To the most beloved brother Acacius — Simplicius.
Simplicius Responds to Acacius’s Report on the Violence Done to the Churches and Implores Imperial Aid
In the letters of Your Charity, which you sent through Our son Epiphanius, a deacon of proven faith, you have reported more fully what the most religious men, Our sons the presbyters and archimandrites together with the monks, had briefly written before — relating at length, in a volume indeed extensive but of necessary discourse, what was done by heretics at Constantinople or in other regions. You have placed before Our eyes each thing committed against ecclesiastical rules and against the Catholic faith itself, wherever they occurred — so that it might be seen by what remedy the Churches might be aided: those on which violence was inflicted under the opportunity of tyrannical domination and through the absence of the most Christian prince, by the pernicious thief and recidivist invader of the Alexandrian Church, who escaped from exile.
Therefore, after God — who has wondrously visited the Church and the commonwealth with consolation — even if you had not requested it, We deemed it necessary to implore the aid of the most clement emperor: that for all the blessings the Lord has granted his reign, the Churches of God may no longer be violated by the contagion and depravity of heretics in the lands he knows to be subject to his empire, but by the command of his piety may be kept immune from diabolical doctrine. Let those who believe that the priestly ministry has been conferred upon them by the presumption of a condemned man be ordered, by a promulgated imperial constitution, to be excluded and segregated even from the assembly of men — so that with these removed and condemned to perpetual relegation in solitude, Catholic bishops may be restored to the deceived Churches, or [new ones] appointed.
In this matter, neither Our prayers to the most religious prince, nor the suggestions of Your Charity, nor the entreaties of so many of Our brothers — the priests whom We find have arrived at Constantinople — nor the supplications of the monks, can fail to labor. For whatever pertains to the integrity of the Catholic faith, in which the security of the Churches is established, the emperor has restored upon his pious return — with the Lord accompanying him everywhere — anticipating the desires of all. And in the most Christian mind, the grace of obtaining favor is easily found where the cause is religion.
Simplicius Demands the Irrevocable Exile of Timothy and His Followers, and Pronounces Anathema on Those Who Usurped the Eastern Sees
Therefore, as with Our letters, so too with the suggestions of Your Charity and of all the brothers who have presented themselves before the most Christian prince with the proofs of their faith, it must be repeatedly urged that Timothy, with his followers, be sent to an irrevocable exile. Together with him, Paul — expelled from the Church of Ephesus — and Peter, driven from the city of Antioch, and all who consider themselves bishops ordained by him or by those he unlawfully appointed, must be struck by the same law.
Concerning Anthony, who, as a leader among those tyrants sent against the Church, appeared as both enemy and defender, as it is written (cf. Ps. 7:5). Concerning a certain John of Constantinople, who, by accepting the priesthood of Apamea from heretics — a position which he, being a presbyter from elsewhere, could not lawfully have received even from Catholics — declared himself a heretic, and turned the reproach of his wrongful act back upon its author: having expelled Peter the usurper from Antioch, he himself has usurped that Church. We remove him from the fellowship of Christians under anathema, even by his very title; nor shall any place for satisfaction ever be opened to him. For just as Judas among the apostles, so these have lurked among God’s ministers with the deceitful fraud of a diabolical spirit.
Simplicius Declares That Nothing May Be Reconsidered Against the Definitions of Chalcedon
Rejoicing in the faith and devotion of the Christian people, We continually seek its progress and multiplication through supplications to God — that, persevering in the fear and love of the Lord, it may grow in number and merit protection by heavenly defense. In this We especially glory and give thanks to our God, for it pleases Him to see the pastoral fruit and the increase of the religious flock.
It is not fitting, however, for Our brothers and fellow bishops to linger long at Constantinople — especially now, when on account of the disturbance of the persecution that had arisen, the cities in the aforementioned Churches are anxious and troubled. Let no one of doubtful reason or trembling mind expect anything new to be reconsidered against the definitions of the Council of Chalcedon; for what was established by the universal assembly of priests is held with inviolable observance throughout the world, as it has been confirmed by the repeated assertion of heavenly vengeance. Therefore, whoever does not follow the venerable definitions of that council, after so many examples of divine indignation, fights against the divine judgment itself.
Footnotes
- ↩ This letter was first published by Lucas Holstenius from a Roman collection and has no transmitted date or consular formula. The PL places it at the end of the Simplicius corpus, following Labbeus’s arrangement. However, Antonius Pagi argued that this placement is incorrect: since Simplicius refers to Timothy Aelurus as still alive and asks that he be sent to irrevocable exile, the letter must belong to the period before Aelurus’s death (July 31, 477). Pagi placed it chronologically after Letter VIII to Zeno (October 7–8, 477) and before Acacius’s letter to Simplicius reporting Aelurus’s death. If Pagi’s dating is correct, this letter belongs to late 477 or early 478 — the period of active cooperation between Rome and Constantinople — not to the final months of Simplicius’s pontificate. The reader should bear this in mind when evaluating the letter’s tone and content, which reflect a relationship still functioning cooperatively.
- ↩ The “pernicious thief and recidivist invader” is Peter Mongus, who had been exiled but escaped and returned to Alexandria. The “tyrannical domination” is Basiliscus’s usurpation (January 475 to August 476), during which the Henoticon’s precursor — Basiliscus’s Encyclical condemning Chalcedon — had been issued and Timothy Aelurus had been restored to Alexandria. The “absence of the most Christian prince” is Zeno’s sixteen-month displacement from the throne. The violence Acacius is reporting to Simplicius encompasses everything that happened to the Eastern churches during this period.
- ↩ The demand is for a formal constitutio imperialis — a promulgated imperial law — that would exclude the heretical bishops not merely from ecclesiastical communion but from human society itself (a conventu hominum segregandi). This is the most extreme version of the exile demand in the Simplicius corpus: not merely banishment to distant lands but perpetual relegation to solitude (solitudinis perpetua relegatione). Simplicius is asking the emperor to use the full coercive force of the state against the heretical party.
- ↩ “Timothy” here is Timothy Aelurus, whom Simplicius asks to be exiled irrevocably (ad irremediabile exsilium). This reference is the principal evidence for Pagi’s early dating of the letter: if Aelurus were already dead (he died July 31, 477), Simplicius would not be requesting his exile. The letter therefore belongs to a period when Aelurus was still alive or when news of his death had not yet reached Rome.
- ↩ The Psalm reference (Psalm 7:5 in the Vulgate numbering, corresponding to Psalm 7:4 in modern editions) concerns the one who repays evil to those at peace with him. The description of Anthony as both “enemy and defender” (inimicus et defensor) is paradoxical and may indicate that Anthony presented himself as a protector of the Church while actually working against it — a wolf in shepherd’s clothing.
- ↩ This is the harshest penalty in the Simplicius corpus: not merely excommunication but permanent exclusion from the possibility of satisfactio. The canonical principle Simplicius had articulated in the Fragment and in Letter XVII — that a returning heretic must pass through satisfactio before any question of promotion — is here denied entirely. John is placed beyond the reach of reconciliation: no satisfaction, no return, no forgiveness. The comparison to Judas that follows — “as Judas among the apostles, so these have lurked among God’s ministers” — frames the offense as irreversible betrayal.
- ↩ The closing declaration is a restatement of the irreformability principle that runs through the entire Simplicius corpus: what the universal assembly of priests (Chalcedon) has established is held insolubili observatione (“with inviolable observance”) throughout the world and has been confirmed by caelestis ultionis assertione (“the assertion of heavenly vengeance”) — meaning that the political reversals visited upon those who attacked Chalcedon (Basiliscus’s fall, the deaths of the heretical leaders) are read as divine confirmation of the council’s authority. The principle is the same one Simplicius had stated in Letter VII: whoever desires Chalcedon to be reopened declares himself not numbered among the faithful.
Historical Commentary