To Maximus of Antioch, on the Two Heresies and the Rights of His See

Leo to Maximus of Antioch.

How much, beloved, you have at heart the most sacred unity of our common faith and the calm harmony of the church’s peace, the content of your letter shows. It was brought to me by our sons Marian the presbyter and Olympius the deacon, and it was all the more welcome to us because through it we can join, as it were, in conversation. So the grace of God becomes more and more known, and greater joy is felt through the whole world over the revealing of catholic truth. And yet we are deeply grieved over some who, as your messengers indicate, still love their darkness. Though the brightness of day has risen everywhere, they still delight in the obscurity of their blindness. Abandoning the faith, they remain Christians in the empty name only, without the knowledge to tell one error from another, and to distinguish the blasphemy of Nestorius from the impiety of Eutyches. For no delusion of theirs can seem excusable, because in their perversity they contradict themselves. For though the disciples of Eutyches abhor Nestorius, and the followers of Nestorius anathematize Eutyches, yet in the judgment of catholics both sides are condemned, and both heresies alike are cut off from the body of the church, because neither falsehood can be in agreement with us. Nor does it matter in which direction of blasphemy they disagree with the truth of the Lord’s incarnation, since their mistaken opinions hold neither with the authority of the gospel nor with the meaning of the mystery. [a]

So, beloved brother, you must consider with all your heart over which church the Lord has set you to preside. Remember the system of teaching whose foundation the chief of all the apostles, the blessed Peter, laid, not only by his uniform preaching throughout the world but especially by his teaching in the cities of Antioch and Rome. Then you will understand that he requires of the one set over the home of his own renown the institutions he handed down, as he received them from the Truth itself, which he confessed. In the churches of the East, and especially in those which the canons of the most holy fathers at Nicaea assigned to the see of Antioch, you must by no means allow unscrupulous heretics to attack the gospel, or anyone to maintain the dogmas of either Nestorius or Eutyches. For, as I have said, the rock (in Latin, petra) of the catholic faith, from which the blessed apostle Peter took his name at the Lord’s hands, rejects every trace of either heresy. For it openly and clearly anathematizes Nestorius for separating the nature of the Word and of the flesh in the blessed Virgin’s conception, for dividing the one Christ into two, and for wishing to distinguish between the person of the Godhead and the person of the manhood. For he is altogether one and the same, who in his eternal Deity was born of the Father outside time, and in his true flesh was born of his mother in time. In the same way it shuns Eutyches for ignoring the reality of the human flesh in the Lord Jesus Christ, and for asserting that the Word himself was transformed into flesh, so that his birth, nurture, growth, suffering, death and burial, and resurrection on the third day all belonged to his Deity only, which put on not the reality but the semblance of the form of a slave. [c]

So you must use the utmost vigilance so that these depraved heretics do not dare to assert themselves. You must resist them with all the authority of priests, and inform us frequently by your reports of what is being done for the progress of the churches. For it is right that you should share this responsibility with the Apostolic See, and realize that the privileges of the third see in Christendom give you every confidence in acting, privileges that no intrigues will in any way impair. For my respect for the Nicene canons is such that I have never allowed, and never will allow, the institutions of the holy fathers to be violated by any innovation. However different the merits of individual bishops may sometimes be, the rights of their sees are permanent; and although rivalry may perhaps cause some disturbance over them, it cannot impair their dignity. So, brother, if you ever think any action ought to be taken to uphold the privileges of the church of Antioch, be sure to explain it in a letter of your own, so that we may be able to reply to your request completely and fittingly. [d]

But for the present let it be enough to make a general declaration on every point: if, in any synod, anyone makes any attempt on the provisions of the Nicene canons, or seems to seize an occasion of wresting an advantage against them, he can bring no discredit on their inviolable decrees. It will be easier for the compacts of any conspiracy to be broken through than for the regulations of those canons to be invalidated in any particular. For intrigue loses no chance of stealing an advantage, and whenever the course of events brings about a general assembly of priests, it is hard for the greed of the unscrupulous not to try to gain some unfair point. So it was at the Synod of Ephesus, which overthrew the blasphemous Nestorius with his dogma. Bishop Juvenal believed that he could hold the presidency of the province of Palestine, and he ventured to rally the insubordinate by a lying letter. Cyril of blessed memory, bishop of Alexandria, was rightly alarmed at this. He pointed out in his letter to me to what audacity the other man’s greed had led him, and with anxious entreaty begged me earnestly that no assent should be given to his unlawful attempts. For you should know that when we searched our bookcase we found the original of Cyril’s letter, of which you sent us copies. On this, however, my judgment lays particular stress: although a majority of priests, through the cunning of some, came to a decision that is found to be opposed to those constitutions of the 318 fathers, it must be considered void on principles of justice. For the peace of the whole church cannot be kept in any other way than by always showing due respect to the canons. [e]

Of course, if anything is alleged to have been done by the brothers I sent in my place to the holy synod beyond what bore on the faith, it will have no weight at all. For they were sent by the Apostolic See only for the purpose of rooting out heresy and upholding the catholic faith. For whatever is laid before bishops for inquiry beyond the particular subjects that come before synodal councils may admit of some free discussion, if the holy fathers laid down nothing about it at Nicaea. For anything that does not agree with their rules and constitutions can never win the assent of the Apostolic See. How great must be the care with which this rule is kept, you will gather from the copies of the letter we sent to the bishop of Constantinople, restraining his greed; and you are to see that it reaches the knowledge of all our brothers and fellow priests.

This too, beloved, you must guard against: that no one but the Lord’s priests dares to claim the right of teaching or preaching, whether he is a monk or a layman who boasts of having some knowledge. For although it is desirable that all the church’s sons should understand what is right and sound, no one outside the priestly rank is permitted to take on the office of preacher. For in the church of God all things ought to be done in order, so that in Christ’s one body the more excellent members may fulfill their own duties, and the lower may not resist the higher. Dated the 11th of June, in the consulship of the illustrious Opilio (in the year 453). [h]