ISS
uo
Gauly and the ktter was chosen his successor. Ee-
tuming to Rome, Leo was consecrated on 29 Septem-
ber ofwe same year, and governed the Roman Church
for the next twenty-one years.
Leo's chief aim was to sustain the unity of the Church. Not long after his elevation to the Chair of Peter, he saw himself compelled to combat energet- ically the heresies which seriously threatened church unity even in the West. Leo had ascertained through Bishop Septimus of Altiniun, that in Aquileia prieste, deacons, and clerics, who had been adherents of Pe- la^us, were admitted to communion without an ex- phcit abjuration of their heresy. The pope sharply censured this procediu^, and du'ected that a provin- cial synod should be assembled in Aquileia, at which such persons were to be required to abjiu« Pelagian- ism pubUcly and to subscribe to an imequivocal confession of Faith (epp. i and ii). This zealous pas- tor waged war even more strenuously against Mani- ch^eism, inasmuch as its adherents, who had been (hiven from Africa by the Vandals, had settled in Rome, and had succeeded in establishing a secret Manichssan conununitv there. The pope ordered the faithful to point out these heretics to the priests, and in 443, together vriih the senators and presbyters, con- ducted in person an investigation, in the course of which the leaders of the commimity were examined. In several sermons he emphatically warned the Chris- tians of Rome to be on their guard against this repre- hensible heresy, and repeatedly charged them to give information about its followers, their dwellings, ac- quaintances, and rendezvous (Sermo ix, 4, xvi, 4; zxiv, 4; xxxiv, 4 sq.; xlii, 4 sq.; Ixxvi, 6). A number of Mismichseans were converted and admitted to con- fession; others, who remained obdurate, were in obe- dience to imperial decrees banished from Rome by the civil magistrates. On 30 January, 444, the pope sent a letter to all the bishops of Italy, to which he appended the documents containing his proceedings against the Bianichsans in Rome, and warned them to be on their guard and to take action against the followers of the sect (ep. vii). On 19 June, 445, Emperor Valentinian III issued, doubtless at the pope's instigation, a stem edict in which he established severe pimishments for the Manichseans ("Epist. Leonis", ed. Ballerini, I, 626; ep. viii inter Leon. ep.). Prosper of Aquitaine states m his "Chronicle (ad an. 447; *'Mon. Germ, hist. Auct. antiauissimi", IX, 1, 341 sqq.) that, in con- sequence of Leo s energetic measiu^s, the Manichseans were also driven out of the provinces, and even Orien- tal bishops emulated the pope's example in regard to this sect. In Spain the heresy of Pnscillianism still survived, and for some time had been attracting fr^sh adherents. Bishop Turibius of Astorga became cogni- zant of this, and oy extensive journeys collected mi- nute information about the condition of the churches and the spread of Priscillianism. He compiled the er- rors of the heresfy, wrote a refutation of the same, and sent these documents to several African bishops. He also sent a copy to the pope, whereupon the latter sent a lengthy letter to Turibius (ep. xv) in refutation of the errors of the Priscilliamste. Leo at the same time ord^^ that a council of bishops belonging to the neighbouring provinces should be convened to insti- tute a rigid enquiry, with the object of determining whether any of the bishops had become tainted with the poison of this heresy. Should any such be dis- covered, they were to be excommunicated without hesitation. The pope also addressed a similar letter to the bishops of the Spanish provinces, notifying them that a umversal synoa of aU the chief pastors was to be summoned; if this should be found to be impossible, the bishops of Galicia at least should be assembled. These two synods were in fact held in Spain to deal witii the pomts at issue (Hefele, " Konziliengesch." n, 2nd ed., pp. 306 sqq.). The creator disorg^zed ecclesiastical condition
of certain countries, resulting from national migra*
tions, demanded closer bonds between their episcopate
and Rome for the better promotion of ecclesiastical
life. Leo, with this object in view, determined to
make use of the papal vicariate of the bishops of Aries
for the province of Gaul for the creation of a centre
for the Gallican episcopate in immediate union with
Rome. Li the begmning his efforts were greatly hiuoa-
pered by his conmct with St. Hilary, then Bishop of
Aries (see Hilaky op Arles, Saint). Even earlier,
conflicts had arisen relative to the vicariate of the
bishops of Aries and ite privileges. Hilary made ex-
cessive use of his authority over other ecclesiastical
provinces, and claimed that all bishops should be con-
secrated by him, instead of by their own metropolitan.
When, for example, the complaint was raised that
Bishop Olidonius of Besangon had been consecrated
in violation of the canons — the grounds alleged being
that he had, as a layman, mamed a widow, and, as
a public officer, had given his consent to a death
sentence — Hilary deposed him, and consecrated Im-
portimus as his successor. Gehdonius thereupon ap-
pealed to the pope and set out in person for Rome.
About the same time Hilary, as if the see concerned
had been vacant, consecrated another bishop to take
the place of a certain Bishop Proiectus, who was fll.
Projectus recovered, however, and he too laid a com-
plaint at Rome about the action of the Bishop of
Aries. Hilary then went himself to Rome to justify
his proceedings. The pope assembled a Roman synod
(about 445) and, when the complaints brought against
Celidonius could not be verified, reinstated the latter
in his see. Projectus also received his bishopric again.
Hilary returned to Aries before the synod was over;
the pope deprived him of jurisdiction over the other
Gallic provinces and of metropoUtan righte over the
Erovince of Vienne, only allowing him to retain his ►iocese of Aries.
These decisions were disclosed by Leo in a letter to the bishops of the Province of Vienne (ep. x). At the same time he sent them an edict of Valentinian III of 8 July, 445, in which the pope's measures in regard to St. Hilary were supported, and the primacy of the Bishop of Rome over the whole Church solemnly recognized ("Epist. Leonis," ed. Ballerini, I, 642). On his return to his bishopric Hilary sought a recon- ciliation with the pope. After this there arose no further difficulties t«tween these two saintly men and, after his death in 449, Hilary was declarecl by Leo as "beatffi memoriffi". To Bishop Ravennius, St. Hil- ary's successor in the see of Aries, and the bi^ops of that province, Leo addressed most cordial letters in 449 on the election of the new metropolitan (epp. xl, xli) . When Ravennius consecrated a little later a new bishop to take the place of the deceased Bishop of Vaison, the Archbishop of Vienne, who was then in Rome, took exception to this action. The bishops of the province of Aries then wrote a joint letter to the pope, in which they begged him to restore to Raven- nius tiie rights of which his predecessor Hilary had been deprived (ep. Ixv inter ep. Leonis). In his reply dated 5 A^y, 450 ^ep. Ixvi), Leo acceded to their re- auest. The Archbishop of Vienne was to retain only tne suffragan Bishoprics of Valence, Tarentaise, (jeneva, and Grenoble; all the other sees in the Prov- ince of Vienne were made subject to the Archbishop of Aries, who also became again the mediator be- tween the Holy See and the whole Gallic episco« pate. Leo transmitted to Ravennius (ep. Ixvii), for commimication to the other Gallican bishops, his celebrated letter to Flavian of Constantinople on the Incarnation. Ravennius thereupon convened a S3mod, at which forty-four chief pastors assembled. In their synodal letter of 451, they affirm that they accept the pope's letter as a symbol of faith (ep. xcix inter ep. Leonis). In his answer Leo speaks further of the con- denmation of Nestorius (ep. cii). The Vicariate of
