Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 19.djvu/511

Rh year 381 the council of Constantinople was convened ; it was an assembly in which the Western Church took no share, and its notable third canon was accordingly enacted mnter without opposition. By this it was declared that the !ns of although the representative of a non-apostolic see, to the ople. next pl ace a f ter Rome, and consequently to precedence of the older and apostolic sees of Alexandria and Ahtioch. This distinguished position was assigned to him as the supreme ecclesiastical authority in the new centre of political power, and a theory of the basis of ecclesiastical dignity was thus put forward by the church which was in direct conflict with that maintained by Rome. The pontificate of SIRICIUS (384-398) is chiefly remark able as that with which commences the series known as .e De- the Decretals a collection of pastoral letters and of replies lita ^ s - to questions submitted for their consideration sent by the popes to the churches of the West. These subsequently formed the basis of a vast and elaborate series of forgeries known as the decretals of the pseudo-Isidorus, of which we shall have occasion again to speak ; but the genuineness of the letter of Siricius to Himerius, bishop of Tarragona, does not appear to have ever been called in question, and it takes its stand therefore as the earliest existing de cretal. In the influence which they exercised upon Western Christianity neither Siricius nor his successor ANASTASIUS I. (398-401) could compare with their illustrious contem porary, Ambrose, bishop of Milan, whom the emperor Theodosius pronounced to be the only true bishop whom he had known. But Ambrose, although acting in perfect independence of the Roman see, always professed to take it as his model in matters of discipline, and by the respect which his example inspired in others for the episcopal office in general he indirectly augmented the conception of the papal prerogatives. I-ision With the division of the empire in the year 395 the h e question of the Roman precedence of Constantinople was lire left for a time in abeyance; but in the West the authority of the bishop of Rome became more and more firmly established. In the following century the general condi tions under which he was called upon to act became so materially modified as to constitute a new period in the history of our subject. P&amp;gt;es of The characters of the men who filled the papal chair tl 5th during this century, most of them of exemplary life, some jUI 7- O f commanding genius, would alone suffice to constitute it a memorable era. &quot; Upon the mind of Innocent I., &quot; says Milman, &quot; seems first distinctly to have dawned the vast conception of Rome s universal ecclesiastical supremacy.&quot; lucent INNOCENT I. (402-417) seems indeed to have been the first of the popes who ventured to repudiate those political conceptions which threatened to circumscribe the extend ing influence of his office. Writing in the year 415 to Alexander, bishop of Antioch, he implies that the church in that city, as an &quot;apostolica sedes,&quot; is entitled to rank second only to Rome ; &quot; but not,&quot; he adds, &quot; so much on account of the grandeur of the city itself as because it is shown to be the first apostolic see &quot; (Mansi, Concilia, vol. iii. p. 1055). In the same letter he distinctly repudiates the notion that the church is bound by political divisions ; the emperor may create two capitals (metropolis), but it by no means follows that a second metropolitan is to be appointed by the church. In the year 412 he gave practical proof of his determination to assert his own theory of his prerogatives, by appointing the archbishop of Thessalonica his vicar over the extensive province of Illyricum, of which but a small portion lay in the Western empire; and, when the bishops of the province showed themselves less amenable than he had anticipated to his directions in matters of discipline, he insisted with unpre- 491 cedented explicitness on the jurisdiction of his see as &quot;head of all the churches.&quot; Innocent was succeeded by ZOSIMUS (417-418) and BONIFACE (418-422). The former, whose pontificate lasted only twenty-one months, exhibits a noteworthy exception to the traditions of his see, in the disposition he at one time showed to temporize with Pela- gianism, and even to set aside in its favour the decrees of his predecessor. The pontificate of Boniface is notable as having been preceded by a contested election which afforded the emperor Honorius an opportunity for the exercise of his intervention, thereby establishing a precedent for imperial interference on like occasions. At the instance of Boniface himself, Honorius enacted an ordinance designed to avert the scandals incident to such contests. By the new pro visions, all canvassing for the vacant chair was strictly prohibited ; in the event of a disputed election both candidates were to be deemed ineligible ; finally, it was essential to any election that the candidate should have been chosen by the unsolicited suffrages of the qualified clergy, and that their choice should have been ratified by the approval of the entire church community. The suc cessor of Boniface was OELESTINUS I. (422-432). The evidence afforded by the events of his pontificate is some what conflicting in character. On the one hand, we find the churches of Africa putting forward their latest recorded protest against the Roman pretensions, adducing the sixth canon of the council of Nicsea in support of their protest ; on the other hand, the success with which Coelestinus inter vened in Illyricum, and again in connexion with the sees of JSTarbonne and Vienne, proves that the papal jurisdiction was being accepted with increasing deference in other parts of the empire. The effect with which his solicited decision was given in the controversy raised by Nestorius, the patriarch of Constantinople, and the synod held under his auspices in Rome (430) for the further consideration of the same question, likewise added to the reputation of his office. Barbaric invasion, although resulting in the overthrow Effects of of many of the institutions of civilization, aad in wide- barbaric spread suffering and social deterioration, served but to mvasiOD - enhance the influence and importance of the Koman see. The apparent fulfilment of prophecy, pagan as well as Christian, when the city was taken and sacked by Alaric (410), seemed to complete the effacement of the tem poral power in Rome. Neither the Western emperors nor the Gothic conquerors held their court in the ancient capital, where the pope was now at once the most import ant and conspicuous authority. In the African provinces, the demoralization occasioned by the fierce controversies and dissensions concerning Pelagianism and Donatism compelled the Catholic communities to exchange their former attitude of haughty independence for one of sup pliant appeal, and to solicit the intervention and counsel which they had before rejected. Such was the aspect of affairs in the West when LEO THE GREAT (440-461) Leo the by some regarded as the true founder of the mediaeval Great, popedom succeeded to the primacy. A citizen of Rome by birth, he exemplified in his own character many of the antique Roman virtues a tenacious adherence to tradi tion in matters of religious belief, an indomitable resolu tion in the assertion of the prerogatives of his office, and the austere practice of the recognized duties of social life. This rigid maintenance of orthodoxy had been instilled into him (or at least confirmed) by the exhortations of Augustine, with whom he had become personally acquainted when on a mission to the African province ; and before his election to the papal office the celebrated Cassian had conceived so high an opinion of his virtues and abilities as to dedicate to him his treatise on the Incarnation. Re garded, indeed, simply as the able antagonist of the Mani-
 * iten- bishop of Constantinople, or ISTova Roma, was entitled,