Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 4.djvu/358

 CONSTANTINOPLE

308

CONSTANTINOPLE

elantinople (Greek, Athens, 1894); Vlasto, Les derniers jours de CoTvstanlinople en llti3 (Paris, 18S3); PonjouLAT, Hislom dr la congiiete el de I'occupation de Constantinople par les Latins (Tours. 1855): D'Odtremann, ConsUintinopolis Bdgica sive de rebus gestis a Balduino et Henrico, imperatoribus Constantino- polis (Toumai, 1643); Mordtmann, Belayerung und Eroberung Konstantinopels durch die Turken im Jahre lioS (Stuttgart, 1858); Vast, Le siege et la prise de Constantinople d'aprks des documents nouveaux in Reme historique. XIII. 1-40.

Modern Reugious Statistics. — Vailhe, Constantinople in Diet de thiol, calh.. Ill, 1307-1519; Cuinet, La Turquie d'Asie (Paris. 1894), IV, 589-705; .)/i,s.siun,,s ailholicw (Rome, 1907), pp. 137-140; Piolet, Les nux-uu:- c,itl,,,ligues franfaises au X/A'« sHcle. I, 39-142, 149-1.S4; Bii.in. Histoire de la Latinite de Constantinople (Paris, I9U4 i; lliniui; in; Baran- ton. La France catholique en Orient (Pari-, 1'mij ; \iin,ni'ich rt r usage des families catholiques de Con ('i/!' ' I'"'! l'M)6).

For extensive bibliographies see: (iii i; - :''-bibl.

(Montbffiard, 1904), I, 780-787; Km mim :. '/ ' .hi,- dcr

byzantinischen LiUeratur (Uunich. 1.S97), 106S-1144; Vaiuie in Did. de theol. calh., 111,1515-1519.

S. Vailhe.

Constantinople, Councils op. — A. Gener.vl Cou.sciLS. — Four general councils of the Church were held in this city.

I. The First Council of Constantinople (Second General Council) was called in May, 381, by Emperor Theodosius, to provide for a Catholic succession in the patriarchal See of Constantinople, to confirm the Ni- cene Faith, to reconcile the Semi-Arians with the Church, and to put an end to the Macedonian heresy. Originally it was only a council of the Orient ; the ar- guments of Baronius (ad an. 381, nos. 19, 20) to prove that it was called by Pope Damasus are invalid (He- fele-Leclercq, Hist, des Conciles, Paris, 1908, II, 4). It was attended by 150 Catholic and 36 heretical (Semi-Arian, Macedonian) bishops, and was presided over by Meletius of Antioch; after his death, by the successive Patriarchs of Constantinople, St. Gregory Nazianzen and Nectarius. Its first measure w'as to confirm St. Gregory Nazianzen as Bishop of Constanti- nople. The Acts "of the council have almost entirely disappeared, and its proceedings are known chieflj' through the accounts of the ecclesiastical historians Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret. There is good reason to believe that it drew up a formal treatise (tonios) on the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity, also against ApoUinarianism ; this important document has been lost, with the exception of the first canon of the council and its famous creed (Nicieno-Constantino- politanum). The latter is traditionally held to be an enlargement of the Nicene Creed, with emphasis on the Divinity of the Holy Spirit. It seems, however, to be of earlier origin, and was probably composed (369-73) bv St. CjTil of Jerusalem as an cxi.ression of the faith of that Church (Bois), though its a.ln|,tion by this council gave it special authority, Imtli as a li:iptis- mal creed and as a theological formula. Recently Harnack (Realencyklopadie fur prot. Theol. und Kirche, 3rd ed., XI, 12-28) has maintained, on ap- parently inconclusive grounds, that not till after the Council of Chalcedon (451) was this creed (a Jerusa- lem formula with Nicene additions) attributed to the Fathers of this council. At Chalcedon, indeed, it was twice recited and appears twice in the Acts of that council; it was also read and accepted at the Sixth General Council, held at Constantinople in 680 (see below). The very ancient Latin version of its text (Mansi, Coll. Cone, III, 567) is by Dionysius Exiguus. The Greeks recognize seven canons, but the oldest Latin versions have only four; the other three are very probably (Hefele) later additions. The first canon is an important dogmatic condemnation of all shades of Arianism, also of Macedonianism and Apol- linarianism. The second canon renews the Nicene legislation imposing upon the bishops the observance of diocesan and patriarchal limits. The fourth canon declares invalid the consecration of Maximus, the Cynic philosopher and rival of St. Gregorj' of Nazian- zus, !is Bi.shop of Constantinople. The famous third canon declares that because Constantinople is New

Rome the bishop of that city should have a pre-emi- nence of honour after the Bishop of Old Rome. Bar- onius wrongly maintained the non-authenticit,\- of this canon, while some medieval Greeks maintaimd (an equally erroneous thesis) that it declared the bishop of the royal city in all things the equal of the pope. The purely human reason of Rome's ancient authority, suggested by this canon, was never ad- mitted by the Apostolic See, which always based its claim to supremacy on the succession of St. Peter. Nor did Rome easily acknowledge this unjustifiable reordering of rank among the ancient patriarchates of the East. It was rejected by the papal legates at Chalcedon. St. Leo the Great (Ep. cvi in P. L., LIV, 1003, 1005) declared that this canon had never been submitted to the Apostolic See and that it was a viola- tion of the Nicene order. At the Eighth General Council in 869 the Roman legates (Mansi, XVI, 174) acknowledged Constantinople as second in patriarchal rank. In 1215, at the Fourth Lateran Council (op. cit., XXII, 991), this was fonnally admitted for the new Latin patriarch, and in 1439, at the Council of Florence, for the Greek patriarch (Hefele-Leclercq, Hist, des Conciles, II, 25-27). The Roman correctures of Gratian (1582), at dist. xxii, c. 3, insert the words: " canon hie ex lis est quos apostolica Romana sedes a principio et longo post tempore non recipit."

At the close of the council Emperor Theodosius is-| sued an unperial decree (.30 July) declaring that the churches should be restored to those bishops who con- fessed the equal Divinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and who held communion with Nec- tarius of Constantinople and other important Oriental prelates whom he named. The oecumenical character of this council seems to date, among the Greeks, from the Council of Chalcedon (451). According to Pho- tius (Mansi, III, 596) Pope Damasus approved it, but if any part of the council were approved by this pope it could have been only the aforesaid creed. In the latter half of the fifth century the successors of Leo the Great are silent as to this council. Its mention in the so-called "Decretum Gelasii", towards the enil of the fifth century, is not orginal but a later insertion in that text (Hefele). Gregory the Great, following the example of Vigilius and Pelagius II, recognized it as one of the four general councils, but only in its dog- matic utterances (P. G., LXXVII, 468, 893). (See Semi-.\bianism; Macedonians; Gregory of Nazi- ANzus, S.unt; Leo I, Saint, Pope; Theodosius

THE GrE.\T.

Hefele. Conn'!' i; ? ^ fFrciburg, 1875). II, 1-33; Eng. tr. (Edinburgh, lv7' '. M: and Leclercq's Fr. tr. (Paris,

1908). II, 1-ls ^ ^ iiiM.hr; Burn, Introduction to th<

Creeds and Th, 1. I I. .i„lun, 1899); HoRT, Ttro Dw.svr/a-

tions, etc. (Lomlmi. 1,^70/: U, The Constantinopolilan Creed and Other Creeds of the FourUi Century (London, 1876); Bright, Canons of the First Four General Councils (Oxford. 1S92); Bethune, The Homoousios in the Constantinopolilan Creed (London, 1905).

II. The Second Council of Constantinople (Fifth General Council) was held at Constantinople (5 May-2 June, 553), having been called by Emperor Jfustinian. It was attended mostly by Oriental bish- ops; only six Western (African) bishops were present. The president was Eutychius, Patriarch of Constanti- nople. This a.sseinbly was in reality only the hist pluuse of the long and violent conflict inaugurated by the edict of Justinian in 543 against Origenism (P. (!., LXXXVI, 945-90"). The emperor was persuaded that Nestorianism continued to draw its strength from the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 42S\ Theo- doret of Cyrus (d. 457), and Ibas of Edessa (d. 457). also from the personal esteem in which the first twc of these ecclesiastical writers were yet held by many The events which led to this council will be narr:itei; more fully in the articles Vigilius, Pope and in Threb Chapters; only a brief account will be given here.

From 25 Jan., 547, Pope Vigilius was forcibly de-