Page:Orthodox Eastern Church (Fortescue).djvu/73

Rh the East at this time) of Constantinople, although they mast first be properly elected (by their suffragans).

This, then, entirely does away with any remains of exarchal power at Heraclea or Ephesus (they must have meant Cæsarea too). But it was the former half of the Canon that most displeased the Pope. First, they wish to renew the 3rd Canon of Constantinople (381), which Rome had never acknowledged. Secondly, they make the entirely false statement the "Fathers" had given the Primacy to Old Rome because of her political position. Where had these bishops ever seen a Canon giving the Primacy to Old Rome? That Primacy was given, not by the "Fathers" but by our Lord Jesus Christ to St. Peter, "who always lives and judges in his successors" (the legates at Ephesus, 431, p. 76), nor had the political importance of the city of Rome anything to do with an authority given at Cæsarea Philippi to a Galilæan fisherman. Thirdly, the Fathers of Chalcedon, on the strength of this false assumption, wish to confirm an ecclesiastical authority in the case of Constantinople because of her position as head of the State—an incorrect and dangerous position, that would, if consistently carried out, expose the Church's hierarchy to a share in every political revolution. They do not, however, think of making New Rome quite as great as Old Rome; New Rome is to be "the second after her." The sees they really wish to supplant are rather Alexandria and Antioch, and their idea seems to be to divide the whole Church into two great patriarchates, a Western one under Rome, and an Eastern one under Constantinople. But the Pope, whose honour consists in the firm position of his fellow-bishops, could not