Recovering our memory: Leo the great

Name: Pope Leo the Great
When: Pope from 440-461
Where: Rome, Italy

So what?

Leo I was Pope from 440-461—but what made Leo “great”? For one thing, he made some pretty “great” claims for the power of the papacy; he believed himself, as Pope, to be Saint Peter’s direct successor and invested with his power. But by many accounts he was also a fine preacher and a terrific theologian.

And this was a period of church history when theology was fiercely fought over. At the time, the church was divided over Christology, the theology of the nature of Jesus. How could he be fully human and fully divine at the same time?

During Leo’s time, a man called Dioscorus was gaining influence. He thought that Christ was only divine: his human-ness had been swallowed up in his divine-ness, like a piece of paper becoming part of a fire as it burns. Opposing him was Flavian, who believed that Christ was both completely human and completely divine. A Council at Ephesus was called in 449 to settle the matter. Leo supported Flavian, and sent him an important letter (called Leo’s tome), outlining his position. It was promptly ignored: Dioscorus bullied his way to victory, and Flavian was beaten-up by marauding monks and died of his injuries. Leo was (understandably!) furious.

Two years later there was another council and a chance to get things straight. Some wanted to stick with the wording of the status quo, but its ambiguous language was being interpreted differently by both sides. Leo insisted that a new, categorical statement be made on the nature of Christ’s divinity. The council made a new creed (or statement of faith) saying that Christ was incarnate “from two natures”, human and divine, but that the two natures came “together to form one person” (ie: they were not separate). Leo’s tome proved crucial in formulating this creed and was recognised by the council as orthodox doctrine.

What was in the tome? And why does it matter? If, like Dioscorus said, Christ was only divine in nature, he could not die on humanity’s behalf, as our representative. But if Christ were only human, his death would be insufficient to pay for the sins of so many. Instead, Leo wrote, “he was able to die in his human nature, but unable to die in his divine nature; and so the conditions of our healing were fulfilled. … God was born in the full and perfect nature of humanity … which he took upon himself in order to restore [those qualities in us].”

It’s tempting to look at Leo’s alarming assertion of papal authority and arrogantly overlook all his work. But Leo serves as a good example of what we stand to lose if we forget the fact that it’s possible for the same person to get some things very wrong and—at the same time—get other things very right; although our relationships with others show this to be true every day, when we look back on figures from church history so often we dismiss anything other than a spotless record of scholarship. But if we do that, we miss out on learning from Leo’s wisdom on the wonder of the incarnation.

Good Quote: On the incarnation of Jesus: “Majesty took upon itself humility, strength took upon itself weakness, eternity took upon itself mortality. To pay the debt into which we had fallen, a nature which cannot be harmed was united with a nature which can suffer” (from Leo’s Tome).

Interesting fact: In 452 Attila the Hun invaded Italy, but Leo was able to persuade him to turn back before he sacked Rome. Exactly how he managed it is lost to history.

Prayer of thanks: Jesus, thank you that you were willing to take on humility, weakness and mortality in order to pay our debts and suffer in our place. Thank you Lord for giving Leo insight into the mystery of the incarnation and help us, too, to appreciate the wonder of God becoming human. Help us to share Leo’s desire to know you more completely and therefore love you more. Amen.