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 COUNCILS that were Held in the First Ages of the Church.

THE Canons and Acts of the Councils, ought to be reckoned amongst the Works of the * 1.1 Ecclesiastical Authors, since they are the Works of several Persons assembled in the same place to deliberate upon the Affairs of the Church, that concern either the Faith, or the Discipline, or the Manners of Christians. These Kinds of Assemblies were used in the First Ages of the Church, and the Apostles were the first Authors of them. For the Christians of the Primitive Church, having had some Disputes, Whether they were Obliged to Circumcise and Follow the Law of Moses; The Apostles and Priests convened at Jerusalem, to Examine and Resolve upon this Matter, and at last concluded, That it was not necessary to impose these Burdens upon Christians; but only enjoined them to abstain from Meats offered to Idols, from Blood, and from things Stran∣gled, and from Fornication. a 1.2 This was the First, and Onely Council, to speak properly, that was held by the Apostles themselves.

After their Exam••l••▪ when ••ny Differen••e 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the Church, or when it was necessary to make any Regulations; the 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Priests themselves met together, to decide the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Question••, and appoint Laws for the better Government and Discipline of the Church. 'Tis true indeed, that in the Three First Ages of the Church, these Assemblies were more rare, and less remarkable, than they were in the following Centuries; as well because the continual Persecu∣tions of the Emperours hindered the Bishops from meeting freely and in Publick, as also because the Tradition of the Apostles being as yet fresh in Mens Memories, it was not supposed necessary to Summon a Council for the Establishing of every Truth, and Condemnation of every Errour. Hence it is, that we don't find b 1.3 in any credible Authors, that any Councils were held to Con∣demn the first Hereticks, such as were the Simonians, the Carpocratians, the Basilidians, the Gno∣sticks, &c. The Errours of these Hereticks were looked upon with horrour by all the Christians, who considered the Authors of them; and likewise those that maintained them, as Persons al∣ready Excommunicated, and separated from the Church, without the Solemnity and Trouble of Con∣vening a Synod to Excommunicate them by Name. In short, every Bishop instructed his own Peo∣ple in the True Faith of the Chuch, and confuted all sorts of Errours by the Authority of Scripture, and Tradition.

The first Councils, that are mentioned in Antiquity, are those that were held under the Ponti∣ficate of Pope Victor, to adjust the celebrated Controversie about keeping Easter; and some others that were Assembled almost at the same time to suppress the growing Faction of the Montanists. Eu∣sebius mentions the last in the Fifth Book of his History, Chap. 15. and Tertullian assures us, That in his time the Montanists also met together c 1.4 for themselves. As for what relates to the Synods that were convened upon the Dispute concerning the Celebration of Easter, though the Number of them is usually reckoned to be great; yet Eusebius mentions but Three; one of which was held in Palaestine, another in Asia, and a Third at Rome. And then, as for what concerns the Churches of France, of Pontus, of Corinth, and of the East, he barely tells us, That the respective Bishops there, wrote to Pope Victor about this Matter, without speaking of any Council Assembled in these places.

Agrippinus, towards the Beginning of the Third Century, held a Council in Africk; where it was Or∣dained that Hereticks should be Re-baptized.

There were likewise Two Councils held in Arabia, under the Emperour Gordianus; one against Berillus Bishop of Bostra, who maintain'd, That Jesus Christ was not a different Person from the Father, before he made himself Man; and the other against the Arabians, who affirmed, That the Souls of Men were Mortal.

We don't know at what time the Councils of Iconium and Synnada were Assembled, that Decreed, It was Necessary to re-baptize Hereticks.

I shall say nothing more of the Councils held in Africk, and at Rome in St. Cyprian's time; be∣cause I discoursed largely about them, when I had occasion to consider the Writings and Life of that Father.

Dionysius Bishop of Rome Summoned a Council, in which he Established the Divinity of the Word, and the Mystery of the Trinity against the Errours of the Sabellians, and that which was af∣terwards the Errour of the Arians. He wrote a Letter upon this Occasion to Dionysius of Alexandria, St. Athanasius mentions this Synod.

In the time of Pope Stephen, a Council was held at Antioch; where the Bishops Condemned the Practice of the Novatians. St. Dionysius of Alexandria sent word to Sixtus, that he was invited thi∣ther: Eusebius Lib. 7. Hist. c. 8. St. Epiphanius in his Account of the Heresie of the Noetians, men∣tions Two Synods that were assembled in Asia against Noetus, and gives us an Account of some Words of that Heretick, and of the last Synod.

But of all the Councils that were Summoned in the Three First Centuries, the most Celebrated and Famous, are the Two Councils of Antioch Assembled against Paulus Samosatenus, Bishop of that City, who maintained, That the Word was not truly United to the Humanity in the Person of Jesus Christ; and who likewise, according to the Testimony of some Authors, denied, that the Word was a distinct Person from the Father. The First Council assembled against him, was held at Antioch about the Year 264. Eusebius tells us, That the principal Bishops who assisted there were, Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, Gregory and Athenodorus Bishops of Pontus, Helenus Bishop of Tarsus, Nicomas Bishop of Iconium, Himenaeus of Jerusalem, Theote••nus of Caesarea; without mentioning an Infinite Number of others as well Bishops as Priests. He says, That St. Dionysius of Alexandria, being invited to this Synod, could not come thither, but that he acquainted them with his Judgment concerning this Matter by way of Letter, where he disdain'd to salute the Author of that Heresie. In all appearance Firmilian presided in this Synod; for the Bishops of the Se∣cond Council say in their Letter, That Paul having Promised to renounce his Opinion, Firmilian gave Credit to his Protestation, and hoping that this Affair might terminate calmly, without any prejudice or dishonour done to the Church, judged it convenient to deferr passing Judgment. And this plainly

proves, that Firmilian held the chief place in the Synod, and that they followed his Advice. Now they did not pass Sentence against Paulus Samosatenus in this Synod, because he had promised to quit his Erroneous Doctrine; but it seems he kept not his Word, but relapsed a little time after into his old Errour; So a Second Council was held against him in the City of Antioch, in the Year 270, where we find Seventy two Bishops. Paulus Samosatenus was here convinced of his Er∣rour by a Priest, whose Name was Malchion, and afterwards he was deposed by the Council, and Dom••us Elected into his Place. The Bishops of this Council soon after wrote a Synodal Letter to Dionysius Bishop of Rome, and to all the other Bishops in the World, to give an Account of their Condemning Paulus, and Electing Domnus in his Room. This Letter is to be seen in Eusebius, Lib. 7. Hist. Cap. 30. They there give an ample Relation of what pass'd in the First Synod; in which Paulus Samosatenus having solemnly Promised to change his Opinion, Firmilian thought it convenient to deferr passing Judgment upon him; That the aforesaid Bishop was upon his Jour∣ney, with a Design to come to the Synod, but died by the way. After this, they proceed to lay open the Manners of Paulus, and accuse him of enriching himself by Publick Extortion, Rapine and Sacrilege; they reproach him for his insupportable Arrogance, and Cruel Temper; they com∣plained of him for taking upon him the State of a great Lord, as appeared by his numerous Retinue, by his sitting in an high Tribunal, by his ill Treatment of those Persons that did not make their Court to him, and would not commend him, when they sang Praises to God; by his commanding Hymns to be sung in his own Praise, and ordering himself to be publickly commended in the Sermons, by his living too familiarly with Women, and using his Clergy and People after a tyrannical insolent manner. In short, After they have accused him of all those Vices that are ordinary and common to Bishops of great Sees, they say they condemned him principally because he revived the Errour of Artemas; teaching, That Jesus Christ was a mere Man, and that he did not exist before he was born of the Virgin Mary; and that having deposed him, they chose Domnus in his room. All which they take notice of, that for the time to come, all Communicatory Letters might be addressed to him only.

There is also another Letter attributed to this Council, addressed to Paulus Samosatenus, which contains a Profession of Faith. Baronius ascribes it to the first Council; but it being writ a little before Paulus's Deposition, as manifestly appears by the Title, and by its carrying the Name of Hi∣menaeus in the Front, who presided in the Second Council, and not Firmilian, who presided in the First; we ought to conclude, that it belongs to the Second Council. But we have a great deal of reason to believe that the Letter published by T••rrianus is Supposititious, as well as that of St. Dio∣nysius of Alexandria to Paulus Samosatenus; as we have already shown in another place.

Baronius attributes besides to this Council, a Profession of Faith, set down in the Council of Ephesus in the Third Part, and assigned in that place to the Council of Nice. I don't know what reasons Baronius had to incline him to this Opinion; but it seems past dispute to me, that it does not belong to this Council at Antioch: for certain it is, that the word Consubstantial was there re∣jected, whereas it is to be found in this Profession, as it is set down in the Council of Ephesus, under the Name of the Nicene Council; although it no more belongs to that, than it does to the former: But the truth is, 'Tis a Profession of Faith drawn up by some Bishops, to reconcile the Decisions of those two Councils, and to explain in what sence the word Consubstantial was rejected by the First, and approved by the Second.

Thus I have given a Catalogue of the Councils held in the Three first Ages of the Church, that are mentioned by Authors that deserve Credit. I don't in the least question, but that there were abundance of other Assemblies convened in this time: but then there is no reason to admit those, that are only spoken of by Modern Authors, such as the Praedestinatus published by Sirmondus, the Author of the Synodical Book, Bed••; and some others of the same Character.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Councils.
• a 1.2

  And only Council of the Apostles.] They usually reck∣on Four. The first concerning the Election of St. Matthias, Acts. 1. The Second concerning the Ele∣ction of Deacons, Acts 6. The Third, that whereof we now speak, Acts 15. The Fourth, Acts 21. Where the Priests of Jerusalem declare, That the Converted Jews might observe the Law, and Exhort St. Paul to make a Vow. But in strictness of Speech, only the Third of these Assemblies deserves the Name of a Council. The two First were not held upon the account of any Controversie; nothing was there de∣cided; the Christians found themselves Assembled to∣gether, but were not expresly Summoned. In short▪ they were Assemblies of all••the Christians, and not of the Apostles only. The fourth was rather a famaliar Conversation, than a Synodical Deliberation; and they only give some Counsel and an Advertisement to St. Paul, without deciding any Matter. And thus 'tis the Third Assembly alone, that deserves to be called a Council. The Council of Antioch is spurious, as we have elsewhere shown.
• b 1.3

  In any Credible Authors.] The Author published by Sirmondus under the Name of Praedestinatus, mentions some Councils that were held against the Ancient He∣reticks; but he is a Modern Author, and does not de∣serve Credit upon his own Authority.
• c 1.4

  For themselves.] Tertull. in lib. De Jejun. Agun∣tur praecepta per Gaercias illas certis in locis Concilia, per quae & altiora quaeque tractantur. Some Persons under∣stand this Passage of the Councils of the Catholicks; but he speaks of those held by the Montanists, as the following words plainly shew.