MARCUS EUGENICUS EPHESIUS METROPOLITA. HISTORICAL AND LITERARY NOTICE. (Fabric. Biblioth. Gr. ed. Harles, Vol. X)
Marcus Eugenicus, Metropolitan of Ephesus, was at the Council of Florence in 1439 — a council he refused to sign—and thereafter remained a most bitter adversary of the Latins and a major hindrance to the union that Emperor John Palaiologus was attempting to forge with them. For this reason, he was called a "new Photius" by Horatio Justiniano in the *Acts of the Council of Florence*. In the year 1447, already near death, he commended to Georgius Scholarius the defense of the dogmas of the Greek Church and the need to shun the union, doing so with the strongest of words. Georgius, too, having invoked God, the angels, and men as witnesses, swore solemnly that he would observe this, and indeed he observed it most diligently thereafter, and delivered a funeral oration in praise of his deceased teacher, Marcus. His writings were attacked by those Greeks who were pro-Latin: Josephus Methonensis, Gregorius the hieromonachus and protosyncellus, Bessarion, and Andreas Colossensis, who wrote in Latin. The following are the writings of his that have come to my attention:
1. *Epistle to John Palaiologus*, beginning: "Δῶρον τοι τοῦτο μικρόν." Cited by Allatius in *De Synodo VIII*, p. 545. FABR. In the Moscow synodal codex 393, addressed to John Palaiologus, after he had been perplexed regarding Latinism: incipit, "Σὺ μὲν, ὦ θειότατε βασιλεῦ." There follows an explanation by the same author regarding ecclesiastical sequencing (ἀκολουθία): it begins, "Ἔδει μὲν κατὰ τὴν κελεύουσαν." See Matthaei's *Notitia of the Greek codices of Moscow*, p. 249, no. 1, 2. In the public library at Paris, nine codices of the Epistles of Marcus Eugenicus exist. See the Index to Vol. II of the *Catalogus of the Paris Royal Manuscripts*. A listing of the individual codices would be burdensome. I shall add a notice of certain other books of the Ephesian that have been indicated less clearly: at Venice, in the Justinian Library, are various works of Marcus of Ephesus, according to Montfauçon, *Bibliotheca bibliothecarum manuscriptorum*, p. 483 D. Ibid., p. 772 E, in Paris, in Cardinal Radulphus's codex, are some works of Marcus of Ephesus. Ibid., p. 1326 D, in the de Mesme Library, are *Scholia* of the Ephesian. At Moscow, in synodal codex 355, no. 1, is his *Dialogue with the Pope's Ambassadors* (Διάλεξις μετὰ τῶν πρέσβεων τοῦ πάπα); it lacks a beginning. And at no. 12 is a collection of scriptural testimonies composed by the Ephesian regarding the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father alone; it begins, "Ἐπειδὴ μετὰ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου." See Matthaei, *loc. cit.*, p. 234 and 235. HARL.
[A portion of this text is omitted in the source, as indicated by the formatting.]
...and Rich. Simon, Vol. IV of *Bibliotheca critica*, p. 24. Infra, no. 16. FABR. At Milan, in the Ambrosian Library, there are works of his which, according to Montfauçon in *Bibliotheca bibliothecarum manuscriptorum*, p. 501 D, are recorded as follows: Works of the Archbishop of Ephesus, otherwise known as a monk and abbot of the Cassinese Congregation of St. Justina of Padua, namely: *Oration delivered concerning Purgatory in the Synod*; *Response to proposed doubts*; *Confession issued at the Council of Florence*; *Certain chapters against the Latins*; *Apologia spoken at his death*; *Epistle to Scholarius*; *Response to certain doubts*; *Astronomical Canons*; *Opusculum on the consecration of altars*. Marcus Eugenicus's speculations on the number of the talents and the parables of the Gospel (compare to no. 7). In the Paris public library, codex 1218, more works pertaining to this are contained, which should be mentioned together for brevity's sake, namely: p. 1, *Anonymous funeral oration in praise of Marcus Eugenicus*. 2) *His first Homily on Purgatory*, delivered at Ferrara before the Supreme Pontiff, the cardinals, and other doctors of the Latin Church. It begins, "Ἐπειδὴ μετὰ ἀγάπης." 3) *His second Homily on the same subject*: begins, "Πολλῆς μὲν ὡς ἀληθῶς." 4) *His response to the objections* by which his position on the purgatorial fire had been attacked both by the cardinals and by the theologians of the Latin Church: begins, "Ἐπειδὴ σαφέστερον." No. 9 is according to the order of Fabricius, no. 13. No. 10, according to Fabricius, is also no. 10. No. 11, *Solutions to certain doubts* proposed to him: begins, "Ὁ Θεὸς σχῆμα οὐκ ἔχει." 12. *On the addition inserted by the Latins into the Creed*: there are added very ample scholia in the margin. It begins, "Θαυμάζω, πῶς ἡμῖν" (see noted at no. 5). No. 26, 27, and 28 are cited in Fabricius, no. 7, 5, and 14. Ibid. in codex 1251, no. 1, *Double response concerning the purgatorial fire*. In codex 1286, no. 1, it is in Fabricius no. 7. No. 8, *Disputations of Marcus of Ephesus, Julian, Andreas Rhodius, Bessarion, and others, held at the Council of Florence*. No. 10, in Fabricius, is no. 6. No. 12, *Work against the Latins*, in which he writes concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit, unleavened bread, the Sabbath fast, the purgatorial fire, blessedness, the words of baptism and the marriage of priests, the fasts of the fourth day and Preparation, and the three Lents. It begins, "Παράκλητε Κύριε." No. 19, see below, no. 28; no. 20 and 21 are in Fabricius, no. 16. Ibid. in codex 1527, no. 31, *Encyclical Epistle on not accepting the Florentine Synod* (perhaps no. 5 according to Fabricius). No. 32, *Epistle to Georgius Scholarius against the rites and...*
A sacrifices of the Roman Church. No. 33, *Congratulatory Epistle to the same, because he has defected from the Latins*. No. 34 is in Fabricius, no. 17. No. 35, *Response to the Latins regarding purgatorial fire*. Ibid. in codex 1372, no. 3, a work by Marcus Eugenicus, who attended the Council of Florence, *On Purgatorial Fire, against the Latins*, unpublished; no. 4, *Exposition*, in Fabricius no. 14. Ibid., in codex 1589, no. 2, *Two Orations on Purgatorial Fire*, the same ones which are at no. 16 in Fabricius; and no. 3, *Exposition on the Sacred Liturgy*. In codex Coislin. 289, a *Homily delivered at Ferrara to the cardinals and the rest of the Latin teachers on the fire of purification which is held by them* (this is in Fabricius, no. 16, the former response). See Montfaucon, *Bibliotheca Coisliniana*, p. 406. In the *Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum Manuscriptorum*, p. 1332, there exist in codex Mazar. 124: no. 1, *Oration delivered at Ferrara to the Cardinals and other Latins on Purgatorial Fire*. No. 2, *Responses to the objections made against it*. No. 6, which is the same as what Fabricius cites at no. 13. - No. 7, *Johannes Eugenicus against the definition of the Council of Florence*; no. 13, *Apology of the synod of bishops present at Constantinople, because they did not receive the Florentine synod*; - no. 15, *Marcus of Ephesus against Scholarius*; no. 16, *Against the Latins, syllogistic chapters* (add no. 7 in Fabricius). *Apology for the union*, held at Florence without his consent; and no. 19, *Confession of the same, published at the Florentine synod by the monk Barlaam, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone*. Confer above in this volume, p. 468, XXII, and on purgatorial fire, etc. In Baumgarten's *Nachricht von merkwürdigen Büchern*, vol. VI, p. 431, and the note there. Harles.
[...] and codex 1527, no. 2, at Leiden among the Vossian codices, see *Catalogus bibliothecae Leidensis*, p. 397, no. 37. Harles. [In the] Royal codex 2016, according to Labbe, p. 88, *Nova Bibliotheca Manuscriptorum*. [Confer codex Mosquensis 353, 41, and in the Escorial codex, to be cited shortly. Harles.]
[...] *by the reply of the Bishop of Methone* is read after the acts of the Council of Florence, Labbe's tom. XIII, p. 677; and tom. IX, Hardouin, p. 549. It begins: 'Εγώ διὰ τὴν ἐπιταγὴν καὶ τὴν χρείαν. In Greek and Latin with the version of Jo. Matthaeus Caryophylus. Fabricius. At Madrid in Royal codex 77, fol. 309, there follow his *Profession of Faith*, in Fabricius no. 17. *A brief excerpt from his syllogistic chapters* (no. 7, in Fabricius). Then a short work which is in Fabricius, no. 13. Next, a short work of which mention is made very rarely, *On the limits of life* (it is, however, in the Escorial codex and in the Mosquensis codex 394, no. 12. See Matthaei l. c. p. 252). It begins: Οὔτ' αὐτὸς ἠπόρεις, ὦ μακάριε δέσποτα, τοῦ ζητουμένου τὴν λύσιν ἐξευρεῖν τε καὶ ἀποδοῦναι. — *Epistle to Georgius* (no. 11, and in Fabricius). Another to the same, and it seems to be the same which is in Fabricius no. 10, and which Du Cange in *Glossarium Graecum* vol. II, col. 1281, mentions as unpublished, and invokes as codex Paris Royal 3118, which is numbered 1218 in the catalog of the public library of Paris, where it occupies the tenth place. Regarding all these, Iriarte argues at greater length in *Catalogus codicum Graecorum Matritensium*, p. 285 sqq. In the Escorial codices, in which there are certain things not observed by Fabricius (see Plueri, *Itinerarium per Hispanias*, p. 180), are preserved: *Marcus Eugenicus' Epistle to orthodox Christians, living everywhere among nations and islands*; *On the resurrection*; *On the limits of life, to Isidore*; *Two sermons to the Emperor John Palaeologus, doubting about the rite of the Latins*; — *Homily on the dormition of Saint Macarius of Coryca* (confer at no. 7); — *Interrogations to a certain doubter*; — *Confession of the true faith made at Florence, according to the synod of the Latins with Chrysostom*; — *Two epistles of Marcus to the superior at the home on the Holy Mountain, Batopedion I*. One to a certain Scholarius the philosopher, the other. In Munich in Bavarian codex 145, fol. 188, where there follow the *Profession* (in Fabricius no. 10) then another *Encyclical epistle* (ibid. no. 6). — *Dialogue of a Greek and a Latin, or on the addition to the Creed*: it begins Θαυμάζω πῶς ἡμῖν ἐγκαλεῖτε. At the end it is noted that it was written in the month of April, year 6951, or 1443 of our era, indiction vi. Fabricius also omitted this dialogue, unless it is, as Harles thinks, an excerpt of the *Syllogistic chapters* (a). After these, *Marcus of Ephesus, metropolitan, to all orthodox Christians everywhere in the lands and islands*: the beginning of which epistle is: Τοῖς ἀπανταχοῦ τῆς γῆς. That epistle is followed by the *Apology of Gregory, hieromonk and protosyncellus, later patriarch, buried at Rome, on the epistle of the Ephesian from various saints*: it begins Τὸ μὲν προοίμιον τοῦ αἰδεσίμου. Ibid. in codex 54, the same *Epistle with the Apology*, etc. Confer the renowned Hardt in *Aretini Beytr.,* etc., an. 1804, part 10, p. 49 sqq. and part 1, p. 23 seq. The same epistle with Gregory's apology in the Moscow Synod codex 352, no. 5. See Matthaei, *Notitia* cited, p. 228 seq., and p. 252, no. 22, codex 391, *Encyclical epistle*. At Florence in the library of the Benedictine monastery of the Blessed Mary, *Joseph, Bishop of Methone, apology against the treatise of Marcus of Ephesus*. See Montfaucon, *Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum Manuscriptorum*, p. 415 C, and at no. 7. Harles.
[The work] *of Gregory the Protosyncellus exists* in Labbe's *Conciliorum* tom. XIII, p. 740, and Hardouin's tom. IX, p. 601. It begins: Οἳ τὴν κακὴν ἡμᾶς αἰχμαλωσίαν αἰχμαλωτεύσαντες. In Greek and Latin with the version of Caryophylus, p. 630. FABRICIUS. Manuscripts at Moscow in the Synod codices 13 and 354, no. 3. See Matthaei's *Notitia* cited, p. 30 and 232. At Milan in the Ambrosian library there is a book by an anonymous author *Against the argument which Marcus, bishop of Ephesus, was particularly accustomed to use against the Catholics*. See Montfaucon, *Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum Manuscriptorum*, p. 519 C. Add above at no. 2 and 5.
(a) The same short work, however, with the same beginning, exists also in the public library of Paris codex 1218, as we noted above at no. 2.
[Regarding the works of Marcus Eugenicus, Metropolitan of Ephesus]:
7. Syllogistic chapters against the Latins concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit, which Bessarion refuted in the remainder, up to chapter 17 of Gregorius Protosyncellus. It begins: Ἐρώμεθα τοὺς Λατίνους. [Florence, in the Laurentian codex XIV, no. 14, folio 10. See Bandini, Cat. codd. Gr. Laur. I, p. 484]. On the same subject, Lambecius VII, p. 3 (b), mentions other syllogistic chapters of Marcus of Ephesus. "The Holy Spirit [proceeds] from the Father." Another item also, V, p. 227. It begins: Καινή τις ἐστὶν ὡς ἀληθῶς. Add the same, V, p. 256. FABR. S. p. 467. Kollar, cod. 280. - Ib. p. 540, no. 6, cod. 294. A schismatic fragment of Marcus against the Latins concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit; it begins: Εἰ δὲ καὶ τὸν μέγαν Κύριλλον συνηγορεῖν αὐτοῖς λέγουσιν Ἰταλοί. - Moscow, in the synodal codex 594, no. 1, contains the same chapters with a response by Gregorius Scholarius. No. 3, Marcus Eugenicus’ Theory on the number of talents in the parable of the Gospel; it begins: Ὢ τῶν πέντε τάλαντα. (Cf. at no. 2). - No. 4, the same author’s Aporia with resolution; it begins: Εἰ καὶ ἡ μικροτάτη πίστις. - No. 9, Apology of Gregorius, Patriarch of Constantinople, against the *homologia* of the Ephesian. - No. 15, Marcus Eugenicus’ Homily on the Dormition of St. Macarius of Coron; it begins: Ὁρῶ τινι ἔοικεν (cf. at no. 5). - No. 16, the same author’s *On the words contained in the divine prayer, that is, "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy"*; it begins: Ὅση μὲν ἡ τῆς εὐχῆς. - No. 20, the same author’s *Terminal homilies during the present assembly of the Orthodox*, etc.; it begins: Βούλομαι πλατύτερον τὴν ἐμήν (cf. at no. 17). And no. 21: Scholarius’ funeral lament on the passing of St. Marcus, Archbishop of Ephesus, read over the relics in the temple; it begins: Φεῦ νῦν, ὦ παρόντες. V. Matthæi, notit. cit. p. 250, sqq. - Paris, in the public library codices 1218, 1261. Oxford, in the Bodleian library codex 78, 8 sqq. Guil. Laud, s. n. 720, Cat. mss. Angliæ etc., vol. I. Marcus Eugenicus’ Account of the Synod of Florence; Letter sent to a certain presbyter, Georgius, in Methone; Letter to Scholarius; Extemporaneous confession, made on his deathbed; to the archon Scholarius, and his response; Syllogisms against the Latins concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit with the response of Gennadius Scholarius. Venice, in the Nanian codex 427, no. 4, syllogistic chapter, begins: Τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον. - No. 5, Theory on the number of talents in the parable of the Gospel. - No. 6, Question and answer concerning the soul of animals. Cf. Cat. codd. Gr. Nan. p. 280. Munich, in Bavarian codex 27, Marcus Eugenicus’ Syllogistic chapters with Georgius Scholarius’ refutations of the first 16 chapters, and Bessarion’s refutation from chapter 18. V. Hardt in Aretini *Beytrægen*, etc., year 1803, part IV, p. 12 sqq., and above in this volume, p. 572, sect. 3, and p. 394, sect. 4. According to the catalogue of Greek Bavarian codices, p. 50 sq., in codex 118 (numbered 256 by Hardt, but that part of the book *Aretini Beytræge*, etc., in which that codex is reviewed, I do not yet have in my hands) are Marcus of Ephesus’ [writings] to Georgius the presbyter, when the Latins departed from the true faith; the same author’s syllogistic chapters against the Latins and various short works against the Latins; add to no. 2. HARL.
8. Apology for his flight. Cited by Nic. Comnenus, p. 525, *Prænotionum mystagog*. 9. Against the encyclical of Bessarion, id. p. 172. 10. Letter to Georgius Scholarius, in which he censures him for having inclined toward the Latins, V. at no. 2, 5 and 7, above in this volume, p. 372, sect. 3. - Paris, in the public library codex 1218 (in which codex there are more works of Marcus Eugenicus, as we have already observed), no. 10. Florence, in the Laurentian codex XIII, no. 43, and no. 42, is the same. Prayer, an Oratio beginning: Ἐθαυμαστώθη ἡ γνῶσίς σου ἐξ ἐμοῦ. V. Bandini, Cat. Codd. gr. Laur. III, p. 110. Turin, in the Royal codex 161, Letter to Georgius Scholarius. V. Cat. codd. gr. Taur. p. 245 seq. beginning: Ὅσης ἡμᾶς ἐνέπλησας ἡδονῆς. The same is in the Moscow synodal codex 24, no. 11, to a certain philosopher, Scholarius; see Matthæi, l. c. p. 314. HARL. 11. Letter to Georgius the presbyter (Scholarius) concerning the rite and sacrifices of the Roman Church, begins: Τὴν γραφήν σου δεξάμενος. This was opposed by Andreas Colossensis in a dialogue to the citizens of Methone, according to Allatius, p. 162. Against Creyghton and concerning the consensus, p. 935. FABR. See at no. 7, and Geri to Cave’s *Hist. litt. SS. EE.* l. c. p. 138. HARL. 12. Antirrhēticus against Andreas Colossensis. Cited by Nic. Comnenus, p. 42, 556, 420. 13. That the consecration of the divine gifts is done not only by the Dominical words, but also by the Holy Spirit through the prayers and blessing of the priest. Begins: Ἡμεῖς ἐκ τῶν ἱερῶν ἀποστόλων. In Greek at the end of the liturgies of St. James, Basil and Chrysostom, p. 138-144; Paris, 1560 fol. And in Latin in the *Liturgica* of Claudius de Sainctes, Antwerp, 1562, p. 82. Paris, in the public library codices 1261, no. 8, and 1218, no. 9. - In the Coislin codex. 14. Exposition of the ecclesiastical order, published in Greek at the end of the works of Simeon of Thessalonica, Jassy in Moldavia 1683, fol. FABR. See at no. 1, 2, Moscow in synodal codex 593, no. 2. V. Matthæi, l. c. p. 249, Paris, in the public library codd. 1218 and 1261. - Conf. above in this vol. p. 80. - Gerius, l. c. suspects that this exposition does not differ from Marcus Eugenicus’ Paraphrase on the Pentecostarion. HARL. 15. Paraphrase on the Pentecostarion. Allat. diss. II, p. 280, *De libris Eccles. Græcorum*. 16. Double response to the Latins concerning purgatory. In the public library at Cesena. Begins: Ἐπειδὴ μετὰ ἀγάπης. Et (b) S. pag. 253. Kollar. n. 6, cod. 63. HARL.
A Since more clearly it is required of us. Lambec. VII, page 110 seq. [p. 237, seq. Koll. n. 3 and 4 cod. 68.] Supra n. 2, also a booklet on purgatory, published under the name of Nilus, is claimed by some to be our Mark’s. FABR. In the Moscow synodal codex 391 there are three Responses to the Latins. n. 6, begins: Ἐπειδὴ μετὰ ἀγάπης; n. 7 begins: Πολλῆς μὲν ὡς ἀληθῶς; n. 8, begins: Ἐπειδὴ σαφέστερον. See Matthæi, loc. cit. p. 251. — In the Catalog of English manuscripts, etc. vol. II, p. 61, n. 2253, concerning the Vossius codex 142, this note of Vossius is adduced: "Orations of Mark, Archbishop of Ephesus, on the Purgatory of the Latins, and on those things which were treated in the Florentine synod. From these I conclude that the anonymous Oration on purgatory, annexed by Salmasius to the work on the Primacy, is not by Mark of Ephesus, as I recently wrote in the *Sacred Observations* and in the *Select Library*. It must therefore be sought whose author this oration is. Some, indeed, attribute it to Nicholas Cabasilas, others to Nilus of Thessalonica." HARL.
17. B Profession of faith in the Florentine council written a long time ago, but finally published shortly before his death, begins: Ἐγὼ τῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ χάριτι δόγμασιν ἐντραφεὶς εὐσεβέσιν. Gregory the Protosyncellus opposed it. See Allatius, *De consensu*, pages 934, 935 and 280, 285, 309. FABR. Moscow in synodal codices 13 and 354, n. 2. See Matthæi loc. cit. p. 29 and 232, where it is mentioned twice; namely n. 2, Mark Eugenicus and the "new theologian," who overturned the unlawful synod in Florence, *Confession of faith: Ἐγὼ τῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ χάριτι*; and Mark Eugenicus' *Testament*. Begins: Βούλομαι πλατύτερον τὴν ἐμὴν γνώμην. (Conf. ad n. 7.) — At Oxford in the Bodleian library, codex Barocc. 114. — ibid. in the codex of Jo. Selden 47, 5, or n. 3377, Catalog of English manuscripts vol. I, and p. 268, n. 14 and 15, in the *Adversaria* of Ger. Langbænius. Add to n. 5, and above, in this volume p. 394, sect. 4. Paris in the public library in five codices partly mentioned, n. 1218, 1259, 1327, 2075 and 3104. HARL.
[Sections 18–28, inclusive of citations and descriptions from the Latin column]
18. *Ecphrasis of one dying*. Allatius cites it in the *Eighth Synod*, page 544. [V. Bandin. Cat. cit. III, p. 106, and n. 27 cit.]
19. *The last words to Gennadius Scholarius*. See above page 367 [and not. supra ad initium, et ad n. 7]. Gennadius himself mentions it above, p. 367.
20. *Theological Questions* ms. in the Imperial library. Begins: Ἡ τοῦ Υἱοῦ προσηγορία δύο ταῦτα σημαίνει. Lambec. VII, p. 3 [p. 239. Koll. n. 5, cod. 68, and Bandin. Cat. citat. III, p. 106, n. 21, cod. 13, plut. 74].
21. *Capita LXVIII, against the heresy of the Acindynists* ms. in the Imperial library, begins: Κεφ. α', Εἰ ταὐτόν ἐστι Θεοῦ οὐσία καὶ ἐνέργεια. Lambec. V, page 226 [p. 466. Kollar. n. 1, cod. 278]. Mark, Archbishop of Ephesus, against the heretics, Venice in the Marciana library, according to Montfaucon, *Bibliotheca bibliothecarum mss.* p. 469, E. — In the Coislin codex 288, an opusculum of Mark the Monk against Barlaam and Acindynus, which Montfaucon edited in Greek and Latin in the *Bibliotheca Coisliniana* p. 404, seq. Conf. above, in this volume p. 507. HARL.
22. *Eight canons on the Virgin Mother of God and two canticles on the Holy Trinity*, ms. in the Imperial library, begins: Ἀρχόμενος σήμερον τοῦ τελευταίου. Lambec. V, p. 284 [p. 599, seq. Koll. cod. 324]. In Paris in the public library 2075, there are many things, which I will list summarily: n. 25, Epistle of Mark of Ephesus to the Supreme Pontiff. N. 26, Profession of faith; — N. 27, Various poems to Euthymius the patriarch; — N. 28, Exposition of the creed; n. 29, Hymns to the Mother of God; — N. 30, Homily on the Lord's Prayer. In the same codex many opuscula of John Eugenicus are found.
*Verses on the tomb of the teacher, the lord Joseph Bryennius*; ms. begins: Οὐδέν τι καινόν; in Moscow synodal codex 297, n. 2. See Matthæi, loc. cit. p. 192. HARL.
23. *Sermon on the feast of St. Elias to be read*, begins: Ἐδει μὲν ἀληθῶς ἡμῖν οὐρανοδρόμου τοῦ λόγου συνεπαρθῆναι. Gregory the Protosyncellus cites it in his *Apology against Mark of Ephesus*, tom. XIII, *Concil.* Labbei, p. 802, and testifies that it was written by him at the request of the inhabitants of Crete (d).
24. *On human imbecility, a tract* (c). Ms. in the Augustan library. p. 89. HARL.
25. *On the Lord's Prayer* ms. in the Imperial library, according to Nesselius. FABR. Part iv, p. 110, n. 15, cod. 195. Add. ad n. 22. HARL.
26. *Image of the death of St. Ephraim the Syrian*. Init: Καὶ νεκρὸν ἔστιν ἐνταῦθα ἰδεῖν; item: n. 1 and 2, plut. 4. V. Bandini, *Cat. cit.* vol. I, p. 543 seq. The former image is also therein in cod. 13, 14, plut. 75. V. Bandin. loc. cit. III, p. 105, where he opines that it is perhaps that which is reviewed by our Fabricius in his place, n. 18, under the title, *Ecphrasis of one dying*. HARL.
28. *Epilogue against the Latins*. Inc: Τοῦτο τὸ σύμβολον; Paris in the public library, codices 1286, n. 10, 1295, n. 9. In both codices other opuscula of Mark Eugenicus are found, and some, omitted by Fabricius, I indicated at n. 7 and passim. For *the limits of life*, see ad n. 5. HARL.
(c) Recently edited by Alb. Jahnius from the Munich codex. (d) Pseudo-Gennadius also cites it in the *Apologia pro concilio Florentino*, ch. 4, sect. 3.
MARCUS ARCHBISHOP OF EPHESUS THAT NOT ONLY BY THE VOICE OF THE DOMINICAL WORDS ARE THE DIVINE GIFTS SANCTIFIED, BUT BY THE SUBSEQUENT PRAYER AND BENEDICTION OF THE PRIEST, BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
A We, having received the exposition of the mystical liturgy from the holy apostles and the teachers of the Church who succeeded them, have found among none of them that the gift of the Eucharist is sanctified and perfected by the Dominical words alone, and transmutated into that very Dominical [Lord's] body and blood. On the contrary, while the words recited first are by the unanimous consent of all intended to call to mind the event that then took place, and as it were to project their power and efficacy into the proposed gifts for their transmutation, the prayer and benediction of the priest which follows thereafter is what, in reality, transforms the gifts into that very archetypal B body and blood of the Lord. These things are also witnessed to by the expositions themselves, which are found to be in harmony among us, and the discourse will be rendered based upon these. For in the Liturgy of the Holy Apostles written through Clement, after the narration of the Dominical miracles and acts, and furthermore of the passion, resurrection, return into heaven, it is written verbatim thus: "Remembering therefore those things which He endured for our sake, we give thanks to Thee, God Almighty, not as much as we ought, but as much as we can, and we fulfill His ordinance. For in the night in which He was betrayed, taking bread into His holy and immaculate hands, and having lifted up His eyes to Thee His God and Father, He broke it, and gave it to His disciples, saying: Take of it, eat; this is my body which is broken for many for the remission of sins." Likewise also, having mingled the chalice with wine and water, and sanctified C it, He gave it to them, saying: Drink of it, all of you; this is my blood which for many...
A is poured out for the remission of sins; do this in remembrance of me. Remembering therefore His passion and death, and resurrection, and return into heaven, and His future second coming, in which He comes to judge the living and the dead, and to render to each according to his works, we offer to Thee, the King and God, according to His instruction, this bread and this cup, giving thanks to Thee through Him, that Thou hast deemed us worthy to stand before Thee and to perform the priestly office for Thee. And we beseech Thee that Thou wouldst look propitiously and with a serene countenance on these gifts lying before Thee, Thou who art the God who has need of nothing; and may it be pleasing to Thee for the honor of Thy Christ, and deign to send Thy Holy Spirit upon this sacrifice, the witness of the passion of the Lord Jesus, that He may make this bread the Body of Thy Christ, and this cup the Blood of Thy Christ. »
These things, indeed, the divine apostles delivered to the Church through the writing of the blessed Clement. But the divine James, the first bishop of Jerusalem, and at once the brother and successor of the first and great high priest, he also, setting forth the mystical Liturgy in the same part, after the recitation of the Dominical words, writes thus: « Remembering therefore also we sinners His life-giving sufferings, the saving cross, and the death, and the burial, and the resurrection from the dead on the third day, and the ascension into heaven, and the sitting at the right hand of Thee, God and Father, and His second glorious and fearful coming, when He shall come with glory to judge the living and the dead, when He is about to render to each according to his works, we offer C to Thee, O Lord, this fearful and unbloody sacrifice. » And after a few words: « Have mercy on us, O God, according to Thy great mercy, and send down upon us, and upon these holy gifts lying before Thee, Thy Spirit, the most holy, the Lord and life-giving, co-enthroned with Thee, the God and Father, and with Thy only-begotten Son, reigning together, consubstantial and coeternal, who spoke in the law and the prophets, and in Thy New Testament, who descended in the form of a dove upon our Lord Jesus Christ in the river Jordan, and remained upon Him; who descended upon Thy holy apostles in the form of fiery tongues in the upper room of the holy and glorious Sion on the day of Holy Pentecost: this same Spirit of Thine, the most holy, send down, O Lord, upon us, and upon these holy gifts lying before Thee, that by coming upon them with His holy and good and glorious presence, He may hallow, and make this bread the holy Body of Thy Christ, and this cup the precious Blood of Thy Christ. »
Following these, those who after them performed the same Liturgy, both the great Basil, and after him John Chrysostom, the former when he came to this part, he also, reciting that first consecration delivered by the Master,
A “He left behind,” he says, “for us memorials of His saving passion, these which we have set forth according to His commandments; for when He was about to go forth to His voluntary and glorious and life-giving death, in the night in which He gave Himself up for the life of the world, having taken bread into His holy and immaculate hands, and having shown it to You, God and Father, having given thanks, having blessed, having sanctified, having broken, He gave it to His holy disciples and apostles, saying, ‘Take, eat; this is My body, which is broken for you for the remission of sins.’ Likewise also having taken the cup from the fruit of the vine, having mixed B it, having given thanks, having blessed, having sanctified, He gave it to His holy disciples and apostles, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you; this is My blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sins. Do this in remembrance of Me.’” And after a few words: “Therefore, O all-holy Master, we also, Thy sinful and unworthy servants, who have been counted worthy to minister at Thy holy altar, not because of our own righteousness—for we have done no good thing upon the earth—but because of Thy mercies and Thy compassions which Thou hast poured out abundantly upon us, we approach with confidence Thy holy altar, and presenting the antitypes of the holy body and blood of Thy Christ, we beseech Thee and call upon Thee, O Holy of holies, in the good pleasure of Thy goodness, that Thy Holy Spirit may come upon us and upon these gifts set forth, and [may] bless them and sanctify them, and show this bread to be the very precious body of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ, and this cup to be the very precious blood of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ, which was shed for the life of the world.” C And the divine Chrysostom, relating the same things again more concisely, says: “The Lord, having come and fulfilled the entire economy on our behalf, in the night in which He was betrayed, or rather, gave up Himself for the life of the world, having taken bread into His holy and immaculate and spotless hands, having given thanks, having blessed, having sanctified, having broken, He gave it to His holy disciples and apostles, saying: ‘Take, eat; this is My body, which is broken for you for the remission of sins.’ Likewise also [taking] the cup after He had supped, saying: ‘Drink of it all of you; this is My blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sins.’” And after a little, he adds thus: “We offer to Thee this reasonable and bloodless sacrifice, and we pray, and we beseech, and we entreat, (mayest Thou) send down Thy Holy Spirit upon us and upon these gifts set forth, and make this bread the precious body of Thy Christ, and that which is in this cup the precious blood of Thy Christ, changing them by Thy Holy Spirit.” Thus, indeed, all these men concordantly first recite the dominical words, and through them bring us to a memorial of that which was done at that time, and they introduce into the things set forth the sanctifying D power and efficacy; but they pray afterwards.
A And [they] invoke the grace of the Holy Spirit, so that it may come and apply what was said then to that which is now, and perfect the things set forth, and transform them into the Lord's body and blood. For this same Spirit also fashioned that God-bearing flesh in the womb of the Virgin, according to that which was said to her by the angel: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you." For this reason, the great Basil, after stating the Lord's words narratively as if spoken by Him over the holy body and blood, calls the things set forth antitypes, clearly because they are not yet perfected by those words, but still bear a certain type and image. And thus, immediately thereafter, he prays that the Holy Spirit may come and manifest the bread as the precious body itself, and the chalice as the precious blood itself. B And this is most reasonable; for just as at that first creation, the earth received the power of germinating the things that grow from it through the divine command, and that command, as the same teacher says, remaining planted in the earth, provides it with the power of germinating perpetually—yet there is need also of our care and of the hands of farmers to perfect the things that it produces—in the same way, this word too, once spoken by the Savior, as the divine Chrysostom says, operates always; yet the power of the divine priesthood also cooperates through prayer and blessing for the perfection of the things set forth. C For this same power also makes the water of baptism, which was simply water based on its appearance, a cleanser of all sins, while the divine Spirit invisibly concurs; this same power also brings to completion the anointing of the chrism, the priests themselves, and all other mysteries of the Church through the grace of the all-holy Spirit. Therefore, we do not pray over the things set forth because we are confident in our own prayer nor because we judge those words to be lacking in power, and we believe that they are perfected in this way, but rather we confess that the words preserve their own strength, and we demonstrate the power of the divine priesthood, which has the capacity of perfecting the whole mystery through the invocation of the Holy Spirit acting through it. For thus also the divine D Chrysostom, again in the third book *On the Priesthood*, says such things regarding this very matter: "The priest stands, not bringing down fire, but the Holy Spirit, and he makes his supplication at length, not so that some torch, lit from above, may consume the things set forth, but so that the grace, falling upon the sacrifice, through it may ignite the souls of all, and render them brighter than refined silver." But neither should we suspect any hesitation or uncertainty in us as we pray, since the Lord Himself, who is deified and partaken of, commanded us to do this: "For this," He says, "do in my remembrance," and He promised that He would give the Holy Spirit to all who ask Him, much more so to priests; and He greatly desires that this be performed by us each day, as is shown through all the following.
A Or if, perhaps, on account of this, you might have some doubt concerning baptism, as to whether it is perfected by prayers and invocations as well as by the forgiveness of sins—if indeed you have perceived it to be truly bestowed through priestly grace—and if you were to reject all other ecclesiastical mysteries in the same way, why, things are not so! Indeed, they are not. For He who promised to be with us all the days, even unto the end of the world, is faithful. We, therefore, having received these things from the holy apostles and those who succeeded them, hold them firmly and give an account for them.
That the Lord's word concerning the mysteries, uttered by way of recitation, is sufficient for the sanctification of the gifts, no apostle and no doctor is seen to have claimed. It is true, as the golden-tongued John says, that because that word was once uttered by Him, it operates evermore—just as the creative Word does—precisely because it was pronounced by Him. But that it now has the power to do this simply because it is uttered by a priest, B cannot be learned from anywhere; for even the creative Word does not operate because it is spoken by some man in each of the things that occur, but because it was once spoken by God. Furthermore, not even they themselves would claim that the Lord's word operates when spoken simply by just anyone, or without an altar. If, therefore, a priest is needed, and an altar, and other things that pertain to this, why not also prayerful supplications, blessing, and through them the arrival of the Holy Spirit, who completes and perfects all the mysteries?
In addition to this, let that holy Dionysius come forward to testify to the rites performed by us. For in his contemplation of the mystery of the synaxis, he says: C “When the hierarch has celebrated the sacred works of God, he approaches the consecration; and first he makes an apology for it, exclaiming: ‘You said: Do this in remembrance of me.’ Then, he prays to be made worthy of this God-imitating consecration and, in likeness to Christ Himself, to perform and impart the divine things most holily, and that those who are to receive the sacred things may receive them in a holy manner. Then he performs the most divine mysteries in this way and brings before the eyes what he has celebrated through the proposed sacred elements. For the bread, which had been covered and undivided, by being uncovered D and distributed into many parts, and the unity of the chalice being divided among all, symbollically multiplies and distributes the unity.” And after a few words: “Having received and distributed the communion, the hierarch concludes with a sacred thanksgiving.”
It is possible for anyone who wishes to see how these things agree—whether with what is performed by us, or what is performed by the Latins. For we, following the holy apostles and doctors, in accordance with the expositions handed down by them and also by this interpreter of the sacred rites, celebrate the sacred works of God—that is, as he says, the incarnation of God for our sake, His death for us, the divine generation of those being baptized, the divine adoption, and the deification through the keeping of the commandments; and thus, arriving at the consecration, we first make an apology for it and exclaim the very words of the Lord which He spoke at that time; and we add,
A that He commanded: "Do this in remembrance of Me." Then, having requested to be made worthy of this god-mimicking sacred service, as the expositions contain, we perform these most divine things through prayer and blessing, and the coming of the Holy Spirit; and having uncovered the bread, which was previously veiled and undivided, we divide it into many parts, and distribute the unity of the cup to all.
As for the priest among the Latins, he too mentions narratively the Lord’s words, that He commanded: "Take, eat, and drink, all of you," and, "Do this in remembrance of Me"; but he does not perform the sacred service any the more for it, but thinks that the mere recital of the words is sufficient for sanctification and the sacred service. Then he takes that unleavened bread, not previously veiled, but just as he happens to have taken it from wherever it lay, and having lifted it up, he breaks off a part and casts it into the cup; the rest he puts into his mouth, and having likewise drunk the whole cup, he urges the deacons who are ministering with him to greet him, having imparted nothing to anyone, while glorying in this word of the Lord: "Take, eat, all of you," and, "Drink of it, all of you." B Do not these things clearly bring a contradiction both to the handed-down expositions and explanations, and to the Lord’s words, and to the very utterances they themselves employ? Do they, then, holding such views, dare to blame us and investigate our rites and interpret them inquisitively, when they are so in harmony with the holy Fathers?
But Chrysostom says that the Lord’s word, once spoken, makes the sacrifice complete. He says "once spoken," not meaning what is now said by the priest, but what was once spoken by the Savior; he says it imparts to the gifts set forth their perfecting power and potential, but does not, by that act alone, carry them to completion. For the coming of the Holy Spirit, through the prayer of the priest, performs this; and this is clear from what he—the golden-tongued—says, as we have set forth before, after reciting the Lord's words: "Send down," he says, "Thy Holy Spirit, and make this bread indeed the precious body of Thy Christ, and what is in this cup the precious blood of Thy Christ, changing them by Thy Holy Spirit." C If these things do not persuade those who are contentious, they would deserve to be pitied for their double ignorance and their profound blindness.
OF MARCUS EPHESIUS: CONFESSION OF FAITH
It exists with the refutation of Gregorius Mamma, which is now edited for the first time at the beginning of this volume.OF THE SAME: EPISTLE TO ALL ORTHODOX
See above, col. 111.The following, namely the Epistle of Marcus Ephesius to Georgius Scholarius; the Epistle of the same to Theophanes the monk; the Dialogue of the same which is entitled *Latinus*, or *Regarding the Addition to the Symbol*; the Epistle of the same to the Emperor Johannes Palaeologus—all these, transcribed from manuscripts, were supplied to us by D. Hergenroether, Professor of Theology at the University of Würzburg.
I Epistle of the Lord Marcus Ephesius to the Lord Georgius Scholarius.
A Most glorious, most wise, most learned, and to me most desired brother and spiritual son, Lord Georgius, I pray to God that you may be healthy in soul and body and fare well in all things, just as by His mercy I myself fare moderately well in body. How much pleasure and joy you brought us when you embraced the right opinion and the pious and ancestral doctrine, and took up the defense of the truth which had been condemned by the unjust judges; and by how much, on the contrary, we were filled with sorrow and sadness when it reached our ears that you have again, with a changed countenance, held and spoken of things that conflict, and that you are gathering with the worst “economists” in order to procure means of union and B arrangement. Are these things glorious and worthy of a philosopher’s soul? Although I had indeed thought to compose praises for you, and was revolving in my mind the great Gregory, who has his name from theology, praising a certain philosopher, Hero, who stood firm against the error of the Arians—saying that, as he says, [he was] like a gazelle, for the noble body was punished and sent into exile. But you, lest you be—
A punished, or perhaps persuaded by promises of gifts and honors, have so easily betrayed the truth again. Who will give water to my head and a fountain of tears to my eyes, that I may weep for the daughter of Zion—by which I mean the soul of the philosopher—which is shaken and carried away like dust from a summer threshing floor? But you will say, perhaps, that the change has not been to the contrary, but that we are looking for a middle ground and an economy. Never, my man, have ecclesiastical matters been corrected through a middle ground. There is nothing [that exists] between truth and falsehood; but just as it is necessary for someone outside of light to be in darkness, so we would truly say that he who has declined even a little from the truth is henceforth subject to falsehood. B And although it is possible to speak of a middle ground between light and darkness—what is called the dawn or twilight—yet no one, even if he toils much to find it, will ever conceive of a middle ground between truth and falsehood. Listen to how the great theologian Gregory praises the synod that pursues a middle ground: “Whether [we call it] the tower C of Chalane, which rightly divided the languages (would that they had also been thus divided in those matters, for in evil they are in agreement), or that assembly of Caiaphas in which Christ is condemned, or whatever else of that kind one must call that synod—which overturned and confounded everything, destroying the pious and ancient dogma and the unique honor of the Trinity, when it raised up a rampart to shatter the co-substantiality with machines, and opened a door to impiety through that 'middle ground' obtained from the scriptures; for they became wise to do evil, but to do good they did not know.” Does this not apply also to our synod here? Yes, certainly, I would say. Yet, in as much as it could not even manage despite its great desire to use a middle ground and duplicity, being hindered by those who had paid their wages, for this reason it even vomited forth its blasphemy openly, as seemed good to them; or rather, to use the words of the prophet, they have hatched the eggs of vipers and they weave a spider’s web; and truly it is a spider’s web which has been fashioned by them and called a "definition." Let them not, therefore, deceive us again, those who flee back to mediation and duplicity. For it is the assembly of Caiaphas so long as the union made by them overshadows the Church. How long, O wretched man, will you [betray] the nobility D of your soul and—
occupy yourself A with vain things? How long will you dote on dreams? May the truth at some time be sought by you. Flee Egypt irrecoverably, flee Sodom and Gomorrah; save yourself to the mountain, lest you be snatched away together with them. But you are held fast by vain glory, and mendacious riches, and elegant, showy garments, and other things by which the prosperity of this world is supported. Alas, alas, that the philosopher has not a philosophical mind! Consider deeply those who were honored before you with similar distinctions. Tomorrow you too shall descend to Hades, having left everything behind upon the earth; and a most exact account of the things done by you shall be demanded of you, just as from the false-named assembly shall be demanded the blood of the lost souls who were scandalized in the mystery of the faith; who received into their souls an B intolerable blasphemy, worthy of no pardon, which is against the Holy Spirit, C daring to refer His existence to two principles, those who were led away to the impious and ridiculous Latin customs; those who drew upon their own heads the curses and anathemas of a perverted faith. "But it will be for the strengthening and increase of our race and nation," you say, "that the union has been made by them." Assuredly so! Do you not see the enemies of the Cross put to flight, and one of us putting a thousand to flight, and two putting ten thousand to rout? Nay, rather, we see the complete opposite. Unless the Lord builds our [imperial] authority, in vain do they labor who build it; unless the Lord guards our city, in vain do they keep watch who guard it with the Pope's gold coins. Therefore, come now, at this time change yourself entirely. Leave the dead to bury their own dead. What is Caesar’s, leave to Caesar. Render to God the soul created and adorned by Him. Reflect on how great a debtor you are to Him; make repayment. Indeed, I beseech you, most friendly and learned man, make it so that I may rejoice in you; grant me that I may offer glory to God, who may keep you unscathed from every harmful encounter. The humble metropolitan of Ephesus and all Asia, Marcus.
Epistle of the Lord Mark of Ephesus to Theophanes the monk
Most honorable among hieromonks, and to me in the Lord most beloved and most reverend father and brother.
A Know, that after I had departed for Constantinople, and one of those who had subscribed with the Latin-minded had ascended the patriarchal throne and was troubling us, I went away to my own church. There, however, finding no rest again and being grievously ill and afflicted and tempted by the impious, because I lacked an authentic determination, I departed from there also, led by the counsel to go to the Holy Mountain. Having therefore crossed over to Gallipolis and passing through Lemnos, I was detained there and confined by the emperor. But the Word of God and the power of truth are not bound; rather they run and prosper, and the majority of the brothers, taking courage from my exile, by their refutations overthrow those wicked men and transgressors of the right faith and the patristic customs, and drive them away from every place as refuse and B impure, neither enduring to concelebrate with them nor even to mention them at all as Christians.
I learn, moreover, that the Latins have ordained as metropolitan of Athens some infamous creature from Monemvasia, who, residing there, celebrates with the Latins without distinction and ordains illegally whomever he finds and of whatever sort they may be. I ask, therefore, your holiness, that taking up zeal for God, as a man of God and a friend of the truth and a genuine disciple of the holy Isidore, you exhort the priests of God to flee his communion in every way, and neither to celebrate the holy sacraments with him nor to make any commemoration of him at all, nor to hold him as a high priest, but as a wolf and a hireling; and neither to celebrate in the Latin churches at all, so that the wrath of God which has come upon Constantinople on account of the transgressions being committed there may not come upon you as well.
Know also that this false union, in so far as it has not yet by the grace and power of God been dissolved, will be dissolved, and so far is the dogma of the Latins from being confirmed by the false synod—which they always had in their desires—that it has been even more overturned and refuted, and is everywhere denounced as blasphemous and impious; and those who confirmed it do not even dare to open their mouths in its defense. C Therefore, the monk of that hireling of yours—and not shepherd—the senseless one of Monemvasia, who received from the emperor the abbacy of the Forerunner, is neither commemorated by his monks nor is he even censed at all as a Christian; but they have him only for the administration of affairs, like some kind of consul. And the emperor, learning these things, says not a word, but even openly confesses that he repents of the things that have been done and transfers the blame onto those who assented and subscribed.
Flee, therefore, you also, brothers, the communion with those with whom it is to be denied, and the commemoration of those who are not to be commemorated. Behold, I, Marcus the sinner, say to you, that he who makes commemoration of the pope as an orthodox high priest is liable to fulfill everything of the Latins, down to the very shaving of the beard; and he who is Latin-minded with the Latins...
shall be judged, and shall be considered a transgressor of the faith. A May your holy prayers be with us. To the noble lord Constantine Contipetræ and to all the other lords who received us with hospitality, correction and that blessing which is from God.
Marcus of Ephesus. June 16.
III
An Apology of Marcus, Metropolitan of Ephesus, spoken by him extemporaneously at the approach of his death.
Exstat supra col. 535.IV
A Dialogue of Marcus of Ephesus entitled LATINUS, or Concerning the Addition to the Symbol.
LATINUS. I wonder how you reproach us for the addition to the Symbol, B since the second of the ecumenical synods altered the entire symbol of the first and handed it down, having expanded it with additions and explained other things for the sake of greater clarity. Therefore, an alteration concerning the words does nothing to harm those who maintain an accurate dogmatic theology.
GREEK. We confess that this is indeed the case, and we are not ignorant that the symbol of the second synod is altered in its wording relative to the symbol of the first; however, we say that just because to those Fathers it was permitted to alter the symbol, it does not follow that this is now permitted to you as well.
LAT. And why is that?
GR. First, because they were an ecumenical C synod, whereas this is not the case for you, no matter how much you may boast of the Pope and his primacy. Second, because at that time it was permitted; for it had not yet been forbidden. But for you, who dare to make an addition after it has been forbidden, no reason allows you to escape being liable to the curses pronounced by the Fathers.
LAT. When, then, was it forbidden, and for what reason?
GR. I will explain everything to you accurately. After the declaration of the faith made by the first synod, many and various declarations of faith were made by various synods, removing the word D "consubstantial." But those were indeed nullified and rescinded. The second synod, however, being ecumenical and having accurately preserved the sentiment of the first, made its own that declaration which we now use without the addition, while you use it with the addition. Nevertheless, neither of these two synods decreed any prohibition against alteration. Wherefore, at the third ecumenical synod...
A a symbol of faith was brought forward, published by those who followed Nestorius, possessing the opinion of the heresy, and by which they even dared to baptize some in Lydia. When the Fathers heard this read and judged it as no longer to be tolerated by him who wished to manipulate the symbol, they immediately brought forth a definition that no one hereafter should dare to change the faith exhibited by the Fathers, that is, the symbol of faith. Whence also the blessed Cyril, in his epistle to John of Antioch, knowing his own decision (for he himself was the president of that great synod), says: "In no way," he says (1), "do we suffer the faith, or the symbol of faith, exhibited by our Fathers to be shaken; nor do we permit unto ourselves B or to others to change even one vowel placed therein, or even to pass over a single syllable, being mindful of Him who said: 'Do not remove the eternal (ancient) boundaries which thy fathers have set.' For it was not they who were speaking, but the Spirit of the Father who proceeds indeed from Him, yet is not for that reason alien to the Son according to the rationale of substance." You hear how he forbids not only the thought, but also the word and syllable to be changed and transgressed. "We do not permit," he says, "unto ourselves or others, as from the person of the whole synod." And yet they were an ecumenical synod; but they themselves set the definition of the prohibition.
LAT. No. But another, he says (Council of Chalcedon), faith—that is to say, the contrary one, having dogmas alien to the Church. For faith, C which contains explanation and elucidation, will not be entirely contrary, whether it differs by one word or by many.
GR. I wonder how you do not try to extract the meaning of the speakers from the words, but rather drag the words to your own preference. For to think that "other" signifies "contrary" is the mark of an unwise man, and of one who does not know at all how to adapt to the nature of things the word suitable to each. For "other" or "different" extends more broadly than "contrary," and not everything which is different from something is already contrary to it. A man, for instance, is different in species from a horse, but in no way contrary; for to substance there is nothing contrary. Therefore, by "another faith" the Fathers did not signify "contrary," just as no one by "animal" signifies "man." D
LAT. I, for my part, have not yet even until now learned such things; but I wonder now even at those who first dared to make this addition, that when there were so many prohibitions, they were nevertheless not afraid to utter it and to transmit it to those after them.