Trollope on Article XXI: Of the Authority of General Councils

These assemblies are of four kinds: — 1. General; con- sisting of prelates of all nations, summoned to consult for the unity and well-being of the Church at large. 2. National ; which are composed of the bishops and dignitaries of a single nation, as was that convoked by Cardinal Pole, in 1556. 3. ProviTwial ; confined to a single province, and attended by the Metropolitan and his Suffragans. 4. Diocesan ; at which the Bishop of the diocese meets his Clei^, either to enforce the decrees of General Councils, or to adopt regulations for the particular guidance of themselves. Properly speaking, the first alone ai*e called Counnila ; and all others are di- signated Synods,

3. Give a brief account of the English Convoca- tion.

The Convocation is a National Synod of the English Clergy, convened to discuss and regulate the afifairs of the Church, during the session of Parliament. It has an upper

88 QUBSTIOirS AND ANSWERS OK

and a lower house; the one oomposed of the Arohbishops and Bishops of the two provinces, and the other of deputies representing^ the rest of the Clerg^y. Since the reign of Charles II. it has existed only in name ; for, though not absolutely abolished, it has never been allowed to meet for the dispatch of business, but has been prorogued from ses- sion to session by royal mandate.

4. By what other names are General Councils Eometimes called ; and by what authority have they been convened ?

They are also called (Ecumenical Councils, as consisting of delegates from all parts rj)c y^c olKovfievrjQ, of the in- habited world. In the early affes of the Church, they were summoned by the emperors of the East, whose dominion was nearly co-extensive with the whole of Christendom ; till at length the Roman Pontiff assumed the right of sum- moning them, and insisted on the observance of their decrees, as bearing the sanction of Infallibility.

6. Can a Council be lawfully convoked without the consent of the reigning sovereign ; and are the Clergy required to attend the summons of a foreign potentate ?

Neither can General or National Councils be convoked, without the consent of the prince, within whose dominions they are held ,* and to whom it belongs of right to preside therein, and control the proceedings. Bishops are not go- vernors of countries, but subject to their civil rulera. Hence it also follows that the Clergy are not bound to obey the summons of a foreign potentate, against the will of their rulers at home ; since they could not do so without an in- fiingement of the rights and privileges of every indepen- dent sovereign, and a breach or the Scriptural injunction of obedience to the ’ powers that be.’ (Rom. xiii. 1.).

6. Where, when, by whom, and for what pur- pose, was the first General Council held ?

The first General Council was convened by the emperor Constantino, at Nice in Bithynia, in the year A. D. 325, for the purpose of terminating the Arian Controversy. It con-

demned the heresy of Arius ; and set forth the true Chris- tian faith y in what is thence called the Nieene Creed, Some- times indeed the Apostolic Council, held at Jerusalem shortly after our Lord’s ascension, is looked upon as the first General Council ; but, it should seem, improperly.

7. Shew that the Apostolic Synod at Jerusalem was not a General Council; that it was .necessarily convened without the consent of the civil power; and that it was distinguished, in an important particular, from all other Councils whatsoever.

This synod was not composed of the heads of all the Churches then in existence, convened for the purpose of deciding a question of importance to the Christian world ; but ‘the Apostles and elders’ of the Church at Jerusalem ’ came together for to consider of a matter* (Acts xv. 6.), which regarded the Gentile Christians only, and more es- pecially tnose of Antioch. Probably all the Apostles were not present ; and Paul and Barnabas were there, not as de- legates, but as ambaeaadors* Since the CivU power was not then Christian, and the assembly had none of the charac- teristics of a general council properly so called, it was held without obtaining the consent of the Jewish rulers ; more espeoially as the Apostles, being inspired with the Holy Gnost, were guided by the higher authority of God. In this respect the synod of Jerusalem stands alone, and dis- tinct from all other councils on record.

8. Prove that General Councils may err: uid assign your reasons for rejecting the Romish asser- tion of their InfaUibility.

Inasmuch as general Councils are composed of many members, of whom every one is liable to error as an indivi- dual, they are also liable to error in their collective capa- city. The very fact of their meeting to deliberate, implies that they may differ, and consequently err. So far irom being inmllible, those who debate on things pertaining to God, if they allow their passions to prevail tor a moment over a due submission to tne word of God, are perhaps more easily led into error than other men. Witness the contro- venies, and heresies, and schisms, which have harassed the

Church of Christ from the days of the Apostles to the pre- sent time. The Church of Rome indeed asserts, according to the Rhenish Commentator on Acts xv. 28., that ’ holy

• Councils have ever the assistance of God’s Spirit, and there-

• fore cannot err in their sentences and determinations ;* hut surely if such were the case, God would have placed so im- portant a privilege beyond dispute, by an express declara- tion of it in the writings of the New Testament. In the place of any such assurance, both reason and experience conti’adict the assertion.

9. Adduce instances in which general Councils have erred,

Not only have Popes and Councils, with equal claims to infallibility, mutusdly condemned each other ; but one general Council has flatly contradicted another, so that both cannot be right. Thus the decree of the Council of Nice was rejected by several subsequent Councils; the second Council of Ephesus reversed the sentence passed against Eutyches by tnat of Chalcedon ; and the very point under consideration, the authority of CouncUsy was asserted at Constance, and denied by the Council of Trent. As a fur- ther proof that councils have erred, the worship of images was approved by the second of Nice (a. d. 787.) ; and that 01 Rimini (a. d. 360.) espoused the Arian heresy.

10. How many General Councils are receiv- ed by Romanists and Protestants respectively ; and what are the groimds upon which their authority is admitted?

The Church of Rome acknowledges eighteen General Coun- cils, ending with that of Trent, which sat at intervals fi’om a. d. 1545—1563. ; and, in the face of their contradictory decrees, she maintains the infallibility of them all, chiefly on the authority of Matt. xiii. 17. It is clear however that this passage enioins an appeal, in case of obstinate resistance to friendly meaiation, to tne particular Church or commun- ion of which the ofiender was a member ; and that it does not bear upon General Councils at all. Protestants, on the other hand, receive only four General Councils ; admitting ’ the authority of their decrees, solely because it may * be de-

ABTiCLB XXII. 91

[…] i. e. tiheron or proved^ in Latin oatendi, — * that

• they be taken out of Holy Scripture.*

11. Name the four General Councils which are universally acknowledged, with the dates of their convention, the princes who held them, and the ob- ject for which they were convened.

They were, 1. That of Nice already mentioned, which maintained the divinity qf Christ f in opposition to the Ariau heresy. 2. The Council of Constantinople (a.d. 381.), con- venea by the Emperor Theodosius. It condemned the heresy of Macedonius, and enlarged the Nioene Creed by the addition of seveitd articles, including the assertion of the divinity of the Holy Ghost, which that heretic denied. 3. The Council of Ephesus (A. D. 434.), assembled by Theo- dosius the younger against the Nestorians, who maintained that there were two persons in Christ. On the other hand, the Council asserted the Scriptural doctrine of the union oi two natures, divine and human, in one person. 4. The Council of Chalcedon (a. D. 451.), which confirmed the de- crees of the three preceding Councils; and maintained further, in condemnation of the Eutychians, that the two natures of Christ, though united in one person, were per- fectly distinct.

12. Shew that the early Fathers asserted the supreme authority of princes, and their right to summon Councils.

With respect to the allegiance due to princes, Tertullian (ad Scan. c. §.), observes that the Mnperar is greater than all besiae, and less than none but the true God : and Jerome (Epist. ad Evagr. 146.), in order to be assured of the au- thority of a Council, enquires, What Emperor commanded it to be convened ?

QUESTIONS AND AlfSWBBS ON