Distinction XVII

GRATIAN. Part I. It was shown above in whose time general councils were celebrated, and the authority of which of them excels the other authorities of the saints. The authority to gather councils, however, belongs to the apostolic see. Hence Pope Marcellus writes to Maxentius:

You cannot regularly hold a synod of bishops without the authority of this holy see, although you may be able to gather certain bishops. [PALEA. Nor may you condemn any bishop who has appealed to this apostolic see before a definitive sentence proceeds from here. For if secular persons use written appeals in public judgments, how much more is it permitted to priests to do these same things, who are over them? Of them it was said: “I have said: You are gods.”]

Likewise Pope Julius [I] to the eastern bishops. Your rule has no force and will not be able to have it, since neither was this council conducted by orthodox bishops nor was a legation of the Roman Church present; the canons command that councils ought not to be held without its authority. Nor is any council valid, nor will any council ever be valid, unless it has been supported by its authority.

Likewise Pope Damasus [I to Stephen, epistle IV]. Let no one who does not wish to be judged unworthy of ecclesiastical honor or a contemner presume, without its counsel, to usurp the things granted to this see.

Likewise Gregory. It was never permitted, nor will it be permitted, for a particular synod to be gathered; but whenever any doubt concerning a universal synod arises among certain persons, in order to receive an account of what they do not understand, either those who desire the salvation of their soul should come voluntarily to the apostolic see to receive an account, or, if perhaps—as it is written concerning such persons, “When the sinner has come into the depth of evils, he contemns”—they prove so obstinate and contumacious that they do not wish to be taught, it is necessary either that they be drawn in any way to salvation by those same apostolic sees, or, lest they be able to become the ruin of others, that they be suppressed by secular powers according to the canons.

Likewise Pelagius [Pope II] to the bishops who assembled at the illicit summons of John of Constantinople [epistle I, c. 1]. We are instructed anew by many apostolic, canonical, and ecclesiastical rules that councils ought not to be celebrated without the judgment of the Roman Pontiff. §1. Therefore, as has already been said, what is rightly annulled is not a council but your conventicle or petty council, and whatever was done in it is held null and void. See to it also henceforth that you do not presume such things at anyone’s urging, if you do not wish to lack communion with the apostolic see. §2. But if questions have arisen in any province, and the reasoning among the bishops of that province begins to disagree, and no agreement is reached among those who disagree, they are then to be referred to the greater see. And if they are not readily and justly determined there, they are to be judged canonically and justly where a synod has been regularly gathered. But the greater and more difficult questions, as the holy synod established and blessed custom requires, are always to be carried to the apostolic see.

Likewise Pope Symmachus. Councils of priests, decreed by ecclesiastical laws to be held yearly throughout the provinces, have lost their validity because they do not have the presence of the pope. Read, most senseless men, whether at any time anything was established in them apart from the sanction of the apostolic summit, and whether, if anything concerning greater affairs arose for consultation, it was not reserved to the judgment of the aforesaid see. Part II. GRATIAN. Hence also, when the authority of King Theodoric had commanded priests from diverse provinces to assemble in the city of Rome so that a holy council might judge concerning the things that were said by his adversaries to have been charged against the venerable Pope Symmachus, prelate of the apostolic see, the bishops of Liguria and Emilia, or of the Venetiae, represented that the very man who was said to be assailed ought to convene the synod. They knew that first the merit of Peter the Apostle, and then the authority of the venerable councils following upon the Lord’s command, had handed down singular power in the churches to his see, and that the pontiff of the aforesaid see had not been subject to the judgment of inferiors. §1. To these things the most serene king, by God’s inspiration, replied that it belonged to synodal judgment to prescribe what was to be followed in so great a matter, and that nothing concerning ecclesiastical affairs belonged to him beyond reverence. He also committed to the power of the pontiffs that, whether they wished to hear the proposed affair or did not wish to hear it, they should deliberate upon what they thought more useful, provided that peace was given to the Roman city by the provision of the venerable council. But the bishops sitting in the synod gathered by the authority of the same Symmachus said: “Let Pope Symmachus, prelate of the apostolic see, assailed by accusations of this kind, be immune and free insofar as regards men; we reserve his whole cause to the judgment of God.” §2. “Concerning the clerics of the aforesaid pope, however, who departed from their bishop prematurely and contrary to the rules and made a schism, we decree that this be done: that by making satisfaction to their bishop they may obtain mercy and rejoice to be restored to ecclesiastical offices.” §3. “Lawrence, bishop of the Church of Milan, subscribed to this our statute, in which we committed the whole cause to the judgment of God.” Peter, bishop of the Church of Ravenna, subscribed with the same words, and after him sixty-five bishops. What concerned the clerics is recognized to have been done mercifully and by dispensation for the restoration of peace in the city. §4. This also is to be noted: that in this council and in another synod of Pope Symmachus, the bishop of Milan is read to have subscribed and responded before the bishop of Ravenna; from this it is also gathered that his see has precedence before the latter.

To Syagrius, bishop of Autun: We decree that bishops, according to the time of their ordination, should observe their places, whether for sitting in council, for subscribing, or in any other matter, and should claim for themselves the prerogative of their own ranks. GRATIAN. But the time of ordination refers not to churches but to persons, as is plainly apparent from the custom of the cardinals of the holy Roman Church and of the bishops of each province.