Me di la molestia y lei esa carta, lee esto:
On the same occasion of this letter and subsequent correspondence on the same subject, see Prolegomena, pp. xiv., xxii.
1587 As to this assertion (repeated in V. 20, 43, and in VIII. 30), Giesler says, “Gregory was mistaken in believing that at the Council of Chalcedon the name Universalis Episcopus was given to the bishop of Rome. He is styled οἰκουμενικὸς ἀρχιεπίσκοπος (Mansi VI. 1006, 1012), as other patriarchs also. But in another place the title was surreptitiously introduced into the Latin acts by the Romish legates. In the sentence passed on Dioscurus, actio iii (Mansi VI. 1048), the Council say, ὁ ἁγιώτατος καὶ μακαριώτατος ἀρχιεπίσκοπος τῆς μεγάλης καὶ πρεσβυτέρας ῾Ρώμης Λέων: on the contrary, in the Latin acts which Leo sent to the Gallic bishops (Leonis, Ep. 103, al. 82), we read; ‘Sanctus ac beatissimus Papa, caput universalis Ecclesiæ, Leo.’ In the older editions the beginning of Leo’s Epist. 97 (ap. Quesn. 134, Baller. 165), runs thus: ‘Leo Romæ et universalis catholicæque Ecclesiæ Episcopus Leoni semper Augusto salutem.’ Quesnel and the Ballerini, however, found in all the Codices only, ‘Leo Episcopus Leoni Augusto.’” (Giesler’s Eccl. Hist., 2nd Period, 1st Division, ch. iii. § 94, note 72).
1588 Cf. III. 53, and reff.
Salud.