W

fifty copies of the Scriptures, legible and fit for use, to be written on prepared parchment, by skilful artists, and to send them to Constantinople by two public coaches, under the care of some deacon of his church. These copies, having the influence of Constantine, must have been received by the churches, for whom they were provided by the emperor, with veneration. That in these copies Eusebius suppressed certain passages tending to establish the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son, particularly 1 John v. 7, has been lately alleged, and too well supported. He excepted against the doctrine of those texts, in the council of Nice, but escaped censure by covering his regard for Arianism under the pretence of a fear of the heresy of Sabellius. In a letter to his charge, he defends his inconsistency, by softening the language of the creed he had reluctantly signed. The disposition of the man, his opposition to the doctrines, the emperor's coincidence with him in sentiments, the opportu nity afforded him by Constantine, the complexion of the Greek copies generally, over which his edition must have had a decisive influence; and, on the contrary, the support which the text receives from Latin copies and writers, Tertullian, Cyprian, Facundus, Vigilius, and others, all conspire with the certainty of his having omitted a portion of Mark's gospel, to attach the blame of the defective copies to his disingen

uousness.

w De vit, Constant. Lib. iv, c. 36.

SECTION XI.

The council at Jerusalem was extraordinary.—Councils may be traced to the commencement of the third century.—They were at first advisory, not appellative, much less legislative.-They strengthened clerical power.-The council of Carthage, A. D. 258.-The two councils of Antioch, A. D. 264, 270. The council of Eliberis, A. D. 305.-The council of Arles, A. D. 309.The synod of Ancyra, A. D. 314.-The synod of Pontus, A. D. 314.— The general council of Nice, A. D. 325.-The general council of Constantinople, A. D. 381.-The general council of Ephesus, A. D. 431.-The general council at Chalcedon, A. D. 451.-The second general council at Constantinople, A. D. 553.—The third general council at Constantinople, A. D. 680.-Another, A. D. 692.-The seventh Ecumeni cal council was at Constantinople, A. D. 754.—Another seventh at Nice, A. D. 787.-This was after the commencement of the empire of Charle magne, the erection of a monarchy in England, and the civil power of the pope.-None of these councils were founded upon the consent of the Christian church, or upon any spiritual authority; often established error, and create no obligation upon the Christian world.

THE records of the early synods and councils of the Christian church, so far as genuine, are credible evidence of facts, and competent, to some extent, to show the condition of the church at different periods. Ecclesiastical associations have never possessed the rightful power of legislation in the church of Christ; but as every man is bound to believe for himself, so every Christian denomination has a right to adopt their own form of church government, and every member equal liberty to dissent and withdraw. The voluntary conventions of synods and councils are justifiable, at least when merely deliberative. The conduct of Paul and Barnabas, in waving the rite of circumcision with respect to Gentile converts, having been censured at Antioch, by persons who had come from Jerusalem, was submitted unto, and confirmed by the opinions of Peter, James, and perhaps John, and

475926

the presbyters and church at Jerusalem. But the question was proposed in the abstract form, and the advice was founded upon the antecedent decisive testimony of the Holy Spirit. This appeal ought, therefore, to have remained, after inspiration ceased, an isolated case, nor was it followed for a long series of

years.

We learn from Tertullian, in the third century, that "councils were collected in certain places throughout the Greek cities, from all the churches, by which the higher matters were managed in common, and the representation itself of the whole Christian persuasion, was regarded with high respect."a Because, when synods were introduced, the churches were represented by delegates, and this was among the Greeks only, it has been conjectured that they took the idea from their own civil forms. The practice was certainly founded on common consent, since they were neither at first of appellative jurisdiction, nor founded on Scriptural authority. The numerous Greeks then in lesser Asia, were probably included in the term " per Gracias." Consultations concerning Easter were held in Palestine, Pontus, Rome, and France, in the days of Polycrates and Victor, about the commencement of the third century. Cyprian did not neglect to avail himself of means, so well adapted to enhance clerical influence and power, to which he was so much inclined. In Africa, therefore, they soon became frequent; and their members gradually losing sight of the representation of their churches, considered themselves as acting by virtue of their offices. And as the presiding presbyters had become bish

a Tertul. adversus Psychicos. c. 13. Whether he speaks only of the Montanists, or of those consultations of the orthodox in Asia Minor, against Montanus, cited by Eusebius, from Apollinarius, Lib. v. c. 15, let the reader decide. "Aguntur præterea per Græcias, illa certis in locis concilia ex universis ecclesiis, per quæ et altioria quæque in commune tractantur et ipsa representatio totius nominis Christiani magna veneratione celebratur."

b Vide Euseb. Eccl. Hist. Lib. v. c. 23, 24, 25.

ops of the bishops, who constituted the presbyteries of the respective congregations, so the metropolitans soon presided in the provincial synods, and afterwards patriarchs in general councils. That of Carthage in the reign of Decius was convened by Cyprian, A. D. 258, to consult of the propriety of re-baptizing those who had been baptized by heretics. There were eighty-four members, who all gave their own, and sometimes also the votes of others, as proxies, and the details evince, that they were considered the representatives of particular churches there named. Cyprian, when opening the business, described the assembly as deliberative only, and not as designed to pass a censure upon any individual. The fifth speaker observed, that all who came to his church from heretics he baptized, "and those from their clergy he placed among the laity." It has appeared from the works of Cyprian, that episcopacy was then parochial; consequently the presbyters of a single church must have been the clergy here named. No other reference to presbyters is found in the record of this council. The councils held at Antioch, A. D. 264 and 270, against Paul of Samosata, excited great interest among Christians. They were not obstructed by the civil power: on the contrary, application was made to the emperor Aurelian, though a Pagan, to effectuate their final decision by ejecting Paul from the church. This appeal of a Christian synod to the civil authority, was unscriptural, unprecedented, and of mischievous tendency.

The council of Eliberis in Spain, about A. D. 305, and that of Arles in France, A. D. 309, both recognize the subordination of deacons to presbyters, and of each to their bishop, who was evidently parochial.

The synod of Ancyra, in Galatia, met A. D. 314, to establish rules of discipline concerning the reception of those who, in time of persecution, had abandoned the cause. The first canon re-admitted such presby

• Και τους απο κλήρου αυτων λαικους εσίησα.—Zonaras, p. 276.

ters unto the honor of their bench, 7ιμης της καλα καθέδραν METɛxew, but denies them the privilege of serving. By the second, deacons so offending are in like manner to be received to the other honor, but not again to administer the bread or the cup, or to preach, aglovn ποληςιον, ανα φερειν, η κηρύσσειν. If the deacons in the churches of Asia Minor served the sacramental tables, preached and held the other honor, Την αλλην Τιμην εχειν, certainly the presbyters were not laymen; nor do such appear in the other canons of this synod. By the thirteenth canon, it is made unlawful for country bishops (chorepiscopi, xoxoяoi xala xwgas) to ordain presbyters and deacons, and also city presbyters without the consent of the bishop in the other parish.a The chorepiscopi presided over congregations in villages, and the design of this canon was to monopolize power and influence in city bishops, by prohibiting ordinations by the chorepiscopi. If they were bishops by a secondary or canonical ordination, this canon was in furtherance of the same design, the accumulation of power, and of no higher authority, that is, merely void. If they had been ordained as presbyters only, this canon is a recognition of their right to ordain presbyters and deacons, at the period of this synod.

The synod of Neocæsarea in Pontus, was A. D. 314, and also prior to the council of Nice. By the first canon, presbyters are forbidden to marry upon pain of deposition, which is conclusive proof that they were not laymen. By the eleventh canon it is decreed, that no presbyter shall be ordained under thirty years; and the reason assigned is, that Christ was baptized and began to teach in his thirtieth year. The thirteenth prohibits country presbyters from offering in the presence of the bishop and presbyters of a city, but if they be absent, (ɛav de añinor) and he alone should be called to prayer, he may administer the bread and

ο Χωρεπισκόποις μη εξείναι πρεσβυτέρους ή διακινους χειροτονειν αλλα μηδε πρεσβυτέρους (Blondell supposed πρεσβυτέροις) πόλεως χωρις του επιτραπηναι ύπο του επιςκοπου μελα γραμμαζαν εν έτερα agoixia.-Zonaras, p. 295.