If judges do not press the accused, or those charged with crimes, with frequent interrogations, they can by no means sufficiently come to the knowledge of the truth, nor can crimes be duly and canonically proved or attested, as in inquiries concerning the faith it has always been judged necessary. Therefore that Quesnellian assertion also totters and falls, namely that in the Acts of the Council of Constantinople nothing at all occurred that was not done duly and canonically. Since we find one thing that was proscribed by the Apostolic See, and understand that the judges themselves, and Flavian himself, were deservedly reproved, for whose cause a new judgment had to be instituted according to the rules prescribed by the same St. Leo...