valuable document and because it proves that the Bishop
of Rome at that time exercised no universal jurisdiction
and did not have those prerogatives that his successors in
later ages claimed that he had.^29
- The letter opened thus: "Julius to Danius,
Flaceillus, Narcissus, Eusebius, Maris, Macedonius,
Theodorus, and their friends who wrote to us from
Antioch, our dearly beloved brethren, salutations ... "
Julius then continues: "I read your letter brought
to me by my priests Elpidius and Philoxenus, and I was
astonished to find that in answer to my letter, written with
affection and love for the Truth, you sent me an answer
full of bitterness and disrespect. The pride and arrogance
of those who have written it are reflected in every line;
such sentiments are far from Christian. In fact the spirit
of dispute bursts from it instead of the spirit of love. If
the writer of this letter desired to give proof of his
eloquence, he might have reserved it for other occasions.
In ecclesiastical affairs, the apostolic canons are to be
sought rather than eloquence ... If it pleased some of you
to listen to the voice of anger and write a letter under its
sway, the sun should not have set on such anger, still less
should it have been consigned to paper. What did you
find in my letter to legitimise such rage? Is it because I
have invited you to the council? This invitation should
have delighted you: those who have no doubt whatsoever
on the justice of their acts cannot be discontented when
their acts are subjected to examination-they ought rather
to be persuaded that what has been passed with justice
will not be found unjust. That is why the great Council of
Nicea permitted the discussion of the acts of previous
councils ... A tradition established by the Church and