Background Image
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  13 / 470 Next Page
Basic version Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 13 / 470 Next Page
Page Background

CONTENTS.

IX

FAGS

GROUNDS OF T$IE PRECEDENCE GIVEN

TO

ROME.

Metropolitan power of

human

origin Origin of metropolitan

dignity Exarchs introduced under

Constantine

The

change

gradually crept

in

The

patriarch

made way

for the

"

universal

bishop

"

Some

churches exempted from the

patriarchate

Advantages gained

by the

Roman

bishop

Encroachments

of

the

pope

The

oriental

churches

op-

posed

his

encroachments Corollaries from

the

preceding account,

203

THIRTY-SIX

CAUSES

ACCOUNTING

FOR THE GROWTH

OF

THE PAPACY,

.

224

SIXTH PAPAL SUPPOSITION,

That

in

fact

the

Roman

bishops,

continually

from St Peter's

time, have enjoyed

and

exercised

this

sovereign

power.

First

Assumption

of

the

pope

CONVOCATION OF COUNCILS.

The

emperor,

and

not

the

pope,

convened

councils

Princes

alone should convene councils,

.

239

Second

Assumption

PRESIDENCY IN

COUNCILS.The pope

did not preside

in

early

councils

The

term "presidency"

ambiguous

Presidency not

fixed

to

the

Roman

chair

The

imperial

commissioners claimed

the

presidency

The

pope's

presidency

not

held essential

It

would be unreasonable,

.

.

.

250

Third

Assumption

LEGISLATIVE POWER

TO

CONFIRM DECREES.

Canons

Of

Councils

passed

without

his consent

The

controversy of the

"

Three Chapters "

The

pope's consent sometimes asked Reasons why

it

was

asked

The

emperor gave

the

effectual confirmation Objections answered,

259

Fourth

Assumption

LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY

TO

PASS

LAWS.The

consent of

the

majority required

to pass laws Metropolitan bishops had

not a

negative

The

pope

subject to

the

laws

ofthe church

Papal

jurisdiction

not

recognised

The emperor alone could

enact

laws,

.

.

.

.

.

.

271

Fifth

Assumption

SovEREIGN

AUTHORITY.

No

traces of

such

a

power

in the pri-

mitive church

No

arbitrary

power

granted

to

the

pope, .

.

.

278

Sixth

Assumption

ORDINATION.

No

foundation for

this

assumption

Primitive

mode

of ordination Objections answered

Popes

intermeddling with ordina-

tions

Checked

for

so

intermeddling

Emperors

interfered in ordinations

more

than

popes

The

emperors

constituted

popes Synods

and

bishops confirmed

ordinations

Confirmation of bishops unknown,

.

.

.

.

282

Seventh

Assumption

CENSURE.

Power

of censure

belonged

to

synods Bishops

have censured bishops

The

power of censure belonged to

all

bishops

Bishops

have deposed popes

The

people

and emperor have

deposed popes

Various

popes

discarded by the

emperor,

.

.

.

.

.

.

298

Cases

of papal depositions vainly

alleged

The

case

of

Marcian

The

case

of

Flavianus

The

case

of Nestorius

The

cases of Dioscorus

and others

The

case

of

Anthimus,

.

.

.

.

.

.

305

Eighth

Assumption

ARSOLuTION.Synods

alone had

the

power of absolution

Restitution not

always

an act of jurisdiction

Some

things premised

Cases

of

papal absolution vainly

alleged,

.

.

.

.

.

311

Ninth

AssumptionAPPEALS.The

mischief of appeals to

the

pope

No

such ap-

peals

in

the primitive

church

Bellarmine's

alleged cases

of appeal to

the

pope

confuted Observations

on

the

case

of

Theodoret

General observations on ap-

peals,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

313

Tenth

Assumption

JURISDICTION.

This

pretence contrary to Scripture

Opinions

of

the fathers

as to

jurisdiction

Vicegerents of

the

pope

a

modern dream

Papal

legates checked

in

England,

.

.

.

.

333

Eleventh

Assumption

IRRESPoNsIRILITY.

Popes

have been condemned

and

excom-

municated,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

339