Part 49

_Boniface_ was naturally a Lover of Peace, and an Enemy to all Strife and Contention. He did not claim, nor attempt to usurp, any new Power over his Collegues; but yet he would not part with any his Predecessors enjoyed, by what means soever they had acquired it; and those who attempted to curtail the usurped Jurisdiction of the Apostolic See, met with as vigorous an Opposition from him as they could have done either from _Innocent_ or _Zosimus_. In short, he had not Ambition enough to inlarge his Authority, but thought himself in Conscience obliged _to maintain the just Rights_, as he styled and believed them, _of the See in which it had pleased Divine Providence to place him, though unworthy of so great an Honour_. [Sidenote: _Dispute between him and the Bishops of_ Illyricum.] His Steadiness in asserting these Claims appeared chiefly in the Dispute that arose between him and the Bishops of _Illyricum_, over whom _Damasus_ had usurped, as I have related elsewhere[1583], and his Successors maintained a particular Power and Jurisdiction. The Transaction is thus related by the Writers of those Times. The See of _Patræ_ in _Achaia_, one of the Provinces of _Illyricum_, being vacant, the Bishop of _Corinth_, Metropolitan of that Province, did all that lay in his Power to get _Perigenes_, a Presbyter of an unexceptionable Character, chosen in the room of their deceased Bishop. But his Endeavours proving unsuccessful, he returned to _Corinth_, and died soon after. Upon his Death the People and Clergy of _Corinth_, to honour his Memory, and shew the Regard they had for one whom he had favoured, unanimously named _Perigenes_ to succeed him. But as they apprehended some Opposition from the Bishops of the same Province, they writ to _Boniface_, begging him to confirm their Election with his Authority. _Boniface_ referred them to _Rufus_, then Bishop of _Thessalonica_, and his Vicar in those Parts, declaring that, as for himself, he had nothing to object either against their Election, or the Person elected. _Rufus_ notified to the Bishops of the Province, and the Metropolitans of the Diocese, the Approbation of _Boniface_, and his own; but it was not received by all in the same manner. [Sidenote: _Law of_ Theodosius _concerning Disputes that should arise in_ Illyricum.] The greater Part indeed agreed to the Ordination of the new Bishop; but some opposed it with great Warmth, prompted, most probably, by the Jealousy they entertained of the growing Power of the See of _Rome_: for, at their Request, a Law was published by the Emperor _Theodosius_, dated the 14th of _July_ 421. commanding all Disputes, that should arise in the Diocese of _Illyricum_, to be finally determined by the Bishops of that Diocese, after they had consulted the Bishop of _Constantinople_[1584]. This was taking those Provinces from the Bishop of _Rome_, and, in some Degree, subjecting them to the Bishop of _Constantinople_, or at least opening a Door for such a Subjection. The Power of the Bishops of _Constantinople_ was already grown very considerable, and their Ambition keeping Pace with that of the Bishops of _Rome_, neither let any Opportunity slip of extending the Jurisdiction of their own See at the Expence of the other. In the present Case the Bishop of _Constantinople_, availing himself of the Favour of the Emperor, and the Disagreement that reigned among the _Illyrican_ Bishops, summoned, without Loss of Time, a Council to meet at _Corinth_, and there to examine the Ordination of _Perigenes_, though he had been ordained, and his Ordination approved of both by _Rufus_ and _Boniface_. [Sidenote: _Three Letters of_ Boniface.] This Step, quite unexpected, alarmed _Boniface_; he divested himself at once of his pacific Disposition, and, assuming the Air and Style of Authority, he writ Three Letters, all dated the same Day, _viz._ 11th of _March_ 422. encouraging the Friends of the Apostolic See to maintain its Rights, and threatening those who dared to invade them. [Sidenote: _He maintains, with Authority, his pretended Rights._] The first was to _Rufus_ of _Thessalonica_, whom he animates not to suffer any Innovations, but vigorously to withstand those, who assumed an Authority that did not become them, and to which they had no kind of Title or Claim, meaning, no doubt, the Bishop of _Constantinople_. The Second Letter he writ to the Bishops of _Thessaly_, exhorting them to acknowlege the Authority of _Rufus_, and no other. The Third was addressed to the Bishops of _Macedon_, _Achaia_, _Thessaly_, _Epirus_, and _Dacia_, who had been summoned by the Bishop of _Constantinople_ to assemble at _Corinth_, and there deliver their Opinion concerning the Ordination of _Perigenes_. In this Letter he complains, in the strongest Terms, of so bold and daring an Attempt, asking, in the Style of a Sovereign, _What Bishop shall presume to question an Ordination approved by us? What Bishop could take upon him to assemble a Council with that View and Intent? Read_, he adds, _read the Canons, and there you will find, that the See of_ Rome _is the First, the See of_ Alexandria _the Second, and that of_ Antioch _the Third. These are the Three great Sees; these the Sees which the Fathers have distinguished above the rest, with ample Privileges, and extensive Jurisdiction._ Since he refers them to the Canons to shew, that these Three Sees are superior to the See of _Constantinople_, both in Dignity and Jurisdiction, it were to be wished he had, at the same time, acquainted them by what Canons his Predecessors had exercised over the Provinces of _Illyricum_ the Jurisdiction which he now so zealously asserts. But that is more than it was in his Power to do. However, in the present Letter, he threatens with Excommunication such of the _Illyrican_ Bishops as shall, in Defiance of his Orders, comply with the Summons which they have received, or presume to question the Ordination of _Perigenes_. What was the Issue of this Dispute is not recorded by any of the Antients; but a modern Historian[1585] informs us, that the Emperor _Honorius_ interposing, at the Request of _Boniface_, in Behalf of the See of _Rome_, prevailed upon _Theodosius_ to revoke his former Law, and enact another in its room, confirming to the Apostolic See all its antient Privileges, and injoining the _Præfectus Prætorio_ to see the latter Law put in Execution. The Historian quotes this Law from the Archives of the _Roman_ Church. But as it is not to be found either in the _Theodosian_ or the _Justinian_ Code, its Authenticity may be justly suspected.

[Sidenote: _He revokes the Privileges granted by_ Zosimus _to the Church of_ Arles.]

The same Year 422. _Boniface_ gave a signal Instance of his Equity and Love of Justice, which redounds greatly to his Honour, and therefore ought not to be omitted. He was sensible, that his Predecessor _Zosimus_, abusing his Authority, had acted in the Affair of the _Gallican_ Bishops, in a most partial and arbitrary manner; that the See of _Arles_ had no just Title to the many Privileges, which he had been induced, by his Partiality for _Patroclus_, to heap on it, at the Expence of Two other Sees; and, consequently, that it was incumbent upon himself, now that he had the Power in his Hands, to rectify by a better Use of it, what his Predecessor had done amiss. The Love of Justice therefore prevailing in him over all other Considerations, he annulled, by a Letter addressed to _Hilarius_ of _Narbonne_, whatever had been done by _Zosimus_ in favour of the See of _Arles_, restored and confirmed to the Sees of _Narbonne_ and _Vienne_ all the Rights and Privileges, which they had been so unjustly divested of, and declaring all the Grants and Concessions made to the See of _Arles_ repugnant to the Canons, strictly injoined the Bishop of _Narbonne_ not to suffer his Brother of _Arles_ to exercise, in virtue of them, any kind of Authority within the Limits of his Jurisdiction[N68]. The Conduct of _Boniface_ was afterwards approved, and that of _Zosimus_ justly condemned, by Pope _Leo the Great_, declaring in a Letter which he writ to the Bishops of the Province of _Vienne_, that the Privileges, which the Apostolic See had granted to _Patroclus_, were afterwards revoked _by a more equitable Sentence_.

Footnote N68:

This Letter is dated the 2d of _February_ 422.

[Sidenote: _A remarkable Instance of his Moderation._]

One of the many Artifices, employed by the Popes to aggrandize their See, was to raise Divisions among their Collegues, or to foment underhand those that others had raised. For in such Divisions they never stood neuter, but, taking Part in the Quarrel, nay, and making themselves Principals, they warmly declared in favour of one Party against the other, that, by supporting them, they might be in their Turn supported by them in all their Pretensions. To this worldly Wisdom, this wicked Policy, _Boniface_ was an utter Stranger: for he did not lay hold of a very favourable Opportunity, which the Division, that reigned at this time among the Bishops of _Gaul_, offered him, to improve his Authority, and extend his Jurisdiction. The Metropolitan Dignity was disputed there by the Bishops of _Vienne_, of _Narbonne_, and of _Arles_, as I have observed above. During that Contest the Clergy of _Valence_, quarreling with their Bishop _Maximus_, charged him with several Crimes; but not caring to accuse him at the Tribunal of any of the Three Competitors (for that had been acknowleging, in one of the Three, the Metropolitan Jurisdiction then in Dispute), they arraigned him at _Rome_, and summoned him to plead his Cause there before _Boniface_. Most other Popes would have eagerly embraced such an Opportunity of inlarging their Power; nay, and founded upon this particular Case the general Right of judging, and finally determining, all Causes of the like Nature. But _Boniface_ declared, in his Letter to _Patroclus_, and the other Bishops of the Seven Provinces of _Gaul_, that though _Maximus_ had been accused at his Tribunal, though he had not appeared to clear himself from the Crimes laid to his Charge, and might thereupon be thought guilty, and be justly condemned; yet he would not take upon him to pronounce such a Sentence, because that Bishop _ought, according to the Canons, to be judged and condemned, or absolved, in his own Province_. An Instance of Moderation that reflects no small Honour on the Memory of _Boniface_; the rather as he had before his Eyes the recent Examples of _Innocent_ and _Zosimus_, the Two most ambitious and arrogant Popes the Church had yet seen. He closes his Letter with exhorting the Bishops of the Seven Provinces to assemble against the First of _November_, that _Maximus_ may be cleared, if innocent, or condemned, if guilty.

[Sidenote: _His Death._]

_Boniface_ died on the 4th of _November_ 422. having held the Chair 3 Years, 9 Months, and some Days. He was buried in the Cœmetery of the Martyr St. _Felicitas_, on the _Salarian_ Way; where he is said to have built an Oratory. He is worshiped by the Church of _Rome_ among her Saints, an Honour which few of his Predecessors better deserved. But it is a Wonder that the last Instance I have given of his Moderation, and Regard to the Canons against the Claims of his See, did not exclude him out of the Calendar. His Festival is kept on the 25th of _October_; and _Bede_ quotes a Book of Miracles wrought by Pope _Boniface_[1586]; but whether by the First Pope of that Name, or the Second, he does not inform us, though he seems to give an intire Credit to every idle Tale that Legend contained. And here I cannot help observing, by the way, that the less necessary Miracles became, the more they were multiplied. In _Bede_’s Time, and the Three preceding Centuries, Men were rather inclined to believe too much than too little; and yet in no other Time was there a greater Profusion of Miracles. From an antient Epitaph quoted by _Baronius_[1587], it appears that _Boniface_ died very old; that he had served the Church from his tender Years; that by his engaging Behaviour he put an End to the Schism, and that he relieved _Rome_ in the time of a Famine.

Footnote 1578:

Bar. ib. n. 37.

Footnote 1579:

Vid. Bar. ib. n. 34. & Baillet. vies de saints, 25 Oct.

Footnote 1580:

Platina in Bon.

Footnote 1581:

Apud Bar. ann. 419. n. 8.

Footnote 1582:

Pagi, crit. hist. in annal. Bar.

Footnote 1583:

See p. 226, 227.

Footnote 1584:

Cod. Theod. l. 45. de Episcop. l. 6.

Footnote 1585:

Fleury hist. eccles. l. 24. n. 31.

Footnote 1586:

Bed. in collectan. in fin.

Footnote 1587:

Bar. ad ann. 423. n. 8, 9.

HONORIUS, CELESTINE, THEODOSIUS II., _Forty-second_ BISHOP _of_ Rome. VALENTINIAN III.

[Sidenote: Year of Christ 422. Celestine _chosen without Opposition_.]

Upon the Demise of _Boniface_, _Celestine_ was chosen in his room, without the least Disturbance or Opposition. _Eulalius_ indeed, who was still alive, and led a retired Life in the neighbouring Province of _Campania_, was tempted by his Friends in _Rome_ to try his Fortune a Second time; but he did not chuse to quit his Solitude, and involve both himself and them in new Troubles. _Celestine_ was a Native of _Rome_, the Son of one _Priscus_, and a Deacon, if not a Presbyter, at the Time of his Election[1588].

[Sidenote: Antony, _one of St._ Austin’s _Disciples, appointed by his Interest Bishop of_ Fussala.]

He was scarce warm in the Chair, when he received a Letter from St. _Austin_ on the following Occasion. As the small Town, or rather Village of _Fussala_, belonging to the Bishoprick of _Hippo_, the See of St. _Austin_, stood at a great Distance from that City, the good Bishop thought he could not better consult the spiritual Welfare of the Inhabitants, who had but very lately abandoned the Party of the _Donatists_, than by causing their Town to be erected into a separate Bishoprick, and letting them have a Bishop of their own. This was indeed abridging both his own Jurisdiction and Revenues; but as he had the Good of the People more at Heart than either, he pursued his Scheme with Success, and prevailed upon his Collegues in _Numidia_ to ordain a young Man named _Antony_, whom he had brought up from his Infancy, the first Bishop of the Place, though at that time only a Reader. This Promotion, _per saltum_, as it is styled, was strictly forbidden by the Popes in their Decretals; but to their Orders St. _Austin_ paid no greater Regard than the other Bishops did, though he always spoke of them, and to them, with all the Respect that was due to the first Bishop in the West.[Sidenote: Antony_’s scandalous Behaviour_.] St. _Austin_ had soon Occasion to repent his transgressing those Regulations, which, it must be owned, are in themselves very wise: for _Antony_, who was but a Youth, and had been kept by St. _Austin_ under great Restraint, no sooner found himself free from all Controul, than abandoning himself intirely to the Indulgence of his youthful Passions, he thereby scandalized the new Catholics to such a Degree, that they let St. _Austin_ know the Conduct of their Bishop, unless he was quickly removed, would certainly drive them to the last Extremity; meaning, perhaps, that they should be forced either to put him to Death, or to join anew the _Donatists_, whom they had but lately forsaken. Such Menaces alarmed St. _Austin_ no less than the Conduct of his favourite Disciple surprised him. A Council was immediately summoned at his Request by the Primate of _Numidia_; _Antony_ was ordered to attend it, and the Inhabitants of _Fussala_ invited to lay their Complaints before the Assembly. The Summons was complied with by all, and _Antony_, by a great Number of Witnesses, convicted of Rapine, Violence, and Extortion. But, because some capital Crimes laid to his Charge were not sufficiently proved, the Fathers of the Council, out of an unseasonable Compassion, contented themselves with only condemning him to restore to the Inhabitants of _Fussala_ what he had with Violence taken from them. [Sidenote: _He is deprived of the Administration, and all Jurisdiction, by a Council._] They were even inclined to leave him in the quiet Possession of his Church; but that being warmly opposed by the People, they deprived him of the Administration, and of all Jurisdiction; but as he still retained the Episcopal Dignity, they did not chuse to remove him to another City to live there even as a private Person, lest they should be thought to transgress the Rules of the Fathers forbidding Translations[1589]. None could think so who were the least acquainted with those Rules.

[Sidenote: _He appeals to_ Rome.]

_Antony_ satisfied, pursuant to his Sentence, the Inhabitants of _Fussala_, whom he had wronged. But pretending that he had been unjustly deprived of his Bishoprick, he resolved to appeal to _Rome_. He was sensible that his appealing at this Juncture, when the Point of Appeals was warmly disputed, as I shall relate hereafter, was Merit enough to recommend him to the Favour of that See. However, not trusting to that alone, as _Boniface_ was still alive, he first engaged in his Favour his own Primate, the Primate of _Numidia_, who, having been excused on account of his great Age from assisting at the Council, was not well acquainted with what had passed there. [Sidenote: _Prevails upon the Primate to write in his Behalf to_ Rome.] Him therefore he easily persuaded, that he had been very ill used by the Council: _For had they thought me guilty_, said he, _of the Rapine and Extortions, that were laid to my Charge, they ought, and, without all doubt, would have deposed me: they have not deposed me; and therefore did not, as is manifest, think me guilty. If I did not deserve to be degraded from my Dignity, I did not deserve to be driven from my See._ Thus he artfully turned the Mercy that had been shewn him against those who had shewn it; and, having by that means imposed upon the Primate, persuaded him to write a Letter in his Behalf to _Boniface_. [Sidenote: _How received by_ Boniface.] With this Letter he repaired to _Rome_, but did not meet there with the Reception he expected: for all he could obtain of _Boniface_ was a Letter to the Bishops of _Numidia_, requiring them to reinstate him in his See, _provided he had represented Matters as they truly were_. This conditional Request _Antony_, on his Return to _Africa_, improved, it seems, into an absolute Command: for he threatened the People of _Fussala_ with a Visit from the Imperial Troops and Commissaries, if they did not receive him as their lawful Bishop, in Compliance with the Orders of the Apostolic See[1590]. [Sidenote: _The People of_ Fussala _write against him to_ Celestine.] In the mean time _Boniface_ dying, and _Celestine_ being chosen in his room, the People of _Fussala_ apprehending, as St. _Austin_ writes, greater Evils from a Catholic Bishop, after their Return to the Church, than they had done from a Catholic Emperor during their Separation, writ a most pathetic Letter to the new Pope, intreating him to pity their Condition, to curb _Antony_ in his unchristian Attempts, and to redeem them, by his Authority, from the Calamities which they had Reason to apprehend from that Prelate’s Cruelty and Ambition. In the same Letter they imputed all their Misfortunes to _Austin_, who had set over them such a Bishop. [Sidenote: _Are seconded by St._ Austin.] And this _Austin_ was so far from taking amiss, that he owned the Charge, and even backed their Request with a Letter of his own, conjuring _Celestine_, by the Memory of St. _Peter_, _who abhorred all Violence and Tyranny_, not to use either with the People of _Fussala_, who, he said, had but too much Reason not to submit tamely to the galling Yoke from which they had been so lately delivered. He adds, that if, in spite of all his Endeavours and Remonstrances, he should still have the Mortification to see the Church of _Fussala_ plundered and tyrannically oppressed by one whom he had raised to that See, he should think himself obliged to atone for the Share which he had in his Crimes, by resigning his own[1591]. [Sidenote: Celestine _acquiesces in the Sentence of the Council of_ Numidia.] _Celestine_ was so affected with these Letters, that he immediately acquiesced in the Sentence of the Council of _Numidia_; and the new Bishoprick of _Fussala_ being suppressed, that Town, with its District, was again subjected to the See of _Hippo_. From these Letters, that were written by the _Africans_ on this Occasion, it appears, that the Bishops of _Rome_ used, in those Days, to send some of their Ecclesiastics into _Africa_, to see the Sentences, which they had given, executed there; and that those Ecclesiastics came with Orders from the Court for the Civil Magistrates to assist them, where their Assistance should be required, or thought necessary.

[Sidenote: _An End put to the Schism formed by_ Eulalius.]

The Schism formed by _Eulalius_ was not, it seems, yet quite extinct in _Rome_ in the Year 425. for I find a Law of that Year, dated the 17th of _July_, and addressed to _Faustus_ Prefect of the City, commanding all _Manichees_, Heretics, Schismatics, and Sects of every Denomination, to be driven out of _Rome_; but more especially those, who, separating themselves from the Communion of the _Venerable Pope_, kept alive a dangerous Schism. Over these _Faustus_ is injoined to keep a watchful Eye, to summon them to communicate with _Celestine_, and, if they did not comply with the Summons in Twenty Days, to banish them an Hundred Miles from _Rome_[1592]. This Law was issued by _Placidia_, who, upon the Death of her Brother _Honorius_, which happened in the Month of _August_ 423. and that of the Usurper _John_, killed in 425, governed the Western Empire, as Guardian to her Son _Valentinian_ III. The Law she issued, probably put an End to the Schism; for no further Mention is made of it by any Historian.