(Updated January 12, 2024)
This Quote Archive is on the Papacy and the Invincibility of the Church. Each Archive is a treasury of original source quotes on various topics relevant to the Catholic Faith, and addressed in Becoming Catholic articles. They are intended to help people explore the “gold, silver, and precious gems” that have been mined and sifted from the sources of the Great Tradition by Eternal Christendom as a labor of love for our readers, and all seekers of Truth. They are periodically updated as more research is completed.
The Papacy refers to the government exercised by St. Peter and his successors over the Catholic Church.
The “Invincibility” of the Church refers to its infallibility and indefectibility, both of which are gifts from Christ.
“Infallibility” refers to a negative promise from Christ to His Church that, in view of its authority to “bind and loose” (Matt. 16:19; 18:18) with the backing of Heaven, it shall never err in its formal teaching on matters of faith and morals.
“Indefectibility” is closely related to infallibility, and refers to Christ’s promise that the Church, as “the pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15), will never be defeated (Matt. 16:18), which means it will endure to the end of the world in both its existence and faith–it will never be destroyed, and it will never fully apostatize.
Since Catholic claims about the Papacy and the Invincibility of the Church (infallibility + indefectibility) are closely related, we deemed it fitting to include quotes from the Church Fathers related to these topics in the same Quote Archive. The Quote Archive The Sacrament of Holy Orders, and the Authority of the Priesthood covers the Sacrament of Holy Orders as such (by which bishops, priests, and deacons are ordained) as well as the general nature and authority of the priesthood. This Quote Archive more specifically addresses the Papacy, as well as the power of the priesthood to teach with God’s authority, and thus without error (infallibility), and to never cease doing so until the end of the world (indefectibility).
Quotes about the Papacy consist of two types: those about St. Peter himself, and those about his successors. Both are important to the case for the Papacy because the Catholic Church teaches that the Popes are the successors of St. Peter and of his government, which it claims is universal (i.e. over all the churches). As such, it is important to include patristic data not only about the Popes themselves, but St. Peter, the man. If the Popes have the authority they claim, this authority must stem from St. Peter himself, which is why the patristic witness to his leading role among the Apostles is relevant to any analysis of the Papacy.
Drawing from these two sets of data, a convincing case for the Papacy must therefore show good evidence for the following:
- Peter is the rock (which can be true alongside his confession, Christ, etc.);
- Peter was given the keys by Christ in a singular way;
- Peter held a primacy of authority among the Apostles, and thus governed the whole Church as leader, chief, and “prince of the Apostles”;
- Peter was in Rome, where he established his throne (cathedra); and
- Peter’s successors in Rome inherited his primacy, and thus his government over the whole Church.
Some Quote Archives cover topics that include multiple sub-topics, in which individual quotes only address particular sub-topics. The Papacy and the Invincibility of the Church is obviously such a topic. Therefore, in order to help readers more easily identify the sub-topics addressed in each quote, they will be listed in the order below after each citation. We will also include quotes that could arguably be used against the Papacy and Invincibility of the Church.
Sub-Topics
The sub-topics in this Quote Archive are:
- ROCK (identified as St. Peter, but could also include his confession, Christ, etc.)
- KEYS (which includes the authority to “bind and loose,” held by St. Peter in a unique way, as well as by the rest of the Apostles)
- PRIMACY (St. Peter himself as the leader, chief, and “prince of the Apostles”)
- ROME (St. Peter’s personal presence in Rome)
- SUCCESSORS (Primacy exercised by Popes after St. Peter)
- INFALLIBILITY (quotes that explicitly or implicitly touch on the issue of papal infallibility, and/or the infallibility of the Catholic Church in some other way, such as through Councils, etc.)
- INDEFECTIBILITY (quotes that explicitly or implicitly affirm the impossibility of the Catholic Church, and particularly the papacy, apostatizing from the Faith)
Apostolic Era Documents
The Shepherd of Hermas (c. 80)
(Book 1, Part 2, Ch. 4) | SUCCESSORS
You will write therefore two books, and you will send the one to Clemens [Clement of Rome] and the other to Grapte. And Clemens will send his to foreign countries, for permission has been granted to him to do so. And Grapte will admonish the widows and the orphans. But you will read the words in this city, along with the presbyters who preside over the Church.
St. Pope Clement I (died 99) | WEST
St. Pope Clement of Rome, Letter to the Corinthians (c. 80)
(§§1, 14, 57-59, 63) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§1) The church of God which sojourns at Rome, to the church of God sojourning at Corinth, to them that are called and sanctified by the will of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, from Almighty God through Jesus Christ, be multiplied. Owing, dear brethren, to the sudden and successive calamitous events which have happened to ourselves, we feel that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the points respecting which you consulted us; and especially to that shameful and detestable sedition, utterly abhorrent to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-confident persons have kindled to such a pitch of frenzy, that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be universally loved, has suffered grievous injury…
(§14) It is right and holy therefore, men and brethren, rather to obey God than to follow those who, through pride and sedition, have become the leaders of a detestable emulation. For we shall incur no slight injury, but rather great danger, if we rashly yield ourselves to the inclinations of men who aim at exciting strife and tumults, so as to draw us away from what is good…
(§57) You therefore, who laid the foundation of this sedition, submit yourselves to the presbyters, and receive correction so as to repent, bending the knees of your hearts. Learn to be subject, laying aside the proud and arrogant self-confidence of your tongue. For it is better for you that you should occupy a humble but honorable place in the flock of Christ, than that, being highly exalted, you should be cast out from the hope of His people…
(§58) …Receive our counsel, and you shall be without repentance…
(§59) If, however, any shall disobey the words spoken by Him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and serious danger…
(§63) Right is it, therefore, to approach examples so good and so many, and submit the neck and fulfil the part of obedience, in order that, undisturbed by vain sedition, we may attain unto the goal set before us in truth wholly free from blame. Joy and gladness will you afford us, if you become obedient to the words written by us and through the Holy Spirit root out the lawless wrath of your jealousy according to the intercession which we have made for peace and unity in this letter. We have sent men faithful and discreet, whose conversation from youth to old age has been blameless among us—the same shall be witnesses between you and us. This we have done, that you may know that our whole concern has been and is that you may be speedily at peace.
St. Ignatius of Antioch (died c. 107) | EAST
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Romans (c. 107)
(Greeting, §§3-4) | ROME | SUCCESORS
(Greeting) Ignatius…to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High Father, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that wills all things which are according to the love of Jesus Christ our God, which also presides in the place of the region of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of obtaining her every desire, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love, is named from Christ, and from the Father…
(§3) You have never envied anyone; you have taught others. Now I desire that those things may be confirmed [by your conduct], which in your instructions you enjoin [on others]…
(§4) …Entreat Christ for me, that by these instruments [the teeth of wild beasts] I may be found a sacrifice [to God]. I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you…
Tatian the Syrian (c. 120-c. 180) | EAST
Tatian, Diatessaron
(§23) | ROCK | PRIMACY
He said unto them, “And you, what say you that I am?” Simon Cephas answered and said, “Thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Jesus answered and said unto him, “Blessed art thou, Simon son of Jonah: flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee also, that thou art Cephas, and on this rock will I build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:16-18).
St. Dionysius of Corinth (early to mid-100s) | EAST
St. Dionysius of Corinth, Letter to St. Pope Soter, quoted in Eusebius, Church History (c. 170)
(Book 2, Ch. 28, 8) | ROME
And that they [Peter and Paul] both suffered martyrdom at the same time is stated by Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in his epistle to the Romans, in the following words: “You have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter and of Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both of them planted and likewise taught us in our Corinth. And they taught together in like manner in Italy, and suffered martyrdom at the same time.” I have quoted these things in order that the truth of the history might be still more confirmed.
(Book 4, Ch. 23, §§9-11) | SUCCESSORS
(§9) There is extant also another epistle written by Dionysius to the Romans, and addressed to [St. Pope] Soter, who was bishop at that time. We cannot do better than to subjoin some passages from this epistle, in which he commends the practice of the Romans which has been retained down to the persecution in our own days. His words are as follows:
(§10) “For from the beginning it has been your practice to do good to all the brethren in various ways, and to send contributions to many churches in every city. Thus relieving the want of the needy, and making provision for the brethren in the mines by the gifts which you have sent from the beginning, you Romans keep up the hereditary customs of the Romans, which your blessed bishop Soter has not only maintained, but also added to, furnishing an abundance of supplies to the saints, and encouraging the brethren from abroad with blessed words, as a loving father his children.”
(§11) In this same epistle he makes mention also of [St. Pope] Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians, showing that it had been the custom from the beginning to read it in the church. His words are as follows: “To-day we have passed the Lord’s holy day, in which we have read your epistle. From it, whenever we read it, we shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was written to us through Clement.”
St. Irenaeus of Lyon (c. 130-c. 202) | EAST/WEST
St. Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies (c. 180)
(Book 3, Ch. 1, §1) | ROME
Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church.
(Book 3, Ch. 3, §§2-3) | ROME | PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS
(§2) Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.
(§3) The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles…To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telesphorus, who was gloriously martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, Anicetus. Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth.
St. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-c. 215) | EAST
St. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata
(Book 6, Ch. 15) | INFALLIBILITY
The liars, then, in reality are not those who for the sake of the scheme of salvation conform, nor those who err in minute points, but those who are wrong in essentials, and reject the Lord, and as far as in them lies deprive the Lord of the true teaching; who do not quote or deliver the Scriptures in a manner worthy of God and of the Lord; for the deposit rendered to God, according to the teaching of the Lord by His apostles, is the understanding and the practice of the godly tradition…“But all things are right,” says the Scripture, “before those who understand” (Prov. 8:9), that is, those who receive and observe, according to the ecclesiastical rule, the exposition of the Scriptures explained by Him; and the ecclesiastical rule is the concord and harmony of the law and the prophets in the covenant delivered at the coming of the Lord. Knowledge is then followed by practical wisdom, and practical wisdom by self-control: for it may be said that practical wisdom is divine knowledge, and exists in those who are deified; but that self-control is mortal, and subsists in those who philosophize, and are not yet wise.
St. Clement of Alexandria, quoted in Eusebius, Church History (c. 200)
(Book 6, Ch. 14, §6) | ROME
The Gospel according to Mark had this occasion. As Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his sayings, should write them out. And having composed the Gospel he gave it to those who had requested it.
St. Clement of Alexandria, Who is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved? (c. 200)
(§21) | PRIMACY
Therefore on hearing those words, the blessed Peter, the chosen, the pre-eminent, the first of the disciples, for whom alone and Himself the Savior paid tribute, quickly seized and comprehended the saying. And what does he say? “Lo, we have left all and followed You” (Matt. 19:27)…
Tertullian (c. 155-c. 220) | WEST
Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics (200)
(Ch. 22, 32, 36) | ROCK | KEYS | ROME | SUCCESSORS
(Ch. 22) …What man, then, of sound mind can possibly suppose that they were ignorant of anything, whom the Lord ordained to be masters (or teachers), keeping them, as He did, inseparable (from Himself) in their attendance, in their discipleship, in their society, to whom, “when they were alone, He used to expound” all things (Mark 4:34) which were obscure, telling them that “to them it was given to know those mysteries” (Matt. 13:11), which it was not permitted the people to understand? Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called “the rock on which the church should be built” (Matt. 16:18), who also obtained “the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:18), with the power of “loosing and binding in heaven and on earth?” (Matt. 16:19)…
(Ch. 30) Where was Marcion then, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus then, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago—in the reign of Antoninus for the most part—and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed [St. Pope] Eleutherus, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled…
(Ch. 32) But if there be any (heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a manner that [that first bishop of theirs] bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men—a man, moreover, who continued steadfast with the apostles. For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter. In exactly the same way the other churches likewise exhibit (their several worthies), whom, as having been appointed to their episcopal places by apostles, they regard as transmitters of the apostolic seed. Let the heretics contrive something of the same kind…
(Ch. 36) Come now, you who would indulge a better curiosity, if you would apply it to the business of your salvation, run over the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre-eminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severally. Achaia is very near you, (in which) you find Corinth. Since you are not far from Macedonia, you have Philippi; (and there too) you have the Thessalonians. Since you are able to cross to Asia, you get Ephesus. Since, moreover, you are close upon Italy, you have Rome, from which there comes even into our own hands the very authority (of apostles themselves). How happy is its church, on which apostles poured forth all their doctrine along with their blood! Where Peter endures a passion like his Lord’s! where Paul wins his crown in a death like John’s [the Baptist]. Where the Apostle John was first plunged, unhurt, into boiling oil, and thence remitted to his island-exile!…
Tertullian, Against Marcion (c. 209)
(Book 4, Ch. 5) | ROME | INFALLIBILITY
Let us see what milk the Corinthians drank from Paul; to what rule of faith the Galatians were brought for correction; what the Philippians, the Thessalonians, the Ephesians read by it; what utterance also the Romans give, so very near (to the apostles), to whom Peter and Paul conjointly bequeathed the gospel even sealed with their own blood…The same authority of the apostolic churches will afford evidence to the other Gospels also, which we possess equally through their means, and according to their usage—I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew—whilst that which Mark published may be affirmed to be Peter’s whose interpreter Mark was…Such are the summary arguments which we use, when we take up arms against heretics for the faith of the gospel, maintaining both that order of periods, which rules that a late date is the mark of forgers, and that authority of churches which lends support to the tradition of the apostles; because truth must needs precede the forgery, and proceed straight from those by whom it has been handed on.
Tertullian, Scorpiace (c. 211)
For though you think heaven still shut, remember that the Lord left here to Peter and through him to the Church, the keys of it, which everyone who has been here put to the question, and also made confession, will carry with him…
Tertullian, Modesty (c. 220)
(Ch. 21) | ROCK | KEYS | PRIMACY
I now inquire into your opinion, (to see) from what source you usurp this right to the Church.
If, because the Lord has said to Peter, “Upon this rock will I build My Church, to you have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom” (Matt. 16:18, 19); or, “Whatsoever you shall have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens” (Matt. 16:19) you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? On “you,” He says, “will I build My Church”; and, “I will give to you the keys,” not to the Church; and, “Whatsoever you shall have loosed or bound,” not “what they shall have loosed or bound.” For so withal the result teaches. In (Peter) himself the Church was reared; that is, through (Peter) himself; (Peter) himself essayed the key…
Origen (c. 184-c. 253) | EAST
Origen, Homily 5 on Exodus (c. 248)
(§4) (pg. 281) | ROCK
But who is so blessed, who so dispatches the weight of temptations that no uncertainty creeps up on his mind? Look at that great foundation of the Church, its most solid rock upon which Christ founded the Church [Matt. 16:18]. What does the Lord say [to Peter]? “Why did you doubt, O you of little faith?” (Matt. 14:31).
Origen, Commentary on Matthew (c. 249)
(Book 13, Ch. 31) | KEYS | PRIMACY
But since it was necessary, even if something in common had been said in the case of Peter and those who had thrice admonished the brethren, that Peter should have some element superior to those who thrice admonished, in the case of Peter, this saying “I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of the heavens” (Matt. 16:19), has been specially set before the words, “And whatever things you shall bind on earth,” etc. And, indeed, if we were to attend carefully to the evangelical writings, we would also find here, and in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter and those who have thrice admonished the brethren, a great difference and a pre-eminence in the things said to Peter, compared with the second class. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on the earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage, with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens [Matt.16:19]. The better, therefore, is the binder, so much more blessed is he who has been loosed, so that in every part of the heavens his loosing has been accomplished.
Origen, Commentary on John
(Book 5, §3) (pg. 161) | ROCK
And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, against which the gates of Hades shall not prevail [Matt. 16:18], has left behind one letter which is accepted.
Caius the Presbyter (200s) | WEST
Caius the Presbyter, Disputation with Proclus, quoted in Eusebius, Church History (c. 210)
(Book 2, Ch. 25, §§6-7) | ROME
(§6) It [the martyrdom of Peter and Paul in Rome] is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the Church, who arose under [St. Pope] Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy [Montanists], speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid:
(§7) “But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church.”
St. Pope Cornelius (died 253) | WEST
St. Pope Cornelius, Letter to St. Cyprian of Carthage (Letter 45), On the Return of the Confessors to Unity (251)
(§2) | SUCCESSORS
There was one voice from all, giving thanks to God; all were expressing the joy of their heart by tears, embracing them as if they had this day been set free from the penalty of the dungeon. And to quote their very own words: “We,” they say, “know that [St. Pope] Cornelius is bishop of the most holy Catholic Church elected by Almighty God, and by Christ our Lord. We confess our error; we have suffered imposture; we were deceived by captious perfidy and loquacity. For although we seemed, as it were, to have held a kind of communion with a man who was a schismatic and a heretic, yet our mind was always sincere in the Church. For we are not ignorant that there is one God; that there is one Christ the Lord whom we have confessed, and one Holy Spirit; and that in the Catholic Church there ought to be one bishop.” Were we not rightly induced by that confession of theirs, to allow that what they had confessed before the power of the world they might approve when established in the Church? Wherefore we bade Maximus the presbyter to take his own place; the rest we received with great approbation of the people. But we remitted all things to Almighty God, in whose power all things are reserved.
St. Cyprian of Carthage (c. 210-258) | WEST
St. Cyprian of Carthage, The Unity of the Catholic Church (251)
(§4) (pgs. 98-99) | ROCK | KEYS | PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS
If anyone considers and examines these things, there is no need of a lengthy discussion and arguments. Proof for faith is easy in a brief statement of the truth. The Lord speaks to Peter: “I say to thee,” He says, “thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven” (Matt. 16:18-19). Upon him, being one, He build His Church, and although after His resurrection He bestows equal power upon all the Apostles, and says: “As the Father has sent me, I also send you. Receive 98 | 99 ye the Holy Spirit: if you forgive the sins of anyone, they will be forgiven him; if you retain the sins of anyone, they will be retained” (John 20:21, 23), yet that He might display unity, He established by His authority the origin of the same unity as beginning from one. Surely the rest of the Apostles also were that which Peter was, endowed with an equal partnership of office and of power, but the beginning proceeds from unity, that the Church of Christ may be shown to be one. This one Church, also, the Holy Spirit in the Canticle of Canticles designates in the person of the Lord and says: “One is my dove, my perfect one is but one, she is the only one of her mother, the chosen one of her that bore her” (Song. 6:8). Does he who does not hold this unity think that he holds the faith? Does he who strives against the Church and resist her think that he is in the Church, when too the blessed Apostle Paul teaches this same thing and sets forth the sacrament of unity saying: “One body and one Spirit, one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God” [Eph. 4:4-6]?
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 39: To the People Concerning Five Schismatic Priests of the Faction of Felicissimus (251)
(§5) | ROCK
There is one God, and Christ is one, and there is one Church, and one chair founded upon the rock by the word of the Lord. Another altar cannot be constituted nor a new priesthood be made, except the one altar and the one priesthood. Whosoever gathers elsewhere, scatters. Whatsoever is appointed by human madness, so that the divine disposition is violated, is adulterous, is impious, is sacrilegious.
St. Cyprian, Letter 44: To St. Pope Cornelius, Concerning Polycarp the Adrumetine (251)
(§§3-4) | SUCCESSORS
(§3) Some persons, however, sometimes disturb men’s minds and spirits by their words, in that they relate things otherwise than is the truth. For we, who furnish every person who sails hence with a plan that they may sail without any offence, know that we have exhorted them to acknowledge and hold the root and matrix of the Catholic Church. But since our province is wide-spread, and has Numidia and Mauritania attached to it; lest a schism made in the city should confuse the minds of the absent with uncertain opinions, we decided—having obtained by means of the bishops the truth of the matter, and having got a greater authority for the proof of your ordination, and so at length every scruple being got rid of from the breast of every one—that letters should be sent you by all who were placed anywhere in the province; as in fact is done, that so the whole of our colleagues might decidedly approve of and maintain both you and your communion, that is as well to the unity of the Catholic Church as to its charity. That all which has by God’s direction come to pass, and that our design has under Providence been forwarded, we rejoice.
(§4) For thus as well the truth as the dignity of your episcopate has been established in the most open light, and with the most manifest and substantial approval; so that from the replies of our colleagues, who have thence written to us, and from the account and from the testimonies of our co-bishops Pompeius, and Stephanus, and Caldonius, and Fortunatus, both the needful cause and the right order, and moreover the glorious innocence, of your ordination might be known by all. That we, with the rest of our colleagues, may steadily and firmly administer this office, and keep it in the concordant unanimity of the Catholic Church, the divine condescension will accomplish; so that the Lord who condescends to elect and appoint for Himself priests in His Church, may protect them also when elected and appointed by His goodwill and help, inspiring them to govern, and supplying both vigor for restraining the contumacy of the wicked, and gentleness for cherishing the penitence of the lapsed…
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 46: To St. Pope Cornelius, Congratulating Him on the Return of the Confessors from Schism (251)
(§1) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
Cyprian to Cornelius his brother, greeting. I profess that I both have rendered and do render the greatest thanks without ceasing, dearest brother, to God the Father Almighty, and to His Christ the Lord and our God and Savior, that the Church is thus divinely protected, and its unity and holiness is not constantly nor altogether corrupted by the obstinacy of perfidy and heretical wickedness.
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 48: Answer to St. Pope Cornelius, Concerning the Crimes of Novatus (251)
(§1) | SUCCESSORS
Cyprian to [St. Pope] Cornelius his brother, greeting. You have acted, dearest brother, both with diligence and love, in sending us in haste Nicephorus the acolyte, who both told us the glorious gladness concerning the return of the confessors, and most fully instructed us against the new and mischievous devices of Novatian and Novatus for attacking the Church of Christ.
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 51: To Antonianus About Cornelius and Novatian (252)
(§1) Cyprian to Antonianus his brother, greeting. I received your first letters, dearest brother, firmly maintaining the concord of the priestly college, and adhering to the Catholic Church, in which you intimated that you did not hold communion with Novatian, but followed my advice, and held one common agreement with [Pope] Cornelius our co-bishop. You wrote, moreover, for me to transmit a copy of those same letters to Cornelius our colleague, so that he might lay aside all anxiety, and know at once that you held communion with him, that is, with the Catholic Church…
(§8) Moreover, [St. Pope] Cornelius was made bishop by the judgment of God and of His Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy, by the suffrage of the people who were then present, and by the assembly of ancient priests and good men, when no one had been made so before him, when the place of [St. Pope] Fabian, that is, when the place of Peter and the degree of the sacerdotal throne was vacant; which being occupied by the will of God, and established by the consent of all of us, whosoever now wishes to become a bishop, must needs be made from without; and he cannot have the ordination of the Church who does not hold the unity of the Church. Whoever he may be, although greatly boasting about himself, and claiming very much for himself, he is profane, he is an alien, he is without. And as after the first there cannot be a second, whosoever is made after one who ought to be alone, is not second to him, but is in fact none at all.
St. Cyprian, Letter 54: Concerning Fortunatus and Felicissimus, or Against the Heretics (252)
(§§7, 14) | ROME | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY | INDEFECTIBILITY
(§7) …Nevertheless, Peter, upon whom by the same Lord the Church had been built, speaking one for all, and answering with the voice of the Church, says, “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure that Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 15:13), signifying, doubtless, and showing that those who departed from Christ perished by their own fault, yet that the Church which believes on Christ, and holds that which it has once learned, never departs from Him at all, and that those are the Church who remain in the house of God; but that, on the other hand, they are not the plantation planted by God the Father, whom we see not to be established with the stability of wheat, but blown about like chaff by the breath of the enemy scattering them, of whom John also in his epistle says, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us” (1 John 2:19)…
(§14) …After such things as these, moreover, they still dare—a false bishop having been appointed for them by heretics—to set sail and to bear letters from schismatic and profane persons to the throne of Peter, and to the chief church whence priestly unity takes its source; and not to consider that these were the Romans whose faith was praised in the preaching of the apostle [Rom. 1:8], to whom faithlessness could have no access.
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 68: To Florentius Pupianus, on Calumniators (254)
(§8) | ROCK | PRIMACY
Peter speaks there, on whom the Church was to be built, teaching and showing in the name of the Church, that although a rebellious and arrogant multitude of those who will not hear and obey may depart, yet the Church does not depart from Christ; and they are the Church who are a people united to the priest, and the flock which adheres to its pastor. Whence you ought to know that the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and if any one be not with the bishop, that he is not in the Church, and that those flatter themselves in vain who creep in, not having peace with God’s priests, and think that they communicate secretly with some; while the Church, which is Catholic and one, is not cut nor divided, but is indeed connected and bound together by the cement of priests who cohere with one another.
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 72: To Jubaianus, Concerning the Baptism of Heretics (256)
(§7) | ROCK | KEYS
But it is manifest where and by whom remission of sins can be given; to wit, that which is given in baptism. For first of all the Lord gave that power to Peter, upon whom He built the Church, and whence He appointed and showed the source of unity—the power, namely, that whatsoever he loosed on earth should be loosed in heaven. And after the resurrection, also, He speaks to the apostles, saying, “As the Father hath sent me, even so I send you. And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and saith, unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained” (John 20:21-23). Whence we perceive that only they who are set over the Church and established in the Gospel law, and in the ordinance of the Lord, are allowed to baptize and to give remission of sins; but that without, nothing can either be bound or loosed, where there is none who can either bind or loose anything.
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 75: To Magnus, on Baptizing the Novatians (255)
(§3) | SUCCESSORS
Wherefore, since the Church alone has the living water, and the power of baptizing and cleansing man, he who says that any one can be baptized and sanctified by Novatian [anti-Pope] must first show and teach that Novatian is in the Church or presides over the Church. For the Church is one, and as she is one, cannot be both within and without. For if she is with Novatian, she was not with [St. Pope] Cornelius. But if she was with Cornelius, who succeeded the bishop Fabian by lawful ordination, and whom, beside the honor of the priesthood, the Lord glorified also with martyrdom, Novatian is not in the Church; nor can he be reckoned as a bishop, who, succeeding to no one, and despising the evangelical and apostolic tradition, sprang from himself. For he who has not been ordained in the Church can neither have nor hold to the Church in any way.
Caius the Presbyter (200s) | WEST
Caius the Presbyter, Fragments
Fragment 2: Against the Heresy of Artemon | SUCCESSORS
For they [heretics] say that all those of the first age, and the apostles themselves, both received and taught those things which these men now maintain; and that the truth of Gospel preaching was preserved until the times of [St. Pope] Victor, who was the thirteenth bishop in Rome from Peter, and that from his successor Zephyrinus the truth was falsified. And perhaps what they allege might be credible, did not the Holy Scriptures, in the first place, contradict them. And then, besides, there are writings of certain brethren older than the times of Victor, which they wrote against the heathen in defense of the truth, and against the heresies of their time: I mean Justin and Miltiades, and Tatian and Clement, and many others, in all which divinity is ascribed to Christ. For who is ignorant of the books of Irenaeus and Melito, and the rest, which declare Christ to be God and man? All the psalms, too, and hymns of brethren, which have been written from the beginning by the faithful, celebrate Christ the Word of God, ascribing divinity to Him. Since the doctrine of the Church, then, has been proclaimed so many years ago, how is it possible that men have preached, up to the time of [St. Pope] Victor, in the manner asserted by these? And how are they not ashamed to utter these calumnies against Victor, knowing well that Victor excommunicated Theodotus the tanner, the leader and father of this God-denying apostasy, who first affirmed that Christ was a mere man? For if, as they allege, Victor entertained the very opinions which their blasphemy teaches, how should he have cast off Theodotus, the author of this heresy?
St. Peter of Alexandria (died 311) | EAST
St. Peter of Alexandria, Canonical Letter (306)
(Can. 9) | PRIMACY | ROME
Thus Peter, the first of the apostles, having been often apprehended, and thrown into prison, and treated with ignominy, was last of all crucified at Rome.
St. Peter of Alexandria, The Genuine Acts of Peter
PRIMACY
[H]e [Meletius] was so hurried on by giving the rein to his madness, that, rending asunder the Catholic Church not only in the cities of Egypt, but even in its villages, he ordained bishops of his own party, nor cared he aught for Peter, nor for Christ, who was in the person of Peter…
In these days information was brought to Maximin about the aforesaid archbishop, that he [St. Peter] was a leader and holding chief place among the Christians; and he, inflamed with his accustomed iniquity, on the instant ordered Peter to be apprehended and cast into prison…
Then a certain virgin dedicated to God, who had her cell adjoining to the tomb of the evangelist, as she was spending the night in prayer, heard a voice from heaven, saying: “Peter was the first of the apostles, Peter is the last of the martyred bishops of Alexandria.”
Lactantius (c. 250-c. 325) | WEST
Lactantius, Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died (c. 318)
(Ch. 2) | ROME
Then were they [the Apostles] dispersed throughout all the earth to preach the Gospel, as the Lord their Master had commanded them; and during twenty-five years, and until the beginning of the reign of the Emperor Nero, they occupied themselves in laying the foundations of the Church in every province and city. And while Nero reigned, the Apostle Peter came to Rome, and, through the power of God committed unto him, wrought certain miracles, and, by turning many to the true religion, built up a faithful and steadfast temple unto the Lord.
Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260/265-339) | EAST
Eusebius of Caesarea, Church History (c. 312)
Peter and His Successors in Rome
See the multiple references Eusebius makes to the first 32 Popes–both St. Peter, and 31 of his successors in Rome–here: Study Bank | The Ancient Lists and Testimonies of Popes Succeeding from Peter.
(Book 2, Ch. 15, §2) | ROME
And Peter makes mention of Mark in his first epistle which they say that he wrote in Rome itself, as is indicated by him, when he calls the city, by a figure, Babylon, as he does in the following words: “The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, salutes you; and so does Marcus my son” (1 Pet. 5:13).
(Book 2, Ch. 25, §§5-8) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
(§5) Thus publicly announcing himself as the first among God’s chief enemies, he [nero] was led on to the slaughter of the apostles. It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day.
(§6) It is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the Church, who arose under [St. Pope] Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid:
(§7) “But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church.”
(§8) And that they both suffered martyrdom at the same time is stated by Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in his epistle to the Romans, in the following words: “You have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter and of Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both of them planted and likewise taught us in our Corinth. And they taught together in like manner in Italy, and suffered martyrdom at the same time.” I have quoted these things in order that the truth of the history might be still more confirmed.
(Book 3, Ch. 1, §2) | ROME
Peter appears to have preached in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Asia to the Jews of the dispersion. And at last, having come to Rome, he was crucified head-downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer in this way.
(Book 3, Ch. 4, §§9-10) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
(§9) As to the rest of his followers, Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul [2 Tim. 4:10]; but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Epistle to Timothy [2 Tim. 4:21] as his companion at Rome, was Peter’s successor in the episcopate of the church there, as has already been shown.
(§10) Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow-soldier [Phil. 4:3].
(Book 4, Ch. 1, §2) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
At that time also [St. Pope] Alexander, the fifth in the line of succession from Peter and Paul, received the episcopate at Rome, after [St. Pope] Evarestus had held the office eight years.
(Book 4, Ch. 19) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
In the eighth year of the above-mentioned reign [of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus] [St. Pope] Soter succeeded [St. Pope] Anicetus as bishop of the church of Rome, after the latter had held office eleven years in all.
(Book 5, Ch. 28, §3) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
[Quoting a work against the “heresy of Artemon” revived by Paul of Samosata] “For they [heretics] say that all the early teachers and the apostles received and taught what they now declare, and that the truth of the Gospel was preserved until the times of Victor, who was the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter, but that from his successor, Zephyrinus, the truth had been corrupted.
(Book 10, §21) | SUCCESSORS
“Constantine Augustus to Chrestus, bishop of Syracuse. When some began wickedly and perversely to disagree among themselves in regard to the holy worship and celestial power and Catholic doctrine, wishing to put an end to such disputes among them, I formerly gave command that certain bishops should be sent from Gaul, and that the opposing parties who were contending persistently and incessantly with each other, should be summoned from Africa; that in their presence, and in the presence of the bishop of Rome, the matter which appeared to be causing the disturbance might be examined and decided with all care.
The Montanist Heresy
The followers of Montanus, Alcibiades, and Theodotus in Phrygia were now first giving wide circulation to their assumption in regard to prophecy—for the many other miracles that, through the gift of God, were still wrought in the different churches caused their prophesying to be readily credited by many—and as dissension arose concerning them, the brethren in Gaul set forth their own prudent and most orthodox judgment in the matter, and published also several epistles from the witnesses that had been put to death among them. These they sent, while they were still in prison, to the brethren throughout Asia and Phrygia, and also to [St. Pope] Eleutherus, who was then bishop of Rome, negotiating for the peace of the churches.
(§1) The same witnesses also recommended [St.] Irenaeus [of Lyon], who was already at that time a presbyter of the parish of Lyons, to the above-mentioned bishop of Rome, saying many favorable things in regard to him, as the following extract shows:
(§2) “We pray, father Eleutherus, that you may rejoice in God in all things and always. We have requested our brother and comrade Irenaeus to carry this letter to you, and we ask you to hold him in esteem, as zealous for the covenant of Christ. For if we thought that office could confer righteousness upon anyone, we should commend him among the first as a presbyter of the church, which is his position.”
The Quartodeciman Controversy (Dating of Easter)
(§1) A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Savior’s Passover [Easter]. It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Savior.
(§2) Synods and assemblies of bishops were held on this account, and all, with one consent, through mutual correspondence drew up an ecclesiastical decree, that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be celebrated on no other but the Lord’s day, and that we should observe the close of the paschal fast on this day only…And there is also another writing extant of those who were assembled at Rome to consider the same question, which bears the name of Bishop [St. Pope] Victor…
(§3) And that which has been given above was their unanimous decision.
(§9) Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicate.
(§10) But this did not please all the bishops. And they besought him to consider the things of peace, and of neighborly unity and love. Words of theirs are extant, sharply rebuking Victor.
(§11) Among them was Irenaeus, who, sending letters in the name of the brethren in Gaul over whom he presided, maintained that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be observed only on the Lord’s day. He fittingly admonishes Victor that he should not cut off whole churches of God which observed the tradition of an ancient custom [Quotes St. Irenaeus of Lyon’s letter]…
(§18) Thus Irenaeus, who truly was well named [the root word of his name meant “peace”], became a peacemaker in this matter, exhorting and negotiating in this way in behalf of the peace of the churches. And he conferred by letter about this mooted question, not only with Victor, but also with most of the other rulers of the churches.
Firmilian of Cappadocia (died c. 269) | WEST
Firmilian of Caesarea, Letter 74: To St. Cyprian, Against the Letter of St. Pope Stephen (256)
(§§16-17) | ROCK | SUCCESSORS
(§16) But what is the greatness of his [St. Pope Stephen’s] error, and what the depth of his blindness, who says that remission of sins can be granted in the synagogues of heretics, and does not abide on the foundation of the one Church which was once based by Christ upon the rock, may be perceived from this, that Christ said to Peter alone, “Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 16:19). And again, in the Gospel, when Christ breathed on the apostles alone, saying, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins ye retain they are retained” (John 20:22-23). Therefore the power of remitting sins was given to the apostles, and to the churches which they, sent by Christ, established, and to the bishops who succeeded to them by vicarious ordination. But the enemies of the one Catholic Church in which we are, and the adversaries of us who have succeeded the apostles, asserting for themselves, in opposition to us, unlawful priesthoods, and setting up profane altars, what else are they than Korah, Dathan, and Abiram [Num. 16], profane with a like wickedness, and about to suffer the same punishments which they did, as well as those who agree with them, just as their partners and abettors perished with a like death to theirs?
(§17) And in this respect I am justly indignant at this so open and manifest folly of [St. Pope] Stephen, that he who so boasts of the place of his episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundations of the Church were laid, should introduce many other rocks and establish new buildings of many churches; maintaining that there is baptism in them by his authority. For they who are baptized, doubtless, fill up the number of the Church. But he who approves their baptism maintains, of those baptized, that the Church is also with them. Nor does he understand that the truth of the Christian Rock is overshadowed, and in some measure abolished, by him when he thus betrays and deserts unity. The apostle acknowledges that the Jews, although blinded by ignorance, and bound by the grossest wickedness, have yet a zeal for God. [St. Pope] Stephen, who announces that he holds by succession the throne of Peter, is stirred with no zeal against heretics, when he concedes to them, not a moderate, but the very greatest power of grace: so far as to say and assert that, by the sacrament of baptism, the filth of the old man is washed away by them, that they pardon the former mortal sins, that they make sons of God by heavenly regeneration, and renew to eternal life by the sanctification of the divine laver. He who concedes and gives up to heretics in this way the great and heavenly gifts of the Church, what else does he do but communicate with them for whom he maintains and claims so much grace? And now he hesitates in vain to consent to them, and to be a partaker with them in other matters also, to meet together with them, and equally with them to mingle their prayers, and appoint a common altar and sacrifice.
St. Pope Julius I (280-352) | WEST
St. Pope Julius, Letter to the Eusebians at Antioch, quoted in St. Athanasius, Apology Against the Arians (341)
NOTE: See the accounts of this same letter from St. Pope Julius in the Ecclesiastical History of Socrates of Constantinople (Book 2, Ch. 17), and the Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen (Book 3, Ch. 10), both quoted in the Archive above.
(Part 1, Ch. 2, §35) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
Give us notice therefore of this, dearly beloved, that we may write both to them, and to the Bishops who will have again to assemble, so that the accused may be condemned in the presence of all, and confusion no longer prevail in the Churches…Supposing, as you assert, that some offence rested upon those persons, the case ought to have been conducted against them, not after this manner, but according to the Canon of the Church. Word should have been written of it to us all, that so a just sentence might proceed from all. For the sufferers were Bishops, and Churches of no ordinary note, but those which the Apostles themselves had governed in their own persons [Rome and Alexandria].
And why was nothing said to us concerning the Church of the Alexandrians in particular? Are you ignorant that the custom has been for word to be written first to us, and then for a just decision to be passed from this place [Rome]? If then any such suspicion rested upon the Bishop there, notice thereof ought to have been sent to the Church of this place; whereas, after neglecting to inform us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, now they desire to obtain our concurrence in their decisions, though we never condemned him. Not so have the constitutions of Paul, not so have the traditions of the Fathers directed; this is another form of procedure, a novel practice. I beseech you, readily bear with me: what I write is for the common good. For what we have received from the blessed Apostle Peter, that I signify to you; and I should not have written this, as deeming that these things were manifest unto all men, had not these proceedings so disturbed us.
St. Athanasius (c. 296/98-373) | EAST
St. Athanasius, To the Bishops of Africa (c. 369)
(§2) | INFALLIBILITY
But the word of the Lord which came through the ecumenical Synod at Nicaea, abides forever [1 Pet. 1:25].
St. Optatus of Milevis (300s) | WEST
St. Optatus, Against the Donatists (c. 384)
(Book 2, §§2-6) (pgs. 31-35, 37)
(§2) Since, therefore, we have proved that the Catholic Church is the one that is spread throughout the whole compass of the earth, we must describe its trappings and we must see where are the five gifts, which 31 | 32 according to you [the Donatists] are six. The first of these is the see, to which, unless the Bishop occupies it, the second gift cannot be joined, which is the angel. We must see who first occupied the see, and where. If you do not know, learn; if you do not know, blush. You cannot be supposed to be ignorant; it can only be, therefore, that you know. To sin is to err knowingly; for sometimes one ignores the faults of ignorance. Therefore you cannot deny that you know that the first episcopal see was set up in Rome, which was occupied by Peter the head of all the Apostles (for which reason he was called Cephas) so that in this one see unity might be preserved by all, lest each of the other Apostles should maintain his own; thus anyone who set up another see against this one see would be a schismatic and a sinner.
(§3) Therefore the one see, which is the first of the gifts, was first occupied by Peter, then Linus succeeded him, Clement succeeded to Linus, Anacletus to Clement, Evaristus to Anacletus, [Alexander] to 32 | 33 Evaristus, Sextus [to Alexander], Telesphorus to Sextus, Hyginus to Telesphorus, Anicetus to Hyginus, Pius to Anicetus, Soter to Pius, [Eleutherius] to Soter, Victor [to Eleutherius], Zephyrinus to Victor, Calixtus to Zephyrinus, Urbanus to Calixtus, Pontianus to Urbanus, Anterus to Pontianus, Fabian to Anterus, Cornelius to Fabian, Lucius to Cornelius, Stephen to Lucius, Sextus to Stephen, Dionysius to Sextus, Felix to Dionysius, [Eutychianus] to Felix, [Gaius to Eutychianus], Marcellinus [to Gaius], [Marcellus] to Marcellinus, Eusebius [to Marcellus], Miltiades to Eusebius, Sylvester to Miltiades, Marcus to Sylvester, Julius to Marcus, Liberius to Julius, Damasus to Liberius, Siricius to Damasus, and he is our colleague today. With him, the whole world, in a single fellowship of communion maintained by the exchange of official letters, agrees. Tell us the origin of your see, which you wish to claim for yourselves as a sacred church.
(§4) But you say that you too have a certain party in the city of Rome. It is a branch of your error, springing from a lie, not from the root of truth. Moreover, if Macrobius were to say where he has his see, could he say, in the see of Peter? I do not know if he has even seen it with 33 | 34 his eyes, and he has not approached Peter’s memorial, acting like a schismatic against the Apostle, who speaks of communicating with the memorials of the saints [Rom. 12:13]. See, there are the memorials of the two Apostles [Peter and Paul]. Tell me if he was able to come up to these or made an offering in the place where the memorials of the saints are agreed to be. Therefore, your colleague Macrobius can say only that he occupies the place that was once occupied by Encolpius; and if it were possible to interrogate Encolpius himself, he would say that he occupies the place formerly occupied by Boniface of Ballita. Then if it were possible to interface the latter, he would say that his is the place formerly occupied by Victor of Garba, sent long ago by your party to a few strays. How is it that your party has not been able to have a citizen as your Bishop in the city of Rome? How is it that all those acknowledged to have succeeded one another in that city are Africans and immigrants? Do you not see the trickery, the factiousness, which is the mother of schism?…
Victor was therefore sent [to Rome]; there he was a son without a father, a novice without a guide, a disciple without a master, a follower without a predecessor, a tenant without a house, a guest without a host, a shepherd without a flock, a bishop without a people. For one could not call either flock or people the few who had nowhere to convene among the forty and more churches [in Rome]. So they marked off a certain cave outside the city with hurdles, to have a meeting-place there 34 | 35 at that time; hence they were called Hillmen…[I]f Victor were to say what see he occupied, he could point to one before him, nor any see except in the midst of plague [presumably heresy]. For the plague sent disease-stricken men to hell, and hell is where they are acknowledged to have their gates; it was against these gates, as we read, that Peter received the keys of salvation, Christ saying to him, “I shall give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the gates of hell shall not overcome them” (Matt. 16:18-19).
(§5) Whence, then, would you arrogate the keys of heaven [given to Peter] for yourselves, when you fight against the see of Peter with your presumptuous notions and sacrilegious audacity, rejecting the blessedness which is the merited praise of him who has not departed into the assembly of the impious and did not abide in the way of sinners and has not sat in the seat of plague [heresy]? Your ancestors went into the assembly of the impious, producing a division of the church. They also entered the way of sinners, when they tried to divide Christ, whose very clothes the Jews did not wish to rend, and that despite the Apostle’s exclamation, “Is Christ divided?” (2 Cor. 1:13). I wish that, having already entered the evil way, they would acknowledge their sin and return upon themselves, that is they would mend their errors and recall the peace that they have put to flight, which would be to return from their way; for in a way one walks, and does not abide. But, since your parents refused to return, it is patent that they stood in the route of sinners. Their steps had been impelled by madness, but lingering discord held them back and bound them. And, so that they could not go back to better ways, they put fetters of schism on themselves, so that they might stand pertinaciously in their error, making it impossible to go back to the peace which they had deserted… 35 | 37
(§6) Therefore of the aforesaid gifts [of the Church] the see is, as we said, the first, and we have proved that it is ours through Peter…
St. Pope Damasus I (c. 305-384) | WEST
St. Pope Damasus I, Letter Condemning Apollinarianism, quoted by Theodoret of Cyrus, Ecclesiastical History
When the most praiseworthy Damasus had heard of the rise of this heresy, he proclaimed the condemnation not only of Apollinarius but also of Timotheus his follower. The letter in which he made this known to the bishops of the Eastern empire I have thought it well to insert in my history.
[Letter of St. Pope Damasus]
Most honorable sons: Inasmuch as your love renders to the apostolic see the reverence which is its due, accept the same in no stingy measure for yourselves. For even though in the holy church in which the holy apostle sat, and taught us how it becomes us to manage the rudder which has been committed to us, we nevertheless confess ourselves to be unworthy of the honor, we yet on this very account strive by every means within our power if haply we may be able to achieve the glory of that blessedness. Know then that we have condemned Timotheus, the unhallowed, the disciple of Apollinarius the heretic, together with his impious doctrine, and are confident that for the future his remains will have no weight whatever. But if that old serpent, though smitten once and again, still revives to his own destruction, who though he exists without the church never ceases from the attempt by his deadly venom to overthrow certain unfaithful men, do you avoid it as you would a pest, mindful ever of the apostolic faith—that, I mean, which was set out in writing by the Fathers at Nicaea; do you remain on steady ground, firm and unmoved in the faith, and henceforward suffer neither your clergy nor laity to listen to vain words and futile questions, for we have already given a form, that he who professes himself a Christian may keep it, the form delivered by the Apostles, as says St. Paul, “if any one preach to you another gospel than that you have received let him be Anathema” (Gal. 1:8). For Christ the Son of God, our Lord, gave by his own passion abundant salvation to the race of men, that he might free from all sin the whole man involved in sin. If anyone speaks of Christ as having had less of manhood or of Godhead, he is full of devils’ spirits, and proclaims himself a child of hell.
Why then do you again ask me for the condemnation of Timotheus? Here, by the judgment of the apostolic see, in the presence of Peter, bishop of Alexandria, he was condemned, together with his teacher, Apollinarius, who will also in the day of judgment undergo due punishment and torment. But if he succeeds in persuading some less stable men, as though having some hope, after by his confession changing the true hope which is in Christ, with him shall likewise perish whoever of set purpose withstands the order of the Church. May God keep you sound, most honored sons.
[End of St. Pope Damasus’s letter]
The bishops assembled in great Rome also wrote other things against other heresies which I have thought it necessary to insert in my history.
See further quotes under “Council of Rome” under “Councils” below.
St. Ephrem the Syrian (c. 306-373) | EAST
St. Ephrem the Syrian, Homily on Our Lord
(§54) (pgs. 329-30)
So Mary took her firstborn and left. Although He was visibly wrapped in swaddling clothes, He was invisibly clothed with prophecy and priesthood. Thus, what Moses had been given was received from Simeon, and it remained and continued with the Lord of these two (gifts). The former steward and the final treasurer handed over the keys of priesthood and prophecy to the One in authority over “the Spirit without measure” (John 3:34), because all measures of the Spirit are under His hand. And to indicate that He received the keys from the former stewards, our Lord said to Simon: “I will give you the keys of the gates” (Matt. 16:19). Now how could He give them to someone unless He had received them from someone else? So the keys He had received from Simeon the 329 | 330 priest, he gave to another Simeon [Peter], the Apostle. So even though the (Jewish) nation did not listen to the first Simeon, the (Gentile) nations would listen to the other Simeon.
St. Ephrem the Syrian, Homily 4 (c. 353)
(§1) (pgs. 197-98)
[Jesus said] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness that I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given 197 | 198 you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures.
St. Epiphanius of Cyprus/Salamis (c. 310/320-403) | EAST
St. Epiphanius of Salamis, Ancoratus
(Ch. 9) (pgs. 75-77) | ROCK | KEYS | PRIMACY
Because of the temple of God, they also will be called holy men, those who established in themselves the Holy Spirit of God, as the chief of the Apostles [Peter] bears witness, the one who was deemed worthy to be blessed by the Lord, because the Father revealed to him. Therefore, the Father reveals the true Son to him [Peter], and he is blessed; and again the same one [the Father] reveals his Holy Spirit. It was necessary for the first of the Apostles, the solid rock, “upon whom the church of God would be built, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it” (Matt. 16:18), [to declare this?]. The gates of Hades are the heresies and the heresiarchs. For in every way the faith was 75 | 76 made firm in him, in the one who received the keys of heaven, in the one who looses upon the earth and binds in heaven. For in this man are found all the subtleties being asked of the faith.
This man is the one who denied three times and cursed three times before the rooster crowed [Matt. 26:34, 69-74; Mark 14:30, 66-71; Luke 22:54-61]. For indicating the abundance of his love toward his master, affirming confidently he was saying: “even if all deny you, I will not deny” (Matt. 26:33; Mark 14:29), saying so much in reference to his [Christ’s] humanity. This is the one who wept at the sound of the rooster [Matt. 26:75; Mark 14:72; Luke 22:62], in order that he might truly confess that the arrest of the Son of God was not in appearance, but true, in order that he [Peter] might say that he was a true man in weeping at his arrest, having been handed over by the Pharisees.
This is [the] one who came to Galilee to fish, the one who was a partner of the one reclining upon his breast (for he [John], learning from the Son and receiving from the Son, was revealing the power of knowledge, and he was aided by the Father, laying the foundation of the certainty of the faith). He [Peter] is the one who, unclothed in the boat on [Lake] Tiberias [John 21:7], back after being called, was fishing (and the disciple, whom Jesus loved, [was with him?]). After the statement that the Savior made: “Children, you do not have anything to eat, do you?” (John 21:5) and, “Cast on the right side of the ship and you will find [fish]” (John 21:6), and after the astonishing statement happened, John, whom Jesus loved, said to Peter: “It is the Lord” (John 21:7), man according to the flesh, born from Mary in truth not in appearance, being God [according to] Spirit, coming form the Father from the heavens.
[This man] is the one who heard from him [Christ], “Peter, tend my sheep” (John 21:15), the one who has been entrusted with the flock, the one guiding well in the power of his own master, the one confessing concerning the flesh, the one truthfully announcing the things of the Father 76 | 77 concerning the Son, the one indicating the Spirit and his worthiness to divinity, the one giving the right hand of fellowship to Paul and Barnabas with James and John, in order that “through three witnesses all that is said may stand” (Deut. 19:15; Matt. 18:20).
(Ch. 11) (pg. 79) | KEYS | PRIMACY
How do they dare to say that the Spirit is alien from God, those who especially are possessed by madness and not by truth, those who do not learn the true expression of the trustworthy and holy Paul the Apostle, to whom the chief of the Apostles, Peter, the one worthy to hold the keys of the kingdom, gave his right hand…
(Ch. 34) (pg. 112) | PRIMACY
For the chief of the apostles, Peter, interprets for you the purpose of his death, saying, “put to death in flesh, but made alive in spirit” (1 Pet. 3:18).
St. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion
(Book 1, Ch. 27, §6) (pgs. 113, 114) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
For the bishops at Rome were, first, Peter and Paul, the apostles themselves and also bishops–then Linus, then Cletus, then Clement, a contemporary of Peter and Paul whom Paul mentions in the Epistle to the Romans. And no one need wonder why others before him succeeded the apostles in the episcopate, even though he was contemporary with Peter and Paul–for he too is the apostles’ contemporary… 113 | 114
In any case, the succession of the bishops at Rome runs in this order: Peter and Paul, Linus and Cletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Xystus, Telesphorus, Hyginus, Pius, and Anicetus, whom I mentioned above, on the list. And no one need be surprised at my listing each of the items so exactly; precise information is always given in this way.
St. Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 313-386) | EAST
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 2 (c. 350)
(§19) | PRIMACY
The Lord is loving unto man, and swift to pardon, but slow to punish. Let no man therefore despair of his own salvation. Peter, the chiefest and foremost of the Apostles, denied the Lord thrice before a little maid: but he repented himself, and wept bitterly. Now weeping shows the repentance of the heart: and therefore he not only received forgiveness for his denial, but also held his Apostolic dignity un-forfeited.
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 6 (c. 350)
(§§14-15) | KEYS | ROME | PRIMACY
(§14) The inventor of all heresy was Simon Magus…This man, after he had been cast out by the Apostles, came to Rome…And he so deceived the City of Rome that Claudius set up his statue, and wrote beneath it, in the language of the Romans, “Simoni Deo Sancto,” which being interpreted signifies, “To Simon the Holy God.”
(§15) As the delusion was extending, Peter and Paul, a noble pair, chief rulers of the Church, arrived and set the error right; and when the supposed god Simon wished to shew himself off, they straightway shewed him as a corpse. For Simon [Magus] promised to rise aloft to heaven, and came riding in a demon’s chariot on the air; but the servants of God fell on their knees, and having shewn that agreement of which Jesus spake, that “If two of you shall agree concerning anything that they shall ask, it shall be done unto them” (Matt. 18:19), they launched the weapon of their concord in prayer against Magus, and struck him down to the earth. And marvelous though it was, yet no marvel. For Peter was there, who carries the keys of heaven [Matt. 16:19]: and nothing wonderful, for Paul was there, who was “caught up to the third heaven, and into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful far a man to utter” (2 Cor. 12:2, 4). These brought the supposed God down from the sky to earth, thence to be taken down to the regions below the earth. In this man [Simon Magus] first the serpent of wickedness appeared; but when one head had been cut off, the root of wickedness was found again with many heads.
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 17 (c. 350)
(§27) | KEYS | PRIMACY
In the power of the same Holy Spirit Peter also, the chief of the Apostles and the bearer of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, healed Aeneas the paralytic in the Name of Christ at Lydda, which is now Diospolis, and at Joppa raised from the dead Tabitha rich in good works…
St. Gregory Nazianzus (c. 329-390) | EAST
St. Gregory Nazianzus, Poem Concerning His Own Life
(Lines 563-74) (pg. 93) | SUCCESSORS
Nature has not given us two suns; but she gave us two Romes [Rome and Constantinople], an old and a new, to stand as beacon lights for the whole universe. The only difference between them is that one lights the East and the other the West, but with complimentary and harmonious brilliance. However, in the matter of the faith, the course of one has for a considerable time run smoothly, and it still does [Rome]. As befits the primal see she binds the whole West to the word of salvation, worshipping the total symphony of God. The course of the other [Constantinople] was previously upright; but now it no longer is. I speak of my own city (or rather, not mine now, of course).
Ammianus Marcellinus (c. 330-c. 391-400) | PAGAN
Ammianus Marcellinus, Res gestae | See #40
(Book 15, Ch. 7) (pg. 80) | SUCCESSORS
During Leontius’s administration [as prefect of Rome] Liberius [the Pope] the Christian bishop was summoned to appear before the imperial tribunal; his offense was resistance to the orders of the emperor and the decision of a majority of his brother bishops in a matter on which I will briefly touch. Athanasius, then bishop of Alexandria, who was persistently rumored to have thoughts above his station and to be prying into matters outside his province, had been deposed from his office by an assembly of the adherents of the same faith, meeting as what they call a synod. It was alleged that, being deeply versed in the interpretation of oracular sayings and of the flight of birds, he had on several occasions foretold the future events; he was also charged with other practices inconsistent with the principles of the faith of which he was a guardian. Liberius shared the views of his brethren, but when he was ordered by the emperor to sign the decree removing Athanasius from his priestly office he obstinately refused; he declared that it was entirely wrong to condemn a man unseen and unheard, and openly defied the emperor’s wishes. Constantius, who was always hostile to Athanasius, knew that the sentence had been carried out, but was extremely eager to have it confirmed by the higher authority of the bishop of the Eternal City. Failing in this object, he just managed to have Liberius deported under cover of night. This was a matter of great difficulty because of the strong affection in which he was held by the public at large.
St. Basil (330-379) | EAST
St. Basil, Letter 125: Transcript of the Faith Dictated by St. Basil, and Subscribed to by Eustathius, Bishop of Sebasteia (373)
(§1) | INFALLIBILITY
Both men whose minds have been preoccupied by a heterodox creed and now wish to change over to the congregation of the orthodox, and also those who are now for the first time desirous of being instructed in the doctrine of truth, must be taught the creed drawn up by the blessed fathers in the Council which met at Nicaea. The same training would also be exceedingly useful in the case of all who are under suspicion of being in a state of hostility to sound doctrine, and who by ingenious and plausible excuses keep the depravity of their sentiments out of view. For these too this creed is all that is needed. They will either get cured of their concealed unsoundness, or, by continuing to keep it concealed, will themselves bear the load of the sentence due to their dishonesty, and will provide us with an easy defense in the day of judgment, when the Lord will lift the cover from the hidden things of darkness, and “make manifest the counsels of the hearts” (1 Cor. 1:5). It is therefore desirable to receive them with the confession not only that they believe in the words put forth by our fathers at Nicaea, but also according to the sound meaning expressed by those words. For there are men who even in this creed pervert the word of truth, and wrest the meaning of the words in it to suit their own notions. So Marcellus, when expressing impious sentiments concerning the hypostasis of our Lord Jesus Christ, and describing Him as being Logos and nothing more, had the hardihood to profess to find a pretext for his principles in that creed by affixing an improper sense upon the Homoousion. Some, moreover, of the impious following of the Libyan Sabellius, who understand hypostasis and substance to be identical, derive ground for the establishment of their blasphemy from the same source, because of its having been written in the creed “if anyone says that the Son is of a different substance or hypostasis, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes him.” But they did not there state hypostasis and substance to be identical. Had the words expressed one and the same meaning, what need of both? It is on the contrary clear that while by some it was denied that the Son was of the same substance with the Father, and some asserted that He was not of the substance and was of some other hypostasis, they thus condemned both opinions as outside that held by the Church.
St. Ambrose of Milan (c. 340-397) | WEST
St. Ambrose, Exposition of the Christian Faith (c. 379)
(Book 4, §§26, 57) | ROCK | KEYS | PRIMACY
(§26) Go your way, therefore, to my brethren—that is, to those everlasting doors, which, as soon as they see Jesus, are lifted up. Peter is an everlasting door, against whom the gates of hell shall not prevail [Matt. 16:18]. John and James, the sons of thunder, to wit [Mark 3:17], are everlasting doom. Everlasting are the doors of the Church, where the prophet, desirous to proclaim the praises of Christ, says: “That I may tell all your praises in the gates of the daughter of Sion” (Ps. 9:14)…
(§57) Moreover, that you may know that it is after His Manhood that He entreats, and in virtue of His Godhead that He commands, it is written for you in the Gospel that He said to Peter: “I have prayed for you, that your faith fail not” (Luke 22:32). To the same Apostle, again, when on a former occasion he said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,” He made answer: “You are Peter, and upon this Rock will I build My Church, and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:18). Could He not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on His own authority, He gave the kingdom, whom He called the Rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church? Consider, then, the manner of His entreaty, the occasions of His commanding. He entreats, when He is shown to us as on the eve of suffering: He commands, when He is believed to be the Son of God.
(Book 5, §§1-2) | PRIMACY
(§1) “Who, then, is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord has made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season? Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he comes shall find so doing” (Matt. 24:45-46). Not worthless is this servant: some great one ought he to be. Let us think who he may be.
(§2) It is Peter, chosen by the Lord Himself to feed His flock, who merits thrice to hear the words: “Feed My little lambs; feed My lambs; feed My sheep” [John 21:15-19]. And so, by feeding well the flock of Christ with the food of faith, he effaced the sin of his former fall. For this reason is he thrice admonished to feed the flock; thrice is he asked whether he loves the Lord, in order that he may thrice confess Him, Whom he had thrice denied before His Crucifixion.
St. Ambrose, On the Death of Satyrus (379)
(Book 1, §47) | SUCCESSORS
But he was not so eager as to lay aside caution. He called the bishop to him, and esteeming that there can be no true thankfulness except it spring from true faith, he enquired whether he agreed with the Catholic bishops, that is, with the Roman Church? And possibly at that place the Church of the district was in schism. For at that time Lucifer had withdrawn from our communion, and although he had been an exile for the faith, and had left inheritors of his own faith, yet my brother did not think that there could be true faith in schism. For though schismatics kept the faith towards God, yet they kept it not towards the Church of God, certain of whose limbs they suffered as it were to be divided, and her members to be torn. For since Christ suffered for the Church, and the Church is the body of Christ, it does not seem that faith in Christ is shown by those by whom His Passion is made of none effect, and His body divided.
St. Ambrose, Concerning Repentance (388)
(Book 1, Ch. 7, §33) | KEYS | PRIMACY
And this confession is indeed rightly made by them [the heretical Novatians], for they have not the succession of Peter, who hold not the chair of Peter, which they rend by wicked schism; and this, too, they do, wickedly denying that sins can be forgiven even in the Church, whereas it was said to Peter: “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven” (Matt. 16:19). And the vessel of divine election himself [St. Paul] said: “If you have forgiven anything to anyone, I forgive also, for what I have forgiven I have done it for your sakes in the person of Christ” (2 Cor. 2:10). Why, then, do they read Paul’s writings, if they think that he has erred so wickedly as to claim for himself the right of his Lord? But he claimed what he had received, he did not usurp that which was not due to him.
St. Jerome (c. 342/347-420) | EAST/WEST
St. Jerome, Against the Luciferians (383)
(§23) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
Cyprian of blessed memory tried to avoid broken cisterns and not to drink of strange waters: and therefore, rejecting heretical baptism, he summoned his African synod in opposition to [St. Pope] Stephen, who was the blessed Peter’s twenty-second successor in the see of Rome. They met to discuss this matter; but the attempt failed. At last those very bishops who had together with him determined that heretics must be re-baptized, reverted to the old custom and published a fresh decree.
St. Jerome, Illustrious Men (392)
(Ch. 1, 15) | PRIMACY | ROME
(Ch. 1) Simon Peter the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion—the believers in circumcision, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia—pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow [the heretic] Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord. He wrote two epistles which are called Catholic, the second of which, on account of its difference from the first in style, is considered by many not to be by him. Then too the Gospel according to Mark, who was his disciple and interpreter, is ascribed to him. On the other hand, the books, of which one is entitled his Acts, another his Gospel, a third his Preaching, a fourth his Revelation, a fifth his “Judgment” are rejected as apocryphal.
Buried at Rome in the Vatican near the triumphal way he is venerated by the whole world…
(Ch. 15) [St. Pope] Clement, of whom the apostle Paul writing to the Philippians says “With Clement and others of my fellow-workers whose names are written in the book of life” (Phil. 4:3), the fourth bishop of Rome after Peter, if indeed the second was Linus and the third Anacletus, although most of the Latins think that Clement was second after the apostle. He wrote, on the part of the church of Rome, an especially valuable Letter to the church of the Corinthians, which in some places is publicly read, and which seems to me to agree in style with the epistle to the Hebrews which passes under the name of Paul but it differs from this same epistle, not only in many of its ideas, but also in respect of the order of words, and its likeness in either respect is not very great. There is also a second Epistle under his name which is rejected by earlier writers, and a Disputation between Peter and Appion written out at length, which Eusebius in the third book of his Church history rejects. He died in the third year of Trajan and a church built at Rome preserves the memory of his name unto this day.
St. Jerome, Against Jovianus
(Book 1, §26) | KEYS | PRIMACY
But you say, the Church was founded upon Peter [Matt. 16:18]: although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the Apostles, and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends upon them all alike, yet one among the twelve is chosen so that when a head has been appointed, there may be no occasion for schism…
St. Jerome, Against Vigilantius (406)
(§§1, 8) | ROME | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§1) …Jovinianus, condemned by the authority of the Church of Rome, amidst pheasants and swine’s flesh, breathed out, or rather belched out his spirit…
(§8) Does the bishop of Rome do wrong when he offers sacrifices to the Lord over the venerable bones of the dead men Peter and Paul, as we should say, but according to you, over a worthless bit of dust, and judges their tombs worthy to be Christ’s altars? And not only is the bishop of one city in error, but the bishops of the whole world, who, despite the tavern-keeper Vigilantius, enter the basilicas of the dead, in which “a worthless bit of dust and ashes lies wrapped up in a cloth,” defiled and defiling all else.
St. Jerome, Letter 14: To Heliodorus the Monk (c. 373/374)
(§8) | KEYS
Far be it from me to censure the successors of the apostles, who with holy words consecrate the body of Christ [the Eucharist], and who make us Christians [in baptism]. Having the keys of the kingdom of heaven, they judge men to some extent before the day of judgment, and guard the chastity of the bride of Christ. But, as I have before hinted, the case of monks is different from that of the clergy. The clergy feed Christ’s sheep; I as a monk am fed by them. They live of the altar [1 Cor. 9:13-14]; I, if I bring no gift to it, have the axe laid to my root as to that of a barren tree [Matt. 3:10]. Nor can I plead poverty as an excuse, for the Lord in the gospel has praised an aged widow for casting into the treasury the last two coins that she had [Luke 21:1-4]. I may not sit in the presence of a presbyter [see Letter 146]; he, if I sin, may deliver me to Satan, “for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved” (1 Cor. 5:5). Under the old law he who disobeyed the priests was put outside the camp and stoned by the people, or else he was beheaded and expiated his contempt with his blood [Deut. 17:5, 12]. But now the disobedient person is cut down with the spiritual sword, or he is expelled from the church and torn to pieces by ravening demons.
St. Jerome, Letter 15: To St. Pope Damasus (c. 376/377) | See #41
(§§1-5) | ROCK | KEYS | ROME | PRIMACY | SUCCESSOS | INFALLIBILITY
(§1) Since the East, shattered as it is by the long-standing feuds, subsisting between its peoples, is bit by bit tearing into shreds the seamless vest of the Lord, “woven from the top throughout” (John 19:23) since the foxes are destroying the vineyard of Christ (Song. 2:15), and since among the broken cisterns that hold no water it is hard to discover “the sealed fountain” and “the garden enclosed” (Song. 4:12), I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul [Rom. 1:8]. I appeal for spiritual food to the church whence I have received the garb of Christ [baptism; cf. Gal. 3:27]. The wide space of sea and land that lies between us cannot deter me from searching for “the pearl of great price” (Matt. 13:46). “Wheresoever the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together” (Matt. 24:28). Evil children have squandered their patrimony; you alone keep your heritage intact. The fruitful soil of Rome, when it receives the pure seed of the Lord, bears fruit a hundredfold; but here [in the east] the seed corn is choked in the furrows and nothing grows but darnel or oats [Matt. 13:22-23]. In the West the Sun of righteousness [Mal. 4:2] is even now rising; in the East, Lucifer, who fell from heaven [Luke 10:18], has once more set his throne above the stars [Isa. 14:12]. “You are the light of the world” (Matt. 5:14), “you are the salt of the earth” (Matt. 5:13), you are “vessels of gold and of silver.” Here are vessels of wood or of earth [2 Tim. 2:20], which wait for the rod of iron [Apoc. 2:27], and eternal fire.
(§2) Yet, though your greatness terrifies me, your kindness attracts me. From the priest I demand the safe-keeping of the victim, from the shepherd the protection due to the sheep. Away with all that is overweening; let the state of Roman majesty withdraw. My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman [St. Peter], to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built [Matt. 16:18]! This is the house where alone the paschal lamb can be rightly eaten [Ex. 12:22]. This is the ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevails [Gen. 7:23]…Consequently I here follow the Egyptian confessors [Catholics expelled by Emperor Valens] who share your faith, and anchor my frail craft under the shadow of their great argosies [large ships]. I know nothing of Vitalis; I reject Meletius; I have nothing to do with Paulinus [rival claimants of the see of Antioch]. He that gathers not with you scatters [Matt. 12:30]; he that is not of Christ is of Antichrist.
(§3) Just now, I am sorry to say, those Arians, the Campenses [the party of Meletius in Antioch, who worshipped outside the city], are trying to extort from me, a Roman Christian, their unheard-of formula…And this, too, after the definition of Nicaea and the decree of Alexandria [allowed three hypostases to be interpreted in a Catholic way, but did not encourage it], in which the West has joined. Where, I should like to know, are the apostles of these doctrines? Where is their Paul, their new doctor of the Gentiles?…
(§4) If you think fit enact a decree; and then I shall not hesitate to speak of three hypostases. Order a new creed to supersede the Nicene; and then, whether we are Arians or orthodox, one confession will do for us all…Or, if you think it right that I should speak of three hypostases, explaining what I mean by them, I am ready to submit…
(§5) I implore your blessedness, therefore, by the crucified Savior of the world, and by the consubstantial trinity, to authorize me by letter either to use or to refuse this formula of three hypostases…I beg you also to signify with whom I am to communicate at Antioch. Not, I hope, with the Campenses; for they—with their allies the heretics of Tarsus [likely semi-Arians or Macedonians, led by Silvanus of Tarsus]—only desire communion with you to preach with greater authority their traditional doctrine of three hypostases.
St. Jerome, Letter 16: To St. Pope Damasus (c. 377/78)
(§2) | ROME | PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS
The untiring foe follows me closely, and the assaults that I suffer in the desert are severer than ever. For the Arian frenzy raves, and the powers of the world support it. The church is rent into three factions, and each of these is eager to seize me for its own. The influence of the monks is of long standing, and it is directed against me. I meantime keep crying: “He who clings to the chair of Peter is accepted by me.” Meletius, Vitalis, and Paulinus [rival claimants of the see of Antioch] all profess to cleave to you [St. Pope Damasus], and I could believe the assertion if it were made by one of them only. As it is, either two of them or else all three are guilty of falsehood. Therefore I implore your blessedness, by our Lord’s cross and passion, those necessary glories of our faith, as you hold an apostolic office, to give an apostolic decision. Only tell me by letter with whom I am to communicate in Syria, and I will pray for you that you may sit in judgment enthroned with the twelve [Matt. 19:28]; that when you grow old, like Peter, you may be girded not by yourself but by another [John 21:18], and that, like Paul, you may be made a citizen of the heavenly kingdom [Phil. 3:20]. Do not despise a soul for which Christ died.
St. Jerome, Letter to St. Augustine (Letter 75 in St. Augustine, replying to Letters 28, 40, and 71) (404)
(§8) | PRIMACY
These quotations should not be tedious to the reader, but useful both to him and to me, as proving that, even before the Apostle Paul, Peter had come to know that the law was not to be in force after the gospel was given; nay more, that Peter was the prime mover in issuing the decree by which this was affirmed [Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15]. Moreover, Peter was of so great authority, that Paul has recorded in his epistle: “Then, after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days” (Gal. 1:18). In the following context, again, he adds: “Then, fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles” (Gal. 2:1-2); proving that he had not had confidence in his preaching of the gospel if he had not been confirmed by the consent of Peter and those who were with him.
St. Jerome, Letter 123: To Ageruchia (409)
(§10) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
The story which I am about to relate is an incredible one, yet it is vouched for by many witnesses. A great many years ago when I was helping Damasus bishop of Rome with his ecclesiastical correspondence, and writing his answers to the questions referred to him by the councils of the east and west…
St. Pope Anastasius I (died 401) | WEST
St. Pope Anastasius I, Letter (St. Jerome, Letter 95) to Simplicianus, Bishop of Milan (400)
(§§1-3) | PRIMACY | ROME | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§1) It is felt right that a shepherd should bestow great care and watchfulness upon his flock. In like manner too from his lofty tower the careful watchman keeps a lookout day and night on behalf of the city. So also in the hour of tempest when the sea is dangerous the shipmaster suffers keen anxiety lest the gale and the violence of the waves shall dash his vessel upon the rocks. It is with similar feelings that the reverend and honorable Theophilus our brother and fellow-bishop, ceases not to watch over the things that make for salvation, that God’s people in the different churches may not by reading Origen run into awful blasphemies.
(§2) Being informed, then, by a letter of the aforesaid bishop, we inform your holiness that we in like manner who are set in the city of Rome in which the prince of the apostles, the glorious Peter, first founded the church and then by his faith strengthened it; to the end that no man may contrary to the commandment read these books which we have mentioned, have condemned the same; and have with earnest prayers urged the strict observance of the precepts which God and Christ have inspired the evangelists to teach. We have charged men to remember the words of the venerable apostle Paul, prophetic and full of warning: “if any than preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:8). Holding fast, therefore, this precept, we have intimated that everything written in days gone by Origen that is contrary to our faith is even by us rejected and condemned.
(§3) I send this letter to your holiness by the hand of the presbyter Eusebius, a man filled with a glowing faith and love for the Lord. He has shown to me some blasphemous chapters which made me shudder as I passed judgement on them. If Origen has put forth any other writings, you are to know that they and their author are alike condemned by me. The Lord have you in safe keeping, my lord and brother deservedly held in honor.
Rufinus of Aquileia (344/45-411) | WEST
Rufinus of Aquileia, A Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed
(Ch. 2-3) | INFALLIBILITY
(Ch. 2) …Being all therefore met together, and being filled with the Holy Ghost, they composed, as we have said, this brief formulary of their future preaching, each contributing his several sentence to one common summary: and they ordained that the rule thus framed should be given to those who believe…
(Ch. 3) But before I begin to discuss the meaning of the words, I think it well to mention that in different Churches some additions are found in this article. This is not the case, however, in the Church of the city of Rome; the reason being, as I suppose, that, on the one hand, no heresy has had its origin there, and, on the other, that the ancient custom is there kept up, that those who are going to be baptized should rehearse the Creed publicly, that is, in the audience of the people; the consequence of which is that the ears of those who are already believers will not admit the addition of a single word. But in other places, as I understand, additions appear to have been made, on account of certain heretics, by means of which it was hoped that novelty in doctrine would be excluded. We, however, follow that order which we received when we were baptized in the Church of Aquileia…
Rufinus of Aquileia, Apology | See #44
(Book 1, §44) | SUCCESSORS
You say that Origen himself repented of these doctrines, and that he sent a document to that effect to [St. Pope] Fabian who was at that time Bishop of the city of Rome; and yet after this repentance of his, and after he has been dead a hundred and fifty years, you drag him into court and call for his condemnation. How is it possible then that you should receive forgiveness, even though you repent, since he who before was penitent for emitting those doctrines gains no forgiveness? He wrote just as you have written: he repented as you have repented. You ought therefore either both of you to be absolved for your repentance, or, if you refuse forgiveness to a penitent (which I do not desire to see you insist upon), to be both of you equally condemned.
(Book 2, §§23, 33) | PRIMACY | ROME
(§23) …I will therefore set forth a Preface of his by which you may see in what foul and unworthy terms he assails even a man of such eminence [St. Ambrose], and also how he praises Didymus to the sky, though he has since cast him down even to the infernal region; and further how he speaks of the city of Rome, which now through the grace of God is reckoned by Christians as their capital, words which were only applicable when its inhabitants were a nation who were heathens and princes who were persecutors…
(§33) …Peter was for twenty-four years Bishop of the Church of Rome. We cannot doubt that, amongst other things necessary for the instruction of the church, he himself delivered to them the treasury of the sacred books, which, no doubt, had even then begun to be read under his presidency and teaching…
St. John Chrysostom (c. 347-407) | EAST
St. John Chrysostom, Homily on Matt. 26:19 and Against Marcionists and Manichaeans
(§2) | PRIMACY
And yet when Peter, the leader of the apostles, said this to Him, “Be it far from thee Lord, this shall not happen unto Thee,” He rebuked him so severely as to say “get thee behind me Satan, thou art an offence unto me, for thou savors not the things which be of God, but those which be of men” (Matt. 16:22-23), although a short time before he had pronounced him blessed.
St. John Chrysostom, Homily on the Holy Martyr St. Ignatius of Antioch
(§4) | PRIMACY
At all events the master of the whole world, Peter, to whose hands He committed the keys of heaven, whom He commanded to do and to bear all, He bade tarry here for a long period. Thus in His sight our city was equivalent to the whole world. But since I have mentioned Peter, I have perceived a fifth crown woven from him, and this is that this man succeeded to the office after him. For just as any one taking a great stone from a foundation hastens by all means to introduce an equivalent to it, lest he should shake the whole building, and make it more unsound, so, accordingly, when Peter was about to depart from here, the grace of the Spirit introduced another teacher equivalent to Peter, so that the building already completed should not be made more unsound by the insignificance of the successor.
St. John Chrysostom, Homily 52 on Matthew
(§2) | PRIMACY
What then saith the mouth of the apostles, Peter, the ever fervent, the leader of the apostolic choir? When all are asked, he answers. And whereas when He asked the opinion of the people, all replied to the question; when He asked their own, Peter springs forward, and anticipates them, and saith, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16).
St. John Chrysostom, Homily 88 on John
“He saith unto him, Feed My sheep” (John 21:17).
And why, having passed by the others, doth He speak with Peter on these matters? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the leader of the band; on this account also Paul went up upon a time to enquire of him rather than the others. And at the same time to show him that he must now be of good cheer, since the denial was done away, Jesus putteth into his hands the chief authority among the brethren; and He bringeth not forward the denial, nor reproacheth him with what had taken place, but saith, “If thou lovest Me, preside over thy brethren, and the warm love which thou didst ever manifest, and in which thou didst rejoice, show thou now; and the life which thou saidst thou wouldest lay down for Me, now give for My sheep.”…
“This spake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God” (John 21:19).
He said not, “Should die,” but, “Should glorify God,” that thou mayest learn, that to suffer for Christ, is glory and honor to the sufferer.
“And when He had spoken this, He saith, Follow Me” (John 21:19).
Here again He alludeth to his tender carefulness, and to his being very closely attached to Himself. And if any should say, “How then did James receive the chair at Jerusalem?” I would make this reply, that He [Christ] appointed Peter teacher, not of the chair, but of the world.
St. John Chrysostom, Homily 3 on Acts
PRIMACY
“And in those days,” it says, “Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said” (Acts 1:15). Both as being ardent, and as having been put in trust by Christ with the flock, and as having precedence in honor, he always begins the discourse.
St. John Chrysostom, Homily 10 on 2 Timothy
(Commentary on 4:21) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
This Linus [2 Tim. 4:21], some say, was second Bishop of the Church of Rome after Peter.
Sulpicius Severus (c. 363-c. 425) | WEST
Sulpicius Severus, Sacred History
(Book 2, Ch. 28) | ROME
Peter was there [Rome] executing the office of bishop, and Paul, too, after he had been brought to Rome, on appealing to Caesar from the unjust judgment of the governor. Multitudes then came together to hear Paul, and these, influenced by the truth which they were given to know, and by the miracles of the apostles, which they then so frequently performed, turned to the worship of God. For then took place the well-known and celebrated encounter of Peter and Paul with Simon [Magus]. He, after he had flown up into the air by his magical arts, and supported by two demons (with the view of proving that he was a god), the demons being put to flight by the prayers of the apostles, fell to the earth in the sight of all the people, and was dashed to pieces.
St. Pope Innocent I (died 417) | WEST
St. Pope Innocent I, Letter 29 (181 in St. Augustine): To St. Augustine and the Bishops of the Council of Carthage (January 27, 417)
SOURCE: St. Augustine, Sister Wilfrid Parsons, SND, trans., The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 30: Saint Augustine, Letters, Vol. IV (165-203) (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1955). See also E. Giles, ed., Documents Illustrating Papal Authority: AD 96-454 (London: SPCK, 1952), 201-202, and DS 217.
(pgs. 121-22, 125-26) | PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
In your inquiries into the things of God, which require to be treated by priests with great care, especially when there is question of a true, just, and Catholic council, you have kept the precedents of ancient tradition, being mindful of ecclesiastical discipline, and you have added strength to our religion, not only now in your council, but before it when you made your pronouncement according to right reason, and when you voted to submit the matter to our judgment, knowing well what is owing to the Apostolic See, since all of us who are placed in this position desire to follow the Apostle himself, from whom the very episcopate and the whole authority of its name are derived [St. Peter]. Following in his footsteps, we know equally how to condemn what is evil and to approve what is praiseworthy, as for example, the fact that you keep the customs of the fathers with priestly zeal, that you do not think they should be trampled underfoot. Because it has been decreed by a divine, not a human, authority that whenever action is taken in any of the provinces, however distant or remote, it should not be brought to a conclusion before it comes to the knowledge of this See [Rome], so that every just decision may be affirmed by our complete authority. Thus, just as all waters come forth from their natural source and flow through all parts of the world, keeping the purity of their source, so all the other Churches may draw from this source knowledge of what they are to teach, whom they are to absolve, and 121 | 122 from whom the waters, intended only for pure bodies, should be withheld as being soiled with indelible filth.
Therefore, I thank you, dearest brothers, for sending us letters by our brother and fellow priest, Julius, in which you show that while administering the Churches of the whole world, in union with all, you ask a decree that may be for the good of all. Thus, a Church, supported by its own rules and strengthened by the decretals of a legitimate pronouncement, may not have to be exposed to those against whom it should be on guard: men instructed or, rather, destroyed by the perverse subtleties of words, who pretend to argue for the Catholic faith yet breathe out deadly poison so as to corrupt the hearts of right-thinking men and drag them down, seeking to overthrow the whole system of true dogma…
Therefore, this poison is to be cut out, which, like a sore, has crept into a clean and wholly sound body, let if it is removed too late it may settle in the very vitals from which it may not be possible for the corruption of this evil to be drawn off… 122 | 125
Therefore, whoever appears to be in agreement with this statement which declares that we have no need of divine help [Pelagianism] shows himself an enemy of the Catholic faith, and an ingrate to the goodness of God. They are unworthy of our communion, which they have polluted by such preaching. They have voluntarily fled from the true religion by following those who make these statements. Since this whole matter rests on our avowal, and we accomplish nothing by our daily prayer except in so far as we receive the grace of God, how can we tolerate such boasting?…They must be plucked out and removed far 125 | 126 from the bosom of the Church, lest their error, gaining ground for a long time, should afterwards grow in to something incurable. If they were to remain long unpunished they must needs draw many into their perverted state of mind, and deceive the innocent or, rather, the unwary who now follow the Catholic faith, who will think the deceivers must be right since they see them remaining in the Church…
Therefore, let the diseased sore be cut off from the sound body, and the miasma of the cruel malady be carefully removed, that thus the healthy parts may continue to live, that the flock, being cleansed, may be clear of this contagion of an infected flock. Let there be an unspotted perfection of the whole body, such as we know, from your pronouncement against them, that you follow and hold, and which we, together with you, uphold with equal assent…
But this answer, furnished with abundant examples of our law, is sufficient to meet your warning, and we think that nothing remains for us to say.
St. Augustine (354-430) | WEST
St. Augustine, Confessions (c. 397-400)
(Book 7, Ch. 7, §11) | INFALLIBILITY
And now, O my Helper, hadst Thou freed me from those fetters; and I inquired, “Whence is evil?” and found no result. But Thou sufferedst me not to be carried away from the faith by any fluctuations of thought, whereby I believed Thee both to exist, and Thy substance to be unchangeable, and that Thou hadst a care of and wouldest judge men; and that in Christ, Thy Son, our Lord, and the Holy Scriptures, which the authority of Thy Catholic Church pressed upon me, Thou hadst planned the way of man’s salvation to that life which is to come after this death.
St. Augustine, Against the Fundamental Letter of Manichaeus (397)
(§§5-6) | PRIMACY | ROME | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§5) For in the Catholic Church, not to speak of the purest wisdom, to the knowledge of which a few spiritual men attain in this life, so as to know it, in the scantiest measure, indeed, because they are but men, still without any uncertainty (since the rest of the multitude derive their entire security not from acuteness of intellect, but from simplicity of faith)—not to speak of this wisdom, which you do not believe to be in the Catholic Church, there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of peoples and nations keeps me in the Church; so does her authority, inaugurated by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by love, established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed His sheep [John 21:15-17], down to the present episcopate. And so, lastly, does the name itself of Catholic, which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house. Such then in number and importance are the precious ties belonging to the Christian name which keep a believer in the Catholic Church, as it is right they should, though from the slowness of our understanding, or the small attainment of our life, the truth may not yet fully disclose itself. But with you, where there is none of these things to attract or keep me, the promise of truth is the only thing that comes into play. Now if the truth is so clearly proved as to leave no possibility of doubt, it must be set before all the things that keep me in the Catholic Church; but if there is only a promise without any fulfillment, no one shall move me from the faith which binds my mind with ties so many and so strong to the Christian religion.
(§6) Let us see then what Manichaeus teaches me; and particularly let us examine that treatise which he calls the Fundamental Epistle, in which almost all that you believe is contained. For in that unhappy time when we read it we were in your opinion enlightened. The epistle begins thus: “Manichaeus, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the providence of God the Father. These are wholesome words from the perennial and living fountain.” Now, if you please, patiently give heed to my inquiry. I do not believe Manichaeus to be an apostle of Christ. Do not, I beg of you, be enraged and begin to curse. For you know that it is my rule to believe none of your statements without consideration. Therefore I ask, who is this Manichaeus? You will reply, An apostle of Christ. I do not believe it. Now you are at a loss what to say or do; for you promised to give knowledge of the truth, and here you are forcing me to believe what I have no knowledge of. Perhaps you will read the gospel to me, and will attempt to find there a testimony to Manichaeus. But should you meet with a person not yet believing the gospel, how would you reply to him were he to say, I do not believe? For my part, I should not believe the gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church. So when those on whose authority I have consented to believe in the gospel tell me not to believe in Manichaeus, how can I but consent? Take your choice.
If you say, “Believe the Catholics,” their advice to me is to put no faith in you, so that, believing them, I am precluded from believing you.
If you say, “Do not believe the Catholics,” you cannot fairly use the gospel in bringing me to faith in Manichaeus, for it was at the command of the Catholics that I believed the gospel.
Again, if you say, “You were right in believing the Catholics when they praised the gospel, but wrong in believing their vituperation of Manichaeus,” do you think me such a fool as to believe or not to believe as you like or dislike, without any reason?
It is therefore fairer and safer by far for me, having in one instance put faith in the Catholics, not to go over to you, till, instead of bidding me believe, you make me understand something in the clearest and most open manner. To convince me, then, you must put aside the gospel. If you keep to the gospel, I will keep to those who commanded me to believe the gospel; and, in obedience to them, I will not believe you at all. But if haply you should succeed in finding in the gospel an incontrovertible testimony to the apostleship of Manichaeus, you will weaken my regard for the authority of the Catholics who bid me not to believe you; and the effect of that will be, that I shall no longer be able to believe the gospel either, for it was through the Catholics that I got my faith in it; and so, whatever you bring from the gospel will no longer have any weight with me. Wherefore, if no clear proof of the apostleship of Manichaeus is found in the gospel, I will believe the Catholics rather than you. But if you read thence some passage clearly in favor of Manichaeus, I will believe neither them nor you: not them, for they lied to me about you; nor you, for you quote to me that Scripture which I had believed on the authority of those liars. But far be it that I should not believe the gospel; for believing it, I find no way of believing you too. For the names of the apostles, as there recorded [Matt. 10:2-4; Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:13-18], do not include the name of Manichaeus. And who the successor of Christ’s betrayer was we read in the Acts of the Apostles [Acts 1:26]; which book I must needs believe if I believe the gospel, since both writings alike Catholic authority commends to me. The same book contains the well-known narrative of the calling and apostleship of Paul [Acts 9]. Read me now, if you can, in the gospel where Manichaeus is called an apostle, or in any other book in which I have professed to believe. Will you read the passage where the Lord promised the Holy Spirit as a Paraclete, to the apostles? Concerning which passage, behold how many and how great are the things that restrain and deter me from believing in Manichaeus.
St. Augustine, Reply to Faustus the Manichaean (c. 400)
(Book 11, §5) | INFALLIBILITY
The authority of these books has come down to us from the apostles through the successions of bishops and the extension of the Church, and, from a position of lofty supremacy, claims the submission of every faithful and pious mind.
(Book 28, §2) | INFALLIBILITY
As, then, I believe your book to be the production of Manichaeus, since it has been kept and handed down among the disciples of Manichaeus, from the time when he lived to the present time, by a regular succession of your presidents, so I ask you to believe the book which I quote to have been written by Matthew, since it has been handed down from the days of Matthew in the Church, without any break in the connection between that time and the present. The question then is, whether we are to believe the statements of an apostle who was in the company of Christ while He was on earth, or of a man away in Persia, born long after Christ. But perhaps you will quote some other book bearing the name of an apostle known to have been chosen by Christ; and you will find there that Christ was not born of Mary. Since, then, one of the books must be false, the question in this case is, whether we are to yield our belief to a book acknowledged and approved as handed down from the beginning in the Church founded by Christ Himself, and maintained through the apostles and their successors in an unbroken connection all over the world to the present day; or to a book which this Church condemns as unknown, and which, moreover, is brought forward by men who prove their veracity by praising Christ for falsehood.
(Book 33, §9) | INFALLIBILITY
Now that all Faustus’ calumnies have been refuted, those at least on the subjects here treated of at large and explained fully as the Lord has enabled me, I close with a word of counsel to you who are implicated in those shocking and damnable errors, that, if you acknowledge the supreme authority of Scripture, you should recognize that authority which from the time of Christ Himself, through the ministry of His apostles, and through a regular succession of bishops in the seats of the apostles, has been preserved to our own day throughout the whole world, with a reputation known to all. There the Old Testament too has its difficulties solved, and its predictions fulfilled.
St. Augustine, On Baptism Against the Donatists (c. 400)
(Book 1, Ch. 7) | INFALLIBILITY
For, in the next place, that I may not seem to rest on mere human arguments, since there is so much obscurity in this question, that in earlier ages of the Church, before the schism of Donatus, it has caused men of great weight, and even our fathers, the bishops, whose hearts were full of charity, so to dispute and doubt among themselves, saving always the peace of the Church, that the several statutes of their Councils in their different districts long varied from each other, till at length the most wholesome opinion was established, to the removal of all doubts, by a plenary Council of the whole world. I therefore bring forward from the gospel clear proofs, by which I propose, with God’s help, to prove how rightly and truly in the sight of God it has been determined, that in the case of every schismatic and heretic, the wound which caused his separation should be cured by the medicine of the Church; but that what remained sound in him should rather be recognized with approbation, than wounded by condemnation.
(Book 2, Ch. 3) | INFALLIBILITY
Now let the proud and swelling necks of the heretics raise themselves, if they dare, against the holy humility of this address. Ye mad Donatists, whom we desire earnestly to return to the peace and unity of the holy Church, that ye may receive health therein, what have ye to say in answer to this? You are wont, indeed, to bring up against us the letters of Cyprian, his opinion, his Council; why do ye claim the authority of Cyprian for your schism, and reject his example when it makes for the peace of the Church? But who can fail to be aware that the sacred canon of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testament, is confined within its own limits, and that it stands so absolutely in a superior position to all later letters of the bishops, that about it we can hold no manner of doubt or disputation whether what is confessedly contained in it is right and true; but that all the letters of bishops which have been written, or are being written, since the closing of the canon, are liable to be refuted if there be anything contained in them which strays from the truth, either by the discourse of some one who happens to be wiser in the matter than themselves, or by the weightier authority and more learned experience of other bishops, by the authority of Councils; and further, that the Councils themselves, which are held in the several districts and provinces, must yield, beyond all possibility of doubt, to the authority of plenary Councils which are formed for the whole Christian world; and that even of the plenary Councils, the earlier are often corrected by those which follow them, when, by some actual experiment, things are brought to light which were before concealed, and that is known which previously lay hid, and this without any whirlwind of sacrilegious pride, without any puffing of the neck through arrogance, without any strife of envious hatred, simply with holy humility, catholic peace, and Christian charity.
(Book 2, Ch. 7, §12) | INFALLIBILITY
Cease, then, to bring forward against us the authority of Cyprian in favor of repeating baptism, but cling with us to the example of Cyprian for the preservation of unity. For this question of baptism had not been as yet completely worked out, but yet the Church observed the most wholesome custom of correcting what was wrong, not repeating what was already given, even in the case of schismatics and heretics; she healed the wounded part, but did not meddle with what was whole. And this custom, coming, I suppose, from apostolical tradition (like many other things which are held to have been handed down under their actual sanction, because they are preserved throughout the whole Church, though they are not found either in their letters, or in the Councils of their successors)—this most wholesome custom, I say, according to the holy Cyprian, began to be what is called amended by his predecessor Agrippinus [who ruled in favor of rebaptism, the incorrect position]. But, according to the teaching which springs from a more careful investigation into the truth, which, after great doubt and fluctuation, was brought at last to the decision of a plenary Council, we ought to believe that it rather began to be corrupted than to receive correction at the hands of Agrippinus.
(Book 6, Ch. 7) | INFALLIBILITY
We, therefore, maintaining on the subject of the identity of all baptisms what must be acknowledged everywhere to be the custom of the universal Church, and what is confirmed by the decision of general Councils, and taking greater confidence also from the words of Cyprian, which allowed me even then to hold opinions differing from his own without forfeiting the right of communion, seeing that greater importance and praise were attached to unity, such as the blessed Cyprian and his colleagues, with whom he held that Council, maintained with those of different opinions, disturbing and overthrowing thereby the seditious calumnies of heretics and schismatics in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, who, speaking by His apostle, says, “Forbearing one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:2-3); and again, by the mouth of the same apostle, “If in anything ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you” (Phil. 3:15)—we, I say, propose for consideration and discussion the opinions of the holy bishops, without violating the bond of unity and peace with them, in maintaining which we imitate them so far as we can by the aid of the Lord Himself.
St. Augustine, Answer to Petilian the Donatist (402)
(Book 1, Ch. 26, §28) | INFALLIBILITY | INDEFECTIBILITY
But it is possible that you may expect of me that I should go on to refute what he has introduced about Manichaeus. Now, in respect of this, the only thing that offends me is that he has censured a most pestilent and pernicious error—I mean the heresy of the Manichaeans—in terms of wholly inadequate severity, if indeed they amount to censure at all, though the Catholic Church has broken down his defenses by the strongest evidence of truth. For the inheritance of Christ, established in all nations, is secure against heresies which have been shut out from the inheritance; but, as the Lord says, “How can Satan cast out Satan?” (Mark 3:23), so how can the error of the Donatists have power to overthrow the error of the Manichaeans?
(Book 2, Ch. 51, §118) | ROME | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
However, if all men throughout all the world were of the character which you most vainly charge them with, what has the chair done to you of the Roman Church, in which Peter sat, and which Anastasius fills to-day; or the chair of the Church of Jerusalem, in which James once sat, and in which John sits today, with which we are united in catholic unity, and from which you have severed yourselves by your mad fury?
Why do you call the apostolic chair a seat of the scornful? If it is on account of the men whom you believe to use the words of the law without performing it, do you find that our Lord Jesus Christ was moved by the Pharisees, of whom He says, “They say, and do not,” to do any despite to the seat in which they sat? Did He not commend the seat of Moses, and maintain the honor of the seat, while He convicted those that sat in it? For He says, “They sit in Moses’ seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not” (Matt. 23:2-3). If you were to think of these things, you would not, on account of men whom you calumniate, do despite to the apostolic seat, in which you have no share. But what else is conduct like yours but ignorance of what to say, combined with want of power to abstain from evil-speaking?
St. Augustine, On the Soul and Its Origin
(Book 2, Ch. 17) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
The new-fangled Pelagian heretics have been most justly condemned by the authority of catholic councils and of the Apostolic See, on the ground of their having dared to give to unbaptized infants a place of rest and salvation, even apart from the kingdom of heaven.
St. Augustine, On the Trinity (428)
(Ch. 6, §10) | INFALLIBILITY
But those reasons which I have here given, I have either gathered from the authority of the church, according to the tradition of our forefathers, or from the testimony of the divine Scriptures, or from the nature itself of numbers and of similitudes. No sober person will decide against reason, no Christian against the Scriptures, no peaceable person against the church.
St. Augustine, On the Grace of Christ and Original Sin (418)
(Book 2, Ch. 8-9) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(Ch. 8) The venerable Pope Zosimus, keeping in view this deprecatory preamble, dealt with the man, puffed up as he was with the blasts of false doctrine, so as that he should condemn all the objectionable points which had been alleged against him by the deacon Paulinus, and that he should yield his assent to the rescript of the Apostolic See which had been issued by his predecessor of sacred memory. The accused man, however, refused to condemn the objections raised by the deacon, yet he did not dare to hold out against the letter of the blessed Pope Innocent; indeed, he went so far as to “promise that he would condemn all the points which the Apostolic See condemned.”…
(Ch. 9) Wherefore Pelagius, too, if he will only reflect candidly on his own position and writings, has no reason for saying that he ought not to have been banned with such a sentence. For although he deceived the council in Palestine, seemingly clearing himself before it, he entirely failed in imposing on the church at Rome (where, as you well know, he is by no means a stranger), although he went so far as to make the attempt, if he might somehow succeed. But, as I have just said, he entirely failed. For the most blessed Pope Zosimus recollected what his predecessor, who had set him so worthy an example, had thought of these very proceedings. Nor did he omit to observe what opinion was entertained about this man by the trusty Romans, whose faith deserved to be spoken of in the Lord [Rom. 1:8], and whose consistent zeal in defense of catholic truth against this heresy he saw prevailing amongst them with warmth, and at the same time most perfect harmony…Now what was the solemn judgment which the holy Pope Innocent formed respecting the proceedings in the Synod of Palestine, by which Pelagius boasts of having been acquitted, you may indeed read in the letter which he addressed to me. It is duly mentioned also in the answer which was forwarded by the African Synod to the venerable Pope Zosimus and which, along with the other instructions, we have dispatched to your loving selves…
St. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine (426)
(Book 3, Ch. 2, §2) | INFALLIBILITY
But when proper words make Scripture ambiguous, we must see in the first place that there is nothing wrong in our punctuation or pronunciation. Accordingly, if, when attention is given to the passage, it shall appear to be uncertain in what way it ought to be punctuated or pronounced, let the reader consult the rule of faith which he has gathered from the plainer passages of Scripture, and from the authority of the Church, and of which I treated at sufficient length when I was speaking in the first book about things.
St. Augustine, Sermon 81 (131) (c. 411)
(§10) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
What then was said of the Jews, the same altogether do we see in these men now [Pelagian heretics]. “They have a zeal of God: I hear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge” (Rom. 10:2). What is, “not according to knowledge”? “For being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and wishing to establish their own, they have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God” (Rom. 10:3). My Brethren, share with me in my sorrow. When you find such as these, do not hide them; be there no such misdirected mercy in you; by all means, when you find such, hide them not. Convince the gainsayers, and those who resist, bring to us. For already have two councils [Councils of Carthage and Milevis, refers in Letter 175 and Letter 176] on this question been sent to the Apostolic see; and rescripts also have come from thence. The question has been brought to an issue [conclusion]; would that their error may sometime be brought to an issue too! Therefore do we advise that they may take heed, we teach that they may be instructed, we pray that they may be changed. Let us turn to the Lord, etc.
St. Augustine, Sermon 295: On the Birthday of the Apostles Peter and Paul (c. 411)
SOURCE: St. Augustine, Edmund Hill, OP, trans., The Works of Saint Augustine: Sermons, III/8 (273-305A) (New York: New City Press, 1994).
(§2) (pgs. 197-98) | KEYS | PRIMACY
Before his passion the Lord Jesus, as you know, chose those disciples of his, whom he called apostles. Among these it was only Peter who almost everywhere was given the privilege of representing the whole Church. It was in the person of the whole Church, which he alone represented, that he was 197 | 198 privileged to hear, “To you will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:19). After all, it isn’t just one man that received these keys, but the Church in its unity. So this is the reason for Peter’s acknowledged pre-eminence, that he stood for the Church’s universality and unity, which he was told, “To you I am entrusting,” what has in fact been entrusted to all…
St. Augustine, Tractate 50 on the Gospel of John
(§12) | KEYS | PRIMACY
One wicked man represents the whole body of the wicked; in the same way as Peter, the whole body of the good, yea, the body of the Church, but in respect to the good. For if in Peter’s case there were no sacramental symbol of the Church, the Lord would not have said to him, “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven” (Matt. 16:19). If this was said only to Peter, it gives no ground of action to the Church. But if such is the case also in the Church, that what is bound on earth is bound in heaven, and what is loosed on earth is loosed in heaven—for when the Church excommunicates, the excommunicated person is bound in heaven; when one is reconciled by the Church, the person so reconciled is loosed in heaven: if such, then, is the case in the Church, Peter, in receiving the keys, represented the holy Church. If, then, in the person of Peter were represented the good in the Church, and in Judas’ person were represented the bad in the Church, then to these latter was it said, “But me ye will not have always.” But what means the “not always” and what, the “always”? If thou art good, if thou belongest to the body represented by Peter, thou hast Christ both now and hereafter: now by faith, by sign, by the sacrament of baptism, by the bread and wine of the altar.
St. Augustine, Tractate 56 on the Gospel of John (c. 416/17)
(§1) | PRIMACY
For who can fail to know that the most blessed Peter was the first of the apostles?
St. Augustine, Tractate 96 on the Gospel of John
(§1) | PRIMACY
For at that time the apostles were not yet fitted even to die for Christ, when He said to them, “Ye cannot follow me now,” and when the very foremost of them, Peter, who had presumptuously declared that he was already able, met with a different experience from what he anticipated: and yet afterwards a countless number both of men and women, boys and girls, youths and maidens, old and young, were crowned with martyrdom; and the sheep were found able for that which, when the Lord spake these words, the shepherds were still unable to bear.
St. Augustine, Tractate 124 on the Gospel of John
(§5) | ROCK | KEYS | PRIMACY
So does the Church act in blessed hope through this troublous life; and this Church symbolized in its generality, was personified in the Apostle Peter, on account of the primacy of his apostleship. For, as regards his proper personality, he was by nature one man, by grace one Christian, by still more abounding grace one, and yet also, the first apostle; but when it was said to him, “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven,” he represented the universal Church, which in this world is shaken by divers temptations, that come upon it like torrents of rain, floods and tempests, and falleth not, because it is founded upon a rock (petra), from which Peter received his name. For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, “On this rock will I build my Church,” because Peter had said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16-19). On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ [1 Cor. 10:4]; and on this foundation was Peter himself also built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus [1 Cor. 3:11]. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church. This Church, accordingly, which Peter represented, so long as it lives amidst evil, by loving and following Christ is delivered from evil. But its following is the closer in those who contend even unto death for the truth.
St. Augustine, Exposition of Psalm 72
(§§5, 12) | INFALLIBILITY | INDEFECTIBILITY
(§5) …For men excelling in the Church ought to counsel for peace with watchful care, lest for the sake of their own distinctions by acting proudly they make schisms and dissever the bond of union. But let the hills so follow them by imitation and obedience, that they prefer Christ to them: lest being led astray by the empty authority of evil mountains (for they seem to excel), they tear themselves away from the Unity of Christ…
(§12) “In His presence shall fall down the Ethiopians, and His enemies shall lick the earth” (ver. 9). By the Ethiopians, as by a part the whole, He hath signified all nations, selecting that nation to mention especially by name, which is at the ends of the earth. By “in His presence shall fall down” hath been signified, shall adore Him. And because there were to be schisms in diverse quarters of the world, which would be jealous of the Church Catholic spread abroad in the whole round world, and again those same schisms dividing themselves into the names of men, and by loving the men under whose authority they had been rent, opposing themselves to the glory of Christ which is throughout all lands; so when He had said, “in His presence shall fall down the Ethiopians,” He added, “and His enemies shall lick the earth:” that is, shall love men, so that they shall be jealous of the glory of Christ, to whom hath been said, “Be Thou exalted above the Heavens, O God, and above all the earth Thy glory” (Ps. 108:5). For man earned to hear, “Earth thou art, and unto earth thou shalt go” (Gen. 3:19). By licking this earth, that is, being delighted with the vainly talking authority of such men, by loving them, and by counting them for the most pleasing of men, they gainsay the divine sayings, whereby the Catholic Church hath been foretold, not as to be in any particular quarter of the world, as certain schisms are, but in the whole universe by bearing fruit and growing so as to attain even unto the very Ethiopians, to wit, the remotest and foulest of mankind.
St. Augustine, Exposition of Psalm 104
(§16) | ROCK
But that rock, Peter himself, that great mountain, when he prayed and saw that vision, was watered from above…
St. Augustine, Letter 40: To St. Jerome (397)
(§9) | INFALLIBILITY
Some of these heretics also you have omitted, and I would fain know on what grounds. If, however, perchance it has been from a desire not to enlarge that volume unduly that you refrained from adding to a notice of heretics, the statement of the things in which the Catholic Church has authoritatively condemned them, I beg you not to grudge bestowing on this subject, to which with humility and brotherly love I direct your attention, a portion of that literary labor by which already, by the grace of the Lord our God, you have in no small measure stimulated and assisted the saints in the study of the Latin tongue, and publish in one small book (if your other occupations permit you) a digest of the perverse dogmas of all the heretics who up to this time have, through arrogance, or ignorance, or self-will, attempted to subvert the simplicity of the Christian faith; a work most necessary for the information of those who are prevented, either by lack of leisure or by their not knowing the Greek language, from reading and understanding so many things.
St. Augustine, Letter 43: To Glorius, Eleusius, the Two Felixes, Grammaticus, and Others (397)
(§7) | SUCCESSORS
Carthage was also near to the countries beyond the sea, and distinguished by illustrious renown, so that it had a bishop of more than ordinary influence, who could afford to disregard even a number of enemies conspiring against him, because he saw himself united by letters of communion both to the Roman Church, in which the supremacy of [the/an] apostolic chair has always flourished, and to all other lands from which Africa itself received the gospel, and was prepared to defend himself before these Churches if his adversaries attempted to cause an alienation of them from him.
St. Augustine, Letter 53: To Generosus (400)
(§2) | ROCK | ROME | SUCCESSORS
For if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: “Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it!” (Matt. 16:18). The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these: Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop [St. Pope] Anastasius. In this order of succession no Donatist bishop is found. But, reversing the natural course of things, the Donatists sent to Rome from Africa an ordained bishop, who, putting himself at the head of a few Africans in the great metropolis, gave some notoriety to the name of “mountain men,” or Cutzupits, by which they were known.
St. Augustine, Letter 54: Book 1 of Replies to Questions of Januarius (400)
(Ch. 1, §1) | INFALLIBILITY
I desire you therefore, in the first place, to hold fast this as the fundamental principle in the present discussion, that our Lord Jesus Christ has appointed to us a “light yoke” and an “easy burden” (Matt. 11:30), as He declares in the Gospel, in accordance with which He has bound His people under the new dispensation together in fellowship by sacraments, which are in number very few, in observance most easy, and in significance most excellent, as baptism solemnized in the name of the Trinity, the communion of His body and blood, and such other things as are prescribed in the canonical Scriptures, with the exception of those enactments which were a yoke of bondage to God’s ancient people, suited to their state of heart and to the times of the prophets, and which are found in the five books of Moses. As to those other things which we hold on the authority, not of Scripture, but of tradition, and which are observed throughout the whole world, it may be understood that they are held as approved and instituted either by the apostles themselves, or by plenary Councils, whose authority in the Church is most useful, e.g. the annual commemoration, by special solemnities, of the Lord’s passion, resurrection, and ascension, and of the descent of the Holy Spirit from heaven, and whatever else is in like manner observed by the whole Church wherever it has been established.
St. Augustine, Letter 164: To Evodius (414)
(Ch. 3, §6) | INFALLIBILITY
As to the first man, the father of mankind, it is agreed by almost the entire Church that the Lord loosed him from that prison; a tenet which must be believed to have been accepted not without reason,—from whatever source it was handed down to the Church—although the authority of the canonical Scriptures cannot be brought forward as speaking expressly in its support, though this seems to be the opinion which is more than any other borne out by these words in the book of Wisdom [Wis. 10:1-2]. Some add to this [tradition] that the same favor was bestowed on the holy men of antiquity, on Abel, Seth, Noah and his house, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the other patriarchs and prophets, they also being loosed from those pains at the time when the Lord descended into hell.
St. Augustine, Letter 209: To St. Pope Celestine (423)
(§§1, 4, 6, 8-10) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§1) First of all I congratulate you that our Lord God has, as we have heard, established you in the illustrious chair which you occupy without any division among His people. In the next place, I lay before your Holiness the state of affairs with us, that not only by your prayers, but with your council and aid you may help us. For I write to you at this time under deep affliction, because, while wishing to benefit certain members of Christ in our neighborhood, I brought on them a great calamity by my want of prudence and caution…
(§4) What shall I do? I am unwilling to accuse before your venerable Dignity one whom I brought into the fold, and nourished with care; and I am unwilling to forsake those in seeking whose ingathering to the Church I have travailed, amid fears and anxieties; and how to do justice to both I cannot discover…
(§6) But why should I detain you with further particulars? I beseech you to assist us in this laborious matter, blessed lord and holy father, venerated for your piety, and revered with due affection; and command all the documents which have been forwarded to be read aloud to you…
(§8) There are cases on record, in which the Apostolic See, either pronouncing judgment or confirming the judgment of others, sanctioned decisions by which persons, for certain offences, were neither deposed from their episcopal office nor left altogether unpunished…
(§9) Since, then, the most blessed Pope Boniface, speaking of Bishop Antonius, has in his epistle, with the vigilant caution becoming a pastor, inserted in his judgment…For either from himself, or at least from very frequent rumors, threats are held out that the courts of justiciary, and the public authorities, and the violence of the military, are to carry into force the decision of the Apostolic See; the effect of which is that these unhappy men, being now Catholic Christians, dread greater evils from a Catholic bishop than those which, when they were heretics, they dreaded from the laws of Catholic emperors. Do not permit these things to be done, I implore you, by the blood of Christ, by the memory of the Apostle Peter, who has warned those placed over Christian people against violently “lording it over their brethren” (1 Pet. 5:3). I commend to the gracious love of your Holiness the Catholics of Fussala, my children in Christ, and also Bishop Antonius, my son in Christ, for I love both, and I commend both to you. I do not blame the people of Fussala for bringing to your ears their just complaint against me for imposing on them a man whom I had not proved, and who was in age at least not yet established, by whom they have been so afflicted; nor do I wish any wrong done to Antonius, whose evil covetousness I oppose with a determination proportioned to my sincere affection for him. Let your compassion be extended to both—to them, so that they may not suffer evil; to him, so that he may not do evil; to them, so that they may not hate the Catholic Church, if they find no aid in defense against a Catholic bishop extended to them by Catholic bishops, and especially by the Apostolic See itself; to him, on the other hand, so that he may not involve himself in such grievous wickedness as to alienate from Christ those whom against their will he endeavors to make his own.
(§10) …If, however, you succeed in restoring the members of Christ in that district from their deadly fear and grief, and in comforting my old age by the administration of justice tempered with mercy, He who brings deliverance to us through you in this tribulation, and who has established you in the seat which you occupy, shall recompense unto you good for good, both in this life and in that which is to come.
St. Pope Celestine I (c. 376-432) | WEST
St. Pope Celestine I, Letter to John of Antioch, Juvenal of Jerusalem, Rufus of Thessalonica, and Flavian of Philippi (August 10, 430)
(§§4-5) (pgs. 155-56) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§4) …We have therefore severed from our communion both Bishop Nestorius [a heretic] and anyone else who copies him in teaching these things, until in a written profession he condemns the perverse teaching he initiated, and declares that he holds the same faith about the virgin birth, that is, about the salvation of the human race, as that which, in accordance with apostolic doctrine, is held, revered, and taught by the Roman and the Alexandrian and the universal Catholic Church. And if anyone has been excommunicated or stripped of episcopal or clerical rank either by Bishop Nestorius or his followers, from the time when they initiated this teaching, it is obvious that he has remained and remains in our communion, nor do we consider him deposed, since no one can be deposed by a sentence delivered by one who has shown that he himself ought to be deposed.
(§5) This, most dear brother, we have thought necessary to write to your holiness, so that, strengthened in the Lord and wearing on your chest the familiar breastplate of Christ with the shield of Catholic teaching, you may protect from the perversity of the most dire doctrine the flocks of our Lord Jesus Christ, who was born and suffered for us, and who, after unlocking hell and conquering death, rose for us on the third day. As we have also written to our holy brother and fellow bishop [St.] Cyril [of Alexandria], a sound defender of the Catholic faith, may your holiness know that the following verdict on the same Nestorius has been delivered by us, or rather by Christ God: within ten days, counting from today’s indictment, he is either to condemn by a written profession his sacrilegious sermons on the birth of Christ and profess that he follows the faith that is preserved by the Roman and the Alexandrian and the universal church, or he is to be aware that he has been deposed from the episcopal college and that ruin has come upon 155 | 156 him. In order that this decree of ours may be executed more effectively, we have decided that this letter is to be faithfully delivered to your love by our son Posidonius, deacon of the church of Alexandria…
Socrates of Constantinople (c. 380-after 439) | EAST
Socrates of Constantinople, Ecclesiastical History
(Book 2, Ch. 17) | SUCCESSORS
When Julius, bishop of Rome, was apprised of these fresh machinations of the Arians against Athanasius, and had also received the letter of the then deceased Eusebius, he invited the persecuted Athanasius to come to him, having ascertained where he was secreted. The epistle also of the bishops who had been some time before assembled at Antioch, just then reached him; and at the same time others from the bishops in Egypt, assuring him that the entire charge against Athanasius was a fabrication. On the receipt of these contradictory communications, Julius first replied to the bishops who had written to him from Antioch, complaining of the acrimonious feeling they had evinced in their letter, and charging them with a violation of the canons, because they had not requested his attendance at the council, seeing that the ecclesiastical law required that the churches should pass no decisions contrary to the views of the bishop of Rome: he then censured them with great severity for clandestinely attempting to pervert the faith; in addition, that their former proceedings at Tyre were fraudulent, because the investigation of what had taken place at Mareotes was on one side of the question only; not only this, but that the charge respecting Arsenius had plainly been proved a false charge. Such and similar sentiments did Julius write in his answer to the bishops convened at Antioch…
St. Vincent of Lérins (died c. 445) | WEST
St. Vincent of Lérins, Commonitory (c. 434)
(§§84-85) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§84) The foregoing would be enough and very much more than enough, to crush and annihilate every profane novelty. But yet that nothing might be wanting to such completeness of proof, we added, at the close, the twofold authority of the Apostolic See, first, that of holy Pope Sixtus, the venerable prelate who now adorns the Roman Church; and secondly that of his predecessor, Pope Celestine of blessed memory, which same we think it necessary to insert here also.
Holy Pope Sixtus then says in an Epistle which he wrote on Nestorius’s matter to the bishop of Antioch, [quotes letter]…
(§85) Holy Pope Celestine also expresses himself in like manner and to the same effect. For in the Epistle which he wrote to the priests of Gaul, charging them with connivance with error, in that by their silence they failed in their duty to the ancient faith, and allowed profane novelties to spring up, he says: [quotes letters]…
St. Sechnall of Ireland (died c. 447/448) | WEST
St. Sechnall of Ireland, Hymn on St. Patrick, Teacher of the Irish (444)
(Lines 9-12) (pg. 61) | PRIMACY
Constant in the fear of God and steadfast in his faith,
On him the Church [in Ireland] is built as on Peter;
And his apostleship has he received from God–
The gates of Hell will not prevail against him [Matt. 16:18].
St. Peter Chrysologus (c. 380-c. 450) | WEST
St. Peter Chrysologus, Letter to Eutyches (448) | See #42
(§2) (pgs. 286-87) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
However, we give you this exhortation in regard to everything, honorable brother: obediently heed these matters which the most blessed Pope of the City of Rome has written, because blessed Peter who lives and presides in his own see proffers the truth of faith to those who seek it. 286 | 287 For, in accordance with our pursuit of peace and of faith, we cannot decide upon cases of faith without the harmonious agreement of the Bishop of Rome.
Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393-c. 458/466) | EAST
Theodoret of Cyrus, Letter 113: To St. Pope Leo the Great (449)
PRIMACY | ROME | INFALLIBILITY | INDEFECTIBILITY
If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet of the Holy Ghost, hastened to the great Peter in order that he might carry from him the desired solution of difficulties to those at Antioch who were in doubt about living in conformity with the law, much more do we, men insignificant and small, hasten to your apostolic see in order to receive from you a cure for the wounds of the churches. For every reason it is fitting for you to hold the first place, inasmuch as your see is adorned with many privileges. Other cities are indeed adorned by their size, their beauty, and their population; and some which in these respects are lacking are made bright by certain spiritual boons. But on your city the great Provider has bestowed an abundance of good gifts. She is the largest, the most splendid, the most illustrious of the world, and overflows with the multitude of her inhabitants. Besides all this, she has achieved her present sovereignty, and has given her name to her subjects. She is moreover specially adorned by her faith, in due testimony whereof the divine Apostle exclaims “your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world” (Rom. 1:8). And if even after receiving the seeds of the message of salvation her boughs were straightway heavy with these admirable fruits, what words can fitly praise the piety now practiced in her? In her keeping too are the tombs that give light to the souls of the faithful, those of our common fathers and teachers of the truth, Peter and Paul. This thrice blessed and divine pair arose in the region of sunrise, and spread their rays in all directions. Now from the region of sunset, where they willingly welcomed the setting of this life, they illuminate the world. They have rendered your see most glorious; this is the crown and completion of your good things; but in these days their God has adorned their throne by setting on it your holiness, emitting, as you do, the rays of orthodoxy. Of this I might give many proofs, but it is enough to mention the zeal which your holiness lately shewed against the ill-famed Manichees, proving thereby your piety’s earnest regard for divine things. Your recent writings, too, are enough to indicate your apostolic character. For we have met with what your holiness has written concerning the incarnation of our God and Savior, and we have marveled at the exactness of your expressions…
We had expected that through the instrumentality of the representatives sent by your holiness to Ephesus, the tempest would have been done away, but we have fallen under severer attacks of the storm…
But I await the sentence of your apostolic see. I beseech and implore your holiness to succour me in my appeal to your fair and righteous tribunal. Bid me hasten to you, and prove to you that my teaching follows the footprints of the apostles.
Sozomen (c. 400-c. 450) | EAST
Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History
(Book 2, Ch. 15) | SUCCESSORS
There each [St. Athanasius, and Paul, bishop of Constantinople] laid his case before Julius, bishop of Rome. He on his part, by virtue of the Church of Rome’s peculiar privilege, sent them back again into the East, fortifying them with commendatory letters; and at the same time restored to each his own place, and sharply rebuked those by whom they had been deposed. Relying on the signature of the bishop Julius, the bishops departed from Rome, and again took possession of their own churches, forwarding the letters to the parties to whom they were addressed. These persons considering themselves treated with indignity by the reproaches of Julius, called a council at Antioch, assembled themselves and dictated a reply to his letters as the expression of the unanimous feeling of the whole Synod. It was not his province, they said, to take cognizance of their decisions in reference to any whom they might wish to expel from their churches; seeing that they had not opposed themselves to him, when Novatus was ejected from the church. These things the bishops of the Eastern church communicated to Julius, bishop of Rome.
(Book 3, Ch. 8, 10) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(Ch. 8) …The Roman bishop, on learning the accusation against each individual, and on finding that they held the same sentiments about the Nicaean dogmas, admitted them to communion as of like orthodoxy; and as the care for all was fitting to the dignity of his see, he restored them all to their own churches. He wrote to the bishops of the East, and rebuked them for having judged these bishops unjustly, and for harassing the Churches by abandoning the Nicaean doctrines. He summoned a few among them to appear before him on an appointed day, in order to account to him for the sentence they had passed, and threatened to bear with them no longer, unless they would cease to make innovations. This was the tenor of his letters. Athanasius and Paul were reinstated in their respective sees, and forwarded the letter of [St. Pope] Julius to the bishops of the East. The bishops could scarcely brook such documents, and they assembled together at Antioch, and framed a reply to Julius, beautifully expressed and composed with great legal skill, yet filled with considerable irony and indulging in the strongest threats. They confessed in this epistle, that the Church of Rome was entitled to universal honor, because it was the school of the apostles, and had become the metropolis of piety from the outset, although the introducers of the doctrine had settled there from the East…
(Ch. 10) The bishops of Egypt, having sent a declaration in writing that these allegations were false, and [St. Pope] Julius having been apprised that Athanasius was far from being in safety in Egypt, sent for him to his own city. He replied at the same time to the letter of the bishops who were convened at Antioch, for just then he happened to have received their epistle, and accused them of having clandestinely introduced innovations contrary to the dogmas of the Nicene council, and of having violated the laws of the Church, by neglecting to invite him to join their Synod; for he alleged that there is a sacerdotal canon which declares that whatever is enacted contrary to the judgment of the bishop of Rome is null. He also reproached them for having deviated from justice in all their proceedings against Athanasius, both at Tyre and Mareotis, and stated that the decrees enacted at the former city had been annulled, on account of the calumny concerning the hand of Arsenius, and at the latter city, on account of the absence of Athanasius. Last of all he reprehended the arrogant style of their epistle.
Julius was induced by all these reasons to undertake the defense of Athanasius and of Paul: the latter had arrived in Italy not long previously, and had lamented bitterly these calamities. When Julius perceived that what he had written to those who held the sacerdotal dignity in the East was of no avail, he made the matter known to Constans the emperor. Accordingly, Constans wrote to his brother Constantius, requesting him to send some of the bishops of the East, that they might assign a reason for the edicts of deposition which they had passed.
(Book 6, Ch. 10) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
The Macedonians, in apprehension of further sufferings, sent deputies to various cities, and finally agreed to have recourse to Valentinian and to the bishop of Rome rather than share in the faith of Eudoxius and Valens and their followers; and when this seemed favorable for execution, they selected three of their own number—Eustathius, bishop of Sebaste; Silvanus, bishop of Tarsus; and Theophilus, bishop of Castabalis—and sent them to the Emperor Valentinian; they likewise entrusted them with a letter, addressed to Liberius, bishop of Rome, and to the other priests of the West, in which they entreated them as prelates who had adhered to the faith approved and confirmed by the apostles, and who before others ought to watch over religion, to receive their deputies with all confirmation, and to confer with them about what should be done in the interval until the affairs of the Church could be approvedly set in order.
St. Pope Leo the Great (c. 400-461) | WEST
St. Pope Leo the Great, Sermon 3: On the Anniversary of His Elevation to the Pontificate
(§§2-4) | ROCK | KEYS | PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§2) …For the solidity of that faith which was praised in the chief of the Apostles is perpetual: and as that remains which Peter believed in Christ, so that remains which Christ instituted in Peter. For when, as has been read in the Gospel lesson, the Lord had asked the disciples whom they believed Him to be amid the various opinions that were held, and the blessed Peter had replied, saying, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” the Lord says, “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and flood hath not revealed it to thee, but My Father, which is in heaven. And I say to thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed also in heaven” (Matt. 16:16-19).
(§3) The dispensation of Truth therefore abides, and the blessed Peter persevering in the strength of the Rock, which he has received, has not abandoned the helm of the Church, which he undertook. For he was ordained before the rest in such a way that from his being called the Rock, from his being pronounced the Foundation, from his being constituted the Doorkeeper of the kingdom of heaven, from his being set as the Umpire to bind and to loose, whose judgments shall retain their validity in heaven, from all these mystical titles we might know the nature of his association with Christ. And still today he more fully and effectually performs what is entrusted to him, and carries out every part of his duty and charge in Him and with Him, through Whom he has been glorified. And so if anything is rightly done and rightly decreed by us, if anything is won from the mercy of God by our daily supplications, it is of his work and merits whose power lives and whose authority prevails in his See. For this, dearly-beloved, was gained by that confession, which, inspired in the Apostle’s heart by God the Father, transcended all the uncertainty of human opinions, and was endued with the firmness of a rock, which no assaults could shake. For throughout the Church Peter daily says, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” and every tongue which confesses the Lord, accepts the instruction his voice conveys. This Faith conquers the devil, and breaks the bonds of his prisoners. It uproots us from this earth and plants us in heaven, and the gates of Hades cannot prevail against it. For with such solidity is it endued by God that the depravity of heretics cannot mar it nor the unbelief of the heathen overcome it.
(§4) And so, dearly beloved, with reasonable obedience we celebrate today’s festival by such methods, that in my humble person he may be recognized and honored, in whom abides the care of all the shepherds, together with the charge of the sheep commended to him, and whose dignity is not abated even in so unworthy an heir. And hence the presence of my venerable brothers and fellow-priests, so much desired and valued by me, will be the more sacred and precious, if they will transfer the chief honor of this service in which they have deigned to take part to him whom they know to be not only the patron of this see, but also the primate of all bishops…For though the whole Church, which is in all the world, ought to abound in all virtues, yet you especially, above all people, it becomes to excel in deeds of piety, because founded as you are on the very citadel of the Apostolic Rock, not only has our Lord Jesus Christ redeemed you in common with all men, but the blessed Apostle Peter has instructed you far beyond all men. Through the same Christ our Lord.
St. Pope Leo the Great, Sermon 82: On the Feast of the Apostles Peter and Paul (June 29)
(§§1, 3-4) | PRIMACY | ROME | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§1) …But, besides that reverence which to-day’s festival has gained from all the world, it is to be honored with special and peculiar exultation in our city, that there may be a predominance of gladness on the day of their martyrdom in the place where the chief of the Apostles met their glorious end. For these are the men, through whom the light of Christ’s gospel shone on thee, O Rome, and through whom thou, who wast the teacher of error, wast made the disciple of Truth. These are thy holy Fathers and true shepherds, who gave thee claims to be numbered among the heavenly kingdoms, and built thee under much better and happier auspices than they, by whose zeal the first foundations of thy walls were laid: and of whom the one that gave thee thy name defiled thee with his brother’s blood [the murder of Remus by Romulus, the traditional founders of Rome]. These are they who promoted thee to such glory, that being made a holy nation, a chosen people, a priestly and royal state [1 Pet. 2:9], and the head of the world through the blessed Peter’s holy See thou didst attain a wider sway by the worship of God than by earthly government. For although thou wert increased by many victories, and didst extend thy rule on land and sea, yet what thy toils in war subdued is less than what the peace of Christ has conquered…
(§3) For when the twelve Apostles, after receiving through the Holy Ghost the power of speaking with all tongues, had distributed the world into parts among themselves, and undertaken to instruct it in the Gospel, the most blessed Peter, chief of the Apostolic band, was appointed to the citadel of the Roman empire, that the light of Truth which was being displayed for the salvation of all the nations, might spread itself more effectively throughout the body of the world from the head itself. What nation had not representatives then living in this city; or what peoples did not know what Rome had learnt? Here it was that the tenets of philosophy must be crushed, here that the follies of earthly wisdom must be dispelled, here that the cult of demons must be refuted, here that the blasphemy of all idolatries must be rooted out, here where the most persistent superstition had gathered together all the various errors which had anywhere been devised.
(§4) To this city then, most blessed Apostle Peter, thou dost not fear to come, and when the Apostle Paul, the partner of thy glory, was still busied with regulating other churches, didst enter this forest of roaring beasts, this deep, stormy ocean with greater boldness than when thou didst walk upon the sea…
St. Pope Leo the Great, Letter 9: To Dioscorus, Bishop of Alexandria (June 21, 445?)
(§1) | PRIMACY
For since the most blessed Peter received the headship of the Apostles from the Lord, and the church of Rome still abides by His institutions, it is wicked to believe that His holy disciple Mark, who was the first to govern the church of Alexandria, formed his decrees on a different line of tradition: seeing that without doubt both disciple and master drew but one Spirit from the same fount of grace, and the ordained could not hand on aught else than what he had received from his ordainer. We do not therefore allow it that we should differ in anything, since we confess ourselves to be of one body and faith, nor that the institutions of the teacher should seem different to those of the taught.
St. Pope Leo the Great, Letter 10: To the Bishops of the Province of Vienne (445)
(§1) Our Lord Jesus Christ, Savior of mankind, instituted the observance of the Divine religion which He wished by the grace of God to shed its brightness upon all nations and all peoples in such a way that the Truth, which before was confined to the announcements of the Law and the Prophets, might through the Apostles’ trumpet blast go out for the salvation of all men, as it is written: “Their sound has gone out into every land, and their words into the ends of the world” (Ps. 19:4). But this mysterious function the Lord wished to be indeed the concern of all the apostles, but in such a way that He has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the Apostles; and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the body, so that anyone who dares to secede from Peter’s solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery. For He wished him who had been received into partnership in His undivided unity to be named what He Himself was, when He said: “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church” (Matt. 16:18), that the building of the eternal temple by the wondrous gift of God’s grace might rest on Peter’s solid rock: strengthening His Church so surely that neither could human rashness assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against it. But this most holy firmness of the rock, reared, as we have said, by the building hand of God, a man must wish to destroy in over-weaning wickedness when he tries to break down its power, by favoring his own desires, and not following what he received from men of old: for he believes himself subject to no law, and held in check by no rules of God’s ordinances and breaks away, in his eagerness for novelty, from your use and ours, by adopting illegal practices, and letting what he ought to keep fall into abeyance.
(§2) But with the approval, as we believe, of God, and retaining towards you the fulness of our love which the Apostolic See always, as you remember, expends upon you, holy brethren we are striving to correct these things by mature counsel, and to share with you the task of setting your churches in order, not by innovations but by restoration of the old; that we may persevere in the accustomed state which our fathers handed down to us, and please our God through the ministry of a good work by removing the scandals of disturbances. And so we would have you recollect, brethren, as we do, that the Apostolic See, such is the reverence in which it is held, has times out of number been referred to and consulted by the priests of your province as well as others, and in the various matters of appeal, as the old usage demanded, it has reversed or confirmed decisions. And in this way “the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3) has been kept, and by the interchange of letters, our honorable proceedings have promoted a lasting affection; for “seeking not our own but the things of Christ” (Phil. 2:21), we have been careful not to do despite to the dignity which God has given both to the churches and their priests. But this path which with our fathers has been always so well kept to and wisely maintained, Hilary has quitted, and is likely to disturb the position and agreement of the priests by his novel arrogance: desiring to subject you to his power in such a way as not to suffer himself to be subject to the blessed Apostle Peter, claiming for himself the ordinations of all the churches throughout the provinces of Gaul, and transferring to himself the dignity which is due to metropolitan priests; he diminishes even the reverence that is paid to the blessed Peter himself with his proud words: for not only was the power of loosing and binding given to Peter before the others, but also to Peter more especially was entrusted the care of feeding the sheep [John 21:15-17]. Yet any one who holds that the headship must be denied to Peter, cannot really diminish his dignity, but is puffed up with the breath of his pride, and plunges himself into the lowest depth…
(7) …For it is but fair, brethren, that the ordinances of antiquity should be restored, seeing that he who claimed for himself the ordinations of a province for which he was not responsible, has been shown in a similar way in the present case also to have acted so that, as he has on more than one occasion brought on himself sentence of condemnation by his rash and insolent words, he may now be kept by our command in accordance with the clemency of the Apostolic See [“as loyalty to the Apostolic See demands”] to the priesthood of his own city alone. He is not to be present then at any ordination: he is not to ordain because, conscious of his deserts, when he was required to answer for his action, he trusted to make good his escape by disgraceful flight, and has put himself out of Apostolic communion, of which he did not deserve to be a partaker…
(§9) Wherefore, because our desire seems very different to this (for we are anxious that the settled state of all the Churches and the harmony of the priests should be maintained) exhorting you to unity in the bond of love, we both entreat, and consistently with our affection admonish you, in the interests of your peace and dignity, to keep what has been decreed by us at the inspiration of God and the most blessed Apostle Peter, after sifting and testing all the matters at issue, being assured that what we are known to have decided in this way is not so much to our own advantage as to yours…For we acknowledge that it can only redound to our credit, if the diligence of the Apostolic See be kept unimpaired among you, and if in our maintenance of Apostolic discipline we do not allow what belongs to your position to fall to the ground through unscrupulous aggressions.
St. Pope Leo the Great, Letter 14: To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica (445)
(§§1-2, 10, 12) | PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§1) If with true reasoning you perceived all that has been committed to you, brother, by the blessed apostle Peter’s authority, and what has also been entrusted to you by our favor, and would weigh it fairly, we should be able greatly to rejoice at your zealous discharge of the responsibility imposed on you.
(§2) …Do but read, brother, our pages with care, and peruse all the letters sent by holders of the Apostolic See to your predecessors, and you will find injunctions either from me or from my predecessors on that in which we learn you have presumed…
(§10) …For the cementing of our unity cannot be firm unless we be bound by the bond of love into an inseparable solidity: because “as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office; so we being many are one body in Christ, and all of us members one of another” (1 Cor. 12:12). The connection of the whole body makes all alike healthy, all alike beautiful: and this connection requires the unanimity indeed of the whole body, but it especially demands harmony among the priests. And though they have a common dignity, yet they have not uniform rank; inasmuch as even among the blessed Apostles, notwithstanding the similarity of their honorable estate, there was a certain distinction of power, and while the election of them all was equal, yet it was given to one [Peter] to take the lead of the rest. From which model has arisen a distinction between bishops also, and by an important ordinance it has been provided that everyone should not claim everything for himself: but that there should be in each province one whose opinion should have the priority among the brethren: and again that certain whose appointment is in the greater cities should undertake a fuller responsibility, through whom the care of the universal Church should converge towards Peter’s one seat, and nothing anywhere should be separated from its Head. Let not him then who knows he has been set over certain others take it ill that someone has been set over him, but let him himself render the obedience which he demands of them: and as he does not wish to bear a heavy load of baggage, so let him not dare to place on another’s shoulders a weight that is insupportable. For we are disciples of the humble and gentle Master who says: “Learn of Me, for I am gentle and humble of heart, and ye shall find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden light” (Matt. 11:29-30). And how shall we experience this, unless this too comes to our remembrance which the same Lord says: “He that is greater among you, shall be your servant. But he that exalts himself, shall be humbled: and he that humbles himself, shall be exalted” (Matt. 23:11-12)…
(§12) But if in that which you believed necessary to be discussed and settled with the brethren, their opinion differs from your own wishes, let all be referred to us, with the minutes of your proceedings attested, that all ambiguities may be removed, and what is pleasing to God decided. For to this end we direct all our desires and pains, that what conduces to our harmonious unity and to the protection of discipline may be marred by no dissension and neglected by no slothfulness. Therefore, dearly beloved brother, you and those our brethren who are offended at your extravagant conduct (though the matter of complaint is not the same with all), we exhort and warn not to disturb by any wrangling what has been rightfully ordained and wisely settled. Let none “seek what is his own, but what is another’s,” as the Apostle says: “Let each one of you please his neighbor for his good unto edifying” (Rom. 15:2; Phil. 2:4). For the cementing of our unity cannot be firm unless we be bound by the bond of love into an inseparable solidity: because “as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office; so we being many are one body in Christ, and all of us members one of another” (1 Cor. 12:12). The connection of the whole body makes all alike healthy, all alike beautiful; and this connection requires the unanimity indeed of the whole body, but it especially demands harmony among the priests. And though they have a common dignity, yet they have not uniform rank; inasmuch as even among the blessed Apostles, notwithstanding the similarity of their honorable estate, there was a certain distinction of power, and while the election of them all was equal, yet it was given to one [St. Peter] to take the lead of the rest. From which model has arisen a distinction between bishops also, and by an important ordinance it has been provided that every one should not claim everything for himself, but that there should be in each province one whose opinion should have the priority among the brethren; and again that certain whose appointment is in the greater cities should undertake a fuller responsibility, through whom the care of the universal Church should converge towards Peter’s one seat, and nothing anywhere should be separated from its Head. Let not him then who knows he has been set over certain others take it ill that some one has been set over him, but let him himself render the obedience which he demands of them; and as he does not wish to bear a heavy load of baggage, so let him not dare to place on another’s shoulders a weight that is insupportable. For we are disciples of the humble and gentle Master who says: “Learn of Me, for I am gentle and humble of heart, and ye shall find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden light” (Matt. 11:29-30). And how shall we experience this, unless this too comes to our remembrance which the same Lord says: “He that is greater among you, shall be your servant. But he that exalts himself, shall be humbled; and he that humbles himself, shall be exalted” (Matt. 23:11-12).
St. Pope Leo the Great, Letter 28: To Flavian of Constantinople, “The Tome” (449)
But when our Lord and Savior Himself would instruct His disciples’ faith by His questionings, He said, “Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?” And when they had put on record the various opinions of other people, He said, “But you, whom do you say that I am?” Me, that is, who am the Son of Man, and whom you see in the form of a slave, and in true flesh, whom do you say that I am? Whereupon blessed Peter, whose divinely inspired confession was destined to profit all nations, said, “Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:13-16). And not undeservedly was he pronounced blessed by the Lord, drawing from the chief corner-stone the solidity of power which his name also expresses, he, who, through the revelation of the Father, confessed Him to be at once Christ and Son of God: because the receiving of the one of these without the other was of no avail to salvation, and it was equally perilous to have believed the Lord Jesus Christ to be either only God without man, or only man without God.
St. Pope Leo the Great, Letter 45: To Pulcheria Augusta
(§§2-3) | PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
(§2)And they indeed, who were sent, and one of whom, escaping the violence of the bishop of Alexandria who claims everything for himself, faithfully reported to us what took place in the Synod, opposed, as it became them, what I will call the frenzy not the judgment of one man, protesting that those things which were being carried through by violence and fear could not reverse the mysteries of the Church and the Creed itself composed by the Apostles, and that no injuries could sever them from that Faith which they had brought fully set forth and expounded from the See of the blessed Apostle Peter to the holy synod…
(§3) And that we may be worthy to obtain this, let your well-tried faith and protection, which has always helped the Church in her labors, deign to advance our petition with our most clement Prince, under a special commission so to act from the blessed Apostle Peter…
Ceretius, Salonius, and Veranus (three Gallic Bishops), Letter to St. Pope Leo the Great (Letter 68 in St. Pope Leo the Great)
(§§1-2) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY | INDEFECTIBILITY
(§1) …We acknowledge frankly, most blessed pope, with what singular loving-kindness you have imparted to us the innermost thoughts of your breast, by the efficacy of which you secure the safety of others: and while you extract the old Serpent’s infused poison from the hearts of others, standing as it were on the watch-tower of Love, with Apostolic care and watchfulness you cry aloud, lest the enemy come on us unawares and off our guard, lest careless security expose us to attack, O holy Lord, most blessed father and pope, most worthy of the Apostolic See. Moreover we, who specially belong to you, are filled with a great and unspeakable delight, because this special statement of your teaching is so highly regarded wherever the Churches meet together, that the unanimous opinion is expressed that the primacy of the Apostolic See is rightfully there assigned, from whence the oracles of the Apostolic Spirit still receive their interpretations.
(§2) …May Christ the Lord long keep your eminence mindful of our humility, O holy Lord, most blessed father and pope most worthy of the Apostolic See.
St. Pope Leo the Great, Letter 105: To Pulcheria Augusta (445)
(§3) | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY | INDEFECTIBILITY
Let him realize what a man he has succeeded, and expelling all the spirit of pride let him imitate Flavian’s faith, Flavian’s modesty, Flavian’s humility, which has raised him right to a confessor’s glory. If he will shine with his virtues, he will merit all praise, and in all quarters he will win an abundance of love not by seeking human advancement but by deserving Divine favor. And by this careful course I promise he will bind my heart also to him, and the love of the Apostolic See, which we have ever bestowed on the church of Constantinople, shall never be violated by any change. Because if sometimes rulers fall into errors through want of moderation, yet the churches of Christ do not lose their purity. But the bishops’ assents, which are opposed to the regulations of the holy canons composed at Nicaea in conjunction with your faithful Grace, we do not recognize, and by the blessed Apostle Peter’s authority we absolutely dis-annul in comprehensive terms, in all ecclesiastical cases obeying those laws which the Holy Ghost set forth by the 318 bishops for the pacific observance of all priests in such sort that even if a much greater number were to pass a different decree to theirs, whatever was opposed to their constitution would have to be held in no respect.
St. Sechnall of Ireland (died c. 447/448) | WEST
St. Sechnall of Ireland, Hymn on St. Patrick, Teacher of the Irish (c. 444)
(Lines 9-12) (pg. 61) | ROCK
Constant in the fear of God and steadfast in his faith,
On him the Church is built as on Peter;
And his apostleship has he received from God–
The gates of Hell will not prevail against him [Matt. 16:18].
St. Pope Gelasius I (died 496) | WEST
St. Pope Gelasius, Letter 12: To Emperor Anastasius Augustus (494)
(§§2-3, 9) (pgs. 74-75, 78)
(§2) …In fact, august Emperor, there are two ways in which this world is chiefly ruled: the hallowed authority [auctoritas] of the pontiffs (pontificum) and royal power [potestas]. In these two the responsibility of the bishops (sacerdotum) is so much greater, to the extent that at the time of divine judgment they will render an account even for the very rulers of human beings. Indeed, my most indulgent son, you must know that you are permitted to superintend through high office of a human kind; however, in your devotedness you bow your head to the leaders (praesulibus) of divine affairs, and from them you await the occasions for your salvation, and, in both taking the heavenly sacraments and being suitably disposed to them, you acknowledge that you must be subject to the order of religion, rather than be in control of it. And so in these affairs you depend on their judgment, and do not wish them to be reduced to your will. For if, as much as pertains to the order of public discipline, by acknowledging that the imperial rule has been conferred on you by heavenly dispensation, the overseers (antistites) of religion themselves also obey your laws, lest their opinions which are extrinsic to worldly affairs be regarded as standing in opposition to them, with what willingness, I entreat you, is it fitting that you obey those who have been assigned to the most excellent and venerable mysteries? Accordingly, just as a charge of no light weight presses upon the pontiffs to remain silent because of the worship of the Divinity, as is proper, so there is no middling danger for those (heaven forbid!) who despise those whom they should obey. And if, in general, when all the bishops are administering divine affairs properly, it is appropriate for the hearts of the faithful to be subject to them, how much more should agreement with the leader of that see [Rome] be adhered to, whom the most high Divinity willed to be preeminent among all the bishops, and the loyalty of the entire church has honored continually?
(§3) Wherever Your Piety turns a clear gaze, never has anybody been able to raise himself by any completely human counsel to the privilege or acknowledgement of that one whom the voice of Christ set before all [Peter], whom the venerable church has always acknowledged and in her 74 | 75 devotedness holds as primate. The ordinances established by divine judgment can be assailed by acts of human presumption, but they cannot be overcome by the power of any of them… 75 | 78
(9) …Indeed, because the authority of the Apostolic See [Rome] has been put at the head of the Universal Church in all Christian centuries, it is strengthened both by a succession of canons of the Fathers and by a complex tradition…
Pope John II (c. 475-535) | WEST
Pope John II, Letter to Emperor Justinian I (534)
(pgs. 1149-54)
John, bishop of the city of Rome, to Justinian Augustus, his most glorious and most clement son.
Amid the bright praises of your Gentleness’ wisdom, most Christian of emperors, a certain constellation (so to speak) shines with purer light, because you, taught by ecclesiastical disciplines, through love for the 1149 | 1150 faith and through zeal for love preserve reverence for the Roman see and to it you subject all things and you bring all things to its unity, to whose founder, that is, the first of the apostles [St. Peter], was given the command, when the Lord spoke, “Feed my sheep” (John 21:17). And that this see is truly the head of all the churches both the fathers’ regulations and the emperors’ statues declare and your Piety’s most reverent addresses testify. Therefore it is obvious that in you will be fulfilled what the Scriptures speak: “Through me kings reign and the mighty draft justice” (Prov. 8:15). For there is naught which shines with brighter light than right Faith in an emperor; there is naught which is so unable to be subject to downfall as true religion…For it is this which strengthens your sovereignty; this which preserves your rule. For the Church’s peace, religion’s unity, guards with self-grateful tranquility the sponsor of the deed who has been raised to the heights. For no little vicissitude is granted by Divine Power to him through whom the Church, divided by no wrinkles, is separated and is changed by no imported stains…
Accordingly your Serenity’s letter we have received…by whose report also we have learned that to your faithful peoples you have proclaimed an edict through love for the faith for the intention of the heretics to be removed, according to apostolic doctrine, by the intervening consent o four brethren and fellow-bishops. And this, because it agrees with apostolic doctrine, by our authority we confirm.
Moreover, the text of the letter is as follows [Quotes letter of Emperor Justinian I, quoted below under his section]… 1150 | 1153
Therefore, most glorious emperor, it is clear—as the tenor of the reading and your legates’ report reveals—that you are desirous for apostolic instructions, when about the Catholic religion’s faith you understand these things, you have written these things, which—as we have said—both the apostolic see teaches and the fathers’ venerable authority has decreed and we have confirmed in all points.
Therefore it is fitting for the faithful to write these things in the tables of the heart, to keep these things as the pupils of the eyes, for there is not anyone, in whom Christ’s love burns, who can be an opponent to the faith of your so right, so true confession, since in damning the impiety of Nestorius and of Eutyches obviously and of all heretics you preserve unshakenly and inviolably and with a mind pious and devoted to God the one, true, Catholic faith of our Lord and God, instituted by the Savior Jesus Christ’s instruction and diffused everywhere by prophetic and apostolic preachings and strengthened by the saints’ confessions throughout the whole world, unified by the fathers’ and the teachers’ opinions and consistent with our teaching…
This, therefore, is your true faith, this the sure religion, this all the fathers of blessed memory and the Roman Church’s heads, whom in all things we follow, this the apostolic see has proclaimed hitherto and indestructibly has guarded: whoever has existed as a contradictor to this confession, to this faith, he himself has judged himself to be alien from the Holy Communion, alien from the Catholic Church… 1153 | 1154
Moreover the first of the apostles [St. Peter] through us to them not believing [heretics] speaks the words of the Prophet Isaiah: “Walk in the light of your fire and of the flame, which you have kindled” (Isa. 50:11), but their heart was hardened, as it is written, that they might not understand and the sheep, which were not mine, wished not to hear the shepherd’s voice [cf. Mark 4:10; John 10:26-27]. And since in these matters they maintained the things which have been ordained by their pontiff, we have not at all received them in our communion and we have ordered them to be alien from every Catholic church, unless, since their error has been damned, they shall have signified, after a canonical profession has been made, that they will follow our teaching as speedily as possible. Surely it is fair that those who do not adapt at all their obedience to our ordinances should be considered banished from the churches. But because the Church never closes her bosom to returners, I beg your Clemency that if, when their previous error has been discarded and when their wicked intention has been removed, they shall have wished to return to the Church’s unity, you would remove the stings of your indignation from them, when received in our communion, and grant the pardon of a kindly spirit to us making intercession.
Moreover we beseech God and our Savior Jesus Christ that he should deign to guard you for long and peaceful times in this true religion and unity and veneration for the apostolic see, whose preeminence you, as most Christian and pious, preserve in all matters…
And by another hand: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the communion of the Holy Spirit be always with you, most pious son.
Likewise the subscription: May Almighty God guard your rule and safety with perpetual protection, most glorious and most clement son, Emperor Augustus.
Emperor Justinian I (482-565) | EAST
Emperor Justinian I, To Pope John II (533)
(pgs. 1150-53)
[Quoted by Pope John II in his letter to the Emperor in his section above] Paying honor to the apostolic see and to your Sanctity (which ever has been and is in our prayer), as becomes those honoring as a father your Beatitude, we hasten to bring to your Sanctity’s knowledge all matters which pertain to the churches’ status, since ever it has been our great desire that the unity of your apostolic see and the status of God’s holy churches should be maintained, which status thus 1150 | 1151 far continues and undisturbedly persists, because no opposition interposes. And so we have hurried both to subject and to unite to your Sanctity’s see all bishops of the whole eastern region.
And at present, therefore, we have thought necessary that the matters which here are disturbed, although they are clear and undoubted and always maintained firmly and proclaimed by all bishops according to your apostolic see’s doctrine, should come to your Sanctity’s knowledge. For we do not permit that anything which pertains to the churches’ status, although it is clear and undoubted, and which is set in motion should not become known also to your Sanctity, because it is the head of all the holy churches. For by all means—as has been said—we hasten to increase your see’s honor and authority.
Therefore we make known to your Sanctity that certain few persons, unbelieving and alien from God’s Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, have dared in Jewish fashion to speak against those matters which by all bishops according to your doctrine are held rightly and praised and proclaimed [creedal formula]…But all the bishops of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and the most reverend archimandrites of the sacred monasteries, following your Sanctity and maintaining the status and the unity of God’s holy Churches, which unity they have in regard to your Sanctity’s apostolic see, changing nothing at all about the ecclesiastical status which hitherto has obtained and obtains, by one consent confess and praise, proclaiming [creedal formula]… 1151 | 1152
Moreover we receive four holy councils, that is, of the 318 holy fathers who assembled in Nicaea, and of the 150 holy fathers who convened in this royal city [Constantinople] and of the holy fathers who assembled first in Ephesus and of the holy fathers who convened in Chalcedon, just as your apostolic see teaches and proclaims.
Therefore all bishops, following your apostolic see’s doctrine, so believe and confess and proclaim.
Wherefore we have hastened to bring these matters to your Sanctity’s knowledge by Hypatius and Demetrius, the most blessed bishops, that the things which by a certain few monks have been denied evilly and in Jewish fashion according to Nestorius’s disbelief may not escape your Sanctity’s notice.
Therefore we ask your paternal Affection that by your letters, sent to us and to the most holy bishop and patriarch, your brother, of this genial city [Constantinople], since he himself has written by the same persons to your Sanctity, hastening in all matters to follow your Beatitude’s apostolic see, you should make known to us that your Sanctity receives all who confess rightly the aforesaid things and condemns the disbelief of those who in Jewish fashion have dared to deny the right faith. For thus both all persons’ love for you and your see’s authority increase the more and the unity of the holy churches—which is your concern—will be preserved undisturbed, when all the most blessed bishops shall have learned through your Sanctity’s sincere doctrine of the matters which have been referred to you. 1152 | 1153
Moreover we ask your Beatitude to pray for us and to seek for us God’s providence.
And by another hand [the emperor’s subscription]: May the Divinity guard you for many years, holy and most religious father.
St. Pope Gregory the Great (c. 540-604) | WEST
St. Pope Gregory the Great, Book of Pastoral Rule
(Book 2, Ch. 7) | PRIMACY
Whence also the first pastor [St. Peter] anxiously admonishes, saying, “The elders which are among you I beseech, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed, feed the flock of God which is among you” (1 Pet. 5:1)…
(Part 3, Ch. 30) | PRIMACY
Hence Peter, when he saw some affrighted by consideration of their evil deeds, admonished them, saying, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you” (Acts 2:38). For, being about to speak of baptism, he spoke first of the lamentations of penitence; that they should first bathe themselves in the water of their own affliction, and afterwards wash themselves in the sacrament of baptism. With what conscience, then, can those who neglect to weep for their past misdeeds live secure of pardon, when the chief pastor of the Church himself believed that penitence must be added even to this Sacrament which chiefly extinguishes sins?
St. Pope Gregory the Great, Letter 18 (Book 5): To John, Bishop of Constantinople
PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS
Certainly Peter, the first of the apostles, himself a member of the holy and universal Church, Paul, Andrew, John—what were they but heads of particular communities? And yet all were members under one Head. And (to bind all together in a short girth of speech) the saints before the law, the saints under the law, the saints under grace, all these making up the Lord’s Body, were constituted as members of the Church, and not one of them has wished himself to be called universal. Now let your Holiness acknowledge to what extent you swell within yourself in desiring to be called by that name by which no one presumed to be called who was truly holy.
Was it not the case, as your Fraternity knows, that the prelates of this Apostolic See which by the providence of God I serve, had the honor offered them of being called universal by the venerable Council of Chalcedon. But yet not one of them has ever wished to be called by such a title, or seized upon this ill-advised name, lest if, in virtue of the rank of the pontificate, he took to himself the glory of singularity, he might seem to have denied it to all his brethren.
St. Pope Gregory the Great, Letter 20 (Book 5): To Mauricius Augustus
For to all who know the Gospel it is apparent that by the Lord’s voice the care of the whole Church was committed to the holy Apostle and Prince of all the Apostles, Peter. For to him it is said, “Peter, lovest thou Me? Feed My sheep” (John 21:17). To him it is said, “Behold Satan hath desired to sift you as wheat; and I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not. And thou, when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren” (Luke 22:31). To him it is said, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind an earth shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven” (Matt. 16:18).
Lo, he received the keys of the heavenly kingdom, and power to bind and loose is given him, the care and principality of the whole Church is committed to him, and yet he is not called the universal apostle; while the most holy man, my fellow-priest John, attempts to be called universal bishop. I am compelled to cry out and say, O tempora, O mores [“Oh times, oh manners]!…
Certainly, in honor of Peter, Prince of the apostles, it was offered by the venerable synod of Chalcedon to the Roman pontiff. But none of them has ever consented to use this name of singularity, lest, by something being given peculiarly to one, priests in general should be deprived of the honor due to them. How is it then that we do not seek the glory of this title even when offered, and another presumes to seize it for himself though not offered?
St. Pope Gregory the Great, Letter 40 (Book 7): To Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria (c. 597)
Your most sweet Holiness has spoken much in your letter to me about the chair of Saint Peter, Prince of the apostles, saying that he himself now sits on it in the persons of his successors. And indeed I acknowledge myself to be unworthy, not only in the dignity of such as preside, but even in the number of such as stand. But I gladly accepted all that has been said, in that he has spoken to me about Peter’s chair who occupies Peter’s chair. And, though special honor to myself in no wise delights me, yet I greatly rejoiced because you, most holy ones, have given to yourselves what you have bestowed upon me. For who can be ignorant that holy Church has been made firm in the solidity of the Prince of the apostles, who derived his name from the firmness of his mind, so as to be called Petrus from “petra.” And to him it is said by the voice of the Truth, “To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:19). And again it is said to him, “And when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren” (Matt. 22:32). And once more, “Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me? Feed my sheep” (John 21:17). Wherefore though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself the See of the Prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the See of one [Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria]. For he himself exalted the See in which he deigned even to rest and end the present life. He himself adorned the See to which he sent his disciple as evangelist. He himself stablished the See in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years. Since then it is the See of one, and one See, over which by Divine authority three bishops now preside, whatever good I hear of you, this I impute to myself. If you believe anything good of me, impute this to your merits, since we are one in Him Who says, “That they all may be one, as Thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee that they also may be one in us” (John 17:21).
St. Pope Gregory the Great, Letter 9 (Book 9): To Callinicus, Exarch of Italy
PRIMACY | ROME
In the midst of what you have announced to me of your victories over the Sclaves, know that I have been refreshed with great joy that the bearers of these presents, hastening to be joined to the unity of holy Church from the island of Capritana, have been sent by your Excellency to the blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles…
Moreover you tell us that you wish to keep the anniversary of Peter, Prince of the apostles, in the city of Rome.
St. Pope Gregory the Great, Letter 45 (Book 11): To Theoctista, Patrician
PRIMACY
But, if they say that a short season of penitence may suffice against sin, so that one may be allowed to return again to sin, rightly does the sentence of the first pastor hit them, when he says, “It is happened unto them according to the true proverb; The dog is turned to his own vomit again, and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire” (2 Pet. 2:22).
St. Bede the Venerable (c. 672/73-735) | WEST
St. Bede, Ecclesiastical History of England
(Book 2, Ch. 4) | PRIMACY | ROME | SUCCESSORS
Laurentius succeeded Augustine in the bishopric [of Canterbury], having been ordained thereto by the latter, in his lifetime, lest, upon his death, the Church, as yet in so unsettled a state, might begin to falter, if it should be destitute of a pastor, though but for one hour. Wherein he also followed the example of the first pastor of the Church, that is, of the most blessed Peter, chief of the Apostles, who, having founded the Church of Christ at Rome, is said to have consecrated Clement to help him in preaching the Gospel, and at the same time to be his successor.
St. John of Damascus (c. 675/76-749) | EAST
St. John of Damascus, Treatise 1: Defense Against Those Who Attack the Holy Images
(§66) (pg. 57) | INFALLIBILITY | INDEFECTIBILITY
Since many priests and emperors have been endowed with wisdom that comes to Christians from above, from God, and have been distinguished for their piety, their doctrine, and their lives, and many synods of holy and divinely inspired fathers have taken place, why does no one attempt to explain these things? We shall not suffer a new faith to be taught. “For a law has come out from Sion,” the Holy Spirit declares in prophecy, “and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem” (Isa. 2:3). We shall not suffer different things to be thought at different times, changing with the seasons, and the faith to become a matter of ridicule and jest to outsiders. We shall not suffer the custom of the fathers to be subject to an imperial constitution that seeks to overthrow ecclesiastical laws. For this is not the way of the fathers; for it is piratical for these things to be imposed by force, and they shall not prevail…These things are matters for synods, not emperors, as the Lord said, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20). It was not to emperors that Christ gave the authority to bind and loose, but to apostles and to those who succeeded them as shepherds and teachers.
St. Boniface (c. 675-754) | WEST
St. Boniface, Letter 8 (16): The Oath of Bishop Boniface (November 30, 722)
(pg. 19) | PRIMACY | ROME | SUCCESSORS
I, Boniface, by the grace of God bishop, promise to you, O blessed Peter, chief of the Apostles, and to your vicar, the blessed Pope Gregory [II] and to his successors, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the indivisible Trinity, and of this, thy most sacred body [the Eucharist], that I will show entire faith and sincerity toward the holy Catholic doctrine and will persist in the unity of the same, so God help me–that faith in which, beyond a doubt, the whole salvation of Christians consist. I will in no wise agree to anything which is opposed to the unity of the Church Universal, no matter who shall try to persuade me; but I will, as I have said, show in all things a perfect loyalty to you and to the welfare of your Church, to which the power to bind and loose is given by God, and to your vicar and his successors.
But, if I shall discover any bishops who are opponents of the ancient institutions of the holy Fathers, I will have no part nor lot with them, but so far as I can will restrain them or, if that is impossible, will make a true report to my apostolic master [the Pope]. But if (which God forbid!) I should be tempted into any action contrary to this my promise in any way or by any device or pretext whatsoever, may I be found guilty at the last judgment and suffer the punishment of Ananias and Sapphira, who dared to defraud you by making a false declaration of their property.
This text of my oath, I, Boniface, a humble bishop, have written with my own hand and laid above they most sacred body [the Eucharist]. I have taken this oath as is prescribed, in the presence of God, my witness and my judge, and I pledge myself to observe it.
Theodore Abū Qurrah (c. 750-c. 825) | EAST
Theodore Abū Qurrah, On the Councils
(pgs. 61-81) | ROCK | KEYS | PRIMACY | ROME | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY | INDEFECTIBILITY
With what arguments might we benefit the orthodox, that is, the Chalcedonians, but not the Nestorians, the Jacobites, the Julianists, the Maronites, nor the other heretics who lay claim to Christianity? Each of these sects imagines that our efforts to confirm Christianity work to their benefit alone, they being the only true Christians. We have already confirmed Christianity over against every other religion and shown that it alone is true; we must now differentiate orthodoxy from these heresies, showing that it alone is Christianity and that all these heresies are false. Some time ago, we, with the help of the Holy Spirit, demonstrated this in a scholarly manner for intellectuals able to fathom abstruse matters such as are impenetrable to the common folk. This scholarly approach, however, is not persuasive to the common folk, whether merchants, farmers, or others like them. We must conclude: Which of them can be healed by that manner of argumentation? We 61 | 62 must therefore devise another clear method and lucid procedure, one that can be followed both by those who are wise and by those who are just plain folk, both by the philosopher and by the merchant. Using this method, we shall confirm orthodoxy and make its light shine as bright as the sun, that it not be hidden from anyone, either young or old, that no one might have an excuse for rejecting it. It will be an inescapable indictment for heretics who delight in their perversity. It will bring joy to the orthodox, with the help of the Holy Spirit, when they see that their faith is correct and their religion is right. (We encourage them, however, to unity piety and righteousness with their faith, lest they fail to benefit from this method, such that their having it becomes for them a curse when they lack the deeds required of those who would be obedience to Christ.) What then is this manifest method that confirms orthodoxy? How one would like to know!
Which is the True Church?
Now then, my friends, as for us, the community of everyone who lays claim to the Christian religion, we agree to the extent that we adhere to and believe in the books of the Old and New Testaments. We are divided only because we are at variance as to the meaning of these books. It is this that divides us into separate churches and prohibits us from praying together. One of two things must be the case. Perhaps we should say that we are all acceptable to Christ, in that we abide by the books of the Old and New Testaments, which were written for us by the Holy Spirit, and that Christ will not call us to account if we have misunderstood the meaning of the words that are in those books. Contrariwise, perhaps we should say that adherence to these books will not be acceptable if it is accompanied by a misunderstanding of the true import of what the Holy Spirit meant by the words of these books, in what concerns religious essentials. Suppose some say that Christ will be pleased with you simply because you adhere to these books, even if you do not understand their true meaning, in what concerns religious essentials. Those who say this have turned Christianity into Judaism. They have made it aim at words rather than an understanding of those words. They have commanded Christians to gather in their bodies in a single church and in unified prayer, even though in their spirits they are divided. They have exhorted them to worship on the outside one God but on the inside diverse gods. They think it fine to 62 | 63 invoke one Christ with their tongues, while imagining many christs in their hearts. Far be it from Christ to be pleased with such worship! It is as he said, “I do not bring strife in place of tranquility.” There is no other possibility: All Christians, if their profession be true, must worship Christ, the Father, and the Spirit with an unadulterated understanding of the meaning of the books of the Old and New Testaments. If hey do not, they have become Jews, not content unless they say either that God changes from state to state or that there are many gods. How so? When they hear Moses say that “God is a consuming fire,” they become Magians, for the only thing they can think of is the fire the Magians worship. When they hear the prophet Daniel say, “He is the ancient of days and his hair is like pure wool,” they imagine God to be a grand old man. When they hear Ezekiel say, “From the waist up, he is fire and like lapis lazuli, and from the waist down, he is fire,” they imagine either that he was changed from his former state or that this God is different from those seen by Daniel and described by Moses. How loathsome when these three images of God are all mixed together in the mind of the believer! So too, when they hear Christ say of himself, “I am the door,” they imagine a door. When they hear him say, “I am the vine,” however, they reckon that he has changed or they think that this Christ is different from the other one. (There are other similar passages.) Accordingly, one must adhere to the true meaning of scripture, in what concerns religious essentials; otherwise, there will be no true worship of God.
If what we have just argued is true, it follows that Christ dwells in just one of the different churches, notwithstanding that each claims to adhere to true Christianity. What then should be done by merchants and farmers, and indeed by all people—a few excepted—when their minds are incapable of comprehending the true meaning of scripture and Christ will not accept anything else from them? Could we say that Christ has imposed on them something they are incapable of doing? Far be it from him! Indeed, if he had done this, he would have turned his descent from heaven for them and his shedding of blood for them into a curse for them. If he has imposed this on them, and he does not impose on them something that they are incapable of doing, and we know that most of them—a few excepted—have minds that do not comprehend what has been imposed on them, how then are they to find this path appropriate for their minds, such that when they travel it, they will arrive thereby at the true meaning of scripture? Not one 63 | 64 heretic has discovered this path or been led to it. No! The heretics have no share in life. They have only words in the dark. By these, they deceive the gullible and utter falsehoods. When the ignorant hear them, they think them a fount of wisdom. In this way, they induce them to follow them, when they speak words that are obscure. Even the heretics themselves do not understand these words, however. Rather, it is as the apostle Paul said: “He does not understand what he says, nor does he prove anything.” As for this lucid path, it is in the possession of orthodoxy, and by it they are led to eternal life. We know that Christ would not have neglected such a weighty matter and that he would not have left common folk without a lucid method, which their minds might be able to understand and which might guide them to the true meaning of scripture, which he imposed on them—not least because both he and his disciples knew that these heresies would arise and that Satan would sift the church through them, so that she might come into possession of her true wheat.
Ancient Israelite Councils
As for the method in question, the Holy Spirit manifested it in the law through Moses the chief of the prophets. How so? God revealed to him laws and commanded him to use these to judge the children of Israel. Moses delivered these laws to the priestly judges, charging them to judge between the children of Israel, and he appointed from them commanders of ten, fifty, one hundred, and a thousand, ordering them to execute judgment among the children of Israel in a just fashion. To them he said, “As for what is clear to you in these laws, observe and execute it over your brothers. If anything in them is unclear or you have doubts about it, refer it to me, that I might refer it to God; and I shall bring you the truth about it” (Deut. 1:16-17). This was their practice as long as Moses was with them. When God decided that Moses should die on the other side of the Jordan, Moses knew, by the Holy Spirit, that if the children of Israel were to lose him, they would fall into confusion and doubt and be dispersed and divided. He thus gave them, through the Holy Spirit, the second law and left them a perpetual successor. To them he said, “Children of Israel, if any case is difficult for you and you have doubts about it—between one kind of homicide and another, one kind of lawsuit and another, one kind of impurity and another, one kind of quarrel and another—so that there are disputes 64 | 65 in your courts, you should go to the place that the Lord your God will choose for the invocation of his name. Take refuge there in those days and come to the priests, Levites, and judges who will be there in those days. They will examine the matter and declare to you the true judgment. Follow the decision they declare to you from the place that the Lord your God will choose for the invocation of his name. Be careful to do all that they prescribe for you and act according to the law and the judgment that they speak to you. Turn not aside from w hat they advise you, either to the right or to the left. If someone is proud and does not heed the priest, who will serve in the name of the Lord your God, or the judge, who will be there in those days, let that person be killed. Purge the enemies from the children of Israel, so that the whole nation might hear and be warned by this and thus refrain from enmity” (Deut. 17:8-13). Do you not see that Moses did not grant the right to examine and decide controversial cases to any of the people, whether those with a claim to knowledge or those without such a claim? Rather, the Holy Spirit revealed to him that he should give this authority to the council of priests and judges who would be in the place that God would choose for the invocation of his name. So too, he did not allow anyone to participate with them in examining controversial claims. Rather, he commanded the people, whoever they might be, regardless of whether they thought themselves wise, resolutely to carry out the decisions of that council, whether it be for or against them. He also ordered the death of those who were filled with pride and would not humble their hearts to accept what had been decided, thinking their own notions better than the council’s. Moses only ordered the death of such folk because he knew the following: When these doubts and controversies were entrusted to the members of this council, the Holy Spirit would surely guide their minds to what is correct and allow only what is true to proceed from them—regardless of their intelligence or circumstances. Suppose someone agrees that the Holy Spirit commanded people to obey this council with regard to difficult cases, but goes on to claim that he allowed erroneous judgments to proceed from this council. Whoever says this makes the Holy Spirit responsible for leading the nation astray. Indeed, whoever says this is truly the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, in that he makes the Holy Spirit, who is the sun of guidance and the treasury of light, to be the cause of error. Far be it from God that such a thing be so! Rather, we believe and know in our hearts that the Holy Spirit would not have allowed this council to issue a ruling that was anything other than proper. 65 | 66
Councils in the Apostolic Age
In the sacred New Testament, of which the Old Testament is only an image, the Holy Spirit employed the same procedure that he used in the Old Testament. If there was some point of religion about which Christians disagreed, he made them refer it to the council of the apostles. Moreover, he appointed for these apostles a single head. All controversial cases were to be referred to this person and to his council. The Holy Spirit also ordered that they judge such cases according to what he himself would show them. Our claim is confirmed by the Acts of the Apostles. While Paul and Barnabas were in Antioch, they were chosen by the Holy Spirit to travel among the Gentiles and preach the gospel of Christ. They went and did what they had been commanded and then returned to Antioch. While they were there, men from Jerusalem went down to Antioch, teaching the brethren, “If you were not circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Paul and Barnabas disagreed with them and argued the point. With regard to this dispute, everyone ag reed that Paul, Barnabas, and some others should go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. On their arrival at Jerusalem, certain Pharisees who had become Christians arose and said to the apostles, “When Gentiles become believers, you must circumcise them and order them to keep the law of Moses.” At this, the apostles and elders gathered to look into the matter. There was much debate until Peter arose and said, “Brethren, you know what in earlier times God decided that the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel from my mouth and that they should believe. God, who knows the heart, purified them and gave them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us; and he made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts. Why do you disagree with God and put on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers were able to bear? We believe that we are saved by the grace of our Lord Jesus, just as they will be.” To this James responded, “Brethren, listen to me. Simone has related to you how God was pleased to take from the Gentiles a nation for his name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, as it is written, ‘After this I shall return, and I shall build the dwelling of David, which was rent; I shall renew its ruins, and I shall raise it up, that the rest of humanity might seek the face of the Lord, and all the nations over whom the name of the Lord is invoked, says the Lord, the one who will make this happen.’ Accordingly, my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God; rather, I think that they should be commanded to abstain from the pollution of 66 | 67 idols, from unchastity, from the meat of improperly sacrificed animals, and from blood.” It then seemed good to the apostles and to the elders, along with the whole church, to choose two men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas—Judas called Barsabbas and Silas, two men held in honor by the brethren—with the following letter: “From the apostles and elders and the brethren to the church that is in Antioch and Syria and the brethren who are of the Gentiles, greetings. We have heard that men from among us went forth and disturbed you with their words and unsettled your spirits, saying that it was necessary for you to be circumcised and keep the law of Moses which we did not command them to do. It seemed good to us all to select two men and send them to you, along with our brothers Barnabas and Paul, who have sacrificed themselves for the sake of Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas and command them to deliver our words with their own mouths. Behold, it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to impose on you a burden beyond these essentials, that you refrain from what has been sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of improperly sacrificed animals, and from fornication. If you keep yourself from these, you will do well. Farewell!” Judas and Silas took leave of the council and went down to Antioch. They gathered the church together and delivered the letter; and when they read it, the church rejoiced in the encouragement that had come to them. Judas and Silas, who were prophets, also encouraged the brethren with many words, and strengthened them. Do you not see that those who went down to Antioch, commanding circumcision and the keeping of the law, were from the community of the Jerusalem brethren, while Paul and Barnabas, who disagreed with them, were prominent apostles? When the two groups quarreled in Antioch about the subject of their disagreement, the church accepted the opinion of neither Paul and Barnabas nor of those other men. Rather, they referred all of them to the council of apostles, of which St. (pg. 67) was the head and leader. When the council of apostles had come to a unanimous decision in the case, they issued their decision as to what they thought best and ascribed their decision to the Holy Spirit, saying, “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us.” Do you not see that this council, to which Christ entrusted the right to examine matters of heresy, thought only what the Holy Spirit thought and that it is necessary for every controversial matter of religion to be referred to this council? No one, whether old or young, is permitted to have opinions that differ from this council and to advice the church to 67 | 68 accept such opinions. Indeed, apart from the council, the church did not even accept such opinions from St. Paul and Barnabas, notwithstanding that they were the sun of the world. No one, whether bishop or patriarch or anyone else, is permitted to say to the church, “Accept what I say, apart from the apostles.”
Bishops of Rome, Councils, and Heretics
You should understand that the head of the apostles was St. Peter, he to whom Christ said, “You are the rock; and on this rock I shall build my church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it.” After his resurrection, he also said to him three times, while on the shore of the sea of Tiberias, “Simon, do you love me? Feed my lambs, rams, and ewes.” In another passage, he said to him, “Simon, Satan will ask to sift you like wheat, and I prayed that you not lose your faith; but you, at that time, have compassion on your brethren and strengthen them.” Do you not see that St. Peter is the foundation of the church, selected to shepherd it, that those who believed in his faith will never lose their faith, and that he was ordered o have compassion on his brethren and to strengthen them? As for Christ’s words, “I prayed for you, that you not lose your faith; but you, have compassion on your brethren, at that time, and strengthen them,” we do not think that he meant St. Peter himself [and the apostles themselves]. Rather, he meant nothing other than the holders of the seat of St. Peter, that is, Rome, [and the holders of the seats of the apostles]. Just as when he said to the apostles, “I am with you always, until the end of the age,” he did not mean just the apostles themselves, but also those who would be in charge of their seats and their flocks; in the same way, when he spoke his last words to St. Peter, “Have compassion, at that time, and strengthen your brethren; and your faith will not be lose,” he meant by this nothing other than the holders of his seat. Yet another indication of this is the fact that among the apostles it was St. Peter alone who lose his faith and denied Christ, which Christ may have allowed to happen to Peter so as to teach us that it was not Peter that he meant by these words. Moreover, we know of no apostle who fell and needed St. Peter to strengthen him. If someone says that Christ meant by these words only St. Peter himself [and the apostles themselves], this person causes the church 68 | 69 to lack someone to strengthen it after the death of St. Peter. How could this happen, especially when we see all the sifting of the church that came from Satan after the apostles’ death? All of this indicates that Christ did not mean [them] by these words. Indeed, everyone knows that the heretics attacked the church only after the death of the apostles—Paul of Samosata, Arius, Macedonius, Eunomius, Sabellius, Apollinaris, Origen, and others. If he meant by these words in the gospel only St. Peter [and the apostles themselves], then after [them] the church would have been deprived of comfort and would have had no one to deliver her from those heretics, whose heresies are truly “the gates of hell,” which Christ said would not overcome the church. Accordingly, there is no doubt that he meant by these words nothing other than the holders of the seat of St. Peter, who have continually strengthened their brethren and will not cease to do so as long as this present age lasts.
Do you not know that when Arius arose, by command of none other than the bishop of Rome, a council was summoned against him. This holy council anathematized Arius and his heresy, and the church accepted this council and rejected Arius, even as in earlier times the church of Antioch had accepted the letter of the apostles and rejected the heretics instructing it to be circumcised and keep the law. When Macedonius arose and said certain things about the Holy Spirit, again, by command of the bishop of Rome, a council was summoned against him at Constantinople. This holy council anathematized him, and the church accepted this council, even as it had accepted the first council, and expelled Macedonius, even as it had expelled Arius. Through these two councils, the church learned to sat that the Son and the Spirit 69 | 70 are of the essence of the Father and that each of them is God, eternally with and of the Father. The church accepted these two councils in the same way that the church of Antioch had earlier accepted the council of the apostles. Even as the church of Antioch did not have competence to judge along with the apostles, so also no individual had competence to judge along with these two councils. Even as what the apostles wrote in earlier times to the church of Antioch was nothing less than the thought of the Holy Spirit, so also the church has no doubt that the thought of these two councils is the thought of the Holy Spirit. Earlier, the church of Antioch did not accept the opinion of either Paul or Barnabas or of the others until it had referred them to the council of the apostles. It then waited for the decision of that council; and when it came, it was comforted by it. In the same way, the church did not accept the opinion of either Arius or Macedonius or of the holy fathers who then opposed them until it had referred the matter to the holy council. It then awaited its decision; and when it came, it accepted it, being comforted and made joyous by it.
When Nestorius arose and said certain things of Christ, the church disclaimed his words and, as was their custom, referred him to the holy council. By command of the bishop of Rome, a council against him was summoned at Ephesus. This holy council expelled him and declared his teachings false, and the holy church accepted that council, expelled Nestorius, and rejected his teachings. The church knew that it had no competence to judge along with that council, but that, rather, it was required to follow that council because of the Holy Spirit, as we have already explained. As for you, Nestorian, know that you are in error. You have slipped off the rock on which the church was built. You have been exiled from Christ. You have been separated from those who dwell in him. All this is because you did not accept the decision of the holy council—notwithstanding that the Holy Spirit required you to accept it and it is nothing less than the decision of the Holy Spirit himself. It is a wonder that you have followed Nestorius, even though you were not commanded to follow him. You have set him above both St. Paul and Barnabas. While the church thought it good not to accept those two, even though they were the light of humanity, you have accepted Nestorius and abandoned the holy council, even though it is necessary for you to follow it. You have set yourself on a weak foundation. You have put your faith in the mind of a human being. You have abandoned the aid of 70 | 71 the Holy Spirit. Know that you have no excuse. After all, you accepted the decision of the first two councils, submitting yourself to them without debate, even as the Holy Spirit commanded you. Your soul took offense at this third council, however, notwithstanding that the Holy Spirit commanded you to accept it in the same way that he commanded you to accept the earlier councils. You have put your own notions on an equal footing with his. You have ceased to trust in the Holy Spirit, who helped that council and spoke through it. If you accuse this council of error, know that Arius and his associates laid similar accusations against the first council, alleging its faults as their reason for rejecting it. Macedonius and his associates too, laid accusations against the second council, finding fault with it and using this as a pretext for rejecting it. Macedonius and his associates, too, laid accusations against the second council, finding fault with it and using this as a pretext for rejecting it. Even as they, in your opinion, have no cause to lay accusations against those two councils, so too, know that you have no excuse before Christ for laying accusations against this third council.
When Eutyches and Dioscurus arose and said certain things about Christ, the church disclaimed their words and holy fathers arose to argue against them. Rather, as was their custom, they referred the two to the holy council. By command of the bishop of Rome, the fourth council was summoned against them at Chalcedon. It anathematized them and declared their teachings false, and the church accepted the words of this council, even as it had accepted the first three councils, expelling Eutyches and Dioscurus and rejecting their teachings. The church knew, after all, that it had no competence to judge along with that council and was confident that the council’s decision was surely the decision of the Holy Spirit. As for you, Jacobite, how is it that you accept the first three councils, submitting yourself to them and not imagining yourself competent to judge along with them, but you do not accept this fourth council? No! You have preferred Eutyches and Dioscurus to it, placing them above both St. Paul and Barnabas. While the church did not think it right to accept what those two had to say, even though they were the sun of the world, you have accepted the opinions of Eutyches and Dioscurus. You have decided to supported yourself not only the pillar of truth that the Holy Spirit appointed for you, but on what is merely a crushed reed. You have allowed your flesh to 72 | 73 be cut to pieces and your soul’s blood to flow, and yourself to die a spiritual death—all this, because you insist on following one whom you were not enjoined to follow, or rather, one whom you were prohibited from following as if he were the snake that was the implement of tyranny. After that, you were continually carried from the doctrine of one man to that of another, who changed and transformed your religion, until in the end you had to be called both “those with many heads” and “those with no head.” You came to resemble a stone that slips off its foundation and continues to roll until it falls as far as it can fall. So too, Eutyches, Dioscurus, Theodosius, Severus, Jacob, as well as others, set you to roll, each of them introducing into your religion a corruption that accorded with his own opinion, each of them opposed both to his associates and to the truth. If you lay accusations against this holy council, do you not see that you were not the first to criticize the holy councils? Indeed, Arius, Macedonius, Nestorius, as well as their associates, each and every sect—with all their hearts, they criticized the council that anathematized them. As for you, what you say about this fourth council is nothing other than what each of them said of the council that anathematized him. If you approve of their having faulted the holy councils that were before this fourth council, you should follow them in this and speak as they do, publicly lifting from your neck the yoke of the Holy Spirit. If you fault them for laying accusations against these holy councils and condemn them for erroneously disagreeing with them, however, you should fault yourself for laying accusations against this fourth holy council and condemn yourself for erroneously disagreeing with it.
As for the fifth council, there is no longer anyone defending the heresy it condemned. We thus have no one with whom to engage in debate, as we did in the case of the earlier heretics.
Macarius, Cyrus, and Sergius then arose and said certain things of Christ. The church disclaimed their teaching and fathers met them in 72 | 73 combat, debating with them and resisting their teachings. The church, however, was resolute in not accepting either their opinion or that of those who were debating with them. Instead, they referred them all to the council, as was their custom. By command of the bishop of Rome, the sixth holy council was summoned at Constantinople. It anathematized them and declared their teachings false, and the holy church accepted this council even as it had accepted the earlier councils, separating itself from Macarius and his associates and scorning their teachings. As for you, Maronite, you submit to and accept the first, second, third, and fourth councils, and do not think yourself worthy of interfering with their opinions, which is as the Holy Spirit commanded you. Why then, when it comes to the sixth council, do you forget the Holy Spirit’s instruction and become so drunk that you will never sober up? You have attacked your fathers, whom you should have treated with respect by following the bidding of the Holy Spirit and adhering to their definition of the faith. Like a dog, you have set yourself to revile them and do away with their definition of the faith. You have torn down the fence protecting you from Satan and gone forth and allowed yourself to be seized by wolves. This is negligence on your part and it is leading you to destruction. If you lay accusations against this holy council, you should know that you are not the first to do this. Each of the earlier heretics—whatever his stripe—laid accusations against the council that anathematized him, nor was he prevented from adding to this accusation all that Satan implanted in his heart. If you fault them for laying accusations against those council, you should be quick to fault yourself for laying accusations against this sixth council. Give up your erroneous ways and allow yourself to receive guidance! If you do not fault them for condemning those holy councils, you should go ahead and get rid of your restraint. Join your friends and speak as does each heresy since then!
Three Possible Objections
What general accusations might you heretics lay against these councils? There are only three possible reasons for you to detest these holy councils. You might say that the council you detest issued a decision that was simply wrong, whether out of ignorance or bad intention. You might say that the council was summoned by an emperor, and for this reason it must not be accepted. You might say that there was before the council you detest another council that forbade that anything be added to or taken away from what is decreed, and for this reason the later council must not be accepted. 73 | 74
If one of you says that these councils issued decisions that were wrong, whether out of ignorance of bad intention, the one who says this is asserting the right to examine what the Holy Spirit allowed neither him nor anyone else to examine. Such a one is overcome by pride, which prevents him from submitting to the decision of the council. Such a one surely deserves spiritual death. It is as you have heard: The holy law of Moses allowed no one to share with the council in examining controversial matters or to have individual opinions that differed from the decision of the council; and if someone did arrogate to himself such rights, he most certainly and without question deserved death.
Heretics, suppose you say that the council you detest was summoned by an emperor and thus must not be accepted. Does no one remember the first two councils and each of the other councils accepted by someone who professes Christianity today, namely, that each and every one of these was summoned by an emperor? The following facts are known to all. The council of Nicaea was summoned by the emperor Constantine the Great. As for the second council, the emperor Theodosius the Great summoned it at Constantinople. The third council was summoned at Ephesus by the emperor Theodosius the Younger. The emperor Marcian summoned the fourth council at Chalcedon. The emperor Justinian the Great summoned the fifth council at Constantinople. As for the sixth council, it was summoned at Constantinople by the emperor Constantine, the son of Heraclius.
Maronite, if you detest the fifth and sixth councils because they were summoned by emperors, suggesting that they do not merit acceptance because emperors exercised coercion on people in them and for them, you yourself do wrong when you accept the fourth and earlier councils. After all, each of those councils was summoned by an emperor, as we have just shown. Every heretic anathematized by one of those councils has alleged an excuse like yours, saying that the emperor who summoned the council coerced the people into rejecting him and that it was through his coercion that the council was summoned against him. If you permit yourself to reject the decision of those two councils, in that they were summoned by emperors, then permit the Jacobites and Nestorians, Macedonius, Arius, and their associates—whatever their stripe—to reject the decision of the council that anathematized him, for it too was summoned by an emperor. If, however, you will not permit them to reject the decisions of those councils because they were summoned by emperors, do not permit yourself to reject the decision of those councils because they were summoned by emperors. 74 | 75
Jacobite, if you detest the fourth council, which anathematized you, because it was summoned by the emperor, suggesting that its decision thus need not be accepted in that the emperor coerced the people in it and for it, you yourself do wrong when you accept the third and earlier councils, each of which was summoned by an emperor. You have also given Nestorius, Macedonius, and Arius an excuse, none of whom accepted the decision of the council that anathematized him. Rather, each of them, like you, alleged that the emperor coerced the council into convening against him and coerced the people into accepting the council’s decision. If you permit yourself to reject the decision of this fourth council because it was summoned by an emperor, you must permit each of them to reject the decision of the council that anathematized him. If, however, you do not permit each of them to reject the decision of the council that anathematized him, you should not permit yourself to reject the decision of the fourth council. Otherwise, you are unjust and unfair, or rather, insane and stupid.
Nestorian, we apply to you the same argument to which the Jacobites and Maronites were subjected. You ought not detest the council that anathematized you because it was summoned by an emperor and for that reason reject its judgment. If you do, you have given Macedonius and Arius an Excuse for rejecting the decisions of the councils that anathematized them: they, after all, offer the same excuse as you. Moreover, if you do this, you have annulled whatever doctrines you yourself received from those two councils.
Such an argument cannot be used to fault even one of the councils. Rather, the church should praise Christ for humbling the emperors to her, that they might serve her fathers and her teachers. After all, every emperor in power when those councils were summoned was responsible with regard to the council for supporting it financially, for restraining the people, that the fathers might reflect on matters of religion in peace and quiet, and for putting its decision into effect. The emperor himself had competence neither to reflect on matters of religion nor to confirm the council’s decision in any way; all he did was serve the fathers, listening to them and obeying them, receiving all that they decided in matters of religion, without in any way participating in their reflections. If any of you heretics who now lay claim to Christianity fault the aid that the emperors gave to councils or their attendance at them, you thereby willingly nullify everything that we Christians have and return us to the point where 75 | 76 all we have to cling to is the texts of the Old and New Testaments. And in that case, it would not matter if any of us says, as did Arius, that the Son is created, or, as did Macedonius, that the Holy Spirit is created. By suggesting this, he has breached the church’s wall, which protects the flock from every ravening wolf expelled from her, and has corrupted the whole religion and turned Christianity into Judaism.
Heretic, suppose that you—whatever your stripe—were to say of the council that anathematized you: An earlier council decreed that nothing be added to or taken away from what it established; accordingly, there is no need to accept this later council. If you say this, you must realize that you understand neither what you say nor its implications. Every decision of every one of those holy councils was nothing other than a medicine prepared by the Holy Spirit in order to rid the church’s body of the disease of the particular heresy condemned by that council. When the council said that no one was to add to or take away from its decision, it only mean: No one is to contradict us and fashion for the sickness of this heresy condemned by us a medicine other than the one we prepared through the Holy Spirit, for the Holy Spirit does not contradict himself. The council did not say to the church: If the sickness of another heresy troubles the church after the sickness of the heresy it anathematized, the holy fathers, her physicians, are not to gather and remove that sickness from her, as it removed the sickness that was troubling her in its own time. If the council had done this—and far be this from it—it would have allowed every later sickness to have power over the church, in that the council prevented the fathers from treating her. This would be contrary, however, to the Holy Spirit, who made these councils as a perpetual and everlasting substitute for the apostles, even as Moses had made those councils to which he ordered obedience a perpetual substitute for himself in every controversy that would arise among the people of the law.
Heretic, suppose that you were to persist and say that the council you accept forbade anything to be added to or taken away from its decree for the simple reason that it did not want there to be any later councils. If this is what you say, it is time for you to annul all the councils, from first to last. After all, St. Paul said to the church that if either he or an angel from heaven were to come and teaching something other than what he himself taught, he is to be condemned. Heretic, accordingly to what you have said, this verse would permit Arius to say to the council of Nicaea, “I shall not accept what you teach, because St. Paul has 76 | 77 forbidden anyone to teach the church something that he himself did not teach her.” As for Macedonius, it would enable him to say to the second council, “I shall not accept what you teach, because St. Paul has forbidden anyone to teach the church something that he himself did not teach her. Moreover, the earlier councils also forbade anything to be either added or taken away from its decision.” Heretic, if this seems right to you, you have returned us to the point where all we have to cling to is the texts of the Old and New Testaments. And in that case, it would not matter if any of us says, as did Arius, that the Son is created, nor does it do him any harm to say, as did Macedonius, that the Holy Spirit is created, nor can anyone be faulted for talking like his favorite heretics. In sum, because of you, Christianity has been turned into Judaism, as we earlier said.
The matter is not as you heretics say. You have misunderstood the words of the fathers. The holy church resembles, rather, the son of an emperor, while the fathers resemble physicians. The emperor charged the physicians to protect the son’s body and to keep it free from every manner of sickness. As for the heresies, they resemble those sicknesses. Now then, consider the physicians responsible for the sons’ body. It could not in any way be said that one of them erred, if, on seeing a sickness befall the emperor’s son and freeing his body from it with a medicine that he prepared, he then said, “No one has the authority to change any of this medicine that I’ve prepared.” In saying this, the physician meant only to forbid others from treating the son’s sickness with a medicine other than that which he had already prepared. He did not say to later physicians, “If another sickness should later befall the body of the emperor’s son, you have not the authority to treat it.” Indeed, if he had, he would be responsible for the death of the emperor’s son, in which case he would be behaving toward the emperor in a deceptive and hostile manner. In the same way, each of these holy councils only prepared medicine for the heresy that had broken out in its own day, teaching the people that its medicine was both effective and adequate for the sickness of that heresy and that no one had the authority to treat or combat that heresy in a manner contrary to that in which it was treating and combating it. None of them commanded the later spiritual physicians that, should a heresy break out in their own day, they were not to prepare a medicine in order to eliminate it. Indeed, if they had, they would be behaving toward Christ in a deceptive and hostile manner. Far be it from a council convened by the Holy Spirit to do this! You heretics have misunderstood the fathers’ words. Satan, the enemy of Adam’s seed, has mocked you 77 | 78 and led you to blaspheme the Holy Spirit—and this, through your finding fault with conciliar decisions, which are nothing less than the decisions of the Holy Spirit. It is as I have already told you that the apostles themselves said: When they issued their decision against the heresy that had broken out in their own day, they said that “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us,” thereby informing all people that their thought was nothing other than the thought of the Holy Spirit. Whoever blasphemes the decision of one of the councils thus blasphemes the Holy Spirit.
Heretic, it may be that you will say that the council that anathematized you was responsible for annulling an earlier council, as one can conclude by examining the implications of its words. You thus claim to know that the council was not from the Holy Spirit, in that the Holy Spirit does not annul himself. Heretic, to you we say: You are coarse of mind and the Holy Spirit does not give his light to you because of your deviant intention. It is for this reason that you think that the council banished you from the church annulled an earlier council. You have not the authority, however, to mingle your reflection with the reflection of the council—if, that is, you understand what the Holy Spirit commanded you in the law through Moses the head of the prophets. Rather, you must resolutely accept the decree of the council; and if you do not, you are compelled to die a spiritual death. The Holy Spirit would not have allowed an error in any matter to issue from the council of St. Peter, that is, the bishop of Rome—and this, because the council attributed to him its reflection on controversial matters of religion, as we have shown you many times. If he were to have allowed this, then the Holy Spirit himself, in that he required people to obey the council, would be the one who leads the people into the error that council issued. Far be it from the Holy Spirit to do that! Heretic, if you permit yourself to reflect on the decision of the council that anathematized you and to examine its words and say that they disagree with an earlier council, permit Arius to reflect on the decision of the council of Nicaea which anathematized him, and to say that its words disagree with what is in the gospel and the apostles. So too, permit Macedonius to reflect on the decision of the second council, which anathematized him, and to say that its words disagree with the decision of the first council. I do not suppose that you will do this; accordingly, you also are not permitted to mingle your own reflection with the decision of the council that anathematized you. 78 | 79
You heretics, all of you, if you accept my arguments, neither you nor anyone else is permitted by the Holy Spirit to accuse these holy councils of defect or to disagree with their decision for any reason. If this were not so, it would be in vain that the Holy Spirit commanded through Moses the head of the prophets that everyone who does not accept the decision of the council be killed, for there would surely be an excuse for everyone to lay accusations against the council that issued a decision against him. It is not possible for anyone to reject its decision through such an accusation and then escape death. Rather, the Holy Spirit allowed no one to reject the decision of a council, but most certainly enjoined death on everyone who disobeyed it, whoever he might be. He made no exceptions. He allowed no one to escape death by laying accusations against the council or by any other means. The same applies to you heretics, all of you. Know well that whoever disobeys the holy councils will die a spiritual death. The Holy Spirit will refuse to dwell in your hearts. Beware the one who dwells in you instead!
An Exhortation to the Heretics
All you who disobey the Holy Spirit, understand this: If someone among you lays no undue claim to knowledge, the way of right guidance has been revealed to him and he has no excuse for abandoning the holy councils. His mind most surely understands both the necessity of following these holy councils and that there is nothing to prevent any of you being exiled from the kingdom of God and going forth in bonds from the throne of Christ, should he not follow them. As for those of you who do lay undue claim to knowledge, you resemble the priests of the Jews and the Pharisees. They turned the ears of the Jews from the instruction of the Holy Spirit and filled them instead with the dregs of their own minds. They made them so drunk as to prevent them from accepting Christ—to whom the law was guiding them—and induced them to believe lies about him. In the same way, you have deceived these poor people who turned their hearts from obedience to the Holy Spirit, who spoke through the mouths of the holy councils. You have filled them with the coarseness of your minds and the darkness of your intellects and what you seek through the blindness of your hearts, inducing them to blaspheme the Holy Spirit. May God fight against you! How you have 79 | 80 been destroyed and destroyed others! You have ensnared those who followed you and cast them into the pit of hell, and Satan has ensnared all of you and cast you into the hell fire prepared for him and his angels, so that you have become for him companions and consolation in his destruction. How can any of you withdraw to one side, while the council stands on the other side? How can you summon people, saying, “Come to me, all of you! Doubt this council and believe in me, for I have knowledge and I am a better friend to you than this council!” Woe to you! How can you claim to have achieved a spiritual wisdom beyond that of all others—in reality, a Satanic blindness/ How can you claim to have become so capable of discerning matters for others—in reality, so capable of deceiving both yourself and them? If you in fact are as you ignorantly think yourself to be, the Holy Spirit would long ago have directed others to you, that they might know of your exalted status. He would have described you to them in this holy scripture, even as he described the aforementioned council. He would have implanted in the holy scripture signs pointing to you, even as he pointed to this holy council. He would have urged others to follow you, even as he urged them to follow the council. How astonishing you are! You are blind, and you do not understand what you say and what you prove, even as St. Paul said of those like you. Ignorance is deep-seated within you, and error surrounds you on every side. Because of your coarseness and your foolishness, however, you are not aware of this. I cannot help but wonder at those poor people who abandon the holy councils, to which they were guided by command of the Holy Spirit, while submitting themselves to your authority, that you might guide them. It is as if you are the blind man of whom our Lord spoke in the gospel, “The blind leads the blind and both fall into the pit.” They constantly take for themselves teachers of error like you, because of the tickling of their ears, as St. Paul said [2 Tim. 4:3].
Conclusions
As for us, the community of the orthodox and the children of the holy church, we give praise and thanks to Christ our God, who made us resolutely obedient to the holy councils, through which the Holy Spirit spoke. Reaching his haven and finding refuge in the enclosure of his sheep, we are now safe, through his protection, from Satan, the ravening 80 | 81 wolf, who lies in wait for our souls, that he might attack those who stray from the church and seize them as if they were prey and quarry. We ask our Lord and God Jesus Christ to make us always stand firm on the rock of his holy church and to give us to drink from the cup of her teachings, until through love of those teachings we are drunk with a drunkenness that fills our minds and opens our hearts to obedience to him and to the keeping of his commandments. By these commandments, we shall be saved and inherit the kingdom of heaven prepared for everyone who is built on the foundation of St. Peter, which foundation is of the Holy Spirit. O Holy Spirit, give us the knowledge of Christ, the eternal Son, God the Son of God, who became incarnate of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin Mary, for the sake of our salvation. To him be praise, glory, might, and honor, along with the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and always and forever and ever! Amen!
St. Nicephorus I of Constantinople (c. 758-828) | EAST
St. Nicephorus, Apol. pro Sacris Imaginibus
SOURCE: PG 100.597A; as quoted by Francis Dvornik, Byzantium and the Roman Primacy, 96; amended translation by Msgr. Paul McPartland, A Service of Love: Papal Primacy, the Eucharist, & Church Unity (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2013).
(§25) (pg. 68)
This Synod [Council of Nicaea II] possesses the highest authority…In fact it was held in the most legitimate and regular fashion conceivable because according to the divine rules established from the beginning it was directed and presided over by that glorious portion of the Western Church, I mean by the Church of Ancient Rome. Without them [the Romans], no dogma discussed in the Church, even sanctioned in a preliminary fashion by the canons and ecclesiastical usages, can be considered to be approved, or abrogated; for they are the ones, in fact, who possess the principate of the priesthood, and who owe this distinction to the two leaders of the Apostles [Peter and Paul].
Councils
Council of Sardica (342-43)
(Can. 3-5, Epitomes) [Greek versions] | PRIMACY | SUCCESSORS
(Can. 3) Bishop Hosius said: This also it is necessary to add—that no bishop pass from his own province to another province in which there are bishops, unless indeed he be called by his brethren, that we seem not to close the gates of charity.
And this case likewise is to be provided for, that if in any province a bishop has some matter against his brother and fellow-bishop, neither of the two should call in as arbiters bishops from another province.
But if perchance sentence be given against a bishop in any matter and he supposes his case to be not unsound but good, in order that the question may be reopened, let us, if it seem good to your charity, honor the memory of Peter the Apostle, and let those who gave judgment write to Julius, the bishop of Rome, so that, if necessary, the case may be retried by the bishops of the neighboring provinces and let him appoint arbiters; but if it cannot be shown that his case is of such a sort as to need a new trial, let the judgment once given not be annulled, but stand good as before.
(Ancient Epitome) No bishop, unless called thereto, shall pass to another city. Moreover a bishop of the province who is engaged in any litigation shall not appeal to outside bishops. But if Rome hears the cause, even outsiders may be present.
(Can. 4) Bishop Gaudentius said: If it seems good to you, it is necessary to add to this decision full of sincere charity which thou hast pronounced, that if any bishop be deposed by the sentence of these neighboring bishops, and assert that he has fresh matter in defense, a new bishop be not settled in his see, unless the bishop of Rome judge and render a decision as to this.
(Ancient Epitome) If a bishop has been deposed and affirms that he has an excuse to urge, unless Rome has judged the case, no bishop shall be appointed in his room. For he might treat the decree with scorn either through his nuncios or by his letters.
(Ch. 5) Bishop Hosius said: Decreed, that if any bishop is accused, and the bishops of the same region assemble and depose him from his office, and he appealing, so to speak, takes refuge with the most blessed bishop of the Roman church, and he be willing to give him a hearing, and think it right to renew the examination of his case, let him be pleased to write to those fellow-bishops who are nearest the province that they may examine the particulars with care and accuracy and give their votes on the matter in accordance with the word of truth. And if anyone require that his case be heard yet again, and at his request it seem good to move the bishop of Rome to send presbyters a latere [“from the side,” i.e. of the Pope], let it be in the power of that bishop, according as he judges it to be good and decides it to be right—that some be sent to be judges with the bishops and invested with his authority by whom they were sent. And be this also ordained. But if he think that the bishops are sufficient for the examination and decision of the matter let him do what shall seem good in his most prudent judgment.
The bishops answered: What has been said is approved.
(Ancient Epitome) [Lacking]
Ecumenical Council of Constantinople I (381)
The Bishop of Constantinople, however, shall have the prerogative of honor after the Bishop of Rome; because Constantinople is New Rome.
Council of Rome (382)
SOURCE: E. Giles, trans., Documents Illustrating Papal Authority, AD 96-454 (London: SPCK, 1952), 130-31.
(pgs. 130-31) | ROCK | KEYS | ROME | SUCCESSORS | INFALLIBILITY
After all these writings of the prophets, evangelists, and apostles which we set out above, and on which, by God’s grace, 130 | 131 the Catholic Church is founded, we think this should also be noticed: that though all the Catholic churches diffused throughout the world are but one bridal chamber of Christ, yet the holy Roman Church has been set before the rest by no conciliar decrees, but has obtained the primacy by the voice of our Lord and Savior in the gospel: “Thou art Peter and upon this rock…shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 16:18, 19). There is added also the society of the most blessed apostle Paul, “a chosen vessel” (Acts 9:15), who was crown on one and the same day, suffering a glorious death, with Peter in the city of Rome, under Caesar Nero; and they alike consecrated the above-named Roman church to Christ the Lord, and set it above all others in the whole world by their presence and venerable triumph.
The first see of the apostle Peter is therefore the Roman church, “not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing” (Eph. 5:27).
But the second see was consecrated at Alexandria, in the name of blessed Peter, by his disciple Mark the evangelist; and he, being directed by St. Peter into Egypt, preached the word of truth, and perfected a glorious martyrdom.
And the third see of the most blessed apostle Peter is at Antioch, which is held in honor because he lived there before he came to Rome, and there, first, the name of the new race of Christians arose.
Council of Hippo (393); Council of Carthage (397)
(Can. 36/47) (pgs. 73, 74) | SUCCESSORS
[It has been decided] that, in the Church, nothing should be read except the canonical writings under the name of the “divine Scriptures.” These canonical writings are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings [two of Samuel, two of Kings], the two books of Chronicles, Job, the Davidic Psalter, the five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Sirach], the twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras [Ezra, Nehemiah], two books of Maccabees… 73 | 74
[In one codex, it is added] that the Church beyond the sea [Rome, etc.] should be consulted for the confirmation of this canon.
Ecumenical Council of Ephesus (431)
Before the Council, St. Cyril of Alexandria, Letter 11 to St. Pope Celestine I (430)
(§§1, 6) (pgs. 128-29, 131) | SUCCESSORS
(§1) To the most holy and most God-beloved father Celestine, Cyril sends greetings in the Lord…
But since in these matters [heresy “undermining the orthodox faith”] God demands sober good sense from us and the long-standing custom of the churches leads us to communicate with your sacredness, 128 | 129 I need to write again in order to inform you of the fact that Satan is even now throwing everything into confusion, raging against the churches of God, and attempting to pervert the laity everywhere who are following the faith correctly… 129 | 131
(§6) We shall not publicly withdraw from communion with him [Nestorius] until we have shared this matter with your religiousness. Therefore be so good as to decree what you think right, and whether one ought to be in communion with him or rather issue a public refusal on the grounds that no one can be in communion with one who holds and teaches such things. The policy of your perfection should be published in letters to the most devout and most God-beloved bishops of Macedonia and to all those in the East, for we shall prompt them, as they desire, to make a joint stand with one soul and one mind and to contend for the orthodox faith now under attack…
Before the Council, St. Pope Celestine, Letter 17: Memorandum to His Legates (431)
(pg. 205) | SUCCESSORS
When through the agency of our God, as we trust and hope, your charity reaches your destination, consult over everything with our brother and fellow bishop [St.] Cyril, and do whatever he judges to be right. We charge you to uphold the authority of the Apostolic See. Since the instructions that have been given to you tell you that you ought to take part in the assembly, if it comes to a debate, you are to pass judgment on their statements but not to descend to controversy.
July 11 Session
(§§31, 35-36) (pgs. 378, 380)
(§31) Philip, presbyter and legate of the apostolic see, said: “It is doubtful to no one, rather it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, the leader and head of the apostles, the pillar of the faith, and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of heaven from our Lord Jesus Christ the savior and redeemer of the human race, and was given the power to bind and unloose sin [Matt. 16:19], and that he lives and performs judgment, until now and always, through his successors. In accordance with this system, his successor and representative, our holy and most blessed pope Bishop Celestine, has sent us to this council as substitutes for his presence, a council that [was convoked] by the most Christian and most philanthropic emperors, who keep in mind and always protect the Catholic Faith, and who have protected and protect the apostolic teaching handed down to them till this day by their most pious and most philanthropic fathers and grandfathers of holy memory… 378 | 380
(§35) Arcadius, the most devout bishop and legate of the church of Rome, said: “Of necessity we shall confirm our own teaching by our own signatures, according to the proceedings in this holy council.”
(§36) The holy council said: “Since the most devout and most religious bishops and legates Arcadius and Projectus, and Philip, presbyter and legate of the apostolic see, have spoken most fittingly, it is appropriate that they fulfill their promise and confirm the proceedings by subscription…”
Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (451)
Session 1 (October 8, 451)
(§§5, 9) (pg. 129) | SUCCESSORS
(§5) Paschasinus, the most devout bishop and guardian of the Apostolic See, took his stand in the center together with his companions and said: “We have [at hand] instructions from the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the city of Rome, the head of all the churches, in which he has thought it right to declare that Dioscorus should not take a seat at the assembly, and that if he has the effrontery to attempt to do so, he should be expelled. This we are obliged to observe. Therefore, if it pleases your greatness, either he must leave, or we shall leave…
(§9) Lucentius the most devout bishop, representing the Apostolic See, said: “He should render an account of his judgment. Although he did not possess the role of a judge, he usurped it. He presumed to hold a council without the leave of the Apostolic See, which has never been allowed and has never been done.
Session 2 (October 10, 451)
(§23) (pgs. 24-25)
After the reading of the aforesaid letter [the Tome of St. Pope Leo the Great] the most devout bishops exclaimed: “This is the faith of the fathers. This is the faith of the apostles. We all believe accordingly. We orthodox believe accordingly. Anathema to him who does not believe accordingly! Peter has uttered through Leo. The apostles taught accordingly. Leo aught piously and truly. [St.] Cyril taught accordingly. Eternal is the memory of Cyril. Leo and Cyril taught the same. 24 | 25 Leo and Cyril taught accordingly. Anathema to him who does not believe accordingly. This is the true faith. We orthodox think accordingly. This is the faith of the fathers.
Session 3 (October 13, 451)
(§94) (pg. 70)
Therefore the holy and most blessed pope, the head of the universal church, through us his representatives and with the assent of the holy council, endowed as he is with the dignity of Peter the Apostle, who is called the foundation of the church, the rock of faith, and the doorkeeper of the heavenly kingdom, has stripped him [Dioscorus] of episcopal dignity and excluded him from all priestly functions…
Lateran Synod (649)
Second Session, Stephen of Dora (on behalf of St. Sophronius of Jerusalem), Letter to St. Pope Martin I (October 8, 649)
(pgs. 142-46, 148-49)
To the holy and apostolic synod convened in this renowned and elder Rome according to the grace of God and the authoritative bidding of Martin the thrice-blessed pope, who is religiously presiding over it for the sacred confirmation and vindication of the definitions and decrees of the fathers and councils of the Catholic Church, I, Stephen by the mercy of God bishop and first man in the jurisdiction subject to the archiepiscopal see of Jerusalem, present what follows. 142 | 143
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all consolation, who, by the blessed and episcopal convening of your most holy selves, has consoled us in all our affliction, namely, that which we feel for his holy Catholic Church because of those [heretics] who oppose the word of faith…
As a result of their [heretics] troubling of the whole Catholic Church in this way—in the words of the blessed Jeremiah, “we have been put to shame, because we heard reproach against us; it has covered our face with reversal, because aliens have entered our sanctuary” (Jer. 51:51)—for this reason we the pious, all of us, have been looking everywhere, sometimes for “water for the head and fountains of tears from the eyes” (Jer. 8:23) for lamenting this pitiable catastrophe, and sometimes for “the wings of a dove” (Ps. 54:7) (in the words of the divine David) so that we might “fly away” and announce these things to the See that rules and presides over all others (I mean your sovereign and supreme See) [Rome], in quest of healing for the wound inflicted.
It has been accustomed to perform 143 | 144 this authoritatively from the first and from of old, on the basis of its apostolic and canonical authority, for the reason, evidently, that the truly great Peter, the head of the apostles, was deemed worthy not only to be entrusted, alone out of all, with “the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:19) for both opening them deservedly to those who believe, and shutting them justly to those who do not believe in the gospel of grace, but also because he was the first to be entrusted with shepherding the sheep of the whole Catholic Church.
As the text runs, “Peter, do you love me? Shepherd my sheep” (John 21:16-17). And again, because he possessed more than all others, in an exceptional and unique way, firm and unshakeable faith in our Lord, [he was deemed worthy] to turn and strengthen his comrades and spiritual brethren [Luke 22:32] when they were wavering, since providentially he had been adorned by God who became incarnate for our sake with power and priestly authority over them all.
Witnessing this, Sophronius of blessed memory, who was patriarch of the holy city of Christ our God [Jerusalem] and under whom I served as a priest, not conferring at all with flesh and blood [cf. Gal. 1:16] but like your most holy self caring only for the things of Christ, hastened without delay to send my nothingness, solely over this mater, to this great and apostolic see with his own appeals, explaining both in writing and orally through me your suppliant the whole innovation of the said men, which they had committed in opposition to the orthodox faith. In addition, while still alive, he in person put up a noble resistance to those in the East, charging and adjuring them to cease from their heresy and return to the pious faith of the fathers, providing in two books six centuries of patristic citations to refute their impiety and confirm the truth; he did not, however, persuade them but excited them to calumny and wicked machinations against himself. Yet 144 | 145 he was not at all alarmed on this account, nor did he “fear where there is no fear” (Ps. 13:5), for (says the scripture) “the just man is confident like a lion” (Prov. 28:1), but, filled with godly eagerness and zeal, he took and placed me, despite my unworthiness, on holy Calvary, where, voluntarily on our behalf, the one who as God transcends us in nature, our Lord Jesus Christ deigned to be crucified in the flesh. And there he bound me with unlosable bonds, saying [quoting St. Sophronius of Jerusalem]:
“To the God who voluntarily on our behalf was crucified in this holy place you yourself will have to render an account at his glorious and dread coming, when He will judge the living and the dead, if you ignore and overlook the danger to faith in him, even though I myself, as you know, am bodily prevented from acting by the incursion of the Saracens [Arabs] as a result of our sins.
Therefore, proceed in haste from one end of the world to the other until you come to the Apostolic See, where are the foundations of the pious doctrines, and acquaint the all-sacred men there, not once or twice but many times, with everything that has with precision been mooted here. You are not to desist from vigorous exhortation and entreaty, until with apostolic wisdom they bring their judgment to a victorious conclusion and issue canonically a total refutation of the outlandish doctrines, lest, as says the Apostle, these any longer “spread like cancer” (2 Tim. 2:17), feeding on the souls of the more simple-minded.”
Wherefore, terrified and petrified at this because of the awesome judgment delivered by him on myself in this most awesome and venerable place, and then reflecting also on the episcopal dignity belonging to me by God’s leave, and on the petitions relating to the matter from almost all the God-loving bishops and Christ-loving congregations in the East, who in accord with the saints Sophronius were urging me to go with this purpose as the first men in the jurisdiction of Jerusalem, I did not, to use scriptural language, “give sleep to my eyes and slumber to my eyelids and rest to my head” (Ps. 131:4) in fulfilling this adorable command, but without any 145 | 146 delay and solely for this purpose made the journey hither.
Since then it is now the third time that I have arrived at your apostolic feet, entreating and beseeching what he and all of them have readily implored, namely, succor for the endangered faith of Christians.
On discovering that I had acted in this way, my opponents piled no slight afflictions on me, sending instructions about me through places and regions that I should be apprehended and sent to them in irons, as is known to all. But the Lord came to my assistance and rescued my life from those in pursuit of it.
Therefore, as I pursued the goal and aimed at the prize [Phil. 3:14] of your Apostolic See, God did not overlook the petition of his servants presented with tears, but stirred up to no small degree the then apostolic high priests to warn ad adjure the men aforesaid, even if in the event they had no success in pacifying them. He also stirred up the one who is now the sacred president, our master Martin, the thrice-blessed Pope, whom he will guard for his churches safe and sound, with a long life, “expounding correctly the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15), so as incomparably and surpassingly to be “zealous with zeal for God” (2 Cor. 11:2); and to gather all of you most sacred high priests to himself for the rejection of outlandish doctrines and the preservation of those of the fathers of the Church.
I too exhort and beseech you to complete the work of grace for which God has summoned you through him, so that (as the scripture says) “you may remove the evil one from among you” (1 Cor. 5:13); for the divine Apostle, writing to you Romans, exhorts you “to observe those who create scandals and divisions in opposition to the teaching you learnt and to shun them, for such people do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ but their own bellies, and by specious and fair words deceive the hearts of the innocent” (Rom. 16:17-18) [End of quote of St. Sophronius of Jerusalem]… 146 | 148
This fact [about troubles in the East] I communicated earlier to the Apostolic See, namely to the sainted Pope Theodore; he by an apostolic letter appointed me his representative, despite my unworthiness, and by an all-sacred instruction bade me, apart from conducting other ecclesiastical business, to carry out a canonical deposition of the bishops ordained in this way, if they proved incorrigible. This indeed I did, particularly in view of the fact that of their own accord they had deserted the truth for error; in accordance with his injunction I only approved those who submitted a declaration of repentance and professed in writing that they had always held, embraced, and preached the pious doctrines of the holy fathers and councils. These declarations I have no brought and presented to the thrice-blessed Pope Martin, who is presiding most sacredly over your 148 | 149 holinesses [the bishops at the synod], because some have been justly approved and other condemned, for the protection of the Catholic Church.
Second Session, Greek Monks, Letter to St. Pope Martin I (October 8, 649)
(pgs. 151-53, 154)
To God’s holy and apostolic synod convened in concord and harmony by the favor and grace and inseparable communion of the all-holy Spirit in this renowned and elder Rome for the sacred confirmation and restoration of the pious and unimpeachable faith of us Christians, according to the sacred bidding and injunction of the one [the Pope] who by divine decree is the president and primate of you and of all, the priest of priests, and father of fathers, our master Martin, the thrice-blessed pope, we, the assembly of the Greek hegumens and monks who reside here [Rome] as servants of your holinesses, present the information that follows…
We must of necessity, 151 | 152 O most blessed one, in all our resolutions choose the most holy faith of our God and Savior Jesus Christ before the world that is drawing to an end, life that is perishing, and even our own lives.
Accordingly, in common, when we were residing in the land of Africa, we—and not only ourselves but also (in unison) every region and city, or rather the communities of priests and congregations of the faith residing in each—besought this Apostolic and sovereign See not to overlook the subjecting of the orthodox faith to innovation and the open rejection of the holy council at Chalcedon—this is to say, the rejection of all the holy and illustrious fathers by Sergius, Pyrrhus, and Paul, the primates of the imperial city [Constantinople], and also by Cyrus, then bishop of the city of Alexandria…
[W]e who are now present beg, entreat, and beseech all you most holy fathers and the Apostolic and sovereign See not to overlook the petitions of Christians over so many years and from all quarters addressed equally to God and to your most holy selves, nor the pleas presented with tears on this matter by our humble selves, whether present or absent, but canonically and in council to vindicate the most holy faith that is under attack from the aforesaid men, and (after God) to keep it safe for all, uncontaminated by innovation and resplendent as before with pious 152 | 153 teaching for the benefit of orthodox priests, laymen, and monks throughout the world, since the hearts of all rely on you (after God), knowing that under Christ you are the supreme head of the churches…Together with them the same anathema should in justice be imposed on the Typos [of Paul of Constantinople, against Pope Theodore I] that has been issued against the orthodox faith by usurpation, without the knowledge or approval of our most pious emperor, but as the importunate teaching and instruction of Paul, who had been deposed by the predecessor of your all-holiness, we mean Theodore the sainted Pope of your Apostolic See… 153 | 154
It must be clearly known to your most holy selves that, if anything at all were to be defined by your beatitude contrary to this (we say) our pious petition on behalf of piety—of which perish the thought, and we do not in the least believe it, since it would be harmful to the integrity of the faith—we would stand before the event wholly free and innocent.
Because of this, for the most complete edification and assurance of our insignificance, we beseech your holinesses that your present proceedings and pronouncements on behalf of the orthodox faith be translated with total precision and in every detail into Greek, so that, taking cognizance of these things with full knowledge, we may offer our assent in these matters to you most blessed ones, adhering inviolably to what you define correctly according to the sacred teaching and tradition of the holy fathers and councils (as has already been said) for the sake of a pure confession and faith in him, our Lord and God.
Second Session, Sergius, Primate of Cyprus, Letter to Pope Theodore I (October 8, 649)
(pgs. 157-61)
Theophylact, primicerius of the notaries of the Apostolic See, said:
I informed your all-sacred holiness [St. Pope Martin I] of something that you yourself are well aware, since with great solicitude according to God you bear and possess an intelligently alert memory of everything most essential, that in your apostolic archive there are lying, kept in all security, many appeals from those in past times who, on the subject of the innovation that has lately been concocted by Cyrus and Sergius and their associates, besought your sovereign and Apostolic See to condemn and anathematize it canonically…
[Quoting the appeal of Sergius, Primate of Cyprus to Pope Theodore I] To my most holy and most blessed master, appointed by 157 | 158 God, father of fathers, archbishop and ecumenical patriarch Lord [Pope] Theodore, Sergius, the most insignificant bishop, sends greetings in the Lord.
Christ our God founded your apostolic see, O sacred head, as a divinely fixed and immovable support and conspicuous inscription of the faith. For you, as the divine Word truly declared without deceit, are Peter, and on your foundation the pillars of the church are fixed; to you he committed the keys of the heavens and decreed that you are to bind and loose with authority on earth and in heaven [Matt. 16:18-19]. You have been made the destroyer of profane heresies, as the leader and teacher of the orthodox and unimpeachable faith. Therefore, my father, do not overlook the faith of our fathers, tempest-tossed, assailed and endangered by the winds of heresy; dissolve the mist of the demented by the light of your knowledge of God, O all-holy one, obliterate the blasphemies and the raging of the heretical teachers, newly sprouted and spouting novelties. For nothing is lacking to your orthodox and apostolic ordinances and traditions, such that the faith should receive some addition from us.
For we, being guided by God, and as the associates and colleagues of the holy apostles, have held and professed them from the first, indeed from the very cradle, proclaiming and affirming to all in the words of the holy and God-bearing [St.] Pope Leo [from his Tome], “Each form operates in communion with the other.” With this all the God-bearing and all-holy fathers speak in accord, and it has been followed by us the most insignificant servants and disciples.
Therefore we do not tolerate the verbosity and adverse arguments of our opponents, for we are ready to undergo martyrdom in defense of the orthodox faith, with the support of the prayers of your most holy self. And if they were to choose to condemn the soul-destroying doctrines newly proposed in the fortunate [city of Constantinople] (that is to say, for the destruction of the beliefs and profession of the holy fathers and of the supremely glorious and renowned Pope Leo), doctrines to which our own beliefs will not cease to be contrary, things would be well, the peace dear to God would be bestowed on the churches, every division in the churches abolished, and the 158 | 159 schisms healed, with a restoration of unity. But since they do not follow you apostolic fathers [bishops who would confer with Pope Theodore in council], taught by God, we anathematize them both in writing and orally. For it is neither godly nor right, indeed it is not, when the plague of heresy is present and blasphemous anathemas have been composed, to engage in a battle of words…
In brief, therefore, most holy ones, what we say is this: let there be condemned the writings that seek to refute and condemn the God-bearing fathers, the all-holy Pope Leo, and you who speak of God. Since at your command, our masters and divinely inspired fathers, we too, as has already been said, strike them with anathemas, let us then initiate proposals and contests on the matters they are examining, since we are filled with hope by your support, which is both taught and inspired by God, since we shall not be timorous or “craven with fear where there is no fear” (Ps. 13:5), when the subject is God and the orthodox faith…For such were also the convictions of our divine Arcadius [Sergius’s predecessor as primate of Cyprus], now among the saints, heeding your orthodox teaching, whose steps we pray to follow with all our strength, concurring with your orthodox and divinely inspired teaching, our most holy masters and fathers; for we shall endure no longer those who scatter tares and stumbling blocks [Matt. 13:25, 18:7], so to speak, throughout the world. These are the beliefs of our sacred synod, which approves and embraces the Tomes of the all-holy and God-bearing Leo, confirms it as a salvific anchor of orthodoxy, exults in the doctrines of your knowledge of God, while falsifying nothing at all, and prays to depart to the Lord and stand before his dread tribunal with this orthodox profession.
May God, the Creator of all things, protect through a long life our 159 | 160 all-holy master for the support of his holy churches and the orthodox faith, the good shepherd who offers his life for his spiritual sheep and drives away the ravenous wolves with his pastoral staff [John 10:11-12]. To all those privileged to serve my all-holy master, honored by God, I and those with me send abundant greetings in the Lord.
Father of fathers, honored by God, pray that I may enjoy good health and be well-pleasing to the Lord [End of quote of Sergius, Primate of Cyprus]…
[Maurus, Bishop of Cesena, a priest from Ravenna, speaking on behalf of another Maurus, Bishop of Ravenna] Therefore it is fitting that this appeal be inserted in our minutes to expose the embattled heresy, and that we do not overlook the plaints, written and oral, addressed on this matter to the Apostolic See, but that 160 | 161 with all probity we duly bring about a total removal of the contrary speech of “chaff” by means of the “flail” [Matt. 3:12] of a canonical examination, on the basis of the nourishing and mature doctrine of the Catholic Church, which strengthens the heart of man through participation in the teaching of the fathers.
Second Session, Three African Synods, Letter to Pope Theodore I (645-46) (October 8, 649)
(pgs. 161-65)
To the most blessed lord and elevated apostolic eminence, the holy father of fathers Theodore, Pope and Supreme Pontiff of all the bishops, [from] Columbus, bishop of the first see of the synod of Numidia, and Stephen, bishop of the first see of the synod of Byzacena, and Reparatus, bishop of the first see of the synod of Mauretania, and all the bishops of the said three synods of the region of Africa.
That there is in the Apostolic See a great and inexhaustible spring pouring forth abundantly for all Christians, from which flow forth rivulets that generously water the entire Christian world, no one can dispute. In honor of the most blessed Peter, [included in the Greek version: O father of fathers], the decrees of the fathers decreed for it unique and total reverence, in the investigation of the 161 | 162 affairs of God that need a full and careful examination, and most justly, since these need to be examined by the apostolic crown of the bishops, whose concern from of old has been both to condemn evil and approve what is worthy of praise. For it has been laid down in ancient regulations that nothing, even if raised in remote and far distant provinces, should first be treated or accepted until it had been brought to the notice of your bountiful See, so that the sentence pronounced might be confirmed by her just authority, and the other churches might taken from there, as from their native source, the origin of their preaching, and there might abide through the various regions of the whole world, unsullied in their purity, the mysteries of the saving faith.
Therefore we pay to your apostolic eminence our must humble respects, which we offer with tears, since we cannot hold back our heartfelt groans.
Some time ago a detestable concoction of novelty in the city of Constantinople was relayed to us by report; we have until now remained silent, because we presumed that it had been severely condemned by the judgment of your Apostolic See.
But when we learnt that it was steadily growing stronger, and read the petition of our brother Pyrrhus, lately our fellow bishop in the same city of Constantinople, which was presented to your venerable see, we sent an appeal, such as necessity required, to our brother Paul, who now occupies the church of the city of Constantinople, beseeching him with many tears to repel from himself and the whole church over which he presides the aforesaid concoction of novelty… 162 | 163 But the divine law contains many lessons which may pour forth as our little streams from the abundant spring of your eminence.
But since our province of Africa has been mentioned as an object of a certain suspicion by malevolent men in the aforesaid imperial city, we have sent to your beatitude, dear to God, the said appeal to our aforesaid brother Paul, bishop of Constantinople. We humbly request you to forward it through the apocrisiarii of your most sacred See, so that we may happily learn if our aforesaid brother has turned from the wicked fabrication of novelty back to the pure preaching of the orthodox faith. But if he is dissembling, the authority of your bountiful see will reflect, with salutary deliberation according to the ordinances of the fathers, how to separate this unhealthy wound from the healthy body, so that, through the careful removal of the infection of the raging disease, the unaffected part may survive, and the flock, pure once more, may be cleansed by the spiritual knife of your eminence from this plague of evil… 163 | 164
[St. Pope Martin I responding to the letter] Martin, the most holy and most blessed Pope of God’s holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Rome, said:
The appeal from the God-beloved bishops of Africa that has now been read is known to be general and universal, since coming from each of the ecclesiastical hierarchies established there according to God…all of whom agree in censuring the outlandish innovation and 164 | 165 entreat our Apostolic and sovereign See to rise up and condemn it…
Since, therefore, in this appeal of theirs they made mention of the other appeals of which they sent copies to our Apostolic See…there should also be brought and read to the holy synod here present copies of the two appeals just mentioned, in which the said devout bishops of the region of Africa displayed, as is fitting, both the zeal and the purity of their faith.
Other Documents
Clementine Homilies, Introductory Letters, “St. Pope Clement of Rome,” Letter to James (221)
Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon, who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus Himself, with His truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect, and associate at table and in the journeyings of Christ; the excellent and approved disciple, who, as being fittest of all, was commanded to enlighten the darker part of the world, namely the West, and was enabled to accomplish it—and to what extent do I lengthen my discourse, not wishing to indicate what is sad, which yet of necessity, though reluctantly, I must tell you—he himself, by reason of his immense love towards men, having come as far as Rome, clearly and publicly testifying, in opposition to the wicked one who withstood him, that there is to be a good King over all the world, while saving men by his God-inspired doctrine, himself, by violence, exchanged this present existence for life.
Clementine Homilies, Homily 17 (221)
(§19) | ROCK | ROME
[St. Peter to the heretic Simon Magus, in Rome] For in direct opposition to me, who am a firm rock, the foundation of the Church, you now stand. If you were not opposed to me, you would not accuse me, and revile the truth proclaimed by me, in order that I may not be believed when I state what I myself have heard with my own ears from the Lord, as if I were evidently a person that was condemned and in bad repute.
Recognitions of Clement
(Preface) | PRIMACY | ROME | SUCCESSORS
The epistle in which the same Clement, writing to James the Lord’s brother, informs him of the death of Peter, and that he had left him his successor in his chair and teaching, and in which also the whole subject of church order is treated, I have not prefixed to this work, both because it is of later date, and because I have already translated and published it. But I do not think it out of place to explain here what in that letter will perhaps seem to some to be inconsistent. For some ask, Since Linus and Cletus were bishops in the city of Rome before this Clement, how could Clement himself, writing to James, say that the chair of teaching was handed over to him by Peter? Now of this we have heard this explanation, that Linus and Cletus were indeed bishops in the city of Rome before Clement, but during the lifetime of Peter: that is, that they undertook the care of the episcopate, and that he fulfilled the office of apostleship; as is found also to have been the case at Caesarea, where, when he himself was present, he yet had Zacchaeus, ordained by himself, as bishop. And in this way both statements will appear to be true, both that these bishops are reckoned before Clement, and yet that Clement received the teacher’s seat on the death of Peter.
Acts of Peter and Andrew (c. 260)
PRIMACY
And while he was thus speaking, the Lord Jesus Christ appeared to them in the form of a child, and said to them: Hail, Peter, bishop of the whole of my Church!
Poem Against the Marcionites (c. 285)
(Lines 276-84) (pg. 204) | ROME | SUCCESSORS
In this chair in which he himself had sat, Peter in mighty Rome commanded Linus, the first elected, to sit down. After him, Cletus too accepted the flock of the fold. As his successor, Anacletus was elected by lot. Clement follows him, well-known to apostolic men. After him Evaristus ruled the flock without crime. Alexander, sixth in succession, commends the fold to Sixtus. After his illustrious times were completed, he passed it on to Telesphorus. He was excellent, a faithful martyr.
The Assumption of Mary (c. 400)
ROME
And the Holy Spirit said to the apostles: Let all of you together, having come by the clouds from the ends of the world, be assembled to holy Bethlehem by a whirlwind, on account of the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ; Peter from Rome, Paul from Tiberia, Thomas from Hither India, James from Jerusalem.
The Teaching of the Apostles, Syriac (400s)
ROME
And after the death of the apostles there were Guides and Rulers in the churches; and, whatsoever the apostles had committed to them and they had received from them, they continued to teach to the multitude through the whole space of their lives. They too, again, at their deaths committed and delivered to their disciples after them whatsoever they had received from the apostles; also what James had written from Jerusalem, and Simon from the city of Rome, and John from Ephesus, and Mark from Alexandria the Great, and Andrew from Phrygia, and Luke from Macedonia, and Judas Thomas from India: that the epistles of an apostle might be received and read in the churches that were in every place, just as the achievements of their Acts, which Luke wrote, are read; that hereby the apostles might be known, and the prophets, and the Old Testament and the New; that so might be seen one truth was proclaimed in them all: that one Spirit spoke in them all, from one God whom they had all worshipped and had all preached. And the divers countries received their teaching. Everything, therefore, which had been spoken by our Lord by means of the apostles, and which the apostles had delivered to their disciples, was believed and received in every country, by the operation of our Lord, who said to them: “I am with you, even until the world shall end” (Matt. 28:20)…
