The following is taken from Migne, PL 102:971-76, “Acta Collationis Romanae: Descripta A Smaragdo Abbate Santi Michaelis.” The material in bold corresponds to PL 102:971-72. It shows that Leo, a Bishop of Rome/Pope, understood the Papacy/See of Rome to be subject to review by an ecumenical council, which he viewed as being of a higher authority.
Lectis a praedictis missis per
ordinem testimoniis, atque a domno apostolico diligentissime auditis, ait: Ita
sentio, ita teneo, cum his auctoribus, et sacrae Scripturae auctoritatibus. Si
quis aliter de hac re sentire vel docere voluerit, defendo; et nisi conversus
fuerit, et secundum hunc sensum tenere voluerit, contraria sentientem funditus
abicio. His dictis, novi quod nonnulla colloquendo potius quam disputando
praecesserunt: quorum series sensuum, seu verborum, nisi quod inde fuit, non
satis memoriae occurrit. Cumque eadem collatio ad hoc usque procederet, ut iam
magis certa disputatio, quam ut supra collocutio habenda esset; et si non eadem
fuit proprietas sermonum, in quantum recordari valeo, iste tamen fuit cursus
sensuum, et summa conclusio novissimarum definitionum. — Missi. Quia vero, ut
dicitis, ita certissimum credendum est, credendo immutabiliter tenendum,
tenendo vero, sicubi necesse fuerit, constantissime defendendum est, nunquid
non id nescientibus docendum, scientibus autem, ut id attentius teneamus,
confirmandum est? — Papa. Ita est. —
Missi. Si ita est, si quis hoc nescierit, vel ita non crediderit, num salvus
esse poterit? — Papa. Quisquis ad hoc sensu subtiliore pertingere potest, et
id scire, aut ita sciens credere noluerit, salvus esse non poterit. Sunt enim
multa, e quibus istud unum est, sacrae fidei altiora mysteria subtilioraque
sacramenta, ad quorum indagationem pertingere multi valent; multi vero, aut
aetatis quantitate, aut intelligentiae qualitate praepediti, non valent. Et
ideo, ut praediximus, qui potuerit et noverit, salvus esse non poterit. —
Missi. Si ergo ita est, imo quia ita est, quod non credere non licet, et non
tacendo docere licet, cur non licet cantare, vel cantando docere? — Papa.
Licet, inquam, licet docendo cantare, et cantando docere. Sed illicite in
prohibitis, nec scribendo, nec cantando licet inserere. — Missi. Quia ergo
utrisque notum est, quod ideo a vobis, ut id symbolum cantando vel scribendo
inseratur, illicitum ducatur vel dicatur, quia illi qui idem symbolum
condiderunt non indiderunt, ut cetera, et sequentes principales synodi,
Chalcedonensis scilicet quarta, Constantinopolitana quoque quinta et sexta, ut
novum ultra symbolum a quoquam qualibet necessitate, seu salvandi homines
devotione, condere, et in volueribus tollendo, addendo, mutando quidquam
inserere prohibuerunt, non est ibi diutius immorandum. Sed hoc quaero, hoc ut
dicatur rogo: quia id credere bonum est, bonum hodie sicut ad credendum ita ad
cantandum tunc esse, si ab eis insertum fuisset. — Papa. Bonum certe, et valde
bonum, utpote tam fidei sacramentum magnum; quod non bene est non credere,
quisquis ad hoc valet pertinere. — Missi. Nunquid non bene idem tunc auctores
fecissent, si quoniam tantum addendo syllabas, tam necessarium fidei
sacramentum cunctis ecclesiae secretis perquirentibus redderetur? — Papa. Sicut
non audeo dicere non bene fecissent, si fecissent, quia procul dubio sicut
ceteri qui vel considerarunt, scientes itaque, et non tam humana quam divina
illuminatione sapientes fecerunt, ita quoque non audeo dicere istud eos nobis
minus intellexisse; propterea eorum dimiserunt, vel cur dimittere, sic et omnia
prohibuerunt. Tu et tui videte quid sentiatis de nobis. Nam et ego non illud
non dico praeferram, sed satis illud abest mihi ut conquisire praesumam. —
Missi. Absit etiam, Pater, Deo nostro protegente, illud a nobis, ut nos
quidquam horum dissentire vel dicamus, vel superbia inflati, vel in divinis
rebus humanae laudis cupiditate provocati, nec si hoc nobis fides non tantum
praestet, verum etiam ostendere praesumamus: sed tantum secundum in rebus temporum
qualitatem, et imbecillitatem fratrum nostrorum caritate compatientes, illud
quaerimus, in quo laboremus, ut, quia finis mundi appropinquat, in quo sicut
praedicta sunt tempora periculosa, etiam ideo inter cetera maxime fratribus
nostris prodesse valeamus. Quo ergo fidei in Domino in sacramento fidei reddere
studeamus, et idcirco quia praefatum symbolum a quibusdam ita cantari
reperimus, et quod id ecclesiasticae congruere fidei, sicut sentimus, atque per
hoc et nunc iam plurimos doctos, et sine fine usque in finem saeculi de tanto
mysterio, si ita teneatur, instruendos esse cognovimus, qui nequaquam
instrueretur, nisi cantaretur: melius nobis visum fuit cantando indoctos
instruere, quam tacendo indoctos relinquere. Si enim sciret paternitas tua, quanta
sunt hodie milia id scientium quia cantatur, qui numquam sciturum essent nisi
cantarentur, fortasse nobiscum teneres, et id tuo etiam consensu ut cantaretur
acquiesceres. — Papa. Interim assentio. Verumtamen, quaeso, responde mihi: Nam
universa huiusmodi fidei mystica sacramenta, quae symbolo non continentur, sine
quibus quisque, qui ad hoc pertingere potest, catholicus esse non potest,
symbolis inserenda, et propter compendium minus intelligendum, ut cuique
libuerit, addenda sunt? — Missi. Nequaquam: quia non aeque omnia necessaria
sunt. — Papa. Etsi non omnia, certe plurima sunt his similia, quae nisi a
sapientibus credantur, catholici esse non possunt. — Missi. Dabisne aliquid,
non dico sublimius, sed saltem huic simile symbolo deesse? — Papa. Nempe dabo,
et abundanter dabo. — Missi. Da primo unum, et si necesse fuerit, adde alterum.
— Papa. Quia amica agitur contentione quod agitur, et pro utramque partem
quaeritur salus quod quaeritur (atque utinam quocies aliquid huiusmodi in
maioribus seu in minoribus ecclesiasticis vel catholicis utilitatibus
quaeritur, ita per omnia pacifice sine perversa intentione quaereretur!), ne
quid forte de tam referente mysterio temere loquamur, detur considerandi locus,
et dabimus quidquid de his dederit Dominus. — Et meturma dilatione congrua
data, ait Papa: Nunquid magis salutare est credere, periculosumve non credere,
Spiritum Sanctum a Filio sicut a Patre procedere, quam Filium sapientiam Deum a
sapientia Deo, veritatem Deum a veritate Deo genitum esse, et tamen utrumque
unam sapientiam, unam veritatem essentialiter Deum esse, cum tamen constet id a
sanctis Patribus eidem symbolo inditum non esse? Si ergo haec duo, sicuti
sapientes decet, in tam familiari disputatione ad hoc valent, ut nobiscum
sentiat et consentiat, tot priores catholicos Patres, qui hoc unde agitur vel
symbolis non inseruerunt, vel inserere quemadmodum cetera, ut supra dictum est,
prohibuerunt: non praesentis ignorantia, non futura negligentia providentia
praetermisisse, et praetermissum ne mitteretur prohibuisse, a coacervandis
testimoniis libentissime quiescimus. Sciendum vero, non solum secundum
essentiam divinitatis, verum etiam secundum mysterium Dominicae incarnationis,
tanta, Deo auctore, et ex eorundem Patrum auctoritate damus et talia, quanta non
solum sapientibus satisfacere, sed etiam stultos valent opprimere. — Missi.
Non, inquam, necesse est in eo laborare, an nesciamus quod scimus: quia
quidquid exinde ceteri sciunt, nos Deo auctore scimus, aut scire possumus, si
non scimus. — Papa. Hoc est, inquit, quod miramur, qui sine proficuo labore
potestis quiescere, laboratis ne quiescatis. — Missi. Non ideo laboramus ne
quiescamus, sed ne propter inertiam pii laboris premium amittamus, et salva
diligentiore inquisitione, declinataque pertinaci contentione, adhuc maius
aestimamus lucrum, quod per hoc in corde quaerentium acquiritur, quam
detrimentum in eo fieri illorum qui addiderunt, ac si per contumaciam
contemptores paternarum constitutionum existerent. Aliud est enim per
arrogantiam transiliendo bona contemnere, aliud bona per benevolentiam meliora
efficere. — Papa. Istud quoque etsi in quibusdam ut agatur bonum est, non tamen
ideo ubique agendum est. Qua de re multa id ita esse probantia adduci poterant
testimonia: sed res per se admodum patet, quanto melius sit, ut quisque
quodlibet bonum ita ut est utile reddere studeat; aut, si forte id ipsum bonum
melius efficere nititur, hoc primo caveat, hoc magnopere perpendat, ne et se
ultra quam debuit temerarium praesumendo, et illud quod per se salubre erat
reddat noxium corrumpendo. Nisi quia forte asserere velit de praesenti unde
agitur, vel similibus capitulis, quae sine periculo suo docere licet et
discere, ut ordo docendi licitus dimittatur, et ibi deserantur, ubi numquam
deinceps docens aut discens innocens, sed semper sane in transgressionis
crimine merito culpabilis uterque iudicetur. Quod te fortasse, si non
dedigneris audire, non immoratur: qui huc quod hactenus in Ecclesia Dei, et
sibi quisque sapiens scire, et sine cogitatione delicti insipienter potuit
docere, iam deinceps non dico stultus discere, sed nec ipse sapiens sine
praevaricatione possit cantare, cantandove ut vultis quemquam docere, et dum
multis alio quam debetis tramite prodesse eligitis, nullum in hac duntaxat
parte dimittis, cui si vos secutus fuerit non noceatis.
Nam de eo quod supra docuistis, non aeque judicandus vel habendus sit ille
qui tale aliquid devote fructum quaerendo ageret, illo qui hoc contumaci
iussione praesumeret. Hac defensio, vel, si dici liceat, tergiversatio, non huc
respicit, non istud intendit: quia non idem patres discernendo vel decreverunt,
nec sanxerunt, ut ipsum benevolus praesumeret, non malevolus, sed tantummodo
nullus. — Missi. Nunquid non a te id ipsum symbolum est data in ecclesia
cantandi licentia? Nunquid a nobis hic usus ille cantandi processit? Hinc
etenim illuc mos idem cantandi, non a nobis huc advenit: et quomodo illum usque
hodie cantamus? — Papa. Ego licentiam dedi cantandi; non autem cantando
quidpiam addendi, minuendi, seu mutandi: et ut expressius aliquid, quia vos
cogitis, loquar, quandiu vobis in hoc satis fuit, quomodo in huiusmodi cantando
vel celebrando sacrosanctis mysteriis sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia, nequaquam
aut nobis in talibus laborare, aut aliis laborandi occasionem necesse fuit
ingerere. Quod vero asseritis ideo vos ita cantare, quoniam alios in istis
partibus vobis priores audistis cantasse, quid ad nos? Nos enim id ipsum non
cantamus, sed legimus, et legendo docere, nec tamen legendo aut docendo addere
quidpiam eidem symbolo inserendo praesumimus. Quae vero praedictis symbolis
fidei tantum non congruentia deesse cognoscimus, non, ut saepe dictum est,
inserere praesumimus, sed, locis temporibusve opportunis quibus competit
ministrare curamus. —
Missi. Ergo, ut video, illud a vestra paternitate decernitur, ut primo
illud, de quo quaestio agitur, de saepe fato symbolo tollatur, et tunc demum a
quolibet licite ac libere, sive cantando, sive tradendo, discatur et doceatur.
— Papa. Ita procul dubio a
nostra parte decernitur: ita quoque ut a vestra assentietur, a nobis omnimodis
suadetur. — Missi. Quanquam ergo, ut supra ipse dixisti, pro ambarum partium
quaeritur salute quod quaeritur, sublatis his quae vultis, bonum est ut idem symbolum
cantetur. — Papa. Bonum sane.
Quod tamen non imperando, sed ut prius permittendo dicimus: quia illud sicuti
tunc ita et nunc, si sincere agatur, utile indigentibus esse posse non
ignoramus. — Missi. Quia vero, ut dicitis, et verum dicitis, bonum est cantare
id ipsum symbolum, nunquid enim si sermo plenus recta fide e medio tollatur,
idem sermo ab omnibus ac si contra fidem sit condemnabitur? Quale ergo
dabis consilium, ne idipsum ad aliquod transeat exitium? — Papa. Si priusquam ita cantaretur interrogatus essem, ne
insereretur utique respondissem. At nunc, quod tamen non affirmando, sed
vobiscum pariter tractando dico, quantum menti occurrit, ita mihi videtur posse
utrumque fieri: ut paulatim in palatio, quia in nostra sancta ecclesia non
cantatur, cantandi consuetudo eiusdem symboli intermittatur; sicque fiat, ut
quod id ipsum ut cantaretur non quaelibet imperantis auctoritas, sed potius
audiendi id fecerat novitas; si dimittatur a vobis, dimittetur ab omnibus: et
ita fortasse quantum esse potest, non incongrue utrumque fieri possit: ut quod
iam nunc a quibusque prius nescientibus recte creditur creetur, et tamen
illicita cantandi consuetudo sine cuiusque fidei laesione tollatur.
After the monks had read out the testimonies in order
and the lord pope had listened to them most carefully, he said: “This is my
view, this is what I hold, together with these authorities and the authorities
of Holy Scripture. If anyone wants to think or teach otherwise about this
matter, I oppose it; and unless he is converted and wants to hold to this
sense, I utterly reject anyone who thinks differently.” After these words, I
know that some things had gone before more by conversation than by formal disputation;
the sequence of the ideas, or of the words, I do not now remember clearly
except in so far as it happened there. And since that exchange had gone on to
the point where it was now more a settled disputation than a mere conversation,
and although the wording was not the same, as far as I can recall, the course
of the argument and the final conclusion of the latest definitions were as
follows.
The monks said: “Since, as you say, this must most
certainly be believed, immutably held once believed, and when necessary most
steadfastly defended once held, ought it not also to be taught to those who do
not know it, and confirmed to those who do, so that we may hold it more
carefully?” The pope answered, “Yes, it is so.” The monks continued: “If that
is so, if someone does not know this or does not believe it thus, can he be
saved?” The pope replied: “Whoever can reach this with a more subtle
understanding, and knows it, or refuses to believe it even when he knows it,
cannot be saved. For there are many things, and this is one of them: the higher
mysteries and subtler sacraments of the holy faith, whose investigation many
are able to pursue; but many, hindered either by age or by the level of their
understanding, are not able. Therefore, as I said, the one who can know it and
does know it cannot be saved.”
The monks said: “Then if that is so, or rather because
it is so, since it is not permitted not to believe it, and it is permitted to
teach it not by silence, why is it not permitted to sing it, or to teach by
singing?” The pope replied: “It is permitted, I say, yes, it is permitted to
sing while teaching, and to teach while singing. But in forbidden matters it is
not permitted to insert anything either by writing or by singing.” The monks
said: “Since it is clear to both sides that you declare it illicit to insert
that creed by singing or writing because those who composed the creed did not
include it, as also the subsequent chief synods—the fourth of Chalcedon and
also the fifth and sixth of Constantinople—prohibited anyone, for any necessity
whatever or even out of zeal to save men, from composing anything beyond the
creed, or from adding, removing, or changing anything in it, there is no need
to dwell on that further. But I ask this, and beg that it be said: since
believing this is good, was it not also good then for it to be sung if it had
been inserted by them?” The pope answered: “Certainly it would have been good,
and very good indeed, as a great sacrament of the faith; it is not good not to
believe it, whoever is capable of attaining to it.”
The monks asked: “Would not those earlier fathers have
done well then, if by adding only syllables they had made so necessary a
sacrament of the faith available to all who investigate the secrets of the
Church?” The pope replied in effect that he would not dare say they would not
have done well if they had done so, since those men clearly acted with
knowledge and not merely with human but with divine illumination. But he did
not dare say that they had understood the matter less than we do; rather, they withheld
it and forbade everything being added. “You and yours,” he said, “must judge
what you think of us. For my part I do not claim to prefer this, nor am I so
far from the matter as to presume to investigate it rashly.” The monks
responded that they did not say this out of pride or from any desire for human
praise, but from charitable concern for the weakness of their brethren and for
the times in which they lived, since the end of the world draws near and the
times are dangerous, and they wanted to help their brethren as much as
possible. Therefore, they said, if the disputed text was found to be sung by
some, and if it was seen to accord with ecclesiastical faith, then it would be
good to sing the creed; indeed, because many learned men now and in the future
would need to be instructed in so great a mystery, it seemed better to instruct
the unlearned by singing than to leave them in ignorance by silence. If the
pope knew how many thousands already learned it because it was sung, and would
never have known it unless it had been sung, perhaps he would agree with them
that it should be sung.
The pope replied that he agreed for the time being, but
asked further: “Are all the mystical sacraments of the faith which are not
contained in the creed, and without which no one who can attain to this is able
to be a Catholic, to be inserted into the creed and added to it for the sake of
brevity, so that anyone may have them?” The monks said, “By no means; not
everything is equally necessary.” The pope answered: “Even if not everything,
certainly many things are like these, and unless they are believed by the wise,
one cannot be Catholic.” The monks asked whether he could give anything, not
necessarily more sublime, but at least something similar, that was missing from
the creed. The pope said that he certainly could, and abundantly. They replied:
“Give one first, and if necessary add another.” The pope said that since the
discussion was amicable and salvation was being sought for both sides, and
since he wished that any such matter in great or small ecclesiastical or
Catholic concerns were always discussed peaceably and without perversity, they
should take time to consider, and then he would give whatever the Lord might
provide.
After a suitable delay, the pope asked whether it is
more salutary to believe, and dangerous not to believe, that the Holy Spirit
proceeds from the Son as from the Father, than to believe that the Son is
begotten as Wisdom, God from God’s Wisdom, Truth from Truth, and yet that both
are one Wisdom and one Truth, essentially God, even though the holy Fathers did
not insert this into the creed. If these two matters, as is fitting for the
wise, are able in so familiar a discussion to bring them to agree with us, then
the many earlier Catholic Fathers who did not insert this matter into the
creed, or who forbade anything to be inserted into it, must not be thought to
have omitted it through present ignorance or future negligence; they forbade
its insertion. So, rather than piling up testimonies further, he said he would
rest content. But it should be understood, he added, that he was giving such
things, with God as author and by the authority of those Fathers, not only to
satisfy the wise but even to refute the foolish.
The monks said there was no need to labor over this if
they already knew what they knew: whatever the others knew about the matter,
they knew, or could know, it by God’s help. The pope replied that this was what
he found remarkable: that they were able to rest without laboring profitably,
while laboring so as not to rest. The monks answered that they did not labor in
order not to rest, but so that they might not lose the reward of pious labor
through laziness; and, while preserving diligent inquiry and setting aside
stubborn contention, they judged the gain greater, because it increases in the
heart of those who seek, than the damage done by the innovations of those who
added the words, as though they were contemptuous of the Fathers’
constitutions. For it is one thing to trample good things underfoot in
arrogance; it is another to improve good things out of goodwill. The pope said
that this too is good in some cases, but it is not therefore to be done
everywhere. He could offer many proofs, he said, but the matter is plain enough
on its own: it is much better for each person to try to preserve whatever good
exists in its usefulness; or, if he is trying to make that good even better, he
must be careful above all not to presume beyond what is proper and thus turn
what was healthy into something harmful. Unless, perhaps, he wishes to speak
about the present case or similar cases, which may be taught and learned
without danger, so that the ordinary rule of teaching may be suspended there
and all remain innocent; but he warned that, once that boundary is crossed,
both teacher and learner are guilty of transgression. What they had previously
taught, he said, could be understood and taught without sin in the Church of
God; but from now on, not only should a foolish person not be allowed to learn
it, but even the wise man himself could not sing it without some breach of
duty, much less teach anyone by singing it.
He then made clear that the issue is not whether
someone who seeks the fruit devoutly should be judged in the same way as
someone who presumes it with contumacious command. That defense or, if one may
say so, evasiveness, does not touch the point here, because the Fathers did not
decree or establish that one man should presume it benevolently, another
malevolently; rather, they allowed no one to add to the creed. The monks then
asked whether he himself had not given permission in the Church for that creed
to be sung. Had this practice not come from them? The pope answered: “I gave
permission for singing; I did not give permission to add, remove, or change
anything by singing. To speak more plainly, since you press me: as long as this
was enough for you, in the Roman Church we had no need either to labor in these
matters or to provide others with an occasion to labor. As for your claim that
you sing it because you heard others in these parts sing it before you, what is
that to us? We do not sing it; we read it, and by reading we teach, but we do
not presume either in reading or in teaching to add anything by inserting it
into the creed. What we know is lacking from the creed, yet does not belong
there, we do not presume to insert; rather, we take care to supply it in
fitting places and times.”
The monks concluded: “Then, as I see it, your Holiness
decrees that the disputed phrase should first be removed from the creed, and
only then may it be freely and lawfully learned and taught, whether by singing
or by instruction.” The pope answered: “That is indeed what we decree on our
side; and we also strongly urge your assent.” The monks said that, as he
himself had said above, since what is being sought is the salvation of both
sides, once the disputed matter is removed it is good that the creed be sung.
The pope agreed that this is indeed good, though not as a command but as a
permission: he did not deny that it could be useful to those in need, then as
now, if it is done sincerely. The monks then argued that if it is good to sing
that creed, and if a statement full of right faith is removed from the middle,
will not that same statement be condemned by all as though it were contrary to
the faith? What counsel, they asked, could prevent it from meeting such a fate?
The pope replied that if he had been asked before it was sung, he would
certainly have said not to insert it. But now, though not asserting it
dogmatically and speaking only in discussion with them, he thought both things
could be done: gradually, in the palace, since it is not sung in their holy
Roman Church, the custom of singing that creed should cease; and if it is given
up by them, it will be given up by all. Then, perhaps, both things could be
achieved without impropriety: what is now rightly believed by those who
previously did not know it would continue to be believed, and at the same time
the unlawful custom of singing it would be removed without harming anyone’s
faith.
