Letter to the Emperor Mauritius

In a letter to Emperor Mauritius, St. Gregory the Great (Dvoeslov) expresses deep concern about the appropriation of the title “ecumenical bishop” by Patriarch John of Constantinople. The saint, referring to the teaching on the primacy of the Apostle Peter and the practice of the Roman popes, who renounced this title in order to preserve equality between all bishops, sees in this desire a manifestation of pride and an encroachment on the authority of the imperial power, as well as a danger to the unity of the Universal Church. He calls on the emperor to take measures to suppress this practice, which he considers offensive to all shepherds and contrary to the gospel and canonical institutions. It is known to everyone familiar with the Gospel teaching that, according to the word of the Lord, Saint Peter, the head of all the apostles (omnium apostolorum principi), was entrusted with the leadership of the entire Church, for he was told: “Peter, do you love me? Feed my sheep." It was said to him: “Peter, Satan has asked that you be sifted like wheat; and I prayed for you, so that your faith would not fail. And you, who have been converted before, strengthen the faith of your brothers.” It was said to him: “You are a stone, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven: whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” Thus. Peter receives the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, he is given the power to bind and decide on earth, he is entrusted with the care of the Church and the supreme authority in it (cura totius ecclesiae et principatus), and despite all this he is not called a universal apostle (universalis apostolus); and my most holy man, my companion in the priesthood, John 1 (consacerdos meus), wishes to be called an ecumenical bishop. At the same time, I must exclaim and say: oh, times, oh, morals! (oh, tempora, oh, mores!). At a time when everything fell under the rule of the barbarians, when cities were destroyed, fortresses razed, provinces devastated; when the fields are left without hands, the idolaters run rampant and dominate to the destruction of the believers: and at such a time the clergy covet vain titles and are proud to bear new, pagan names, instead of throwing themselves into the dust, shedding tears. Am I defending, most pious sovereign (piissime domine), my own cause? Do I really want to take revenge on my personal offense by saying this? No, I speak in defense of God’s cause and the cause of the Universal Church. Who dares to assign a new name to himself, contrary to the decrees of the Gospel (statuta evangelica) and canonical definitions (canonum decreta)? However, did you really find only one who decided to call himself universal? In fact, in the Church of Constantinople, I know, there were many such shepherds who fell into the abyss of heresy and became not only heretics, but even heresiarchs. This was your Nestorius, who allowed two persons in Jesus Christ, the mediator between God and people. He stooped to Jewish unbelief, not recognizing that God could become man. From your midst also came Macedonius, who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, consubstantial with the Father and the Son. If someone in such a church arrogates to himself the name of the universal, then good people will think; consequently, the Universal Church, God forbid, turned away from its path when the one who was called universal fell. But let this blasphemous name (nomen blasphemiae) be far from the hearts of Christians, which is offensive to the honor of all shepherds when it is recklessly appropriated by one person. This title was proposed by the highly venerable Council of Chalcedon to the Roman Pontiff, in honor of blessed Peter, prince of the apostles. However, not one of the Roman Pontiffs called themselves by this distinctive name, and did not even agree to accept it, precisely because, by assigning themselves a special title, they would not deprive other clergy of the due honor. So, what can it mean that, although we were offered this title, we do not use it, while another, to whom no one offered it, dares to appropriate it for himself? Anyone who decides to disregard canonical decrees must be brought to obedience to the authority of the most pious monarchs. Whoever insults the holy Universal Church, in whose heart pride rages, who wants to use special titles and finally wants to place himself above the prerogative of your power with this title - he must be punished. So we all suffer from this scandal (scandalum palimur). Let the culprit of the scandal itself turn to the path of truth, and then the disagreements between the pastors of the Church will disappear. I consider myself a servant of all shepherds to the extent that they behave in a manner befitting shepherds. The one who, out of vainglorious pride, in opposition to the will of almighty God and the decrees of the fathers, raises his neck, will not bend mine, not even with a sword, because I trust in the almighty Lord. John IV the Faster, Patriarch of Constantinople (582–595).