The See of Peter

The Early Church and Peter's Primacy

Letter LV, from Emperor Valentinian to Emperor Theodosius

Synopsis: Valentinian III writes to Emperor Theodosius to recount how, having come to Rome to propitiate God and proceeding to the basilica of blessed Peter, he was requested by the Roman bishop and the many priests gathered with him from various provinces to press upon Theodosius the petition that the faith disturbed by Ephesus II be restored — urging that the most blessed bishop of the Roman city, to whom antiquity has conferred the primacy of the priesthood over all and the faculty to judge concerning the faith and concerning priests, be acknowledged in that role, and that all matters be transmitted to the judgment of the council and of the Apostolic See, in which he who first received the heavenly keys holds the primacy of the episcopate.

To the lord Theodosius, victorious and triumphant, ever Augustus and son — Valentinian, glorious, victorious and triumphant, the senior Augustus and father.

Valentinian’s Visit to Rome and Leo’s Petition; The Bishop of Rome Holds the Primacy of the Priesthood Over All by Antiquity

When We had come to the city of Rome to propitiate the Divinity, on the following day We proceeded to the basilica of the Apostle Peter; and there, after the venerable night-vigil of God’s Apostle, the Roman bishop — and the others gathered with him from various provinces — requested Us to write to Your Meekness concerning the faith, which, being the guardian of all faithful souls, is said to be disturbed. This faith, received from Our ancestors, We are bound to defend with every suitable devotion, and to preserve inviolate in Our times the dignity of proper veneration for the blessed Apostle Peter — so that the most blessed bishop of the Roman city, to whom antiquity has conferred the primacy of the priesthood over all, may have both the standing and the faculty to judge concerning the faith and concerning priests, most sacred lord and father and venerable emperor.

For by this grace — in accordance with the custom of the councils — the bishop of Constantinople appealed to him by formal petition on account of the controversy that has arisen over the faith. To this one who is petitioning and adjuring Us on behalf of Our common salvation, We did not refuse Our assent, in order that We might press Our request upon Your Meekness: that the aforesaid priest, having gathered the remaining priests from the whole world within Italy as well, with all prejudice set aside, examining from the beginning with careful deliberation the entire cause at issue, might deliver a sentence such as the faith and logic of true Divinity demands. For in Our times the insolence of disturbance against religion ought not to prevail, while the faith has remained unshaken until now. For the fuller understanding of Your Divinity, We have also directed the proceedings, through which your piety may come to know the desires and acclamations of all.

All Matters Are to Be Referred to the Judgment of the Apostolic See

That everything be referred to the judgment of the council and of the Apostolic See, in which he who first received the heavenly keys holds the primacy of the episcopate — since indeed it befits Us, above all for this city which is the mistress of all the earth, to preserve with all reverence what Our ancestors have always kept with constant devotion. Apply yourself more diligently to this matter, most sacred lord and father and venerable emperor, and let Us not permit in Our times that which the incommovable faith has kept secure from all disturbance up to the present. For We desire to show your piety, through the proceedings We are sending, what the desires and acclamations of all demand.

Source/Reference

PL 54:857

Notes / Historical Commentary

Letter LV is addressed by the Western emperor Valentinian III to his Eastern counterpart Theodosius II, written in late 449 after the Latrocinium. It was composed in the context of a visit by Valentinian and the Western imperial family to Rome — a visit that became the occasion for Leo to rally secular imperial authority behind his appeal for an Italian council to overturn the results of Ephesus II. The letter belongs to a coordinated bloc of Western imperial correspondence: Letters LV, LVI, LVII, and LVIII were all written by members of the imperial family at approximately the same time, each pressing the same demand through a different voice.

The theological core of Letter LV is not Leo’s but Valentinian’s, and that is precisely what makes it remarkable. When Valentinian writes that the bishop of the Roman city is one “to whom antiquity has conferred the primacy of the priesthood over all,” he is not offering a theological deduction or an ecclesiological argument. He is recording what he takes to be a settled historical fact — the established order that the Church’s tradition has produced and that his own predecessors have recognized. The phrase “antiquity has conferred” is significant: this is not something Leo has claimed, or that the Council of Nicaea has decreed, or that an imperial edict has established. Antiquity — the accumulated practice and recognition of the Church from its earliest centuries — is what has conferred the primacy. Valentinian’s letter is therefore a piece of secular testimony to what the Church’s own tradition has consistently understood about Rome’s position.

The closing section, directing that all matters be referred to “the judgment of the council and of the Apostolic See, in which he who first received the heavenly keys holds the primacy of the episcopate,” makes the institutional point explicit. The Apostolic See is the institution in which Peter’s primacy continues to operate — not as a historical memory but as a living governing reality. Valentinian is not merely asking Theodosius to be kind to Leo; he is asking him to submit the entire affair to the institution that holds Peter’s keys. This is the political translation of Leo’s own theological claim, and its presence in a secular imperial letter demonstrates the degree to which the Roman primacy was understood — in the mid-fifth century West — as a structural feature of the Church’s constitution rather than a personal claim of an ambitious bishop.

The reader should be aware that the Orthodox theological tradition reads primacy language of this kind as expressing what is sometimes called primus inter pares — “first among equals” — a position of honor and precedence within a collegial episcopate rather than a hierarchical jurisdiction over it. On this reading, when Valentinian says the Roman bishop holds “the primacy of the priesthood over all,” he is acknowledging Rome’s place of honor as the first see, not a governing authority that can judge, command, or overrule other bishops. This is a serious theological position, and the reader deserves to know it is in play. What makes Letter LV particularly difficult to accommodate within that reading, however, is the specific language Valentinian uses alongside the primacy claim. He does not say the Roman bishop holds the place of honor among his equals; he says the Roman bishop has the facultatem de fide et de sacerdotibus judicare — “the faculty to judge concerning the faith and concerning priests.” A first among equals presides; he does not judge. Presiding over a deliberation of equals is a procedural role; judging concerning faith and concerning priests is a judicial one — an authority exercised over others, not with them. Valentinian’s phrasing does not describe a chairmanship; it describes a court. The reader who holds the “first among equals” interpretation is invited to consider whether that interpretation can account for the judicial faculty Valentinian explicitly assigns to the Roman bishop’s primacy.

The reader who has followed the project’s key interest — in how Rome’s primacy was acknowledged by those outside the papacy — will find Letter LV among the most powerful pieces of evidence in the corpus. It is not Leo claiming the primacy of the priesthood over all; it is the Western emperor affirming that antiquity has conferred it on Leo’s see, and pressing that claim upon the Eastern emperor as the basis for resolving the Eutychian crisis.