merit of not growing up into a fatal and implacable schism." The Semi-Pelagians, though condemned in several successive councils, were not cast out of the Church, and did not therefore form separate and hostile communities. This rare mutual respect, which now prevailed, is no doubt to be attributed to one important cause. The monasteries, which were held in such profound and universal veneration, were the chief schools of these doctrines; some of the most austere and most admired of these Coenobites were the chief assertors of the free will of man." m No question has been more disputed in later days, or with less certain result, than whether there was a distinct sect of Predestinarians at this period. The controversy originated in the publication of a remarkable tract, the "Prædestinatus," by the Jesuit Sirmond. The great object was to clear the memory of Augustine, who was claimed both by Jesuits and Jansenists. Such a sect, if it existed, would carry off from St. Augustine all the charges heaped upon Predestinarianism at that time. If they were heretics, Augustine was of unimpeached orthodoxy, and therefore could not have held a condemnable Predes tinarianism. Walch discusses the question Prosper himself betrays this enforced Principium et capiti non dant in corpore regnum. Prosper ad Ingratos, xxxvii. CHAPTER III. NESTORIANISM. Death of ZOSIMUS filled the See of Rome only a year and nine months. His short pontificate was agitated Mar. 18, 417. not only by the Pelagian controversy, but by dis- Dec. 26, 418. putes with the bishops of Southern Gaul and of Zosimus. Africa, hereafter to be considered when the relations of those provinces to the See of Rome shall take their place in our history. The death of Zosimus gave rise to the third contested election for the See of Rome. election, The greater the dignity of the Bishop of Rome, and the more lofty his pretensions to supremacy, the more would ambition covet this post of power and distinction; the more, on the other hand, would holy and Christian emulation aspire to place the worthiest prelate in this commanding station; and men's opinions would Disputed not always concur as to the ecclesiastic best quali- Dec. 27, 28. fied to preside over Western Christendom. Thus while the most ungovernable worldly passions and interests would intrude themselves into the election, honest religious zeal, often the blindest, always the most obstinate of human motives, would esteem it a sacred duty to espouse, an impious weakness to abandon, some favourite cause. form of The unsettled form of the election, and the undefined rights of the electors, could not but increase the Unsettled difficulty and exasperate the strife. The absolute election. nomination by the clergy would have been no security against contested elections; for in every double election a large part of the clergy was ranged on either side, and formed the rival factions. A certain assent of the people was still considered necessary to ratify the appointment. At all events, the people looked on the election with such profound interest, during a contest with such violent excitement, that it was impossible to exclude them from interference and both factions were so anxious for their support, that only the losing party would see the impropriety of their tumultuous mingling in the fray. The election of the Bishop was now as much an affair of the whole city as that of a consul or a dictator of old, without the ancient and time-honoured regulations for collecting the suffrages by centuries or by tribes. And who were the people? Was this right equally The people. shared by all the members of the religious community, now almost co-extensive in number with the inhabitants of the city? Had the Senate any special privilege, or were all these rights of the laity vested in the Emperor alone as the supreme civil power, and so in the Prefect of Rome the representative of imperial authority? The popular universal suffrage, which, in a small primitive church, one pervaded with pure Christian piety, tended to harmony, became an uncontrolled democratic anarchy when the bishopric included a vast city. It is surprising that this difficulty, which was not removed until, at a comparatively recent period, the election was vested in the College of Cardinals, was not fatal to the supremacy of Rome. But though the wild scenes of anarchy and tumult, which, especially from the eighth to the eleventh century, impaired the authority of the Pope in Rome itself, and desecrated his person; though the successful Pontiff was often only the head of a triumphant faction, and was either disobeyed, or obeyed with undisguised reluctance, by the defeated party; still distance seemed to soften off all this unseemly confusion, above which the Pope appeared seated on his serene and lofty throne in undiminished majesty. It constantly happened that at the very time at which in Rome the Pope was insulted, maltreated, wounded, imprisoned, driven from the city, the extreme parts of Christendom were bowing to his decrees in unshaken reverence. Twice already-perhaps more than twice-had Rome been afflicted with a fierce and prolonged contest. The austere bigotry of Novatian had maintained his claim against the authority of Cornelius. Felix had been the antipope to Liberius. The streets of Rome had run with blood, the churches had been defiled with dead bodies, in the more recent strife of Damasus and Ursicinus. On the death of Zosimus, some of the clergy chose the Archdeacon Eulalius in the Lateran Church; on the same, or the next day, a larger number met in the Church of S. Theodora, and elected the Presbyter Boniface. Three bishops, among whom was the Bishop of Ostia, either compelled, it was said, or yielding through the weakness of extreme old age, consecrated Dec. 27, 28. Eulalius. Boniface was inaugurated by nine bishops, in the presence of seventy presbyters, in the Double Church of St. Marcellus. Rome might appre- election. hend the return of those terrible and bloody days which marked the elevation of Damasus. The Prefect of Rome was Symmachus, son of that eloquent orator who had defended with so much energy the lost cause of paganism. The outward conformity, at least, of Symmachus to Christianity may be presumed from the favour of Honorius; but it is curious to find a contest for the Papacy dependent for its decision on the son of such a father. Symmachus, in his report to the Emperor, inclines toward the party of Eulalius. Boniface was sum- Eulalius. moned to Ravenna. He delayed to obey the mandate, which reached him when he was performing his sacred functions without the city; the officers of the Prefect were maltreated by the populace of his party. The gates of Rome, therefore, were closed upon Boniface, and Eulalius, in great state, amid the acclamations of part, at Jan. 6. least, of the people, took possession of St. Peter's, the Capitol, as it were, of Christianity. The party of Boniface were not inactive, or without influence at the court of Ravenna. The petition to the Emperor declared that all the Presbyters of Rome would accompany Boniface, to make known her will, or, rather, the judgment of God. Honorius issued a rescript, with supercilious impartiality commanding both pre- Edict of lates to remain at a distance from the city, until Honorius. * Prelectis singulis Titulis, presbyteri hoc est, judicium Dei proloquantur. omnes aderunt, qui voluntatem suam, Apud Baronium, sub ann. 419. the cause should be decided by a synod of bishops from Italy, Gaul, and Africa. In the mean time, as the Roman people could not be deprived of the solemn rites of Easter, Achilleus, Bishop of Spoleto, was ordered to officiate during the vacancy. Eulalius would not endure this sacrilegious usurpation of the powers of his see. Mar. 18-28. He sur prised by night, at the head of that part of the populace which was on his side, the Lateran Church; and in contempt of the Emperor's orders, celebrated the holy rites. But the days of successful conflict with the civil power were not yet come. The rashness of Eulalius estranged even Symmachus from his cause: this act was treated as one of rebellion. Eulalius was expelled from the city. He was threatened, as well as all the clergy who adhered to him, with still more fearful penalties. The laity who communicated with Eulalius were to be punished, the higher orders with banishment and confiscation, slaves with death. The primates of the Regions of Rome were to be responsible for all popular tumults. Such was the commanding judgment of the Emperor. Boniface Pope, Boniface took possession without further contest of the Pontifical throne. He was the son of a presbyterd Apr. 10. named Jocondus, a Roman by birth; an aged Prelate, of mild and blameless character: he was wisely anxious to prevent, as far as possible, the scandals, and even crimes, in which he had been so nearly involved. He addressed the Emperor, urging the enactment of a law, a civil law, which should restrain ecclesiastical ambition, and coerce those who aspired to obtain by intrigue, what ought to be the reward of piety and holiness. Honorius issued an edict, that in case of a contested election both the rival candidates should be excluded from the office, and a new appointment made. Thus the Imperial power assumed, and was acknowledged to possess, full authority to regulate the election of Bishops of Rome. During the three years of the pontificate of b Symmachi rescript. apud Baron. See the rescript of Honorius, apud Baronium. e d Platin. vit. Bonifac. Rescriptum Honorii, apud Baronium. |