscillian, 522Bin the year 400, the first council of Toledo granted the same kind of favour. And Innocent indeed not only approves the statutes of the Nicene synod towards the Navatians, or of Anisius and his associates towards those who had adhered to Bonosius, but also vehemently rebukes and refutes those who were displeased by the indulgence of the council of Toledo towards the followers of Priscillian (Epist. 3, c. 1). Yet the pontiff, most loving of equity, so admits and approves those exceptions as to contend sharply that, where a necessity of this kind is absent, one must hold to the general rules of the Church. While he strives to persuade of this, he brings forward the Nicene canon 8 in this manner: « Concerning those who name themselves Cathari, that is, the pure, and at any time come to the catholic Church, it pleased the holy and great synod that, having received the imposition of the hand, they remain so in the clergy. » Whence a new question arises about the genuine understanding of this canon, which it will be helpful to explain here.

In no other words does the ancient Code of the canons, 522Cwhich Paschasius Quesnel will have to have been in the use of the Roman church, report that canon, in cap. 22, in this letter of Innocent, although in chapter 1 of the same Code, where the Nicene canons are presented together, it is expressed thus: « Concerning those who call themselves Cathari, that is, the pure, if any come to the catholic Church, it pleased the holy council that they be ordained, and so remain in the clergy. » Now since this translation is proper to that code, it ought to have been common to those who used that Code, and so to Innocent himself, if, as is alleged, the aforesaid Code was in the use of the Roman Church in his age. Yet in the translation which Innocent follows, while the order of the words is different, the greatest difference certainly lies in this, that where the Code mentioned presents that they be ordained, he gives that, having received the imposition of the hand. Whence it follows that this pope used a translator of the Nicene council who had read in can. 8 ὅστε χειροθετουμένους, not Quesnel's Code, in which is inserted the translation of a man who, in place of χειροθετουμένους, had come upon χειροτονουμένους. Feeling that this goes no little against his opinion 522Dof that Code, the man cited, dissert. 12, cap. 7, devised this cause of the aforesaid difference: « that Pope Innocent, since he was answering the objection of the Macedonians, wished to write out or translate word for word the canon which had been objected, from their letters, » not from his own Code. But in answering thus he is convicted of not having weighed Innocent's words sufficiently. For that pope, having first said by way of preface: « First that canon instituted by the fathers must be set down, so that we may be able to observe, etc., » declares plainly enough that he is setting forth this canon first, not copying or translating it from the letters of others. On the other hand 523Ait is known that in his own copy of the Nicene council he read in can. 8 χειροθετουμένους, not χειροτονουμένους, and that in the same copy the word χειροθετουμένους had been turned into Latin not by the word of ordination, but by that of the imposition of the hand. For, expressing this Nicene canon summarily in epist. 2, n. 11, after Siricius, epist. 4, c. 8, he prescribes « that those coming from the Novatians or Montenses be received through the imposition of the hand. » Nor does Siricius confirm this only in the place just cited, but also in epist. 1, n. 2, where he answers Himerius, who was consulting whether those coming from the Arian heresy were to be baptized anew: « Whom we, with the Novatians and other heretics, as has been established in the synod, join to the assembly of catholics by the invocation of the sevenfold Spirit alone, by the episcopal imposition of the hand. » For no prudent man will deny that there by the name of synod the Nicene is understood, and its canon 8 is recalled. It is manifest, therefore, that in this canon Siricius and Innocent read that, having received the imposition of the hand, not that they be ordained. 523BLeo also, treading in their footsteps, in epist. 2, answers the inquiry of Rusticus, 18, in like manner: « Through the imposition of the hand, the power of the Holy Spirit having been invoked, which they could not receive from the heretics, they are to be joined to the Catholics. » With these agrees the Corbie codex also, written out in the middle of the sixth century, in which the Nicene canon is reported thus: « Concerning those who surname themselves Cathari, that is, the pure, if at any time they come to the catholic Church, it pleased the holy and great council that, receiving the imposition of the hand, they remain so in the clergy. » But in what way the imposition of the hand there required is to be understood, it is of no light moment to explain.

Here the man cited, in the aforesaid Dissertation 12, c. 7, lays down two things as certain which it would have been worth the trouble to prove. For first he says: « The Macedonians freely confessed that ordination was signified there (Nicaen. can. 8, manus impositione). » And then he adds that on this the Macedonians and Innocent were agreed, 523Cthat if the Bonosians were to be permitted to remain in the clergy, this was to be granted them only by a repeated ordination. As regards the Macedonians, if from what one man did, although his deed is disapproved by others, one may conjecture what a whole province or region thinks, it must be granted that they were not far from the opinion which the learned man attributes to them. For in the preceding letter we saw that a certain Rusticius, returning from the fellowship of Bonosus to the catholic Church, « had received the presbyterate by a repeated ordination; » and that this was the greatest hindrance to others who desired to return, « while either they grieve that a man of this kind is retained in the Church, or he judges that others ought to be sinned against in the same way as he acknowledges that a sin was committed in his own case. » But who would wish it to be judged, from the singular sin of one man, which is a horror to the rest, what has been received in the usage of a whole province? On the contrary, from the fact that the Macedonians had permitted Germanio, Lupentius and many others to keep their churches without a repeated ordination, 523Dit is clear that they were not of that opinion, that those ordained by Bonosus might not remain in the clergy except by a repeated ordination. Innocent also, in the words adduced concerning Rusticius, who suffered himself to be ordained again, signifies that he thinks together with the Macedonian clerics on this, namely that he had committed a sin, and indeed a sin of such a kind as does not permit the same man to be retained in the Church or reckoned among the ecclesiastics. Far, therefore, both the same pope and the Macedonian clerics and the bishops of the same province stood from that opinion, that if the Bonosians were permitted to remain in the clergy, this was to be furnished them by a repeated ordination. But let us take the matter up from further back.

In the Church that law has always obtained, that those coming from heresy to the Church, whether clerics or laymen, were received through the imposition of the hand. That this custom had prevailed before the Nicene synod, nay, before 524Athe times of Pope Stephen and of Cyprian, we have proved above, p. 240 and following, by the testimonies both of Stephen himself and of the councils of Africa under Cyprian, and also of Eusebius and others. But it is plain from the same testimonies that the hand was then imposed on them unto penance, not that they might be ordained; and anyone who contended that laymen were ordained by this imposition would offer himself to be laughed at by all. Who, therefore, would assent that the Nicene fathers spoke of the imposition of the hand in another sense, where they decree concerning the Novatians: « It pleased the holy and great synod that, having received the imposition of the hand, they remain so in the clergy? » For us, lest we should think they spoke in another sense, the authority is Siricius, who indeed, in the place already cited, epist. 1, to Himer., c. 1, testifies that the Arians and other heretics are joined at Rome to the assembly of catholics by that very imposition of the hand by which the Nicene synod prescribed that the Novatians were to be received, and that this is guarded by the whole East and West together. Whence it follows that what is prescribed in the Nicene canon concerning receiving 524Bthe imposition of the hand, the whole East and West, tradition persuading them, understood to have been commanded concerning all heretics; but that what is added there, and so let them remain in the clergy, was granted to the Novatians alone, Innocent himself being the interpreter. And if towards the Arians or other heretics that imposition of the hand was not a repeated ordination, then neither was it towards the Novatians. Besides this, Innocent below (Num. 8), having professed that he adheres to the law of his church, which willed that the hand be imposed on those coming from heresy, openly teaches that by this imposition ordination is by no means conferred, since he affirms at the same time that only lay communion is granted through it (Num. 9). When, therefore, he says, « This was the chief deliberation of Anysius, our brother of former days, and of other fellow priests, that those whom Bonosus had ordained, lest they should remain with him and no mean scandal should arise, should be received as ordained, » he does not understand that ordained as though they were to be ordained again before they were received, but 524Cbecause those whom Bonosus had ordained were to be held as ordained, and received in the grade and order which they had received.

But, as the same pope warns beforehand (Ibid.), one thing is to be distinguished as the lawful order, another as usurpation. Nor should we undeservedly call, with him, guilty of a usurped dignity those whom Bonosus, when condemned, had ordained (Num. 12): because they thought themselves to be that which had been granted them by no regular reckoning. And although what had been given remained in them, yet because it remained, to speak with Augustine (Lib. II, cont. Epist. Parmen. n. 29), to the punishment of the usurper, both of him who unlawfully gave and of him who unlawfully received; they are truly to be said to have received nothing, inasmuch as they could not lawfully use the power made for them against the rules. « For the rest, says the same Augustine (Num. 30), concerning those who are separated from the unity of the Church, there is now no question but that they both have and can give, and that they have perniciously and hand on perniciously (baptism and ordination) 524Doutside the bond of peace. For each, » he says a little above (Num. 28), « is a sacrament, and each is given to a man by a certain consecration; the one when he is baptized, the other when he is ordained: and therefore in the Catholic Church neither may be repeated. » And a few things being interposed. « But just as they have in baptism what can be given through them, so in ordination the right of giving; each indeed to their own destruction, as long as they have not the charity of unity: but it is one thing not to have, another to have perniciously, another to have salutarily. » And these things are of so much the greater weight for illustrating and proving Innocent's opinion, because, when Augustine set them out about the year 400, and so before Innocent wrote to the Macedonians, he asserts that he is defending not what he himself privately thought, but « what has been discussed and considered, perfected and defined in the very unity of the whole world » (Ibid.). Certainly he would not have been going to say « this was defined in 525Athe very unity of the whole world » if the agreement of the Roman Church in the same doctrine had been lacking. For how scrupulously the Africans, especially at that time and concerning questions of this kind, took care not to dissent from the decrees of this Church, their embassies and letters directed to Siricius, to Anastasius and to Innocent himself are witnesses. But if we weigh where that definition which Augustine cites was published, there will occur first of all what the Africans write, Cod. can. Eccl. Afr., c. 48: « But we suggest this which was commanded us, which is also seen to have been established in the plenary synod of Capua, that rebaptizings and reordinations may not take place. » Nor can anyone deny that in so celebrated a council nothing was done except according to the mind of Siricius, certainly nothing that he himself did not approve. Although, therefore, the learned man already mentioned more than once most recently asserts (Dissert. 12 in Leon. c. 7): « Nor was it a question (between the Macedonians Macedodonas and Innocent) whether the Bonosians ought to be ordained again, so that they might remain in that order of the clergy 525Bwhich they had obtained under Bonosus, on that both were agreed; but whether they were to be permitted to remain in the clergy even by a repeated ordination; » one may rightly appeal from his opinion to that of Augustine (Lib. II, cont. Epist. Parmen. n. 28): « Concerning those who are separated from the unity of the Church, there is now no question but that they both have and can give (baptism and ordination). And therefore in the Catholic Church neither may be repeated. » Whence, he says, when « it seemed necessary that (those coming from the party of Donatus) should perform the same offices which they were performing, they were not ordained again: but as baptism in them, so ordination remained whole. »

If we go even to the very source, that is, to the Greek text of the Nicene council, it will become manifest to us that the fathers of this council were unwilling that ordination be repeated except for those whose baptism they judged null, and therefore to be repeated. Certainly, since in can. 8 they grant that the Novatians, whose baptism they admitted, χειροθετουμένους, 525Cthat is, having received the imposition of the hand, remain in the clergy; in can. 19 they are unwilling that the clerics of the Paulianists, whose baptism they rejected, be admitted into the clergy, unless « they had first been baptized and ordained ( ἀναβαπτισθέντες χειροτονείσθωσαν ) by a bishop of the catholic Church. » For not without cause do they not use the same word in those two places: but they admit to the clergy the first χειροθετουμένους, which sounds simply to receive the imposition of the hand, the others χειροτονουμένους, which properly sounds to receive ordination. Whence it is clear also that the translation of the Nicene canon which Innocent uses in this letter is more apt and more congruous than that which obtains in Quesnel's Code. Perhaps too the craftsman of the latter, since in can. 19, on the Paulianists, he came upon χειροτονείσθωσαν said, was led thence to judge that in can. 8, on the Novatians, one should read in Greek χειρονουμένους and in Latin that they be ordained. And from a faulty translation of this kind chiefly that opinion seems to have been born which holds that clerics coming from heresy to the Church were received into the clergy only by a repeated ordination. 525DBut even if there have from time to time been some who doubted whether sacraments were efficaciously conferred by condemned bishops, yet never was the mind of the Church wavering or doubtful in that matter. At the close of the fifth century, when it was the opinion of certain men that, « the judgment having been pronounced by Pope Felix (II adversus Acacium), he had afterwards acted inefficaciously in the sacraments which Acacius usurped, » Pope Anastasius answered, epist. I, c. 8: 526A« Since the condemned man claimed for himself the name of priest, the swelling of pride was inflicted upon his own head; because the people, who in the mysteries thirsted for his gift, was not shut out, but that soul alone which had sinned was, by just judgment, liable for its own fault. » Which is truly said of him who seeks the sacraments with a simple soul, not of him who abuses the occasion of schism to serve his own ambition. In the ninth century a like controversy arose concerning the clerics ordained by Ebbo after he had been cast down from the episcopate. But the third council of Soissons, in the year 866, decreed concerning them that « they should be received in their grades, according to the indulgence of the Nicene synod concerning those whom Meletius, when condemned, ordained, and according to the tradition of the African council » towards the Donatists. See also the second council of Nicaea, Labbe vol. VII, from p. 66 to 78. Thus the Nicene fathers judged that the Meletians and Novatians were to be received in their honours, the Africans certain of the Donatists, the synod of Capua and Innocent those ordained by Bonosus before his condemnation, Anastasius II those 526Bwhom Acacius, when condemned, ordained. Besides, Gregory I, in the epistle formerly 61, in the month of July, Indiction IV, to Quiricus, judged that even the Nestorians likewise were to be received in their honours. Other like judgments and decrees we pass over in silence.

That if a priest or anyone of the clergy has married a widow, or a woman put away, he lose his office. -- II. That if anyone as a catechumen had a wife, and, she having died, has after baptism obtained another, he be not a cleric. --III. That those ordained by heretics be not received in the clergy. --IV. That in ordinations crimes or vices are not rightly believed to be taken away. 526C--V. That those who were ordained by the heretic Bonosus were received for this reason, that scandal might not remain for the Church. --VI. That in the Church the sin of a people is wont to be passed over unpunished. --VII. That the apostolic see had been taken by surprise, and has changed its sentence for the better.

From the ancient Corbie codex.

Of those who are alleged to have taken two wives. --II. That he who as a catechumen had and lost a wife ought not to be called a digamist. --III. In what way crimes are remitted in baptism. --IV. Of sons who were born before baptism. --V. Of catechumens who have applied themselves to holy virtues. --VI. Of heretical clerics, in what way they ought to be reconciled. --VII. That the sacrilegious 526Dand adulterers ought not to be admitted to the clergy. --VIII. And in what way heretics are received. --IX. Of those who call themselves cathari and pure. --X. Of those returning from the Novatians and heretics. --XI. Of catholic clerics who pass over to heresy. --XII. Of the reception of Fontinus and Eustasius.

INNOCENT This inscription is offered thus in the old Corbie manuscript: Innocentius Eustasio Eugenio, Policronio, Hilario, Zosimo, Hermogeni, Thorentiano, Rufo, Claudio, Gerontio, Suffronio, Macedonio, Profuturo, Vincentio, Herodiano, Eusebio, Maximiano, Joanni, Flaviano, Calecrati, Nicitae, Aciologo, Martiano, episcopis Macedonibus et diaconibus in Deo salutem. The other Colbert manuscript agrees with the same codex. Whence it is clear that from the order which the bishops hold in inscriptions of this kind no firm argument can be made by which their dignity or seniority may be proved. Dionysius Exiguus, content to name two of those bishops, abridges the whole inscription in this manner: Innocentius Rufo, Eusebio et caeteris episcopis Macedonibus et diaconibus in Domino salutem: and afterwards the author of the Spanish collection and Isidore imitated him. TO RUFUS, EUSEBIUS, EUSTATHIUS, CLAUDIUS, MAXIMIANUS, EUGENIUS, GERONTIUS, JOHN; POLYCHRONIUS, SOPHRONIUS, FLAVIANUS, HILARY, MACEDONIUS, CALICRATIUS, ZOSIMUS, PROFUTURUS, NICETAS, [ Quidam mss. NICETIO], HERMOGENES, VINCENT, ASIOLOGUS, TERENTIANUS, HERODIANUS and MARCIANUS, In the Roman edition and in the Councils after Crabbe, et caeteris is added here: which is absent from all the manuscripts in which the names of the bishops are called one by one, and is without doubt taken over from those in which, as we observed just now, only two bishops being named, the rest are passed over in silence. And of those named above, Chrysostom, writing from exile in epistle 165 to the Macedonian bishops, likewise names Eustathium, Eusebium, Maximianum, Eugenium et Gerontium in that inscription. Here the question arises whether there were in Macedonia as many bishops as are now enumerated. For the name of Marcianus, who is established to have been a bishop, set in the last place, does not permit us to think that some deacons were named above together with the bishops. Perhaps Innocent, when he had mentioned indiscriminately the bishops whom he knew from Macedonia and other provinces of Illyricum, added episcopis Macedonibus et diaconis, to signify that his letter, although inscribed also to the bishops of the neighbouring provinces, concerned the Macedonians first of all: just as earlier the synod of Capua, as Siricius witnesses, ep. 9, n. 1, had decreed that the bordering and neighbouring bishops of Bonosus, chiefly the Macedonians, should take cognizance of his case. to the Macedonian bishops and deacons, greeting in the Lord. 527A

Great rejoicing took hold of me when, after so many perils of the whole world, so to speak, Vitalis the archdeacon, the bearer of your letters, sent from those parts, arrived all the way to us. When we had seen him, we at once, as was fitting, inquired about your state. But when The Corbie manuscript with one Colbert manuscript: reperiremus. we found that you were living as we wished, we returned abundant thanks to our God, who protects his servants and those who serve his altars both in 527Badversity, and deigns to govern them in prosperity. When he had delivered the letters, I ordered them to be gone through at once: in which I perceived many things set down which might bring The same manuscripts: nostris ut inducerent. The others, with Merlin: nostri inducerent. Injicerent would not displease. astonishment upon our minds, and make us doubt not a little whether we were thinking otherwise, or those things were set down just as they sounded. When I had had them read over again several times, I noticed that From the better manuscripts the word aliquam is recalled here, which was formerly wanting. Innocent had already forbidden, in epist. 2, n. 7 and 8, and also in epist. 3, n. 11, that anyone be admitted to the clergy who had married either a widow or a second wife, even if he had taken the first before baptism. It is probable, moreover, that after the example of Siricius he took care that letters and decrees of this kind should travel through the provinces, as he himself speaks in epist. 1, n. 2, lest any of them should plead ignorance. Certainly that about which he testifies that he had written before falls under the two aforesaid heads, not under the other two, which are treated next. some injury was being done to the apostolic see, to which the report sent was running as to the head of the churches, whose sentence was still being drawn into doubt. Hence, concerning matters on which I remember having written long since, the redoubled inquiry In the manuscripts of the collections of Dionysius, Hadrian and the Spanish, relationis vestrae is wanting. In the Colbert Lombardic codex relationis stands, and in the other Colbert and the old Corbie relegationis, without vestrae added. Then all the other manuscripts subjoin geminata percontatio vestra. Merlin printed gemina percontatio vestra. The old copies of Quesnel's Code preserve the common reading. of your report compels me now to repeat the form with more evident arguments.

Those (Ivo p. 8, c. 503) who are alleged to have taken widows 528Aas wives I have learned not only became clerics, but even reached the fillets of the highest priesthood: which no one is unaware is against the precepts of the law. For since Moses the lawgiver cries out: Let the priest take a virgin to wife (Lev. XXII, 13, 14); and, lest anything in this precept be thought ambiguous, he added, not a widow, nor one put away. Against this precept, set under So the better manuscripts. But other books: subnixum. Pithou: subnexum. divine authority, no defence of any other command is opposed except your custom: which, as you yourselves confess, was established from ignorance, to speak more modestly, not from apostolic tradition and sound reason. But let your love know that we, and all the churches through East and West, by no means admit these things; and do not take up such men into even the last place of the ecclesiastical order Agreeing with the first part of this decree, the first council of Valence, in the year 374, can. 1, decreed that henceforth no one of the digamists or of the husbands of women married twice could be ordained a cleric, whether they had fallen into digamy before baptism or after. Yet it does not dare to remove those who had been ordained up to that time. From that severity of discipline the Gallican councils, the first of Orange, can. 25, and the second of Arles, can. 45, later relaxed somewhat, thinking it enough to forbid that men of this kind be promoted beyond the subdiaconate. Nor were the Spaniards, the Moors or the Italians more observant of the apostolic rule in this matter, as are witness the first epistle of Siricius, to Himerius of Tarragona, n. 12, Leo's epistle 1, to the Moors, n. 3 and 5, and his epistle 4, to the bishops of Campania, Picenum and Tuscia, n. 3. 528B, and, if they are found, remove them.

Next it is set down that one ought not (Dist. 26, c. 3; Ivo, p. 1, c. 292, et p. 8, c. 303) to be called a digamist who as a catechumen had and lost a wife, if after baptism he has obtained another; and that she is to be regarded as the first who was joined to the new man: because that marriage was washed away through the sacrament of baptism together with the other crimes. And since this is said of one, certainly if, while placed in the old man, he had three wives, she who is fourth after baptism will be, for those who interpret thus, the first: Quesnel: primae virginis nomen, against the credit of the manuscripts and the mind of Innocent. In the other editions: prima virginis aeque nomen. In several manuscripts: virgini aeque nomen. and she who was married in the fourth place will receive the name of a virgin. Who, I pray, would not see that this is against the precept of the Apostle, who says (I Tim. III, 2; 529ATit. I, 6) that a man of one wife ought to be made priest?

But it is objected that in baptism everything whatever that was done in the old man is loosed. Tell me, I speak with your leave: are only crimes remitted in baptism, or also those things which are fulfilled according to So the manuscripts of better note. But Merlin, Crabbe and the Roman edition, with the manuscripts of the collections of Dionysius and the Isidorian: Domini praecepta. Our reading is confirmed by that with which number 5 closes: quod Lex praecepit, et Deus junxit. the precepts of the Law and the institutions of God? To take a wife is a crime, or is not a crime. If it is a crime, then, begging pardon beforehand, I would say, the author will be at fault who, when he himself joined them thus in paradise, blessed them to commit crimes. But if it is not a crime, because what God joined (Gen. I, 28) it is impious to call a crime; and Solomon added: For a wife is prepared for a man by God (Prov. XIX, 14) [Vulg. a Domino autem proprie uxor prudens, "but a prudent wife is properly from the Lord"]: how is that believed to have been remitted among the crimes which is read to have been accomplished with God as its author? 529B

What is reckoned of the sons of such men (28, q. I, c. 3)? Will those not be admitted to the fellowship of the inheritance who were begotten of her who was wife before baptism? And are they to be called either natural or spurious, because there is no lawful marriage, as it seems to you, except that which is taken up The manuscripts of Dionysius and some others: assumetur. after baptism? The Lord himself, when he was asked by the Jews whether it was lawful to put away a wife, and was explaining that it ought not to be done, added: What therefore God has joined, let no man put asunder (Matth. XIX, 6). And lest he be believed to have spoken of those who So the manuscripts, with great agreement. But Crabbe and the Roman edition: qui. Further, the verb sortiuntur is to be understood passively, just as if accipiuntur stood there. are obtained after baptism, let them remember that this was both asked by Jews and answered to Jews. I ask, and I ask anxiously, if the wife of him who before was a catechumen and afterwards is one of the faithful is one and the same, and he begot sons of her when he was a catechumen, 529Cand afterwards others when one of the faithful: whether they are to be called brothers, or whether they are afterwards, the father having died, not to have the fellowship of dividing the inheritance, from whom spiritual regeneration is believed to have taken away the name of sons? Since it is absurd to think and judge so, what reason is there (a plague on it) for this to be defended, and to be tossed about by an empty opinion rather than strengthened by any authority, 530Asince what the Law commanded, and God Several manuscripts: jungit. One of the Colbert: indulget; Pithou and Quesnel: injungit. It is plain that the words of Christ, Quod Deus junxit, etc., are looked to here. But what is subjoined after the words Deus junxit, in Merlin et lex junxit, in Crabbe et lex jungit, rests on no authority. joined, cannot be reckoned among sins?

If a catechumen has applied himself to the virtues, has followed humility, has held to patience, has done almsgiving, has by whatever means rescued those appointed to death, has shuddered at adulteries, has held to chastity; I ask whether, when he has been made one of the faithful, he loses these things, because through baptism all that the old man did is thought to be taken away? Let us look at the gentile man Cornelius, who in his prayers One of the manuscripts, a Colbert: orationibus deditum atque eleemosynis per revelationem Petrum evocasse, ipsumque vidisse. From it Quesnel snatched orationibus deditum, and then from Crabbe and the other editions after him subjoined et eleemosynis vacantem per revelationem Angelum Petrumque. Merlin had earlier printed orationibus et eleemosynis per revelationem Angelum Petrumque. Our reading is that of all the manuscripts, with the one Colbert named above excepted. and almsgivings saw a revelation, and Peter himself: were these things taken away Six manuscripts of good note: abluta: which can be understood thus, that as stains are wont to vanish when washed away, so the merits of prayers and almsgivings, washed away, are judged to have perished. In which sense we heard above, n. 3, conjugium per baptismi sacramentum cum caeteris criminibus ABLUTUM. But if abluta is not foreign to Innocent's mind, what we read just before, quia per baptismum, totum quod vetus homo gesserit putatur AUFERRI, persuades that the word ablata is no more alien to it. from him through baptism, on account of which baptism is seen to have been granted to him? If it is so believed, believe me, there is no small error: because whatever has been well done, and kept according to the precepts of the law, cannot The editions after Dionysius and the Isidorian: non potest facientibus deperire. Nuptiarum ergo copula quia Dei mandato perficitur, non potest: they are corrected by the authority of the manuscripts, which are wont to be more sincere. perish for the doer; and that which, 530Bbecause it is brought about by God's command, cannot be called sin: and what is not sin ought by no means to be loosed among sins Crabbe added credi here: a word the following editors seized on, although it is absent from the manuscripts.. And it will be sound to judge that the name of the former wife cannot be abolished, since it was not remitted as a sin, because it was accomplished by the will of God.

(I, q. I, c. 17; Ivo p. 6, c. 59.) We have come to the third question, which for its difficulty demands a longer disputation: since we say that those ordained by heretics have a head wounded through that imposition of the hand. [And where a wound has been inflicted, medicine must be applied, that it may be able to receive health. Which health, following after a wound, cannot be without a scar:] and where the remedy of penance is necessary, there the honour of ordination 530Ccannot have place The word decernimus, which was added here in the Roman edition and the later editions of the councils, we have not met in even one written codex, nor in Merlin, Crabbe, etc. At the opening of this disputation it will be helpful to have observed the difference which lies between ordination and the honour of ordination. And indeed Innocent does not deny that ordination can be conferred by heretics, but contends that the honour of the ordination conferred by them cannot have place. Nay, he himself asserts at length in the preceding epistle 5 that for an ordination of this kind, where the utility of the Church demands it, its honour can be preserved. (Num. XIX, 22). For if, as is read, what the unclean man has touched shall be unclean: how shall that be granted to him which cleanness and purity have been wont to receive? But on the other hand it is asserted that he who has lost honour cannot give honour: nor has that man received anything, because there was nothing in the giver Two manuscripts: in dante remanserat. In imitation of this place, those who in the Capitulary of the year 803, c. 4, in Baluze p. 381, made definitions against the episcopal functions of the chorepiscopi, expressed their own words: that no one had anywhere received anything of the episcopal ministry from the chorepiscopi, because there was nothing in the giver which any of them could have received; since what none of them had, he could not give. But we should not wish Innocent's words to be explained to the sense of this Capitulary. By his argument only this is made out: that by one who lacked the lawful power of ordaining, a lawful ordination could not have been conferred. which he might receive. We assent, and it is 531Atrue. Certainly, because what he did not have he could not give, he gave at any rate the condemnation which he had, through the depraved imposition of the hand: and So the old Corbie codex and the other Colbert, with two others favouring, in which comparticeps factus est is likewise read, not to mention Pithou, in which factus est remains. But other books: qui particeps effectus est damnato. Long before, according to Innocent's mind, the council of Laodicea, can. 32, had decreed: One ought not to receive the blessings of heretics, since these are curses rather than blessings. Further, he who is made a partaker of condemnation is not without share in reproach; and therefore he is judged by the apostolic sentence unworthy of the honour of ordination. how he who has been made a fellow partaker of condemnation ought to receive honour, I cannot find.

But it is said that the true and just blessing of a lawful priest takes away every fault which had been put in by the faulty one. Then, if it is so, let the sacrilegious, adulterers and those guilty of all crimes be brought forward to ordination, since through the blessing of ordination crimes or faults In two manuscripts: possunt auferri. are thought to be taken away. Let there be no place for penance, since ordination can furnish what a long satisfaction has been wont to furnish. But A council of Italy, recalled in the Code of the canons of the African church, cap. 56, had decreed that law, or rather had confirmed it as handed down by the Apostles or apostolic men. There the Africans, although they acknowledge the equity of this law, yet decree an embassy to Anastasius, Innocent's predecessor, to ask that something of its severity be relaxed for them, because of the shortage of clerics with which their churches were labouring. Complying with the same law, Augustine, in the epistle formerly 73, now 245, n. 2, wrote to Possidius: As to ordaining one who was baptized in the party of Donatus, I cannot be your authority: although he at once adds: For it is one thing to do it if you are compelled, another to counsel that you do it. By all means to be read is the letter of the Africans to John II, epistle viii, in which they ask in what way the priests of the Arians ought to be received into the catholic faith, whether in their honours or in lay communion. And presently they add: From the silent movements of all our colleagues we have perceived that it pleases no one that they be received in their honours. And they add also below: We consult not only about the priests, but also about the very little ones baptized among them, whether they are wont or ought to be brought forward to the clerical state, if they have asked. The opinion of Cyprian on that matter, in epist. 72, to Stephen, is this: It is enough that pardon be given to such men returning; but faithlessness ought not to be promoted in the house of faith. IT IS THE LAW OF OUR CHURCH, for those coming from the heretics who were nevertheless baptized there, to grant through the imposition of the hand 531Bonly lay communion, and not to put any of them in the place of even the least honour of the clerical state. But those who The editions, with only the manuscripts of the Spanish collection and the Isidorian: a catholica fide. More truly other manuscripts: a Catholica; supply Ecclesia. So also below, n. 11: De Catholica ad haeresim transiens; likewise, De Catholica ad Bonosum transierunt. And this manner of speaking is familiar to other writers too, and by name to Augustine. passed over from the Catholic Church to heresy, whom it is fitting to receive in no other way than through penance, among you not only do not do penance, but are even heaped with honour.

But One of the Colbert manuscripts with the old Corbie: Sed ante duodecim fratres quondam nostri: corruptly. From the epistle of Siricius, 9, n. 1, we had already learned that the synod of Capua delegated the hearing of the case of Bonosus to Anysius and other bishops of Illyricum, and especially to the Macedonians; now we are taught what their judgment on this case was; and while Innocent approves it, he shows that he is far from thinking the ordination of heretics void and altogether null. this was the chief deliberation of Anysius, our brother of former days, and of other fellow priests: that those whom Bonosus had ordained, lest they should remain with him and no mean scandal should arise, should be received as ordained. The same manuscripts: Vicensimus: faultily. Nor better another Colbert: Vicibus, ut opinor, ambiguis. Further, it was in doubt whether the honour of ordination was always to be kept for those ordained by a heretic, or always to be denied. Innocent resolves and overcomes this doubt, when he answers that it is to be denied them in such a way that, when necessity demands or grave scandal is feared, he judges it is to be kept for them; and he praises the judgment of Anysius and his associates, by which, Bonosus being set apart, they allowed those ordained by him their honours, lest they should remain with him. We have overcome, as I think, the doubtful points. 532ANow therefore (I, q. 7, c. 7; Ivo in prologo) it is established that what was decreed as a remedy and for the necessity of the time did not exist originally, and that there were ancient rules, handed down by the Apostles or apostolic men, which the Roman church guards and commands to be guarded by those who have been accustomed to hear her. But the necessity of the time greatly demanded that this be done. Therefore (I, q. I, c. 41; Ivo in prologo) what necessity found as a remedy, when the necessity ceases, what was pressing ought certainly to cease likewise: because the lawful order is one thing, usurpation another, which time drives to be done for the present.

But the canons established at Nicaea permitted this to be done concerning the Novatians. First that canon instituted by the fathers must be set down, so that we may be able to observe either what or in what manner it was meant or commanded by them. 532BConcerning those, it says, who name themselves Cathari, that is, the pure, and at any time come to the catholic Church, it pleased the holy and great synod that, having received the imposition of the hand, they remain so in the clergy (Nic. syn. c. 8). But I can say that this was commanded of the Novatians alone, and does not pertain to the clerics of other heresies. For if indeed they were defining so concerning all, they would have added that those returning from the Novatians and other heretics ought to be received The editions: in suum ordinem. Next Quesnel: suscipi; quod ita non esse, the negative particle being added against the credit of the manuscripts and the mind of Innocent: who indeed, having first said by way of preface, Possum dicere de solis hoc Novatianis esse praeceptum, then, being about to prove that he can say this in fact, rightly adds, Quod ita esse. In place of these words, in the manuscripts of Dionysius or Hadrian, Quod si ita esset has been very badly substituted; and from there the author of the Spanish collection, Isidore and Merlin took that reading. Opposite this place, in the Colbert Lombardic manuscript, this marginal note is written: He speaks of the Novatians: When they have returned to the catholic Church, and been received through the imposition of the hand, let these remain in the clergy. Let the clerics of other heresies, when they have returned, receive only lay communion. in their own order. That this is so, that also above all which was said of the Paulianists will be able to confirm, those coming from whom they command even 533Ato be baptized. When they give orders concerning the Paulianists, will all who return from heretics be to be baptized after this example (Nic. syn. c. 19)? Since no one would dare to do this, reason itself shows that it was commanded of them only. Finally, Peter and John complete by the imposition of the hand alone those duly baptized by Philip the evangelist. But those whom the apostle Paul found baptized with the baptism of John, and asked whether they had received the Holy Spirit, and who confessed that they had not even heard that name, he ordered to be baptized (Act. VIII, 17; XIX, 2 seqq.). You see, therefore, that those duly baptized cannot be repeated with that gift: and that those otherwise washed with water alone are perceived to need to be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. So too it is read over again, by lucid 533Bmanifestation, that the command was concerning the Novatians only. Manifest reason declares that the distinction was drawn between those two heresies for this cause: because the Paulianists by no means baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (I; q. I, c. 53); and the Novatians baptize in the same tremendous and venerable names, nor was any question ever stirred among them concerning the unity of the divine power, that is, of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; and therefore Several manuscripts, with Dionysius: de omnibus. It pleases more, with the printed editions and also the Corbie manuscript and two Colbert: omnibus; supply haeresibus. By the examples of the Novatians, whose baptism is accepted because they sin in nothing in conferring this sacrament, and of the Paulianists, whose baptism is rejected because they sin in the same, the Nicene synod gave us a pattern of those whose baptism is either to be admitted or to be refused., all being set apart, this one alone was chosen, to which they believed this should be granted, because they sinned in nothing in the sacrament of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

But if anyone, passing over from the Catholic Church to heresy, or one of the faithful The Isidorian, after the Spanish collection, and from there the Roman edition and the Councils: ab apostasia revertens et resipiscens. turned back to apostasy, coming to his senses, 534Awishes to return, will he be able by the same reckoning to be permitted The Roman edition: admitti. Then Dionysius with the older manuscripts: quorum commissum. What Innocent says next, that by the canons it is not lawful to become a cleric after penance, rests on rules established before the Nicene synod, which that very synod marks in can. 10 in these words: Whoever of the lapsed have been promoted to the order of the clergy through ignorance or through the connivance of those ordaining, this does not prejudice the rule of the Church; for once known they are deposed. Augustine, epist. 185, n. 41, teaches that this rule, which Siricius also confirms, epist. 1, n. 18, was prudently established, both so that, through despair of temporal eminence, the medicine of humility might be greater and truer, and so that the conversion of those returning might be more sincere; since perhaps the fathers had experienced the feigned penances of some through affected powers of honours. A third reason for the same decree, no less firm, Siricius adds in the place cited: namely that although cleansed, those who were formerly vessels of vices ought not to take up any instruments for administering the sacraments. A fourth Innocent sets out below. A fifth Simplicius touches on, epist. 18: lest one who is convicted of having long been perverse should, under the appearance of one coming back, seek not the remedy of salvation, but find the means of propagating depravity. to the clergy, whose offence can be abolished only by a long penance? Not even after penance do the canons themselves by their authority permit one to become a cleric. Hence it is established that those who passed over from the Catholic Church to the condemned That is, after he was condemned in the council of the bishops of Illyricum, to which his case had been carried by the synod of Capua. Hence it is clear that in that whole third question the dispute was about the clerics ordained by Bonosus alone. Nor did the question turn on this, whether those whom that heretic had ordained before the council of Illyricum were to be received. For in this council Anysius with his colleagues, condemning Bonosus, had decreed that those ordained by him, lest they should remain with him, were to be received in their grades; and Innocent approves this decree above, n. 9. But the matter concerned those who had been ordained by him after Bonosus had been condemned by the judgment of Anysius and the Macedonians. Bonosus, and suffered or desired to be ordained by him, ought not to have taken up the dignity of ecclesiastical ordination, since, deserting the common judgment of all the churches, they judged that their own vanity was to be followed peculiarly in Bonosus.

But (1, q. I, c. III) it is established that many suffered violence, and were dragged unwilling, and were ordained by him while resisting. Let whoever believes this tell me, I wish it: if after the ordination Quesnel alone: Bonoso. Yet the other books, not badly: Bonosi, that is, conferred by Bonosus. of Bonosus he was not present when he performed 534Bthe sacraments; if he was not made a partaker of his communion; if, departing at once from his most wicked conventicle, he returned to the Church: such a man can have some colour of excuse. But those who returned to the Church after either a year In the printed editions, aut mensem .... intelligimus eos qui in (Quesnel: qui a) Catholica. Quesnel below: reperire locum; Merlin and Crabbe: recipere locum; where other books keep invenire locum. Here Innocent sets out a new reason why he shows himself difficult towards those who come ordained by heretics, so that they be not admitted to the clergy; and he observes that it was the custom of most heretics that any Catholics, however corrupt and depraved in morals, sometimes even expelled or degraded from the Church for crimes, who passed over to them, were not only taken in by them without the satisfaction of penance, but were sometimes even heaped with new honours. For the devil, the parent of the heretical sects, is not at all anxious about purity of morals. The Church, on the other hand, never rejoices in a multitude of hypocrites or of the wicked. Certainly he betrays himself a lover of himself, not of God, who honours those given over to him and does not care that they be good. or months, it is understood that, because they knew that in the Catholic Church they could not receive ordination on account of their vices, they therefore went to him who made unlawful ordinations everywhere and without any examination, believing that through that appointment they could find in the Catholic Church a place of which they had before despaired. Now I ask what remains: he who returned after a month or more, when he trusted that he had been ordained a presbyter by Bonosus, 535Aif he did not perform The copies of the collection of Hadrian: si non sacra confecit. Then Crabbe in the margin, and from there the Roman edition and the Councils: si non populis distribuit: which is also read in the Pithou exemplar of Quesnel's Code. the sacraments, if he did not give them to the peoples, if he did not complete Masses according to custom, what you judge of these things, I ask you, set forth more openly. In sum, certainly those who received nothing from Bonosus are guilty of a usurped dignity, who claimed for themselves In the printed editions, as in the Noyon manuscript, the words aut non vindicaverunt are wanting, which are presented in the other manuscripts with great agreement. Hence the sentence of Innocent is had fuller and more whole, pronouncing generally of those who were ordained by Bonosus against right, that whether they claimed for themselves, or did not claim, the authority of performing the sacraments, they are guilty of a usurped dignity, inasmuch as they received nothing of regular and lawful power: and so in vain they thought themselves to be that which (badly in the Roman edition and the Councils, quod de eis) had been granted them by no regular reckoning. Here indeed Quesnel omits the word regulari, but it stands in all the books, both printed and written, except that in its place one Colbert faultily has relaxandi, and Pithou relaxari. or did not claim the authority of performing the sacraments, and thought themselves to be that which had been granted them by no regular reckoning.

Let your love therefore perceive that such things have passed up to now, and take note that what, as you say, necessity certainly commanded, churches already set in peace Quesnel, with two manuscripts: non posse praesumere. If anything were to be added, debere would be more apt than posse. For Innocent teaches that what necessity commanded to churches when disturbed is by no means to be presumed by churches set in peace. And here, therefore, he not obscurely confesses that he would grant the Bonosians the honours which he now denies, if there were an equal necessity. do not presume. But (I, q. 7, c. 14), as often happens, whenever a sin is committed by peoples or by a crowd, because vengeance cannot be taken on all on account of the multitude, 535Bit is wont Four manuscripts, with Quesnel: solere. Several others, with Merlin and Crabbe: soleat. These two editors, as also Quesnel, then subjoin transire. Priora ergo. Our reading is that of the more correct manuscripts. Innocent, ever consistent with himself, here confirms what he had already taught in epist. 3, c. 4, concerning offences which are either to be handled more gently or tolerated, or severely restrained and punished. Akin to this is what Augustine writes, book III, against the Epistle of Parmenian, n. 11: For rebuke by the many cannot be salutary unless he is rebuked who has not a multitude as his associate. In truth, he says, some things being interposed, if the contagion of sinning has invaded a multitude, the severe mercy of divine discipline is necessary: for counsels of separation are both empty and pernicious and sacrilegious. But, as he premises in the same place, n. 13, when the crime of anyone is so known that he has either no defenders at all, or not such that through them a schism could come about, let not the severity of discipline sleep, in which the correction of depravity is the more efficacious the more diligent the preservation of charity. So the prudent pastor, moderating discipline according to the different condition of the times, is more indulgent towards some of those ordained by Bonosus, whom he thinks it enough to leave to the judgment of God, and more severe towards others, whom he judges are to be punished according to the prescription of the stricter discipline. to pass unpunished; I say that the former things are to be left to the judgment of God, and that for the rest one must take precaution with the greatest solicitude.

I shall come now to Photinus, as it were a certain very great theme, and, what is to me anxious and most difficult, I shall turn over again the sentences of my elders (36, q. 9, c. 5). Concerning him too, by some arrangement, 536Aas you yourselves also remember, something certainly rather grave had been decreed. But since you show that this was obtained from this see by stealth through a false rumour, as you assert, and drawn out by snares, since the matter has returned to safety; The particles et vel, first suppressed by Dionysius and then passed over in the Spanish collection and the Isidorian, are recalled from six manuscripts of sincerer note. By their help Innocent softens and removes the odium of the word veniam, as though he said: Photinus indeed, whom you testify was not guilty, needs no pardon: but if he had been guilty, I judge it harsher not to ratify even the pardon which you granted him. even pardon too, so far as this, at your striving, we substitute after the condemnation The editions, with several manuscripts: more: from a repetition of the last letter of the preceding word, familiar enough to copyists. We prefer, with the old Corbie manuscript and one Colbert, ore, that is, pronounced by the apostolic see. And this sentence against Photinus had been pronounced not by Innocent himself, but either by Anastasius or by Siricius. Wherefore he had said beforehand, Majorum meorum revolvam sententias: which, although he felt it anxious for him, the love of equity and justice nevertheless overcame the feeling of anxiety. by apostolic mouth; and not to give consent to such great assertions of yours, you being so good, so dear, we judge harder than all hard things. For your approval therefore, dearest brethren, and your sentence and demand, hold it lawful to appoint Photinus bishop, as you pray, and receive our sentence, changed for the better by your labour or testimony, having gained Crabbe and several manuscripts: votis: the letter s wrongly doubled, with which the following word takes its beginning. Next, where some manuscripts present Eustasium, others Eustachium or Eustatium or Eustathium, and all comprobatum, Quesnel substituted Eustathius... comprobatus, I think in order to fit the sentence to the laws of grammar. Here Innocent begins to ask the Macedonians to pardon and remit the sentence which they had pronounced against Eustathius, just as at their request he himself had pardoned and remitted that which the apostolic see had brought forth against Photinus. your wish.

And do not expect that Eustathius, very often approved by me, 536Bbe stripped of the grace of the diaconate. For I gladly hear you when you are anxious for salvation (II Cor. II, 10): against the head, even if it must be done, I do not gladly admit it. To whom you stretch out the hand, I stretch it out with you: to whom I stretch it out, stretch it out with me. For this is the apostolic kindness declared to the Corinthians, that the good should always follow without distinction a sentence pronounced In the printed editions and several manuscripts: ductam. In the old Corbie and one Colbert: ducta ac reducta sententia. What stands in the other Colbert pleases more: dictam. Innocent looks to the words of Paul, both in I Cor. v, 4, where he pronounces sentence against the Corinthian guilty of incest, and in II Cor. II, 6, where he draws back and revokes the sentence pronounced. and drawn back in one spirit. For, I confess, 537Athis matter first sits well with me concerning Eustathius the deacon: that he neither spoke anything against the faith, nor admitted one who spoke, nor have I recognized that he committed any crime unto death, either ever bandied about or feigned. And he who is sound in these things, if in some way he does not have amiable manners, is to be held as less loved for the time, not as an enemy The word aestimatur Quesnel passed over. In its place in the other editions stands aestimatus or existimatus. Hence it is gathered that Eustathius had been not only stripped of the grace of the diaconate but also struck with anathema: which was very harsh against a man of whom no one ever either bandied about or feigned that anything had been said by him against the faith, or any crime unto death committed. is he judged to be delivered over to the devil for ever. I recognize that amid those rivalries and whirlwinds he thought differently against the zeal of many, I do not say of what kind, and that hence, although the affairs and calamities themselves have been amended, up to So the manuscripts. But the editions: adhuc, usque being omitted. Then the Pithou manuscript: Dyzoniani. Some others: Dezoniani or Diozeniani. Next most: et Quiriaci. this point he has not been able, on the commendation of Dizonianus and Cyriacus the subdeacons, to The Roman edition and the Councils, following the collections of Dionysius, the Spanish and the Isidorian: emendationem reviviscere. Compescite, quaeso: they are corrected by the authority of six manuscripts of better note. revive among you. Extinguish, I ask, from him and from those aforesaid, the So one Colbert codex and the other, Pithou's, with Quesnel. But others: animos ac. spirited and unjust 537Brivalries of whomsoever you see, so that he himself, whole among us, and restored among you together with his own The editions after Dionysius and the Isidorian: reparatus mercatur pacem, non fictam pervidens charitatem. Omnibus igitur vobis ac singillatim occurrat charitas, et vinculis quae ..... connexa laetetur: they are corrected by the help of the better manuscripts, in three of which charitati stands in place of charitatis. The sentence would be fuller if charitatisque vinculis were read., perceiving a deep peace and an unfeigned charity, may meet you all, and each one singly, and, joined together with you equally for ever by the bonds of charity which are in no way loosed from Christ, may rejoice in the Lord. Given on the Ides of December In the printed editions Flavio is wanting. Next, in three Colbert manuscripts and the Pithou, Constantino stands. From the Corbie and Fossés manuscripts, in which Flaviis Constantio remains, we conjecture that et Constante is to be added. For in this year 414 Constans had been created consul together with Constantius. (13 Decemb. ann. 414), Flavius Constantius, a most illustrious man, being consul.

538AINNOCENT TO RUFUS, GERONTIUS, SOPHRONIUS, FLAVIANUS, MACEDONIUS, PROSDOCIUS AND So the better manuscripts. But the Navarre: Aristeo; and another, with the printed editions: Oristeo. The names of this Aristeas and of Prosdocius do not appear in the inscription of the preceding letter, in which we read the rest named above. From which one may conjecture that in the preceding letter neither the bishops of Macedonia alone nor all of them are named, but in this one both all and only the bishops of this province, their legates being joined in the body of the letter. ARISTEAS, bishops established throughout Macedonia.

The delay of our fellow bishops Maximianus and In the letter immediately preceding, as also in Chrysostom's epistle 165, likewise written to the Macedonians, Eugenius is joined to Maximiano. Hence there is a suspicion that here too Eumenii has crept in in place of Eugenii. Eumenius, or rather the importunity of the times, has brought it about that you have repeated your complaint about Bulbalius and The Royal codex of the pure collection of Dionysius shows Thariano here, and Tariano below. Others of the collection of Hadrian have Tariano here, but Tauriano below: which the manuscripts of the Spanish collection and the Isidorian also have in both places. Taurianus, and that we have risen up again against most abandoned men. But (35, quaest. 9, c. 7), as I can, I shall measure out The editions: imitabor: they are corrected from the Royal codex cited above. in fewer words a summary of such great evils, and shall go over again briefly the things I have seen in the volume of your letters. It ought not In the copies of the collection of Hadrian: non potuit. It is to be kept, with the rest, non oportuit: as Nicholas I also reads it. Hadrian II imitates the same place in the letter to King Charles given in Indiction v. (Nicolaus I, epist. 32, n. 12) to seem grievous to your most pious minds that anyone's judgment be reconsidered: because truth, when more often stirred up, shines out the more in the light: and ruin, recalled into judgment, is condemned more heavily and 538Bwithout repentance That is, of him who judged before, as is also noted in Labbe's margin. From this it is gathered that Bubalius and Taurianus, judged by the Macedonians, appealed to the apostolic see, and that the Macedonians took it ill that their own judgment was being reviewed.. For it is a divine fruit, dearest brethren, that justice be more often reviewed.

But I see that this has moved your minds: that Bubalius, often caught out in many deceits, put forward copies of letters feigned as if from us, although, from the man's habit, nothing that he brought forward seemed by now most worthy of credit. But let all murmuring about such a business now be silenced, and let the very breathings of the convicted devil be suppressed. We have, moreover, subjoined to these the earlier These letters are not extant. letters, which we had sent by the bishops mentioned, in which the full 539Asentence of our mind was so set out that, when you have read them again, you will seek again nothing doubtful, nothing to be inquired into, in this case for the rest. And send this little page of ours more carefully In the manuscripts of the collection of Hadrian: credentibus: to which word the author of the Spanish collection added sibi: and that reading prevailed both in the Isidorian and thereafter in the printed editions. The Royal exemplar of the pure collection of Dionysius supplies the true one. Further, among the churches in which Innocent, epist. 13, n. 2, commits his office to Rufus, Crete also is reckoned. to the Cretan bishops to be read again: that they may know most fully what has been pronounced concerning Bubalius and Taurianus and the rest; that It would please more: and observent. Next, in place of administratione, which we recall from the excellent Royal codex, there stands in the others admonitione. Presently the Noyon manuscript: ne talibus sortiantur: from which the common reading ne talibus socientur was made up. To be kept, with the better manuscripts: ne talia sortiantur, that is, that knowing what was judged concerning Bubalius and Taurianus, they may beware lest they do such things, and thence incur an equal penalty. And what that penalty was is understood from the words qui digni administratione sunt: for this is said by antiphrasis, since Bubalius and Taurianus had been cast down from the administration of the churches. those who are worthy of administration may keep to beware of such men, lest they obtain such a lot.

All those letters Dionysius Exiguus has preserved for us. From his collection they flowed into the Spanish and the Isidorian. It is admitted that they were written on the occasion of the peace of the Antiochene church. Of which peace Theodoret, book V of the History, c. 35, to touch on his words summarily, committed these things to memory. 539BAlexander, excelling in the institute of a stricter life, in the pursuit of wisdom, in contempt of riches, in eloquence and in countless other gifts, when he had succeeded Porphyrius, joined to the body of the Church, by the gentle persuasion of his words and frequent exhortations, the Eustathians, whom formerly Paulinus, and after him Evagrius, had by no means permitted to be united with the rest; and for that cause he instituted a festival of such a kind as no mortal had ever seen. Having set these things first, the same writer adds concerning Alexander: « He first of all inscribed the name of the most excellent John in the ecclesiastical tablets. » And the dissension of the Antiochene church, as the same author recounts, book III, c. 5, « lasted eighty-five years, » up to Alexander. Whence the time also at which that peace was entered into, and the following letters were written, could be discerned and determined with certainty, if there were agreement among the learned about the beginning of the aforesaid dissension. And Baronius indeed, at the year 308, while he thinks it is to be reckoned either from the day on which Meletius professed the faith of the consubstantial, 539Cor from that on which Lucifer ordained Paulinus, that is, from the year 361 or 362, is compelled to reject Theodoret's reckoning as false. But Tillemont, counting the beginning of the Antiochene dissension from the deposition of Eustathius, which he judges to have happened in the year 430 or 431, observes that those eighty-five years end in the year 413 or 414. Eutychius, although not accurate enough elsewhere, supports this computation, when he relates that Porphyrius, whom he calls Barchus, presided over the church of Antioch for ten years. For Palladius, in the dialogue on the Life of Chrysostom, p. 141, is the authority that he was put in place of Flavian about the beginning of the year 403. Besides this, Theodoret, book V, cap. 35, teaches that the reconciliation of the Antiochene church came about when Cyril, the successor of Theophilus, was bishop of the Alexandrian church. But Theophilus, as Socrates witnesses, book VII, c. 7, ceased to live in the year 412, on the 15th day of the month of October. From which it follows that this reconciliation cannot be assigned earlier than the year 413. But there is no inconvenience 539Dif it is put off to the year 414 or even 415.

The reconciliation of the dissenting parties in the Antiochene church was followed at no long interval by the embassy by which its bishop Alexander made haste to ask for the communion of the Roman 540Asee. The father of the Annals judged that he did not obtain it at once; and therefore he devised a double embassy: one in which Alexander asked for Innocent's communion, and to which Innocent prescribed the conditions for granting peace; the other in which Alexander testified that the prescribed conditions had been satisfied by him. But no cause appears for this double embassy. For already from the death of John Chrysostom, that is, from the year 407, Innocent had made these conditions well enough known, when he denied his communion to the bishops of the East until they should have inscribed John's name in the sacred diptychs. On which matter Theodoret, book V, c. 34, speaks thus: « After the death of the great Doctor of the world, the Western bishops (without doubt by the consent and prescription of Innocent) did not admit the communion of the bishops of Egypt and of the East and of the Bosphorus and of Thrace before they had recorded the name of that divine man together with the rest of the bishops who had died. » Nor was Alexander so ignorant of affairs as not to know this; nor 540Bso inconsiderate as knowingly to send a useless embassy. And indeed Innocent, in epist. 22, recalling that the conditions of peace had been fulfilled by Alexander, and demanding a like « profession of the fulfilment of all the conditions » from Atticus, does not say, which we prescribed when Alexander's embassy was sent back, but « which we declared beforehand at different times. »

Nor can we assent either to the learned Tillemont, who judges that epistle 20 was sent first, and 19 given somewhat later. For we judge that both, with 21 to Acacius joined to them, were given together. And the note added at the foot shows that the former, that is 19, was synodal and common to Innocent with the twenty bishops who subscribed it. The other, that is 20, we judge private and familiar. Mention of the synodal acts, which were subjoined to the former, is made in both.

By the grace of apostolic favour the great beauty of peace has shone out even to us: and it has shed so much light and joy upon the faithful that, speaking the greatest praises to God, we confessed that we owed greater. And we were the more gladdened by God because, all the sides 540Dof the actions of thy fraternity having been examined, we learned that the whole had been so done with piety and patience that in all things we praised the Lord. And we see that success itself was granted 541Ato thy labours for this reason: that, being a lover of peace with all thy strength, thou didst find it when sought, and didst keep it when found with the highest charity, both towards all, and especially concerning those who had once been counted under the name of the bishops Paulinus and Evagrius. (I have the sum of my wishes, in that the cleansing of the ancient blemish is bestowed in thy times and by thy merits.) Of whom I judged that those also of the same name who received the merits of the clerical state in Italy should, for the good of quiet, retain the grace they had received. And because our fellow presbyter Cassianus said Merlin and Crabbe, with the Royal, Noyon and one Colbert manuscript: duxit. This Cassian is thought to be the writer of the Conferences, who, as Palladius relates in the Life of Chrysostom, p. 27, came to Rome while still a deacon as the year 404 was passing: but afterwards was honoured with the grade of the presbyterate. This whole passage, inasmuch as it is that of a mind speaking with the highest feeling, and caring not so much how it should order the words as how it should express its feeling, will perhaps seem intricate to some. To understand it, it must be recalled that the Antiochene church had been split into two parties, namely that of Paulinus, to whom Evagrius succeeded, and that of Flavian, in whose place Alexander was put after Porphyrius, Evagrius having already died. And because the West favoured Paulinus and then Evagrius, some who were attached to them betook themselves to Italy, and there had earned the dignity of the clerical state. Now the custom of ecclesiastical discipline required that, if the dignity conferred were judged to be kept for these men, they should be counted clerics of that city by whose bishops they had been ordained or promoted. But Innocent first judged that the grace of the clerical state was to be kept for the clerics of the parties of Paulinus or Evagrius ordained or promoted in Italy, and then, at Cassian's instance, decreed that the same should be numbered among the other priests and ministers who are in the city of Antioch. The same things are confirmed below too, in epist. 23, and stated a little more openly. Here it is to be observed in passing that by the word sacerdotes, contrary to the usual custom of the ancients, presbyters, not bishops, are signified. In the same sense too Jerome, using this word on chapter 48 of Ezekiel, rebukes the arrogance of the deacons, who, ignorant of the humility of their order, swell beyond the priests, that is, the presbyters. And in the epistle to Evangelus: If a presbyter is ordained from a deacon, let him know that he is less in gains, greater in priesthood. Innocent, in epist. 25, n. 6, writes that presbyters are second priests. it would be pleasing to thy worthiness if, by my counsel, they were judged to hold the order of the clerical state in your city, I have decreed, on account of thy benevolence and the promises of the man mentioned, that they be numbered among the other priests and ministers who are in the city, dearest brother. Gladly 541Bbesides I learned concerning the bishops That those two bishops were shut up in their houses for three years for the cause of Chrysostom, Palladius relates, p. 195, in these words: Elpidius, that great bishop of Laodicea in Syria, and Pappus, for the whole three years did not come down the stairs of their houses, giving themselves to prayers. Elpidius and Pappus that they have recovered their churches without dispute: and, as the acts subjoined In the printed editions, as in the Isidorian: subscripta. Better in the manuscripts of the collections of Dionysius, Hadrian and the Spanish: subjecta. Namely, Innocent did not confirm the peace before he had heard Alexander's legates in a public assembly, and had diligently questioned them about the things which had been done at Antioch. And since he had taken care that acts should be drawn up on that matter, he saw to it that they were subjoined to this letter. testify, I inquired anxiously and much whether all the conditions had been satisfied in the cause of the blessed and truly God-worthy priest 542AJohn. And when the assertion of the legates acknowledged point by point that they had been fulfilled as wished, giving thanks to the Lord, I received the communion of your Church in such a way that I openly declare that the fellow disciples of the apostolic see were the first to give the others the way of peace, in which the kindness of the Lord Christ will so embrace and fortify you and us, established in it, that for the rest it may be struck by no The Colbert exemplar: titulamento: which would not unfitly be said for a title, or pretext, or colour. A little before, the Antiochenes are called fellow disciples of the apostolic see: because the Antiochene church was founded by the same Apostle as teacher as the Roman. titillation, or by the slight shame of anyone's contention.

And the writings The edition of the councils, with one Colbert manuscript and the Noyon: Attici. In place of this word Labbe wrote in the margin Acacii; which word the manuscripts of the collections of Dionysius and Hadrian and the Roman edition present, and which epistles 21 and 22 plainly persuade us is to be kept. In the latter, further, Innocent testifies that he has received no writings from Atticus. And he who substituted the name Attici here manifestly betrays his error at the head of epistle 21, which in the same manuscripts is read inscribed ad Atticum Beroeae episcopum. For not Atticus but Acacius presided over Beroea. This Acacius Palladius is wont to count first among the enemies of John Chrysostom and the chief actors of the tragedy stirred up against him. For which cause he had deserved to be suspended by Innocent: which is to be understood thus, that Innocent's communion with him was suspended, not that he interdicted him from his office. The same pope opens his mind more plainly in epist. 22. of Acacius the bishop, since they were handed in together with yours, we have received, lest through wrong done to you he who had formerly been suspended by us should be repudiated: and yet we have decreed amply enough in the acts The editions: quae in actis: they are corrected from the manuscripts., as thou wilt deign to take care to read again, what ought to be observed in his person: so that if he shall have asked to be in communion with your counsels and so holy acts in all things, 542Bthe grace of communion and of letters from us, bestowed beforehand by your favour and our judgment, may be furnished to the old man Rightly is Acacius now called old man; whose very nostrils had very long grey hairs when he came to Rome bearing the decree of the ordination of John the bishop (that is, before the year 404), as Theodore the deacon speaks in Palladius, dial. p. 39. The same man is also read to have taken part in the Roman synod under Pope Damasus, in Baluze, nov. coll. concil. p. 703. Which we proved above, p. 491, n. 3 and 4, happened in the year 378.. Subscribed So the manuscripts with great agreement. But Merlin: Subscripserunt episcopi xx, Italiae xxiv. Then Crabbe, removing the numeral mark xx, kept xxiv, and that reading prevailed thereafter. The cause of the error flowed from the manuscripts of the Spanish collection, in which after the words subscripserunt episcopi 20 Italiae, xxiv is added, not to indicate the number of the subscribing bishops, but the order which the following letter holds among the others in that collection. twenty bishops of Italy.

INNOCENT TO ALEXANDER, BISHOP.

How welcome to me, how pious, how necessary was the embassy sent to us by thy holiness, dearest brother, thou wilt learn from the unfolding of the acts themselves. For our fellow presbyter Cassianus wished that this little page of our friendship should be written by our fellow presbyter Paul, Nicholas the deacon, 543Band Peter the subdeacon, our sons, as it were the first fruits of our peace. I therefore greet both thy brotherhood to me in Christ and all that church which thinks so well with thee. And I ask that, as you do, you both address us more often by letters and gladden us more frequently about your welfare. For the Lord, as I trust, will grant us to make up the losses of all the past time by a most loving converse The editions: recompensare: the manuscripts opposing. of letters.

543CWe have gathered from thy letters that thy fraternity rejoices over the reception of the clerics and peoples of the bishops Paulinus or Evagrius, and over the restoration of the fellow bishops Elpidius and Pappus, 544Aand we have perceived that thou dost cherish the grace of a peace received, even if late, all contention being put aside. Wherefore we have sent these to our most excellent brother and fellow bishop Alexander, to be delivered to thy unanimity: namely that, if all enmities, all rivalry, both concerning the name of saint John the wonderful bishop and concerning all the partakers of his communion, have departed from thy animosity, thou mayest receive these letters of our fellowship, dearest brother; provided that all the things which In the edition of the councils, as in one Colbert manuscript: quae his actis. The things done in the ro... synod (a word worn on the plate), at which at least twenty bishops of Italy were present, are noted here. have been confirmed here by the acts thou confess with thine own mouth before our amiable mediator Alexander, as befits one The Royal exemplar: communicantes. in communion. For as this cause of unanimity and charity is venerable to us, so it clings anxious lest anything oblique or residual be known The editions, except Merlin: cognoscat: they are emended from the written copies. The sincerity of Acacius in this whole business becomes very suspect from what is written about him in Nicephorus, book xiv, c. 26 and 27, both by Atticus to Cyril and by Cyril to Atticus. to remain in anyone.

INNOCENT TO MAXIMIANUS, BISHOP.

We wonder that thy prudence, both by thine own pleading and by the petition that is annexed below, asks of us letters to Atticus, bishop of the city of Constantinople, from whom thou hast brought not so much as any 544Cletters sent to us or to your synod; and that thou reckonest that to be bestowed on one who does not ask, which thou seest granted, after the case was examined, to those who entreat. 545AFor suspended communion Innocent's communion with Atticus had been suspended for this reason: that he, as Palladius testifies, p. 95, the contriver of all the machinations against John, had forced his way into John's place; so that the bishops of the East and the people of the city of Constantinople shrank from his communion, and he could scarcely obtain, by an imperial rescript, that they should communicate with him even against their will. And the bishops of the West expressly, as Theodoret testifies, book v, c. 34, had determined after the death of Chrysostom to admit none of the bishops of the East to communion until they had inscribed the name of this great Doctor in the sacred diptychs. And it is this cause of the suspended communion that Innocent wishes above all to have removed, so that he may be able to communicate with Atticus. is restored to one who shows that the causes through which it had happened have now been wiped away, and who professes that the conditions of peace have been fulfilled. This Atticus, as I said before, has been willing neither to state nor to show as accomplished, either among you or among us, by sending any of his own people, in the way that our brother and fellow bishop Alexander of the church of Antioch both pursued it and proved it by a worthy embassy. Having deigned indeed to be present at all these things, thou hast learned how I examined One of the Colb. manuscripts: discusserint; which once found favour, because it seemed to belong to those whose part it was to fulfil what was demanded, to examine what was to be fulfilled. But afterwards, when Epistle 19, n. 1, was read again, it became clear that Innocent had examined in his synod whether the conditions which he had prescribed at various times, and in writing, for the sake of obtaining peace had been satisfied. Next, in the printed editions ut quae, where utque should be read, that is, and how. Soon after, for monstrarint, the Royal exemplar has nuntiaverint, and some editions ostenderint. one by one all the points of our earlier writings on the cause of the most blessed John, formerly our bishop, and how they showed quite evidently in every respect that all things which ought to have been done at Antioch had been accomplished. Embracing their peace, we have indeed given 545Bassurance, and have shown The printed editions: magno tramite; they are corrected from the manuscripts. a great path to all who shall ask for the same Merlin: eamdem quam praestaturis, corruptly. Although Innocent, not content with the writings of those who asked for peace, seems also to demand a solemn embassy, he did not, however, require that each should send legates to him in his own name: but, as is clear from the example of Maximianus, he held it enough if anyone offered him his writings through legates sent by anyone at all. But as regards Atticus, who had been put in John's place after Arsacius, the approval of his ordination was also then in question. For now, as we observed above, p. 598, n. 21, the custom had begun to be introduced that the Roman pontiffs should not hold the ordination of the prelates of the imperial city ratified until they had been informed of it by a solemn embassy.; provided only that they too, for their part, show at some time that they have done or accomplished what has been examined and accomplished, and, as these did, by an embassy solemnly dispatched, ask that communion be restored to them. We await, therefore, both the profession of the aforesaid concerning the fulfilment of all the conditions which we laid down beforehand at various times, and his petition for communion, so that we may rightly restore it to one who both asks and proves that he merits it, dearest brother. For concerning all these things thou hast long since received most full letters addressed to the holy synod of 546Aour brethren The letters which he mentions here are not extant..

INNOCENT TO BONIFACE, PRESBYTER.

The church of Antioch, which the blessed apostle Peter made illustrious by his presence before he came to the city of Rome, did not, as a sister of the Roman church, suffer itself to be long estranged from Crabbe and the other editions after him: ab eodem. More fittingly Merlin, as in the manuscripts: ab eadem, that is, from the Roman church. her. For, having sent legates, it so asked for peace, and merited it, that it received the Evagrians in their ranks and places, the ordination which they had received from the aforesaid Supply Evagrio. For Innocent carries on his sentence as if he had said before Evagrii clericos, not Evagrianos. Then in the manuscripts susciperent, although in the same manuscripts colligeret atque congregaret follows. Both can be understood thus: that susciperent refers to the church, and colligeret to Alexander. Next, instead of the word promittens, which is used in the epistolary style then accepted, a grammarian would prefer Promittit praeterea. being left unviolated; and that the bishop of that city himself, my brother 546BAlexander (Vide epist. 19, n. 1), gathered and assembled into one both the clerics and the laymen of John of holy memory, promising that even if anyone of later ordination should perhaps come to them, either from us or from elsewhere, he would receive him without dispute, and would recite the name of the aforesaid bishop (John) among the bishops at rest. Know that we have given our hands to this matter, dearest brother, and have received them into our bowels: lest members which had sought their health again should long be held estranged from the unity of the body. All that was done, in order, my son the deacon Paul, the bearer namely of this letter, will be able to relate to thy love, so that thou mayest both 547Ahave a common joy with us, and inform those who have been accustomed to intervene on the side of Atticus.

That the first see of blessed Peter is recorded to be at Antioch. --II. That it is not right, according to the constitutions of the Emperors, for there to be two metropolitan bishops. --III. That the clerics of the Arians are not to be received in their offices, although the Church confirms the baptism So the exemplars of Dionysius in the general index. But within the text of the letter the title is repeated with a change of this kind: although the Church confirms their baptism, which is agreed to be catholic; and Isidore, and from him the editions of the Councils, preferred this. which is given through them.

INNOCENT TO ALEXANDER, BISHOP.

Both the burden and the honour laid upon us by thy fraternity have brought in the grounds of a necessary treatment, by which we may answer your letter or memorandum, as the grace 547Bof the Holy Spirit grants. Turning over, therefore, the authority of the synod of Nicaea, which (Can. 6) alone sets forth the mind of all the priests throughout the world, which decreed concerning the church of Antioch what all the faithful, not to say the priests, must needs keep: whereby, over its own diocese and not over some province That is, which it established ought to preside not over one province but over the whole Eastern diocese, which consisted of fifteen provinces. This right of the see of Antioch over the East, asserted by the synod of Nicaea, Jerome, Epistle 61, to Pammachius, against John of Jerusalem, vindicates and explains in these words: Thou who seekest the ecclesiastical rules, and makest use of the canons of the council of Nicaea, answer me: what hast thou in Palestine to do with the bishop of Alexandria? Unless I am mistaken, it is decreed there that Caesarea be the metropolis of Palestine, and Antioch of the whole East. Either, then, thou oughtest to have referred it to the bishop of Caesarea; or, if judgment was to be sought from afar, letters should rather have been directed to Antioch. Where Jerome has in view the Nicene canons 6 and 7. Moreover, the Nicene synod did not so much establish Antioch over its diocese as recognize it as established, and it wills that this prerogative be kept unimpaired for it., 548Awe recognize the aforesaid church to have been established. Whence we observe that this was granted to it not so much on account of the magnificence of the city as because it is shown to be the In the Reg. manuscript prima is lacking. In one Colb. there stands prima sedes apostolica esse. From this passage it is plain why Innocent, in Epistle 19, n. 1, calls the Antiochenes fellow disciples of the apostolic see. first see of the first apostle, where the Christian religion also received its name, and which merited that a most famous assembly The assembly of the Apostles held at Antioch is not only praised by Gregory also, bishop of the Pisinuntians, in the second council of Nicaea, vol. vii of the Councils of Labbe, p. 63, but he also produces from it a canon in favour of images. The learned, however, judge that no assembly of the Apostles was held there. On which matter see Tillemont, vol. I of the Ecclesiastical History, p. 525. But this passage of Innocent is at least an argument that the document which the aforesaid bishop cited in favour of a council of Antioch celebrated by the Apostles had not been written recently; and so that the authority which he produced from it in favour of images is not to be spurned: not that that canon may truly be assigned to the Apostles, but that it may with likelihood be believed to be not more recent than the fourth century. of the Apostles should take place in it (Act. XI), and which would not yield to the see of the city of Rome, except that the former merited him in passing, while the latter rejoiced that he was received and brought to his consummation in her (Nicol. I, epist. 8). Therefore we judge, The Corb. manuscript: fratres charissimi, ut sicut metropolitanus ordinat: corruptly. dearest brother, that just as thou ordainest the metropolitans by a singular authority, so thou shouldst not allow the other bishops either to be created without thy permission and knowledge. In which thou wilt rightly keep this measure: that those placed far off thou decree, by giving letters, to be ordained by those who now ordain them by their own judgment alone; but those nearby, if thou thinkest fit, thou appoint to come to the imposition of the hand of thy grace 548B. For those whose care in the greatest measure awaits Nicholas I, epistle otherwise 42, n. 9, accommodating this passage to his own see, speaks thus: We are indeed bound by the care of all who make up the Church, and all (perhaps omnes) whose care in the greatest measure awaits us ought especially to merit our judgment, as Innocent to Alexander, etc. And in the epistle otherwise 1, appendix 4, where he reported Innocent's very words, he infers: Therefore, because the care of the whole Church awaits us. From which it follows that Nicholas understood the word exspectat here to have been said in its common sense, that is, for praestolatur. We, however, are persuaded that it is written here in the ancient manner for spectat, and that this te exspectat means nothing else than pertains to thee. Which interpretation would have suited Nicholas's own purpose far better. thee ought especially to merit thy judgment.

For (Nicolaus I, haec laudat, epist. 32, n. 6) as to thy inquiry whether, when provinces have been divided by imperial judgment so that two metropoles come to be, two metropolitan bishops ought likewise to be named: it has truly seemed that the Church of God is not The printed editions, and the manuscripts of the Spanish collection and of the Isidorian collection: non vere visum; Nicholas I and the codices of Hadrian's collection: non ergo visum; they are corrected with the help of the Royal exemplar of the Dionysian collection, in which non esse visum stands. At variance with this opinion of Innocent is what the synod of Chalcedon laid down in can. 17: that if any city has been renewed by imperial authority, or shall hereafter be renewed, the order of the ecclesiastical parishes too should follow the civil and public forms. Only against those who, doing things beyond the ecclesiastical statutes, by the authority of imperial letters divide one province into two, so that as a result of this act there seem to be two metropolitans in one province, did the same synod decree, in can. 12, that whoever should attempt this hereafter should be punished by the loss of his own rank. to be 549Achanged according to the fickleness of worldly necessities, or to undergo the honours or divisions which the Emperor has thought fit to make for his own reasons. Therefore it is fitting that metropolitan bishops be So the manuscripts. But in the printed editions, nominari. numbered according to the former custom of the provinces.

Thou assertest indeed that the Cypriots, once worn down by the power of the Arian impiety, did not keep the Nicene canons (5 et 6) in ordaining bishops for themselves, and that up to now they hold it as a presumption that they ordain at their own discretion, consulting no one. Wherefore we urge them to take care to be of catholic mind according to the faith Although Crabbe, rashly and against the authority of the manuscripts, repeated the word fidem here, that repetition was nevertheless retained in the following editions. Nor indeed is it a question here of the faith, but of the discipline instituted by the rules of the canons and received by the usage of the universal Church. Innocent exhorts the Cypriots to take care to be minded according to the catholic understanding of the canons. Not only Alexander but his successors too claimed for themselves the ordinations of the bishops of Cyprus: but the Cypriots constantly protested. On this controversy there is extant the seventh session of the synod of Ephesus, in which, when Zeno, bishop of Carium in Cyprus, had said: From the holy Apostles they can never show that the bishop of Antioch was present and ordained, or ever communicated to the island the grace of ordination, the holy synod said: Let the holy synod be mindful of the canon (namely, 6) of the holy fathers gathered at Nicaea, which preserves to each its ancient dignity. See both what precedes and what follows. In this business Innocent, the Cypriots and the synod of Ephesus agree in this, that all wish the Nicene canons to be kept. Nor did Innocent advise the Cypriots to allow themselves to be ordained by the prelate of Antioch, except in so far as, on Alexander's word, he took it as certain that they had usurped this right for themselves against the ancient custom. of the canons, and to think as one with the other provinces, so that it may appear that they too, like all the Churches, are governed by the grace of the Holy Spirit.

The Arians, moreover (I, q. I, c, 73), 550Aand In the manuscripts, caeterosque. the other pests of this kind: because we receive their laity, converted to the Lord, under the image What that phrase sub imagine poenitentiae, repeated again at the close of the letter, may mean is a question. The word imago will recur also in the following letter, n. 7, where it is declared that the image of the Lord's day and of the sixth day (on which Christ suffered and rose again) is to be renewed every week. But another passage, of Epistle 29, n. 2, contributes more to illustrating this place, where Pelagius and Coelestius are brought in as men furnished, or rather destroyed, by perverse subtleties of words, disputing under the image of the catholic faith. For as there it is called an image of the catholic faith because it bears a certain appearance of the catholic faith, so here too what bears a certain image of penance is named an image of penance. And not without reason did Innocent call the imposition of the hand, by which heretics once corrected were formerly joined at once to the faithful, an image of penance: because, of course, that imposition carried a certain profession of penance. Wherefore Augustine, in the book on Baptism against the Donatists, c. 2, says aptly to the mind of this pope: If the imposition of the hand were not applied to those coming from heresy, they would be judged as though they were outside all fault. But on account of the bond of charity, which is the greatest gift of the Holy Spirit, without which whatever other holy things there may be in a man avail nothing for salvation, the hand is laid on heretics who have been corrected. But this imposition of the hand did not have the reality of penance, that is, squalor of garments, frequent fasts, and the other labours and apparatus of mournful penance to which those were subjected who, having been separated from the assembly of the faithful, were admitted to it again only after long satisfaction. Of this penance, then, it was merely a shadowing and an image. Further, Siricius, Innocent and Pope Vigilius distinguish two kinds of heretics returning to the Church: one of those who, having been baptized among heretics, say Novatians, Donatists or Arians, betake themselves to the Church; the other of those who, having received baptism in the catholic Church, allowed themselves to be rebaptized by those heretics. And to both they prescribe the imposition of the hand, but one which in the first bears only the image of penance, in the last shows the reality. Of the first Siricius speaks thus, Epistle 1, n. 2: Whom we, with the Novatians and other heretics, as was established in the synod (of Nicaea), join to the assembly of Catholics only by the invocation of the sevenfold Spirit, through the imposition of the bishop's hand. Of the same he says again, Epistle 4, c. 8: That those coming from the Novatians or the Montenses be received through the imposition of the hand. But he notes that others are to be distinguished from these by the exception subjoined: except those whom they rebaptize. Our Innocent explains the mind of Siricius in Epistle 2, n. 11, where he likewise prescribes, That those coming from the Novatians or the Montenses be received through the imposition of the hand: but he subjoins a more explicit exception in this manner: except those who, if perhaps passing over from us to them, have been rebaptized: these, if they repent and consider their ruin and prefer to return, are to be admitted under a long satisfaction of penance. The first, therefore, were received under the image of penance; because the hand was laid on them for receiving the Holy Spirit, in such a way that no satisfaction of penance followed. But the others were admitted no longer under the image, but under the very reality of penance; because communion was granted them only under a long satisfaction of penance, which followed upon the imposition of the hand. Pope Vigilius, plainly distinguishing that twofold imposition of the hand in Epistle 2, to Profuturus (or, as it is corruptly circulated in the printed editions, to Eutherius), n. 4, illustrates and confirms our explanation, where he likewise decrees concerning those who have been rebaptized: Whose reconciliation, however, is accomplished not through that imposition of the hand which works through the invocation of the Holy Spirit, but through that by which the fruit of penance is acquired and the restoration of holy communion is completed. of penance and with the sanctification of the Holy Spirit through the imposition of the hand, it does not seem that their clerics ought to be received with the dignity of the priesthood or of any ministry: since those for whom we allow The copies of Hadrian's collection: promittimus. More correctly Dionysius, with other codices both manuscript and printed: permittimus. What Innocent does not now permit, because no necessity underlies it, he acknowledges above, Epistle 16, n. 9 and 10, can be permitted for necessity and as a remedy. baptism alone to be valid, which is indeed performed in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, we do not judge to have the Holy Spirit from that baptism and those mysteries: since, when their authors fell away from the catholic faith, they lost the perfection of the Spirit which they had received. Nor can they give its fullness, which works above all in ordinations, which they lost through what I should call the perfidy of their impiety rather than their In the printed editions, quam per fidem. More fittingly the particle per is absent from the manuscripts. It is noted here that the faith of heretics is rightly called perfidy, because, as Hilary observes in the book against Constantius, n. 24, whatever is beyond the one faith is perfidy, not faith. faith. How can it be that we should judge their profane priests worthy of the honours of Christ To this points what the Donatists, to whom it was promised that the honour of their clerical rank would be kept, object in Augustine, Epistle 185, n. 44: If then it is right that we should repent of having been outside the Church and against the Church, how after this penance do we remain among them clerics, or even bishops? To whom Augustine answers: This would not be done, since in truth, as must be admitted, it ought not to be done, unless it were healed by the compensation of peace itself. But it ought not to be done, because those are not worthy of the honours of Christ who are not free from reproach., 551Awhen we receive their laity, imperfect as I said, for receiving the grace of the Holy Spirit, with the image of penance? Let thy gravity therefore bring these things to the knowledge of our fellow bishops, either through a synod, if it can, or through the reading of this letter: so that what thou hast so necessarily inquired, and we have so carefully answered, may be kept by the common consent and zeal of all.

Instead of the subjoined titles, which are copied from the exemplars of Dionysius and of the codex published by Quesnel, the old Corbie codex presents these: I. How one ought to give the peace in church. II. On the names to be recited. III. On signing infants. IV. On the leaven. V. On the baptized who are afterwards vexed by a demon. VI. On anointing the sick. On giving the kiss of peace after the mysteries have been completed. -- II. On not reciting the names before the priest's prayer. --III. That the baptized ought not to be signed except by the bishop. --IV. That fasting is rightly kept every sabbath. --V. On the leaven, that it is to be sent only to the 551Bpresbyters of the city. --VI. On baptized energumens. --VII. On penitents. --VIII. On the epistle of St. James the apostle, in which prayer for the sick is enjoined.

From the Colbertine manuscript 932.

That those about to communicate should give one another the peace in church when the mysteries have been completed. --II. That the names of those who offer be recited not beforehand, but within the mysteries. --III. On signing infants; that it is lawful for bishops alone to give of the consecrated oil. --IV. On the leaven on the holy day of Easter, that it ought to be delivered only to those priests who are within the city. --V. On the fast of the sabbath. --VI. On those who after baptism are seized by a demon. --VII. On penitents, what measure ought to be kept about the holy day of Easter. --VIII. That 551Cit is lawful not only for priests but also for all Christians to anoint with the holy oil, in their own need and in that of their own people. --IX. That the holy oil, like the other sacraments also, is not to be granted to penitents in the time of penance.

INNOCENT TO DECENTIUS, bishop of Eugubium One Colb. codex: Capuano. Others of good repute: Egubino. In the copies of Dionysius, where Eugubino is read, salutem is added, which was expressed from them in the printed editions too., greeting.

If (Ivo p. 4, c. 67) the priests of the Lord wished to keep the ecclesiastical institutions whole, as 552Athey were handed down by the blessed Apostles, there would be no diversity, no variety in the orders and consecrations themselves. But while each one reckons that what is to be held is not what has been handed down, but what has seemed good to him, thence different things are seen to be held or celebrated in different places or churches; and a scandal arises for the peoples, who, not knowing that the ancient traditions have been corrupted by human presumption, think either that the churches do not agree, or that contradiction was introduced The Corb. manuscript with one Colb.: aut Apostolis. Then, with the same, three others: vel apostolicis ipsis, not viris. Next, one Colb.: contraria et non utenda inducta. Already above, in Epistle 17, n. 9, we heard Innocent commending the ancient rules which, handed down by the Apostles or by apostolic men, the Roman Church keeps. by the Apostles or by apostolic men (Dist. 5, c. 11).

For who does not know, or does not observe, that what was handed down to the Roman Church by Peter, the prince of the Apostles, and is kept until now, ought to be kept by all; and that nothing ought to be brought in over it or introduced 552Bwhich has no authority, or which seems to take its pattern from elsewhere? especially since it is manifest that throughout all Italy, the Gauls, the Spains, Africa and Sicily, and the islands Supply terrasque. Hilary, writing the book on the Synods to those who were joined with the Gauls in the one communion and fellowship of faith, lists together with them the bishops of the first and second Germany and of the Britains. If to these are added the various provinces of Illyricum, which Innocent lists in Epistle 13, n. 2, when committing his vicariate over them to Rufus, a fairly accurate enumeration will be had of the dioceses which belong to the Roman patriarchate. Of the churches named by this pope, however, there are some who think that the church of Lyons should be excepted, which they judge received its first priest neither from Peter nor from his successors. But the author of this opinion confesses elsewhere that it is unknown to him by whom Pothinus, the first prelate of that same church, was either ordained or sent. lying between, no one founded churches except those whom the venerable apostle Peter or his successors appointed priests. Or let them read whether in these provinces any other of the Apostles is found, or is read to have taught. And if they do not read it, because they find it nowhere, they must follow what the Roman Church keeps, from which it is not doubtful that they received their beginning; lest, while they are eager for foreign assertions, they be seen to abandon the head of their institutions.

It is not doubtful that thy love has often come to the City and 552Cassembled with us in church, and has come to know what custom it keeps, whether in consecrating the mysteries or in performing the other secret rites. That this would suffice The word arbitrarer is added here in the old editions of the Councils, as in the manuscripts. for the instruction of thy church, or for its reformation if thy predecessors held anything less or otherwise, we should hold as quite certain, hadst thou not thought that we should be consulted about some matters. 553ATo these we reply, therefore, not because we believe thou art ignorant of anything, but so that with greater authority thou mayest either instruct thine own, or, if any stray from the institutions of the Roman Church, either admonish them or not delay to report them, so that we may be able to know who they are that either bring in novelties or think that the custom of another church than the Roman is to be kept.

Thou assertest, then, that some enjoin the peace upon the peoples before the mysteries have been completed (De consec. dist. 2, c. 9), or that the priests give it to one another among themselves, whereas the peace must Merlin and several manuscripts: necessaria. The usage of the churches was not one in this matter. In the Constitutions of the Apostles published under the name of Clement, book II, c. 61, the kiss of peace follows the oblation. Indeed the kiss of peace, as Justin Martyr testifies, Apology 2, to Antoninus Pius, preceded the oblation itself. When the prayers are finished, he says, we greet one another with a kiss. Then bread and a cup of water and wine are offered to him who presides over the brethren. The Laodicene synod, can. 19, states that rite thus: After the bishop has given the kiss of peace to the presbyters, then the laity shall give the peace to one another, and so the holy oblation shall be celebrated. In the Mozarabic Missal, for the Sunday of Advent, the peace is prescribed to be proclaimed and offered to the peoples before the Illation, or, as we say, the preface, that they may be fit to be present at the most holy mysteries of God. For the same reason, in certain others, for instance of the church of Salisbury, the priest is bidden to offer the kiss of peace to the deacon and subdeacon, that they may be fit for the ministry of the most holy altar of the Lord, and so before the sacred mysteries are celebrated. With these agrees the old Gallican Order, in which a collect for the peace, or, after the peace has been given, is everywhere set before the Illation. Noteworthy is that caution and reverence of Innocent, by which, even when writing to a bishop, he says of the mysteries, which I ought not to disclose. This certainly leaves no room for the novel opinion of the heterodox about those mysteries. necessarily be enjoined after all the things which I ought not to disclose, so that by it it may be established that the people has given its consent to all that is done in the mysteries and celebrated in the church, and that these are shown to be finished by the seal of the concluding peace.

As for reciting the names (De consecr. 553Bdist. I, c. ult.) before the priest makes 554Ahis prayer and by his prayer commends the oblations of those whose names are to be recited, how superfluous this is thou thyself recognizest in thy prudence: that thou shouldst put forward beforehand the name of one whose victim thou dost not yet offer to God, although nothing is unknown to him. First Merlin: Prius enim oblationes sunt commendandae, ac tunc nomina edicenda. But in one Colb. manuscript, after the word commendandae, there is subjoined: Et nomina offerentium non ante nisi infra mysteria recitentur. Ac tunc eorum oblationes sunt edicendae, ut inter sacra, etc., doubtless from the marginal note of a scholiast, who, it is clear, read in his exemplar, as is found in the other Colb., quorum sunt oblationes edicendae, for quorum sunt edicenda. That reading would favour the custom which Jerome, on chapter 18 of Ezekiel, thought should be censured in these words: We see many who oppress by power, or commit thefts, so that out of much they may give a little to the poor, and glory in their crimes, and the deacon publicly recites the names of those who offer: SO MUCH SHE OFFERS, SO MUCH HE HAS PROMISED, and they are pleased with themselves at the applause of the people. But it is plain that Innocent does not approve boasting of this kind, since he wishes the oblations of the faithful to be commended to God, not to the people, and not by the public recitation of the deacon but by the silent prayer of the priest. His precept was renewed by the council of Frankfurt in the year 794, by a decree issued on not reciting the names before the oblation is offered. For what this synod there calls the oblation, Innocent above calls the prayer. And by each of those names is understood what we call the Canon. Hence Gregory the Great, in the same epistle to John, otherwise 64, Indiction 2, where he first mentioned that it had been complained of by some that he had decreed that the Lord's Prayer be said soon after the CANON, then adds: We say the Lord's Prayer soon after the PRAYER for this reason. Socrates, book vii, c. 25, also names the same part of the sacred mysteries εὐχάς. Wherefore Innocent and the synod of Frankfurt do not approve those who, with the Eastern church, recited the names before the canon, or, as Cyprian says in Epistle 10, to his clergy, offered the names. That usage, however, which they disapprove, was received afterwards too in the Gauls and the Spains, as the ancient Gallican order and the Mozarabic Missal bear witness., therefore, the oblations are to be commended, and then the names of those whose they are are to be proclaimed; so that they may be named among the sacred mysteries, not among the other things which we set before them, so that by the mysteries themselves we may open the way for the prayers to come.

As for signing infants, it is manifest that it is lawful for this to be done by no other than the bishop (De consecr. dist. 4, c. 119). For presbyters, although they are priests in the In the printed editions secundi is lacking: which we restore on the authority of the older Corb. manuscript and of two others. To this points that saying of Optatus, book I: Why should I mention deacons in the third, presbyters in the second priesthood? The bishops themselves are the summits and princes of all. second place, nevertheless do not have the summit of the pontificate (Ivo p. 1, c. 265). But that this 554BSo the manuscripts just mentioned. But other books: Haec autem pontificibus solis deberi, ut vel consignent. Theologians are accustomed to interpret this saying of Innocent of ordinary law. And Jerome indeed, in the dialogue against the Luciferians, teaches that the custom by which in the Church one who is baptized does not receive the Holy Spirit except through the hands of the bishop was instituted rather for the honour of the priesthood than for the necessity of law. And not only does the same Doctor seem to claim the right of signing for presbyters, but he also hints, in the letter to Evangelus, that its exercise is sometimes permitted them, where he says: For what does a bishop do, ordination excepted, which a presbyter does not do? With which agrees what Chrysostom writes of bishops, homily II on the first epistle to Timothy: For they are superior by ordination alone, and in this only do they seem to have more than presbyters. Gregory indeed writes, book IV, epist. 9, to Januarius, bishop of Cagliari in Sardinia: Let presbyters anoint those to be baptized on the breast, so that bishops may afterwards anoint them on the forehead. But, ibid., epistle otherwise 24, he writes back to the same: It has also reached us that some were scandalized because we forbade presbyters to touch with chrism those who are to be baptized. To whom he first answers, And we indeed did so according to the ancient usage of our church; then he adds, But if some are altogether saddened about this matter, we grant that, where bishops are lacking, presbyters may touch with chrism those to be baptized even on their foreheads. Nor is Gelasius opposed to these, when in epist. 12, c. 6, he enjoins presbyters not to seize for themselves the faculty of making chrism, nor of applying the pontifical signing. For it is one thing to seize such a faculty for oneself, and another to use a power that has been granted. In the commentaries published under the name of Ambrose, on Ephesians c. IV, one reads: In Egypt the presbyters sign, if the bishop is not present. With which agrees also what the ancient author of the questions on both Testaments, mixed together, in Augustine, appendix to vol. III, cap. 101, relates: In Alexandria and through the whole of Egypt, if the bishop is lacking, the presbyter consecrates (more correctly the Colb. manuscript, consignat). And this usage still obtains among the Greeks. Nor does the first council of Toledo, can. 20, seem at variance with it, by which it was established that the deacon should not chrismate, but the presbyter, in the absence of the bishop; when he is present, however, only if it has been enjoined by him; nor the first of Orange, can. 11, and that of Epaon, can. 16, when they wish heretics placed in danger of death, if they desire to be catholics, and if a bishop is lacking, to be signed by presbyters with blessing and chrism. As for Innocent, both from this decree and from the preceding decrees and from the proem of the whole letter it appears that what he wished above all to guard against was that the churches which received the faith from the Roman should decline to rites alien to the custom of that same church. Deferring to him, the second council of Seville, held in the year 619, c. 7, defines that it is not lawful for presbyters either to make chrism, or to sign the forehead of the baptized with chrism. In imitation of him also Theodulf, bishop of Orléans, in the book on Baptism, c. 17, concludes: That it is lawful for presbyters to anoint the baptized with chrism, but not lawful to hand on the Holy Spirit through the imposition of the hand, this ancient custom was handed down by the Apostles (that is, by the example of the Apostles recorded in the Acts). And this power is denied not to presbyters alone but also to chorepiscopi, both by the sixth council of Paris, in the year 827, part II, c. 27, and by that of Meaux, in the year 843; c. 44. Wherefore Isaac, bishop of Langres, title XI, can. 30, decrees: If anyone has been confirmed not by a bishop but by a chorepiscopus, he ought to be confirmed over again with other blessings. The Capitulary of the year 803 too, in Baluze, p. 381, declares the same thing, as resting on the authority of Leo III, who had been consulted beforehand. pontifical power is due to bishops alone, namely either to sign or to hand on the Paraclete Spirit, is demonstrated not only 555Aby ecclesiastical custom, but also by that reading of the Acts of the Apostles which asserts that Peter and John were sent to hand on the Holy Spirit to those already baptized. For it is lawful for presbyters, when they baptize, whether apart from the bishop or with the bishop present, to anoint the baptized with chrism, but chrism which has been consecrated by the bishop; yet not to sign the forehead with the same oil, which is due to bishops alone, when they hand on the Paraclete Spirit. But to say Hence it is concluded that the sacrament of Confirmation was accomplished not by the anointing of the forehead alone but also by prescribed formulas of certain words. But while Innocent deliberately keeps silent about these words, he makes plain how great was the scruple of the ancients against revealing the mysteries of the sacraments. Examples of this are more frequent when they speak of the Eucharist. the words I cannot, lest I should seem rather to betray than to answer the consultation.

That on the sabbath (De consecr. dist. 3, c. 13) one must fast, a most evident reason demonstrates. For (Ivo p. 4, c. 28) if we celebrate the Lord's day on account of the venerable resurrection of our Lord Jesus 555BChrist not only at Easter, but also through the several cycles of the weeks repeat the image of that very day, and fast on the sixth day on account of the Lord's passion, we ought not to pass over the sabbath, In the manuscripts, qui (Quesnel here adds dies) inclusus. Consult, if you please, the special Dissertation of the same Quesnel, at the end of the works of Leo, on the fast of the sabbath in the Roman church. which is seen to be enclosed between the sorrow and the joy of that time. For it is certainly agreed that the Apostles on those two days were both in grief and hid themselves for fear of the Jews. And it is certainly not doubtful that they fasted on the two days mentioned (Joan. XX) to such a degree that the tradition of the Church holds that In the Capitularies, book vii, c. 430, where it is read, For since the canons command it, the sacraments ought not to be celebrated on these two days, we may conjecture, not rashly, that this passage is in view. The council of Rouen of the year 1072, c. 22, records that this very custom was prescribed in the pontifical book. on these two days 556Athe sacraments are not celebrated at all. Which form Supply jejunii ab Apostolis servati. For the nearby mention of the sacraments not celebrated on the two days before the resurrection of the Lord is made only in passing, as added solely to assert the fast of the sabbath, and the very sequence of the sentence confirms this. Socrates indeed says, book v, c. 22: Although all the churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the sabbath day every week, the Alexandrians and the Romans, following an ancient tradition, refuse to do this. But the liturgies of Gregory and of Gelasius, which prescribe Masses even on the sabbaths of Lent, suggest otherwise. Nor would Jerome, Epistle 28, to Lucinius, have written: As to what thou askest about the sabbath, whether one must fast on it; and about the Eucharist, whether it is to be received daily, which the Roman churches are said to observe, unless the sacred mysteries, from which the Eucharist is received, had been celebrated daily. Augustine, Epistle 54, to Januarius, n. 4, reports the same usage of receiving the Eucharist daily. From which it follows that the divine mysteries too were celebrated daily. For the Eucharist was not commonly received outside their celebration, except by the sick. What we have just cited Socrates perhaps said because the Romans and the Alexandrians, having transferred the solemnity of the sabbath to the Lord's day, refused to celebrate both days with equal reverence. is certainly to be kept through each of the weeks, because the commemoration of that day is always to be celebrated. But if they think that one must fast once, and on a single sabbath; then both the In the manuscripts, Dominicum... celebrandum. But very badly in Merlin and Crabbe, Dominica... celebrandum. Lord's day and the sixth day will certainly have to be celebrated once, at Easter. But if the image of the Lord's day and of the sixth day is to be renewed each week, it is the part of a madman to keep the custom of the two days with the sabbath passed over; since it has no unlike cause, namely from the sixth day, on which the Lord suffered, when he was also in the underworld, so that rising on the third day he might restore joy after the preceding two days' sorrow. We do not, then, deny that one must fast on the sixth day; but we say that this is to be done on the sabbath too, because both days imposed sorrow on the Apostles, or on 556Bthose who followed Christ. And they, made glad on the Lord's day, not only wished it to be most festive, but also judged that it should be kept again and again through all the weeks.

As for the leaven which we send through the titles on the Lord's day, thou hast wished to consult us superfluously, since all our churches are established within the city. Because their presbyters cannot assemble with us on that day on account of the people entrusted to them, they therefore receive the leaven In one Corb. manuscript a nobis confectum is lacking. By the name of leaven some understand here blessed bread which serves in place of the Eucharist, but others, far more numerous, the Eucharist itself. And indeed our Mabillon observes that it is quite often designated in the Roman Order by the word leaven. Nor need we fear that by this latter understanding the opinion of those is helped who think that the Eucharist was formerly made from leavened bread in the Latin Church. For the argument drawn from here in favour of this opinion is very light. For that venerable sacrament, according to the custom of those times, by which they were careful to hide the secret of the sacred thing from the profane, was aptly called leaven when it was sent to the churches, so that it might signify that, as leaven put into flour and mixed with it binds the whole together, so it was for them a certain bond of union and of mutual communion. For that reason Christ himself too, even apart from the sacrament of the Eucharist, is called leaven in the encyclical codex of the letters sent to the emperor Leo, epist. 37, vol. IV of the Councils of Labbe, p. 920, and on that account the council of Chalcedon is praised by the bishops of maritime Phoenicia, because it destroyed those who monstrously believe that our LEAVEN is not from the virgin Mother of God. But that we should not think that bare eulogia are understood by Innocent under the word leaven, his reason subjoined forbids, by which he teaches that this rite of sending the leaven suits neither the church of Eugubium nor the others which did not have several titles within one city, because, of course, the sacraments are not to be carried far. For if anyone were to deny that the eulogia, or blessed bread, could be carried farther without any distinction, he would be refuted by the letters both of Paulinus of Nola in Augustine, 24 n. 6, 25 n. 5, and 32 n. 5, and of Augustine himself, epistle formerly 34, now 31, n. 9, in which we read that those holy men sent one another blessed loaves from Italy into Africa, and in turn, as a symbol of unity or of mutual communion. The usage of sending the leaven to the churches, which was perhaps peculiar to the Roman city, is attributed to Melchiades, as was observed above, p. 339, where we also discussed this matter more fully. made by us 557Athrough acolytes, so that they may not judge themselves separated from our communion, especially on that day. That this ought to be done through the The printed editions: parochias. In the copies of Dionysius and Hadrian, paroecias or parroecias. In the very old Corbie codex, proicias, doubtless for paroicias. From which one may gather that it was not at first, but in the course of time, that copyists came to write parochias or parrochias. By this name Innocent here understands the churches situated outside the episcopal city. That among the Romans the cemeteries too stood outside the cities, since it was against their religion to bury bodies within the walls, no one is unaware. parishes I do not think; because the sacraments are not to be carried far (nor do we send them to the presbyters stationed throughout the various cemeteries) Quesnel, after the old editions of the Councils and also the manuscripts of the Spanish collection and of the Isidorian collection: ut et presbyteri eorum. Two manuscripts: ut precibus eorum. Pith.: et precibus eorum. The reading afterwards published is both the sounder and that of the better manuscripts. To the first reason, by which he had taught that it was not fitting for the sacraments to be carried into the parishes, Innocent now adds another, by which he shows that this is not even necessary. and the presbyters have the right and the licence of making them.

As for those baptized who afterwards 558Aare seized by a demon, through some vice or sin intervening, thy love So some manuscripts of good repute. But Pith., Dionysius and the Isidorian collection: quaesivit dilectio. is anxious whether they can or ought to be So the old Corbie codex, with the ancient exemplars of the Codex published by Quesnel, and also another Colb. manuscript of good repute. So too Dionysius seems to have read, whose Royal copy still has assignari. In the other books, however, consignari stands. Then the Roman edition: quod hoc nisi episcopis praecipere. Quesnel: quod nisi, suppressing hoc against the agreement of all the codices. The sentence will be whole if before that quod the word censeo is supplied, or if, with the Royal exemplar of Dionysius and some others, Quod hoc nisi episcopum praecipere non liceat is preferred. Joh. Morin, in a certain posthumous work, supposes that Innocent in this place gave deacons, when necessity presses, the power of administering Confirmation: but his editor Moret rightly observes that there is no talk here of that sacrament. The word consignari, by which the sacrament of Confirmation is expressed above, deceived that learned man. The question raised was plainly about the baptized, that is, the faithful, who were seized by a demon not in the very receiving of baptism but afterwards. That in this age the sacrament of Confirmation was customarily conferred on those coming out of the sacred font of baptism, neither the learned Morin nor anyone skilled in antiquity is unaware: and this is taught by Tertullian, book on Baptism, c. 7 and 8, Cyprian, epist. 73, to Jubaianus, Ambrose, book on the Mysteries, c. 7, Jerome, Dialogue against the Luciferians, Augustine, Serm. 324, Pope Leo, Serm. 4 on the Nativity of the Lord, and long afterwards Magnus, bishop of Sens, in the booklet which he composed on the mystery of baptism at the command of Charles the Great, and which our Edmond Martène published in the Ancient Rites of the Church, vol. I, p. 160. In which work we read: When all the sacraments of baptism have been completed, last of all, through the imposition of the hand by the high priest, they receive the Holy Spirit of sevenfold grace. Besides, there is in this whole chapter not a word about the Holy Spirit, though Innocent is not accustomed to be silent about him where he speaks of the sacrament of Confirmation. Finally, he who in the preceding chapter 3, n. 6, asserted that this is due to pontiffs alone, either to sign or to hand on the Holy Spirit, and denied this power to presbyters, was far from granting the same to deacons. It is evident, therefore, that the rites by which one who is seized by a demon is succoured are explained here. These rites our Edmond Martène explains at length, Ancient Rites of the Church, book III, c. 9. Expressly, among those which he describes from an old Royal codex 3866, and another of Vendôme, ibid. p. 366, it is prescribed that the priest to whom the energumen has been brought should receive the confession of all his sins, lay his hand on the top of the sick man's head, and make the cross three times, and after many prayers sign him on the forehead, on the eyes, on the ears, on the nostrils, on the breast, on the mouth, on the feet, on both hands, a blessing proper to each member being applied. Wherefore there is scarcely any room for doubting that Innocent marks this last rite by the word designari. Yet I make no objection to consignari being kept: nor do I deny that this favours that reading, that in the codices cited, copied out by our Martène, p. 520, a twofold formula of signing is given, and the latter is headed: Another signing of the head, and of the eyes, or of all the members. Care must be taken, however, lest the word consignandi be thought to be used here in the sense in which it is used above, cap. 3. Perhaps it was to distinguish the two things that Innocent used the verb consignandi above and designandi now. But whether thou preferest designari or consignari here, neither seems to have to mean anything other than simple signari. marked by a presbyter or deacon. This, unless the bishop has enjoined it, is not lawful. For the hand is not to be laid on them at all, unless the bishop has given authority to do it. But that it be done, it is the bishop's part to command that the hand be laid The Corb. manuscript: imponantur. That imposition of the hand was a certain kind of penance. And whatever belongs to public penance has always been subject in the Church to the power of bishops. Where the bishop was present, the hand was laid on penitents both by him and by his clergy. Hence Cyprian, in Epistle 10, to his clergy, complains that whereas in lesser sins sinners do penance for a long time, and according to the order of discipline come to confession, and through the imposition of the hand of the bishop and clergy receive the right of communion; now at an unripe time... before penance has been done, before confession has been made, before the hand has been laid on them by the bishop and clergy, the Eucharist is given them. But the bishop, when he was absent, and not even necessity pressed, permitted this very thing to presbyters or even to deacons. Wherefore the same Cyprian writes to his clergy, Epistle 13: If they are overtaken by any misfortune and the danger of sickness, without waiting for our presence, before any presbyter who is at hand, or, if a presbyter is not found and death begins to press, before a deacon too, they may make confession of their sin, so that, the hand being laid on them unto penance, they may come to the Lord with peace. To this points what Regino, book I, c. 295 and 296, and Burchard, book X, c. 155 and 156, bring forward as from the Roman Penitential: For as none but bishops and presbyters ought to offer the sacrifice, so neither ought others to usurp the judgments of penitents. But if necessity arises, and a presbyter is not present, let a deacon receive the penitent to holy communion. And these things indeed were said of reconciling a penitent where danger of death threatens: but Innocent defines that a certain power regarding energumens can be granted by the bishop which seems to belong not to the presbyter or the deacon alone, but also to the other clerics, among whom the lowest is the order of exorcists. Which is to be understood thus, that the inferior clerics omitted those rites which it is granted to priests alone to perform. on them either by a presbyter or by the other clerics. For how 559Acan it be done without great labour that an energumen situated far away be brought to the bishop, since, if such a mishap befalls him on the journey, he can neither easily be carried on to the bishop nor carried back to his own?

As for penitents, who do penance whether for graver offences or for lighter ones, if no sickness intervenes, the custom of the Roman Church shows that remission is to be given them on the fifth day of the week before Easter (De consecr. dist. 3, c. 17; Ivo p. 15, c. 40; Isaac Lingon. c. 15). But as to estimating the weight of the offences, it is for the priest to judge, so that he may pay heed to the confession of the penitent, and to the weeping and tears of one amending himself, and then order him to be released when he has seen his fitting So two Colb. manuscripts. But other books: satisfactionem. Sane si quis. How anxious the ancients were that penitents should neither be absolved before fitting satisfaction, nor depart from the world without reconciliation and communion, Cyprian bears witness in the passages just cited, to pass over others. There too that holy martyr mentions penance done for lesser sins; but we may think, not rashly, that these were called lesser and lighter in comparison with graver ones, although they too were deadly. satisfaction. Or if anyone has fallen into sickness, and 559Bhas come to the point of despair, he is to be released before the time of Easter, lest he depart from the world without communion.

Indeed, since thy love wished to consult about this, as about the rest, my son 560Athe deacon Coelestinus also added in his letter that thy love had put forward that which is written in the epistle of the blessed Apostle James: If anyone among you is sick So six of the better manuscripts, which in expressing this passage agree almost entirely with the ancient exemplar of the Italic version. But the printed editions: Infirmatur quis in vobis? Inducat presbyteros Ecclesiae: except that the word Ecclesiae is not found in Merlin, as in the remaining manuscripts. Then two Colb.: ut orent pro eo: Pith.: et orent pro eo.; let him call the presbyters, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer One of the Colb. manuscripts, with Pith. and the cited exemplar of the Italic version: in fide: and then, with the older ones, salvabit laborantem: where in the printed editions, salvabit infirmum. of faith shall save him who labours, and the Lord shall raise him up, The printed editions: si in peccatis fuerit, remittentur ei: they are corrected by the authority of the better manuscripts, in three of which si peccata fecit stands. Then in Dionysius remittetur ei, as it is read also in the ancient exemplar of the Italic version. and if he has committed sin, he shall forgive him (Jacob. V, 24). There is no doubt that this ought to be taken or understood of the faithful who are sick, who can be anointed with the holy oil of chrism, Crabbe and the other editions after him: quo ab episcopo confecto, Merlin and the manuscripts resisting. Our Edmond Martène, vol. II of the Ancient Rites of the Church, p. 114, proves that among the Greeks that oil is customarily made by presbyters as well. which, made by the bishop, it is lawful not only for priests but also for all Christians to use, in their own need or in that of their own, for Quesnel: ungendo. The Roman edition: ad ungendum. The rest: inungendo. More truly the manuscripts: ungendum, or, as it is written in most, unguendum. Nor indeed is it unusual for grammarians to join a fourth case to the verb uti, as may be seen in these words of Plautus: Caetera quae utimur. Moreover, those stray from Innocent's mind who think that in this place he attributes to all Christians the right of anointing both themselves and their own with the holy oil, and declare all the faithful to be ministers of this sacrament. He only refutes the opinion of those who had perhaps then persuaded themselves that the use of the holy oil was so proper to the priests by whom it is made that no others were to be anointed with it; and he teaches that it is made by them not so that they alone may be anointed with it, but all Christians too. For here there is not yet any talk of the minister of the anointing, but only of him on whom it can be conferred. Then, proceeding to the other question, namely whether it is so proper to presbyters to administer this sacrament that it is not lawful for bishops to confer it, he refutes the false opinion of some on that matter, about which Decentius had thought he should consult him. And indeed this question of Decentius plainly shows how far it was from the belief of those times that any and every Christian could anoint the sick with the sacred oil. anointing. But (Dist. 95, c. 9; Ivo p. 2, c. 75) we see that this was added superfluously, that doubt should be raised about the bishop concerning a thing which, it is not doubtful, 560Bis lawful for presbyters. For it was said to The Roman edition and that of the Councils, after Crabbe, with one Colb. manuscript: de presbyteris. Merlin with the other manuscripts: presbyteris, which we so understand that licere is understood with it. Nor is what stands in Quesnel displeasing, presbyteros, with this meaning, namely: for this reason it was said (by James) presbyters, supplying vocet. presbyters for this reason, that bishops, hindered by other occupations, cannot go to all the sick. But if the bishop either is able, or deems someone worthy to be visited by him, he may both bless and Quesnel: et ungere. Although above, n. 6, we read chrismate baptizatos ungere licet: yet here in no old codex have we found ungere. In two manuscripts tangere is lacking; and in one of them, for chrismate, there stands chrismare: with which reading agrees this of the first council of Toledo, can. 2, where it is laid down that a deacon may not chrismate. Gregory, book 4, epist. 26, to Januarius, uses the expression to touch with chrism once and a second time. touch with chrism; without hesitation 561Ahe can, he whose office it is to make the chrism. For this cannot be poured on penitents, because it is a kind of In one of the Colb. manuscripts, sacramentorum. In favour of which is the fact that sacratorum is read in the old Corbie. That this reading is faulty, however, and that the anointing of the sick is reckoned by Innocent not only among sacred things but also among the sacraments, is plain from what is subjoined. And where he denies this sacrament to those penitents to whom the rest of the sacraments are denied, he teaches plainly enough that it was then received usage that it be granted to other faithful who were sick without danger of death. For he prescribes above, n. 10, that the rest of the sacraments be conferred without delay on penitents too, if they have fallen into a desperate sickness. But the Greeks, as Peter Arcudius testifies, book v, c. 4, went so far as to anoint, applying the form of the sacrament too, not only the sick who labour under no dangerous illness, but also penitents in good health, no differently from the sick. sacrament. For to those to whom the rest of the sacraments are denied, how is it thought that one kind can be granted?

To all these things, then, dearest brother, which thy love wished us to set forth, we have taken care to answer as far as we were able, so that thy Church may be able to preserve and guard the Roman custom, from which it draws its origin. The rest, which it was not right to write, we shall be able to declare when asked, once thou art present. And it will be for the power of the Lord to bring this about too: that thou instruct well both thy Church and our clerics who serve the divine offices under thy pontificate, and give to others a pattern which they ought to imitate. 561BGiven on the fourteenth day before the Kalends of April (Martii XIX, ann. 416), Theodosius Augustus for the seventh time and Palladius The printed editions: viris clarissimis. More correctly the manuscripts: v. c., that is, viro clarissimo: which applies to Palladius alone. But where the notaries wish to express viris clarissimis, they double the same abbreviation in this manner: vv. cc., which is then understood to be predicated of two consuls., a most illustrious man, being consuls.

The six following letters are presented by a great many old codices examined in the newest edition of Augustine. The same, together with the following 32, are presented by the exemplars not only of the collection of Isidore, but also of the Spanish collection, and also of the Codex published by Quesnel. Augustine himself, epistle formerly 106, now 186, num. 2, mentions them one by one in this manner: « So reports were sent on this matter from two councils, that of Carthage and that of Milevis, to the apostolic see . . . We also wrote to Pope Innocent of blessed memory, besides the reports of the councils, a familiar letter, in which we dealt with the cause itself at somewhat greater length. To all of it he wrote back to us in the manner which was right and fitting for the apostolic 561Csee. » And expressly concerning the letters of Innocent he says this, book I against Julian, c. 4: « For what could that holy man answer to the African councils, except what the apostolic see and the Roman Church, with the others, has held perseveringly from of old? » Then, having copied out certain sentences which Innocent sets forth in those letters, he presses Julian thus: « Answer him, or rather the Lord himself, whose testimony that prelate used. » Likewise, book II against the Two Letters of the Pelagians, c. 4, n. 6, where he has brought forward some words of Epistle 29, he exclaims: « What is clearer than this judgment of the apostolic see? » And again, num. 7, having set out other words from Epistle 30, he adds: « What does the ungrateful man say to this? » So he calls Coelestius, whom there too, n. 5, he convicts of deceit, since he afterwards answered falsely before Zosimus that he agreed with these letters of Innocent. With so many and such evident testimonies Henry Noris, Hist. Pelag. p. 74, refutes the censure of Vossius, who after Erasmus calls into doubt « whether these letters are worthy of so great a prelate, » 561Dand at the same time confutes the opinion of a certain more recent writer, who seems likewise to hesitate about their genuineness. We pass over in silence Prosper, Pope Celestine and the other 562Awriters who ascribe those letters to Innocent in express words. Nor is there need to explain at greater length why he by no means discourses more fully on so abundant and so ample a matter, since he himself has given the reason for this.

What the cause was for the Africans to write to Innocent, they themselves did not keep silent. They testify that they desire, in so grave a storm as Pelagius and Coelestius had stirred up, to be made more certain about the truth of the faith; and that their own sentence be approved by the judgment of Innocent; and that in this way the firm authority of the apostolic see be added to their statutes. Then at last they indicate that they hope that those who hold such perverse and pernicious opinions will more easily yield to the authority of the same see, as being « drawn from the authority of the holy Scriptures (epist. 27, n. 3) ».

How much the Africans judge should be deferred to the apostolic see, they show clearly in their letters. From this Innocent too seized the occasion of extolling it. If it should seem to anyone that in this he exceeded measure, Augustine will refute him, 562Bin whose judgment, as we saw above, « he wrote back to all of it in the manner which was right and fitting for a prelate of the apostolic see. » Or are Augustine and the other Africans to be thought to have approved only what Innocent judged concerning Pelagius, Coelestius and their associates, and not likewise what he says by way of preface, in Epistles 29 and 30, about the prerogative of his see? That these things too were approved by them is gathered from what their successors write in the opening of the letter which, sent by three councils of Africa to Pope Theodore, was afterwards read out in the Lateran council under Martin I. For there whatever Innocent, epist 29, maintains about the dignity of the Roman Church, they repeat in their own name in the same sentences, and all but entirely in the same words (Lab. t. 6, p. 118). But nothing more illustrious can be wished for to commend the pre-eminence of the apostolic see than what Augustine, on receiving the letters of Innocent, openly proclaimed, serm. 131, n. 10: « For already two councils have been sent on this cause 562Cto the apostolic see; rescripts too have come from there: the cause is finished; would that the error may at some time be finished! » That is, the Pelagian cause was diligently examined and judged in two African councils. And since the judgment of the apostolic see also agrees with them, the cause, decided by a threefold judgment of so great authority, is rightly judged to be finished.

So Augustine preached, when he was still uncertain whether the Pelagians would abide by those rescripts or not; and so when they had recently arrived in Africa. Now it has been observed in the new edition of Augustine that that Sermon is headed in an old codex « preached on the ninth day before the Kalends of October, on the Lord's day », and that in the year 417 the ninth day before the Kalends of October fell on a Sunday. From which it also follows that those rescripts are not more recent than the month of September of the year 417. But their date remains certain, preserved in manuscripts of the best repute, in which they are dated « on the sixth day before the Kalends of February, after the consulship of Theodosius for the seventh time and Junius for the fourth, V. C., » that is, on the 27th day of the month of January of the year 417. Nor does this other date, which some codices present, make that date 562Ddoubtful, but rather confirms it: « on the sixth day before the Kalends of February, Honorius and Constantius, V. C., being consuls. » For 563Ain fact Honorius and Constantius held the consulship in the year 417. And we shall judge, not rashly, that this change came about partly through the work of a copyist, who noted in the margin, in place of the consuls of the past year, the consuls of that very year, whom Innocent perhaps did not then know, and partly through the simplicity of a scribe, who, removing the original reading, carried that annotation into the text. Further, of the seven following letters, the first was written a little before 27 and 28, but was sent together with them by the same Julius, an African bishop, as the year 416 was running out. The four following, however, were dated on one day and were delivered by the same bishop Julius, who carried them. That these too were delivered to the Africans before the month of October of the year 417 is concluded from the note prefixed to Augustine's Sermon 131, as we pointed out before.

Peter Marca, book VII On the Concord, c. 12, n. 5, and John Garnier, in the Dissertation on the synods held in the Pelagian cause, assert that Innocent wrote back to the Africans from some Roman synod: but Ant. Pagi, at the year 416, n. 19, denies this, and confirms his opinion 563Bwith the words of Augustine, book IV to Boniface. But that twofold opinion may be reconciled without much trouble. For if, when the Pelagians boasted that the dogmas of Pelagius and Coelestius had been condemned without the gathering of a synod, Augustine, book IV against the Two Letters of the Pelagians, c. 12, n. 31, does not deny this to them; the same Doctor, in the same work, book II, c. 3, answers the same heretics, who were accusing the Roman clerics of prevarication: « If, which God forbid, judgment had then been given in the Roman church concerning Coelestius or Pelagius in such a way that those dogmas of theirs, which Pope Innocent had condemned in them and with them, were pronounced worthy to be approved and held; from this rather would the brand of prevarication have to be burned upon the Roman clerics. » But there would be nothing for which these clerics could be blamed, if Innocent had written against Pelagius and Coelestius without their knowledge. That holy pope, therefore, composed these letters without the gathering of a synod of bishops summoned from different provinces, but not without a gathering of the Roman 563Cclerics: and in this way opinions that seem to conflict are reconciled; and the perpetual custom 564Ais confirmed by which, as we have seen hitherto, the Roman pontiffs, when consulted by the Churches, were accustomed to answer only when at least the assembly of their clerics had been gathered.

To the most blessed and most honourable lord, the holy brother, Pope INNOCENT, AURELIUS, NUMIDIUS, RUSTICIANUS, So the manuscripts, one excepted, in which Fidentianus. But the printed editions: Fidentius, with the Conference of Carthage favouring it, in which three bishops are read who bore the name of Fidentius. FIDENTINUS, EVAGRIUS, In Crabbe, in the margin: Antonius: which the manuscripts also have here. But the letter by which Innocent wrote back to him is addressed, in the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts, Antonio, not Antonino. ANTONIUS, PALATINUS, ADEODATUS, VINCENTIUS, PUBLIANUS, THEASIUS, TUTUS, The Roman edition: Pantonius, the manuscripts resisting. In the Conference of Carthage, cap. 126, Pannonius, bishop of the people of Puppita is read. PANNONIUS, VICTOR, RESTITUTUS, another RESTITUTUS, RUSTICUS, FORTUNATIANUS, AMPELIUS, In the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts the name of this bishop is lacking, who in the same manuscripts is called Ambivius in Innocent's rescript, and is noted in the Conference of Carthage, c. 133, as bishop of Pisita. But in Quesnel, as in the Pith. and Colb. manuscripts and those of the Isidorian collection, he is called Avivius, and in Merlin and Crabbe, as in the Roman edition, Avinius. 564BAMBIVIUS, FELIX, DONATIANUS, ADEODATUS, OCTAVIUS, SEROTINUS, In one manuscript, Majorianus. Then the Roman edition, after Merlin, Porturianus; next, the same edition, Trispulus; Merlin and Crabbe, with the manuscripts of the Isidorian collection, Crispotis. In the Conference of Carthage, c. 123, Posthumianus, bishop of the people of Tagora; and, c. 128, Crispulus, bishop of the church of Volita are mentioned. MAJORINUS, POSTHUMIANUS, CRISPULUS, VICTOR, another VICTOR, The Navar. manuscript of the Isidorian collection: Leucianus. Two Colb. and the Corb., as in Merlin, Leutius. Another Colb., Lucius, with the Conference of Carthage favouring it; the Vatic., Leontius; the Germ., Eleutius. Next, the Roman edition Macinus, Merlin Marinus, Crabbe Marinianus. In the Conference of Carthage two bishops are read who were called by the name of Mariani. LEUCIUS, MACIANUS, FRUCTUOSUS, FAUSTINIANUS, QUODVULTDEUS, CANDORIUS, MAXIMUS, Quesnel and two Colb. manuscripts: Magerius; another Colb., Magarus; Pith., Megarius; the Capuchin codex of the Isidorian collection, Magorus; Merlin, Crabbe and the Roman edition, Magarius. From the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts, and also from the edition of Augustine, we restore Megasius. MEGASIUS, RUSTICUS, So the manuscripts, except that in one Colbert, as in Quesnel, Rufianus. But Crabbe and the Roman edition: Sufinianus. RUFINIANUS, None of our manuscripts supports the conjecture of Garnier, by which he thinks Proculianus should be read. Next, from the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts and the new edition of Augustine, the name of Severus is supplied, which is lacking in the other manuscripts and printed books. PROCULUS, SEVERUS, THOMAS, JANUARIUS, OCTAVIANUS, PRAETEXTATUS, SIXTUS, QUODVULTDEUS, PENTADIUS, In one manuscript, as in Quesnel, item is set first here: which is absent in five others, as in the edition of Augustine. In the Roman edition, Crabbe and Merlin, Quodvultdeus is lacking here. Indeed the same name is omitted before too in the manuscripts of the Isidorian collection. QUODVULTDEUS, CYPRIANUS, SERVILIUS, So in Augustine, as in the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts. But in the other books, Pelagius. PELAGIANUS, MARCELLUS, VENANTIUS, DIDYMUS, SATURNINUS, One Colb. manuscript: Bazathinus; another, from the Vatican: Bizatenus; two other Colb. and Pith., with the Roman edition and Quesnel: Bazacenus; Merlin and Crabbe: Bazecenus; the Isidorian collection: Batecenus. We follow the edition of Augustine, which agrees with the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts. BIZACENUS, GERMANUS, GERMANIANUS, In Augustine, Inventius. In the Roman edition, Quesnel, Crabbe and Merlin, as in the Pith. manuscript, Juventius. The Isidorian collection, Viventius. In other manuscripts, Invenitus. INVENITUS, MAJORINUS, The printed editions and the manuscripts just mentioned, with which the Isidorian collection now agrees, keep Inventius or Juventius here too, to which word Quesnel prefixed item. Here indeed the Corb. codex shows Juventinitus, but in the rescript it keeps the name Inveniti, which two Colb. and the Germ. also show here. INVENITUS, CANDIDUS, CYPRIANUS, AEMILIANUS, ROMANUS, AFRICANUS, and MARCELLINUS, et caeteri was first added here in the edition of Augustine, on the authority of the Corb. and Germ. codices. and the rest of us who were present at the council of the Church of Carthage.

564CWhen, according to custom It was their custom to assemble at Carthage about the month of June or about autumn. But they did not constantly assemble in the same months. Therefore that ex more refers rather to the place than to the time., we had solemnly come to the Church of Carthage, and a synod assembled 565Afrom among us was being held for various causes, our fellow presbyter Orosius gave us letters of our holy brethren and fellow priests In the manuscripts of the Isidorian collection, Nerotis, or Anerotis. In the editions of the Councils, Averothis. Heros was bishop of Arles, and Lazarus of Aix. Both, driven from their sees, when they had come into Palestine, presented a libellus against Pelagius and Coelestius to Eulogius of Caesarea; by whose authority the synod of Diospolis was afterwards assembled in the year 415. But the letters of those bishops mentioned here have perished. Heros and Lazarus, whose text we have decided should be subjoined to these. These having been read, then, we perceived that Pelagius and Coelestius were The word argui, which was formerly lacking, we supply with the edition of Augustine from the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts. From there too, as also from the Pith. manuscript, we have restored anathemandi in place of anathematizandi. charged as the authors of an error altogether wicked and to be anathematized by all of us. Whence it came about that we asked that there be reviewed what had been debated about the name of Coelestius here, at the Church of Carthage, almost five years before. When this had been read out, as thy holiness will be able to observe from the The Roman edition, ex subsequentibus. More fittingly the other books, ex subditis. Those episcopal acts, which had been subjoined to this letter, have perished, except the extracts which M. Mercator takes from them at the beginning of the Commonitorium against the Pelagians, and those which Augustine copies out of them, both in book II On Original Sin, c. 3 and 4, and in the book On the Proceedings of Pelagius, cap. 11. Moreover, they are touched upon by the same Doctor in Epistle 157, to Hilary, n. 22. subjoined documents, although the judgment was manifestly established by which at that time this so great wound seemed to have been cut out of the Church by episcopal judgment; nevertheless we decided this by common deliberation: that the authors of such a persuasion, although 565Bthe same Coelestius is said to have afterwards come to the presbyterate too, unless they most openly anathematize these things, must themselves be anathematized; so that, if their own health cannot be procured, at least that of those who have been deceived by them, or can be deceived, may be procured, once the sentence passed against them is known. This proceeding, therefore, lord brother, we have thought should be made known to thy holy charity, so that to the statutes of our mediocrity the authority of the apostolic see may also be applied, for protecting the salvation of many, and for correcting also the perversity of some.

For these men aim at this by their damnable disputations: that, not by defending free will, but rather by exalting it into sacrilegious pride, they leave no room for the grace of God by which we are Christians, by which too the very choice of our will is made truly free, 565Cwhile it is freed from the dominion of carnal concupiscences, as the Lord says: If the Son shall have made you free, then you shall be truly free (Joan. VIII, 36). This sentence, Quod auxilium fides impetrat quae est in Christo J. D. N., is omitted in the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts. Which help faith obtains, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. But these men assert, as we have learned from brethren who have also read their books, that the grace of God is to be reckoned in this: that he established and created such a nature of man as could fulfil the law of God by its own will, whether 566Athe law written naturally in the heart, or that given in letters. That this same law also belongs to grace, because God gave it to men for their help. But that grace by which, as has been said, we are Christians, of which the Apostle is the preacher when he says, For I am delighted with the law of God according to the inward man; but I see another law in my members fighting against the law of my mind, and making me captive The Roman edition and that of the Councils, with the Isidorian collection, and also two Colb. manuscripts and Pith.: in lege. under the law of sin, which is in my members. Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom. VII, 22 seqq.), they are altogether unwilling to acknowledge, nor indeed do they dare to attack it openly (I Cor. II, 14).

But what else are they doing, when they do not cease to persuade 566Banimal men, who do not perceive the things that are of the spirit of God, that for working and perfecting justice, and for fulfilling the commandments of God, human nature alone can suffice them? not attending to what is written, The Spirit helps our infirmity (Rom. VIII, 26); and, It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy (Rom. IX, 16); and that we are one body in Christ Jesus, and each of us members one of another, having different gifts according to the grace which is given to us (Rom. XII, V); and, By the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace in me was not void, but I laboured more than all of them: yet not I, but the grace of God with me (I Cor. XV, 10); and, Thanks be to God, who has given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ (Ibid., 57); and, Not that we are sufficient to think anything as of ourselves, but our sufficiency 566Cis from God (II Cor. III, 5); and, We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be of God, and not of us (Ibid. IV, 7); and innumerable things, for which, if we wished to collect them from all the Scriptures, In Augustine, as in the Corb. and Germ. manuscripts, tempus. With the other books we keep tomus; by which word a synodical letter is usually signified among the ancients. And indeed in that sense Athanasius entitled the letter of the synod of Alexandria the tome to the Antiochenes: and the council of Constantinople, in epist. 13, to Damasus, n. 4, called the letter of the council of Antioch τόμον. The synodical letter 4 of Damasus himself is designated by the name of tome by the same council of Constantinople, can. 5. The use of this word in the same sense is more frequent in the council of Chalcedon, for instance in Labbe's edition, vol. IV, p. 187 d, 264 d, 491 e. Commonly too the celebrated letter of Leo to Flavian is called the tome. Sometimes also tome signifies the Compendium of a longer discourse, and in that sense it is taken in the preface of the eighth council of Toledo: literally, however, it is the same as sectio. As regards the Africans, they seem to mean nothing else here than that they would exceed the measure of an ordinary letter if they were to collect all the testimonies that serve their purpose. a tome does not suffice. And we fear lest, by recalling before thee these very things The Roman edition and that of the Councils, after Crabbe: qui majore. More fittingly the other books: quae majore. which thou preachest with greater grace from the apostolic see, we should seem to act unfittingly. But we do so because, in proportion as, being weaker, each of us everywhere in preaching the word of God 567Ais thought the more attentive, the more often and the more boldly we suffer them rising up against us.

If, then, Pelagius should have seemed to thy veneration also to have been justly acquitted by the episcopal proceedings ( of the synod of Diospolis ) which are said to have been drawn up in the East; yet the error itself and the impiety, which already has many assertors scattered through various places, must be anathematized by the authority of the apostolic see as well. For let thy holiness consider, and suffer with us with pastoral bowels, how pestilent and deadly it is to the sheep of Christ, what follows necessarily from the sacrilegious disputations of these men: that we ought not even to pray that we enter not into temptation, which the Lord both admonished his disciples and placed in the prayer which he taught (Matth. VI, 13): or that our faith fail not, which he himself testified that he had asked for the apostle 567BPeter (Luc. XXII, 32). For if these things are placed in our power by the possibility of nature and the choice of the will, who does not see that they are asked of the Lord in vain, and prayed for deceitfully, when by praying things are sought which are obtained by the sufficient powers of a nature already so created: and that the Lord Jesus ought not to have said, Watch and pray (Matth. XXIV, 41); but only, Watch, that you enter not into temptation: nor to the most blessed Peter, first of the Apostles: I have prayed for thee, but, I admonish thee, or I command and enjoin, that thy faith fail not (Lucae XXII, 32)? Our blessings too are contradicted by the contention of these men, so that we seem to say over the people in vain whatever we pray the Lord for on their behalf, that by living rightly and piously they may please him; or those things which the Apostle prays for on behalf of the faithful, 567Csaying: I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom all paternity in heaven and on earth is named, that he may grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with power through his Spirit (Ephes. III, 14). If then, in blessing, we wish to say over the people: Grant it, O Lord, to be strengthened with power through thy Spirit: the disputation of these men contradicts us, affirming that free will is denied if that is asked of God which is in our power. For if we wish, they say, to be strengthened with power, we can be, by that possibility of nature which we do not receive now, but received when we were created.

They deny too that little ones are to be baptized for the salvation which is given through Christ the Saviour; and so by this deadly doctrine they slay them for eternity, promising 568Athat even if they are not baptized they will have eternal life, and that they do not belong to those of whom the Lord says, For the son of man came to seek and to save that which had perished (Luc. XIX, 10): because these, they say, had not perished, nor is there anything in them to be saved, or to be redeemed at so great a price; because nothing in them is corrupted, nothing is held captive under the power of the devil, nor was The Pith. manuscript: fusus esset; the Isidorian collection and also the Roman edition and that of the Councils: fusus esse, omitting next qui fusus: they are restored from the manuscripts of better repute. And the blood of Christ, to be shed for the remission of sins, is read in Matt. xxvi, 28. the blood shed for them, which is read to have been shed for the remission of sins. Although Coelestius has already confessed in his libellus, in the church of Carthage, that through the baptism of Christ the redemption of little ones too In the Roman edition, as in Merlin, dicunt is wrongly added here. Augustine, epist. 157, n. 22, speaks of this very thing concerning Coelestius thus: He was compelled to confess, on account of the little ones to be baptized, that redemption is necessary for them also. Where, he says, although he was unwilling to say anything more expressly about original sin, yet by the very name of redemption he committed himself not a little. takes place. But many who are said to be or to have been their disciples do not cease to affirm these evils, by which they try to overturn the foundations of the Christian faith, in whatever way they can The Roman edition and that of the Councils: possunt astutia. We remove the word astutia on the authority of all the manuscripts.. 568B

Wherefore, even if Pelagius and Coelestius have been corrected, or say that they never held these things, and deny that whatever writings have been brought forward against them are theirs, and there is no way by which they may be convicted of lying: yet in general, whoever dogmatizes and affirms that human nature can suffice for itself for In the Corb. manuscript, by the first hand, ad nitenda, and by a second correction, ad vitanda: which also stands in the Germ. and was preferred in the edition of Augustine. We keep, however, vincenda, both on the authority of more manuscripts, and because below, epist. 28, n. 13, the five bishops write again that Pelagius defends the possibility of nature for conquering sins and fulfilling the commandments. Wherefore in the synod of Diospolis too he had been compelled to confess that when we fight against temptations and unlawful concupiscences, the VICTORY comes not from our own will but from the help of God. conquering sins and doing the commandments of God, and in that way is found an adversary of the grace of God, which is declared more evidently by the prayers of the saints: and whoever denies that little ones are freed from perdition through the baptism of Christ and receive everlasting salvation, let him be anathema. As for whatever else is objected to them, we do not doubt that thy veneration, when it has looked through the episcopal proceedings ( of the synod of Palestine ) which are said to have been drawn up in the East in the same cause, will so judge 568Cthat we may all rejoice in the mercy of God. Pray for us, most blessed lord pope.

That he may restrain as soon as possible by his authority the pernicious heresy of the enemies of the grace of Christ.

To the most blessed lord, rightly to be venerated and to be honoured in Christ, Pope INNOCENT, SILVANUS In the Roman edition and that of Augustine senex is lacking: which word is expressed in all our manuscripts. The same Silvanus signs in Augustine, both at the end of epistle 128 as senex of the church of Summa, and at the end of epistle 129 as of the first see of the province of Numidia. Moreover, among the Africans senex is the same as primas: because among them the primacy was accorded to him who was senior by ordination. the senior, VALENTINUS, AURELIUS, DONATUS, RESTITUTUS, LUCIANUS, ALYPIUS, AUGUSTINE, PLACENTIUS, SEVERUS, FORTUNATUS, POSSIDIUS, NOVATUS, SECUNDUS, MAURENTIUS, LEO, FAUSTINIANUS, CRESCONIUS, MALCHUS, Merlin and Crabbe, with one manuscript: Lictorius. The other editions of the Councils, after the Roman: Victorius. The other books: Litorius or Littorius. In the Conference of Carthage, c. 133, Litorius, bishop of Suava is named. LITTORIUS, FORTUNATUS, DONATUS, 569A The Pith. manuscript and one Colb.: Ponticianus. Two others, with Merlin, Crabbe and Quesnel: Pontianus. PONTICANUS, SATURNINUS, In the Roman edition and that of Augustine: Christonius. In the other editions, as in all our manuscripts: Cresconius. That the name of Cresconius, or Crisconius, was familiar to the Africans is witnessed by the Conference of Carthage, at which several bishops of different sees are read to have been present who bore that same name. CRESCONIUS, HONORIUS, LUCIUS, ADEODATUS, PROCESSUS, CRESCONIUS, SECUNDUS, FELIX, ASIATICUS, Five of our manuscripts, with Merlin, Crabbe and Quesnel: Rufinus. RUFINIANUS, FAUSTINUS, SERVUS, TERENTIUS, CRESCONIUS, SPERANTIUS, QUADRATUS, LUCILLUS, SABINUS, Sabinus again, in place of Faustinus, is repeated in Quesnel, Labbe, Crabbe and Merlin, as in the exemplars of the Isidorian collection, the better manuscripts resisting. FAUSTINUS, CRESCONIUS, VICTOR, In Augustine, Gignantius. But the names of this bishop and of the nine following are passed over in the editions of the Councils, because of the repetition of the word Victor, by a common slip of copyists. GIGANTIUS, POSSIDONIUS, ANTONINUS, The manuscripts of the Isidorian collection, and also two other Colb. with Pith.: Innocentius, Felix, the names of Praesidius and Crescentius being omitted. INNOCENTIUS, PRAESIDIUS, CRESCENTIUS, FELIX, ANTONINUS, VICTOR, HONORATUS, DONATUS, PETRUS, PRAESIDIUS, CRESCONIUS, LAMPADIUS, DELPHINUS, from the council of Milevis, greeting in the Lord.

Since the Lord, by a special gift of his grace, has placed thee in the apostolic see, and has granted thee to our times as such a one that it would rather count against us as a fault of negligence if we kept silent before thy veneration about what must be suggested on behalf of 569Bthe Church, than that thou couldst receive it either disdainfully or negligently; we beseech thee to deign to apply pastoral diligence to the great dangers of the weak members of Christ.

For a new and exceedingly pernicious heresy Garnier recalled from the old editions of Augustine: perniciosa tempestas inimicorum gratiae coepit, the other printed editions and all the manuscripts resisting. is trying to rise up, that of the enemies of the grace of Christ, who by impious disputations are trying to take away from us even the Lord's Prayer. For whereas the Lord taught us to say, Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors (Matth. VI, 12): these men say that a man can in this life, once the precepts of God are known, attain to so great a perfection of justice without the help of the grace of the Saviour, through the sole choice of free will, that it is no longer necessary for him to say, Forgive us our debts: and that what 569Cfollows, Do not bring us into temptation (Ibid., 13), is not to be understood as though we ought to ask for divine help, lest, being tempted, we fall into sin; but that this is placed in our power, and that for fulfilling it the will of man alone suffices: as though the Apostle had said in vain, 570AIt is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy (Rom. IX, 16); and, God is faithful, who does not permit you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but will make with the temptation also a way out, that you may be able to bear it (I Cor. X, 13). In vain too would the Lord have said to the apostle Peter, I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not (Lucae XXII, 32); and to all his own, Watch and pray, that you enter not into temptation (Matth. XXIV, 41): if this whole thing lies in human power. Little children too, The Roman edition and that of the Councils: si nullis, which the manuscripts support. Next, in Garnier and Augustine, innoventur. The reading etsi nullis is favoured by that of the preceding letter, n. 5: promising that EVEN IF they are not baptized, they will have eternal life. From this too it is plain that baptism is here called the sacraments of Christian grace. even if they are imbued with no sacraments of Christian grace, will have eternal life: so they contend, with a presumption In place of nequaquam, Garnier substituted nequam: which passed from there into the edition of Augustine. The ambiguity will be removed if you read praesumptione nequaquam Christiana. by no means Christian, making void what the Apostle says, By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so it passed into all men, in whom all have sinned (Rom. V, 12); and in another place, as in 570BAdam all die, so in Christ all shall be made alive (I Cor. XV, 22). To omit, then, the other things, very many, which they argue against the holy Scriptures, there are meanwhile these two, by which they try to overturn entirely all that we are as Christians, and which faithful hearts Garnier: non sustinent, adding a negative particle against the faith of the old codices and without necessity. might endure: that God is not to be asked to be our helper against the evil of sin and for working justice, and that the sacrament of Christian grace does not aid little ones to attain eternal life.

Suggesting these things to thy apostolic breast, we have no need to say much, and to magnify so great an impiety with words; since beyond doubt these things move thee In Quesnel and Augustine: te ita permoveant. so that, as to correcting them, lest they spread more widely and defile many, or rather destroy them, while under the name of Christ they estrange them entirely from the grace of Christ, 570Cthou canst in no way hold back. The authors of this most pernicious error are said to be Pelagius and Coelestius, whom indeed we would rather have healed in the Church than cut off from the Church with their salvation despaired of, if no necessity compels. Of whom one, that is Coelestius, has come even to the presbyterate in Asia Mar. Mercator, Commonitorium c. 1, Baluze's edition p. 133, relates the matter thus: Coelestius, accused on six chapters in the council of Carthage and ordered to condemn them, but in no way acquiescing, was deprived of ecclesiastical communion. From which sentence he thought an appeal should be made to the examination of the bishop of Rome: but soon, neglecting that same appeal, he made for Ephesus, a city of Asia, and there dared by stealth to seek the place of the presbyterate. Earlier, about the end of the year 411, as Augustine testifies, epist. 157, n. 22, when he was settled at Carthage, he had already begun to creep up to the honour of the presbyterate in the church of that same city: but through the most faithful freedom of the brethren, on account of these very disputations against the grace of Christ, he was brought as far as episcopal judgment. There is extant a letter of Nestorius to him in Mar. Mercator, p. 131, inscribed to the honourable and most religious presbyter Coelestius., 571Ait is said. What was done about him a few years ago, thy holiness is Namely because the Church, or synod, of Carthage had subjoined to the preceding Epistle 26 the acts of another council held at Carthage about the name of Coelestius almost five years before. Since both this letter of the council of Milevis and that of Carthage, carried by the same bishop Julius, were delivered to Innocent together, there was no need for Garnier to substitute of his own melius instruetur for melius instruitur. better instructed from the church of Carthage. But Pelagius, as letters sent by certain of our brethren say, being settled at Jerusalem, is asserted to be deceiving some. Yet many more, who have been able to investigate his meaning more diligently, fight against him for the grace of Christ and the truth of the catholic faith, but especially thy holy son, our brother and fellow presbyter Jerome. But we judge that, with the help of the mercy of the Lord our God, who deigns One manuscript: dignabitur. Into the new edition of Augustine dignetur crept, through the sheer carelessness of a copyist. both to guide thee when thou consultest and to hear thee when thou prayest, those who hold such perverse and pernicious opinions will more easily yield to the authority of thy holiness, The manuscripts of the Isidorian collection: de clarum (through the unskilfulness of a copyist, who had read in his exemplar de scarum, that is, de sanctarum). The Capuchin codex, by a second correction: declaratione sacrarum) Scripturarum depromptae. From this, in the Roman edition and that of the Councils, it had become de claro Scripturarum lumine depromptae. The better manuscripts supply the sounder reading. Here the fathers of the council of Milevis declare that the authority of the Roman pontiff is supported by the very authority of the Scriptures. drawn from the authority of the holy Scriptures; so that we may rather rejoice together over their 571Bcorrection than be saddened by their destruction, most blessed lord. But whatever they themselves choose, thy venerableness certainly sees that provision must be made urgently and speedily at least for others, very many of whom they can entangle in their snares if they are left unregarded. We have sent these writings to thy holiness from the council of Numidia, imitating The Roman edition and Garnier omit Carthaginensem ecclesiam, et: which words are restored from the other books. the church of Carthage and our fellow bishops of the province of Carthage, who, we have learned, have written on this cause to the apostolic see, which thou, blessed one, makest illustrious. ( And in another hand: ) Mindful of us, mayest thou increase in the grace of God, most blessed lord, rightly venerable and to be honoured in Christ, holy pope.

To the most blessed lord, and brother rightly most to be honoured, Pope INNOCENT, AURELIUS, ALYPIUS, AUGUSTINE, EVODIUS, and POSSIDIUS, greeting in the Lord.

From the two councils, of the province of Carthage and of Numidia, we have sent to thy holiness letters subscribed by no small number of bishops, against the enemies of the grace of Christ, who trust in their own strength, and in a certain manner say to our creator: Thou hast made us men, but we have made ourselves just; who call human nature free for this reason, that they may not seek a liberator; and sound for this reason, that they may judge 572Ba saviour superfluous. For they say it is so strong that, with its powers received once for all in the origin of its creation, it can through free will, with the grace of him who created it giving no further help, tame and extinguish all desires, and overcome temptations. And many of them rise up against us and say to our soul: There is no salvation for him in his God (Psal. III, 3). The household of Christ, which says, When I am weak, then One Colb. codex: tunc fortior sum: which it also seems to have had at first. am I strong (II Cor. XII, 10); and to which its Lord says, I am thy salvation (Psal. XXXIV, 3), awaits with anxious heart, in fear and trembling, the help of the Lord, through the charity of thy veneration also.

For we have heard that there are in the city of Rome, where he (Pelagius) lived a long time, some who for various reasons 572Cfavour him: some, namely, because So Quesnel, from the Oxford manuscript, and from there the new edition of Augustine: with which agrees what Innocent writes back. But Merlin and Crabbe: qui nobis talia persuasisse perhibentur: where Crabbe added in the margin, qui vos and quia vos. From there the Roman edition and the other editions of the Councils: quia vos talia persuasisse perhibent. The manuscripts show similar readings, except that for perhibent most have perhibentur, and one Colb. and another from the Vatican perhibetur. In the latter there is read besides quia vobis. From which this reading could conveniently be put together: quia vobis talia persuasisse perhibetur. The Pelagians, namely, as Possidius testifies, c. 18, tried through their own ambition to persuade the holy see of their perfidy. And what they could not accomplish, they boasted falsely that they had accomplished. Among those, moreover, whom they boasted they had persuaded of their depraved dogmas at Rome, the chief was Xystus, then a presbyter and afterwards supreme pontiff, whom, after the calumny had been exposed, Augustine, epist. otherwise 101, now 191, n. 1, congratulates thus: For what can be read or heard more welcome than so pure a defence of grace against its enemies, from the mouth of him who was boasted to be a patron of great weight to those same enemies? See also his epistle 194, n. 1. he is said to have persuaded them of such things; but more, who do not believe that he holds such things; especially because ecclesiastical proceedings are boasted to have been held in the East, where he lives, by which he is thought to have been cleared; where indeed, if the bishops pronounced him catholic, it must be believed to have been done for no other reason than that he said he confessed the grace of God, 573Aand that man can live justly by his own labour and will in such a way that he did not deny that he is helped to this by the grace of God. For when these words were heard, the catholic prelates could understand no other grace of God than that which they were accustomed to read in the books of God and to preach to the peoples of God, that namely of which the Apostle says, I do not make void the grace of God; for if justice is through the Law, then Christ died in vain (Galat. II, 21): without doubt the grace by which we are justified from iniquity, and by which we are saved from infirmity; not that by which we were created with our own will. For if those bishops had understood that he meant that grace which we have even in common with the impious, with whom we are men, but denied that by which we are Christians and sons of God: which of the catholic priests, we do not 573Bsay, would hear him patiently, but Two Colb. manuscripts: tantum ante oculos: with a certain greater emphasis. How Pelagius confessed the grace of God in the synod mentioned, Augustine sets out in the book On the Proceedings of Pelagius himself, c. 6 and 7, and presently, cap. 10, explains how he detected that he had confessed the grace of God there deceitfully. would bear him before his eyes? Wherefore the judges are not to be blamed, because they heard the name of grace according to ecclesiastical custom, not knowing what men of this kind are accustomed to scatter either in the books of their teaching or in the ears of their own followers.

It is not a question of Pelagius alone, who perhaps has already been corrected, and would that it were so! but of so many, by whom, as they contend talkatively, and drag weak and untaught souls as though bound together Merlin: conjunctas. The Roman edition and the more recent editions of the Councils, and Garnier: convictas. The new edition of Augustine: vinctas. We prefer, with Crabbe and the better manuscripts, convinctas, as though bound together. devinctas would not displease, because of what Innocent writes back in epist. 31, n. 2: If then there are any whom so great a perversity has bound fast in its defence. And indeed nearer to this word comes what we read in the copies of the Isidorian collection, pervinctas., and weary the firm and those stable in the faith by the very contention, all things are now full everywhere. Either, then, he must be summoned to Rome by thy veneration, and diligently questioned what grace he means, by which he confesses, if indeed he now confesses it, that men are helped not to sin and to live justly: 573Cor this very thing must be dealt with him by letter. And when he has been found to mean that grace which the ecclesiastical and apostolic truth teaches, then he is to be absolved without any scruple of the Church, without the hiding place of any ambiguity; then in truth we must rejoice over his clearing.

For whether he has said that grace is free will, or that grace is the remission of sins, or that grace is the precept of the law; he says none of those things which belong, through the supply of the Holy Spirit, to conquering concupiscence and temptations, 574Athe Spirit whom he who ascended into heaven, and, leading captivity captive, gave gifts to men, poured out most richly upon us (Tit. III, 6). For hence we pray that we may be able to overcome the temptation of sins (Ephes. IV, 8), that the Spirit of God, of whom we have received the pledge, may help our infirmity (Rom. VIII, 26). But he who prays and says, Do not bring us into temptation (Matth. VI, 13), certainly does not pray for this, that he may be a man, which is nature; nor does he pray for this, that he may have free will, which he already received when nature itself was created; nor does he pray for the remission of sins, because this is said above, Forgive us our debts (Matth. VI, 12); nor does he pray that he may receive the commandment; but plainly he prays that he may do the commandment. For if he has been brought into temptation, that is, has failed in temptation, he certainly commits a sin 574Bwhich is against the commandment. He prays, therefore, that he may not sin, that is, that he may do nothing evil: which the Apostle prays for on behalf of the Corinthians, saying: And we pray to the Lord that you do nothing evil (II Cor. XIII, 7). Whence it appears clearly enough that for not sinning, that is, for not doing evil, although it is not doubted that there is a choice of the will, In the Roman edition and that of the Councils liberum is added here, superfluously and against the faith of the manuscripts. What the bishops a little above call liberum arbitrium, without adding the word voluntatis, they now call arbitrium voluntatis, without prefixing the epithet liberum. Hence also at the beginning of num. 5 they say: Nor would the law command, unless there were will; nor would grace help, if will were enough, now making mention of will alone. yet its power does not suffice unless infirmity is helped. Prayer itself, therefore, is the clearest testimony of grace. Let him confess this, and we shall rejoice in him whether he is upright or corrected.

Law and grace are to be distinguished. The law knows how to command, grace how to help. Nor would the law command, unless there were will: nor would grace help, if will were enough. We are commanded to have understanding, where it is said, Be not like the horse and the mule, which have no understanding (Psal. 574CXXXI, 9); and yet we pray that we may have understanding, where it is said, Give me understanding, that I may learn thy commandments (Psal. CXVIII, 125). We are commanded to have wisdom, where it is said, You fools, be wise at last (Psal. XCIII, 8); and yet it is prayed that we may have wisdom, where it is said, But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all abundantly and does not upbraid; and it shall be given him (Jacob. I, 5). We are commanded to have continence, where it is said, So Merlin, Crabbe, Garnier and our manuscripts. Yet it is manifest that something is lacking here. Wherefore the Roman editor added this within brackets, in another type: ［Something of this kind is lacking here: Let your loins be girded: and yet we pray that it be given us, where it is said.］ Which was afterwards retained in certain other editions as well. In place of this addition Quesnel substituted: Turn away from thy pleasures, and yet it is prayed that we may have continence, where it is said. Neither supplement satisfies. But how this place is to be mended may be fished out from another like passage of Augustine. That Doctor, epist. 147, to Hilary, n. 9, treating the same argument, writes thus: When the Law says, Thou shalt not covet, what else does it seem to command but continence from unlawful desires?... and yet it is prayed that we may have continence, where it is said, When I knew that no one can be continent, etc. And presently he concludes: God therefore commands continence, and gives continence. According to the mind of Augustine, then, our passage will be made whole if we restore: We are commanded to have continence, where it is said, Thou shalt not covet: and yet it is prayed that we may have continence, where it is said, When I knew, etc. The close repetition of the same words, a fruitful crop of lacunae, gave occasion to this. When I knew that no one can be continent unless God grant it, and 575Athis very thing was a part of wisdom, to know whose gift this was: I went to the Lord, and besought him (Sap. VIII, 21). Finally, lest it be too long to run through everything, we are commanded not to do evil, where it is said, Turn away from evil (Psal. XXXVI, 27); and yet it is prayed that we may not do evil where it is said: And we pray to the Lord that you do nothing evil (II Cor. XIII, 7). We are commanded to do good, where it is said, Turn away from evil and do good (Psal. XXXVI, 27); and yet it is prayed that we may do good, where it is said, We do not cease praying and asking for you (Coloss. I, 9), and among the other things which he prays for them he says: That you may walk worthily of God, unto all pleasing, in every good work and word (Ibid., 10). As, then, we acknowledge the will when these things are commanded; so let him too acknowledge grace 575Bwhen they are asked for.

We have sent to thy reverence a book which certain religious and honourable young men, servants of God, gave us, whose names too we do not keep silent; for they are called Timasius and Jacobus. Who, as we have heard, and as thou too deignest to know, at the exhortation of Pelagius himself abandoned the hope which they had in the world, and now serve God in continence. When at length, through our efforts such as they were, by the Lord's inspiration, they had been freed from that same error, they brought forward the same book, saying that it was Pelagius's, and earnestly asked that it be answered. It was done: the answer itself was written back to them ( Augustine's book On Nature and Grace ); they wrote back giving thanks (Epist. apud Augustin. nunc 168). We have sent both, 575Cboth that to which the answer was made and the answer that was made. And lest we should be too burdensome, we have made marks at those places which we ask thee not to be loath to look at, how, when the question was put to him that he denied the grace of God, he answered in such a way as to say that it was nothing but the nature in which God created us.

But if he denies that this book is his, or those same places in the book, we do not contend: let him anathematize them, and confess most openly that grace which Christian doctrine demonstrates and preaches to be proper to Christians, which is not nature, but that by which nature is saved: So this passage was restored in the newest edition of Augustine from a Vatican manuscript, which two Colb. also favour. But in the other books, Merlin's edition excepted, quae naturam... fovet is lacking. Of those three words Quesnel kept only the first. Then in the same books, and also in Merlin's edition, sicut plantatur quodammodo et irrigatur, except that Quesnel struck out the particle sicut. which fosters nature not by teaching sounding in the ears, or by some visible aid, as a planter, in a certain manner, and a waterer from without, but by the supply of the Spirit and by hidden mercy, 575Das he does who gives the increase, God (I Cor. III, 7). For although, by a reckoning not to be disapproved, that is called the grace of God by which we were created, so that 576Awe should not be nothing, nor be something in such a way as a corpse which does not live, or a tree which does not feel, or a beast which does not understand; but men, who should both be, and live, and feel, and understand; and might be able The Roman edition: agere debeamus: it is corrected from the other books. to give thanks to our creator for so great a benefit; whence this too can rightly be called grace, because it was given not for the merits of any preceding works, but by the gratuitous goodness of God: yet there is another, by which, predestined, we are called, justified, glorified, so that we can say: If God is for us, who is against us? He who spared not his own son, but delivered him up for us all (Rom. VIII, 3).

It was about this grace that the question turned, when it was said to Pelagius by those whom he was gravely offending and troubling, that he was attacking it in his disputations, 576Bin which he asserted that human nature is sufficient to itself through free choice, not only for doing but even for perfecting the divine commandments. It is this grace that the apostolic doctrine In Merlin, Crabbe and the edition of Augustine, non immerito is added here. calls by that name, by which we are saved and justified by the faith of Christ. Of this it is written: I do not make void the grace of God. For if justice is through the Law, then Christ died in vain (Galat. II, 21). Of this it is written, You are made void of Christ, you who are justified in the Law; you are fallen from grace (Galat. V, 4). Of this it is written, But if by grace, it is not now of works; otherwise grace is no more grace (Rom. XI, 6). Of this it is written, Now to him that works, the reward is not reckoned according to grace, but according to debt: but to him that works not, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, 576Chis faith is reckoned unto justice (Rom. IV, 4). And many other things, which thou thyself canst better remember, and understand more wisely, and preach more illustriously. But that grace by which we were created men, even though we understand, not undeservedly, that it may be so called, it is nevertheless a wonder if we read it so called in any writings of the Law, the Prophets, the Gospels or the Apostles.

When therefore the question was put to him concerning this grace, best known to faithful and catholic Christians, that he should cease to attack it, what is it that, when he himself in his own book had put this objection to himself as from an opposing person, so that he might clear himself by answering, he answered nothing else than that the nature Quesnel alone: naturam creati referri ad gratiam creatoris. This referre means to display and represent in itself. Augustine, in the book On Nature and Grace, c. 51, copies out and reports Pelagius's very words in this manner: The very possibility of not sinning lies not so much in the power of choice as in the necessity of nature. Whatever is placed in the necessity of nature is without doubt held to belong to the author of nature, namely God. How then is that thought to be said to be without the grace of God which is shown to belong properly to God? There, says Augustine at once, the opinion that lay hidden was expressed. He attributes the possibility of not sinning to the grace of God for this reason, that God is the author of that nature in which he says the possibility of not sinning is inseparably implanted. of created man displays the grace of the creator; and that he thus says that justice can be fulfilled without sin through free choice 576Dwith the help of divine grace, because God gave this to man by the very possibility of nature?

To whom it is deservedly answered: Then is made void 577Athe stumbling-block of the cross (Galat. V, 11). Then Christ died in vain (Rom. IV, 25). The Roman edition and the Councils: Non enim. Next, Merlin and Crabbe: nec ascendisset in altum et captivans; the Roman edition and Labbe: nec ascendens in altum, captivans. For if he had not died for our sins and risen again for our justification, nor ascended on high and, leading captivity captive, given gifts to men, would that possibility of nature which he defends not be in men (Eph. IV, 8; Psal. LXVII, 19)? Or was the commandment of God perhaps lacking, and was it for that reason that Christ died? Nay, this too already existed, holy and just and good (Rom. VII, 12). It had already been said, Thou shalt not covet (Exod. XX, 17); it had already been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself (Levit. XIX, 18). In which saying the Apostle says that the whole law is fulfilled (Rom. XIII, 9). And since no one loves himself unless he loves God, therefore the Lord says that on these two commandments 577Bhang the whole law and the Prophets (Matth. XXII, 40). These two commandments had already been divinely given to men. Or had the eternal reward of justice not yet been promised? He himself does not say this, who has set down in his writings that the kingdom of heaven was promised even in the Old Testament. If then there already existed, for doing and perfecting justice, the possibility of nature through free choice, there already existed the holy and just and good commandment of the law of God, there already existed the everlasting reward promised: then Christ died in vain.

Therefore justice is neither through the law, nor through the possibility of nature; but from faith and the gift of God through Jesus Christ our Lord, the one mediator of God and men. Who, had he not in the fullness of time 577Cdied for our sins, and risen again for our justification (Rom. IV, 25), assuredly both the faith of the ancients would be made void, and ours. And faith being made void, what justice would remain to man, since the just man lives by faith (Heb. X, 38; Rom. I, 17)? For since by one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned (Rom. V, 12): beyond doubt, from the body of this death, where another law fights against the law of the mind (Rom. VII, 21 et 24), no one has been delivered or is delivered by In some manuscripts, faultily: suae possibilitas. Hence occasion was given to a copyist, in a second revision, in the Navarre manuscript and perhaps in others, to add naturae. Whence in the printed editions too, except the Augustine edition, suae possibilitas naturae prevailed. Below, in the 29th epistle of Innocent, n. 3, we shall read quasi ex nostra in totum simus possibilitate (the word naturae not being added) perfecti. See below, epist. 30, n. 4. his own possibility, which, being lost, needs a redeemer; being wounded, a saviour: but by the grace of God through faith in the one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus (I Tim. II, 5); who, since he was also God, made man, and remaining 577DGod, having been made man, himself remade what he made.

But I think it escapes him that the faith of Christ, which afterwards came into revelation, was hidden in the times of our fathers; through which nevertheless they too were delivered by the grace of God, whoever in all the times of the human race could be delivered, by the hidden judgment of God, yet not a blameworthy one. Whence the Apostle says: But having the same spirit 578Aof faith (the same, that is, as they also had) according as it is written (II Cor. IV, 13), I believed, for which cause I have spoken; we also believe, for which cause we speak also (Psal. CXV, 1). Thence it is that the mediator himself says: Abraham desired to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad [Vulg. "exsultavit ut videret," rejoiced that he might see] (Joan. VIII, 56). Thence Melchisedech, bringing forth the sacrament of the Lord's table, knew how to figure his eternal priesthood (Gen. XIV, 18). But now, when the Law had been given in writing, which the Apostle says entered in that sin might abound (Rom. V, 20), and of which he says: For if the inheritance be of the Law, it is no more of promise. But God gave it to Abraham by promise. Why then the Law? It was set for the sake of In Quesnel and the Augustine edition, as in the Pithou manuscript: proposita est. transgression, until the seed should come to whom the promise was made, being ordained by Angels in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator 578Bis not of one, but God is one. Was the Law then against the promises of God? God forbid. For if there had been a Law given which could give life, justice would altogether be of the Law. But the Scripture has shut up all things under sin, that the promise by the faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe (Galat. III, 18, seqq.). Is it not sufficiently shown that this was done through the Law, that sin might be recognized, and be increased by transgression? For where there is no law, neither is there transgression (Rom. IV, 15); and that so, against the victory of sin, refuge might be taken in the divine grace which is in the promises: and thus the Law would not be against the promises of God, since the knowledge of sin comes through it for this purpose, and from the transgression of the Law the abundance of sin, that for deliverance the promises of God may be sought, which is the grace of God; and that there may begin to be in man a justice 578Cnot his own, but God's, that is, given by the gift of God.

Which even now certain men, not knowing the justice of God, as was then said of the Jews also, and seeking to establish their own, have not submitted themselves to the justice of God (Rom. X, 3). For they too think themselves justified through the Law, free choice sufficing them for keeping it, that is, by their own justice brought forth from human nature, not given from divine grace, on account of which it is called the justice of God. Whence likewise it is written: For by the Law is the knowledge of sin. But now without the Law the justice of God is made manifest, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets (Rom. III, 21). When he says is made manifest, he shows that it existed then too, but like that rain which Gedeon obtained, then hidden as in the fleece, but now manifest as on the threshing-floor (Judic. 578DVI, 37). Since therefore the Law without grace could have been, not the death of sin, but its strength; for thus it is said, The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the Law (I Cor. XV, 56): as many now take refuge from the face of reigning sin in grace, lying open as on the threshing-floor; so few took refuge in it when it then lay hidden as in the fleece. But this distribution of the times is referred to the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God, of 579Awhich it is said, How incomprehensible are his judgments, and his ways unsearchable (Rom. XI, 33)!

Wherefore, if Quesnel expunged altogether the particle si, for which Garnier substituted sic. both before the time of the Law and in the very time of the Law it was not the possibility of a nature weak and The Roman edition and the Councils and several manuscripts: indignae: which arose from indiguae; for so the ancients liked to write the word indigae. needy and vitiated and sold under sin, but the grace of God through faith, that justified the just fathers who lived by faith, and now the same grace, coming at last into the open, revealed, justifies: let Pelagius then anathematize his writings, where he disputes against it, if not through obstinacy, yet through ignorance, by defending the possibility of nature for overcoming sins and fulfilling the commandments. Or if he denies that they are his, or says that the writings which he denies are his were foisted among his writings by his enemies, let him nevertheless anathematize and condemn them, at the fatherly exhortation and by the authority of thy holiness. If then he is willing, let him learn to remove the scandal, burdensome 579Bto himself and pernicious to the The Pithou manuscript: Ecclesia: faultily. Quesnel published this whole passage thus: si non vult; onerosum sibi et perniciosum esse discat Ecclesiae scandalum afferre, quod auditores; against the credit of all the codices and the mind of Innocent. But the reading which he judged less correct coheres excellently with what goes before and what follows. Namely, the five bishops counsel Pelagius to learn by what means he may remove the scandal both burdensome to himself and pernicious to the Church. Nor do they doubt that it will be removed as soon as his disciples learn that the book published under his name has been condemned by himself. Church: a scandal which his hearers, and those who love him in a perverse way, do not cease to spread everywhere. For if they learn that the same book, which they either think or know to be his, has been anathematized and condemned by him himself, on the authority of catholic bishops, and above all of thy holiness, which we by no means doubt carries greater weight with him; we do not think they will dare any longer, by speaking against the grace of God which has been revealed through the passion and resurrection of Christ, to trouble faithful and simply Christian hearts: but rather, with the help of the Lord's mercy, and thy prayers, burning with charity and piety, contending together with us, that they will trust, not only for being blessed for ever, but also for being just and holy 579C, In Quesnel the word conari is added here: which is more rightly absent from the other books. not in their own strength, but in that same grace. Wherefore we have thought that the letter written to him himself by one of us, to whom he sent certain writings, as it were of his Nor was there need here for Quesnel to add the word causa. This passage is illustrated by that other one of Augustine's book On the Proceedings of Pelagius, c. 32: In the little paper of his defence, which he sent me by a certain Charus, our fellow citizen of Hippo but a deacon of the East, he did something which stands otherwise than is contained in the episcopal proceedings. But what the proceedings contain is far better and firmer and clearer for the catholic truth against the plague of that heresy. From which it is manifest that Pelagius called writings of his clearing, or proceedings (or, as Augustine says, epist. formerly 252, now 179, n. 7, a certain defence, as it were, composed by himself, in which he said he had answered the objections of the Gauls), the adulterated proceedings of the synod of Diospolis which he had sent to Augustine. Of these again Augustine, in the same book On the Proceedings of Pelagius, c. 29, speaks thus: Whatever proceedings of his clearing he may have brought forward. Nor is it hence less plain that by the five bishops Augustine is to be understood under the name one of us; whose letter indeed, sent at that time, has perished and has not come down to us. clearing, by a certain deacon of the East but a citizen of Hippo, should rather be directed to thy blessedness beattiudini, judging it better and 580Aasking that thou thyself deign to Quesnel, with one Colbert manuscript and the Pithou: ut eam emittere. The reading of the other books is sounder. send it to him. For thus he will not disdain rather to read it, attending in it more to him who sent it than to him who wrote it.

But as for what they say, that man can be without sin and easily keep the commandments of God if he will: although, when this is said to be through the help of grace, which nevertheless was revealed and bestowed through the incarnation of his Only-begotten, it may seem more tolerable to say; yet, since it can, not undeservedly, Merlin and Crabbe: quoniam merito quaeri potest. Quesnel kept quaeri potest: which we have found in no manuscript. For quaeri, Crabbe noted debere in the margin, which the Pithou manuscript also has in the text. move [us], where and when it is brought about in us through that same grace that we be altogether without any sin, whether in this life, when the flesh lusts against the spirit; or rather in that one, when the saying shall come to pass which is written (Galat. V, 17): O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting? for the sting of death is sin 580B(I Cor. XV, 55); it must be handled more diligently on account of certain others, who have held, and have committed to memory in their writings, that even in this life man can be without sin, not from the beginning of his birth, but by conversion from sins to justice, and from a In Garnier and the Augustine edition: a vita. Pelagius at one time came over to the opinion of those of whom there is question here. For Augustine, epist. formerly 252, now 179, n. 7, relates that he wrote this to him: We did not say that anyone is found who from infancy to old age has never sinned; but that, having been converted from sin by his own labour and helped by the grace of God, he can be without sin. But that he did not always stand by this opinion the same Doctor proves in the same epistle, n. 8. reprobate way to a good life (S. Ambros. in I Lucae 6). For so they understood what is written of Zachary and Elizabeth, that they walked in all the justifications of the Lord without blame (Lucae I, 6). This that is said, without blame, they took as said for "without sin," not indeed denying, nay rather, as is found in other places in their writings, piously confessing the help of the grace of our Lord, not through the natural spirit of man, but through the principal Spirit of God. Who seem to have considered too little that Zachary himself 580Cwas certainly a priest. And all priests at that time were bound by the law of God to offer sacrifice first for their own sins, then for those of the people (Levit. IX, 7; Hebr. VII, 27). As then now In one of the Colbert manuscripts: per orationes sacrificiorum. we are convicted, through the sacrifice of prayer, of not being without sin, since we are commanded to say, Forgive 581Aus our debts (Matth. VI, 12): so then too the priests were convicted, through the sacrifices of animal victims, of not being without sin, since they were commanded to offer for their own sins. But if the matter stands thus, that through the grace of the Saviour we make progress indeed in this life, as desire decreases and charity grows; but are made perfect in that life, when desire is extinguished and charity completed: assuredly that which is written, The same manuscript: Qui ex Deo est. The other Colbert, with the Pithou: Ex Deo, the words Qui natus est being omitted. He who is born of God sins not (I Joan. III, 9), is said according to charity itself, which alone does not sin. For to the birth which is of God belongs charity, which is to be increased and perfected, not desire, which is to be diminished and consumed: which nevertheless, so long as it is in our members, by a certain law of its own fights against the law of the mind (Rom. VII, 20). But he who is born of 581BGod, neither obeying its desires, nor yielding his members as weapons of iniquity to sin (Rom. VI, 13), can say, Now it is no more I that do it, but the sin that dwells in me (Rom. VII, 20).

But however that question stands, since, even if a man is not found without sin in this life, it is nevertheless said that this can come about through the help of grace and of the Spirit of God, and that in order that it come about it must be striven for and prayed for: anyone is tolerably mistaken in this; nor is it diabolical impiety, but human error, to affirm what is to be laboured for and wished for, even if he cannot show what he affirms. For he believes that that can come about which it is certainly praiseworthy to will. But it suffices us that no one of the faithful is found in the Church of God, in any The Roman edition and the Councils: profectu excellenti atque justitia. Garnier and the Isidorian manuscripts: profectu, excellentia atque justitia: they are corrected from Quesnel, the Augustine edition and the better manuscripts. advancement and excellence of justice, who would dare to say to himself 581Cthat the petition of the Lord's prayer, Forgive us our debts (Matth. VI, 12), is not necessary; and to say that he has no sin, lest he deceive himself, and the truth be not in him, although he already lives without blame (I Joan. I). For it is not Merlin and Quesnel, with one Colbert manuscript and the Pithou: qualescumque etiam tentationes. Truer is the reading of the other codices, by which we are taught that those who are proclaimed to live without blame are to be understood as immune from grave sins indeed, but not likewise from light ones, which we contract through temptation or human frailty. any sin whatever of human temptation, but grave sin, that comes to blame. 582A

The other things which were objected to him, thy blessedness will without doubt judge of them, just as thou shalt have seen them defended in the proceedings. The most gentle sweetness of thy heart will surely grant us pardon for having sent to thy holiness a letter perhaps longer than thou wouldst wish. For we do not pour back our rivulet into thy large fountain to increase it; but in this In two Colbert manuscripts: non cum parva. In the rest: non comparva. In the Augustine edition: non tamen parva. But Merlin and Crabbe, after the word refundimus above, immediately subjoin verum etiam no ter licet exiguus, etc., the intermediate words being omitted. not small temptation of the time, from which may he deliver us to whom we say, Bring us not into temptation, we wish this to be approved by thee, whether ours too, though small, flows from the same head of streams as thine abundant one also, and to be consoled by thy rescript concerning the common participation of the one grace.

INNOCENT The printed editions, except the Augustine edition, following the old copies of the Code published by Quesnel and of Isidore: Aurelio et omnibus sanctis episcopis vel caeteris qui in concilio Carthaginensis ecclesiae adfuerunt, omitting the names of the individual bishops, which are recorded in the sounder manuscripts. to AURELIUS, NUMIDIUS, RUSTICIANUS, FIDENTIANUS, EVAGRIUS, ANTONIUS, PALATINUS, ADEODATUS, VINCENTIUS, PUBLIANUS, THEASIUS, TUTUS, PANNONIUS, VICTOR, RESTITUTUS, Hence it is clear that this second Restitutus too is missing in the inscription of epistle 26. another RESTITUTUS, RUSTICUS, FORTUNATIANUS, AMPELIUS, AMBIVIUS, FELIX, DONATIANUS, ADEODATUS, OCTAVIUS, SEROTINUS, MAJORINUS, POSTHUMIANUS, CRISPULUS, VICTOR, another VICTOR, LEUCIUS, MARIANUS, FRUCTUOSUS, PROCULUS, FAUSTINIANUS, QUODVULTDEUS, CANDORIUS, MAXIMUS, MEGASIUS, RUSTICUS, RUFINIANUS, PROCULUS, SEVERUS, THOMAS, JANUARIUS, OCTAVIANUS, PRAETEXTATUS, SIXTUS, QUODVULTDEUS, PENTADIUS, QUODVULTDEUS, CYPRIAN, SERVILIUS, PELAGIANUS, MARCELLUS, VENANTIUS, DIDYMUS, 582CSATURNINUS, BIZACENUS, GERMANUS, GERMANIANUS, INVENITUS, MAJORINUS, INVENITUS, CANDIDUS, CYPRIAN, ROMANIANUS, AEMILIANUS, AFRICANUS, MARCELLINUS, and the rest who were present at the council of Carthage, most beloved brethren, greeting in the Lord.

In The edition of the Councils: Inquirendo de his rebus. In Garnier, Quesnel and the Augustine edition: In requirendo de his rebus. The Roman edition and some manuscripts: In requirendis de his rebus. More truly the manuscripts of Saint-Remi, Corbie and Saint-Germain: In requirendis Dei rebus; and that reading is confirmed by the letter of the Africans to Pope Theodore, inserted in the Lateran council under Martin I, act. 2, tom. VI of Labbe's Councils, p. 128, whose opening, as we noted before, being modelled on the words and sentences of Innocent, it will be of use to reproduce here. Thus then they begin: That a great and unfailing fountain, overflowing with streams for all Christians, stands at the Apostolic see, no one could doubt; from which rivulets come forth abundantly, most largely watering the whole world of Christians; to which also, in honour of the most blessed Peter, the decrees of the fathers have decreed all special reverence IN SEEKING OUT THE THINGS OF GOD, which ought altogether and carefully, but most of all and justly, to be examined by the very apostolic summit of prelates, whose ancient solicitude it is as much to condemn evil things as to approve things worthy of praise. For it was ordained by ancient rules that whatever was done, even in provinces set in remote or distant places, should not be treated or received before it had been brought to the notice of your kindly see, so that by its authority whatever pronouncement had been just might be confirmed, and thence the other churches might take the beginning of their preaching as from their native fountain, and throughout the diverse regions of the whole world the sacraments of the faith of salvation might remain of uncorrupted purity. seeking out the things of God, which it befits to be handled by priests with all solicitude, above all by a true and just 583Aand catholic council, you, keeping the examples of ancient tradition and mindful of ecclesiastical discipline, have confirmed with true reason the vigour of your religion, no less now in consulting than before when you pronounced; you who have approved that the matter should be referred to our judgment, knowing what is owed to the apostolic see, since all of us set in this place desire to follow the Apostle himself, from whom the episcopate itself and the whole authority of this name arose. Following him, we know how as much to condemn evil things as to approve things worthy of praise. Or this indeed, that, guarding the institutions of the fathers by your priestly office, you judge that they are not to be trampled upon, which they decreed by a sentence not human but divine: that whatever was done, even from separated and remote provinces, they should not consider as to be concluded before it had come to the notice of this see, 583Bso that by its whole authority whatever pronouncement had been just might be confirmed; and that thence the other churches might take (as all waters proceeded from their native fountain, and throughout the diverse regions of the whole world the pure The Roman edition and the Councils, and also Quesnel: puri capitis; then Merlin: incorrupti; Crabbe: incorrupte; the others: incorruptae: they are restored from the Augustine edition and the Corbie and Saint-Germain manuscripts. Innocent took the matter of this opening chiefly from what the five bishops had written to him at the end of the preceding letter: For we do not pour back our rivulet into thy large fountain... whether ours too, though small, flows from the same head of streams as thine abundant one also, this we wish to be approved by thee. streams of an uncorrupted head flowed forth) what to command So the Saint-Germain and Corbie manuscripts. But many others, with the Roman edition and the Councils: quid praecipere. Then in the Saint-Germain codex quos absolvere, where in the others quos abluere. In Quesnel and the Augustine edition quid praeciperent, quos abluerent has been put back. But Garnier, indulging his own ingenuity more than was fair, edited this whole passage thus: unde aquas sumerent caeterae ecclesiae, velut de natali suo fonte a quo cuncta procedunt, et per diversas totius mundi regiones puri capitis incorruptae manant; unde perciperet quos veluti coeno, etc. Our reading, in which there is nothing not supported by the authority of the old codices, will be complete if after the words quos abluere one understands deberent. Nor let us think it rash that a threefold class of men presenting themselves to the judgment of the Church is distinguished here, and a threefold manner of that same Church's judgments concerning them, drawn from a threefold property of water, is set forth. For she, like clean water, of her own accord receives into herself the harmless and undefiled as pure rivulets; the soiled but penitent she washes; and the uncorrected, who could stain her, she prudently avoids and rejects. [Forte leg. praeciperent] whom to wash, whom, soiled as with mire that cannot be cleansed, the water worthy of clean bodies should avoid.

I rejoice therefore, dearest brethren, that you have sent a letter to us by our brother and fellow bishop Julius: and that, while you take care of the churches over which you preside, you show your solicitude for the benefit of all: and that you ask that something be decreed which may profit all alike throughout all the churches of the whole world: so that the Church, established by her own rules 583C, The Roman edition and the more recent Councils have ex hoc, and then, with the older ones, quod illos caveat pronuntiationis justae firmata decretalibus (Merlin: petere; Crabbe: patere; the Roman edition and those following: pavere) non possit. Garnier, cutting out hoc quod illos caveat, kept et pronuntiationis justae firmata decretalibus pavere non possit. Our reading is that of Quesnel, the Augustine edition and the better manuscripts, except that in Quesnel hoc has been struck out, and in the Augustine edition, as in the Corbie and Saint-Germain manuscripts, parete stands in place of patere. It is then to be understood thus, as if Innocent said: You ask that it be decreed by me that the Church, already established by her ancient rules, being now also strengthened by this new decree justly pronounced, by which she is bidden to beware of those heretics mentioned, may not henceforth lie open to such men, but may remain shut off from them for ever. strengthened also by this decree of just pronouncement, by which she may beware of them, may not lie open to such men as, instructed, nay rather destroyed, by perverse subtleties 584Aof words, disputing under the appearance of the catholic faith, as if breathing out a pestilential poison, so as to corrupt towards the worse part the hearts of men who think rightly, seek to overturn the whole discipline of true doctrine. It must therefore be healed the more speedily, lest an accursed One of the Colbert manuscripts: exsecrandis animorum moribus inserpat. The other: exsecrandos animis morbos inserpat. The Roman edition and the Councils, with some other manuscripts, keep the word inserpat. In its place the Saint-Germain and Corbie manuscripts better show inrepat. disease creep further into souls: just as a physician, when he sees some sickness in this earthly body, reckons it a great proof of his art if someone despaired of quickly escapes through his intervention; or when he has looked upon a putrid wound, applies poultices, or the other things by which the wound that had arisen may be closed over; and if, remaining, it cannot be healed, lest it corrupt the rest of the body with its decay, he cuts off with the knife what was doing harm, so as to keep the rest whole and untouched. That must therefore be cut off 584Bwhich has crept upon the body, all too pure and sound, like a wound; lest, when it is cleansed too slowly, a bilge of this evil that cannot afterwards be drained should settle almost in the very vitals.

For what are we henceforth to reckon right in their minds concerning these men, who think that they owe it to themselves that they are good, and do not consider him whose grace they obtain daily? But now these men, who are such, obtain no grace of God; Crabbe, and after him the editions of the Councils and the Roman: quia sine illo. who trust that they can attain without him as much as those who ask of him scarcely The Roman edition and the Councils, with the Pithou and Isidorian manuscripts: et accipiunt. One Colbert codex: ut accipiunt; whence Quesnel preferred ut accipiant. In the Augustine edition, as in the Corbie manuscript: accipere, the particle et not being put before it, which is kept with the Saint-Germain and others. The sentence will be clear if arranged in this way: quantum vix illi etiam, qui postulant, accipere promerentur. also merit to receive. For what can be so unjust, so barbarous, so ignorant of all religion, so hostile to Christian minds, as to deny that thou owest whatever thou obtainest in daily grace to him to whom thou thyself confessest that thou 584Cowest that thou wast born? Wilt thou then be more excellent for thyself in providing, than So the manuscripts. But the Roman edition and the Councils: quam potest is esse. can be in him who brought it about that thou shouldst be? Garnier: Si huic putes debere. Other printed editions: Et cum te putes ei debere. Pelagius is here refuted without being named: who, distinguishing to be able, to will and to be, placed being able in nature, willing in choice, and being in effect. Then he so granted that being able belongs properly to God, the author of nature, as to contend that willing and being, or acting, are to be referred to man. He taught that it is of God alone that man is able to will and to accomplish the good; but that he wills to accomplish it, and actually accomplishes it, and so too that he wills to be good and perfect, or even is so, he proclaimed to be of man himself. He did not deny that man is always helped by the aid of grace: but he placed that aid in this, that God never fails to give the possibility of willing and of working. See his very words in Augustine, book On the Grace of Christ, cap. 4. And to whom thou thinkest thou owest that thou livest, 585Ahow dost thou not think thou owest to him that, by obtaining his daily grace, thou livest thus? And thou who deniest that we need the divine help, as if we In the Roman edition and the Councils simus is missing. were entirely perfect from our own possibility, how do we not call forth his help The word ejus is recalled from the Saint-Germain manuscript and the Augustine edition. Garnier alone presents this passage thus: Dic quomodo vere adjutorium ejus in nos, cum tales a nobis etiam esse possimus, provocemus. Eum qui adjutorium Dei negat, rursus vellem interrogare cur dicat nos id non promereri? upon us, when we can be such even of ourselves?

For I should like to ask him who denies the help of God what he says: that we do not deserve it, or that he cannot bestow it, or that there is nothing on account of which each one ought Quesnel, with one Colbert manuscript: praestolari. to ask for it? That God is able to do this, his works themselves testify. And that we need daily help, we cannot deny. For whether we live well, So the manuscripts, and also the old editions of the Councils. But the Roman edition and the more recent Councils, with Garnier: precamur. we call it forth, that we may live better and more holily; or whether, thinking wrongly, we are turned away from good things, we need his aid the more, that we may return to the right way. 585BFor what should seem so deadly, so headlong towards a fall, so exposed to all dangers, as if, thinking that this alone can suffice us, that we received free choice when we were born, we should seek nothing further from the Lord, that is, forgetful of our author, should abjure his power in order to show ourselves free; as though he who made thee free at thy birth had nothing more that he could give: not knowing that unless grace, implored with great prayers, descends Garnier: nequidquam; and below, David inclamat, for Nam si ille clamat. upon us, we should by no means strive to overcome the errors of earthly defilement and of the worldly body, since not free choice, but the aid of God alone, can make us equal to resisting?

For if he cries out that he has need of the divine help, who would not worthily have sought it, if free 585Cchoice were of more profit to anyone; since, although a blessed man and already chosen by the Lord, he lacked nothing, yet he so beseeches God, asking: Be thou my helper, forsake me not, neither despise me, O God my saviour (Psal. XXVI, 9): we ask free choice for ourselves, he 586Aasks God for himself as helper; we say that what we were born with can suffice us, he prays God that he be not forsaken. The Roman edition: Nos ergo dicimus manifeste, etc. Garnier: Nos dicimus manifeste, ut quid oremus Deum, ille: and below, David ergo, for David enim. Do we not, I ask, learn plainly what we should pray for, when that man, so greatly blessed, as we said above, longs not to be despised? For those who confirm the one must needs refute the other. For let David be accused of being ignorant of prayer and unaware of his own nature, who, though he knows that so much is present in The Roman edition and the Councils: in sua natura esse. Next, Garnier: adjutorem invocat, nec illi sufficit assiduum invocare: against the other books, from which it is clear that the word adjutorem is governed by the verb exoptat. his nature, longs for God as his helper, and a constant helper, nor does constant suffice him, but, bowed down in prayers, longs that he may never despise him; and throughout the whole body of the psalter he both proclaims and cries this. If then he, so great Some manuscripts with Quesnel, and also the Roman edition and the Councils: ita magnum scit, ut assidue diceret. In the Augustine edition: ita magnus sicut assidue dicere. Garnier: hoc illi tam magnum visum sit, ut assidue diceret, tam necessarium confessum sit. We keep what the more numerous and older manuscripts present. We should prefer, however, ita magnus scivit assidue dicere, et ita., knows so to say this continually, so confessed it necessary as to teach it: how do Pelagius and Coelestius, setting aside every answer 586Bof the psalms and renouncing such teaching, trust that they will persuade some that we neither ought to seek the help of God nor need it; when all the saints testify that they can do nothing without it?

For that man once, having undergone free Merlin, and from him Quesnel: Libero enim arbitrio olim ille perversus; against all the manuscripts and the other printed editions, not only here, but also in book II of Augustine to Boniface, cap. 4, n. 6, in Prosper's book against the Collator, c. 5, n. 15, and in the epistle of Celestine 21, n. 5, where these same words are cited. Certainly the sense of Innocent calls for permissus rather than perversus. choice, while he used his goods too unadvisedly, falling, was sunk into the depths of transgression, and found no way by which he could rise from there; and, deceived for ever by his own liberty, he would have lain under the crushing of this ruin In the manuscripts, as in the editions of Merlin and the Roman: ruinae latuisset oppressus or oppressum, except that in the Pithou oppressu stands, and in the Corbie jacuisset has been restored by an ancient hand: an emendation proved right both by Augustine's book II to Boniface against the two letters of the Pelagians, n. 6, and by the epistle 21 of Pope Celestine, cap. 4, where these words are cited. Although in those two places too manuscripts are not lacking which present latuisset oppressu. In Crabbe, and thence in the editions of the Councils, one may read here huic ruinae suae jacuisset oppressus; in Garnier and Quesnel, hujus ruina subjacuisset oppressus., had not the coming of Christ afterwards So the manuscripts with great agreement, together with the Augustine edition. But in the printed editions: per suam gratiam. raised him up for his grace: who through the purification of the new regeneration cleansed all past fault by the laver of his baptism; and, strengthening his state, so that he might proceed more rightly and more steadily, yet did not deny his grace for the time to come. For although he had redeemed 586Cman from past sins, yet knowing that he could sin again, he kept in reserve for himself many things for his restoration, by which he could correct him even after these things: he supplies daily remedies, and unless we strive relying and trusting on them, we shall by no means be able to overcome 587Ahuman errors. For it is necessary that, as we conquer when he helps, so, when he does not help, we be conquered again.

But I could say more, were it not evident that you have said everything. Whoever therefore is seen to assent to this opinion, by which he would say that we have no need of the divine help, professes himself an enemy of the catholic faith and ungrateful for the benefits of God. The conjunction Nam is recalled from the editions of Merlin, Crabbe, the Augustine edition and most manuscripts. Then in the Isidorian manuscripts nostra is missing. Next the Roman edition and the Councils, with some manuscripts: Sic enim, where with the other books we prefer Ipsi enim. But Garnier, judging this passage mutilated, advises by a note written in the margin that it could be repaired thus: Pelagium igitur et Coelestium, quos auctores nefarii prorsus et omnibus anathematizandi erroris advertistis, justa sententia damnastis: nec illi nostra, etc. But these words of theirs at the end of the preceding epistle 26 do not sound like a sentence pronounced by name against Pelagius and Coelestius by the fathers of the council of Carthage: If Pelagius and Coelestius have been corrected, or say that they never held these things, and deny that whatever writings have been brought forward against them are theirs, and there is no way in which they may be convicted of lying, yet let whoever shall have been found a champion of the doctrines whose authors they are thought to be be anathema in general terms. Nothing appears in this passage of Innocent either, from which it should be judged matilus. For neither are they worthy of our communion, which they have polluted by preaching in such a way. For they themselves of their own accord, while they follow those things which they say, have fled further from the true religion. For since the whole of this consists in our profession, and in our daily prayers we do nothing but seek how we may obtain the mercy of God; how can we bear these men boasting? What error, 587CI ask, so great blinds their hearts, that if they themselves feel no grace of God, because they are neither worthy nor deserve it, they do not even consider concerning others what divine grace bestows daily on each? They are indeed So in Garnier and the Augustine edition, as in the better manuscripts. But in other books: omnes; and below, Negantes enim Dei adjutorium. most worthy of all blindness, who have not left even this to themselves, that they should believe that they can be recalled from their errors by the divine aid. For denying help, they have taken this away utterly not from others but from themselves: they are to be torn further away and removed far from the vitals of the Church; lest The printed editions, except the Augustine edition: ne diu multa. More fittingly in the Augustine edition, as in the Corbie and Saint-Germain manuscripts: ne diu inultus multa. Hence there is aptly joined on: Si enim diu fuerint sub hac IMPUNITATE. the error, long unpunished, seizing on many things, should afterwards grow incurable. For if they have long lived under this impunity, they must needs lead many into this depravity of their mind, and deceive the innocent, or rather the unwary, who follow the catholic This reading of Garnier, which is also that of the Corbie and Saint-Germain manuscripts, Quesnel approves, although he himself keeps the common one in the Roman edition and the Councils, namely non sequuntur. But here in the Augustine edition the particle nunc has dropped out by the copyist's drowsiness. faith now. For they will think that those think rightly 587Cwhom they see still remaining in the Church. Let the unsound wound then be separated from the sound body, and, the breath of the raging disease being removed, let the things that are sincere endure more safely, and let the purer flock be cleansed from this contagion of the evil beast. Let there be an unimpaired perfection of the whole body, which we have learned that you follow and hold by this pronouncement against them, and which we preserve together with you with equal assent. 588A

Yet if they call forth in themselves some In the Roman edition and the Councils: aliquando in se. help of God, which up to now they have denied, and recognize that they need his aid, so that they may be freed from this stain into which they had fallen by the crookedness of their heart; and, as if drawn into the light out of a foul darkness, all things being removed and renounced by which their whole sight, lest it should behold In Quesnel and the Augustine edition: aspicerent. the truth, was befouled and darkened, let them condemn these things which up to now they have held; and at length, applying their mind to right disputations, corrected in some small measure from this stain, they give and submit themselves to be healed In Garnier: conciliis. The preceding word, sanandos, which Quesnel removed, all our manuscripts preserve. by true counsels: if they do this, it will be in the power of the bishops to come to their aid in some degree, and to afford such wounds some care, which the Church is not wont to deny to the lapsed when they have come to their senses: so that, The word revocati is missing in Merlin. In its place the Roman edition and the later Councils have substituted remoti. recalled 588Cfrom their precipices, they may be brought back within the sheepfold of the Lord: lest, set outside, and shut out from so great a protection Quesnel: praesidio aede munitionis. Garnier: praesidio fidae munitionis. This last reading displeases less. of the defence of faith, they be exposed to all dangers, to be devoured and harried by the teeth of wolves, whom they could not resist with this perversity of doctrine by which they had provoked them against themselves.

But it is proved that sufficient answer has been made by your admonitions, so abounding in examples of our law. Nor have we thought that anything remains for us to say, since it is evident that nothing has been passed over by you, nothing suppressed, by which they may be known to be refuted and utterly convicted. And therefore no testimonies are set down by us, because in these things your report is full, and it is sufficiently evident that so many most learned priests have said everything: nor is it fitting to believe that you have passed over anything which could 588Cprofit the cause. And in another hand: Farewell, brethren. And at the side: Given on the sixth day before the Kalends of February (Jan. 27 ann. 417) after the consulship In the Corbie manuscript: Luni Quarti. In the Saint-Germain: p. c. Theodosio augusto VII et Lucio Quarto v. consulibus: from the ignorance of a copyist, who did not know that by the former note p. c. is signified post consulatum, and that therefore Theodosii augusti, etc., was to be kept, not Theodosio augusto substituted; and who did not know that the latter note, v. c., was to be rendered by the words viri clarissimi, not by v consulibus. of Theodosius Augustus for the seventh time and of Junius Quartus, V. C.

INNOCENT to SILVANUS the elder, VALENTINUS, It is the more probable that in this inscription Innocent addressed by name the individual bishops who had been named at the head of the letter of the council itself, because the only copies of this rescript that survive are those which, likewise in the preceding epistle, after naming Aurelius, indicated the other bishops under a general formula. and the rest who were present at the synod of Milevis, most beloved brethren, greeting in the Lord.

Among the other cares of the Roman church, and the occupations of the apostolic see, in which we treat the consultations of various persons with faithful and In the Roman edition and the Councils, from the Isidorian manuscripts: modica: a fault which Garnier, trying to correct it on his own, adds non before modica. healing deliberation, our brother and fellow bishop Julius unexpectedly thrust upon me the letter of your charity 589Bwhich you sent, with a more inclined care for the faith, from the council of Milevis, Only in copies of the Isidorian collection, and thence in Merlin and Crabbe: ex Milevitano ex nostra auctoritate concilio: a gloss worthy of Mercator, and deservedly removed in the Roman edition. As if indeed Innocent would have said that the letter of a council which had been assembled by his own authority had been thrust upon him unexpectedly. adding also the writings of the synod of Carthage with a like complaint. Truly the Church exults that the shepherds show such solicitude for the flocks committed to them, that not only do they suffer none of them to go astray; but if the grass of a perverse Merlin: sive; Crabbe: saevae; the other editions of the Councils, after the Roman, and also Garnier: obscaenae; more rightly the other books: scaerae: which Labbe too noted in the margin. Next, the Isidorian manuscripts: dilectionis. delight has rather led astray any of the sheep, they are willing either, if these remain in error, to have them wholly separated, or, if they avoid what they had long unlawfully sought, to protect them with the circumspection of their former keeping: taking counsel, that is, on both sides, lest either by receiving such, the others Quesnel: seducantur. be led by a like example; or, by spurning those who return, these should seem to be thrown to the bites of wolves. Very prudent, and full of the catholic faith, is Garnier: consolatio. The Roman edition and the Councils, with the Isidorian manuscripts: consultationis voluntas. In one Colbert manuscript consultationis indeed stands, but voluntas is absent. More apt, as Quesnel has already observed, though a less Latin word, is consultio, which the other Colbert codex presents. By this name, then, is called that by which they take counsel for both sides, or use this counsel, neither to admit the obstinate nor to spurn those returning. this counsel. For who could either tolerate 589Cone who errs, or not receive In the Augustine edition: se corrigentem. one who corrects himself? For as 590AI think it hard to show connivance to those who sin; so I judge it impious to refuse the hand to the converted.

Diligently therefore and fittingly Garnier, with the Roman edition: apostolico consulitis honori, honori. Quesnel, following one Colbert manuscript: apostolici consulitis honoris arcanis, honoris. Nor does the other Colbert codex differ, except that for arcanis it has arcani. The Isidorian manuscripts: apostolici consulitis honores arcani, honoris. One of the Vatican manuscripts: apostolici consulitis oneris arcana, oneris. Sounder is the reading which we present here after the edition of the Councils and the Augustine edition. For this is what it means: you who consult the apostolic see, whose it is to disclose secret things. In the same manner of speaking Boniface I, epist. 5, n. 4, says quae hujus consulis sedis arcanum. Hence it is clear that arcam was wrongly written here in Crabbe's margin in place of the word arcana. do you consult the secret counsels of the apostolic honour (of that honour, I say in quam, upon which, besides the things that are without, the care of all the churches waits) as to what judgment is to be held on anxious matters (II Cor. XI, 28): following, that is, the form of the ancient rule, which you know, as I do, has always been kept by the whole world. But these things I let pass: for I do not believe that this is hidden from your prudence. So our manuscripts. The same sense is also given by what is in Merlin: Qui id etiam actione firmastis, nisi scientes. But the Roman edition and the Councils, after Crabbe: quid id etiam, with nisi then suppressed: which Quesnel likewise omits, preferring before it quod etiam. In the Augustine edition: Qui id enim actione, etc. In Garnier: Cur id enim actione, etc. If to anyone this, that responses always flow from the apostolic fountain through all the provinces to those who ask, should seem exaggerated, let him recall what Jerome wrote, epist. 110, now 91: When I was helping Damasus, bishop of the city of Rome, with ecclesiastical papers, and answering the synodical consultations of the East and of the West. Why have you also confirmed this by action, unless knowing that through all the provinces responses always flow from the apostolic fountain to those who ask? Especially (24, q. 1, c. 12) whenever the reason of the faith is discussed, I think that all our brethren and fellow bishops ought to refer to none but 590BPeter, that is, to the author of their name and honour, Inasmuch as from him the episcopate itself and the whole authority of this name arose, as he has it in the preceding epistle, n. 1; or, as Siricius says, epist. 5, n. 5, through whom both the apostolate and the episcopate took their beginning in Christ: which our Innocent too copies out, epist. 2, n. 2. as your charity has now referred, what may profit all the churches in common throughout the whole world. For they must needs become more cautious, when they see the inventors of evils, on the report of a double synod, by the statutes of our judgment Quesnel alone: se ab ecclesiastica communione sejungi. Next Garnier: fruetur, for fungetur. cut off from ecclesiastical communion. Your charity will therefore enjoy a twofold good. For you will both possess the grace of the canons observed, and the whole world will In the Roman edition and the Councils: tutabitur. make use of your benefit. For who among catholic men would wish any longer to mingle speech with the adversaries of Christ? Who would share even the very light of life in common with them? The particle cum is put before it here in one manuscript. Let the authors of the new heresy surely be shunned.

For what more bitter could they feign against the Lord, 590Cthan when they made void the divine helps, and took away the cause 591Aof daily prayer? This is to say, What need have I of God? Deservedly might the hymn-singer say against them: Behold the men who did not make God their helper [Vulg. "Ecce homo qui non posuit," in the singular: Behold the man who did not make] (Psalm. LI, 9). Denying therefore the aid of God, they say that man can suffice to himself, and does not need divine grace: deprived of which, he must needs fall, entangled in the snares of the devil, while he strives for fulfilling all the commandments of life by his liberty alone. O perverse doctrine of most depraved minds! In the old editions of the Councils, as in the Augustine edition: Advertat id tandem. In the other printed editions and two manuscripts: Adverte tandem: which the epistle 21 of Celestine also favours, c. 7, where this passage is quoted thus: Adverte tandem o pravissimarum mentium doctrina. Wherefore, although the order of Innocent's words is changed there, yet on account of so ancient an authority we should incline to keep adverte, did not the train of the sentence resist it, in which one reads not audi, as Garnier and Quesnel edited against the manuscripts, but audiat. It pleases more, therefore, with some manuscripts, advertens, or attendens. Noticing at last that liberty itself so deceived the first man that, while he used its reins too indulgently, he fell by presumption into transgression, Quesnel, with one Colbert manuscript: praesumptionis. Merlin and Crabbe, with the Isidorian manuscripts: in praevaricationis praesumptione. and could not be rescued from it unless the coming of Christ the Lord had, by the providence of regeneration, restored Quesnel alone: adventu. to him the state of his former liberty: let it hear David saying: 591BOur help is in the name of the Lord (Psalm. CXXIII, 8); and, Be thou my helper, forsake me not, neither despise me, O God my saviour (Psalm. XXVI, 9). Which he would have said in vain, if Garnier: si totum. what he asked of the Lord with tearful speech had lain so fully in his own will.

Since these things are so, and since in all the divine pages we read that nothing but the help of God is to be joined to the free will, and that it can do nothing when destitute of heavenly aids; in what manner do Pelagius and Coelestius, obstinately defending, as you assert, this possibility for it alone, persuade themselves, nay, what is In Quesnel: gravius et dignius. Then for dolore communi Garnier substitutes dolore, communiter. Then for the particle jam, which is suppressed in the Roman edition, nam wrongly stands in Merlin and Crabbe. more worthy of common grief, already very many? We could indeed use manifold examples Two Colbert manuscripts: ad instruendum: which reading Merlin and Crabbe followed. for destroying such a teaching, did we not know 591Cthat your holiness is fully versed in all the divine scriptures; especially since your report is so filled with so many and such testimonies, that by these alone the present doctrine could be cut down; and that there is no need of recondite ones, since they neither dare nor are able to oppose even those which you set down as readily occurring to you. So Garnier: Ergone Dei. they try to take away the grace of God, which we must needs seek even when the liberty of our former state has been restored to us; since Quesnel: quippe qui nec aliquas; Garnier: quippe nefarias. Our manuscripts support neither. we cannot avoid the other machinations of the devil either, except 592Awith the same helping (Augustin. lib. II, ad Bonifac., c. 4, n. 7).

But that which your fraternity asserts that they preach, that little ones can be rewarded with the prizes of eternal life even without the grace of baptism, is utterly foolish. For unless they eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink his blood, they shall not have life in themselves (Joan. VI, 54). But those who defend this for them without regeneration seem to me to wish to make void baptism itself, since they preach that these have what is believed to be conferred on them only by baptism. If then they will have it that not to be reborn does no harm: they must needs confess that the sacred streams of regeneration are of no profit either. But, that the depraved doctrine of superfluous men may be ungirded by the swift reason So Quesnel and two Colbert manuscripts. But Merlin, with another Colbert manuscript: distingui: faultily. Nor better the other books: discindi. Silius too said dolos ratione discingere. of truth, the Lord proclaims 592Bthis in the Gospel, saying: Suffer the little ones, and forbid them Two Colbert manuscripts: prohibere a me. Pro qua re Pelagium. not to come to me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven [Vulg. "pueros … regnum Dei," children … the kingdom of God] (Lucae XVIII, 16).

Wherefore we decree, by the authority of apostolic vigour, that Pelagius and Coelestius, that is, the inventors of new words, which, as the Apostle said, are wont to bring forth nothing of edification, but rather the vainest questions (II Tim. II, 23), be deprived of ecclesiastical communion, until they come to their senses out of the snares of the devil, by whom In one manuscript: capti. they are held captive at his will; and that meanwhile they be not received into the Lord's sheepfold, The Roman edition and the Councils: quo ad ipsi perversae viae (Merlin: secuti tramitem; others: quem secuti sunt tramitem) deserere voluerint: they are corrected from the manuscripts. which they themselves, following the path of a perverse way, have chosen to desert. For they are to be cut off who In two manuscripts: nos. trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ (Galat. V, 12). And at the same time we command that whoever 592Cstrive with like obstinacy to defend it, a like punishment should bind them; for not only they that do, but they also that consent to them that do (Rom. I, 32) Supply: constringere par vindicta debet. In Quesnel there is added here digni sunt poena. I scarcely know whether on any authority. In place of these, in Merlin and the Augustine edition, from two Vatican manuscripts, one finds digni sunt morte. Garnier, however, presents these as words of Scripture: Non solum enim digni sunt morte qui faciunt, sed etiam qui consentiunt facientibus. Those three readings smack of an interpolator's work all the more because in our manuscripts, as in the Roman edition, Crabbe and others, the pure words of the Apostle stand. And it was enough indeed to have indicated this to bishops versed in the Scriptures.: because I think there is not much difference between the mind of him who commits and the favour of him who consents. I add yet more: he generally unlearns erring with whom no one agrees. Let this sentence therefore, dearest brethren, remain fixed against the aforesaid: let them be absent from the courts of the Lord, let them be deprived The particle duntaxat is missing in the Augustine edition. Garnier not only passed it over but also changed Innocent's sentence thus: Caveat custodia pastoralis. Just as that pope, at the opening of this epistle, praises the shepherds who do not disdain to protect with the circumspection of their former keeping the sheep that avoid what they had long unlawfully sought, that is, that have turned to a better life; so now he wishes those sheep which obstinately remain in error to lack pastoral keeping, or to be separated from the flock which has been committed to the keeping of the shepherds. only of pastoral keeping, lest the dire contagion of two sheep 593Ashould perhaps creep through the unwary crowd, and the wolf with ravening heart rejoice within the Lord's sheepfold over such scattered troops of sheep, while the wound of two is overlooked by the keepers. We must take care therefore lest, by admitting wolves, we seem to be hirelings rather than shepherds. We do indeed command (since Christ our Lord has signified by his own Garnier: propria voluntate significavit. The word significavit was thence transferred into the Augustine edition. voice that he does not will the death of the dying (Ezech. XXXIII, 11; II Pet. III, 9), but only that he turn and live), that if ever they come back to In one Colbert manuscript ad sanum is lacking, in place of which the other presents sano, Quesnel sanum, Garnier sani. a sound mind, having laid aside the error of their depraved doctrine, and condemn those things by the transgression of which they have condemned themselves, the customary medicine, that is, her own shelter, be not denied them by the Church: lest, while we perhaps forbid them as they return, In Quesnel, as in one Colbert manuscript: velut, for vere. In place of this word Garnier substituted ores. Then in the Augustine edition, from Vatican manuscripts, as in Labbe's margin: remanentes et exspectantes. Then Merlin: hostis rapidi. The other editions of the Councils, with the Roman: hostis rapidis. But Garnier omits the word rabidis, and substitutes none for it. remaining truly outside the sheepfold, they be swallowed by the raging jaws of the waiting enemy, 593BGarnier: quas in semetipsas. Quesnel, with an old Colbert exemplar: quo auctore semetipsos quibusdam (the Colbert manuscript: quosdam) spiritalis. which they have armed against themselves with the darts of evil disputation. Farewell, brethren. Given on the sixth day before the Kalends of February (27 Jan. ann. 417), Honorius and In the Isidorian manuscripts: Constantino. In Merlin: Constantio consulibus. In the other editions of the Councils and the Roman: Constantio viris clarissimis (one Colbert codex: vv. cc.) consulibus. In Garnier: Honorio XI et Constantio II coss. For that consular note to be accurate, it ought to be expressed thus: Honorio Augusto XI et Constantio v. c. (that is, viro clarissimo, not vv. cc., which is viris clarissimis) consulibus. But this note is to be reformed from epistles 29 and 31, which have come down to us from manuscripts of better note than this one. For it seems not to be doubted that Innocent signed the three letters, given together, in the same manner, and so post consulatum Theodosii VII et Junii Quarti. But because after the consulship of Theodosius VII and Junius Quartus Honorius and Constantius were distinguished with the same dignity, the conjecture is that Honorio et Constantio cons. was added in the margin by the work of some copyist, and that this scholion was carried over from the margin into the text. Constantius, most illustrious men, being consuls.

INNOCENT In the Corbie manuscript: Dilectissimis fratribus Aurelio, Alypio, Augustino, Evodio, Possidonio Innocentius., to the bishops AURELIUS, ALYPIUS, AUGUSTINE, EVODIUS, POSSIDIUS, greeting. 594A

The letters of your fraternity, full of faith and strengthened with all the vigour of the catholic religion, sent from two councils through our brother and fellow bishop Julius, we have received with a most grateful mind, because their tenor and whole contexture Garnier here has contertio est, and below integra relatio ita consistit for integra ratione consistit. Before that, for correctione, the Corbie manuscript has correptione. rests with sound reason upon the consideration of the daily grace of God and upon the correction of those who think the contrary: so that it may both take away In Quesnel, as in the Pithou manuscript, pos int. The other books more correctly have possit, that is, the contexture of the letters. Next, the Roman edition and that of the Councils have idoneo dato cuiris, except that in the older editions of the Councils quovis remains. In Garnier: idoneum cuivis, dato legis. all error from them, and, given any example whatever of our law, may offer them a worthy and fit teacher whom they ought to follow. But of these things, as I think, we have already said enough above, when, answering your reports, we wrote back what we thought either of their faithlessness or of your judgment. But 594Bthereupon there comes to hand and is supplied against them what may be said: nor can there ever In the editions of Merlin, Crabbe, Garnier and Augustine, as in the Vatican manuscripts, deesse. It seems better to prefer esse with the other books, as if it were said: Nor can it ever come about that that doctrine should prevail which is so wretched and so impious that it is more fully overcome by the strength of our faith and by the truth itself. be what may prevail, since that is so wretched and impious which is more fully overcome by the strength of our faith and by the truth itself. For he who has spurned and despised every hope of life, confounding his heart with a hostile and damnable disputation, since he believes that there is nothing which he may receive from God, nor anything left which he may ask for his healing; he who has taken this from himself, what has he left The Vatican manuscripts: quid requirit. further?

If therefore there are some whom so great a perversity Merlin: defixit; Garnier: devinxerit. Lower down Crabbe and Labbe have oberrans; and the Roman edition aberrans for abhorrens. has bound to its defence, who give themselves up to and join themselves with this doctrine, hoping that that belongs to catholic teaching which, shrinking far from it, is proved to be thoroughly contrary, The editions: infecti; the Vatican manuscript: infectis; they are corrected from an old Colbert exemplar. These answer to the words of the five e, i-covorum no. 14: which scandal its hearers and, perversely, ITS LOVERS do not cease to spread everywhere. For if they come to know, etc. led on by their affection and by their admonitions and words to slip, they will make haste to return to 594Cthe right track of the way, lest error, besieging the mind any longer Garnier: nec diutius.... invadet. and as it were fed upon their senses, 595Ashould invade it. For if Pelagius, in whatever place he has stayed, has deceived by this assertion the minds of those who would easily or simply believe him as he disputed, One Colbert codex and the Pithou, with the Corbie in the first hand: seu hic illi, etc. The other, as in Quesnel: seu hic aliqui decepti sint, quos nescientes. whether those are in this city, which, not knowing it, we can neither make manifest nor deny, since even if they are, they lie hidden, nor would they ever dare either to defend him when he preaches these things, or to throw out such things when any one In one manuscript: quolibet nostrorum. of ours is present, and in so great a multitude of people someone could easily be detected, In Garnier: nec ubi lateat possit. Manuscripts of lower note: nec deprehendi aliquis facile vel alicubi. nor be recognized anywhere; or whether they dwell in any place of the earth whatever, we believe by the mercy and grace of our God that they will easily be corrected on hearing the condemnation of him who has been found the obstinate and resisting author of this doctrine. Nor does it matter where these have been, so long as, wherever they can be found, they are to be healed. 595B

We, however, In place of the particle nec, Garnier substituted vix. cannot be persuaded that he has been cleared, although acts have been brought to us Garnier recalled here from the early editions of Augustine: a nostris quibusdam laicis. The acts of the synod of Diospolis are meant here. by I know not what laymen, in which he would believe himself both heard and acquitted. Whether these are true we doubt, because they came with no proceeding of that council, Merlin and Crabbe: executione; then Garnier: innotuerint: the other books opposing. nor have we received any letters on this matter from those before whom this man pleaded the causes of this affair. But if he had been able to be confident of his clearing, we believe that he would rather have done this, which could have been much more truly done, namely to compel them by his letters to indicate In Quesnel: quid judicaverint, which the Navarre codex also has from a second correction; which indeed, with the other exemplars of Isidore, showed quid judicaverunt. The later editions of the Councils: qui judicarerunt. In Augustine: qui dijudicaverunt. In the Roman edition, as in the Colbert, Pithou and Corbie manuscripts: quid judicaverant. Nearer to these comes what we recall from Merlin, Crabbe, etc.: qui dijudicaverant. But Garnier's quod judicaverant more ecclesiastico indicare smacks of a gloss. what they had judged. But since there are some things set down in the acts themselves which, when objected, he partly suppressed by avoiding them, partly confounded in total obscurity by twisting many words back upon himself, some things he cleared by false arguments rather than by true reason, One of the Colbert manuscripts: quod ad tempus. Garnier presents this whole passage thus: quam vera ratione purgavit negando, alia falsa interpretando, ne ad tempus quidem videri potuerit absolutus, words taken away or added or moved from their place against the credit of the other books. From this account of Innocent one may suspect that the acts of the synod of Diospolis sent to him were not genuine, but those which Pelagius had adulterated and which he called the paper of his defence, such as the same heretic had also sent to Augustine. Certainly Augustine too suspects, in the book On the Proceedings of Pelagius, no. 57, that he had taken pains that those adulterated acts should run about everywhere, where he says: Who would not believe that this was contrived, so that that paper might run about everywhere as though it were an abridgement of those acts? Nor should we think without reason that those unknown men who brought the writing mentioned were devoted to Pelagius, and delivered to Innocent what, out of favour to their master, they held as established. Rightly therefore does Innocent say above that he doubts of those acts, whether they are true, and repeats it below. as he could seem for the time, 595Cdenying some things, turning others by a false interpretation.

596ABut would that, what is rather to be wished, he may now turn himself from that error of his own track to the true way of the catholic faith, so that he may desire and wish to be cleared, considering the daily grace of God and acknowledging his help, so that he may be seen In Augustine, as in the manuscripts: verum. Shortly after, Labbe, following the Roman edition and Merlin: gestorum judicio: wrongly. truly and be approved by all as corrected by manifest reason, not by the showing of acts, but with his heart turned to the catholic faith! Wherefore we can neither approve nor blame the judgment of those men, since we do not know whether the acts are true; or, if they are true, whether it is certain that he rather slipped out than cleared himself with the whole truth. If he is confident, and knows that what he says is not worthy of our condemnation, Quesnel, having put before this Qui si se confidit, here adds ut confirmet verum esse quod dicat, aut etiam hoc totum, etc., a mere gloss, which we have not found even in the old exemplars of the Codex he himself published. In the Roman edition the conjunction aut is lacking before jam hoc totum. By Garnier, and thence in the new edition of Augustine, this passage was published thus: Quod si confidit novitque nostra dignum se esse damnatione, quod dicat jam totum hoc refutare (in Augustine, refutasse) quod dixerat. Our reading is the better in that it is not only drawn out according to the credit of the old codices, but is also fuller and more complete than the others. For Innocent means this: that if Pelagius is confident that what he even now says and teaches is not worthy of condemnation, or that he has already refuted, that is, retracted and repudiated, what he had formerly said and taught, he himself, sure of his acquittal, ought to hasten to Rome. or that he has already refuted all this which he had said, he ought not to be summoned by us, but rather himself to hasten, so that he can be acquitted. For if he still thinks in such a way, when, summoned by any letters whatever, The editions: acceptis; the Pithou manuscript: acceptus. More fittingly the Corbie: accitus. A little before, for accersiri, the Vatican manuscript has acciri. 596Bwill he commit himself to our judgment, since he knows that he is to be condemned? But if he were to be summoned, it would better be done by those who are nearer and are seen not to be separated by a long space of lands. But care will not be lacking if he offers matter for the medicine. For he can condemn what he had thought, and by letters sent, as befits a return to us, ask pardon for his error, dearest brethren.

The book indeed which was said to be his, sent to us by your charity, we have unrolled: in which we read that many things were written against the grace of God, many blasphemous things, nothing that pleased, nothing almost This pene, and the words above, multa contra Dei gratiam legimus esse conscripta, have been restored from Augustine's edition and the Vatican and Corbie manuscripts, since they were lacking in the others. that did not wholly displease, to be condemned and trodden under foot by anyone, whose like no other would take into his mind and think except him who had written these things. 596CFor we did not 597Athink it necessary in this place to dispute more broadly about the law, as though Pelagius were placed before us and resisting; since we are conversing with you who know the whole The Roman edition and that of the Councils: totam rem. The Corbie manuscript: totum. More truly the other printed and written books: totam, namely the law. For, as Quesnel noted, Innocent alludes to that saying of the Apostle, Rom. VII, 1: For I speak to them that know the law. So too afterwards Celestine, addressing the synod of Ephesus in Epistle 17, no. 4, says: Encouraged briefly by all these things, since, as the Apostle says, I speak to them that know the law. of it, and who rejoice with us in equal assent. For these examples are better set down when we deal with those whom it is plain to be ignorant of these matters. In three manuscripts, as in the edition of the Councils: prudentes. The other books more correctly: imprudentes, that is, unskilled and rude men who are less versed in the law. Therefore the nearest melius is the same as more opportunely and more fittingly. For concerning the possibility of nature, concerning free will, and concerning all the grace of God, and daily grace, to whom that thinks rightly would it not be most fruitful to dispute? Let him therefore anathematize what he has thought: so that those who had fallen through his discourses and precepts may know at length what the true faith holds. For they will be able to be recalled more easily when they perceive that these things are condemned by their own author. But if he wishes obstinately to persist in this impiety, it must be done Garnier: qualiter vel iis possit subveniri, quos non scelus huc, sed magis error induxit: corruptly. Here the author of the error is distinguished from those whom he led astray. so that help may at least be given to those whom not their own error but rather his has led on; lest this medicine perish for them too, whose cure this man neither admits nor asks for. ( And 597Bin another hand: ) May God keep you safe, dearest brethren. Given on the sixth day before the Kalends of February In Quesnel, as in the Roman edition and that of the Councils and most manuscripts, what follows is lacking. In its place Garnier substituted Honorio XI et Constantio II coss. He who wrote out the Corbie codex, unless the fault is older, having the genuine reading before his eyes, set it out thus corrupted through unskilfulness: Pridie kalendas Februarias gloriosissimi Theodosii qui et Junii quarti Palladii v. c. conss. That is, as was observed in the newest edition of Augustine, moving the sign p. c. from its place and joining it with VI kalendas, he made pridie kalendas out of it; and in place of Theodosii VII aug. he read Theodosii qui. By comparison with Epistle 29, as each slip becomes manifest, so it is also repaired. The same subscription is given thus in the Vatican manuscript: Data kal. Februarii post. cons. Theodosii aug. et Junii Quarti Palladii, the two numeral signs, namely, being omitted. (Jan. 27, ann. 417) after the consulship of the most glorious Theodosius Augustus for the seventh time and of Junius Quartus Palladius, V. C.

INNOCENT TO AURELIUS, bishop of Carthage.

In familiar writings true love consists. For the offices of charity buy a firmer right better The Roman edition and that of the Councils: melius se orsa mercantur; they are corrected from the manuscripts. Just after, extrinsecus missae, that is, written separately. apart. Wherefore, through our brother Julius, I was eager to answer An old exemplar of Quesnel's Codex: respondere maluimus, ne apud nos forsitan, and just after frater charissime omitted. a letter sent separately, lest perchance there should remain with me the offence of a particular greeting 597Cdenied, dearest brother. I therefore restore the aforesaid brother of ours to thy love, with the judgments of the apostolic see In the early editions of the Councils and the Roman, the word dignum is wrongly added here, against the credit of the manuscripts. Further, Innocent calls judicata the answers which show the judgment of the apostolic see on matters referred to it. We shall see in their place that these two words, judicatum and constitutum, are synonyms for Pope Vigilius and for Gregory. upon the report of the twofold synod. It remains that the Lord, entreated by us, may deign to grant that every stain of his Church may be wiped away by our continual labours. May God keep thee 598Asafe, fratrer dearest brother. Given on the sixth day before the Kalends of February The consular note, omitted here, is to be supplied from the preceding letters..

The three following letters were first published at Rome among the pontifical letters from an old book of the Vatican library, and afterwards reprinted by Baronius too, at the year 416, after a collation of them had been made with another codex. Whence their first editor thought occasion was given for writing them he explains thus: « When John, bishop of Jerusalem, followed the errors of Origen, Jerome, living at Bethlehem, and very many others abstained from his communion. For which reason, through the work of John, they were afflicted with many evils. » But we have learned the truer cause of them from what Augustine relates at the close of the book On the Proceedings of Pelagius, in this manner: « But concerning those things which after this judgment (held at Diospolis in Palestine) are said to have been perpetrated there with incredible audacity by I know not what band of abandoned men, who are said to favour Pelagius in a very 598Bperverse way, so that the servants and handmaids of God belonging to the care of holy Jerome were afflicted with most wicked slaughter, a deacon was killed, the buildings of the monasteries were burned, and he himself was scarcely protected from this onset and incursion of the impious, in the mercy of God, by a more fortified tower, I see that we must rather be silent, and wait to see what our brethren the bishops there think should be done about these great evils, which who would believe they could pass over? » For it is clear that the evils described in the letters subjoined were suffered by Jerome not at all from the Origenists but from the Pelagians.

From the same account we learn that the irruption of these heretics into the monastery committed to Jerome's care happened after the synod of Diospolis. Whence it follows that it by no means took place at the time when Jerome was abstaining from John's communion. For in the year 415, as the month of December was running out, the synod of Palestine, or of Diospolis, 598Cwas held. But from the year 397 the learned prove that John had been reconciled with Jerome through the work of Theophilus of Alexandria. (V. Tillem. tom. XII, p. 199.) From the same place it is also manifest that the following letters were by no means written before the year 416. But neither does the death of John, recorded at the year 417, allow them to be much later than this year. By Baronius they are referred to the end 599Aof the year 416. But he ought to have gathered from Epistle 33 itself that they are to be put off to the year 417. For Aurelius, to whom this letter is inscribed, and through whom Jerome wished his letters to be delivered to Innocent, and in turn Innocent wished those in which he wrote back to Jerome to be delivered to him, he judges to be none other than the bishop of Cathaginensi Carthage; nor does anyone oppose him in this matter. But in truth, when this Aurelius with his colleagues wrote at the beginning of the year 417 to Innocent against Pelagius and Coelestius, he did not know that Jerome had suffered anything from the satellites of these heretics. At that time it was only noised abroad in Africa that Pelagius, established at Jerusalem, was deceiving many there, but that many more, of whom in the letter of the synod of Milevis Jerome alone is named, « were contending against him for the grace of Christ and the truth of the catholic faith. » Certainly this place called for the addition also of what the new defender of the grace of Christ had borne from the impious, if knowledge of so atrocious a crime had reached Africa. It is not to be doubted, however, that 599Bthat most keen conflict of Jerome against Pelagius was the true cause why he was dealt with so cruelly. Although, therefore, Eustochium and Paula had kept silent about the cause and the author of the violence brought upon their monastery, yet it was not difficult for Innocent, forewarned of what Pelagius was busy doing at Jerusalem, to scent this out.

This pope rebuked John of Jerusalem with letters so threatening, not only because it was his part either to restrain or to punish such great crimes, but also because perhaps a suspicion was not lacking that he had favoured them. The old enmities between him and Jerome on the cause of Origen, although long since laid to rest, were not hidden. He had also heard, as report announced, how greatly Pelagius was loved by John. Wherefore Augustine, epist. 179, no. 1, addresses John himself thus: « But Pelagius our brother, thy son, whom I hear that thou lovest much; » and in no. 5: « If you love Pelagius, let him also love you, nay rather himself, 599Cand not deceive you. »

Lastly we observe that the letter of Innocent to this John savours of Greek phrasing: and therefore that this pope either wrote in Greek, or at least took care that what he had written in Greek should be turned into Latin, and that only the Latin interpretation of this Greek text, very tenacious of the letter, has come down to us. Certainly one or another place which at first sight appears obscure or even maimed, when brought to the Greek phrasing, at once comes out clear and whole.

• 600A

INNOCENT TO HIS MOST BELOVED BROTHER AURELIUS.

Our fellow presbyter Jerome did well to believe in thy most pious affection for coming Some persuade themselves from this, following Baronius, that the letters of Jerome, as also of Eustochium and Paula, to Innocent were carried by Aurelius himself. Yet this Aurelius is mentioned here as having the affection for coming into the City, not as having come. Nor, if he had been present in person, would there have been need of these letters. We should therefore think it better that he took pains to have them carried by one of his own people. to us. We suffer with a member of our flock, and what we thought should be done, or were able to do, we have speedily carried out. Let thy brotherhood, dearest brother, make haste to deliver the letter all the sooner to the aforementioned ( Jerome ).

INNOCENT TO HIS MOST BELOVED SON JEROME, PRESBYTER. 600B

The Apostle testifies that contention has never done any good in the Church; and therefore he bids that the rebukes of heretics be made first rather So we had thought it should be corrected, because it had been published thus with no sense, nay with a sense contrary to Innocent's mind, as magisque diuturna, when our conjecture was confirmed by a re-examination of the Vatican archetype itself, and we learned that the fault had arisen from the mere unskilfulness of a copyist in reading old books. Innocent looks to that saying of Paul, Tit. III, 10: A man that is a heretic after the first and second rebuke avoid. And that pope teaches this chiefly of the obstinate and deceitful heretic, such as Pelagius was, who was more eager to deceive and to cover his heresy than to seek the truth. than that they be drawn out in lengthy conference. While this rule is carelessly regarded, Baronius, having thrown aspicitur out to the margin of the book (which here is the same as consideratur), substituted accipitur in the text. the evil which is to be guarded against is not avoided, but increased. Yet since thy grief and groaning so shake our bowels that In the Vatican manuscript ratio is lacking. Some other word is wanted for the completeness of the sentence. It will be more complete if one reads ut nulla ratio. there is reason for not treating and consulting: first I address the faith of thy constancy. That everyone, for the truth, is struck with injury or, as thou sayest, with danger, In the edition of the Councils, after Baronius: qui exspectat. More truly the Roman, with the Vatican manuscript: quia exspectet. This reading will become clearer if construed thus: Quisque (as quisquis) injuria aut periculo pro veritate percelletur, quia is beatitudinem exspectet, ipsi multis saepe narrastis, that is, exposuistis. From which it follows that a man of this sort, since he is blessed in hope, is the less to be mourned. because he awaits blessedness, you have often related in many words, and we remind The Roman edition: et tu averte praedicationum; the others: et tuae verbis praedicationis: they are corrected by the help of the Vatican manuscript, in which tuarum te praedicationum stands. thee, well mindful of thy own preachings. And so, roused by so great a scene of evils, we hastened to take up the authority of the apostolic see for putting down all wickedness; 600Cbut against whom we should rise up we read neither named by name nor taxed with any account of the crime. What therefore we can, we grieve with thee. But if thou layest an open and manifest accusation against any men, I will either assign competent judges, or, if anything more urgent and careful can be done by us, I will not delay it, most beloved son. Yet I have written to my brother bishop John that he act more circumspectly: lest This place will be more complete if it is read thus: ne si circa ecclesiam sibi creditam adhuc tale aliquid fiat, quale providere eum oportuit ne accideret, vel ne accidat. Innocent here mentions what he writes to John at the beginning of the following letter: It behoved thy brotherhood to keep guard, and to provide more carefully for his own flock, lest anything of this kind should arise, and also the other things with which he closes that same letter. With what Innocent now writes are to be compared these words of Augustine, in the book On the Proceedings of Pelagius, no. 66, about the same evils: For the impious doctrines of men of this kind are to be refuted by any catholics whatever, even those who are far away from those lands, lest they be able to do harm wherever they have been able to reach. But impious deeds, whose restraint belongs to episcopal discipline, are to be punished chiefly where they are committed, by those present or placed nearby, with pastoral diligence and godly severity. We therefore, placed so far away, ought to wish that such an end be given to these causes there that there be no need for them to be judged any further anywhere. Where that doctor, distinguishing impious doctrines from impious deeds, teaches that impious doctrines can be refuted by any catholic and anywhere, but not likewise that impious deeds can be restrained by anyone. But Innocent, thinking otherwise of the power of his see, did not doubt that he had the right of punishing impious deeds committed in a territory no less distant from him than from Augustine, either by assigning competent judges, or even by some other means. Although he comes near to Augustine's opinion in this, that he teaches that competent judges are to be assigned by him. For by this name he may not undeservedly seem to understand bishops placed either in the same province or in the nearest one. anything of the kind 601Ashould still happen with regard to the church entrusted to him, such as to provide against and drive off, lest it should happen, or lest it happen, would be most troublesome even to himself, and afterwards.

INNOCENT TO HIS MOST BELOVED BROTHER JOHN.

Plunderings, slaughters, burnings, every crime, the most noble holy virgins Eustochium and Paula, of utmost It once pleased us, with Baronius and the edition of the Councils, to read dementiae: but afterwards it seemed to us rather that the holy virgins are praised here as of utmost clemency, because they kept silent the name of the hostile man and the cause of the hatreds: and so we must hold to the reading of the Roman edition. clemency, have lamented that the devil has perpetrated in places of thy Church: for they kept silent the name of the man and the cause. And though it be not doubtful 601Bby whom The suspicion of this crime fell upon Pelagius. it was committed, yet it behoved thy brotherhood to keep guard, and to provide more carefully for his So Baronius. But the Roman edition: gregis. This is the first place from which we have conjectured that this letter was turned from the Greek. For what is in Greek τῷ ποιμνίῳ ἑαυτοῦ or αὐτοῦ, if it be rendered in Latin not word for word gregi illius, but as the Latin idiom requires, gregi suo, the course of the sentence, which at first appeared maimed and obscure, will become full and plain. flock, lest anything of this kind should arise which, with danger to others, thy negligence provokes to admit The Roman edition and that of the Councils: amittere gregem, from a bad reading of the old books, in which ammittere is usually written for admittere: they are corrected from Baronius, in whom, however, a no lighter error then stands, where one reads et tales agnos, quos incendio.... nudas, as though the word nudas were the second person of the verb nudo. On which supposition John is proclaimed the author of these crimes, against the whole course of the letter. into the flock of the Lord; and we have heard that such lambs, by fire, by arms and by persecutions, naked, weak, after the slaughters and deaths of their own people, scarcely live. Does nothing move that piety This other place too smells of a Greek speaking Latin after the manner of his own tongue, and one who, having had τὴν εὐσέβειαν before him in Greek, thought that the article τὴν should be expressed in Latin by the word illam. Then he would have said more Latinly tanta... potestas than de tanta... potestate. of thy priesthood, concerning so great a power of the devil let loose against thee and against thine? Against thee, I say; for In Baronius: sacerdotii. so great a wickedness having been accomplished in the Church altogether condemns the gravity of a priest. Where are thy provisions? where, at least, if the mischances had happened, the aids or consolations, 602Asince they say that they still fear more than they complain of having suffered? I would judge more deeply if they had spoken with me somewhat more openly on this matter. See, brother, the snares of the ancient enemy, and watch with the spirit of a good ruler, so that these things which have been brought to us more by report than by manifest accusation may either be corrected or checked: lest the ecclesiastical law concerning things overthrown compel him who has not defended to answer for The editions: causis, for which word we had already conjectured that causam, that is, account, should be restored, when we learned that causas is read in the archetype. Further, jus ecclesiasticum is expressed here in the nominative case. the causes.

INNOCENT TO This Probus seems to have been the son of Probus the praetorian prefect and of Proba Faltonia, that distinguished matron of whom and of whose children Jerome, epist. 8, to Demetrias, has this: That Proba, the most illustrious name of every dignity and of all nobility in the Roman world, whose holiness and goodness toward all was venerable even among the barbarians, whom the ordinary consulships of her three children Probinus, Olybrius and Probus did not weary: and when, the houses having been burned and plundered, there is captivity in the City, she is now said to renumdare the possessions she has held. Ursa is readily believed to have been carried off in that captivity which happened in the year 409, in the month of August, when the City was stormed by Alaric; but when she returned is not known. PROBUS.

602BThe turmoil of the barbarian storm has brought a mischance upon the power So the Roman edition, with the genuine Royal exemplar of Dionysius. But the other books: legis. of the laws. For captivity's incursion had made a blemish in the well-established marriage between Fortunius and Ursa, had not the holy statutes of religion provided. For while the aforesaid woman Ursa was held in captivity, the aforementioned Fortunius is known to have entered into another marriage with Restituta (34, q. 1 et 2, c. 2; Ivo p. 8, c. 245). But by the favour of the Lord Ursa returned and came to us, and, no one denying it, fully proved herself to be the wife of the aforementioned. Wherefore, lord son of deserved renown, we decree, the catholic faith giving its support, that that is the marriage which was from the first The marriage which the catholic faith judges to be founded by divine grace we rightly believe to be a sacrament. For a similar cause a similar answer was given afterwards in Leo, epist. 149, no. 2. Cresconius too indicates the answers of both pontiffs under the single canon 226. Before, Tertullian, book II To his Wife, no. 8, had proclaimed of Christian marriage: Whence shall we suffice to set forth the happiness of that marriage which the Church joins, and the oblation confirms, and the blessing seals, angels announce, the Father holds ratified? founded by divine grace; 603Aand that the union with the second woman, the former surviving and not cast out by divorce, can by no means be lawful.

INNOCENT TO FELIX, bishop So the Royal codex, where in the others: Nuceriano. of Nocera.

1 We cannot wonder that thy love follows the institutions of the elders, and refers to us, as to the head and 603Bsummit of the episcopate, all things that can admit any doubt, so that the apostolic see, being consulted, may namely pronounce something certain out of the doubtful matters themselves The editions: faciendum pronuntiet, the conjunction being omitted, which is recalled from the manuscripts. and to be done. Which we both gladly accept, and approve thy love as mindful of the canons.

Thou hast written, then, that by the fervour of faith in which thou art strong, and by love of the holy people, thou hast either repaired the churches of God or built certain new ones: but that in these thou hast no clerics whom thou mightest appoint, and that some are mutilated, some are digamists. At which we were astonished, that a prudent man should have wished to consult about things which are known to all by certain reason. We therefore say this not as to men ignorant; but we say that you, occupied perhaps with other things, have forgotten this.

Whoever, then, of his own will has cut off part of any finger 603Cfrom himself, him the canons do not admit to the clergy (Dist. 55, c. 6; Concil. Tribur. c. 33, Nicaen. c. 1) But whomsoever it has befallen The Royal manuscript: labsu aliquo. by some chance, while he is either bestowing care on rustic work, or, doing something, has struck himself not of his own accord, these the canons direct both to be made clerics and, if they have been found in the clergy, not to be cast out. For in the former the will In the same codex: voluntas est quae sibi ausa fuerit ferrum incidere, judicata being omitted; which word is the same as damnata, inasmuch as veniam meruit is opposed to it just after. And the reason of this judgment is subjoined, that such a one would not hesitate to commit against others, that is, would commit without any scruple, what he had committed against himself. Hence dubitari, which then stands in the printed texts, does not please. Then in the Royal manuscript: possint; nothing prevents that word from being admitted, referred to those whose will is charged, not to the will itself. has been judged, which has dared to lay the iron upon itself, because, namely, it could not hesitate to do 604Athis to others as well: but in the latter the chance has earned pardon.

Concerning Labbe, as in the Royal manuscript: bigamis. The other books more elegantly: digamis. digamists, however, there ought not even to have been a consultation, since the reading of the Apostle is manifest, that a man of one wife ought to be admitted to the priesthood or to the clerical state, and this very one only if he took her a virgin (I Tim. III, 2). For she who has had a husband before, although he be dead, yet if she has afterwards been joined to a cleric, the cleric who has taken her cannot be one, because it is provided in the law that a priest cannot have as wife a widow, nor one cast off (Levit. XXI, 13).

But thy religion has consulted concerning laymen, whom the canons forbid to be ordained (Vide concil. Sardic. c. 13). It is certain indeed that the ecclesiastical rules contain this: but it has not been so defined as to have been decreed of 604Ball laymen. For clerics cannot be born and not be made: but (Dist. 51, c. 2; Ivo. p. 6, c. 95) the kinds have been marked out from which men cannot come to the clerical state, that is, if any of the faithful has served as a soldier, if any of the faithful has pleaded causes, that is, By this word is designated the advocate, who demands that penalties be decreed by the judges against the accused, just as by the word administrantis just after is indicated the judge, whose part it is to decree penalties and torments of this kind, or even to pronounce a capital sentence. About both of these Exsuperius, bishop of Toulouse, once doubted whether they were to be admitted even to communion. Innocent, consulted on this matter, answers him in epist. 6, chap. 3 and 5. has prosecuted, if any of the faithful has held an administration. Concerning curials, moreover, the reason is manifest; since, even if men of this sort are found who ought to be made clerics, yet since they are rather often reclaimed to the curia, one must beware of them (Vide supra epist. 2, n. 14) on account of the trouble which often comes to the Church from them.

But laymen who were baptized having wives, and have so ordered themselves that their reputation wavers in nothing, so that they have either been joined to clerics, or have clung to monasteries 604Cfrom the time they were baptized, and if they have known not a So Dionysius, which was not changed even in the exemplars sent by Hadrian to Charlemagne. But the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections, as in the printed texts: concubinam. It is to be noted that Innocent so permits access to the clergy to those who have taken a wife that he wishes them to have the testimony of a life led innocently from the time they were baptized. concubine, not a mistress, if they have been watchful in all The word omnibus, first struck out by Crabbe and not restored afterwards, is recalled from Merlin and the manuscripts. good works, such men are not forbidden to be taken up into the lot of the clerical state. CHAP. V.--Yet so, that the times established by the elders be observed in their case (V. Siric. epist. 1, n. 13, et Zosim. epist. 9, n. 5). Nor let anyone quickly become a lector, quickly an acolyte, quickly a deacon, quickly a priest: because if in The Royal exemplar: in omnibus officiis. From this place it is seen how frivolous is what an unskilled writer writes, who, having persuaded himself that the Roman pontiffs were accustomed to ordain only once a year, in the month of December, contends that those who had been ordained had to wait, by no law save that of necessity, until another year, in order to be advanced to a higher grade. the lesser offices 605Athey continue long, both their life and their services alike are approved, so that afterwards, having served out the merits of their stipends, they may come to the priesthood, and may not snatch beforehand what a proved life deserves to receive.

Since, then, it has been shown by a certain definition who ought to be admitted, or who rejected: out of all those whom thy worthiness sees cannot be rejected thou shalt be bound to choose those whom thou wouldst make clerics. For if we are willing to show NO FAVOUR or benefit to men, we can find such men that, concerning their taking up, we may be able neither to incur scandal nor to blush.

INNOCENT TO MAXIMUS and SEVERUS, bishops among the Bruttii.

605BThe norm of the ecclesiastical canons ought to be unknown to none of the priests: because it is unbecoming enough for these things not to be known by a pontiff, especially since they are both known by religious lay men and held to be binding. Recently indeed (Dist. 81, c. 6). Maximilian our son, an agens in rebus, The printed texts, with the manuscripts of the Spanish and Isidorian collections: in rebus hujusmodi qualem querelam: they are corrected from the exemplars of Dionysius and Hadrian. the series of his petition, annexed, declares what sort of complaint he has brought. Who, led by zeal for faith and discipline, does not suffer the Church to be polluted by unworthy presbyters, who, he asserts, have begotten sons while in the presbyterate. That this is not lawful I would set forth, did I not know that your prudence has knowledge of the whole law. And therefore, dearest brethren, having looked into the tenor of the petition which is subjoined, you will order those who are said to have perpetrated such things to be placed in the midst; and the objections which are thrust upon these presbyters having been examined, 605CSo the manuscripts of the collections of Dionysius and Hadrian. But others, with the printed texts: si convicti fuerint; and just after tractare for tentare. It does not escape me that the Africans, Code of the Canons of the African Church, c. 4, decreeing that the bishop, the presbyter and the deacon, or those who HANDLE the sacraments, as guardians of chastity abstain from their wives, seem to favour the latter reading. But we have thought that we must by no means depart from the manuscripts which we have found more genuine: especially since here the discourse is about presbyters alone, and by the name sanctorum are understood not only the sacraments of the body and blood of Christ, but whatever things belong to the ministry of presbyters. Wherefore the word tentare, the more general it is, the more apt it is also for expressing this. if they can be convicted, let them be removed from the priestly office: because those who are not holy cannot handle holy things; and let them be made strangers to the ministry which they have polluted The Royal manuscript: polluunt. by living unlawfully. We wonder, moreover, that their bishops overlook these things, so that they are judged either to connive or not to know them to be unlawful.

• 606A

INNOCENT TO AGAPITUS, MACEDONIUS and In the printed texts, Mauriano; the Royal manuscript, Martino. The rest, Mariano. MARIANUS, epicopis bishops of Apulia.

That many things are usurped by very many in the province against the ecclesiastical canons and the decrees of the elders, both the reports of divers persons and most faithful suggestions have brought back: which indeed could easily be cut away if bishops were not found the authors in these things, who, while they strive to show favour either to friends or to those who are obsequious, violate religion and corrupt the orders. And so it comes about that all the unworthy take up ecclesiastical honours, and those are admitted to the clergy who would not deserve to have a worthy place even among the laity: just as has been shown in the petition now given to us, 606Bthat a certain Modestus, involved in many crimes, on account of which he is also said to have done penance, has not only been made a cleric, which is not lawful, but also is reaching toward the summit of the episcopate; whereas the canons established at Nicaea exclude penitents even from the lowest offices of the clergy Not indeed in express words, but because the fathers of this council decree that from which this is understood to follow. Nay, since in can. 10 they profess to follow the ecclesiastical rule on this matter, they set it down as already established before. And indeed that reasoning applies to all who are defiled by any stain of grave sin, by which Cyprian, epistle 72, with the common consent of the brethren, keeps back and removes from the clergy those who were returning to the Church from heresy or schism: For priests and ministers who serve the altar and the sacrifices ought to be whole and spotless. To this tend in truth the laws which the Church sanctioned from the beginning, that none should be promoted to the clergy save those who had led from baptism a life harmless and clean from every stain of any crime. But if anyone's fault, at first hidden, was afterwards discovered, the Nicene canons 2 and 10 will that he, when at length convicted, be deposed. See above, epist. 16, n. 11. (Dist. 50, c. 60; Nic. conc. c. 10). And therefore, dearest brethren, having looked into the tenor of the petition, you will order him to be presented: and if it has truly been established that he is such as the petition affirms, let him be removed not only from the ambition, Crabbe and the other editors after him: ab episcopatus ambitione; Merlin and all the manuscripts opposing. Nor indeed is Modestus kept only from the episcopate, but from any grade whatever which he had not yet attained, and from which he was reaching toward the summit of the episcopate. but also from the office of the clerical state.

INNOCENT TO FLORENTINUS, So the old codices of the collections of Dionysius and Hadrian. But others: Florentio. bishop of Tibur.

606CNot once but several times divine Scripture cries out that the bounds set by the fathers ought not to be moved: because it is wickedness if one should invade what another has always possessed, which our brother and fellow bishop Ursus asserts that thy goodness has perpetrated. For he has complained, not without grief, that thou didst invade the parish of Nomentum, or of Felicia, In the Royal manuscript: Faciliensem. Next, the word paroecia signifies not a collection of several churches subject to a bishop, in which sense it is commonly taken in early times, but a single church assigned to one presbyter. In the same sense it is used above too, epist. 25, n. 8, by Innocent himself. belonging from of old to his Paschasius Quesnel, on Leo's first letter, note 4, laying it down as certain that the word DIOCESE was hardly used in those times (of Leo) by the bishops of the Romans or of the Eastern parts for a provincial parish subject to some bishop, raises this place of Innocent against himself, and says that in it the word diocese seems to him to be taken for administration, though he admits that in the use in which it is now frequent it was familiar both to the Africans at that time and, after Leo's time, to the Gauls. But since there were then only two dioceses in Italy in the sense in which this word signifies an administration, namely the Roman, over which the Roman prelate presided, and the Italian, which was under the bishop of Milan, in that sense the parish of Nomentum belonged to the diocese of the Roman prelate, not to that of Ursus or Florentinus. But we shall see that the word diocese was used for the episcopal territory by Hilarus, Leo's successor, as also by Gelasius, Vigilius, etc. The same is its use both in Augustine's epistle 209, n. 8, and in these words of the first council of Toledo, can. 20: It has pleased that from this day no other but the bishop shall make chrism and send it through the DIOCESE. 607Adiocese, and celebrated the divine mysteries there, without consulting him and without his knowledge. If this is true, know that thou hast not lightly Crabbe added culpam here of his own: a word which would require not non leviter but non levem. Yet it was not corrected afterwards. Further, incurrere and offendere are synonyms in Tully. fallen into it. Wherefore, if thou desirest to decline the odium of so great a usurpation, it befits thee, admonished by our letter, to abstain. Certainly, if thou believest that any justice supports thee, all things remaining untouched and in their former state, thou must be present after the venerable days of Easter, so that thou mayest be able to answer the charges of the The printed texts, after Crabbe: memoratis. More fittingly Merlin and the manuscripts: memorati, namely of Ursus. Next, intentionibus, that is, the expostulation. For intentio was familiar to the ancients for a controversy and expostulation, or a suit brought. aforementioned: and, the parties having been placed in the midst, we may inquire what antiquity or truth holds.

607BINNOCENT TO LAURENTIUS, bishop In some manuscripts: Siniensi. In Merlin: Symensi. of Senia.

We have long wondered, having read the letter of thy love, that heretics following the poisons of Photinus are not only in the territory of thy love, but also publicly prepare conventicles for themselves on the possessions of certain people; whereas nowhere from almost the whole world have so many chosen to dwell as among you. The author of whose nefarious doctrine, Marcus, driven out of the City some time ago, has been led by the audacity of such great rashness as to claim the first place among them for himself. But lest they have any further opportunity of raging, and drag with them into Gehenna, to which they are destined, the souls of the simple and of the rustic, The Roman edition: rusticorum. The other books more correctly: rusticanorum: by which word are designated not the inhabitants of the country, but men lacking learning. action has been taken against them by the defenders The name and office of the defenders of the Roman church, if I remember well, we now read mentioned for the first time in the letters of the supreme pontiffs. But Innocent does not speak of that office as newly instituted. Mention of them will recur at the end of epistle 9, of Zosimus to Hesychius. of our Church, by which they may be able to expel them: 608Aso that those who deny that Christ God was begotten of the substance of the Father before the ages may have a share in the condemnation with the Jews, who denied his deity and deny it even until now. It is thy part, dearest brother, to carry out the things commanded not the more sluggishly: lest thou lose by dissimulation the people entrusted to thee, and begin to render account to God for the lost.

Among these, as Augustine testifies (Lib. de Gratia Christi, c. 30), Pelagius says that there are things about which men try to defame him: one, that he denies to little ones the sacrament of baptism, and promises the kingdom of heaven to some without the redemption 608Bof Christ: the other, that he says that man can so avoid sin as to exclude the help of God, and trusts so much in free will as to repudiate the aid of grace.

Augustine continues (Ibid., c. 31): When he had mixed in with these invidious complaints about his enemies, he comes to the matter thus: Behold, let this letter clear me before thy beatitude, in which purely and simply we say that we have whole free will for sinning and for not sinning, which in all good works is always helped by divine aid.

Then, says Augustine (Ibid.,), having interposed certain things about the condition of man, and about his natural possibility of sinning and of not sinning, he added: 609AWhich power of free will we say is in all generally, in Christians, in Jews and in Gentiles. In all free will is equally by nature: but in Christians alone it is helped by grace. In the former the good of their condition is naked and unarmed: but in these who belong to Christ it is fortified by the help of Christ. The former are to be judged and condemned because, since they have free will, through which they could come to faith and merit On these words Augustine: "Plainly, he says, it is manifest that he says grace is given according to merits, whatever or whatsoever kind of grace he means; which however he does not openly express." the grace of God, they make ill use of the liberty granted. But these are to be rewarded who, making good use of free will, merit the grace of the Lord and keep his commandments.

Likewise he challenged his adversaries to the reading of the books which he had written earlier, in these words 609B(Ibid., c. 35): « Let them read that letter To these Augustine again subjoins: "This I have read; and I found that through almost the whole of it he dwells on nothing but the faculty and possibility of nature, and places the grace of God almost there alone. But Christian grace he touches with such brevity that he seems to have done nothing else than to have feared to be silent about it.", which we wrote to the holy man Paulinus, bishop, almost twelve years ago, which in perhaps three hundred lines confesses nothing else than the grace and help of God, and that we can do nothing at all of good without God. Let them read also the letter Augustine testifies that he could not find this. "But if, he says, it is not unlike the others, it too has not what we are looking for." to the holy bishop Constantius (Ibid., c. 36), where briefly indeed, but plainly, I joined the grace and help of God to the free will of man. Let them read also the one which Of this the same Doctor speaks thus: "This indeed I have read, and it had almost persuaded me that he confesses that grace which is in question. But when other things too had come into my hands, which he wrote later and more at large, I saw how he could have named grace even there, hiding what he thought under an ambiguous generality, yet breaking the odium and declining offence by the word grace." And Augustine laid bare the poison lurking in this work of Pelagius in the epistle formerly 143, now 188, to Juliana, at the end of which letter he marks, not obscurely, this letter of Pelagius to Innocent, nay this very passage, where he says: "But in a certain letter of his, where the same Pelagius both puts his own name most openly and does not keep silent the name of the sacred virgin, he says that he wrote to her, and tries to prove by the testimony of that same work of his that he most openly confesses the grace of God, which he is asserted either to keep silent or to deny." we wrote in the East to Demetrias, the sacred virgin of Christ (Ibid., c. 37): and they will find that we so praise the nature of man that we always add the help of the grace of God. Let them read also my recent Of this little work this is Augustine's judgment: "There are four books of this work, and I have read them... But in these four books also, whatever he seems to say in favour of the grace by which we are helped to turn aside from evil and to do good, he so says that he in no way departs from verbal ambiguity, which he can so explain to his disciples that they believe in no help of grace by which the possibility of nature is aided, except in the law and teaching." And after a few things left out: "But this help of law and teaching he judges to have existed in the times of the prophets too, while the help of grace, which is properly called grace, he judges to consist in the example of Christ; which you perceive nonetheless belongs to teaching, which is preached to us as the gospel." little work (Ibid., c. 41), which we were lately compelled to publish on behalf of free will: and they will recognize how unjustly they have been eager to defame us with the denial 609Cof grace, we who through almost the whole text of that very work perfectly and entirely confess both free will and grace. » 610A

But from this letter too he wishes the reader to pass over to the book of his faith, which he had subjoined to it (Ibid., c. 32). This book of faith, moreover, is inserted whole in the Sermon formerly of Augustine de Tempore 191, now appendix 236, n. 2 and following, and besides has been published separately in the appendix of vol. X of the new edition of the same saint, page 96, as also among the works of Jerome, to whom it had once been ascribed.

Moreover in that letter, « which, » says Augustine (lib. de Peccato origin., n. 19, 20 et 21) , « he sent to Rome to Pope Innocent of blessed memory, and since they did not find him in the body, it was given to holy Pope Zosimus, and directed to me, that is, in the same letter, he complained » that he was defamed To this Augustine, in the place cited: "These things are not objected to them as he has put it. For they neither deny to little ones the sacrament of baptism, nor promise the kingdom of heaven to some without the redemption of Christ... But it is objected to them that they will not confess that unbaptized little ones are liable to the condemnation of the first man." by men, as though he denied to little ones the sacrament of baptism, and promised to some the kingdom 610Bof heaven without the redemption of Christ. » And when he had said « that he had never heard even any impious heretic who would say this of little ones, » he went on: « For who is so ignorant of the reading of the Gospel as not only to attempt to affirm this, but who could even lightly say it or even think it? Next, who so impious as to wish little ones to be excluded from the kingdom of heaven, while he forbids About to bring forward these words of Pelagius, Augustine puts before them: "See him preparing hiding-places of ambiguity as refuges for falsehood, pouring darkness over the truth; so that even we, when we first read these things, almost rejoiced at them as right or corrected. But his broader disputations in his books, he says, where, however much he may cover himself, he is mostly compelled to uncover himself, made even these things suspect to us, so that, looking into them more attentively, we found them ambiguous." them to be baptized and reborn in Christ, and forbids Having explained how much Augustine laboured over the understanding of these words, he adds: "They are so ambiguous that they could afford hiding-places for their doctrine, from which the heretical sense might leap out to lie in wait." him who was born to an uncertain life to be reborn to a perpetual and certain one. »

Together with the aforesaid letter of Pelagius and his little book of faith there was sent to Innocent, and together delivered to Innocent's successor Zosimus, the letter of Praylius, bishop of Jerusalem, of which we learn this one thing from Zosimus, that in it Praylius, John's successor, intervened as a very earnest supporter of the cause 610Cof Pelagius (Epist. 3, n. 2).

But whoever reads the aforesaid 611Afragments of the letter of Pelagius, and weighs also the observations subjoined by Augustine, who knew well all the arts and subterfuges of this crafty heretic, and hears at the same time that the same man was approved and praised by the commendation of the prelate of Jerusalem, will surely wonder the less that Zosimus, receiving his words simply as they sounded, could be deceived by him.

To the letters of Innocent I above, published often, we subjoin a larger part of his unpublished letter to Severian, bishop of Gabala. Indeed in the Arabic codex Haiala is written, not Gabala, a reading which receives some force from the fact that Aila is an episcopal city of Palestine in Le Quien, Or. ch. vol. III, p. 758; but yet among the very few bishops of that city whom 611BLe Quien knew, Severian is not counted. I therefore thought at once of Severian, bishop of Gabala, likewise a Syrian city, who was a contemporary of Innocent; and, what matters more, we learn in the notice of the lost letters of Innocent in Coustant, p. 921, that letters passed back and forth between Severian and Innocent. Besides, a little below in the Arabic codex a fragment likewise of Severian is read, in which place his episcopal see is called not Haiala but Gabala. The fault of the Arabic codex therefore arose from the likeness of a small letter. Let us then gratefully accept this fragment of a letter of Innocent, preserved for us by an Arab.

611CWhen the divine Word came from heaven, and dwelt in the womb of the holy Virgin Mary, from whom he took flesh, he by no means brought his body 612Awith him from heaven, nor did he acquire his divinity on earth; but he himself was God, he himself formed his body in the Virgin's womb; nor did he have any partner in making his body, but he alone made it. And we confess that in all things which were done by the humanity the divinity was its companion, which was never separated from the humanity by any moment of time, not even the least. We confess also that at the very time when our Saviour came from heaven and descended into the womb of the Virgin Mary, he joined the divinity with the humanity, which were never divided in any thing or action, since they were indivisible. And just as his divinity lacks end, so also his humanity remains for ever after the resurrection. He sucked milk from a woman; nonetheless the divinity 612Band the humanity constituted one ( Christ ). Nor let anyone think that at the time when the divine Word on earth came to receive baptism from John, the beginning of his divinity was then, when, namely, John heard the voice of the Father coming out of heaven. It is by no means so; but at the very moment of time at which he descended into the Virgin's womb, one indivisible thing was made with the body and the divinity; and the divinity was the consort of the body, and in a certain immutable and inseparable manner a single unity was made. The divinity is not separated from the humanity. When Christ was on the cross, the divinity did not withdraw from his humanity. He ascended into heaven with the body which he took from the Virgin Mary, and sat at the right hand of his most good Father. This is our 612Cfaith. But those who do not so believe, the catholic Church expels them, nay its author, God, excommunicates them. Praise be to God for ever! Amen.