2

some instances, clerics who had married previously to taking orders, continued to cohabit with their wives; not, however, without giving offense and incurring reproach,1 and hence the councils of Elvira (a. D. 305) and of Arles (a. D. 314) required that all clerics in major orders, and those engaged in daily ministry, should abstain from conjugal society. Again, the Synod of Neo-Caesarea passed sentence of deposition against any priest who should marry after his ordination.3 On the other hand, the Synod of Ancyra (s. D. 314) gave permission to deacons to marry after having taken orders; provided, however, that, having signified their intention of so doing, the bishop would express his willingness to ordain them.4

The severe discipline of the councils of Elvira and Arles obtained the force of law, and became general throughout the Western Church. It was, moreover, rigorously enjoined by Popes Siricius and Innocent I. In the Greek or Eastern Church, on the contrary, the canon of Ancyra seemed to meet with more favor.

The course pursued by the two Churches on this question, is indicative at this early date of what afterward became the established practice of each. In the Western Church, the observance of clerical celibacy became of rigorous obligation everywhere and for all; while a milder and more indulgent

1Cf. the Apostol. Fathers, Ignat. ep. ad Polyc., c. 5; Euseb. h. e. IV. 23, and compare with it Cypriani, ep. 49, ad Cornelium episc. rom.

2 Concil. Illiberit. can. 33. Placuit in totum prohiberi Episcopis, presbyteris et diaconibus vel omnibus clericis positis in ministerio, abstinere se a conjugibus suis et non generare filios: quicunque fecerit, ab honore clericatus exterminetur. (Harduin, T. I., p. 253. Mansi, T. II., p. 11.) Conc. Arelat. can. 6 (resp. 26): Suademus fratribus ut sacerdotes et levitae cum uxoribus suis non coeant, quia ministerio quotidiano occupantur. Quicunque vero contra hanc constitutionem fecerit, a clericatus honore deponatur.

3 Concil. Neocaesar, can. I. Presbyter, si uxorem duxerit, ab ordine suo illum deponi debere. (Harduin, T. I., p. 282. Mansi, T. II., p. 539.)

4 Concil. Ancyran, can. 10. Quicunque Diaconi ordinantur, si in ipsa ordinatione protestati sunt et dixerunt, velle se conjugio copulari, quia sic manere non possunt: hi si postmodum uxores duxerint, in ministerio maneant, propterea quod eis episcopus licentiam dederit. Quicunque sane tacuerint et susceperint manus impositionem, professi continentiam, et postea nuptiis obligati sunt, a ministerio cessare debebunt. (Harduin, T. I., p. 275. Mansi, T. II., p. 518.)

practice obtained in the Eastern Church, which, as might be expected, led the way in the latter to a gradual relaxation of discipline, and finally to a degeneracy of morals. The action of the Council of Trullo, in which the observance of celibacy was, by confining it to bishops alone, utterly done away with, is ample evidence that the discipline on this point was kept up in the East only for the sake of appearance.

OBSERVATION. The following passages from Holy Scripture are quoted against the practice of celibacy: 1 Cor. ix. 5, vii. 9, and also 1 Tim. iii. 2, 12, considered in connection with Tit. i. 6, though without any show of reason. First: Have we not power to lead about a woman a sister, as well as the rest of the Apostles and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?"

It may be stated that there is no reference to a wife in this passage, for St. Paul does not say yvvý, but adɛλón yʊvý. The passage is fully explained by St. Jerome (contra Jovinian. I. 14), where he says that reference is made to those holy women who, according to the custom of the Jews, followed their master about, and provided out of their abundance for his wants and comfort.

The life of Christ furnishes examples of this practice, and also those of Rufinus and St. Jerome, notwithstanding that the latter was almost excessive in his advocacy of virginity. St. Paul, indeed, makes special mention of Peter, but this fact does not militate against our view, which is rather confirmed by the passage from Matt. xix. 27, where Peter himself addresses our Lord in these words: "Behold, we have left all things and have followed Thee."

Second: A reply to the passage from 1 Cor. vii. 9, "Melius est nubere quam u," may be found in the drift of the whole chapter from which it is taken, wherein the Apostle gives advice to those about to enter upon a new state of life, and warns such to make careful trial of themselves beforehand, that they may discover whether they are more fitted for the married or for the clerical state, and tells them that if they are not naturally continent, they should not take upon themselves the practice of celibacy and the discharge of the priestly office, unless, perhaps, they trust that by the grace of God they will remain so, for the sake of gaining the kingdom of Heaven. This is, in fact, the way the Church puts the momentous question to the young man who seeks admission into the order of subdeaconship.

It may be remarked, in this connection, that the words of St. Paul, 1 Cor. vii. 7, "I would that all men were even as myself," i. e. unmarried, refer exclusively to the clergy—to those who are the successors of Christ and the Apostles; and that the passage from the same chapter, v. 5, "Defraud not one another, unless perhaps by consent, for a time, that you may give yourselves to prayer," has a higher sense in which it is applicable to priests; for their life, being one of continual prayer, the condition to such a life is here distinctly pointed out. (Cf. Epiph. haer. 59.)

Third: We have already given above the sense of the passages from the pastoral epistles 1 Tim. iii. 2, 12, and Tit. i. 6, which is a solemn prohibition forbidding bishops and deacons to marry a second time, because such conduct was regarded as a proof of incontinency. The passages, therefore, show that

whether married or not, bishops and deacons must lead a life of continence. This view is corroborated by the fact that second marriage, later on, was made an impediment, which excluded those to whom it attached from the ecclesiastical state.

§ 86. Development of the Organization of the Church-Growth of the Authority of the Metropolitan—Institution of Provincial Councils.

We learn from the Apostles that even in their day the spirit of union existing in the Church, and drawing together all the faithful by one common bond, began to manifest itself externally in the action of several communities, which entered into close relations with one another, not, however, in such way as to recognize any hierarchical precedence, or priority, in one above the other. It was not long, however, till the breath of the Holy Ghost, quickening the whole body of the faithful, and inspiring all with one common impulse, gave a spiritual unity to the Universal Church, whose outward expression was the external bond, which united together, not alone the flock of each single diocese (Пapoxia) under one bishop, but the flocks of all the dioceses under one pastor.

The relations of distant communities gradually grew more intimate, till finally, as if by one common impulse, all Christians began to regard themselves, not as belonging to isolated and independent bodies, but as members and integral portions of the one sheepfold, under the one Shepherd. Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna, while engaged in their apostolic labors and on their journeys, brought home to the faithful, by word of mouth and by letter, the necessity of union among the faithful for the very existence of a Church. Irenaeus and Tertullian, in their controversies with heretics, insisted on it as the very condition of unity of doctrine and the essential note of the true Church. St. Cyprian, in his work "De Unitate Ecclesiae," drew out the same idea more clearly, and with greater force, than any of those who went before him. "As," says he, "the rays of the sun all proceed from one source, and as the branches of a tree all do all derive life from a common root, so, in the same way, the Christian communities, spread over the face of the earth,

derive life from and center in one and the same Church. For as the ray is invisible, except in the light of the sun, and as the branch can not subsist if disconnected from the trunk, so neither is it possible to be truly a Christian if the bond of union with the Church be severed. Whoever does not live in union with the Church, is an alien and a profane man, and has no part with the flock of Christ. He who has not God for his Father, has not the Church for his Mother. He may die a martyr's death, but this will not avail for merit.”

The unity, both internal and external, existing in the Church and fully expressed in the word "Catholic," impressed itself upon the organization of the Church in the following manner: The same reasons which brought together, under one bishop, all the churches of a city and the surrounding country, operated in uniting adjoining and neighboring dioceses under one common head, usually under the bishop of the civil metropolis, or capital of a province,1 thus forming, as it were, another sort of diocese greater in extent and superior in dignity to the others, the bishop of which has, since the third century, been uniformly called the Metropolitan. The first example of a metropolitan see is that of the Mother Church of Jerusalem in the East, to which the churches of Asia, Judea, Samaria, and Galilee were united. After the destruction of this city, in the reign of Hadrian, her metropolitan dignity

2

1This custom obtained the force of law at the Concil. Antioch, 341, can. 9: ToÙS καθ' ἑκάστην ἐπαρχίαν ἐπισκόπους εἰδέναι χρὴ τὸν ἐν τῇ μητροπόλει προεστῶτα ἐπίσκο πον, καὶ τὴν φροντίδα ἀναδέχεσθαι πάσης τῆς ἐπαρχίας, διὰ τὸ ἐν τῇ μητροπόλει πανταχόθεν συντρέχειν πάντας τοὺς πράγματα έχοντας.-Per singulas provincias episcopos constitutos scire oportet, episcopum metropolitanum, qui praeest, curam et solicitudinem totius provinciae suscepisse. Propter quod ad metropolitanam civitatem ab his qui causas habent sine dubio concurratur. Let the bishops in each province know that the metropolitan has charge of the whole province, because all those who have any business to attend to come from all parts to the metropolis. (Harduin, T. I., p. 595.)

2 Cf. Eusebius, h. e. III. 33, who relates after Hegesippus, that the bishops of Jerusalem enjoyed a metropolitan power. It is said of James and another relation of Our Lord, who were bishops of Jerusalem: προηγοῦνται πάσης ἐκκλησίας ὡς μάρτυρες καὶ ἀπὸ γένους τοῦ κυρίου.-Universae ecclesiae praesident, utpote martyres et agnati Christi. Cf. Petr. de Marca, concord. sacerdotii et imperii VI. 1.

passed to the see of Caesarea Stratonis, a city situated on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea.

The Church of Antioch, composed of converts from both Judaism and Paganism, was the next to enjoy the dignity of a Christian metropolis, and Alexandria the third. But the see of Alexandria soon ranked second, and that of Antioch third, on account of the superior merit of Mark and Annianus over Ennodius. The fourth was Rome in the West, to which were united the churches of Lower and Central Italy, and those of the islands of Sardinia, Corsica, and Sicily, which were called suburban provinces. Besides these three great metropolitan sees of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, those of Ephesus and Carthage enjoyed special consideration, and were looked up to as metropolitan sees.

The subordination of the diocese to a metropolitan, or primate, exercised a very beneficial influence on the most important affairs of the Church-such, for example, as the election of bishops. The established modes of communication existing among the churches of a province, by which one was informed of anything of importance that took place in the other-such, for instance, as the litterae communicatoriae, proclaiming the election of bishops, and the litterae formatae, or commendatory letters, introducing strangers to communities where they were not known, and similar ones making known excommunicated persons-were at once the necessary consequences of the internal1 and the evidences of the external union of the churches.

2

Provincial councils, which consisted of the assembled bishops of a province, accompanied by their priests and deacons,

1Ferrari, de antiquo epistolar. ecclesiae genere, Mediol. 1613, 4to. Kiessling, de stabili primit. eccl. ope litterar. communicatoriar. connubio, Lps. 1744, 4to. 2 Zúvodos, concilium, conventus, in Paganism, was an assemblage of several persons for the purpose of consulting on public affairs; in Christianity, of ecclesiastical persons, especially of the clerical order, for the purpose of consulting on and deciding ecclesiastical matters. The assemblies were called from the persons composing them, either provincial or diocesan synods. To these were added, during the next epoch, ecumenical, endemic, and national synods. The assemblies of the heretics, or those in which heretical doctrines were advanced, were named "conciliabula, conventicula." Cf. Hefele, Hist. of Councils, Vol. I., Introduction.