264 THE POPE'S CONSENT SOMETIMES ASKED. for in their general synod (the second Nicene), without contradic- tion, one of them is alleged (out of the very original paper, wherein the fathers had subscribed) as a " canon of the holy general sixth synod,' and avowed for such by the patriarch Tarasius, both in way . of argument of defence and of profession in his synodical epistle to the patriarchs, where he says, that " together with the divine doc- trinesof the sixth synod, he also embraces the canons enacted by it;"' of which epistle Pope Adrian, in his answer thereto, recites a part containing those words, and applauds it for orthodox, signifying no offence at his embracing the Trullane canons.' And all those hun- dred and two canons are again avowed by the synod in their an- tithesis to the synod of. Constantinople. In fine, if we believe Anastasius; Pope John VII., " being timorous, out of human frailty, directed these canons, without amendment, by two metropolites, to the emperor; " that is, he admitted them so as they stand. But it may be instanced [insisted] that divers synods have asked the pope's consent for ratification of their decrees and acts. Thus the fathers of the second general synod having, in an epistle to Pope Damasus and the western bishops, declared what constitu- tions they had made, in the close speak thus: " In which things, being legally and canonically settled by us, we do exhort your reve- rence to acquiesce, out of spiritual charity and fear of the Lord."' Thus the synod of Chalcedon did, with much respect, ask from Pope Leo the confirmation of its sanctions: " That you may know that we have donenothing for favour or out of spite, but as guided by the divine direction, we have made known to you the substance of all that has been done, for your concurrence, and for the confir- mation and approbation of the things done."6 Of the fifth synod Pope Leo II. says, " That he agreed to what was determined in it, and confirms it with the authority of theblessed St Peter."T To these allegations we reply, that it was, indeed, the manner of I Kaváv &yhey xai oixoup4£vrz i; äzmnç ovvíLov. Syn. Nic. II, Act. iv. 631. 11lamá- T2A.6ç xápmnç éomiv, áv m" S úasya,Pav aazip£;. - Ibid. 2 T;;; aVTns &yíac VX7,16 02vF02, 1.45.74 'r, vTW Troy lyeirp om ú£r ro£ 6%provnAÉYTWy SomeiTav Y'ap' EaT;iis, xai roús lAdivTas ravávas &aroS'£xop4ar. Act. iii. p. 392. 3 Taúre Tñ p rEpTVpíg Tñç LpAaSEEy TETT£aç, &c. 1bid,p. 363; Act. vi. p. 732; Dist. xvi. cap. 5, &c. 4 Sed hic humana fragilitate timidushos nequaquam tomos emendans per suprafatos metropolitan direait ad principem.Anast. in Vit. Joh. VII. 6 Oiç áç idier,a'ç xai zavovrzaç army' ;:lay w£xpeeT, çíe' zai 'ri, úa£Tipav evyxaipuv vrapa- xaa.ovpc£y £llÀáߣrav, Tñs a'y£Up4aT£4'ç p4£arTC00Ons &yáarnç, za TO %Lira %OY Çíß0Ú, Theed. y. 9. e °Iva SE yvmT£ ñ,ç oihv ,'pá; x4y, ï7 TO; &axAuav a£arorñxap4£v, lax' EL; »u' xuߣpvá- po£vor orvuipeaTn, a-äoav Sp47v Täv orsorpafCEvrov T97Y Sivapsro iyvropíeapc£v £iç oúaTaory Ap4£Tipa,, zai r e T£apaypcívrov ߣß'ía íy T£ 'cal ouyxamálee,e. Syn. Chalc. ad P. Leon L, p. 476. 7 Tc7ç oral; aúmñç ;proIlan ovvarv£ , %ad Tñ avA£vmícp Toe psaxa, íc2 níTpo2 ߣßa117.-P. Leo IL, Ep., p. 306.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=