A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

Of the Third COUNCIL of Constantinople.

THIS Letter from those of the West, was deliver'd in the Year 383, to a Synod assembled at Constantinople, whereof Nectarius was President. The Bishops of this Council made answer, * 1.1 That they wished they could be present at Rome to treat there of the Affairs of the Church; but not being able to do it lest they should leave their Churches in a forlorn condition, they thought it would be sufficient to give them an account of all that they had ordain'd. They say therefore, That they have approved the Creed of the Council of Nice, That they admit one and the same Divine Majesty in Three Persons, That as to the Incarnation they have a very Orthodox Doctrine, being persuaded that Jesus Christ took a Body, Soul and Spirit, and that he is a perfect Man. They prove that this is their Doctrine by the Tome of the West, which they approved at the Synod of Antioch. As to the manner of Governing the Churches, they declare, That according to the Canons of the Council of Nice, they believed that the Bishops of each Province, ought to Ordain the Bishops of their own Province, and call in to their assistance their Neighbours also, if they thought fit: That according to this Law Nectarius was ordained Bishop of Constantinople in the General Synod, with the Consent of the People and Clergy of Constantinople, and in the presence of the Emperour; that after the same manner Flavianus was ordain'd by all the Bishops of the Province and of the Diocess of the East, and that St. Cyril was some time ago ordain'd Bishop of Jerusalem by the Bishops of the Province. They exhort the Western Church to approve of what they had done, and to admonish them to pre∣ferr the Edification of the Church, before the Inclinations they might have to any particular Persons, that so they might re-establish a perfect Union among all the Members of the Church. This is what is contained in the Letter of this Synod related by Theodoret. This Council is not dif∣ferent from that mention'd by Socrates, Ch. 10. of B. V. of his History, and by Sozomen, Ch. 12. of B. VII. In which were present the Chief Bishops of all the Sects, ready to defend their own Opinions: But Nectarius confounded them all, by asking them if they would referr themselves to the ancient Catholick Authors, who lived before the beginning of these Disputes: For some being willing to accept of these Terms, and others refusing to do it, the Emperour who saw them divided, desired of every one their Confession of Faith, and when they had presented them to him, he tore all those in which there was not Profession made of believing the Consubstantial Trinity, and made an Edict against all Heresies.

The Creed of the Council of Constantinople is not very different from that of Nice. The Fathers of this Council have only added some more express Terms, to denote the Divinity of the Holy Spirit, by calling him, The quickning Lord who proceedeth from the Father, who is to be worshipped and glorified together with the Father and the Son, who spake by the Prophets. They make Profession also, of believing one only Holy and Apostolick Church, of confessing one Baptism only for the Remission of sins, of looking for the Resurrection of the dead, and the Life of the World to come. This Creed was not at first received by all Churches, and there were some that would add nothing to the Nicene Creed. For this cause it was perhaps, that no other Creed but that of Nice was read in the Council of Ephesus, and there it was also forbidden to make use of any other: But this of Constan∣tinople was authentically approved in the Council of Chalcedon, where it was read after that of Nice.

It was a long time before the Canons of this Council were approv'd by the Western Bishops: Not only St. Leo rejected them in his Epistle 53, now the 80, but also Gelasius in his Epistle to Dardanus, and St. Gregory in his Epistle 25 of B. VI. rejects them, as not being received in the West; but however, they have been received in the East, and are put in the Code of the Canons of the Uni∣versal Church. 'Tis not easy to tell how many Canons were made in the Three Councils of Constan∣tinople, whereof we have just now spoken, nor to which of the Three they are to be attributed, and whether they were all made in one and the same Synod. The Version of Dionysius Exiguus contains but Three of them; but the Second contains that which is the Third in theGreek, and the Last is reckon'd for the Fourth which concerns the Ordination of Maximus. But the Code of the Canons of the Uni∣versal Church, adds to these a Fifth, which concerns the Tome of the Western Bishops, a Sixth about the Form of Ecclesiastical Decisions, and a Seventh concerning the manner of receiving Hereticks. Photius, Zonaras, Balsamon, and the other Greeks, acknowledged these last Canons, and attribute them to the Council of Constantinople, so that there can be no Question but they were made by one of those three Councils of which we have spoken, but it is more probable that they were made by the Last. First, Because Dionysius Exiguus has not put them in his Collection of Canons; Secondly, Be∣cause Socrates and Sozomen mention only the Four first when they speak of the First and Second Coun∣cil of Constantinople; Thirdly, Because 'tis plain that these Canons are an Addition, or Supplement to the Three other Canons; Fourthly, because it appears that the Fifth Canon was made by some Bishops, who had a Confession of Faith of the Bishops of the West, which they call a Tome, and which they approv'd. Now the Bishops of the Third Council of Constantinople speak of this Con∣fession in their Letter to the Bishops of the West, and give it the Name of a Tome; which shows that the Fifth Canon and this Letter were from the same hand. Lastly, Nicholas the I. in his Letter to the Emperour Michael, cites the Sixth Canon of this Council, as belonging to the Council of Con∣stantinople; but he observes that it is not to be found in his Code of the Canons. These Reasons shew, That the Four first Canons of the Council of Constantinople; belong to the First and Second Synods,

but rather to the First than the Second, because of the Fourth which is against the Ordination of Maximus, and that the three following belong to the Third Synod held in 383.

The 1st. of these Canons confirms the Creed of the Council of Nice, and pronounces an Anathema against all the Heresies that are contrary to it, especially against the Eunomians, the Anomaeans, the Arians, the Eudoxians, against the Semi-Arians who were Enemies to the Holy Spirit, against the Marcellians, the Photinians and Apollinarists.

The 2d. Canon consists of Four Parts: In the First the Bishops of one Diocess are forbidden (taking the name of Diocess for many Provinces) to go out of their own Diocess; and 'tis ordained according to the Canons, That the Bishop of Alexandria shall govern Egypt only; That the Bishops of the East shall govern the East, saving always to the Church of Antioch its Privileges and Prerogatives, which are mention'd in the Sixth Canon of the Council of Nice; That the Bishops of the Diocess of Asia shall regulate what concerns their own Diocess; That those of Thrace shall govern only the Churches of Thrace, and those of Pontus the Churches of Pontus.

The Second Part forbids every Bishop in particular to go out of the Bounds of his own Country to Ordain, or to meddle with the Affairs of the Churches in another Diocess.

The Third ordains, That the Synod of every Province shall regulate what concerns its own Pro∣vince, as had been ordain'd by the Council of Nice.

The Last Part declares, That the Churches which are among the Barbarians, that's to say, those that are without the Roman Empire, shall be governed according to their ancient Customs, because in these Countries there is no distinction of Diocesses or Provinces.

The 3d. Canon grants to the Bishop of Constantinople the first Place of Honour next to the Bishop of Rome: Some have pretended that this Canon is to be extended to Jurisdiction; but this Explica∣tion is contrary to the Terms in which it is conceiv'd, and was never approv'd by Practice, tho' the Bishop of Constantinople taking occasion of this Prerogative of Honour, endeavoured afterwards to usurp the Diocesses of Thrace, of Asia, and of Pontus, which at last were subjected to him by the De∣termination of the Council of Chalcedon. The Reader may see this more largely explained in the first Dissertation about the ancient Discipline of the Church.

The 4th. Canon declares, That Maximus was never Bishop, that his Ordinations are null, and that all that he did ought to be made void.

The 5th. Canon, which is the first of those of the Third Council, approves the Tome of the Bi∣shops of the West, and of those of Antioch who acknowledge one and the same Divinity in the Three Persons of the Trinity. There is also mention made of this Tome in the Council's Letter, and 'tis probable that this was the Synodical Letter of Damasus, sent to the Council of Antioch held in the Year 378.

The 6th. Canon regulates the Form of Ecclesiastical Decisions, and ordains, First, That all sorts of Persons shall not be admitted to accuse Bishops of Crimes which concern Religion; That no He∣reticks, Schismaticks, Persons excommunicated, condemned, and in word, all those that are separa∣ted from the Communion of Bishops shall be allowed to do it. Secondly, That the Accusation of a Bishop shall be carried to the Bishops of his own Province. Thirdly, That if the Bishops of the Pro∣vince cannot judge of the Crimes whereof a Bishop is accus'd, recourse must be had to the Synod of the Diocess. Fourthly, That those who accuse a Bishop, ought in writing to subject themselves to the same Penalty, to which they expose him that is accus'd, if they be convicted of Calumny. Lastly, That if any one slighting these Laws, shall address himself either to the Emperour or to Secular Judges, or shall desire a General Council, without acquiescing in the Judgment of the Bishops of the Diocess, he ought to be heard no longer, since he has violated the Canons, and overthrown the Disci∣pline of the Church.

The Last Canon is concerning the manner of receiving Hereticks, who offer themselves to return into the Bosom of the Church. It ordains, That the Arians, Macedonians, Sabbatians, Novatians, Quartodecimani, Tetratites and Apollinarists, shall be receiv'd after they have made Profession of Faith, and Anathematiz'd their Errours, By the Unction of the Holy Spirit, and the Chrism wherewith they shall be anointed on the Forehead, the Eyes, the Hands, the Mouth, the Ears, at the pronouncing of these Words: This is the Seal of the Holy Spirit. As to the Eunomians, the Montanists, the Sabel∣lians, and all the other Hereticks, the Council ordains, That they shall be received like Pagans; that's to say, That at First they shall receive Imposition of Hands to give them the Name of Chri∣stian; That afterwards they shall be plac'd in the rank of Catechumens; That they shall be exor∣cis'd by blowing three times upon their Faces, and into their Ears; That they shall be catechiz'd, and that for a long time they shall be permitted to hear only the Holy Scripture in the Church; and at last they shall be baptized.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Of the Third of Constanti∣nople, 383.