Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

this council was held in the presence "of the commissioners, officers of the emperor, and councillors of state, "who regulated every motion of it, "and were seated in the middle of "the assembly; that at their left were Paschasinus, and the other legates "of the Pope; and on the right were "Dioscorus, of Alexandria; the holy" gospels were placed in the middle." From this confused narration one would be inclined to infer, that the Pope had not the first authority in the council, and that the patriarch of Alexandria had the first seat; and that the civil officers sat in the same place where the holy gospels were. This therefore requires an explanation. The holy gospels were in the middle, but at the higher end of the council, which was held in a church; and the officers were also in the middle, but at the lower end, towards the door, admitting or excluding those who offered to come in, as we have just seen in the case of Theodoret. The Pope's legates sat next to the sacred volumes, on the right, which was the gospel side, but was the left in regard to persons who stept into the church. So the Pope's legates may be said to have been on the left, that is, on the left of the emperor and his officers, who had their faces turned towards the holy gospels, and the patriarch of Alexandria sat on their right, but on the left of the gospels. Thus it appears, that in this council, and it was the same in all others, there were two presidents," the one over the bishops, this was always the Pope himself, or his legates, and the other over the officers of the crown, and this was the emperor, or some person appointed by him. The council accordingly, writing to St. Leo, says,

St.

about two hundred bishops were present. That Pope Celestin presided to it, by his legate, St. Cyril, of Alexandria, Arcadius and Projectus, bishops, and Philip, priest, Calvin could not deny; but he pretends that "he used 66 an artifice to save the dignity of his see, by giving a commission to Cyril to act in his place, who was to pre"side at any rate.." L. iv. c. 7. No. I. By what right did Calvin pretend that St. Cyril would have presided at Ephesus, although he had been commissioned by the Pope, I cannot see. For Ephesus was not within the jurisdiction of the patriach of Alexandria. The bishops of that see had never presided to any general council; nor any bishop ever did, without a commission from the Pope. Calvin here only betrays his ignorance of ecclesiastical history, or his impudence. Cyril had been appointed the Pope's vicar long before the convocation of this council, and received an order from him to excommunicate, in his name, Nestorius, archbishop of Constantinople, if within a certain term he did not retract his errors." "The authority "of our see," says the Pope, "being now entrusted to thee, and using "with power the representation of our place, thou shalt execute punctual"ly and with vigour, this sentence; "namely, that if within ten days af"ter the notification of it, Nestorius "do not retract his wicked errorsthy holiness will provide for that church, and pronounce him entirely cut off from our body." The Pops informed the clergy of Constantinople of his intended excommunication against their archbishop. "We have "conferred our authority on our holy "brother Cyril, on account of the sea and the distance of the place ;" and to Nestorius himself he wrote,→ "We have sent to our holy fellow bi"shop of Alexandria, the form of this "judgment, with all the documents, "that he may act our vicar." The council accordingly acknowledge in their relation to the emperor, that This council was held A. D. 431, Nestorius had been condemned by au

66

66

66

66

66 "You have presided to the "council as head of its members, and "the emperor for order and decen

[ocr errors]

cy." And the Pope's legate signed, "Paschasinus presiding over the coun"cil, I have approved it, consented to "it, and subscribed it."

EPHESUS.

"This sentence "head of the council," and out of the 200 bishops there assembled from all parts of the world, not one contradicted him; for as he himself observed, the doctrine expressed in his speech was known to all ages, it was a doctrine doubtful to no body. The legates returned thanks to the fathers, that they had' shewn themselves "holy "members of their holy head." Act 2,

CONSTANTINOPLE.

thority of the Pope. "against him and his adherents, even "before the holy synod was assembled, "the most holy Celestin bishop of the 66 great Rome, has testified by letters, "and appointed the most holy Cyril 66 to act in his place." In the very sentence of deposition which they pronounced against Nestorius, they declared that they acted in obedience to the Pope. "We are come," said they, in a body, "not without tears, to pro- This council, held in 381, was not 66 nounce this sad sentence, compelled intended to be general; and its de"to it by the canons, and by the let- crees in doctrinal points acquired the "ters of our holy father and fellow- authority which those of general coun"labourer Celestin." This took place cils enjoy in the church, only after at the beginning of the council, before they had been received and approved the arrival of John, patriarch of Anti- by the See-apostolic. It was composed och, and of forty eastern bishops, who of one hundred and fifty eastern bishops, came with him. These, in a separate and presided by Nectarius archbishop assembly, undertook to justify Nesto- of Constantinople. That this council rius, not by defending his errors, but ackuowledged the Pope's supremacy, pretending they were not his doctrine; and his spiritual authority over them and they condemned Cyril. The em- in particular, appears from various peror not knowing on which side jus- circumstances. For 1st, although all tice stood, caused both Cyril and Nes- the partriarchs, metropolitans, and torius to be arrested and confined. In principal bishops of the east were the mean time arrived the three other present, yet they applied to Pope legates of the Pope, who now tak- Damascus, to confirm not only their ing the lead in the council, confirm- decrees in matters of faith, but also ed the condemnation of Nestorius, the sentence of deposition which they and annulled the sentence rashly pro- had pronounced against Timothy, one nounced against Cyril. It was on of the eastern bishops, consequently this occasion, that Philip, one of the a bishop immediately subject to their legates, spoke these memorable words jurisdiction. This letter of the counbefore the fathers,-" It is not doubt-cil is lost : but its contents are gather"ful to any body, nay, it is a thing ed from the Pope's answer. "known to all ages, that the most holy Peter, prince and head of the apostles, who is the pillar of the "faith, and the foundation of the Ca-" it, is much to your credit.-But tholic Church, received from our "what occasion was there to request "Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and me now again to depose Timothy, "Redeemer of Men, the keys of the "since he had long been deposed here, 66 kingdom, and had the power of "with his master Apollinari, by the "binding and loosing sins given him," judgment of the See-apostolic, in 66 who, in his successors, to this day "had always liveth and judgeth, whose 66 regular successor and vicegerent, the holy and most blessed bishop our "Pope has sent us to this holy council, in order to supply his presence." The same legate on the second sitting had called the Pope

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Acts 3.

66

66

That

your charity, my most dear children, says the Pope, pays to the See-apos"tolic that reverence which is due to

66

presence of Peter bishop of Alexan"dria." (Theodoret. Hist. Ec. L. v. chap. 9). 2dly, In their answer to the Pope, who had summoned them to go from Constantinople to Rome, there to hold a general council, the fathers acknowledge that they had been assembled at Constantinople, not by

[ocr errors]

66

66

66

66

66

66

their own authority, or merely by the Rome, and he was commanded to emperor's commands, but in conse- "take care of the suburbic towns. quence of the letters which he (the "When the council thus makes the Pope) had sent to the emperor for that "shares between him and the other purpose. "We went to Constanti- patriarchs, so as to asisgn to each 66 nople last year, upon the letters of their respective limits, it does not your reverence, sent, after the coun- "certainly establish him head of all, cil of Aquilea, to the most religious" but makes him one among the chief. emperor." (Ibid. L. v. c. 9.) 3dly," Vitus and Vincentius were present, If they did not go to Rome as they" in the name of Julius, who then were requested to do, it was not that they denied the Pope's authority to call them to a council; for they had obeyed his summons the year preced-" ing; and in the answer they returned to him they acknowledge him to be their superior, and their head, by calling themselves his members, but they thought it impossible for them to obey, owing to particular circumstances which therefore they mention to the Pope, as an excuse for not complying with his will; and let it be observed, that they equally declined conforming to the emperor's letters. "Moved "by brotherly charity, you have con"voked us, as your members, by the "letters of the most religious emperor. "But besides that our churches, which "had only began to recover themselves "would have been exposed on all "sides, it was a thing that some of us "could by no means execute. For "when we resorted last year to Con"stantinople, upon the letters of your reverence. We had made pro"visions only for that journey to "Constantinople, and had only taken "the consent of those bishops who "remained in these parts, for that "council."

66

NICE.

This council, where 318 bishops were present, met A. D. 325. Speaking of this council, with reference of the Pope's supremacy, Calvin who has been copied by a crowd of Anticatholic writers, says: "As to the

66

governed the Roman church. Το "them the fourth place was given. "Pray, (asks Calvin,) if Julius had been acknowledged head of the church, would his legates have been "thrust to the fourth seat? Would "Athanasius have presided in the council, where above all things the image of the hierarchic order must shine?" (Inst. L. iv. ch.7.) Let those who have been accustomed to look upon this reformer, as the greatest scholar of his age, and to receive his decision, as so many oracles, blush now at his stupidity and ignorance. He makes St. Athanasius to preside in this council thinking that he was at this time patriarch of Alexandria, and supposing also that the bishop of that church had the first seat. But St. Athanasius was then only deacon; the patriarch of Alexandria was St. Alexander, who held not the first but the second rank in the council. The Pope, whose legates presided, was not Julius, but Silvester, who died ten years after the council. But Calvin was here led into error by Sozomen, or more probably his copist. It was also a passage of that historian, which he did not understand, which made him assert, that the Pope's legates had only the fourth place in the council. "As this council (says Sozomen) were

[blocks in formation]

66 antiquity of the primacy of the "Roman-See, there is nothing to "establish it more ancient than that "decree of the Nicene council, by "which the first rank among the "patriarchs was given to the bishop of

is meant to be the first, by that very reason that he is mentioned the last, as Macarius of Jerusalem was the last though mentioned first. Eusebius, also, after having said that bishops came to the council from Syria, Cilicia, Phenicia, Arabia, &c. ends his list by the bishop of Rome; who will infer thence that the Pope was in those days the very last of bishops, in the hierarchy? He says expressly, that Vitus and Vincentius, in the council," filled "his place," and what could be the place of the first patriarch there, but the first?

that by a decree of the council of Nice, the first place was given to the Roman bishop, I shall observe, that the council's decree gives nothing to the Pope. The Pope had the first rank among the bishops before the council met, and, by virtue of that supremacy, convened the council. Constantine, indeed, sent letters to the bishops, requesting them to meet at Nice, but this was done at the desire, and by the authority, of the Pope Silvester. Ruffin testifies in his history, that the emperor called the council ex Sacerdotum Sententia. (L. 1. chap. 1.) The third general council of Constantinople (Act 18.) still more expressly declares, that "the

Had

But did not Hosius, bishop of Corduba in Spain, who is named by Socrates before Vitus and Vincentius, (Hist." most august Constantine, and the Ec. L. i.ch. 8.) preside in the council? "renowned Silvester, called the great He did, but not by the right of his "and famous council at Nice." church, nor by the emperor's ap- it been assembled, without the Pope's pointment, but because he was legate concurrence, this fact would have been of St. Silvester, together with Vitus known to the fathers who met at and Vincentius; and he took seat Chalcedon; and in that case, how before them because they were only could the Pope's legate have asserted, priests; but they sat with him, before in their presence without being conthe patriarch of Alexandria, which tradicted, that to "assemble a council. proves that all three together, like "without the authority of the Seeone person, held the first rank, that apostolic, was a thing which had is the Pope's place, since the bishop of "always been esteemed unlawful, and Alexandria, before whom they sat, "indeed had never been done?" The held the second. That Hosius was desire, by which Calvin pretends that really legate of the Pope, is attested the first rank was given to the bishop by Photius patriarch of Constantino- of Rome, is the sixth. "Let the ple, the greastest enemy the Roman "ancient customs prevail, that are in church ever had, who would never "Egypt, Lybia and Pentapolis; that have acknowledged this fact, had he "the bishop of Alexandria have power not known it to be indubitably true : over them all, as much as the bishop "To Vitus and Vincentius (says he)" of Rome also hath the same custom. 66 was joined Hosius bishop of Con- "In like manner in Antioch and all "duba." (Ep. de vii. Synt) By" other provinces, let the privileges

Ilinchmer, who was no flatterer of the Popes: "To the council of 66 Nice, in room of Silvester, presided "Hosius bishop of Corduba, Vitus and "Vincent." (Opusc. 55.) By Gelasius of Cyzica in the age next to that of the council: "At this synod was 66 present the most famous bishop of "Spain, who held the place of the bishop of the great Rome, with the priests Vitus aud Vincentius." (Synt. Couc. Nic. L. ii. c. 5.)

[ocr errors]

In answer to what Calvin asserts,

66

66

"be preserved to the churches." It is evident that, by this canon, the council does not mean to introduce any new right, or to give churches a rank which they had not before; but merely to confirm the three great patriarchal churches in their ancient rights and privileges. And it only relates to the rights of the Roman Pontiff, as patriarch of the west, without saying a word of his supremacy, which I have shewn already but shall more fully demonstrate afterwards, he exercised

over the patriarch of Antioch and Alexandria, and all the eastern bishops, as well as over those within his patriarchal jurisdiction. For I intend, with your leave, to resume the subject in your next number, and answer the principal objections of Protestant writers against the supremacy of the Pope, which will give me an opportunity to produce the testimonies of the primitive fathers in support of it, and also those declarations of Christ from which it took its first rise. In concluding, let me point out the stupid inconsistency of the Genevian reformer, who, whilst he pretends that the Nicene council gave to the bishop of Rome the first rank among the patriarchs, affirms that the legates who filled his place, in that council, had only the fourth seat, yet observing himself that it is "in a council particularly that the image of the hierarchical order must I remain, &c. N. G.

shine."

POETRY.

HYMN

FOR THE VERSERS OF ONE MARTYR.
Deus tuorum militum, &c.

O God! in whom thy servants find
Their crown, their portion, and reward,
From chains of sin our souls unbind,
Whilst we thy martyr's praise record.

Vain to this saint seem'd worldly joys;
Life's pleasure mix'd with gall appear'd;
Riches he deem'd delusive toys,

Thus safe to heav'n his course he steer'd.

Dauntless he brav'd a lingering death,
Serene his varied tortures bore,
Gave with his blood his latest breath
To THEE: now reigns for evermore.

Prostrate before the throne of grace, With humble hope, O Lord, we pray, Do thou our sinful stains efface,

On this thy saint's triumphal day, '

This blessing grant, O bounteous Lord! O sovereign Godhead! three in one. O thou by earth and heav'n ador'd, Fix'd on thy everlasting throne ORTHOD. JOUR. VOL. II.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
« ÖncekiDevam »