the Western bishops in Africa, Tuscany, Illyricum, and Liguria, rejected it at first, under the persuasion that its condemnation of the writings of Theodoret and Ibas was derogatory to the synod of Chalcedon, in which those prelates had been received as orthodox. However the greater part of them soon concurred with the majority of the catholic church in acknowledging the synod as œcumenical; and the remainder were viewed as schismatics.

SECTION VI.

THE THIRD SYNOD OF CONSTANTINOPLE.

The sixth oecumenical synod of 170 bishops, was assembled by the Emperor Constantine Pogonatus, in 680, to terminate the divisions in the church which had been caused by the heresy of the Monothelites, who held that in our Lord Jesus Christ, after the union of the divine and human natures, there was but one will and one operation. This error evidently was connected with the Eutychian heresy condemned by the fourth œcumenical council, and like it, was inconsistent with the revealed doctrine of the co-existence of the divine and human natures perfect and distinct, in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ. The synod of Constantinople having fully examined the controversy, published a definition of faith, in which they received the preceding five œcumenical synods, and the creeds of Nice and Constantinople; condemned the authors and supporters of the Monothelite heresy, viz. Theodore of Pharan, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul and Peter of Constantinople, Honorius bishop of Rome, Cyrus of Alexandria, Macarius,

Fleury, liv. xl. s. 10. Nat. Alex. sæc. vii. Diss. 1.

and Stephen; approved the synodical letters of pope Agatho and a synod of 125 bishops assembled at Rome from Italy, France, and Britain; and in conclusion declared that in Christ are two natural wills, and two natural operations, without division, conversion, or confusion". The decree of this synod was universally received and approved in the catholic church.

The acts of the sixth oecumenical synod are still

extant.

These are the only synods which the universal church has ever received and approved as oecumenical. The decrees of other synods, called œcumenical or general, are of very inferior authority, as will be presently shown.

The doctrine of these genuine ecumenical synods, having been approved and acted on by the whole body of the catholic church, and thus ratified by a universal consent, which has continued ever since; this doctrine is, according to the principles laid down in Chapter IV., irrefragably true, unalterable, irreformable; nor could any particular church forsake or change this doctrine. without ceasing to be christian.

d Actio xviii. Definitio Fidei. -Harduin. Conc. iii. p. 13951402. The general tenor of the two Epistles of Agatho and the Roman synod, which taught the

doctrine of two wills and two operations, was entirely approved by the bishops.-Harduin. iii. 1158.

CHAPTER X.

COUNCILS IMPROPERLY STYLED ECUMENICAL,
HELD BEFORE A.D. 1054.

I AM now to speak of various synods sometimes styled œcumenical, and held before the year 1054, when the existing divisions between the Eastern and Western churches commenced. Of these synods some are simply deficient in authority, others are to be rejected, as unjust, or injurious to the catholic faith.

SECTION I.

THE SYNOD OF SARDICA.

The synod of Sardica was assembled in 347, by the emperors Constantius and Constans, to re-establish the union of the Eastern and Western churches, which had been disturbed by the violent proceedings of the Arian party, who had expelled from their sees St. Athanasius, and other orthodox bishops. This synod, which consisted of 100 bishops of the western provinces (the oriental bishops under the influence of the Arians, having retired from it), restored St. Athanasius and the orthodox bishops to their sees, confirmed the Nicene

creed, and made several canons of discipline, in one of which they conferred on the Roman bishop the privilege of desiring a rehearing of the causes of bishops condemned by their provincial synods. This novel privilege however, did not take effect until some centuries afterwards. This synod was orthodox and always approved by the church, but as it made no new definition in faith, so it was never accounted an œcumenical synod, nor esteemed of the same authority as the synods of Nice, Constantinople, &c.

SECTION II.

THE SYNOD OF ARIMINUM, AND ARIANISM.

The questions concerning the synod of Ariminum are of the highest importance in controversies concerning church authority. Those who are desirous of overthrowing that authority, affirm that the synod of Ariminum apostatized to Arianism, and that the whole church fell along with it. I maintain that neither the one nor the other fell into the Arian heresy, or decided in its favour.

The Arian party, which at first only existed in the east, did not for many years dare to assail the Nicene faith to which they had subscribed; but persecuted on various false pretences, its sincere defenders. Arian bishops were unlawfully intruded into several of the Eastern sees, and thus the heresy gained ground among the chief rulers of the church; while the great body of the faithful remained attached to the truth. The West was sound in faith: synods at Rome 341, Milan 346,

b Socrates, ibid.

c Canons iii. iv. v.

Discipl. Dissert. ii s 3, 4.

a Socrates, i. 23, 24. 32. 35,

d See Du Pin, De Antiq. Eccl. 36; ii. 7.

and Sardica 347, confirmed the catholic faith, and restored to his see the holy confessor Athanasius, who had been unlawfully expelled by the Arians with the aid of the emperor. Their example was followed by the synod of Syria and Palestine, under Maximus archbishop of Jerusalem. Ursacius and Valens, Arian bishops, had even openly renounced their heresy, and been received into communion by the Western bishops assembled at Milan d.

The emperor Constantius designed to convene an œcumenical synod to terminate the existing controversies in a manner favourable to Arianism; but considering the difficulty of assembling the bishops in one place, he ordered the eastern bishops to meet at Seleucia in Isauria, and the western at Ariminum. The synod of Seleucia was divided in sentiments, and the semi-Arians, who formed the majority, and whose sentiments were substantially orthodox, approved of a creed made at Antioch, in which the word consubstantial alone was omitted.

The synod of Ariminum comprised about 400 bishops, only eighty of whom were Arians, headed by Ursacius and Valens, who had again apostatized. These bishops presented to the synod a formulary of faith which had been recently agreed on privately by their party at Sirmium, and required that all former confessions of faith should be abrogated, and this alone be received. The proposed formulary asserted in the strongest terms the divinity of Christ, but prohibited the use of the term which the Nicene fathers had used to designate it. The