Latin ecclesiastics.
1. The first of that name who occupied the papal throne, is usually styled the GREAT. He was a native of Rome, and must have been born towards the close of the fourth century, although the precise year is unknown. Nothing has been recorded concerning his parents, except that his father was called Quintianus, nor with regard to his early training; but when we remark the erudition and polished accuracy displayed in his writings, and the early age at which he rose to offices of high trust, it becomes manifest that his great natural talents must have been cultivated with uncommon assiduity and skill. While yet an acolyte he was despatched, in A. D. 418, to Carthage, for the purpose of conveying to Aurelius and the other African bishops the sentiments of Zosimus concerning the Pelagian doctrines of Coelestius. [COELESTIUS.] Under Coelestinus [COELESTINUS] he discharged the duties of a deacon; and the reputation even then (431) enjoyed by him is clearly indicated by the terms of the epistle prefixed to the seven books, De Incarnatione Christi, of Cassianus, who at his request had undertaken this work against the Nestorian heresy. Having obtained the full confidence of Sixtus III., to whom he rendered much good service, he attracted the notice of Valentinian III., and by the orders of the emperor undertook a mission to Gaul, in order to soothe the formidable dissensions of Aetius and Albinus. [AETIUS.] While Leo was engaged in this delicate negotiation, which was conducted with singular prudence and perfect success, the chief pontiff died, and by the unanimous voice of the clergy and laity the absent deacon was chosen to fill the vacant seat, and on his return was solemnly installed, A. D. 440.
From the earliest ages until this epoch no man who combined lofty ambition with commanding intellect and political dexterity had presided over the Roman see: and although its influence had gradually increased, and many popes had sought to extend and confirm that influence, yet they had merely availed themselves of accidental circumstances to augment their own personal authority, without acting upon any distinct and well devised scheme. But Leo, while he sedulously watched over the purity of his own peculiar flock, concentrated
In the East the struggle was much more complicated, the result much less satisfactory. The Archimandrite Eutyches [ EUTYCHES], in his ve-hement denunciation of Nestorius, having been betrayed into errors, very different indeed, but equally dangerous, was anathematised, deposed, and excommunicated, in A. D. 448, by the synod of Constantinople. Against this sentence he sought redress, by soliciting the interference of the bishops of Alexandria and Rome. By the former his cause was eagerly espoused; the latter, although at first disposed to listen favourably to a complaint which he chose to regard as an appeal from an inferior to a higher court, was eventually induced, either by policy or conviction, to reject the application, and drew up an elaborate epistle to the patriarch Flavianus, in which the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation was authoritatively expounded and defined. Meanwhile, a general council was summoned to be held on the 1st of August, 449, at Ephesus, and thither the ambassadors of Leo repaired, for the purpose of reading publicly the above letter. But a great majority of the congregated fathers acting under control of the president, Dioscuros of Alexandria, refused to listen to the document, passed tumultuously a series of resolutions favourable to Eutyches, excommunicated the most zealous of his opponents, and not only treated the Roman envoys with indignity, but even offered violence to their persons. Hence this assembly, whose acts were all subsequently annulled, is known in ecclesiastical history as the Synodus Latrocinalis. The vehement complaints addressed to Theodosius by the orthodox leaders proved fruitless, and the triumph of their opponents was for a time complete, when the sudden death of the emperor in 450 again awakened the hopes and called forth the exertions of Leo. In consequence of the pressing representations of his envoys, Anatolius, the successor of Flavianus, together with all the clergy of Constantinople, were induced to subscribe the Confession of Faith contained in the Epistle to Flavianus, and to transmit it for signature to all the dioceses of the East. Encouraged by this success, Leo solicited the new monarch Marcianus to summon a grand council, for the final adjustment of the questions concerning the nature of Christ, which still proved a source of discord, and strained every nerve to have it held in Italy, where his own adherents would necessarily have preponderated. In this, however, he failed. Nicaea was the place first fixed upon, but it eventually met at Chalcedon in October, 451. Although the Roman legates, whose language was of the most imperious description, did not fail broadly to assert the pretensions put forth by the representative of St. Peter, at first all went smoothly. The Epistle to Flavianus was admitted as a rule of faith for the guidance of the universal church, and no protest was entered against the spirit of arrogant assumption in which it was conceived. But when the whole of the special business was concluded, at the very last sitting, a formal resolution was proposed and passed, to the effect that while the Roman see was, in virtue of its antiquity, entitled to take formal precedence of every other, the see of Constantinople was to stand next in rank, was to be regarded as independent of every other, and to exercise full jurisdiction over the churches of Asia, Thrace, and Pontus. The resistance of Leo was all in vain. The obnoxious canons were fully confirmed, and thus one half of the sovereignty at which he aimed was for ever lost, at the very moment when victory seemed no longer doubtful. Two other events in the active life of this remarkable man must not be passed over in silence. In 452, when Attila was advancing in full career upon Rome, Leo was selected as the chief of an embassy, sent forth in the forlorn hope of propitiating the fierce conqueror. What the arguments employed by the eloquent suppliant may have been history has failed to record. The result is well known. The Hun not only spared the metropolis, but evacuated Italy, and returned with his
His last anxiety arose from the tumults excited in the church at Alexandria about 457 by the disorderly proceedings of Timotheus Aelurus. Having united with the emperor of the East and with the patriarch of Constantinople in restoring order and discipline, and having written a congratulatory letter to the clergy of Alexandria upon the happy termination of their troubles, he soon after died, on the 10th of November, 461.