CHAPTER VIII. THE DIOCESAN GOVERNMENT. THIS term denotes the ecclesiastical organization which succeeded a fuller development of the Episcopal system, and further concentration of power in the hands of the bishop. It was gradually matured, and was settled upon the churches in the several provinces, at different times, extending through an indefinite period. The establishment of this form of government cannot with precision be assigned to a specific epoch. Suffice it to say, that the third century may be regarded as the period in which the diocesan government was chiefly consolidated and established. It was the result of a variety of causes, which deserve a careful consideration, and was productive of consequences of great moment to the interests of religion. The course of our inquiries in relation to the establishment of Diocesan Episcopacy will lead us to consider, I. The means of its development, II. Its results. I. Means of its development. 1. The formal organization of the diocesan government was chiefly effected by means of provincial synods and councils. The consideration of these councils belongs to another work. But whatever may have been their origin, such ecclesiastical assemblies were regularly held in Asia Minor, in 1 Christian Antiquities, chap. 17. § 9. pp. 356–367. the third century, and were frequently convened in other provinces, for the transaction of business relating to the interests of the church. They were summoned by the presiding bishop of the province. The bishops of the province were expected to attend, and if any were present from other provinces, they were courteously recognized as members of the same. The presbyters and deacons, also, had at this time, in the opinion of many, a seat and a voice in these councils, though at a later period they were excluded. The council, on the one hand, was the highest judicature of the church, where all that related to its interests in the province was discussed; on the other, it served as a privy-council to the bishop. Here, especially, were all cases brought relating to the bishops. Cases of this kind could only be brought before the council in a full assembly of the bishops, and even then not at pleasure, but only with their consent. Such an assembly, it must readily be seen, afforded a convenient method of deciding any subject of common interest to the churches; though the bishops themselves probably were not aware of the important consequences which might result from assuming thus to give laws to the church. The decisions of the synod, also, at first, assumed the form of law, rather by common consent, than as imperative enactments. They were the decisions of a public deliberative and representative assembly, in which the voice of the majority becomes the law of the whole; and under the sanction of such authority, were received as the rule of the church. But the bishops, having once acquired the power of giving laws to the church, soon changed the ground of their authority; and, instead of legislating for those churches in their name, and as their representatives, they assumed the right of giving laws to the church by virtue of their Episcopal office; and for this assumption, 2 Necessario, says Firmilian, A. D. 257, apud nos fit, ut per singulos annos seniores et praepositi in unum conveniamus, ad disponenda ea quae curae nostrae commissa sunt.—Cyp. Ep. 75. p. 143. they claimed, as has been already mentioned, the sanction of divine authority, jure divino, as the ministers of God, and under the guidance of his Spirit.3 The above representation is only an epitome of the sentiments of Planck, in his work on the Constitution of the Church, which has been so frequently cited. They accord entirely with the representations of Mosheim, and many others who might be named.5 Mosheim remarks, that these councils 66 were productive of so great an alteration in the general state of the church, as nearly to effect the entire subversion of its ancient constitution. For, in the first place, the primitive rights of the people, in consequence of this new arrangement of things, experienced a considerable diminution, inasmuch as thenceforward none but affairs of comparatively trifling importance were ever made the subject of popular deliberation and adjustment;-the councils of the associated churches assuming to themselves the right of discussing and regulating everything of moment or importance; as well as of determining all questions to which any sort of weight was attached.—In the next place, the dignity and authority of the bishops were very much augmented and enlarged. In the infancy, indeed, of the councils, the bishops did not scruple to acknowledge that they appeared there merely as the ministers or legates of their respective churches; and that they were in fact nothing more than representatives acting under instructions. But it was not long before this humble language, began by little and little, to be exchanged for a loftier 3 Placet! Visum est! is the style not unfrequently, in which the summary decisions of their councils are given; or if the decision relates to an article of faith, credit catholica ecclesia! Athanasius, De Synodo. Arimin. et Seluciae, Ferdin. De Mendoza, De Confirmatione Conc., Ill. Lib. 2. c. 2, cited by Spittler. 4 Gesellschafts-Verfass. 1. S. 90-100. 5 Compare also Henke and Vater, Allgemein. Kirchen Gesch. I. S. 120 seq. Eichhorn, Can. Recht. I. S. 20. Riddle's Chron. pp. 32, 33. tone; and they, at length, took it upon them to assert that they were the legitimate successors of the apostles themselves and might, consequently, by their own proper authority, dictate to the Christian flock. To what extent the inconveniences and evils arising out of these preposterous pretensions reached in after times, is too well known to require any particular notice in this place."6 Some of these remarks, however, are especially applicable, as the intelligent reader will perceive, to the state of things which existed somewhat later, under the metropolitan government. 2. The doctrine of the unity of the church had an influence in consolidating the churches under an Episcopal gov ernment. 8 This notion was early developed. It first occurs in the epistle of the church of Smyrna, concerning the martyrdom of Polycarp. It was more distinctly advanced by Irenaeus and Tertullian, in the second century; and, in the third, became the favorite dogma of Cyprian, and, after him, of many others.9 The effect was to create greater oneness of feeling and concert of action among the churches as members of one and the same body. It brought the churches into more frequent correspondence; and, in many ways, contributed to the establishment of uniform laws and regulations under an Episcopal hierarchy.10 This idea of a holy catholic church, one and indivisible, extending through all lands, and binding together in one communion the faithful of every kindred and people, was a conception totally unlike the apostoli 6 De Rebus Christ., Saec. II. § 23; Comp. Saec. II. § 22; Saec. III. § 24. Also, Kirch. Recht. S. 65, 66. 7 Euseb. Eccl. Hist. Lib. 4. c. 15. § 1. 8 Pro corpore totius ecclesiae cujus per varias quasque provincias membra digesta sunt.-Ep. 30. p. 41. 9 Planck, Gesell, Verfass. I. S. 100 seq. Rothe, Anf. Christ. Kirch. I. S. 576-589. 10 Neander, Allgem. Gesch. I. S. 355, 371, 2d ed. D'Aubigné's Hist. of the Reformation. N. Y. 1843. Vol. I. pp. 20-22. cal idea of union in love and fellowship in spirit. Whatever may have been the motive with which it was at first promulgated, it had its influence in blending the churches together under a uniform diocesan organization, and became the occasion of no small share of the bigotry, intolerance and persecution which have so often dishonored the Christian church. 3. The correspondence and intercourse between the bishops of different provinces had much influence in establishing their diocesan authority. Not only were the results of their councils officially communicated to foreign bishops and churches, but the bishops themselves of different dioceses were in mutual correspondence. Their own appointment to office, and their various official acts, were duly communicated. By mutual understanding they acted unitedly and in concert, and aided each other in the promotion of their common ends. Their acts of ecclesiastical censure were extensively published; so that one under the Episcopal ban was followed by his sentence of excommunication wherever he went. He must also return to his own bishop to be restored again to the fellowship of the church. Without credentials also duly certified by his diocesan no stranger was entitled to the confidence of any body of believers. The effect of these regulations was to sustain and enforce the authority of the bishops in their dioceses.11 4. The Disciplina Arcani, the sacred mysteries of the church, while they shed an air of awful sanctity over its solemnities were well suited to inspire the people with a profound veneration for the bishop, who was the high-priest of these rites and the chief agent in administering them. The discussion of this subject would be altogether foreign to our present object, but it needs no peculiar sagacity, to perceive that the system addressed itself to principles of our 11 Siegel, Handbuch. 1. art. Briefwechsel, Rheinwald's Arch. § 4. |