Leontius of Byzantium or of Jerusalem

things, not by uttering a voice, but ^A by presenting themselves exactly as they were done by us.

CAP. LXX. The condition of the present life, which is destined to pass away, imitates the passage of a ship sailing across the sea; for it deceives us, its sailors, and gradually sweeping us along in a hesitant course, at length brings each of us to his own end. If, therefore, these things are so, let us hasten past the fleeting concerns of the world and run toward those things which remain into ages of ages.

CAP. LXXI. Let the haughty and supercilious man not be puffed up like a high-horned bull, but, reflecting on the subsistence of the flesh, he must calm the swelling of his heart. For even if he has been made a prince on earth, he must not be ignorant that he originated from the earth, since ^B he can ascend from dust to a throne, and must at last descend into the dust.

CAP. LXXII. Strive always, most unconquerable emperor; and just as those who begin to climb stairs do not stop, nor cease being carried to higher levels, until they arrive at the highest step, so you too must assiduously apply yourself, that you may ascend to noble things; so it will come to pass that you may also one day enjoy the heavenly kingdom. Would that Christ, the King of all, of both those who rule and those who are ruled, may grant this to you and your consort, into the ages. Amen.

ANNO DOMINI DCX.

LEONTIUS BYZANTINUS SEU HIEROSOLYMITANUS

NOTITIA

1. Leontius Byzantinus, first a scholastic by profession, who, it seems, practiced as an advocate in the Byzantine forum: but afterward, having abdicated legal duties, he is thought to have professed the monastic life in Palestine. Hence, perhaps, in some manuscripts he is called Hierosolymitanus, because the monastery of the New Laura was not far from Jerusalem. However, he is by no means to be confused, as it pleased Canisius and Cave, with the other Leontius, who was one of the leaders of the Origenists and Nestorians, about whom Cyril of Scythopolis says more. Our Leontius was indeed at one time of the sect of the Nestorians, having been enticed into that impiety by the snares of heretics while he was still an adolescent; but celestial grace was present to him, which snatched him from that abyss, as he himself professes; but the other man, who lived under Justinian, is found to have adhered to the impious sect until his death, and for that reason had been separated for a long time from the company of the blessed Sabas, as the aforementioned Cyril is the author. Furthermore, the Leontius of whom we speak here, from what he himself handed down in his writings, is recognized to have flourished in the sixth century…

at the end of the sixth or the beginning of the seventh century. For he ^A weaves together the series of the prelates of Alexandria—not, however, of Constantinople, as Vossius says through a lapse of memory—ending with Eulogius, who, after having spent 27 years in the episcopate, finally departed from the living in the year of Christ 607, in the 6th year of the Emperor Phocas, as we have taught above. He subsequently makes mention of Philoponus as having met his fate; which event, indeed, Fabricius thought to have occurred no earlier than the year 510, though he later changed his opinion, acting upon testimony taken from the writings of Philoponus himself; a matter which we, following him, noted a little earlier. As to the time at which our author died, we leave this for learned men to discuss.

II. Leontius wrote many things, some of which are already published, while others have not yet been brought to light. The book *De sectis* [On the Sects], distributed into ten *Actiones* [Actions], first appeared at Basel in the year 1578, with G. L. (Joannes Leunclavius) as translator; it was subsequently printed both in volume I of the *Auctarium Bibliothecae Patrum*, published at Paris in 1624, and in volume XI of the Morellian edition in 1644. We have followed this latter edition; yet it has everywhere been collated and, in some places, restored or illustrated with a few notes. Here, however, it does not seem inappropriate to mention what Combefisius, in his *Historiae Byzantinae scriptores post Theophanem*, attested regarding an outstanding Royal codex, which Leo Cinnamus transcribed from an older one: "This codex," he says, "contains Leontius' *De sectis*, far more emended than the published editions and expanded with authorities that are missing therein." Concerning the age of this excellent Royal codex, marked no. 2951, the illustrious Montfaucon should be consulted. Cave also writes that another manuscript of Leontius' *De sectis*, much fuller than the published versions, once existed in the possession of Isaac Vossius; and Colomesius had previously mentioned it in his catalogue of the manuscripts of the same Vossius; although in the edition of Colomesius' works which Fabricius prepared, it is erroneously read: *Leonis Byzantii scholia*, etc.

III. Following the book *De sectis* are the short treatises which Henricus Canisius first brought into the public domain from the papers of Franciscus Turrianus. They are as follows: I. Three books against the Eutychians and Nestorians. II. A book against those who offer us certain works of Apollinarius falsely inscribed with the name of the holy Fathers. III. Solutions to the arguments of Severus. IV. Hypothetical and definitive doubts against those who deny that there are two true natures in Christ after the union. Regarding the value of these treatises, their editor says: "Leontius is most learned and is always occupied with those arguments which would exercise even the most acute professors of scholastic theology: and Leontius seems to have devoted all his effort and industry to uprooting and utterly extirpating the followers of Eutyches and Nestorius. The many volumes written against them, with such great apparatus of doctrine and talent, are the proof." Furthermore, following the study of Canisius, Antonius Bonjovanni of Verona brought to light an *Apology for the Council of Chalcedon* by the same Leontius, from an ancient manuscript codex in the Greek library of St. Mark, with his own interpretation and scholia; it was published first at Lucca in the year 1752, in the *Supplement to the Venetian-Labbe Councils*, by the care and study of the distinguished Joannes Dominicus Mansi. We have not wished to let this Apology be absent from the rest of the Leontian writings. Moreover, apart from Cave and Fabricius, Labbe will give more information about Leontius.

ANOTHER NOTICE.

Leontius, by birth a Byzantine, by profession a scholasticus or advocate, was in his youth snared in the traps of the Nestorians. Afterwards, aided by divine grace, he was snatched from that abyss and, having abandoned legal cares, he retired to a monastery in Palestine near Jerusalem, whence he is also called a monk of Jerusalem. He was a man of fruitful, sharp, and manifold talent.

^A Having perfected his doctrine as the sixth century was ending or the seventh was beginning, he vanquished the opposing heresies of the Nestorians and Eutychians.

His writings are these: 1. The *Scholia*, or *Book of Sects*, distributed into ten actions (πράξεις) or readings, reports excerpts from the mouth of Theodorus, abbot and most learned philosopher. In it, he premises a profession of faith (act 1) and a canon of Holy Scripture (act 2), adding a survey of the principal heresies regarding the Trinity and the Incarnation (act 1, n. 4), as well as an exposition of the doctrine of the Jews and Samaritans (act 2, n. 5-8). He divides Christian times into two periods, namely, from the birth of Christ to the empire of Constantine, and from the empire of Constantine to his own age. Of the former period, he recounts the Fathers and doctors (act 3, n. 1), then the heresies of the Manichaeans (n. 2) and Paul of Samosata (n. 3). Also, of the other period, he enumerates the Fathers and doctors (act 3, n. 4), then the heresies of Arius (n. 4), Macedonius, Apollinaris, Nestorius, and Eutyches (act 4), and the perturbations and factions of the Eutychian sect (act 5. Cf. act 10, n. 1-3). Hence, having turned to the objections of the Eutychians, he destroys those which they were accustomed to bring against the Council of Chalcedon (act 6 and 9); then he dissolves their reasonings (act 7); finally, he explains the authorities of the Holy Fathers brought forward by his adversaries (act 8). In the end, he adds certain things regarding Origen and the detesting of his errors (act 10, n. 4-6).

2. The *Three Books Against the Nestorians and Eutychians* argue in such a way that in the first book, the truth impugned by the crafty objections of the Nestorian and Eutychian heresy on both sides is set forth through the genuine reason of the hypostatic union. In the second book, he institutes via a dialogue a struggle against that opinion held by certain Monophysites, which defended the idea that the body of Christ was incorruptible before the resurrection. Finally, in the third book, he shows the snares of the Nestorians and uncovers the sources lurking in Diodorus of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Paul of Samosata. For each of these books, many testimonies of the Holy Fathers were provided by Leontius in confirmation of Catholic doctrine.

3. The *Seven Books Against the Nestorians* ^B and the unbelievers who affirm ^C that there were no persons in Christ and confess no connection in him. This illustrious work concerns itself not so much with authority as with subtle reasoning regarding the conjunction of the divine nature of the Word with the human (lib. 1), the one person of Christ (lib. 2), the one Son, Christ (lib. 3), the Blessed Virgin Mother of God (lib. 4), Christ as God and man (lib. 5), Christ not as a man-bearing God but as a man-made God (lib. 6), and finally with the formula: "One of the Holy Trinity suffered in the flesh" (lib. 7).

4. The *Book Against the Monophysites*, entitled *Questions* (ἀπορίαι) against those who speak of a composite nature of Our Lord Jesus Christ, in a scholastic and philosophical manner [attacks] the error regarding one...

they strongly and cleverly impugn the nature of Christ. This argumentation is followed by a discussion set up with the greatest care from the holy Fathers, in which the sayings of the holy Fathers, commonly touted by the Monophysites in defense of their own error, are brought forward and explained; then, too, very many authorities of the Fathers are employed for the sake of the catholic truth; finally, he solidly refutes what those same heretics were accustomed to bring forward against the Council of Chalcedon.

5. The thirty chapters against Severus the Monophysite contain as many arguments drawn up against the false assertion of a single nature in Christ 10.

6. The book of the solution of objections 11, held in the form of a dialogue between an orthodox believer and a Monophysite (Acephalus), again very subtly refutes the Eutychian heresy from reason, confuting the objections of the adversary one by one.

7. The book against the frauds of the Apollinarists, which presents to us certain things of Apollinaris, falsely inscribed with the name of the holy Fathers 12, likewise impugns the Eutychians who, in order to show that tradition favored them, loved to bring forward writings and sayings of the holy Fathers that had been once either forged or corrupted by the most crafty Apollinarist falsifiers. These, therefore, he examines and judges one by one, with no small benefit to criticism 13.

All these works of Leontius taken together constitute an extraordinary corpus of theology, to be placed with reverence in the treasury of the Church. In them shine forth both a singular sharpness of genius and a marvelous knowledge of the holy Fathers and untiring zeal against the crafty arts of heretics and an accurate judgment in discerning the genuine from the spurious works of the holy Fathers 14.

An edition which exhibits all the works of Leontius in Greek and Latin is found nowhere. Galland, in *Bibliotheca* vol. XII, pp. 623-750, indeed gave a collection of the works of Leontius, but for the most part in Latin only, since the Greek text had not yet seen the light of day. Finally, Angelo Mai published most of them in Greek, partly in *Nova Collectio veterum scriptorum* vols. VII and IX, and partly in *Spicilegium Romanum* vol. X. I have therefore thought it better to subjoin to each work of Leontius where they may be found, both in Greek and in Latin.

ADMONITION REGARDING THE GREEK EDITION OF THE WORKS OF LEONTIUS OF BYZANTIUM

The five treatises of the monk Leontius, easily the prince of theological science in his age, against the Nestorians, Eutychians, Severus, the Incorrupticolae, and the Apollinarists, with the testimonies of the ancient Fathers inserted, were extant in Latin in Canisius, translated by Fr. Turrianus. And although Basnage adorned the Canisian volumes with several Greek texts, he nevertheless allowed these books of Leontius to lie in their Latinity for want of a Greek exemplar. I, however, who had long since begun to esteem Leontius on account of his other studies which I had edited at another time, having finally obtained an ancient, complete, and

[Not having received a previous page of translation, I provide the translation of the current page as the commencement of the work.]

THE WORKS OF LEONTIUS THE MONK OF BYZANTIUM

HITHERTO EXTANT

COLLECTED, EDITED, AND ILLUSTRATED WITH NOTES

SCHOLIA OF LEONTIUS THE SCHOLASTIC OF BYZANTIUM

FROM THE MOUTH OF THEODORE, THE MOST DEVOUT ABBOT AND MOST WISE PHILOSOPHER, WHO STUDIED BOTH DIVINE AND SECULAR LITERATURE.

SCHOLIA OF LEONTIUS THE ADVOCATE OF BYZANTIUM

FROM THE MOUTH OF THEODORE, THE MOST RELIGIOUS ABBOT AND MOST LEARNED PHILOSOPHER, WELL-VERSED IN DIVINE AND EXTERNAL LETTERS, RECORDED.

ACT I

^A I. Since we are about to speak of heresies, it is necessary that we first treat of four things in the usage of the Fathers. These are: essence (ousia), nature (physis), hypostasis, and person (prosopon). We must know, then, that for them, essence and nature are the same; and likewise, hypostasis and person are the same. For them, essence, or nature, is what the philosophers call species. And species is that which is predicated of many things differing in number. By hypostasis, or person, they mean what the philosophers call "individual essence"—and we have rightly added "individual essence." For ecclesiastical writers do not call the individuals of accidents a person or a hypostasis. With these things thus premised, our faith is this: that there is one divinity, existing in three hypostases. And one hypostasis is that of the Father, and one that of the Son,