o trouble himself any more about the Roman See. He made
no pretence to give any satisfaction for what he had done. Before he had
been the champion of orthodoxy, now he had become in league with heretics.
But he lost all remaining confidence among Catholics. The zealous monks of
his own city withdrew from his communion, and sent one of themselves,
Symeon, to Rome to inform the Pope of all that had happened, and disclose
the faithless behaviour of his legates.[35]

In another letter the Pope had cited Acacius to appear at Rome to meet the
accusation brought against him by John Talaia, the patriarch of Alexandria.
Acacius took no notice of this citation, nor of the complaint brought
against him.

Thereupon, the Pope, in a council of seventy-seven bishops, held at Rome
the 28th July, 484, made inquiry into all this transaction. He annulled the
judgment on Peter the Stammerer, passed without his authority by his
legates, deprived them of their offices, and of communion. He renewed the
condemnation of Peter the Stammerer, he had in the interval admonished
Acacius again, without result. He now issued the decree of deposition upon
him. It runs in the following words:

"You are[36] guilty of many transgressions; have often treated with insult
the venerable Nicene Council; have unrightfully claimed jurisdiction over
provinces not belonging to you. In the case of intruding heretics, ordained
likewise by heretics, whom you had yourself condemned, and whose
condemnation you had urged upon the Apostolic See, you not only received
them to your communion, but even set them over other Churches, which was
not, even in the case of Catholics, allowable; or have even given them
higher rank undeservedly. John is an instance of this. When he was not
accepted by the Catholics at Apamea, and had been driven away from Antioch,
you set him over the Tyrians. Humerius also, having been degraded from the
diaconite and deprived of the Christian name, you advanced to the
priesthood. And as if these seemed to you minor offences, in the boldness
of your pride you assaulted the truth itself of apostolic doctrine. That
Peter, whose condemnation by my predecessor of holy memory you had yourself
recorded, as the subjoined proofs show, you suffered by your connivance
again to invade the see of the blessed evangelist Mark, to drive out
orthodox bishops and clergy, and ordain, no doubt, such as himself, to
expel one who was there regularly established, and ho