THE STYLE USED BY PRIMITIVE BISHOPS. 201 my master."' The synod of Illyricum call Elpidius, " Our seignior and fellow-minister."' Inwhich instances, and some others of later date, we may observe that the word xúprog, or " dominus," was then, as it is now, barely a term of civility, being then usually given to anyperson of quality, or to whom they would express commonrespect; so that St Chrysostom in his epistles commonly gives it, not only to meaner bishops, but even to priests: "My most honoured master."8 " Now, therefore, having with me my most honoured seignior and most reverend pres- byter,"4 &c. " My most honoured master, Asyncritus thepresbyter."b And St Augustine thus salutes even Donatist bishops, reflecting thereon thus: " Since, therefore, by charity I serve you in this office of writing letters to you, I do not improperlycall you master, for the sake of our one true Master, who enjoined on us these duties. "6 PopeCelestine himself saluted the Ephesine fathers, xvpror, " masters, brethren."' Even in the sixth council, Thomas, bishop of Constantinople, inscribed according to the old style to Pope Vitalianus, his "brother and fellowminister."8 The French bishops liad good reason to expostulate with Pope Nicholas I., " You may know that we are not, as you boast and brag, your clerks; whom, if pridewould suffer, you ought to acknow- ledge for your brethren and fellow-bishops."9 Such are the terms and titles which primitive integrity, when it meant to speak most kindly and respectfully, allowed to the pope, being the same which all bishops gave to one another (as may be seen in all solemn addresses and reports concerning them); which is an argument sufficiently plain that bishops in those times did not take themselves to be the pope's subjects, or his inferiors in office, but his fellows and mates, co-ordinate in rank. Were not these improper terms for an ordinary gentleman or nobleman to accost his prince in? yet hardly is there such a distance between any prince and his peers as there is between a modern pope and other bishops. It would now be taken for a great arrogance and sauciness, for an underling bishop to address to thepope in such language, or to speak ' Tw SEdvrñ.s pang. Conc. Eph. ccii. 2 Tàr xúprvr 414;4 zai duxAusoupyóv. Theod. iv. 9. s Aídvra,d /.eau srpardra .s.Chrys., Ep. xxvi. 4 Ngr yogv évrraaCófccvor sag xupíau poi; srperwrdsou zai 21Xaói,rdrau vrprdCuríp,u. Id., ibid. A.dvrósgv pang s, dr,,, 'Adrryxprrev sàv aptdP,úsapov. Ep. 68, 71, 75, 77, 84, 91, &o. s Cum ergo vel hoc ipso officio literarum per charitatem tibi serviam, non absurde to dominum voco, propter unum et verum Dominum nostrum qui nobis istaprsecepit. Aug., Ep. ciii. 7 P. Celest. I. Ep. ad Syn. Eph., Act. ii. p. 324. s Conc. vi., Act. xiii. p. 224. Scias nos non tuos esse, ut to jactaset extollis, elericos, quos ut fratres et coepis. copos recognoscere, si elatio permitteret, debueras. An. Franc. Pith., an. 858.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=