282 THLRD PFEIOO. A..D. 311-590.
be dismissed. The commissioners then closed the transactions witli the words : " What we a little while ago proposed, the whole council hath ratified ; " that is, the prerogative grantee to the cliurch of Constantinople is confirmed by the council ic spite of the protest of the legates of Rome.'
After tlie council, the Roman bishop, Leo, liimself protested in three letters of the 22d May, 452 ; the first of which waa addressed to the emperor Marcian, the second to the empresa Pulcheria, the third to Anatolius, patriarch of Constantinople.* He expressed his satisfaction with the doctrinal results of the council, but declared the elevation of the bishop of Constantinople to the patriarclial dignity to be a work of pride and ambition — the liumble, modest pope ! — to be an attack upon the rights of other Eastern metropolitans — the invader of the same rights in Gaul ! — especially upon the rights of the Roman see guaranteed by the council of Nice — on the authority of a Roman interpolation ! — and to be destructive of the peace of the church — which the popes have always sacredly kept ! Pie would hear nothing of political considerations as the source of the authority of his chair, but pointed rather to Divine institution and the primacy of Peter. Leo speaks here with great reverence of the first ecumenical council, under the false impression that that council in its sixth canon acknowledged the primacy of Rome ; bnt with singular indiflference of the second ecumenical council, on account of its third canon, which was confirmed at Chalcedon. He charges Anatolius with using for his own ambition a council, wliich had been called simply for the extermination of heresy and the establishment of the faith. But the canons of the Nicene council, inspired by the Holy Ghost, could be superseded by no synod, however great ; and all that came in conflict with them was void. He exhorted Anatolius to give up his ambition, and reminded him o? the words : Tene quod hahes, ne alius accipiat coronam tuam '
But this protest could not change the decree of the council nor the position of the Greek church in the matter, although
' Mansi, vii. p. 446-454 ; Ilarduin, ii. C39-G43 •, Ilefele, ii. 524, 525
• Leo, Epist. 104, 105, and 106 (al. cp. 78-80). Comp. Hefele, 1. c. ii 63'" eqo
• Rev. iii. 11.
§ 56. SYNODICAL, LEGISLATION, ETC. 283
tinder the iniiiience of the emperor, Anat:)lius wTotc an humble letter to Leo. The bishops of Constantinople asserted theif rank, and were sustained by the Byzantine emperors. The twenty-eighth canon of the Chalcedonian council was expressly confirmed by Justinian L, in the 131st IS^ovelle (c. 1), and Bolemnly renewed by the Trullan council (can. 36), but waa omitted in the Latin collections of canons by Prisca, Dionysius, Exiguus, and Isidore. The loud contradiction of Rome gradually died away ; yet she has never formally ackiiowhidged this canon, except during the Latin empire and the Latin patriarchate at Constantinople, when the fourth Lateran council, under Lniocent III., in 1215, conceded that the patriarch of Constantinople should hold the next rank after the patriarch of Rome, before those of Alexandria and Antioch.*
Finally, the bishop of Jerusalem, after long contests with the metropolitan of Csesarea and the patriarch of Antioch, succeeded in advancing himself to the patriarchal dignity ; but his distinction remained chiefly a matter of honor, far belov; the other patriarchates in extent of real power. Had not tlia ancient Jerusalem, in the year YO, been left with only a part of the city wall and three gates to mark it, it would doubtless, being the seat of the oldest Christian congregation, have held, as in the time of James, a central position in the hierarchy. Yet as it was, a reflection of the original dignity of the mother city fell upon the new settlement of ^lia Capitolina, which, after Adrian, rose upon the venerable rui.\s. The pilgrimage of tlie empress Helena, and the magnificent church edifices of iier son on the holy places, gave Jerusalem a new importance as the centre of devout pilgrimage from all quarters of Christendom. Its bishop was subordinate, indeed, to the metropolitan of Csesarea, but presided with him (probably secundo loco) at the Palestinian councils." The council of Nice gave him an honorary precedence among the bishops, though without affecting his dependence on the metropolitan of Csesarea.
' Harduin, torn. vii. 23 ; Schrockh, xvii. 43 ; and Hefele, ii. 544.
" Comp. Eusebius, himself the metropolitan of Caesarea, H. E. v. 23. He give* the succession of the bishops of Jerusalem, as well as of Rome, Alexandria, an^ Antioch. while ho omits those of Caesarea.