PL 54 · cols. 221–225

Leo the Great, Sermons

Sermon XXVIII

est visibilibus creaturis, sicut uteris terra, mari, coelo, aere, fontibus atque fluminibus; et quidquid in eis pulchrum atque mirabile est, refer ad laudem et gloriam Conditoris. Noli esse deditus illi lumini quo volucres et serpentes, quo bestiae et pecudes, quo muscae delectantur et vermes. Lucem corpoream sensu tange corporeo, et toto mentis affectu illud verum lumen amplectere quod illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum (Joan. I, 9), et de quo dicit propheta: Accedite ad eum, et illuminamini, et vultus vestri non erubescenl (Ps. XXXIII, 6). Si enim templum Dei sumus, et Spiritus Dei habitat in nobis (I Cor. III, 16), plus est quod fidelis quisque in sua habet animo, quam quod miratur in coelo.

[…] is to be used, the visible creatures, just as you use the earth, the sea, the sky, the air, the springs and the rivers; and whatever in them is beautiful and wonderful, refer it to the praise and glory of the Creator. Do not be devoted to that light in which birds and serpents, in which beasts and cattle, in which flies and worms take delight. Touch the bodily light with the bodily sense, and with the whole affection of the mind embrace that true light which enlightens every man coming into this world (John 1:9), and of which the prophet says: Come to Him, and be enlightened, and your faces shall not be ashamed (Ps. 33:6). For if we are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells in us (1 Cor. 3:16), what each of the faithful has in his own mind is more than what he marvels at in the sky.

Non itaque vobis, dilectissimi, hoc aut indicimus, ant suademus, ut despiciatis opera Dei, aut contrarium aliquid fidei vestrae, in iis quae Deus bonus bona condidit, aestimetis; sed ut omni creaturarum specie, et universo hujus mundi ornatu rationabiliter et temperanter utamini: Quae enim videntur, sicut ait Apostolus, temporalia sunt; quae autem non videntur aeterna sunt (II Cor. IV, 18). Unde quia ad praesentia sumus nati, ad futura autem renati, non temporalibus bonis dediti, sed aeternis simus intenti; et ut spem nostram possimus propius intueri, in ipso sacramento Natalis Domini cogitemus quid naturae nostrae gratia divina contulerit. Audiamus Apostolum dicentem: Mortui enim estis, et vita vestra abscondita est cum Christo in Deo. Cum autem Christus apparuerit vita vestra, tunc et vos apparebitis cum ipso in gloria (Coloss. III, 3, 4); qui vivit et regnat cum Patre et Spiritu sancto per omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen.

So, dearly beloved, we do not tell or urge this upon you so that you should despise the works of God, or think there is anything contrary to your faith in the things which the good God made good; but that you should use every kind of creature, and the whole adornment of this world, reasonably and with moderation: For the things that are seen, as the Apostle says, are temporal; but the things that are not seen are eternal (2 Cor. 4:18). Therefore, since we were born for things present but reborn for things to come, let us not be devoted to temporal goods but intent on eternal ones; and so that we may look upon our hope more nearly, let us consider, in the very mystery of the Lord's Nativity, what divine grace has conferred on our nature. Let us hear the Apostle saying: For you are dead, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. But when Christ, your life, appears, then you also shall appear with Him in glory (Col. 3:3–4); Who lives and reigns with the Father and the Holy Spirit for ever and ever. Amen.

SERMO XXVIII [Al. XXVII].

SERMON 28 [Otherwise 27].

In Nativitate Domini VIII.

On the Nativity of the Lord, 8.

CAP. I. — Cum semper nos, dilectissimi, gaudere in Domino, omnia divina eloquia exhortentur, hodie

CHAP. I. — Although all the divine utterances always exhort us, dearly beloved, to rejoice in the Lord, today […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 221

Footnotes

(a) ‹fontibus atque fluminibus› · printed under col 221

Vnus Vat., ut quidquid.... referas.

One Vatican [manuscript has] ut quidquid.... referas [so that whatever … you refer].

(b) ‹Lucem› · printed under col 221

Ita omncs nostri codd. et editi ante Quesnellum, qui testatur ita etiam legi in mss. Gaudiival.; at ipse edidit incorpoream, et post incorporeo, nec ullum mss. librum sic praeferentem indicavit. Neque contextus Leonis id requirit. Lucem enim corpoream tangi corporeo sensu non vetat, qui praemiserat: Utere, quomodo utendum est visibilibus; dum solo sensu tangantur, mente autem verum lumen amplectamur.

So all our manuscripts and the editions before Quesnel, who testifies that it is read so also in the Gaudiival. manuscripts; but he himself printed incorpoream [incorporeal], and afterwards incorporeo, and pointed to no manuscript book offering this. Nor does Leo's context require it. For he does not forbid bodily light to be touched by the bodily sense, who had said before: Use the visible things as they are to be used; provided that they are touched by sense alone, while with the mind we embrace the true light.

Sic ex mss. S. Petri et Casin. Al., habet in sua anima. Mox utique pro itaque in prima editione.

So from the manuscripts of St Peter's and Monte Cassino. Others, habet in sua anima [has in his soul]. Just after, utique for itaque in the first edition.

(d) ‹sed ut› · printed under col 221

Cod. Bon. et prima editio, omnium; et dein temporaliter pro temperanter in uno mss. S. Petri et alio Vat.

The Bon. manuscript and the first edition, omnium [of all]; and then temporaliter [temporally] for temperanter [with moderation] in one of the manuscripts of St Peter's and another Vatican one.

(e) ‹aeterna sunt (II Cor. IV, 18).› · printed under cols 221–222

Quia autem ad praesentia sumus nati, ad futura sumus renati, in mss. Bon. et prima edit.

Quia autem ad praesentia sumus nati, ad futura sumus renati [But since we were born for things present, we were reborn for things to come], in the Bon. manuscripts and the first edition.

(f) ‹SERMO XXVIII [Al. XXVII].› · printed under col 222

In uno ms. S. Petri. De Nativitate Domini contra haereticos. In alio ejusdem basilicae cod., Contra Nestorium et alios haereticos de Incarnatione Domini.

In one manuscript of St Peter's: On the Nativity of the Lord, against the heretics. In another manuscript of the same basilica: Against Nestorius and other heretics, on the Incarnation of the Lord.

(g) ‹omnia divina eloquia› · printed under col 222

Tres Vat. codd. et prima editio, cohortentur.

Three Vatican manuscripts and the first edition, cohortentur [encourage].

Editors' prose

SYNOPSIS. — I. Quanta laetitia mysterium Christi nascentis sit excipiendum. — II. A carne animaque in Christo humana nullo momento Verbum abfuisse. — ,II. In delendo peccato Adae voluntario justitiam esse servatam.ı — IV. Varii errores circa incarnationem Domini. — V. Nestorii et Eutyehis impia dogmata. — VI. Veritatem utriusque naturae in Christo, in unitatem personae convenire. — VII. Quomodo plenitudo Divinitatis corporaliter in Christo inhabital, et in Ecclesia.

SYNOPSIS. — I. With how great joy the mystery of Christ's birth is to be received. — II. That the Word was not absent for a single moment from the human flesh and soul in Christ. — III. That in destroying the voluntary sin of Adam justice was preserved. — IV. Various errors concerning the incarnation of the Lord. — V. The impious dogmas of Nestorius and Eutyches. — VI. That the truth of both natures in Christ comes together into the unity of the person. — VII. How the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily in Christ, and in the Church.

Page

running head: SERMO XXVIII. (across cols 221–222; col number 221 at left)
marginal letters: A ‹est visibilibus creaturis›; B ‹mus, ant suademus›; C ‹gnat cum Patre et Spiritu›; D ‹(a) Unus Vat.› (in the footnotes)
old-edition numerals: 97 after ‹creaturarum specie,›
signature: none
other: small capitals PLUS EST and AD PRAESENTIA set in ordinary case in layer 1; the Synopsis prints ",II." for III. and a stray mark after "servatam."

PL 54:222

procul dubio ad spiritalem laetitiam copiosius incitamur. Nativitatis Dominicae sacramento nobis clarius coruscante: ut recurrentes ad illam divinae misericordiae ineffabilem inclinationem, qua Creator hominum homo fieri dignatus est, in ipsius nos inveniamur natura, quem adoramus in nostra. Deus enim Dei Filius, de sempiterno et ingenito Patre unigenitus, sempiternus manens in forma Dei, et incommutabiliter atque intemporaliter habens non aliud esse quam Pater est, formam servi sine suae detrimento majestatis accepit, ut in sua nos proveheret, non se in nostra dejiceret. Unde utrique naturae in suis proprietatibus permanenti, tanta est unitatis facta communio, ut quidquid ibi est Dei, non sit ab humanitate disjunctum; quidquid autem est hominis, non sit a Deitate divisum.

[…] we are without doubt roused more abundantly to spiritual joy, as the mystery of the Lord's Nativity shines upon us more brightly: so that, returning to that ineffable condescension of the divine mercy by which the Creator of men deigned to become man, we may find ourselves in His nature, Whom we adore in ours. For God the Son of God, only-begotten of the eternal and unbegotten Father, remaining eternal in the form of God, and unchangeably and timelessly having no other being than the Father has, received the form of a servant without loss to His majesty, so as to advance us into what is His, not to cast Himself down into what is ours. Hence, while each nature remains in its own properties, so great a communion of unity has been made that whatever of God is there is not disjoined from the humanity, and whatever is of man is not divided from the Godhead.

CAP. II. — Celebrantes igitur, dilectissimi, natalem diem Domini Salvatoris, partum beatae Virginis integre cogitemus, ut carni animaeque conceptae virtutem Verbi nullo temporis puncto defuisse credamus, nec prius formatum atque animatum templum corporis Christi, quod sibi superveniens vindicaret habitatur, sed per ipsum et in ipso, novo homini datum esse principium; ut in uno Dei atque hominis datum esse principium: ut in uno Dei atque hominis filio, et sine matre Deitas, et sine patre esset humanites. Simul enim per Spiritum sanctum fecundata virginitas, sine corruptionis vestigio edidit et sui generas sobolem, et suae stirpis auctorem. Unde et idem Dominus, sicut evangelista commemorat, quaesivit a Judaeis cujus filium Christum Scripturarum auctoritate didicissent; et eisdem respondentibus quod ex David venturus semine traderetur: Quomodo, inquit, illum Dominum suum David iu spiritu vocat, diccns: Dixit Dominus Domino meo: Sede a dextris meis, donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum (Matth. XXII, 43, 44; Ps. CIX, 1)? Nec potuerunt Judaei propositam solvere quaestioncm, quia non intelligebant in uno Christo et progeniem Davidicam, et naturam prophetatam esse divinam.

CHAP. II. — Celebrating, then, dearly beloved, the birthday of the Lord and Saviour, let us think soundly of the blessed Virgin's childbearing, so as to believe that the power of the Word was absent at no point of time from the flesh and soul that were conceived, and that the temple of Christ's body was not first formed and animated for its indweller, coming upon it, to claim for himself, but that through Him and in Him a beginning was given to the new man; so that in the one [Son] of God and man a beginning was given: so that in the one Son of God and man there should be both Godhead without a mother and humanity without a father. For at one and the same time virginity, made fruitful through the Holy Spirit, brought forth without trace of corruption both the offspring of its own race and the author of its stock. Hence the same Lord, as the evangelist records, asked the Jews whose son they had learned from the authority of the Scriptures the Christ was; and when they answered that it was handed down that He would come from the seed of David, He said: How then does David in the spirit call Him his Lord, saying: The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies the footstool of Thy feet (Matt. 22:43–44; Ps. 109:1)? And the Jews could not solve the question put to them, because they did not understand that in the one Christ both the offspring of David and a divine nature had been foretold.

CAP. III. — Majestas autem Filii Dei aequalis Patri, vestiens se humilitate servili, nec metuebat minui, nec indigebat augeri; ipsumque effectum misericordiae suae, quem restitutioni impendebat humanae, sola exsequi poterat virtute Deitatis; ut creaturam ad imaginem Dei conditam (Genes. I, 26) a jugo diri

CHAP. III. — Now the majesty of the Son of God, equal to the Father, clothing itself with a servant's lowliness, neither feared to be diminished nor needed to be increased; and the very work of its mercy, which it was spending on the restoration of man, it could have carried out by the power of the Godhead alone; so as to [rescue] the creature made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26) from the yoke of the cruel […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 222

Footnotes

(h) ‹Creator hominum› · printed under col 222

Cod. S. Petri, et Vat. 1267, homo esse.

The manuscript of St Peter's, and Vat. 1267, homo esse [to be man].

(i) ‹intemporaliter habens› · printed under col 222

Codd. S. Petri, et Bon., non aliter esse quam Pater est. Unum verbum est lectioni vulgatae adjecimus tum ex his codd., dum ex antiquo Lectionar. Vat. 1267.

The manuscripts of St Peter's and Bon., non aliter esse quam Pater est [to be not otherwise than the Father is]. We have added the one word est to the common reading, both from these manuscripts and from the ancient Vatican Lectionary 1267.

(j) ‹ut in sua nos proveheret,› · printed under col 222

Editi, non ipse nostra deficeret. Melius in cod. S. Petri. Paulo post in hoc codice, et in Vat. 1267, non sit ab homine separatum, et quidquid est hominis.

The editions, non ipse nostra deficeret [not that He Himself should fail by what is ours]. Better in the manuscript of St Peter's. A little after, in this manuscript and in Vat. 1267, non sit ab homine separatum, et quidquid est hominis [is not separated from the man, and whatever is of man].

(k) ‹a jugo› · printed under cols 222–223

Editi, dirae dominationis. Quesn. in margine, diri dominatoris; quod praetulimus auctoritate duornm codd. S. Petri, et Casinen., etc. In Vat. 1267, duri dominatoris. Mox exueret pro erueret in ms. Bon. et prima editione, in quibus paulo ante factam pro conditam.

The editions, dirae dominationis [of the cruel domination]. Quesnel in the margin, diri dominatoris [of the cruel tyrant]; which we have preferred on the authority of two manuscripts of St Peter's, and the Cassino one, etc. In Vat. 1267, duri dominatoris [of the harsh tyrant]. Just after, exueret [strip off] for erueret [rescue] in the Bon. manuscript and the first edition, in which a little before [there is] factam [made] for conditam [founded].

Page

running head: SERMO XXVIII. (across cols 221–222; col number 222 at right)
marginal letters: A ‹procul dubio ad spiritalem›; B ‹minis, non sit a Deitate› (beside the gap before CAP. II); C ‹tate didicissent›; D ‹mus renati, in mss. Bon.› (in the footnotes)
old-edition numerals: 98 after ‹detrimento majestatis›
signature: none
other: none

PL 54:223

dominatoris erueret. Sed quia non ita in primum hominem diabolus violentus exstiterat, ut eum in partes suas sine liberi arbitrii consensione transferret, sic destruendum peccatum fuerat voluntarium et hostile consilium, ut dono gratiae non obesset norma justitiae. In totius igitur humani generis strage communi, unum solum erat remedium sub divinae rationis occulto, quod posset subvenire prostratis, si aliquis filiorum Adam originalis praevaricationis alienus atque innocens nasceretur, qui caeteris et exemplo prodesset et merito. Sed quia hoc naturalis generatio non sinebat, nec poterat vitiatae radicis propago esse sine semine, de quo Scriptura dicit: Quis potest facere mundum de tmmundo conceptum semine? Nonne tu qui solus es (Job XIV, 4)? Dominus David factus est filius David, et de promissi germinis fructu proles est orta sine vitio, in unam personam gemine conveniente natura: ut eodem conceptu eodemque partu gigneretur Dominus noster Jesus Christus, cui et vera inesset Deitas ad miracula operum, et vera humanitas ad tolerantiam passionum.

[…] tyrant it might rescue. But since the devil had not been so violent against the first man as to carry him over to his side without the consent of free will, the voluntary sin and hostile counsel had to be destroyed in such a way that the rule of justice should not stand in the way of the gift of grace. Therefore, in the common ruin of the whole human race, there was, in the hidden depth of the divine plan, one single remedy that could come to the aid of the fallen: if one of the sons of Adam should be born free of the original transgression and innocent, who might profit the rest both by example and by merit. But since natural generation did not permit this, and the offspring of a vitiated root could not be without the seed of which Scripture says: Who can make clean one conceived of unclean seed? Is it not Thou, Who alone art (Job 14:4)? — the Lord of David became the son of David, and from the fruit of the promised shoot an offspring arose without fault, the twofold nature coming together into one person: so that by one and the same conception and one and the same birth our Lord Jesus Christ was begotten, in Whom there was both true Godhead for the miracles of His works and true humanity for the enduring of His sufferings.

CAP. IV. — Fides igitur catholica, dilectissimi, oblatrantium haereticorum spernat errores, qui mundanae sapientiae vanitate decepti, a veritatis Evangelio recesserunt, et incarnationem Verbi intelligere non valentes, de causa illuminationis fecerunt sibi materiam caecitatis. Nam omnium fere falsa credentium opinionibus, quae etiam in sancti Spiritus negationem proruunt, retractatis, neminem pene deviasse cognoscimus, nisi qui duarum in Christo naturarum veritatem sub unius personae confessione non credidit. Alii etenim Domino solam humanitatem, alii solam ascripsere Deitatem. Alii veram quidem in ipso Divinitatem, sed carnem dixerunt fuisse simulatam. Alii professi sunt veram eum suscepisse carnem, sed Dei Patris non habuisse naturam; et Deitati ejus, quae erant humanae substantiae, deputantes, majorem sibi Deum minoremque finxerunt, cum gradus in vera Divinitate esse non possit: quoniam quidquid Deo minus est, Deus non est. Alii cognoscentes Patris et Fil⟨i⟩i nullam esse distantiam, quia non poterant

CHAP. IV. — Let the catholic faith, then, dearly beloved, spurn the errors of the heretics who bark against it, who, deceived by the vanity of worldly wisdom, have departed from the Gospel of truth, and, being unable to understand the incarnation of the Word, have made for themselves out of the cause of enlightenment the matter of blindness. For when the opinions of almost all who believe falsely have been reviewed, even those which rush headlong into the denial of the Holy Spirit, we find that hardly anyone has gone astray except one who did not believe the truth of the two natures in Christ under the confession of one person. For some ascribed to the Lord humanity alone, others Godhead alone. Others said that there was indeed true Divinity in Him, but that His flesh was feigned. Others professed that He took true flesh, but did not have the nature of God the Father; and, assigning to His Godhead what belonged to the human substance, they invented for themselves a greater God and a lesser, although there can be no degrees in true Divinity: since whatever is less than God is not God. Others, recognizing that there is no distance between the Father and the Son, because they could not […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 223

Footnotes

(k) continued from col 222, set in n222

(a) ‹destruendum peccatum› · printed under col 223

Tres codd. Vat. et unus S. Petri, fuit. In Vat. 1267, sic destruendum fuit voluntarium et hostile consilium.

Three Vatican manuscripts and one of St Peter's, fuit [was] [for fuerat]. In Vat. 1267, sic destruendum fuit voluntarium et hostile consilium [so the voluntary and hostile counsel was to be destroyed].

(b) ‹unum solum› · printed under col 223

Ita ex duobus mss. S. Petri et antiquo Vat. laudato. Al., fuit. Paulo post in illis, caeteris et exemplo. adjecimus particulam et Leonis stylo maxime congruam ex eodem antiquo Vat.

So from two manuscripts of St Peter's and the ancient Vatican one cited. Others, fuit [was]. A little after, in those [manuscripts], caeteris et exemplo; we have added the particle et, most suited to Leo's style, from the same ancient Vatican manuscript.

In editis ante Quesnellum et aliquibus mss., generis. Lectio autem germinis, quam in aliis mss. Vat. et S. Petri reperimus, magis congruit cum textu Jeremiae XXIII, 5: Suscitabo David germen justum: et Isaiae XI, 1: Germen de radice ejus.

In the editions before Quesnel and some manuscripts, generis [of the race]. But the reading germinis [of the shoot], which we found in other manuscripts of the Vatican and of St Peter's, agrees better with the text of Jeremiah 23:5: I will raise up to David a just shoot; and of Isaiah 11:1: A shoot from his root.

(d) ‹Jesus Christus, cui› · printed under col 223

Particulam et supplevimus ex quinque mss. ac prima editione.

We have supplied the particle et from five manuscripts and the first edition.

(e) ‹in vera Divinitate esse› · printed under col 223

Ms. Casin. et duo Vat., cum prima editione, non possint.

The Cassino manuscript and two Vatican ones, with the first edition, non possint [there cannot be] [plural].

Page

running head: S. LEONIS MAGNI SERMONES. (across cols 223–224; col number 223 at left)
marginal letters: A ‹dominatoris erueret›; B ‹nis fructu proles›; C ‹Alii etenim Domino›; D ‹silium. (b) Ita ex duobus› (in the footnotes, beside the end of note a)
old-edition numerals: 99 after ‹et exemplo›
signature: none
other: faint, worn impression throughout this column (e often reads as c); read from context of the letter forms

PL 54:224

unitatem Deitatis intelligere nisi in unitate personae, eumdem asseruerunt esse Patrem quem Filium: ut nasci et nutriri, pati et mori, sepeliri et resurgere, ad eumdem pertineret, qui per omnia et hominis personam impleret et Verbi. Quidam putaverunt Dominum Jesum Christum non nostrae substantiae corpus habuisse, sed ab elementis superioribus ac subtilioribus sumptum. Quidam autem aestimaverunt in carne Christi humanam animam non fuisse, sed partes animae ipsam Verbi implesse Deitatem. Quorum imprudentia in hoc transiit, ut animam quidem fuisse in Domino faterentur, sed eamdem dicerent mente caruisse, quia sufficeret et homini sola Deitas ad omnia rationis officia. Postremo iidem asserere praesumpserunt, partem quamdam Verbi in carnem fuisse conversam, ut in unius dogmatis varietate multiplici, non carnis tantum animaeque natura, sed etiam ipsius Verbi solveretur essentia.

[…] understand the unity of the Godhead except in a unity of person, asserted that the Father is the same as the Son: so that being born and nourished, suffering and dying, being buried and rising again, belonged to the same one, who in all things filled the person both of the man and of the Word. Some thought that the Lord Jesus Christ did not have a body of our substance, but one taken from higher and subtler elements. Others again supposed that in the flesh of Christ there was no human soul, but that the Godhead of the Word itself filled the part of the soul. Their folly went so far that they admitted there was indeed a soul in the Lord, but said that it lacked a mind, because the Godhead alone sufficed even for the man for all the functions of reason. Lastly the same men presumed to assert that some part of the Word had been turned into flesh, so that in the manifold variety of a single doctrine not only the nature of the flesh and soul but even the essence of the Word itself was dissolved.

CAP. V. — Multa sunt et alia prodigia falsitatum, quibus enumerandis charitatis vestrae non est fatigandus auditus. Sed post diversas impietates, quae sibi invicem sunt multiformium blasphemiarum cognatione connexae, de his potissimum erroribus declinandis observantiam vestrae devotionis admoneo; quorum unus dudum Nestorio auctore consurgere non impune tentavit, alius nuper pari exsecratione damnandus, Eutyche assertore prorupit. Nam ille beatam Mariam Virginem hominis tantummodo ausus est praedicare genitricem, ut in conceptu ejus et partu nulla Verbi et carnis facta unitio crederetur: quia Dei Filius non ipse factus sit hominis filius, sed creato homini sola se dignatione sociaverit. Quod catholicae aures nequaquam tolerare potuerunt, quae sic Evangelio veritatis imbutae sunt, ut firmissime noverint nullam esse humano generi spem salutis, nisi ipse esset filius Virginis, qui creator est matris. Hic autem recentioris sacrilegii profanus assertor, unitionem quidem in Christo duarum confessus est naturarum, sed ipsa unitione id dixit effectum, ut ex duabus una remaneret, nullatenus alterius existente substantia, quae utique finiri, nisi aut consumptione,

CHAP. V. — There are many other monstrosities of falsehood too, with the enumeration of which the hearing of your charity must not be wearied. But after the various impieties, which are linked to one another by the kinship of manifold blasphemies, I admonish the attentiveness of your devotion above all to shun these errors: one of which, some time ago, under Nestorius as its author, attempted to rise up, not with impunity; the other, lately, to be condemned with equal execration, has burst forth with Eutyches as its champion. For the former dared to proclaim the blessed Virgin Mary mother of a man only, so that no union of the Word and the flesh should be believed to have been made in her conception and childbearing: since the Son of God did not Himself become the son of man, but joined Himself to a created man by condescension alone. This catholic ears could by no means tolerate, being so imbued with the Gospel of truth that they know most firmly that there is no hope of salvation for the human race unless He were Himself the son of the Virgin Who is the creator of the mother. But this profane champion of the more recent sacrilege confessed indeed a union of two natures in Christ, but said that by that very union the effect was that of the two one remained, the substance of the other in no way continuing to exist; which surely could not have come to an end except either by consumption […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 224

Footnotes

(f) ‹rant› · printed under cols 223–224

Quatuor mss. et prima editio, veritatem. Retinuimus unitatem, quia similiter serm. 24, c. 5, de hac eadem Sabellii haeresi loquens S. pontifex, unitatem substantiae appellat. Paulo post, ut nasci... pertineret, cum Quesnello praeferunt nostri codd. et prima editio. Aliae editiones, et nasci... pertinere.

Four manuscripts and the first edition, veritatem [truth]. We have kept unitatem [unity], because likewise in Sermon 24, ch. 5, the holy pontiff, speaking of this same heresy of Sabellius, calls it unitatem substantiae [unity of substance]. A little after, our manuscripts and the first edition, with Quesnel, offer ut nasci... pertineret. Other editions, et nasci... pertinere.

(g) ‹humanam animam› · printed under col 224

Aliquot codd. et editi ante Quesnellum, non habitasse, nec fuisse. Post pauca prima editio, pro Quorum imprudentia, habet Quorumdam imprudentia; et forte melius, cum aliqui ex Apollinaristis, in antecedenti periodo indicatis, ad hunc errorem declinaverint.

Some manuscripts and the editions before Quesnel, non habitasse, nec fuisse [did not dwell, nor was]. A few words later the first edition, for Quorum imprudentia, has Quorumdam imprudentia [the folly of certain of them]; and perhaps better, since only some of the Apollinarists, pointed out in the preceding sentence, fell away into this error.

(h) ‹animaeque› · printed under col 224

Ita nostri codd. et editi ante Quesnellum, qui nullo indicato ms., et nulla etiam indicata diversa lectione, sic vulgavit: Naturam, sed etiam ipsius verbi solverent essentiam. In uno Vallicel. A 10, exiguo discrimine ab edita lectione sic habetur: Ut in hujus dogmatis vartetate multiplici non carnis tantum animaeque sed etiam ipsius verbi solveretur essentia. Mox initio capitis sequentis cod. Vat. 1267: Multa sunt alia.

So our manuscripts and the editions before Quesnel, who, pointing to no manuscript and pointing out no differing reading either, published it thus: Naturam, sed etiam ipsius verbi solverent essentiam [they dissolved the nature, but also the essence of the Word itself]. In one Vallicellian manuscript, A 10, with little difference from the printed reading, it runs thus: Ut in hujus dogmatis varietate multiplici non carnis tantum animaeque sed etiam ipsius verbi solveretur essentia [so that in the manifold variety of this doctrine not only of the flesh and soul, but even the essence of the Word itself was dissolved]. Just after, at the beginning of the following chapter, the manuscript Vat. 1267: Multa sunt alia.

(i) ‹non ipse› · printed under col 224

Al., factus est, et postea, sociavit.

Others, factus est [became] [indicative], and afterwards sociavit [joined].

(j) ‹quae utique› · printed under cols 224–225

Ita Quesnellus, et prima editio cum mss. S. Petri et aliis Vat. Perperam in aliis editis et nonnullis posteriorum collectionum codd., fieri.

So Quesnel, and the first edition with the manuscripts of St Peter's and other Vatican ones. Wrongly in other editions and in some manuscripts of the later collections, fieri [to be made].

Page

running head: S. LEONIS MAGNI SERMONES. (across cols 223–224; col number 224 at right)
marginal letters: A ‹rant unitatem Deitatis›; B ‹dam Verbi in carnem›; C ‹Dei Filius non ipse›; D ‹habitasse, nec fuisse› (in the footnotes)
old-edition numerals: 100 after ‹ac subtilioribus›
signature: none
other: none

PL 54:225

aut separatione non posset. Haec vero tam inimica sunt sanae fidei, ut nequeant recipi sine excidio nominis Christiani. Si enim Verbi incarnatio unitio est divinae humanaeque naturae, sed hoc ipso concursu quod erat geminum, factum est singulare; sola Divinitas ex utero Virginis nata est, et per ludificatoriam speciem sola subiit nutrimenta et incrementa corporea; utque omnes mutabilitates humanae conditionis omittam, sola Divinitas crucifixa, sola Divinitas mortua, sola Divinitas est sepulta; ut jam secundum talia sentientes sperandae resurrectionis nulla sit ratio, nec sit primogenitus ex mortuis Christus (Coloss. I, 18): quia non fuit qui deberet resuscitari, si non fuisset qui posset occidi.

[…] or by separation. But these things are so hostile to sound faith that they cannot be received without the destruction of the Christian name. For if the incarnation of the Word is a union of the divine and human nature, but by this very coming together what was twofold has become single, then the Godhead alone was born from the Virgin's womb, and the Godhead alone, in a deceptive appearance, underwent bodily nourishment and growth; and, to pass over all the changes of the human condition, the Godhead alone was crucified, the Godhead alone died, the Godhead alone was buried; so that for those who think such things there is no longer any ground for hoping for the resurrection, nor is Christ the firstborn from the dead (Col. 1:18): since there was no one who ought to be raised again, if there had been no one who could be killed.

CAP. VI. — Absint a cordibus vestris, dilectissimi, diabolicarum inspirationum virulenta mendacia, et scientes quod sempiterna Filii Deitas nullo apud Patrem crevit augmento, prudenter advertite quod qui naturae in Adam dictum est, Terra es, et in terram ibis (Gen. III, 19), eidem in Christo dicitur, Sede a dextris meis (Ps. CIX, 1). Secundum illam naturam qua Christus aequalls est Patri, numquam inferior fuit Unigenitus sublimitate Genitoris. nec temporalis est ei cum Patre gloria, qui in ipsa Patris est dextera, de qua in Exodo dicitur: Dextera tua, Domine, glorificata est in virtute (Exod. XVI, 6); et in Isaia: Domine, quis credidit auditui nostro? et brachium Domini cui revelatum est (Isai. LIII, 1: Rom. X, 16)? Assumptus igitur homo in Filium Dei, sic in uuitatem personae Christi ab ipsis corporalibus est receptus exordiis, ut nec sine Deitate conceptus sit, nec sine Deitate editus, nec sine Deitate nutritus. Idem erat in miraculis, idem in contumeliis; per humanam infirmitatem crucifixus mortuus et sepultus; per divinam virtutem die tertia resuscitatus, ascendit ad coelos, consedit ad dexteram Dei Patris, et in natura hominis accepit a Patre quod in natura Deitatis etiam ipse donavit.

CHAP. VI. — Let the poisonous lies of diabolical promptings be far from your hearts, dearly beloved; and, knowing that the eternal Godhead of the Son has grown by no increase with the Father, observe wisely that to the same nature to which it was said in Adam, Earth you are, and into earth you shall go (Gen. 3:19), it is said in Christ, Sit at My right hand (Ps. 109:1). According to that nature by which Christ is equal to the Father, the Only-begotten was never inferior to the loftiness of the Begetter; nor is His glory with the Father a temporal one, since He is the very right hand of the Father, of which it is said in Exodus: Thy right hand, O Lord, is glorified in strength (Exod. 16:6); and in Isaiah: Lord, who has believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed (Isa. 53:1; Rom. 10:16)? The man, then, taken up into the Son of God, was so received into the unity of the person of Christ from the very beginnings of his bodily existence that he was neither conceived without the Godhead, nor brought forth without the Godhead, nor nourished without the Godhead. He was the same in the miracles, the same in the insults; through human weakness crucified, dead and buried; through divine power raised on the third day, He ascended to the heavens, sat down at the right hand of God the Father, and in the nature of man received from the Father what in the nature of the Godhead He Himself also gave.

CAP. VII. — Haec, dilectissimi, pio corde meditantes, apostolici semper memores estote praecepti, qui

CHAP. VII. — Meditating on these things with a devout heart, dearly beloved, be ever mindful of the apostolic precept, which […]

Editors' notes and page, col. 225

Footnotes

(j) continued from col 224, set in n224

(a) ‹Verbi incarnatio› · printed under col 225

Erat in editis et aliquot mss., non unitio est; sed particula non perperam inserta fuit: nam Eutyches, cujus errorem S. Leo impugnat, duarum naturarum unitionem non negavit, sed ita fatebatur ut post unitionem ex duabus unam remansisse diceret. Deest sane haec particula in duobus mss. Petri, in Vallicel., in Casinensi, etc. In prima editione et in codice Bonon., non solum deest non, sed etiam unitio, sic: Sic enim Verbi incarnatio divinae humanaeque naturae est. Post pauca cum potioribus mss. inseruimus praepositionem ex ante vocem utero, quae in nonnullis editionibus, et a Quesnello omittitur.

In the editions and some manuscripts there was non unitio est [is not a union]; but the particle non had been wrongly inserted: for Eutyches, whose error St Leo attacks, did not deny the union of the two natures, but so confessed it as to say that after the union one remained out of the two. This particle is indeed lacking in two manuscripts of [St] Peter's, in the Vallicellian, in the Cassinese, etc. In the first edition and in the Bologna manuscript not only non is lacking but also unitio, thus: Sic enim Verbi incarnatio divinae humanaeque naturae est [For thus the incarnation of the Word is of the divine and human nature]. A few words later, with the better manuscripts, we have inserted the preposition ex before the word utero, which is omitted in some editions and by Quesnel.

(b) ‹si› · printed under col 225

Sic ex duobus mss. S. Petri et uno Vallicel. Al., non fuit. Cod. Casin., non fuit qui possit.

So from two manuscripts of St Peter's and one Vallicellian. Others, non fuit [there was not]. The Cassino manuscript, non fuit qui possit [there was no one who could].

Quatuor codd., truculenta.

Four manuscripts, truculenta [savage].

(d) ‹cum Patre gloria› · printed under cols 225–226

Ita emendavimus ex duobus mss. S. Petri, Vallicel. et Casin., cum antea legeretur, quae est ipsa Patris dextera. Unus Vat. Collect. 5, qui est ipsa Patris dextera. Alius Vat., quia ipse Patris est dextera. Congruit emendatio cum illo psal. CIX, 1: Sede a dextris meis. Mox unus codex S. Petri, et Vallicel., in Exodo canitur.

So we have corrected from two manuscripts of St Peter's, the Vallicellian and the Cassino, since before it read quae est ipsa Patris dextera [which is the very right hand of the Father]. One Vatican manuscript of Collection 5, qui est ipsa Patris dextera [Who is the very right hand of the Father]. Another Vatican, quia ipse Patris est dextera [because He Himself is the right hand of the Father]. The correction agrees with that of Ps. 109:1: Sit at My right hand. Just after, one manuscript of St Peter's, and the Vallicellian, in Exodo canitur [is sung in Exodus].

(e) ‹ascendit ad coelos› · printed under col 226

Sic mss. S. Petri, et antiquus Vat. 1267. Al., sedet. Mox initio capitis sequentis: Hoc, dilectissimi, pro Haec, dilectissimi, in ms. Bon. et prima editione.

So the manuscripts of St Peter's, and the ancient Vat. 1267. Others, sedet [sits]. Just after, at the beginning of the following chapter: Hoc, dilectissimi, for Haec, dilectissimi, in the Bon. manuscript and the first edition.