302 BISHOPS HAVE DEPOSED POPES. tain communion with him."1 So every bishop, yea, every Christian, has a kind of universal jurisdiction. 6. If any pope assumed more thanwas.allowed in this caseby the canons, or was common to other bishops of his rank, it was an irregu- larity and an usurpation. Nor would examples, if any were pro- ducible; serve to justify him or to ground a right thereto, any more than the extravagant proceedings of other pragmatical and factious bishops in the same kind, whereof so many instances can be alleged,a can assert sucha power to any bishop. 7. When the pope has attempted in this kind, his power has been disavowed, as an illegal, upstart pretence.3 8. Other bishops have taken upon them, when they apprehended cause, to discard and depose popes. So theoriental factionat Sardica deposed Pope Julius for transgressing, as they supposed, the laws of the church, in fostering heretics and criminal persons condemned by synods; so the synod of Antioch threatened deposition to the same pope; so the patriarch Dioscorus made show to reject Pope Leo from communion; so St Hilary anathematized Pope Liberius.4 9. Popes, when there was great occasion, and they had a great mind to exert their utmost power, have not yet presumed by them- selves, " without joint authority of synods," to condemn bishops.5 So Pope Julius did not presume to depose Eusebius of Nicomedia, his great adversary, and so much obnoxious by his patronizing Arian- ism. Pope Innocent did not censure Theophilus and his complices, who so irregularly and wrongfully had extruded St Chrysostom, al- thoughmuch displeased with them, but endeavoured to get a general synod to do the business. Pope Leo I., though a man of spirit and animositysufficient, would not, without assistance of a synod, attempt to judge Dioscorus, who had so highly provoked him, and given so much advantage against him, by favouring Eutyches, and persecut- ing the orthodox. Indeed, often we may presume that popes would have deposed bishops if they had thought it regular, or if others commonly had received that opinion, so that they could have expected success in their attempting it. But they many times were angry when their horns were short, and showed their teeth when they could not bite. 10. What has been done in this kind by popes jointly with others, or in synods, especiallyupon advantage, when the cause was just and 1 Alicubine dictum, aut tibi alicubi mandatum est, quod sine satisfactione fidei com- munionem tuam subiremus ? Hier., Ep. Lai., ad Pammach., cap. 15. Quod tibi non communicemus, fidei est.Ibid. cap. xvi. S Theophilus, John of Antioch, Dioscorus. 8 Novam legem, &c.; Vid. de Conc. Sard. 4 Soz. iii. 11; Soz. iii. 8 ; Evag. ii. 4; Hilar. fragm. 5 An qui in hominem imperatorem peccasse dicebatur, nulla interveniente synodo dejici debuerunt ? P. Gelas. L, Ep. xiii.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=