Letters of St. Proclus and of various persons to him and to others.

eat my flesh and drink my blood, remains in me and I in him. ^A For this reason, with a contrite spirit, they would chant many prayers, imploring the divine Power with great intensity. Moreover, they trained those who were recently baptized from among the Jews and the Gentiles in these mysteries of grace; they taught them to leave behind the things that were before the time of grace—inasmuch as they were a shadow of grace—and they instructed them piously and religiously. By such prayers, therefore, they awaited the coming of the Holy Spirit, so that by his divine presence he might declare and reveal the bread and wine mixed with water, which had been set out for the liturgy, to be that very body and blood of our Savior Jesus Christ; a thing which is accomplished no less even to this day, and will continue to be until the consummation of the age. But those who came later, having cast off the firmness and the fervor of faith, having become occupied with the activities and cares of this world, and being weary—as I said before—of the length of the liturgy, would scarcely attend the divine recitation of the Lord’s words. Wherefore the divine Basil, using a certain remedial method, rendered it shorter and more concise. And not long after, our Father John, gifted with a golden tongue, being solicitous with vigorous care for the salvation of the sheep, as befits a shepherd, and looking upon the sluggishness and apathy of human nature, desired to tear out by the root every satanic pretext. And for this reason, he cut away many things and ordained that the sacred service be performed with a more concise and compressed prayer, so that men—who mostly embrace a certain freedom and inertia—might not, in being deceived by the fallacious arguments of the adversary, be deterred from such an apostolic and divine tradition and abandon it, just as we discover to this day that this very thing has happened to many, in various places.

THE EPISTLES OF SAINT PROCLUS, ARCHBISHOP OF CONSTANTINOPLE, AND OF VARIOUS PERSONS TO HIM AND OTHERS.

From the petitions presented by presbyters and deacons, which were transmitted by bishops, clergy, monks, and others of Greater Armenia and Persia and other nations.

To the most holy Proclus, bishop of the city of Constantinople.

There was some pestiferous man, or rather a wild beast having the form of a man, diabolic in nature, bearing the feigned name of Theodorus, who, while holding the schema and name of a bishop, was lurking in a corner—an ignoble place of the world—in the vile town of Mopsuestia in Second Cilicia; a man who, truly and principally from Paul of Samosata ^{B C}

descending, just as [he did] with Photinus and the other heresiarchs, in his book *On the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ*, in the entirety of his design, is found to have used the very same words, and even worse. This man, through the deceit, audacity, and error of the devil, wished that all men should perish by his sharp tongue, like the serpent’s ^A, and by the poison that is under the lip of the asp. And for a time indeed he was kept in his lair, fearing the power of those who from our great God and Savior Jesus Christ had received the authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and all the powers of the enemy: I mean the holy apostles, and those who subsequently received [the faith] from them: martyrs, confessors, bishops, and other holy men. But, having found a moment, I know not how, he began to creep even beyond his own borders, bearing confidence, and in a parish ^B not belonging to him, like an erudite orator, and speaking in the church in Antioch of Syria, he said: "The man Jesus. For what is man, that thou art mindful of him?" But the Apostle says that this was said of Jesus: "We see, he says, Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels." What then? "The man Jesus" in the same way as all men, having no difference from men of the same kind except for those things which grace gave to him: for given grace does not change nature. But after the destruction of death, God gave him a name which is above every name. Who gave? God. To whom did he give? To the man Jesus Christ, the firstfruits of those rising again; for "he is the firstborn from the dead." He ascended, therefore, and sits at the right hand of the Father, and is above all things. O ^C grace, which is given above all things to Jesus! O grace, which surpassed the nature of all things! He who is of the same nature as me is shown to be above the heaven; he sits at the right hand of the Father, and I say to him: "Is my nature not the same as yours? And you, indeed, are in heaven, but I in sufferings ^D; and you, indeed, are above every principality and power, but I am in the mire. But let me hear to these things what well-pleased the Father in me. Does the clay say to him who fashioned it: 'Why have you made me thus?' I have nothing to say to this; but my brothers, who are sons of the same mother as I, say to me: 'Do not separate the man and the God, but call him one and the same man.' I say he is consubstantial with me, I say he is God. If I say he is consubstantial with God, I say: 'How are man and God one?' Is there one nature of man and God, of Lord and servant, of creator and creature? Is a man consubstantial with a man, but God consubstantial with God? How then can God and man be one through unity? The savior, and he who is saved? He who is before the ages, and he who appeared from Mary? But I am vehemently grieved that my brothers speak these things to me, things which it is not possible for those who are well-instructed to say in the Church." These things ^A were put forward by the impious Theodore, and they add thus: "Not that he moved just any kind of tumult from his most impious words in the Church, but he is known to have declined hither and thither from the rectitude of the dogmas. For the way of him who is perverse is not straight." Hence many of the clergy had confidence convincing him; and that wretched Nestorius [was known] to have been moved, and to have accepted tediously the things said by him; and much other disturbance was done by the people from the discordant words of his in the Church of the Christians, as the epistle of John of Antioch to Nestorius contains. With much time, forsooth, persevering, Theodore persuaded many, and Nestorius, that Christ the Son of the living God, who was born from the holy Virgin Mary, is not the God the Word born of the Father, consubstantial with the Begetter; but [that he was] a man who for the measure of his own will received help from God the Word, and did not merit the conjunction ^B of God the Word before he was made immaculate, so that he might become a participant of the immaculation, of the name alone of filiation and lordship. "For how," he says, "can man and God be one ^C through unity? The one who saves and the one who is saved? He who is before the ages, and he who appeared from Mary? Lord and servant, creator and creature?" Such things, and the like ^D, the very defamer of Christ, Theodore, dared to say, and caused to be inserted into his writings, feigning as if to contradict Arius and Eunomius and Apollinaris, and not truly giving [honor] to God the Word born of the substance of God the Father, nor [to] the birth according to the flesh from the holy Virgin Mary, or any other thing pertaining to the incarnation and humanization; but to Jesus Christ, who is both anointed and participates in honor, whose participant he is because of the preparation made for him from God the Word and the consubstantial Son, in order that he might conduct himself well. But the impious Nestorius having been persuaded along with others, the devil was already rejoicing that through his son Theodore he had persuaded many, and Nestorius, to serve error. Nor was he content with the ruin of some in the regions of Syria, but he wished to comprehend the land much more widely. It happened, however, that this Church became widowed, and we do not know for what sins or how he obtained the episcopacy.

Nestorius, by the circumvention of certain individuals—those who possess no grace from God and abuse their power ^A—exulted in his impiety, hoping to surpass his own mentor, Theodore. But God, having compassion on the Churches, raised up many things against him; and we, though humble, have omitted nothing, struggling even unto death for the truth, just as we have stated in our own petitions against Theodore and his writings to the most religious Bishop of Alexandria, Cyril, and in those things which we have said to your beatitude. And we ask, after these things have been read, that you also, ^B by your unity, may rise up against Theodore, his sacrilegious chapters, and the dogmas of those who think or teach similar things. And just as it pleased the Lord that the sacrilegious Nestorius be condemned clearly and by name at Ephesus by the universal synod, so too do we ask that you, who had previously condemned him without naming him, should now condemn by name Theodore—who is more sacrilegious in his varied impiety—as well as those who, following his most impious exposition, have hitherto thought and taught such things in Syria and Cilicia.

EPISCOPII II

Letter of Proclus, Archbishop of Constantinople, to the Armenians, concerning the faith.

To the most God-beloved and most pious bishops, ^B presbyters, and archimandrites throughout all Armenia, of the holy orthodox Church, Proclus sends greeting in the Lord.

1. Not slightly, brothers, has the rumor of novel, fallacious tares—which recently that common enemy of our nature cunningly oversowed in your region—confounded and wounded our soul and mind with tyrannical grief. For the report of things to be rejected is wont to strike intolerably at a soul not yet practiced in such exercises; and it strikes the more harshly, implanting its arrows the deeper, in that the danger does not stop at the solid nature of the body, but rather, as the report spreads, it besieges the more subtle state of the soul, ^C scattering abroad the report that that precious garment of faith is either rent or has been entirely carried off by pillage. For every virtue is deemed desirable by those in whom the power of reason has not been obscured by the fault of material nature, and every vice is rightly judged by prudent men as something to be fled, since it battles against nature itself, in that very fact that it is contrary to nature. For just as that which is useful is necessarily to be defended by those who choose it, so too that which is not of this kind, but is rather the contrary, must either be driven away if present, or, if feared, must be anxiously guarded against lest it occur. There are, therefore, many species of virtue; ^D and these have been variously defined, both by the Greeks, who are throttled by error and whose subtlety of discernment is obscured by ignorance of the Divinity, and by Christians, who have the eyes of their mind illuminated by the light of faith, and who are able to gaze clearly upon the Sun of Justice through their confession.

II. For those others, stumbling in their own thoughts as if in the dark, and having a mind destitute of a guide and ruler because of their preconceived opinion, enter upon a dangerous path led by their own reasonings; in the things they determine, they grasp at nothing except the flowing and unstable nature of visible things; for they have lost the keen edge of true contemplation, either because it has been dulled by the passage of time or blinded by the vice of error. And they say that there are four species of virtue, namely, justice and pru-

prudence, temperance, and fortitude: which, though they may seem good and honest, yet creep along the ground and float about the earth, and are far inferior to the heavenly canopy. For having termed fortitude that which struggles against matter, and temperance that which overcomes vices and passions, and prudence that which is most powerful in the governance of a commonwealth, and justice that best distribution of equality, they established a rule for life, as they supposed, restraining by this definition the excess of immoderation on either side. But something more sublime and more excellent than the present life they could neither conceive nor express; rather, through the foolishness of a hardened heart, they applied force and confined virtue only to those things which are seen, allowing it nothing sublime or comparable to the harmony of the heavens. ^B

III. But those who have the eyes of their heart illuminated through faith, whose instructor and teacher is the blessed Paul, have defined virtue as that which raises us up to God and keeps in order those things which are on earth. And so this very man, who is to be celebrated in all things, enumerated many species of virtue; but he proclaimed these three as preeminent: faith, hope, and charity. Of these, faith bestows upon men things that are above nature, mingling with intelligible realities him who still wears the multi-passionate garment of matter. For that which the nature of the angels and the remaining incorporeal powers does not know because of its excellence, faith bestows as knowledge upon men who creep on the ground and wallow upon the earth; it leads them to the royal and formless throne, and sheds the clear radiance of the unoriginate and uncreated nature, and by its own lightning it both drives away the haze of the senses, and draws the mind away from whatever is thick and snowy in things here below; for it causes one to see clearly those things which are seen because they cannot be reached, and are grasped because they are inaccessible. ^C And hope does not cause one to dream beautifully, as one might say, but prepares one to hold onto the future things strenuously in the present, since that firm certainty presents to the mind that which is not yet present in time as if it were already there, and brings what is expected almost beneath one’s view. For hope, transcending the obstacles that stand in the way, connects the desiring soul with that which is desired, overcoming the flowing nature of time through the comprehension of future things. But charity is the head of our holy religion; for this compelled God the Word, though always present on earth, to come to us through the flesh. Each, therefore, corresponds to the other; for faith is the mirror of charity, and charity is the confirmation of faith. We believe that God the Word was incarnate without passion, and we believe piously; for this is the foundation of our salvation. But we also love him who for our sake took on the form of a servant, so that neither mu- ^D

must our virtue be considered to be any alteration of His nature, nor should it introduce any addition to the Trinity. Therefore, every Christian who is not rich in faith, hope, and charity, is not what he is called; and even if he seems to bring his body into servitude and to be free from the passions of the soul, since he has accomplished only moral virtue, he shall not obtain the crown of victory, because he has not arrived at the distributor of crowns through the acknowledgement of the Divinity. ^A

IV. Faith, therefore, which, as I have said, is the head of all virtues, must be kept sincere, admitting nothing adulterated from human reasonings, nor defiled by profane novelties of words, but remaining within the evangelical and apostolic limits; ^B so that no one may hear anything other than that by which we are saved, and which we have written down in the ministry of the tongue at baptism. For the sublimity of faith repels every impulse and attempt of audacity, not only human, but even that which is sublimely moved by an incorporeal nature, as the blessed Paul says: "If we or an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which you have received, let him be anathema." For an angel was placed in the order of ministering, not of prescribing dogmas; and it is truly dangerous for everyone not to remain in the order in which he has been placed, but to attempt things that are above his nature. Therefore, even if a daring one brings forward the authority of his own nature, let the novelty of the preaching not be received. ^C

V. Let us, therefore, most vigilantly keep what we have received, always having the eye of our mind fixed upon the treasury of faith. But what is it that we have received from the Scriptures, if not this, precisely: that God created the world by his Word, and brought forth the creature which previously did not exist; that he honored the rational animal with natural law; that he gave a commandment to the free will, indicating what was expedient, so that by the best choice he might avoid what was harmful; that he drove the disobedient one from paradise because of that voluntary inclination of man toward worse things; that furthermore, through the Fathers and patriarchs, through the law and judges and prophets, the Creator instructed nature to reject sins and to strive for just actions; ^D that finally, when sin held sway over us because we so willed it, and the devil, as a punishment for transgression, demanded the common destruction of all nature—since the natural law had been obscured, and the written law was held in contempt, and, although the prophets warned as men about what ought to be done, yet they did not liberate [us] from vice and ruin—that then finally God himself, the formless, without beginning, uncircumscribed, and omnipotent Word, came and was incarnate; for the power to do so when he willed was present to him, and taking the form of a servant he was made flesh, and was born of a Virgin, desiring everywhere to show that he truly was made man; for by necessity, beginnings, habits, and passions follow nature. For the evangelist does not say that he entered into an already perfect man, but that he was made flesh, for the sake of our very own

^A nature, reaching back to the very origins of generation. For just as a man born according to nature does not immediately emerge perfect in his activities, but the very foundation of his nature first becomes flesh, and then, as time progresses, little by little acquires the powers that contribute to the completion of his senses and activities; so also the Word of God, turning back to the very origin and root of human generation, first became flesh—not transformed into flesh, God forbid; for the Godhead remains superior to all change; for change is a passion of a flowing nature, whereas immutability is proper to that eternal nature which always exists in the same way.

^B VI. We profess, therefore, using both expressions of Scripture, that he both "became flesh" and "took the form of a servant"; and both being piously understood are seeds of salvation for us. For by the word, "Became," the evangelist hints at the indivisibility of the supreme union. For just as a unit could not be divided into two units—for that which is divided into these would no longer be a unit, but a duality—so that which is one by supreme union could not be divided into two. But the word, "Took," proclaims the immutability of his nature. For since everything that is brought into existence is either created from non-being, like the heaven which did not exist before, or is changed from that which exists into something else, like the stream of the Nile which was changed from water into blood; yet neither of these is appropriate to the divine nature. For the One who is eternally without beginning was not produced from non-being, nor was the immutable Word changed from anything that ^C exists. For this reason, the divine Scripture, so as to indicate through both words both the immutability of the Godhead and the indivisible unity of the mystery, said, "He became," and proclaimed, "He took," in order that through the former it might present the singularity of the person, and through the latter it might proclaim the unchangeability of the nature.

VII. The Word of God, therefore, became a perfect man, not by mutilating his immutable nature in the miracle that surpasses understanding; but we have learned this by faith, and have not left it to inquiry. And having become man, he saves the human race, which is of one kind with him according to the flesh, through his likeness in suffering, having paid the debt of sin by dying for all as a man, yet having destroyed, as the God who hates evil, him who held the power of death, that is, the devil. ^D He showed this to be the strength of the Law by fulfilling all righteousness; and he restored to nature its former nobility, by honoring, through his becoming man, the nature fashioned by him from the earth. There is, therefore, one Son. For while we worship the consubstantial Trinity, we do not add a fourth to the number; but there is one Son, born of the Father without beginning, through whom we believe the ages to have been created; the co-

-eternal branch from the root, the Word who shines forth from the Father without flow, proceeding from that mind and yet remaining inseparably with it; for even if He was seen on earth, yet He was not separated from Him who begat Him. He wished to save the one whom He fashioned, and He did indeed save him, inhabiting the womb, the common gateway of nature; and having blessed it by His inhabitation and marked it with His birth, by a delivery which was above nature, He showed Himself to have become man beyond reason.

VIII. Therefore, God the Word is not one and Christ another, nor is God another; for the divine nature does not know two sons. He alone begat the Only-Begotten; for where there is no union of those who beget, there the duality of those who are begotten is not found. In the name of Jesus Christ every knee bows, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth. ^B But if Christ is someone other than God the Word, then Christ must necessarily be a mere man, as stupid men say. But if Christ is a mere man, how do heavenly beings venerate Him above the condition of His nature, and bend the knee at the name of One who is inferior? How, moreover, are we to accept the prophetic oracles crying out: *Our God has appeared on earth, and has conversed with men*? For by "vision" He means this very thing, that He was manifested in the flesh; and by "conversation" He calls that very stay with men for a time, in which He, being not in the least envious, in order to declare His omnipotence, showed that as almighty, He remained what He was for His own sake, and what He willed Himself to become for our sake.

IX. But if the swaddling clothes, and that reclining in the manger, and the growth in time according to the flesh, and the fact that He slept in a boat, and was wearied from the journey, and was hungry at certain times, and everything else that befalls a man who has truly come into existence, provide an occasion of scandal to some, let them know that while they mock the passions, they deny nature; and while they deny nature, they do not believe in the dispensation; and not believing in the dispensation, they suffer the loss of salvation. ^C For if, since the world was created, anyone has fallen into this life having entered upon a path of nature other than this one, let those who contentiously oppose us point it out, and only then may they weave their deliriums. But if these are the beginnings of common nature, and God the Word has truly become man, why do those who acknowledge the nature mock the passions? Let them choose one of the two: either, blushing at the passions, let them deny the nature, and agreeing with the Manichaeans, be counted among the impious; or, if they admit the profit resulting from the incarnation, let them not blush at the passions which are appropriate to the nature. But I marvel at the insanity of those who enter upon a new path of error. For I, since I know and have piously been taught that ^D there is one Son, confess one hypostasis of the Word of God who was made flesh; one who is the One…

^A who endured the sufferings, and the same who performed the miracles. Why, then, while passing over the diviner things in silence, do they deride the humbler ones through mockery? For in order to provide proof that, being God and existing as the Word, and remaining what He was, He became flesh, an infant, and a man—without the mystery being violated by any change—that same One both works miracles and sustains sufferings: by the signs, indeed, signifying that He had remained what He was, and by the sufferings, on the other hand, confirming that He had become that which He had formed. We therefore confess one and the same Son, both eternal and having become incarnate in the last times, adding nothing bastard to the nature; for there is nothing superfluous in that throne.

Γ.

X.

ΙΑ.

XI.

^A Nor indeed would anyone who has entered into this life through corruption, and who has not had an origin of birth devoid of guilt, be able to deliver the world from sins. But it was necessary that the same being should be both God and man, not divided into two, but remaining one; by the fact that He was born of a woman, He demonstrated that He is man; but by the fact that He was born without union and kept His Mother a virgin, He was declared to be God. Jesus Christ saved the world when He came onto the earth and dwelt with men. But if Christ is a mere man, and not God the Word Himself, how did He create all things in the beginning, when, as they themselves say, He did not exist? For if man was the last among creatures, it is clear that Christ could not have bestowed creation upon those things that existed before Him, since He was brought forth later as a mere man. How then did Paul cry out: *One Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things*? For if all things are through Christ, it is clear that Christ is God the Word, as the evangelist testifies: *In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word ^B was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him*. If, therefore, the evangelist says that all things were made through the Word, and the blessed Paul, interpreting this, says, *One Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things*, it is clear that Christ is God the Word.

XII. But if they bring forward voices from the divine Scriptures in which He is called man, as Peter says: *Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested by God*; and Paul asserts: *In a man by whom He has determined, providing faith to all*; and the Lord Himself confesses concerning Himself: *Why do you seek to kill Me, a man?* ^C let them know that either through sloth they do not grasp the intelligence of the Scripture, or through malice they pervert what has been well written to their own wickedness. For Christ is indeed man in truth; but He became this, when before He was nothing but God. For just as God is uncreated, so the same is also man, not fashioned by imagination; and just as He is consubstantial with the Father according to divinity, so is He the same, related by blood to His mother according to the flesh; so that everywhere the truth of the mystery may shine forth, and every fraud of deception be removed. But if the Virgin did not give birth to God, neither will that inviolate one be worthy of a great miracle: for many other women also brought forth just men into this world. But if the voices of the prophets, foretelling an ^D mystery so ineffable, cry out: *Behold a virgin shall have in the womb, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel*: which Gabriel interpreted, saying, *God with us*: why, because of the condescension of the One who is born, do they cut off the glory of the one who brought Him forth? But they will by all means oppose this and say: Everything that is born is of the same genus as the one that generates: if therefore man

^A is the one who gave birth, it is necessary that the one who was born be a man. You speak reasonably, O you men; but she who is in labor brings forth one of the same genus whenever the birth proceeds according to nature. Now the beginning of a natural birth is corruption, since commingling precedes corruption; but here, as there was not even a thought of this shame, but the miracle was accomplished beyond the comprehension of reason—where the birth is beyond nature, there the one who is born is God. We confess, therefore, that the same One both fashioned the world, and gave the law, and inspired the prophets, and in the last times was incarnate, and fished for the apostles for the salvation of nations and peoples.

XIII.

XIV.

^A which everyone from the seed of Abraham is to be blessed—the nations, and their fathers, who rose up in the night of error like luminaries of faith; and from whom is the Christ. And blessed Paul did not stop there: for not from the time that the birth from Mary occurred did the existence of the beginningless Word commence; but he immediately added, "according to the flesh," that he might signify the manifestation made in the flesh, and not a generation according to the divinity. Who then is this Christ who was born of the Virgin, who was contained in a cave, as he knows, who was laid in a manger, who grew in time according to the flesh, who descended even to the lowest parts of the earth, who underwent all things pertaining to the flesh, that he might give assurance that he truly became man; he who is not one other than the one who descended, but is himself both the one who descended and the one who ascended—for he did not ascend before he descended, being, as he is, God not by process of progression, perish the thought, but man by reason of his own mercy; for we had need of this: who this is, I say, do not seek to learn from me or from any other, but from blessed Paul, who learned of the Son from the Father himself through revelation, and said: "But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me." For he will truly teach you who Jesus Christ is, crying out: "Of whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever." What inroad of calumny do these words of blessed Paul not block for those who study to be abusive? He called him Christ, that he might show that he truly became man; he called him one of the Jews according to the flesh, that he might show that he did not begin to exist only ^B from the time that he became incarnate; he called him "who is," that he might declare that he has no beginning; he called him "over all," that he might proclaim him Lord of the whole creation; he called him God, that we, deceived by his sufferings and his appearance, might not deny his immortal nature; he called him blessed, that we might adore him as omnipotent, and not calumniate him as a fellow-servant; he called him "to the ages," that he might show that he who by his Word created them, is eternally glorified in them as God.

XV. Since, therefore, we have Christ ^D as being God, and blessed, let us adore him, and say to those who think otherwise: "If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." But we have the mind of Christ; wherefore also we await the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; who will render to those who think piously the rewards of faith, but to those who reject him, the recompense of their audacity. We have written these things to your charity, moved by the libels you sent to us, in which you signify that certain pestilential men and

^A prating fellows desire to intrude themselves into your territory, striving by wicked writings and the oppositions of knowledge falsely so called to distort the simple and pure beauty of the orthodox faith. But I again admonish you with the words of the blessed Paul: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men who speak rashly, and not after Christ." For no man can lay any other foundation of pious faith than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Stand, therefore, in one spirit, with one mind struggling together for the faith of the Gospel, and being in nothing terrified by your adversaries, but keeping the traditions which ye have received from the holy and blessed Fathers who set forth the orthodox ^B faith at Nicaea, and from the holy and blessed Basil and Gregory, and the rest who were of the same mind as they, whose names are in the book of life. I and those who are with me salute all the brotherhood that is with you.

LETTER III

Proclus, Bishop of Constantinople, to John, Bishop of Antioch

I. I think that you are aware, most religious one, but I surely know, that they who watch over ecclesiastical necessities with the unsleeping eye of the mind do not collect any ordinary reward from God, by caring for and looking after things night and day, so that everything that is familiar to the people may be well governed, and the orthodox faith may be pure from reprobate tares. This, however, merits providence, that which, according to the presumption of the adversaries in the meantime, has a malady, so that it might be transferred into the same sense and obedience, especially with the divine Scripture crying out: "If thou bring forth the precious from the vile, thou shalt be as my mouth." For if to neglect those near us who are falling into worse states, and for the sluggishness of a superior to allow the rapine made by the jaws ^C of a voracious wolf to become a trial of irrecusable condemnation for the sleeper, whom Scripture calls a mercenary and not a shepherd—how is it not in all things just to pursue the zealous in such matters, and to avoid the sluggish in urgent ones? For in the same person both exist, similar to vituperation and irrecusable to condemnation: both this, that a man himself lives negligently, which exhorts those who see it to an emulation of worse things; and that he does not immediately correct those who sin in faith and are delinquent in life, although, looking down upon it, he is not set outside of such punishment ^D. I do not invent a pattern of this kind from myself, but write having been instructed by the divine Scriptures. That Eli, burdened with age, and sacrificing in Silo things pertaining to the law, he himself indeed did not perform the things that the boys dared; but he was a cooperator with them, in that he did not prohibit them when they were sinning; since, according to true reason, not to prohibit sins is akin to doing them. And again, the boys, injuring the rank by their actions, showing themselves unworthy of the priesthood through which they sinned, not only perished themselves, but were even calling others to sin, proposing an image of sin to those who emulated them. On account of which, the punishment was brought equally upon them who did the impious things, and upon him who did not prohibit them. For slothfulness harmed the father himself in regard to virtue; but to the sons, failure of correction brought ruin; and the old man suffered shipwreck in the storm of the young men, for whom he did not govern his affection with rebuke.

II. So it is proper, most religious one, for him who has obtained success in presiding over the people and holding the reins of the priesthood, not only to take care of how he himself appears upright, but that this also, which is said by him, may be pure from all vituperation. For this which is first, even if it is to be wondered at, is not such as that which is said after it: inasmuch as that indeed concludes in one alone 82 who perfects the things that pertain to virtue; but this, by saving many through his providence, is clothed in the confidence of piety, through each individual.

[... continued from previous page] ...to reject ^A with a confident voice and an unblushing countenance, that he may manifest what is in his soul, rejecting and trampling upon all the chapters of the epistle sent to the Armenians, as inventions and ordinances of diabolical insanity, and judging them all worthy of anathema; so that all who are here, knowing the truth about this man, might now confidently refrain from uncritical thought toward him. For it is not proper, most religious one, as you yourself will agree with us, to despise those who are harmed without cause, being inclined toward worse things; but rather to show the greatest concern for those who are scandalized, so that uncritical thought might not extend to all, while [they] shudder, especially at that most terrible condemnation in the Gospels, which, for the sake of one of the humble who is scandalized, is brought upon those who dare or despise them. For if the blessed Paul established that priests should lawfully be patterns of good works; how much more so the authors and teachers of the faith, without which it is impossible to please God? For some other virtues, receiving their perfection from habits, have their nature as a teacher for their improvement; but faith alone, which is superior to nature and reason, as being akin to that which is always by nature intelligible and ungraspable, is better than apprehension and all virtue, yielding in this only to charity, because He who is believed to be God, became man for the sake of charity alone. I pray, therefore, that effective zeal be present. For know, most religious one, that the aforementioned Bishop Ibas, by complying with this present epistle, will gratify no one else so much as himself. ^C For he will have not only those who now doubt him, wondering about him, but also our most holy father, the priest and archimandrite Dalmatius, who honors and admires him greatly; if he sees him wise regarding those things which are of the pious faith. For now, although it has been rumored about others, the aforementioned most holy one is not moderately lacerated on account of charity, because those who ought to preach in divine matters are accused in adverse ones, whether by the zeal of those speaking or by the envy of those accusing. For which reason I have also directed to your reverence Theodotus, the most reverend deacon of our Church, with the documents, that you may know, most religious one, that I do not consider the perfection of this cause to be negligible, but rather something to be studied. ^D *Epistola IV*

Proclus, Bishop of Constantinople, to John of Antioch.

...... But saying again that the God who is passible, that is, Christ, we confess that He did not suffer in that which He is, but in that which He became,

that is, in his own flesh. And in thus preaching, we are in no way deceived: since we confess that one of the Trinity was crucified in the flesh, and we do not in the least blaspheme the passible divinity. 91

EPISTLE V. John, Bishop of Antioch, to Proclus.

The tome which was made to the Armenians, by our most reverend son the deacon Theodosius, who is worthy to minister to your dispositions because of the diligence that is in him beyond his years, we have both requested, and with all delight have made mention of his name. And it was not the beauty of the composition alone that gave us delight, nor the multitude of arguments discussed against both sides of the adversaries, as much as the very caution of the sacred dogmas, joined with piety. Piety, indeed, because you pursued the royal way of the divine Scriptures in those things which were said, rightly confessing the word of truth, not presuming to preach anything of your own authority without the testimonies of Scripture: yet caution, because you proposed [those things] to prove what was said, [joining] with the divine Scriptures the sayings of the Fathers as well.

EPISTLE VI. John, Bishop of Antioch, and the Synod of the East, to Proclus of Constantinople.

^B Our souls are exceedingly wounded, because we not only endure such calumnies from those who wish to disturb the Churches, continuously while we are yet alive, but also [because] the blessed Theodorus, who lived a life of such excellence, and who for forty-five years shone brightly in dogma, and conquered every heresy, and who in his life received no detraction from the orthodox anywhere, after his departure from this life, and after many struggles, and after ten thousand books written against errors, and after he was approved in the sight of priests and emperors and peoples, is in danger of enduring those things which belong to the heretics, and of being preached as one nearest to them. These things have filled us with confusion and turbulence: ^C and not only us, but also the Christian peoples, who, knowing these things, do not at all allow clerical celebrations to be carried out without a riot: but they make seditions against us, and have not even endured to hear the anathemas that are being devised against the sleeping Fathers, and they threaten ten thousand evils against us, if any such thing should have been presumed by anyone. But let your holiness know this, that searching the writings of the ancient doctors of the Church, we have found ten thousand such things and similar ones, such as certain men of evil habit, extracting from the books of Theodorus and cutting away the rest of the body, have offered to your holiness. For indeed, in the great martyr Ignatius, who, second after Peter the first of the apostles, ordained the Church of Antioch; and in the most blessed Eustathius, who, being the first of the holy Fathers gathered at Nicaea, confirmed the orthodox faith; and in the most holy and blessed Athanasius, who suffered thousands upon thousands of struggles for the evangelical dogmas; but further, also in Basil and both Gregories who were of the same opinion; and in the most blessed Flavianus, Diodorus, and John, who were the bright lights of the entire East: furthermore, also in the most blessed Ambrose, who illuminated all the Western parts; and in the most blessed Amphilochius, [the] most excellent doctor: and likewise in the blessed Atticus, your father, and in ten thousand other most excellent men, that we may not run through them individually, ^D we have found points consonant with these chapters: by whose anathematization, it is necessary to encompass also those [points] which were said by the aforementioned Fathers. And who, from now on, would be present with [such] doctrines, with such admirable and most famous men condemned after death? It is not, therefore, for us to insult the glorious opinions of those who have preceded us, nor to judge those who have died in honor, but [it belongs to] the sole judge of the living and the dead.

LETTER VII.

John of Antioch and the synod, to Cyril of Alexandria. (See among the Epistles of St. Cyril of Alexandria.)

LETTER VIII.

St. Cyril’s epistle to Acacius, bishop of Melitene. He wrote the same to Theodotus of Ancyra, and to Firmus of Caesarea in Cappadocia. (See ibid.)

LETTER IX.

The epistle of our holy Father Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, to Proclus, bishop of Constantinople: concerning Theodore of Mopsuestia, wherein he requests of him not to permit Theodore to be anathematized, lest it should be the cause of a disturbance. (See ibid.)

Letter X.

Proclus, Archbishop of Constantinople, to John, Bishop of Antioch. ^A ...... For when I wrote to your Holiness that it was necessary for Theodore, or certain others who have long since departed this life, to be submitted to anathema, I made mention of no one by name. But I think, as even the letters themselves directed to your Holiness cry out, the epistle contains nothing difficult or perverse. But because it is necessary to be freed from every suspicion and to muzzle the mouths of detractors, I have subscribed to the Tome sent directly, and I have rejected those chapters which were attached, as having no piety or subtlety. For I have not written to you, most beloved, concerning Theodore, nor concerning anyone else who has already died, that he should be anathematized or condemned. Nor has the most dear Theodotus, the deacon who was sent by us, received such instructions.

LETTER XI.

Proclus, Archbishop of Constantinople, to Maximus the Deacon.

Your Reverence is mindful that, when I enjoined letters upon you to the most holy Bishop of Antioch, I instructed that all things should be done with his consent, and that nothing should be done toward the confusion or tumult of the Churches living in peace: but that the Tome should indeed be subscribed to, while those chapters attached without a name were to be averted and condemned as having no subtlety of holiness. How then did I learn through letters now, that the names of Theodore of Mopsuestia and of certain others were prefixed to the chapters to be anathematized, when they have already migrated to God, and it is superfluous to heap injuries upon those after death, whom we never once blamed when they were alive? Therefore I ask, make haste as a son obedient to a father to inquire no further, ^B but to entrust all things to the authority of that same most reverend fellow-priest John. But after the subscription to the Tome and after the rejection of the chapters, whose they may be we do not know, make haste at once to prepare the deacon Theodotus to come to the royal city, so that the most holy Churches everywhere may not be filled with storm and tumult, and that you might grant something to the desire of the impious Nestorius, who thinks many hold the same opinions as he.

LETTER XII.

Theodosius and Valentinian, Emperors, to John of Antioch and the synod.

The Emperors Caesars Theodosius and Valentinian, victors, triumphers, most pious, always Augusti, to the God-loving Archbishop John and the synod ^C gathered with him.

Our Empire has learned of the turbulence and tumult which is occurring in the East, through our most religious and most holy Father and Bishop Proclus. Since, therefore, we provide for the quiet and peace of all, and especially for the Catholic faith which also guards our empire, we write to your Holiness, so that you may obtain peace, and not give heed to any word of those who wish to disturb the holy religion against their own salvation. For the intention of our divinity is this, that all men may live with quiet, especially the holy Church of God, through which we also are saved, and our empire flourishes. By this word, therefore, providing for the quiet of the Church, we [expect] something more useful from you.

urch of God, through which we also are saved, and our empire flourishes. By this word, therefore, providing for the quiet of the Church, we [expect] something more useful from you, unless you should also determine something with the whole Church against those who have died in its peace, so that no one may presume such a thing henceforth.

Letter XIII. Rescript of the synodal letters.

Proclus, to Domnus, Bishop of Antioch.

To the most holy and God-beloved brother and fellow-priest Domnus, Proclus, greeting in the Lord.

Mutual charity, most beloved of God, is the greatest gift that makes us embrace one another. For God, the most excellent artificer, having forged the nature which He created for concord, bound together those who are ruled by reason with benevolence, so that as they might share the trials of others, and everyone should measure the affairs of another by his own, they might be joined into an unbreakable bond of sympathy and a nature ^B of one mind, and be connected by one consenting will in matters that are of the same nature. For those things which are separated by feeling necessarily tend toward mutual destruction; but those which are united in spirit do not easily fall away from their firmness. Wherefore the blessed Paul also compared the multitude of the faithful and the union of the Church to a body, saying: *You are the body of Christ, and members of a member* (1 Cor. XII, 27); altogether proclaiming the conspiracy of the multitude, and prohibiting from the concord of the members, so that we may not labor under that disease of contention to which wars are friendly.

But why do I write these very things, most beloved of God, dear Father, bear with me for a little while to learn. The most beloved of God, Athanasius, bishop of the Church of the Perrhenians, lamented an incredible tragedy, one not mildly distressing to those who hear it, saying: that his clerics, as if casting off the thought of subjection, and thinking their own will to be sufficient for them, so that they might be tyrants of sacred things, had expelled him from the Church, when no just reason subsisted; and, as far as they are concerned, had leaped into such huge madness that they even condemned him, and persuaded themselves by their works that the order of sacred things consists in the unbridled will of the insolent, and not in the decree of the canons; and that they had appointed stewards and curators by their own authority for the Church of God, and had removed the name of the bishop, who at that time governed the Church, from the sacred diptychs; and, to speak briefly, had openly expelled all ecclesiastical order; adding that the lack of reasonable pardon given for their previous and impious crimes had nourished this very reckless insolence of theirs. For when his predecessors did similar things, having made a step from there, they renewed their assault toward things worse than those for which they had not formerly endured merited punishments; ^D opening an entrance from this, so that they might not restrain themselves even in the future. But do you, most beloved of God, deign, being asked by us (for you are able), to make your fellow-priest's infirmities your own,

perientes ne in posterum etiam sibi temperarent. Sed tu, Dei amantissime, dignare a nobis rogatus (potes enim) consacerdotis infirmitates tuas ^A to listen to some of the neighboring and impartial God-beloved bishops regarding the case; for he fears the God-beloved bishop of the metropolis, as one who has provided the power and material for the flame of the adversaries' madness against him. And if those who are being denounced by him are convicted on the charges for which they are accused, and having imitated that Absalom in their pride of spirit, they should receive a punishment equal to his example. For God so hates those who arm themselves against their fathers that he brands those who attack their fathers with infamy throughout the whole world. I know, however, God-beloved one, that since you embrace all in the bowels of Christ and are full of compassion, you will comfort the old man and wipe away the tear of his tribulation, and you will show yourself to him as a hater of the wickedness that has been committed; and after the enemies of the priesthood have been convicted, submitting them to just anger and appropriate punishment, you will drive them out, wisely cutting away the evil which feeds by spreading and harms the community of the priesthood. For if one were to grant that those who dare what is improper, and attain such boldness as to be so daring that they insult the priesthood, should be pitied without judgment, from which they seek to hunt for mercy for their lawlessness and beg—nothing remains ^B but that all the leaders of the Churches should become a laughingstock and a reproach even to the diabolical instruments themselves. But God raised up your God-fearingness for this purpose: to both remove injustices, and to restrain rash boldness, and to assist the suffering priesthood, and not to provide room for one's own slanders; but after an investigation, to help the one who is being slandered, if indeed he is being slandered, and to cut off the slanderer, if he is truly slandering. Let not your God-fearingness, therefore, suppose that the aforementioned God-beloved bishop reached these parts to the insult of the throne of the great city of the Antiochians; but rather, fearing some, as he says, who rejoice in seditions and serve their own passion, he gave place for a time to anger; ^C since he does not cease to proclaim the long-suffering and gentleness and love of justice of your God-fearingness; and he is not otherwise complaining—heaven forbid—but is beseeching that your mediation on his behalf might become more reverent. Therefore, having equipped him with the present letters, we told him to be confident, I and the most holy bishop and our fellow-minister Cyril. For because of the love prevailing among us, respecting those who have sent him, you will by all means assist the bearer. I greet the whole brotherhood with you most warmly. ^D

885 FRAGMENTS. 886

EPISOTLE XIV.

EPISTLE XV.

EPISTLE XVI.

^A (*)

EPISTLE XVII.

SYNODICAL EPISTLE OF PROCLUS.

FRAGMENTS OF THE WORKS OF S. PROCLUS. I.

Homily in Quadragesima (Lent).

These words are reported by Ephraem in his Oration to Domnus, in Photius, Bibliotheca, cod. CCXXIX; and by Anastasius Sinaites in his book *Odeges*, ch. 7, fol. 110, and ch. 10, fol. 166; and by Leontius of Byzantium in his book against Nestorius and Eutyches, in tom. IV, *Antiq. lect.* of Canisius. But the inscription is: "Proclus on that text, 'A child is born to us'." He is truly God and truly man, in that He was consubstantial with the Father; and in that He was made without sin for me, He is of the same nature. "The divine nature is uncreated," etc. From which it is evident that the former Oration is one and the same as the following one.

II.

From a homily on that text, "A child is born to us, and a son is given to us."

III. For there is one and only-begotten Son and Word of God, with His natures not divided into a duality of hypostases, but joined into one hypostasis by an ineffable reason: being adorned within by His most holy body, through...

^A the most holy body, guarded from without by the Holy Spirit, so that from both the radiance of the natures might be shown clearly. For thus we say that He even ate, not only before the passion, but also after the resurrection, verifying the nature of His body.

Flavianus, Bishop of Constantinople, successor of Saint Proclus, brings forward this testimony in his Tome, which Anastasius Sinaita also reviews in his book *Guide*, chapter 40, folio 196.

Saint Proclus also composed another Oration after the victory over the barbarians was reported by the Emperor Theodosius, explaining those words of Ezekiel (xxxviii, 2): *And, son of man, prophesy against Gog*, etc. Concerning which, Socrates writes in book VII of his *History*, chapter 43. This is not unlike that which Saint Ambrose writes about the same matter at about the same time, in book II *De fide*, last chapter, at the end of volume IV, and they seem to be attached from some other Oration: for he says, "Truly, O Emperor, I ought not to keep you occupied with too many things, being intent on war," etc. And yet he writes three other books after that to the same person on the same subject, though not in the same year, as stated in Baronius, volume IV. And perhaps those fragments were taken from that Oration of Proclus. I have provided these fragments thus, since it was not permitted to have the complete Orations. RICCARD.

FRAGMENTS OF THE EPISTLE OF SAINT PROCLUS TO THE ARMENIANS.

I. From John Maxentius, *On the Profession of Christ*. In volume IV, part 1, *Bibliotheca Patrum* Paris. year 1643, page 437 C.

But perhaps you ask me about that novel vanity or empty talk, saying: "Since he who confesses that He who was crucified is Christ God, also confesses the Father and the Holy Spirit as crucified, if the nature of the Trinity is one." But I, on the contrary, object to you and ask: Is it One of the Trinity who was crucified, or some other outside the Trinity? And if indeed it is One, the quarrel is resolved; but if it is some other besides the Trinity, he is without doubt a fourth Lord of glory, and exists as one foreign to that glorification with which the seraphim glorify Him*. But those animals praise the Trinity and confess the Unity. But if that voice does not teach falsely, how did the Fourth—whom He did not create—save [men]? Or how did He blot out the handwriting of sins on the cross**, not having the power to forgive sins, if He is not God according to you?

And again after a little: But if you offer [an objection] to me, saying: "Since he who confesses that the crucified is God the Son, also confesses the Father and the Holy Spirit"; you are writing upon water and building upon sand. Attend, therefore, to the nerves of the Catholic faith, and wash away your imprudence. For what is it that we know and feel? Truly, that in this very essence and divine nature, by which He consists and by which He is joined and united, ^B we do not say that the Son suffered in His deity with the Father and the holy Spirit, but in the flesh which He assumed for us, and which was made from us and for us. But He was not made another, except one of the Trinity, and He was crucified in the flesh in which He was made; and He did not suffer in the divinity by which He is united to the Father and the Holy Spirit, lest we say that they too were crucified likewise. If, however, we should say that He was crucified in His divinity, we would in truth introduce passion into the Trinity. But if we say that the Word took sufferings in His own flesh, we confess that it is indeed One of the Trinity who suffered, and the nature of the Trinity remained impassible.

And again: But if He who was incarnate had not suffered, the very cunning objection might perhaps have a reason. But if He who was incarnate suffered; evidently, since the cause of the incarnation is the cross, that which is crucified is that which has become incarnate. But if that which is incarnate is crucified, and the Father and the Spirit are not crucified: therefore, One of the Trinity is crucified. ^C He kept the divinity, however, by which He communicates with the Father and the Spirit, impassible. But in the flesh, because He alone was made [flesh], it is the same He—and He alone—who suffered.

II. Fragment of the same epistle from the third epistle of Blessed Pope John II, volume V of the *Epistolæ decretales*. From the epistle to the Westerns: Over and above these, we also confess the one out of the uncreated and ineffable Trinity, God the Word, made man.

III. Fragment from Saint Cyril in the *Symbolum*, before the Ephesian Council, part III, chapter 43. For Proclus himself also wrote to the most pious bishops of the East in these words: ^D "And He is incarnate without change, He who is beyond form; and He is born according to the flesh, He who is without origin; and He progresses in age according to the body, He who is by nature perfectly complete; and He endures sufferings, He who is superior to sufferings—not in that by which He was, did He endure the insults, but in that by which He became, He accepted the sufferings of the body."

IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD 449. ST. FLAVIANUS, BISHOP OF CONSTANTINOPLE. NOTICE.

(Oriens Christianus, vol. I, p. 216.)

In the 40th year of Theodosius the Younger Augustus, according to Theophanes, in the year of Christ 447, Flavianus assumed the see of Constantinople. In that year, when Flavius Zeno and Posthumianus were consuls, on the fifth day before the Ides of November, he held a synod of thirty bishops, or, as Theophanes writes, forty. In it Eusebius, Bishop of Dorileum in Phrygia, accused the archimandrite Eutyches of denying that Christ, having assumed flesh, is consubstantial with us. Eutyches confessed this impiety, and because he refused to retract it, he deserved to be condemned by the Fathers. Through his friends, who had the greatest authority with the emperor, he obtained that the judgment passed against him should be brought back for examination in a second assembly before Thalassius of Caesarea, with Flavianus also presiding. However, he openly affirmed his error again, and would not altogether abjure it, appealing to the Roman Pope. Flavianus reported all that had been done in two letters to Pope Leo, who wrote back to him the letter which was thereafter held as the standard of the correct faith concerning the Word made flesh, given on the Ides of January, in the consulship of Asterius and Protogenes, in the year 449. In that year, the second Ephesian synod convened on the sixth day before the Ides of August. In that profane assembly, Dioscorus of Alexandria, acting in nothing short of a predatory manner, having absolved Eutyches, stripped Flavianus of his priesthood and ensured that he was banished to the town of Hypaepa in Lydia, where, as the author of the *Breviary of the History of the Eutychianists* writes, he immediately met his fate, whether by the onset of natural death or by death inflicted upon him.

ST. FLAVIANUS’S EPISTLES.

I. TO POPE LEO, AGAINST THE HERESY OF EUTYCHES. (Exists in Greek and Latin among the epistles of St. Leo; see *Patrologia Latina* vol. LIV, col. 723.)

II. TO THE SAME. ALSO AGAINST THE EUTYCHIANS. (See ibid., col. 743.)

III. TO THEODOSIUS AUGUSTUS. (Mansi, VI, 539.)

Copy of the confession of faith of Flavianus, Bishop of Constantinople, written by his own hand and presented by him to the emperor upon his request.

Flavianus, Bishop of Constantinople, to our most pious and Christ-loving emperor, Theodosius, greeting. Nothing is so becoming to pious