Sect. 1.

CHAPTER XVI.

OF PRIMATES, OR METROPOLITANS.

Some derive the original of metro

tolical constitution.

THE same reasons which first brought in chorepiscopi and coadjutors, as subpolitans from apos- ordinate to bishops in every city church, made the bishops of every province think it necessary to make one of themselves superior to all the rest, and invest him with certain powers and privileges for the good of the whole, whom they therefore named their primate, or metropolitan, that is, the principal bishop of the province. Bishop Usher' derives the origin of this settlement from apostolical constitution. So also Bishop Beverege,' Dr. Hammond,3 Peter de Marca, and some others. And there are several passages in Eusebius and Chrysostom which seem to favour this. For Eusebius says,' Titus had the superintendency of all the churches in Crete: and Chrysostom in like manner, that the apostle committed to him the whole island, and gave him power to censure all the bishops therein. He says the same of Timothy, that he was intrusted with the government of the church in the whole region or province of Asia. And it is certain the Cyprian bishops, in the council of Ephesus,' pleaded the privileges of their metropolitan to be as ancient as the apostles.

49 Con. Carth. 5. can. 8. Placuit, ut nulli intercessori licitum sit, cathedram cui intercessor datus est, quibuslibet populorum studiis, vel seditionibus retinere: sed dare operam, ut intra annum eisdem episcopum provideat. Quod si neglexerit, anno expleto, interventor alius tribuatur. Usser. de Orig. Episc. et Metrop.

2 Bevereg. Cod. Can. Vind. lib. 2. c. 5. n. 12.

3 Ham. Pref. to Titus. It. Dissert. 4. cont. Blondel, c. 5. 4 Euseb. Η. Ε. lib. 3. c. 4. τῶν ἐπὶ Κρήτης ἐκκλησιῶν ἐπισκοπὴν εἰληχέναι.

not long after the apostolic age, when sects and schisms began to break in apace, and controversies multiplying between particular bishops, it was found necessary to pitch upon one in every province, to whom the umpirage of cases might be referred, and by whom all common and public affairs might be directed. Perhaps it took its rise from that common respect and deference, which was usually paid by the rest of the bishops, to the bishop of the civil metropolis in every province; which advancing into a custom, was afterward made into a canon by the council of Nice.

Sect. 3 Confessed by all to have been long

of Nice.

This is certain, that the Nicene council speaks of metropolitans as settled by ancient custom long be- before the counci fore, when it ushers in the canon about them with, ̓Αρχαῖα ἔθη κρατείτω, Let ancient customs be continued," and then goes on to speak of the custom in Egypt, which was for the bishop of Alexandria to have power over all the churches of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis; which was metropolitical, if not patriarchal, power. Epiphanius" mentions the same: speaking of Alexander and Peter, bishops of Alexandria, before the council of Nice, he says, they had έκκλησιαστικὴν διοίκησιν, the administration of ecclesiastical affairs throughout all Egypt, Thebais, Mareotes, Libya, Ammoniaca, Mareotis, and Pentapolis. And Athanasius,12 speaking of Dionysius, who was bishop of Alexandria above sixty years before this council, says, he also enjoyed this power, having the care of the churches of Pentapolis and Libya, when Sabellius broached his heresy, and that he wrote letters of admonition to several bishops of those parts, who began to be infected with his heresy. These are undeniable evidences that the bishops of Alexandria were not first invested with metropolitical power by the council of Nice, but only confirmed in those rights which, by ancient custom and prescription, they had long enjoyed. And this was also the case of other churches.

the bishop of Carthage had a presidency over all the other African bishops, and power to send his mandates among them. And St. Austin speaks of the primate of Nuinidia, as well as the primate of Carthage, before the schism of the Donatists, and says, they gave that for one reason of their schism,16 that the primate of Numidia was not called to elect❘ and consecrate the primate of Carthage. And therefore, as both the same St. Austin" and Optatus take notice, the Donatists pretending that the ordination of Cæcilian, bishop of Carthage, was not valid, because not performed by a primate, sent for Secundus Tigisitanus, who was then primate of Numidia, to ordain Majorinus in his room. Now, as all this was transacted several years before the council of Nice, so it proves that primates were in Africa antecedent to the establishment of that council.

Sect. 4.

litans in the second century.

If we ascend higher yet, and look Proofs of metropo into the second century, there are some footsteps of the same power, though not so evident as the former. Lyons, in France, was a metropolis in the civil account, and Irenæus, who was bishop of it, is said to have the superintendency of the Gallican paræciæ, or dioceses, as Eusebius 19 words it. Philip, bishop of Gortyna, in Crete, is styled, by Dionysius" of Corinth, bishop of all the Cretian churches. Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, presided in council over all the bishops of Asia; Palmas, bishop of Amastris, over the bishops of Pontus, and Theophilus," of Cæsarea, with Narcissus, of Jerusalem, over the rest of the bishops of Palestine.

These are the common proofs, which are ordinarily alleged in this case. Yet I shall freely own, that the three last of them do not cogently prove the thing in dispute. For presiding in council does not necessarily infer metropolitical power; because they might preside as senior bishops, as Eusebius says expressly one of them did, viz. Palmas, bishop of Amastris, ὡς ἀρχαιότατος προυτέτακτο, he presided as the most ancient bishop among them. Which seems to be noted by Eusebius not without good reason; for Heraclea, and not Amastris, was the civil metropolis of Pontus. Blondel, from this passage, concludes, that at this time the senior bishops in all places were the metropolitans. But this does not

sufficiently appear to have been the custom any where else but in the African churches, of which I shall presently give an account: for the other instances that have been given, seem rather to make it evident, that the bishops of the civil metropoles were generally the primates or metropolitans in the church also.

Sect. 5. By what names metropolitans were

It is true, indeed, none of these are expressly called metropolitans; for that name scarcely occurs in any an- anciently called. cient record before the council of Nice: but they were at first termed πρῶτοι, and κεφαλαί, chief bishops, and heads of the province, as the Apostolical Canon styles them." After ages gave them other names, as that of archbishops, at Alexandria" and other places, till that name became appropriate to the patriarchs. The council of Sardica" styles them, ἔξαρχοι τῆς ἐπαρχίας, exarchs of the province. St Austin sometimes calls them principes," princes: and Pope Hilary," monarchs. But these being titles of secular grandeur, and savouring too much of absolute sovereignty and dominion, were expressly prohibited by the third council of Carthage, which ordered that no superior bishop should be called high priest," or prince of the priests, but only primæ sedis episcopus, primate, or senior bishop. Hence it was that those bishops, who, in other parts of the world, were called metropolitans, in Africa had commonly the name of primates; though we sometimes meet with the name metropolitan" in the African councils also.

Sect. 6. Primates in Africa called senes, because the oldest bishop was always metropolitan.

But these primates, in Africa, are frequently called patres and senes. As, in the African code, Xantippus, primate of Numidia, is once and again styled senex Xantippus." And St. Austin, writing to him, inscribes his epistle Patri et consacerdoti seni Xantippo." And thus in many other epistles,*2 writing to the primates, or speaking of them, he gives them the name of senes. And there was a peculiar reason for giving them this name in Africa. For here the primacy was not fixed, as in other places, to the civil metropolis, but always went along with the oldest bishop of the province, who succeeded to this dignity by virtue of his seniority, whatever place he lived in. In other parts of the world, the bishop of the civil metropolis was com

26 Aug. Brevic. Collat. tert. die, c. 16. Non exspectavit Cæcilianus, ut princeps a principe ordinaretur.

27 Hilar. Ep. ad Leont. Arelatens. ap. Baron. an. 462. In provincia quæ ad monarchiam tuam spectat, &c.

28 Con. Carth. 3. can. 26. Ut prima sedis episcopus non appelletur princeps sacerdotum, aut summus sacerdos, aut aliquid hujusmodi, sed tantum primæ sedis episcopus. 29 Con. Car. 3. can. 39. Carth. 4. can. 1. 30 Cod. Can. Eccl. Afr. c. 91 et 101. 32 Aug. Ep. 149, 152, 235, 261, &c.

31 Aug. Ep. 236.

monly metropolitan in the church also: and so it was ordered to be by several canons both of the eastern and western churches. The council of Antioch bids all bishops observe, that the bishop of the metropolis has the care of the whole province, because all men that have business or controversies to be decided, resort from all parts to the metropolis. And the council of Turin" upon this foot determined a dispute about primacy betwixt the two bishops of Arles and Vienna; decreeing that he that could prove his city to be the metropolis, should be the primate of the whole province. The council of Chalcedon has two canons, appointing those cities to be metropoles in the church, which were so in the civil division of the empire. And the council of Trullo has one to the same purpose.

87

36

35

But in the African churches it was otherwise: for they were governed by rules and canons of their own; and their rule was, to let the primacy remove from city to city, and still go along with the senior bishop, without any regard to the civil metropolis, except only at Carthage, where the bishop was a fixed and standing metropolitan for the province of Africa, properly so called. But in Numidia and Mauritania this honour was movable; as may appear from this one instance. Constantina was the civil metropolis of Numidia, as we learn both from the ancient notitia of the empire, and one of the canons of the African code, which expressly styles it so: yet the primacy was so far from being settled here, that we never so much as find that the bishop of Constantina was at any time the primate; but in Constantine's time, Secundus Tigisitanus" was primate of Numidia; in St. Austin's time, Megalius bishop of Calama was primate, who by virtue of his office" ordained St. Austin bishop; afterwards Xantippus of Tagasta" succeeded by virtue of his seniority, whence he is always styled in St. Austin" and the African councils," senex Xantippus. This is sufficient to show, that the primacy in Africa was not confined to the civil metropolis, but was always conferred upon the senior bishop, whose seniority was reckoned from the time of his consecration. Some there are who pretend to say, that these

African primates, notwithstanding this, were subject to the bishops of the civil metropoles, who were properly the metropolitans. But there is no ground for this opinion, and it is justly exploded by De Marca" and others, who have occasionally touched upon this subject.

Sect. 7. How African bishops might for

primacy.

It is true indeed, by the African discipline, a bishop might lose his primogeniture, and so forfeit his title to feit their title to the the primacy; as is evident from a passage in St. Austin," which speaks of such a punishment inflicted upon one Priscus, a Mauritanian bishop, who for some misdemeanor was denied this privilege, though he still kept his bishopric: but in such cases, the primacy did not devolve to the bishop of the civil metropolis, but to the next in order, who could prove himself senior by consecration.

Sect. 8. A register of or

church. And all bishops to take

&c.

And because disputes sometimes arose about seniority; to prevent dinations to be kept these, several good orders were made in the primates by the African fathers relating to this place by seniority, matter. As, first, that a matricula, or archivus, as they called it, should be kept both in the primate's church," and in the metropolis of the province, for bishops to prove the time of their ordination by.

48

Then, secondly, every bishop was to have his letters of ordination subscribed by his ordainers, and dated with the year and day of his consecration." Thirdly, all bishops were to take place according to seniority, and so sit and vote, and have their names subscribed in council; which was a rule not only in Africa," but in all other churches, being enacted by several councils, and inserted into the civil law “ by Justinian the emperor. But they were the more nice in observing this in Africa, where the primacy went by seniority, lest the neglect of it should have bred confusion among them. Insomuch that St. Austin 50 blames Victorinus, (who pretended to be primate of Numidia,) only because in his tractoria, or letter of summons to a provincial council, he wrote the names of the Numidian bishops in a confused order, and put Austin's name before many of

tat. lib. 1. p. 121. Stillingfleet, Hist. of Separ. par. 3. sect. 9. p. 253. Fell, Not. in Con. Carth. ap. Cypr. p. 230. 44 Aug. Ep. 261.

45 Con. Milev. in Cod. Can. Afr. c. 86.

4e Con. Milev. can. 14. Placuit ut quicunque ab episcopis ordinantur, literas accipiant ab ordinatoribus suis, manu eorum subscriptas, continentes consulem et diem, ut nulla altercatio de posterioribus vel anterioribus oriatur.

47 Con. Milev. c. 13. Posteriores anterioribus deferant, &c. Vit. Fulgentii, cap. 20. Inter episcopos, tempore ordinationis inferior, ultimus sedebat.

48 Con. Bracar. 1. can. 24. Con. Tolet. 4. can. 4. Secundum ordinationis suæ tempora resideant.

49 Cod. Justin. lib. 1. tit. 4. c. 29. Episcopi tempore ordinationis prælati, &c.

50 Aug. Ep. 217. ad Victorin.

:

Sect. 9. Three sorts of honorary primates, besides the primate in power.

1. Primates aro.

I must here take notice further, that besides the primacy of power, there was in most provinces also a primacy of honour; whence some bishops had the name and title of primates, who had not the jurisdiction. And these were of three sorts: 1. The primates aro, the oldest bishop in each province next to the metropolitan. These had no power above others, except when the metropolitan was some way disabled, or unqualified for discharging his office by irregularity or suspension: then his power of course devolved to the senior bishop of the province. And this, I conceive, was the reason why the bishop of Amastris " presided in council over the bishops of Pontus, when yet Heraclea, and not Amastris, was the metropolis of the province.

Sect. 10.

politans.

52

51

Thus

The second sort of honorary pri2. Titular metro- mates were the titular metropolitans, which were the bishops of such cities as had the name and title of civil metropoles bestowed on them by some emperor, without the power and privileges, which were still retained to the ancient metropolis of the province. Marcian the emperor dignified the city Chalcedon with the title of a metropolis, and the honour was confirmed to the bishop by the council of Chalcedon itself, only with a salvo jure to the rights of Nicomedia the old metropolis: from that time therefore the bishop of Chalcedon styled himself metropolitan of Bithynia, as may be seen in the Acts of the Sixth General Council. The same honour was done to the city and bishop of Nice, in the council of Chalcedon " likewise. So that here were three metropolitans in one province, but one only had the power; the privileges of the other two were only honorary, to sit and vote in council next to their metropolitan. Yet this gave such bishops an opportunity to exalt themselves, and sometimes they so far encroached upon the rights of the first metropolitan, as to draw off his suffragans, and divide the province with him. Thus it was with the bishop of Nice, who before the time of the sixth general council, had got a synod of suffragans under him. For so Photius subscribed himself in that council 5 bishop of Nice, and metropo

55

was under him.

Sect. 11. 3. The bishops churches, which were honoured by ancient custom.

Besides these there were a third sort of primates, who, though they were of some mother neither bishops of titular metropoles, nor the oldest bishops of the province, yet took place of all the rest, by a general deference that was paid to them, out of regard to the eminency of their see, being some mother church, or particularly honoured by ancient prescription. This was the case of the bishop of Jerusalem. That city was no metropolis of the empire, but subject to Cæsarea, the metropolis of Palestine; yet, in regard that it was the mother church of the world, this peculiar honour was paid to it, that the bishop thereof was always next in dignity to the metropolitan of Cæsarea, and took place of all the other bishops of the province. And this privilege was confirmed to him by the Nicene council, which made a canon to this purpose: That whereas, by ancient custom and tradition, the bishop of Elia had a particular honour paid him, the same should be continued to him, still reserving to the metropolis the dignity and privilege which belonged to it. Some fondly imagine " that this canon gave the bishop of Jerusalem patriarchal power; whereas it does not so much as make him a metropolitan, but leaves him subject to the metropolis of Palestine, which was Cæsarea, as St. Jerom informs us, whose words clear the sense of this canon, and prove that the bishop of Jerusalem was no metropolitan, nor independent of his metropolitan, as Valesius imagines, but had only the second place of honour assigned him next to his metropolitan, which was that honorary primacy which the bishops of Jerusalem had always enjoyed, because, as the council of Constantinople words it," Jerusalem was the mother of all other churches.

50

57

But leaving these honorary priSect. 12. mates, who had little more than a The offices of metropolitans. 1. To name, I am here to show what were ordain their suffra gan bishops. the offices and privileges of those who were properly metropolitans; and they were these that follow. First, They were to regulate the clections of all their provincial bishops, and either ordain, or authorize the ordination of them. No bishop was to be elected or ordained without their consent and approbation: otherwise the canons pronounce both the election and the ordination null. The Kupoç, or ratification of all that is done, says the council of Nice," belongs to the metropolitan in

τῇ μητροπόλει σωζομένου τοῦ οἰκείου ἀξιώματος. 57 Sylvius Addit. ad Caranz. summ. Concil.

38 Jerom. Ep. 61. ad Painmach. Hoc ibi decernitur ut Palæstina metropolis Cæsarea sit.

59 Vales. Not. in Euseb. 5. 23.

Con. Constant. Ep. Synod. ad Damas.

G Con. Nic. can. 4.

every province. And again, If any bishop is made without the consent of the metropolitan, this great synod pronounces such a one to be no bishop. The same rule is repeated in the councils of Antioch, Laodicea," Arles, Turin," Sardica," Ephesus, and Chalcedon. And whereas some pretend that the African primates had not this power, the contrary appears evidently from several canons of their councils. The second council of Carthage 70 says, No one shall presume to ordain a bishop without consulting the primate of the province, and taking his precept, though many other bishops should join with him. The third council of Carthage requires but three bishops to the ordination of a bishop, but then" they must be such as are expressly authorized by the metropolitan. And the fourth council" requires either his presence, or at least his authority and commission. Here a primate and a metropolitan are the same thing, viz. the senior bishop of the province, who usually went to the church, where the new bishop was to be placed, and consecrated him with his own hands, as St. Austin and Possidius" testify, who are good witnesses of their practice.

Sect. 13.

nued to them after

triarchs.

Nor was this power at all infringed This power conti- by setting up of patriarchs above the setting up of pa- them. For though the metropolitans were then to be ordained by the patriarchs, and obliged to attend on them for it, who before were ordained by their own provincial synod; yet still the right of ordaining their own suffragans was all along preserved to them, and expressly confirmed by the council of Chalcedon;" nor do we ever find any patriarch assuming this power, except the bishop of Alexandria, for a particular reason, of which I shall give an account in the following chapter, sect. 11.

68 Con. Ephes. Decret. de Episc. Cypr. 69 Con. Chalced. Act. 13. It. can. 25. 70 Con. Carth. 2. c. 12. Inconsulto primate cujuslibet provinciæ nemo præsumat, licet cum multis episcopis, sine ejus præcepto, episcopum ordinare.

71 Con. Carth. 3. c. 39. Non minus quam tres sufficiant, qui fuerint a metropolitano directi ad ordinandum episcopum.

72 Con. Carth. 4. c. 1. Conventu totius provinciæ episcoporum, maximeque metropolitani vel præsentia, vel auctoritate ordinetur episcopus.

73 Aug. Ep. 261. Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 8.

Seet. 15.

Metropolitans to

be chosen and or

dained by their own provincial synod.

And the same rule was to be observed in the ordination of metropolitans themselves, who were to be chosen and consecrated by their own provincial bishops; who were not obliged to send for a metropolitan out of another province to do it, but they had power to do it in their own provincial synod among themselves. This, St. Austin says, was the custom of the catholic church, both in Africa and at Rome. And therefore, when the Donatists objected against Cæcilian, primate of Carthage, that his ordination was uncanonical, because he had not sent for the neighbouring primate of Numidia to come and ordain him: his answer was," that Cæcilian had no need of this; since the custom of the catholic church was otherwise, which was not to have the Numidian bishops to ordain the bishop of Carthage, but the neighbouring bishops of the province of Carthage: as it was not the custom at Rome to send for a metropolitan out of another province, to ordain the bishop of Rome, but he was always ordained by the bishop of Ostia, a neighbouring bishop of the same province.

It is true there is a canon in the council of Sardica," which orders the bishops of the next province, as some interpret it, to be called in to the ordination of a metropolitan, τοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς πλησιοχώρου ἐπαρχίας

79

LOKÓTOVÇ. But this perhaps may as well be rendered, the neighbouring bishops of the same province; and since custom and the practice of the church, which is the best interpreter of doubtful canons, does manifestly favour this sense, there is some reason so to understand it. But however it be, here is no mention of one metropolitan having a right to ordain another. From which it appears,

74 Con. Chalced. Act. 16. in fin."

75 Con. Arelat. 2. can. 5. Si inter partes aliqua nata fuerit dubitatio, majori numero metropolitanus in electione con

sentiat.

76 Con. Nic. can. 6.

77 Aug. Brevic. Collat. tert. die, c. 16. Non exspectavit Cæcilianus ut princeps a principe ordinaretur; cum aliud habeat ecclesiæ catholicæ consuetudo, ut non Numidiæ, sed propinquiores episcopi episcopum ecclesiæ Carthaginis ordinent: sicut nec Romanæ ecclesiæ ordinat aliquis episcopus metropolitanus, sed de proximo Ostiensis episcopus. 78 Con. Sard, can. 6.

79 Harmenopulus so understood it; for in his Epitome he thus words it: Οἱ πλησιόχωροι τῆς ἐπαρχίας παρέσωσαν. Vid. Harmen. Epit. Canon. ap. Leunclav. Jur. Gr. Rom. t. 1. p. 2.