22. On Friday [April 27,
1234] morning we approached the palace of the Emperor, where the council had
assembled. And first the Emperor began to speak, saying: ‘Even if the prelates
had promised to answer you, it is still not surprising if they wished first that
the confusions they had over the letters of the lord Pope should be explained
to them.’ To that we answered: ‘We said then and we still say now that after
they have satisfied us on our question, we will then be prepared to reply not
just to that ambiguity but to all other doubts which arise in the question.’
Then, after taking counsel with the Emperor and other prelates, the Patriarch
answered first: ‘And we also will answer you.’ Next, the archbishop of Amastris
began to speak in this way: ‘You ask if the body of Christ can be accomplished
in azymes; and we answer that it is impossible.’ Therefore, wishing to understand
his meaning it cannot be done by law, or because it cannot be done at all. And
they answered: ‘Indeed, because it cannot be done at all, because we know that
the Lord himself used leavened bread, and so gave it to the Apostles. Whence
the Apostle says in 1 Corinthians, chapter 11: I received from the Lord that
which I passed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed,
took arton etc. Peter and other Apostles, just as they received [the tradition
in this form] from the Lord, in the same form they also passed [the tradition]
to the four patriarchal churches. So Peter passed [the tradition] to Antioch,
John the Evangelist [passed it[ to the churches which were in Asia, Andrew
[passed it] to the churches in Achaias, James [passed it] to Jerusalem, and
again, blessed Peter [passed it] to blessed Clement, and thus it was first
celebrated in the Roman Church, as we believe. This is why we say this, that it
cannot be done [using] another bread—that is in the leaven.’ Listening to his
heresy, we asked each one separately, first the Patriarch of Nicaea, next [the
Patriarch] of Antioch, then each prelate individually, if this was their faith,
and if they believed it. And they answered separately: ‘This is our faith, and
we believe this.’ (The Disputatio of the Latins and the Greeks, 1234 [trans.
Jeff Brubaker; Translated Texts for Byzantinists 12; Liverpool: Liverpool
University Press, 2022], 176-77, italics in original; first comment in square
brackets added for clarification)
On the quote of 1 Cor 11:23:
According to the friars, the
disputants make a clear difference between artos, the Greek word for
bread, and the Latin word panis. (Ibid., 177 n. 19)
The Eastern Orthodox representatives presenting their view
on leavened bread and the Eucharist:
23. On the Sabbath [April
29, 1234], after a meal, we were summoned to the council, and both sides
offered their documents. They presented their own document to us first, the
contest of which were as follows: The most honourable apocrisarii of the
most holy Pope of older Rome asked us if it is possible to complete the
anemakton that is, the sacrifice of the body of Christ, in azymes. And we
answered that this is impossible for men who wish to follow the new grace, as
it [was handed down] from the beginning in the tradition of the Saviour. Indeed
he passed it on to his own holy disciples and apostles through [the use of]
leavened bread, according to the words of the Gospels. And they likewise passed
on the mystery in this form, just as they themselves received [it], as it is
written in the wors of the magister Paul to the Corinthians [1 Cor 11:23-26
quoted] Therefore, we have received from the well-regarded Apostles, just as
they received from Christ, and thus the four ecclesiastical dioceses of the
world maintaining right up to the present day; indeed, we judge that the
diocese of elder Rome also received [it] and will continue to hold [it] in this
way. For this reason we say that one cannot consume the sacrifice through
azymes, as azymes arise from his part, which was free of legal servitude. And
indeed we have written these things as a summary, in accordance with the desire
of the apocrisarii, who could not endure to hear more. If, however, the
authorities and evidence for our argument are required of us, then we will
extend our argument from both the old and new Testament.
In the month of April, the
seventh indication, signed by me, the Chartophylax of the most holy great
church of God of Constantinople on the order of the universal [Patriarch] of
the most holy patriarchs, of the [Patriarch] of the great Teupolitan city of
Antioch, and of the bishops who were present with them. (The Disputatio of the Latins and the Greeks, 1234 [trans. Jeff Brubaker; Translated Texts
for Byzantinists 12; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2022], 178-80,
first comment in square brackets added for clarification)
After the Roman Catholic representatives presented their own
document:
25. After reading this document,
we gave it to the Patriarch of Nicaea and to everyone listening we said: ‘You
have given us your writing which contains heresy. And know this, what whoever
believes what is written in your document, the Roman Church considers such a
person as a heretic. Nevertheless, because a defense of heresy makes a heretic,
we wish to know why you say such things. There can be two reasons why you say
this: ignorance or malice. Therefore, we are prepared to show the truth to you,
exposing you to be creators of lies, so that when you have seen the truth, the
heresy that you say may cease and be revoked. Or, if it does not case, we may
know that what was said all this time was out of malice, and that you are
heretics. But because we do not have judges, let the books, namely the old and
new Testament, and the writings of the saints, be brought forward and let them
decide between us and you.’ And it is astonishing to tell, when everyone there
looked among themselves for the books, they were unable to find a single Old or
New Testament. Therefore, wishing to show that they were deceitful in all
things, we asked why they said that the Lord had made his body in leavened
bread. And they answered: ‘We have that in the Gospel of Luke, that the Lord
took the arton, broke it etc.’ And we added: ‘What does arton mean?’
They answered: ‘It means completed bread, risen bread, leavened bread.’ And we
asked if arton everywhere stands for leavened bread. And they responded:
‘No, because from time to time arton is used on its own, and from time
to time it is used with the adjective. When it is used on its own, it indicates
leavened bread. Ahen [it is used] with the adjective, as in Leviticus VII, unleavened
arton, there is, so to speak, a contradiction in the adjective, as when
one says: a dead man.’ And again we asked: ‘If arton is used on its own,
does it always indicate leavened bread?’ They answered that it did not. For
whenever it is used on its own, it is kept in its proper [sense] and then it is
always kept [in a sense of being] leavened. And whenever it is used improperly,
then it indicates azymes. Therefore, arton used on its own retains both senses;
it does not always mean leavened, nor does it always mean unleavened, but
sometimes it means the one, sometimes it means the other. Therefore, the arton
used in its own stands for bread, and does not specify [what kind]. Therefore,
what you say concerning the Gospel supports our case as much as it supports
yours. And this is what our Gospels call bread [panem], where you have arton.
Likewise, we find in Leviticus 7, where it is dealing with the law of peace
offerings, leavened arton and unleavened arton, according ot the
letter of the Greek text. When they are specifically different they are
referred to as azymes or leavened arton, but arton on its own can
be used for either of them in common, equally for one or the other. Neither
genus is used more or less properly as the predicate than the other. Therefore,
your distinction, which you made about proper and improper [usage], was meaningless.
Therefore, where it is said in the Gospel: Jesus took the arton, it
stands for bread, not specifying a particular bread. . . . (The Disputatio of the Latins and the Greeks, 1234 [trans. Jeff Brubaker; Translated Texts
for Byzantinists 12; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2022], 184-86)