Zosimus (4), bp. of Rome after Innocent I., from Mar. 18, 417, to Dec. 25, 418, under Honorius as the Western and Theodosius II. as the Eastern emperor.
, having been expelled from Constantinople by the patriarch Atticus, went to Rome, 417, hoping for the support of Zosimus, who had newly succeeded to the Roman see. Atticus had written letters about Coelestius to Asia, Carthage, and Thessalonica, but not to Rome; the churches of Rome and Constantinople not being then in full communion, owing to the name of John Chrysostom not having been restored to the diptychs of the latter church. On the other hand, Zosimus had before him, when Coelestius appealed to him, letters addressed by Pelagius to pope Innocent, but not received by him before his death. These letters had by no means satisfied St. Augustine (de Pecc. Orig. c. 17, 21; De Grat. x. 30, 31); but being expressed so as to evade the main points at issue, they may have seemed a sufficient exculpation to the pope, less sharpsighted than Augustine in detecting heresy, and apparently less ready to find fault with it in this case. Thus Zosimus was disposed to receive Coelestius with favour, while the independent action of the African bishops in the time of Innocent may have further inclined him to give the condemned persons a chance of clearing themselves. Coelestius appeared before him in the church of St. Clement, presented his defence, and was questioned as to whether he spoke sincerely and assented to what pope Innocent had written to the African bishops against the heresies imputed to him and Pelagius. This, Augustine tells us, he did, but refused to condemn the alleged errors imputed to him in the libellus of Paulinus (his original accuser at Carthage, 412), which had been sent to Rome. He further, according to Augustine, desired the pope's correction of any error of which he might through ignorance have been guilty (Aug. de Pecc. Orig. c. 607). Zosimus thereupon took up his cause, as that of one unfairly and improperly condemned. He wrote to this effect to Aurelius and the African bishops, desiring them either to send persons to Rome to convict the accused of heresy or to hold him innocent, and inveighing against the two Gallican bishops, Heros and Lazarus, who had been the accusers of Coelestius. Zosimus wrote a second time to Aurelius and the Africans, having meanwhile received a letter in favour of Pelagius from Praylius, bp. of Jerusalem, and others from Pelagius himself. These last had entirely satisfied him of the writer's orthodoxy; they had been publicly read at Rome, and received (says Zosimus) with universal joy; and Zosimus wrote again
to Carthage, declaring Pelagius and Coelestius
to have fully vindicated themselves against
the calumnious accusations of those "whirlwinds
and storms of the church," Heros and
Lazarus; to have been condemned by unjust
judges; and to be still in the church's communion. He sent with his letter copies of those which he had received from Pelagius.
By the same messenger Zosimus summoned
Paulinus, the original accuser of Coelestius, to Rome. Coelestius had retorted on Paulinus the charge of heresy, and neither the latter nor any other accusers had come to Rome to prove their charges, and now Paulinus respectfully refused to go, saying there was no need. He assumes in his extant reply that the pope's verdict had already been on his side, in that Coelestius had been called upon at Rome, however in vain, to condemn the heresies which he, Paulinus, had charged him with. Aurelius also, and the other African bishops, remained resolute. Several letters, no longer extant, appear to have passed between them and Zosimus, alluded to by Augustine (contra Duas Ep. Pelag. lib. ii. c. 3), and by Zosimus himself. Early in 418 they held a council of 214 bishops at Carthage, which confirmed their condemnation of Pelagius and Coelestius, and declared, with regard to Rome, that they must hold the verdict of Innocent against the heresiarchs to be still in force, unless the latter should recant. The decrees of this council were sent to Zosimus; and he, in his extant reply, dated Mar. 21, 418, begins by a lengthy assertion of the authority of the Roman see inherited from St. Peter, which was such, he says, that none might dare to dispute its judgment. Still, he declares himself willing to consult his brethren, though not as being ignorant of what ought to be done or requiring their concurrence.