The Holy See and the Wandering of the Nations, from St. Leo I to St. Gregory IAllies, T. W. (Thomas William)
History
The Holy See and the Wandering of the Nations, from St. Leo I to St. Gregory I
Allies, T. W. (Thomas William)
Church history -- Primitive and early church, ca. 30-600
The respective action, therefore, of Pope Felix on one side, and of Acacius
on the other, brought to an issue the most absolute of contradictions. The
Pope claimed obedience, as a superior, from Acacius. When that obedience
was refused, he exerted his authority as superior, and degraded Acacius
both from his rank as bishop, and from Christian communion. And a special
token of that sentence was to order his name to be removed from the
diptychs, and to enjoin the people of his own diocese to hold no communion
with him, on pain of incurring a like penalty with him. Acacius answered by
practically denying the Pope's authority to do any such act. He asserted
himself to be his equal by removing the Pope's name from the diptychs.
There could be no more striking denial of any such authority as the claim
to inherit Peter's universal pastorship, than to treat the Pope himself as,
in virtue of that pastorship, he had treated Acacius.
Even apart from this, the conduct of Acacius carried with it a double
denial of the Pope's authority: a denial that he was the supreme judge of
faith; and a denial that he was the supreme maintainer of discipline in its
highest manifestation, the order of the hierarchy itself.
He denied that the Pope was the supreme judge of faith, by drawing up a
formulary of doctrine, which he induced the emperor to promulgate by
imperial decree; and this independently of what doctrine that formulary
might contain. Further, he did this by supporting two persons judged to be
heretical by the Holy See--Peter the Fuller at Antioch, Peter the Stammerer
at Alexandria. He denied that the Pope was the supreme maintainer of
discipline, by making the two great sees of the East and South subordinate
to himself. As the Pope expressed it in his sentence, he had done
"nefarious things against the whole Nicene constitution," of which the Pope
was special guardian. In fact, his conduct was an imitation of that pursued
in the preceding century by Eusebius of Nicomedia, by Eudoxius, and all
their party. It was even carried out to its full completion. The emperor
was made the head of the Church, on condition of his leading it through the
bishop of Constantinople. Acacius put together the canon of the Council of
381, which said that the bishop of New Rome should hold the second rank in
the episcopate, because his city is New Rome, with the canon attempted to
be passed at Chalcedon, and cashiered by St. Leo, that the fathers gave its
privileges to Old Rome because it was the imperial city. Uniting the two,
he constructed the conclusion, that as Old Rome had ceased to be the
imperial city, which New Rome had actually become, the privileges of Old
Rome had passed to the bishop of New Rome.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account