1 Complaint of all this has very justly been made recently by the Rev. Luke Rivington, a Romau Catholic writer, in his work The Primitive Church and the See of Peter, p 336.

1 It should be noted that in the Acts Cyril is described as having "the place of the most holy and sacred Archbishop of the Roman Church C(lestine." Hefele says "that Cyril presided as Pope's vicar is asserted also by Mennas of Constantinople and other Greek bishops in their letter to Pope Vigilius, in Mausi, t. ix., p. 62; Hardouin,t . iii.. p.10." (Hef.,Hist. of the Councils, Vol.111., p.46, n. 4.)

2 This seems to me to be the climax of improbable statements. There are many other things which will induce the curious reader to suspect that the Acts are not in good shape.

1 This letter we know was originally written in Latin, and that it was tsanslated into Greek and then read afterwards in that language to the Council. There would seem to be no doubt that the Greek text we now find in the Acts is that first translation, but whether the Latin is the original or whether it is a translation back again from the Greek is not known, so far as I am aware. Certainly the Latin is of the most extraordinary character. and suggests that it was the work of one not skilled in that tongue. The text in several places is manifestly corrupt and the Greek and Latin do not always agree. If I may venture to express an opinion I should say that the Greek was more lucid. Although in nineteen places Labbe considers the true reading uncertain.

1 This seems to be ceertainly corrupt. I have literally followed the Greek.