Letter 88: Leo, the bishop, to Paschasinus, bishop of Lilybæum. I. He sends a copy of the Tome and still further explains the heterodoxy of Eutyches.

Leo, Bishop of Rome, to Paschasinus, Bishop of Lilybaeum. I. He sends a copy of the Tome and further explains the error of Eutyches Although I have no doubt, brother, that the full extent of the scandal that has arisen in the Eastern churches concerning the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ is well known to you, I have nonetheless sent for your careful study our letter which addresses this matter most thoroughly -- the letter we sent to Flavian of holy memory, which the universal Church has accepted. By understanding how completely this blasphemous error has, with God's help, been destroyed, you too may show the same spirit in your love toward God and may know that those who follow the blasphemy and madness of Eutyches are to be utterly abhorred. They have dared to say that there are not two natures in our Lord, the only-begotten Son of God -- that is, perfect Godhead and perfect manhood -- and they think they can deceive us by claiming to believe in "the one incarnate nature of the Word." But the Word of God, in the Godhead of the Father and of Himself and of the Holy Spirit, does indeed possess one divine nature. When, however, He assumed the reality of our flesh, our nature was united to His unchangeable substance. Even the term "incarnation" could not be spoken of unless the Word had truly taken flesh. This taking of flesh forms so complete a union that no division may be imagined between the Godhead and the living flesh -- neither in the blessed Virgin's childbearing nor in her conception -- since in the unity of Person, the Godhead and the humanity came together both in the conception and in the birth. II. Eutyches might have been warned by the fate of earlier heretics A similar blasphemy, therefore, is to be abhorred in Eutyches as was once condemned and overthrown by the Fathers in the heresies of former times. The doctrine of the holy Fathers is the measuring line against which all new claims must be tested. We must hold fast to the faith that the eternal Son of God became true man without ceasing to be true God, and that in one Person two complete natures are preserved, united without confusion, without conversion, without division, and without separation. Let this be proclaimed clearly in your churches, so that the faithful may be fortified against all deception. We ask that Your Fraternity be prepared to serve as our representative, should the need arise for a general council to resolve these matters definitively.

Leo, the bishop, to Paschasinus, bishop of Lilybæum. I. He sends a copy of the Tome and still further explains the heterodoxy of Eutyches. Although I doubt not all the sources of scandal are fully known to you, brother, which have arisen in the churches of the East about the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, yet, lest anything might have chanced to escape your care, I have dispatched for your attentive perusal and study our letter , which deals with this matter in the fullest way, which we sent to Flavian of holy memory, and which the universal Church has accepted; in order that, understanding how completely this whole blasphemous error has with God's aid been destroyed, you yourself also in your love towards God may show the same spirit, and know that they are utterly to be abhorred, who, following the blasphemy and madness of Eutyches, have dared to say there are not two natures, i.e. perfect Godhead and perfect manhood, in our Lord, the only-begotten Son of God, who took upon Himself to restore mankind; and think they can deceive our wariness by saying they believe the one nature of the Word to be Incarnate, whereas the Word of God in the Godhead of the Father, and of Himself, and of the Holy Spirit has indeed one nature; but when He took on Him the reality of our flesh, our nature also was united to His unchangeable substance: for even Incarnation could not be spoken of, unless the Word took on Him the flesh. And this taking on of flesh forms so complete a union, that not only in the blessed Virgin's child-bearing, but also in her conception, no division must be imagined between the Godhead and the life-endowed flesh , since in the unity of person the Godhead and the manhood came together both in the conception and in the childbearing of the Virgin. II. Eutyches might have been warned by the fate of former heretics. A like blasphemy, therefore, is to be abhorred in Eutyches, as was once condemned and overthrown by the Fathers in former heretics: and their example ought to have benefited this foolish fellow, in putting him on his guard against that which he could not grasp by his own sense, lest he should render void the peerless mystery of our salvation by denying the reality of human flesh in our Lord Jesus Christ. For, if there is not in Him true and perfect human nature, there is no taking of us upon Him, and the whole of our belief and teaching according to his heresy is emptiness and lying. But because the Truth does not lie and the Godhead is not passible, there abides in God the Word both substances in one Person, and the Church confesses her Saviour in such a way as to acknowledge Him both impassible in Godhead and passible in flesh, as says the Apostle, although He was crucified through (our) weakness, yet He lives by the power of God 2 Corinthians 13:4 . III. He sends quotations from the Fathers, and announces that the churches of the East have accepted the Tome. And in order that you may be the fuller instructed in all things, beloved, I have sent you certain quotations from our holy Fathers, that you may clearly gather what they felt and what they preached to the churches about the mystery of the Lord's Incarnation, which quotations our deputies produced at Constantinople also together with our epistle. And you must understand that the whole church of Constantinople, with all the monasteries and many bishops, have given their assent to it, and by their subscription have anathematized Nestorius and Eutyches with their dogmas. You must also understand that I have recently received the bishop of Constantinople's letter, which states that the bishop of Antioch has sent instructions to all the bishops throughout his provinces, and gained their assent to my epistle, and their condemnation of Nestorius and Eutyches in like manner. IV. He asks him to settle the discrepancy between the Alexandrine and the Roman calculation of Easter for 455, by consulting the proper authority. This also we think necessary to enjoin upon your care that you should diligently inquire in those quarters where you are sure of information concerning that point in the reckoning of Easter, which we have found in the table of Theophilus, and which greatly exercises us, and that you should discuss with those who are learned in such calculations, as to the date, when the day of the Lord's resurrection should be held four years hence. For, whereas the next Easter is to be held by God's goodness on March 23rd, the year after on April 12th, the year after that on April 4th, Theophilus of holy memory has fixed April 24th to be observed in 455, which we find to be quite contrary to the rule of the Church; but in our Easter cycles as you know very well, Easter that year is set down to be kept on April 17th. And therefore, that all our doubts may be removed, we beg you carefully to discuss this point with the best authorities, that for the future we may avoid this kind of mistake. Dated June 24th in the consulship of the illustrious Adelfius (451).