PRESIDENCY NOT FIXED TO THE ROMAN CHAIR. 255 of Chalcedon, the pope's legate, Paschasinus,' together with other bishops, complained that Dioscorus was preferred before the bishop of Constantinople. But, notwithstanding those ineffectual mutinies, the emperor's will took place, and according thereto Dioscorus had, although he did not use it so wisely and justly as he should, the chief managery of things. It is to be observed, that to other chief bishops the presidency in that synod is also ascribed, by virtue of the emperor's appointment. " Let the most reverend bishops," say the imperial commissaries in the synod of Chalcedon, " to whom the authoritative management of affairs wasby the royal sovereignty granted, speak why the epistle of the most holy archbishop Leo was not read;"' and, " You," say they again, "to whom the power of judging was given."' And of Dios corus, Juvenalis, bishop of Jerusalem, Thalassius of Csarea, Euse- bius of Ancyra, Eustathius of Beristus, Basilius of Seleucia, it is by the same commissioners said that they " had received the autho- rity, and governed the synod then sitting."4 And Elpidius, the em- peror's agent, in the Ephesine synod itself, expressly styled them " presidents;" and Pope Leo himself calls them " presidents and primates of the synod."6 Whence it appears, that at that time, according to common opinion and practice, authoritative presidency was not affixed to the Roman chair. In the synod of Chalcedon, Pope Leo, indeed, assumed to himself a kind of presidency by his legates ;6 and no wonder that a man of a stout and ardent spirit, impregnated with high conceits of his see, and resolved with all his might to advance its interests (as his legates themselves in effect declared to the world), should do so, having so favourable a time, by the misbehaviour of Dioscorus and his adhe- rents, against whom the clergy of Constantinople, and other fathers of the synod, being incensed, were ready to comply with Leo, who had been the champion and patron of their cause, in [by] allowing him extraordinary respect, and whatever advantages he could pre- tend to. 1 nadxadïVaç ET7rEY-7a6 44E4 ese; 9iT.ovvoç Kúprov ?óv'Ava?áarov vrpói?ov Éx01.46v oú?or 5114fL9r?0Y É?ataY ?ÓV f<ax[4proY 49.auravóv.Syn. Chale., Act. i. p. 62. p 01 6ÚaaßÉd?a?or ÉTÌdxoXOr, aTç ñ aVAEV?%a ?ó?E ?oJV vrpa??ofcivmY arapá ?nç 13adrarxñç iSábaro xaputpñe, a6yi?ardav, &e.Ibid, p. 65. 3`Tfa67s, aie ñ Zaudia ,roi; Srx&;srv iS'ESo?o, &c.Ibid, p.p 77. 4 Toiç i,oudiav Eiavlfpá?az, cal i,áp;cov?aç ?ge ?á?6 duvóSou, &c. Act. ii. p. 202, iv. 288. (Evagr. xxiv., £gapxar.) KorYYe 2or2V?arY QorVñe CrrVAsfLÉV,IE ?E xa; E14Y11a4dmd%e '14, ÚfJ.WY ?a.Y orposp6udáY?mv 4.ï70ov, &c. Ibád, P. 70. Siquidem pene omnes, qui in consensum prmsidentium ant traducti fuerant, ant coacti.Leo, Ep. li. Ibi primates synodi nec resistentibus, &c.P. Leo. I., Ep. . 6 In his fratribus,me synodo vestrm fraternitas existimet prmsidere.P. Leo L, Ep. xlvii. °S2v dú piv áç xEpaaát fa6aa+v 9)yEfaóVEUSç, 1v ?oïç ?ñY dlv ?á¿rv évróxoudr.Syn. Chale. Ep. adLeon. p. 475.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=