Mondays are for Church History
9/16/24
Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter V. The Hierarchy and Polity of the Church." In History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 1993-2106). (Original work published 1889). Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 48-67).
"§62. The Decrees of Councils on the Papal Authority." (pp. 2062-2065).
While Schaff previously detailed the responses of individual Fathers to Rome's claim to authority, he considers the decrees of church councils to be more important evidence. The council of Sardica, in 343, considered it appropriate that deposed bishops should appeal to the bishop of Rome, and that vacant bishoprics should await the counsel of the bishop of Rome before being filled (Schaff 2014, p. 2062). This applied to posts both in the West and the East. However, it was specifically applied only to the Roman bishop Julius, without mention of any successors. Schaff observes this council was only that of a local synod, and that its decision was not binding on other regions (Schaff 2014, p. 2063).
The stance of Sardica was not affirmed by any of the subsequent ecumenical councils. "The general councils of 381, 451, and 680 knew nothing of such a supreme appellate tribunal, but unanimously enacted, that all ecclesiastical matters, without exception, should first be decided in the provincial councils, with the right of appeal - not to the bishop of Rome, but to the patriarch of the proper diocese" (Schaff 2014, p. 2063). The ecumenical councils took Rome to have a primacy of honor, but not of authority, despite Rome's protests (Schaff 2014, p. 2064). Schaff observes a fundamental difference between the Eastern rejection of the papacy and the Protestant rejection. While the Eastern church held the leadership was a rightful oligarchy, the Protestants rejected the primacy of bishops on the theory that the need for such rule passed away as the Church was well established (Schaff 2014, p. 2065).
"§63. Leo the Great. A.D. 440-461." (pp. 2065-2073).
After a brief bibliography, Schaff observes that in early Christian history the bishop is generally eclipsed by the office. This changed with Leo I (Schaff 2014, p. 2066). Leo was uniformly considered not only an important scholar but also elevated the papacy to a notably prominent office (Schaff 2014, p. 2067). Though little is known of his early life, he comes into view as an archdeacon by about 432. He was elevated to be pope, serving from 440-461, taking on the role with a strong concept of personal unworthiness. He then proceeded to be fully dedicated to the work of the Church.
Leo's view of papal supremacy was built on an understanding of Matthew 16 that Jesus had transferred his authority to Peter, as the rock on which the church would be built (Schaff 2014, p. 2068). This authority, in Leo's view, was passed down to subsequent generations who followed Peter (Schaff 2014, p. 2069). He further understood that Peter's primacy was what had made Rome to have an eternal dignity. Leo's claim, then, was to the primacy of his office as bishop of Rome, rather than to his personal authority (Schaff 2014, p. 2070). Yet Schaff describes Leo as forcefully rejecting rival claims to his authority. "Obedience to the pope is . . . necessary to salvation" (Schaff 2014, p. 2070).
Schaff describes Leo as using not only his theological acumen, but also considerable political leverage to establish his claims to primacy (Schaff 2014, p. 2071). He was able to use circumstances of conflict to assert his authoritative opinions in East and West alike. Leo was, however, unsuccessful in these attempts in Gaul and Constantinople (Schaff 2014, p. 2072).
Schaff notes that Leo twice rescued the city of Rome from destruction. He persuaded Atilla the Hun not to overthrow the city, then several years later negotiated a treaty with Genseric the Vandal, limiting him to fourteen days of pillaging (Schaff 2014, p. 2073).
9/16/24
Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter V. The Hierarchy and Polity of the Church." In History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 1993-2106). (Original work published 1889). Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 48-67).
"§62. The Decrees of Councils on the Papal Authority." (pp. 2062-2065).
While Schaff previously detailed the responses of individual Fathers to Rome's claim to authority, he considers the decrees of church councils to be more important evidence. The council of Sardica, in 343, considered it appropriate that deposed bishops should appeal to the bishop of Rome, and that vacant bishoprics should await the counsel of the bishop of Rome before being filled (Schaff 2014, p. 2062). This applied to posts both in the West and the East. However, it was specifically applied only to the Roman bishop Julius, without mention of any successors. Schaff observes this council was only that of a local synod, and that its decision was not binding on other regions (Schaff 2014, p. 2063).
The stance of Sardica was not affirmed by any of the subsequent ecumenical councils. "The general councils of 381, 451, and 680 knew nothing of such a supreme appellate tribunal, but unanimously enacted, that all ecclesiastical matters, without exception, should first be decided in the provincial councils, with the right of appeal - not to the bishop of Rome, but to the patriarch of the proper diocese" (Schaff 2014, p. 2063). The ecumenical councils took Rome to have a primacy of honor, but not of authority, despite Rome's protests (Schaff 2014, p. 2064). Schaff observes a fundamental difference between the Eastern rejection of the papacy and the Protestant rejection. While the Eastern church held the leadership was a rightful oligarchy, the Protestants rejected the primacy of bishops on the theory that the need for such rule passed away as the Church was well established (Schaff 2014, p. 2065).
"§63. Leo the Great. A.D. 440-461." (pp. 2065-2073).
After a brief bibliography, Schaff observes that in early Christian history the bishop is generally eclipsed by the office. This changed with Leo I (Schaff 2014, p. 2066). Leo was uniformly considered not only an important scholar but also elevated the papacy to a notably prominent office (Schaff 2014, p. 2067). Though little is known of his early life, he comes into view as an archdeacon by about 432. He was elevated to be pope, serving from 440-461, taking on the role with a strong concept of personal unworthiness. He then proceeded to be fully dedicated to the work of the Church.
Leo's view of papal supremacy was built on an understanding of Matthew 16 that Jesus had transferred his authority to Peter, as the rock on which the church would be built (Schaff 2014, p. 2068). This authority, in Leo's view, was passed down to subsequent generations who followed Peter (Schaff 2014, p. 2069). He further understood that Peter's primacy was what had made Rome to have an eternal dignity. Leo's claim, then, was to the primacy of his office as bishop of Rome, rather than to his personal authority (Schaff 2014, p. 2070). Yet Schaff describes Leo as forcefully rejecting rival claims to his authority. "Obedience to the pope is . . . necessary to salvation" (Schaff 2014, p. 2070).
Schaff describes Leo as using not only his theological acumen, but also considerable political leverage to establish his claims to primacy (Schaff 2014, p. 2071). He was able to use circumstances of conflict to assert his authoritative opinions in East and West alike. Leo was, however, unsuccessful in these attempts in Gaul and Constantinople (Schaff 2014, p. 2072).
Schaff notes that Leo twice rescued the city of Rome from destruction. He persuaded Atilla the Hun not to overthrow the city, then several years later negotiated a treaty with Genseric the Vandal, limiting him to fourteen days of pillaging (Schaff 2014, p. 2073).
RSS Feed