JERUSALEM, COUNCILS OF 861
JERUSALEM, NE^y
6, The most recent and complete works on motlern Je- rusalem are Dr. Titus Tobler's Zicci Jiiicher Toporjrupkie von Jerusalem und seiiie [/inr/ebiim/en (Bcrl. ISoiJ. et sctj.), which contains (vol. i, p. xi-civ) a nearly full list of all ■works by travellers and others on the subject, with brief criticisms (continued in an appendix to liis /)7-i/le W'an- dciuiif/, Gotlia, 1859, and greatly enlarged in his Biblio- yrapkia Geofjruphica PaUesliim, Lpz. 18('>7), and Prof. Sepi)'s Jerusalem und das Jleili(/e Land (^Miiuchen, 18(54, 2 vols.), which almost exhaustively treats the sacred topography from the Roman Catholic point of view. The city has been more or less described by nearly all who have visited the Holy Land; see especially Bartlett's Walks about Jerusalem (Lond. 1842). The map of Van dc \'elde (Gotha, 1858), with a memoir by Tobler, has remained the most exact one of the present city till the publication of the English Ordnance Survey (London, 18G4-5, 186G; N. Y., 1871), which contains 'minute de- tails. The most perfect pictorial representation ij the Panorama of Jerusalem, taken from the Mount of Ol- ives, in three large aquatint engravings, with a key, jiub- lished in Germany (Munich, 1850). iSIany new and in- teresting details have been furnished by the scientilic surveys and subterranean explorations of the engineers lately employed under the auspices of the "Palestine Exploration Fund" of England, the results of which are detailed in their successive Quarlerlij Statements, and popularly summed up in their volume enUtl^A Jerusalem Rtcovered (Lond. and N. Y. 1871, 8vo). See Palestine.
JERUSALEM, COUNCILS OF (Concilia Ilieroso- lipnitana). Much depends, in determining the number of councils held, on the signiticance of the name. See the article Council. \A'e have room here only for the principal councils held at Jerusalem. They are, L The first ecclesiastical council mentioned in Acts xv, which is believed to have been hekl during the year 47, under James the Less, bishop of Jerusalem, in consequence of the dispute in the Church ,of Antioch on the propriety of dispensing with circumcision (probably provoked by Judaizers). By the decisions of tliis council, the faith- ful were commanded to abstain (!) from meats which had been offered to idols (so as not even to appear to countenance the worship of the heathen), (2) from blood and strangled things (probably to avoid giving offence to the prejudices of the Jewish converts), and (3) from fornication (the prevailing vice of the Gentiles). See Council, Apostolical, at Jeuusalem. IL In 335, when many bishops had met in the sacred city to con- secrate the church of the Holy Sepulchre, Constantine directed that an effort should be made to heal the divi- sions of the Church. It was by this council that Arius was restored to fellowship, and allowed to return to Al- exandria. Eusebius ( Vit. Const, iv, 47) pronounces it the largest he knew next to the Council of Nice, with which he even compares it. III. One in 349, bj^ Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem, and some sixty bishops, upon the return of Athanasius (q.v.) to Alexandria, after the death of Gregory. They rescinded the decree which had been published agahist him, and drew up a synodal letter to the Church in Alexandria. IV. Held in 399, in con- sequence of a synodal letter from Theophilus of Alexan- dria on the decrees passed in council against the Origen- ists. Thej-^ concurred in the judgment, and stated their resolution not to hold communion with any who denied the e<iuality of the Son and the Father. See Ouigen ; Tkinity. V. In 453, on Juvenal's restoration, by the emperor Marcian, to the bishopric of Jerusalem (from which he had been deiwsed on account of his concur- rence in the oppression of Flavianus in the Latrocinium at Ephesus), and the expulsion of Theodosius, a Euty- chian heretic, who had become bisliop by prejudicing the empress Eudoxia and the monks against Juvenal (q. v.). \T. Held in 518, under the patriarcli John III, and composed of thirty-three bishops. They addressed a synodal letter to John of Constantinople imlorsing the decisions of the council of that city, and condemned the Severians aed Entychians. VII. About 530, under i
jiatriarch Peter, attended by forty-five bishops. They indorsed the acts of the Council of Constantinople (530) concerning the deposition of the MonotheUte patriarch Anthymus and the election of Menai in his stead. The Acei)lialists were also condemned by them. VIII. Held \ in 553, where the acts of the fifth oecumenical council of j Constantinople were received by all the bishojis of Pal- estine with the exception of Alexander of Abilene, who j was therefor deposed. IX. In 034. In this council the [ patriarch Sophronius addressed a synodal letter to the I different patriarchs, inlorming them of his election, and I urging them to ojjjjose the jMonothelites. X. In 1443, I under Arsenius of C.esarea, ordering that no ordination of a clerk should be considcretl valid if performed by a I bishop in communion with Rome, unless the clerk proved to the orthodox bishops his adhesion to the faith of the j (Jreek Church. XI. By far the most important council I held there was that of 1072. It was convened by Dosi- theiis, at that time patriarch of Jerusalem. There were present fifty-three prelates of his diocese, including the ex-patriarch Nectarius; six metropolitans, archiman- drates, presbyters, deacons, and monks. The council call- ed itself affTTic ip^ovo'£,iat; fj oTroXoyia. Its main ob- ject was to eradicate Calvinism, which threatened to find many adherents amongst this branch of the Eastern Church, into which it liad been introduced by Cyrillus Lucaris. The declarations of belief put forth by this council gave rise to considerable trouble in the Eastern Church. Many charged it with Romanistic tendencies, especially because it avoided all utterance on points of difference between the two churches ; and it was claim- ed, also, that their confession directly opposed the con- fession of Cyril. (Consult Harduin, xi, 179 ; Kimmel, Libri Si/mbolici eccles. Orient.) See IMansi, Suppl. i, coll, 271 ; Baronius, iv, Cone. p. 1588; v. Cone. p. 275, 739; IMansi, note to Raynaldus, ix, 420; Landon, Man. Coun- cils, p. 271 sq. ; Herzog, Real-Encijklopddie, vi, 501 scj.