The Early Church and Peter's Primacy

Letter CV, from Pope Leo to Empress Pulcheria

Synopsis: Leo writes to Pulcheria to rejoice in the faith’s victory — in which both those who stood firm and those who were led astray but returned overcame the enemy — then turns to Anatolius’s ambition, recounts how his legates faithfully opposed the Canon 28 claim in his stead, declares the agreements of bishops standing contrary to the Nicene canons null and void, and — by the authority of the blessed Apostle Peter — nullifies them with a universal definition, urging Pulcheria to restrain Anatolius so that her glory may be praised for ambition suppressed as well as for faith restored.

Leo, bishop, to Pulcheria Augusta.

Chapter I: Leo Rejoices That Both Those Who Stood Firm and Those Who Were Led Astray Have Overcome the Enemy

We rejoice beyond all telling in the holy and God-pleasing efforts of your clemency — defending the Catholic faith against heretics and restoring peace to the universal Church. We give thanks to the merciful and almighty God, who — except for those who chose to love darkness more than light (John 3:19) — has allowed no one to be defrauded of the evangelical truth: so that, with the darkness of error dispersed, the purest light might rise in the hearts of all, and that dark enemy might not exult even over the weak souls of certain ones — for he was overcome not only by those who stood firm, but even by those whom he had caused to change, so that, with error abolished, the true faith might reign throughout the entire world, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ the Lord is in the glory of God the Father (Phil. 2:11). And with the whole world confirmed in the unity of the Gospel and the hearts of all priests directed to the same understanding, it would have been best that — beyond those things for which the holy synod was assembled and which, in accordance with your piety’s effort, were brought to a good and probable conclusion — nothing contrary to Christian truth should be sought, nor through the occasion of an episcopal council should that be importunely pressed which it was not lawful to covet.

Chapter II: Anatolius’s Ambition; Leo’s Legates Faithfully Opposed It in His Stead

For our brother and fellow bishop Anatolius, giving too little thought to how great a benefit of your piety and how great a grant of my favor attended his obtaining the priesthood of the Constantinopolitan Church, was inflamed not so much with joy at what he had obtained as with desire for what exceeded the measure of his honor. He believed this intemperate desire could be aided by the fact that the subscription of certain ones — extorted from them — is said to have lent him their consent; while nonetheless the contradiction of my brothers and fellow bishops, who were faithfully and laudably acting in My stead, stood in the way of those attempts that were set to be destroyed. For since against the statutes of the paternal canons — established in the spiritual decrees long ages ago in the city of Nicaea — no one is permitted to dare anything: so that if anyone wishes to decree something different, he diminishes himself rather than corrupts those canons. If these are kept inviolate, as they should be, by all the pontiffs, throughout all the Churches there will be tranquil peace and firm concord — no dissensions about the measure of honors, no contentions about ordinations, no ambiguities about privileges, no conflicts arising from the usurpation of another’s rights. But with right and fitting equity, the orderly and rational conduct of office and character will be maintained; and truly great (1156) will be the one who is free of all ambition — as the Lord says: Whoever wishes to be greater among you, let him be your servant; and whoever wishes to be first among you, let him be your slave: just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve (Matt. 20:26–28; Mark 10:43). And yet these words were addressed to those who wished to advance from the small to greater things, from the lowly to the highest. But what further does the bishop of the Constantinopolitan Church covet beyond what he has obtained? Or what will satisfy him if the magnificence and eminence of so great a city is not enough? It is excessively proud and immoderate to press beyond one’s own limits — trampling antiquity, trying to seize another’s right, and, so that the dignity of one may increase, attacking the primacies of so many metropolitans, and bringing a war of new disturbance upon the provinces long ordered by the settled moderation of the ancient holy synod of Nicaea.

Chapter III: The Agreements Contrary to the Nicene Canons Are Declared Null; Leo Nullifies Them by the Authority of the Blessed Apostle Peter

Let him acknowledge the man he succeeded. And with all spirit of elation cast out, let him imitate the faith of Flavian, the modesty of Flavian, the humility of Flavian — which carried him all the way to the glory of a confessor. If he wishes to shine in those virtues, he will be praiseworthy and will gain the fullest measure of esteem everywhere — not by pursuing what is human, but by meriting what is divine. By this observance I also pledge my own spirit to be joined with his, and the love of the Apostolic See — which has always been extended to the Church of Constantinople — will suffer no breach through any change of circumstance. For even if immoderate bishops sometimes incur certain faults, the integrity of the Churches of Christ endures. The agreements of bishops, however, which stand in opposition to the rules of the holy canons established at Nicaea — joined with the piety of your faith — We declare null and void; and by the authority of the blessed Apostle Peter We nullify them with a universal and complete definition: adhering in all ecclesiastical causes to those laws which the Holy Spirit established through the three hundred and eighteen bishops for the peaceable and steadfast order of the whole priesthood — so that even if many more should decree something other than what they decreed, whatever is contrary to the constitutions of those Fathers is to be held in no reverence whatsoever.

Chapter IV: Leo Asks Pulcheria to Restrain Anatolius, So Her Glory May Be Praised for Ambition Suppressed

I therefore ask your piety to receive graciously, through our brother and fellow bishop Lucianus — who has faithfully discharged all that his commissioned service required — and through my son the deacon Basilius, the prolixity of my letter, in which I have found it necessary to explain what I think. And since it is your custom to labor for the peace and unity of the Church, hold our brother the bishop Anatolius in salutary restraint in those matters that will profit him — so that the glory of your clemency, as it is magnified for the faith restored, may likewise be proclaimed for ambition suppressed.

Dated the eleventh day before the Kalends of June, in the consulship of Herculanus, most illustrious man.

Source/Reference

Notes / Historical Commentary

Letter CV is the formal apex of the Canon 28 sequence — the letter in which Leo delivers the act itself. Letters CIV and CVI carry the arguments; Letter CV carries the nullification. It is addressed to Empress Pulcheria rather than to Marcian or Anatolius, and that choice of addressee is significant: Pulcheria had been the most consistent imperial ally of Chalcedonian orthodoxy, the one through whom the definition of the faith had been solemnly sealed (as Anatolius describes in Letter CI), and the one whose influence over her husband Marcian was most directly relevant to whether the imperial court would support or resist Leo’s position. Leo asks her, at the letter’s close, to restrain Anatolius — making her the agent of the suppression of ambition as she had been the agent of the ratification of the faith.

The nullification in Chapter III is the culmination of a sequence that began with the council’s request in Letter XCVIII, continued through Marcian’s request in Letter C and Anatolius’s in Letter CI, and passed through Leo’s canonical arguments in Letters CIV and CVI. The formal act rests on three elements that the reader should hold together. The first is the declaration of invalidity: in irritum mittimus — “We declare null and void.” The acts have no force. The second is the ground of the act: per auctoritatem beati Petri apostoli — “by the authority of the blessed Apostle Peter.” It is not Leo’s personal authority as bishop of Rome that nullifies Canon 28; it is Peter’s authority, which Leo mediates as Peter’s successor and which was entrusted to the governance of the Church through the Petrine succession. The third is the scope: generali prorsus definitione — “with a universal and complete definition.” This is not a local ruling for the Western churches, not a provisional judgment pending further deliberation. It is a universal judgment, binding on the whole Church.

The no-numbers-override principle that follows — “even if many more should decree something other than what they decreed, whatever is contrary to the constitutions of those Fathers is to be held in no reverence whatsoever” — is the ecclesiological corollary to the formal act. Five hundred bishops at Chalcedon had signed Canon 28. Leo’s response is that the number is entirely beside the point. The three hundred and eighteen Fathers at Nicaea established what the Holy Spirit willed for the governance of the universal Church; any subsequent decree by any number of bishops that contradicts that establishment carries no authority. The magnitude of a council does not override the quality of an earlier council’s divine institution. This principle is stated in Letter CVI to Anatolius in nearly identical terms, confirming that it is Leo’s settled canonical theology rather than a polemical flourish.

The reader who has followed the Canon 28 sequence from Letter XCVIII through Letter CV will recognize that what the sequence demonstrates — in aggregate — is not simply that Leo rejected a particular ecclesiastical decree. It demonstrates the architecture of authority within which the fifth-century church operated. The council of Chalcedon itself, the emperor of the Roman world, and the bishop of Constantinople’s own see all appealed to Leo’s confirmatory authority for the act they wanted ratified. When Leo responded with a nullification rather than a ratification, he exercised the same authority they had invoked — in the opposite direction. The judgment was his to render, and he rendered it. That this is the act of Peter’s successor, grounded in Peter’s authority and issued as a universal definition, is not Leo’s private ecclesiology: it is what the formal document of nullification states, and it is addressed to the empress of the Roman world.

The Early Church and Peter's Primacy