Council Ultramontanism Infallibility

COUNCIL ; ULTRAMONTANISM ; INFALLIBILITY.) The earlier oecumenical councils have well been called "the pitched battles of church history." Summoned to combat heresy and schism, in spite of degrading pressure from without and tumultuous disorder within, they ultimately brought about a modicum of doctrinal agreement. On the one side as time went on they bound scholarship hand and foot in the winding-sheet of tradition, and also fanned the flames of intolerance ; yet on the other side they fostered the sense of the Church's corporate oneness. The diocesan and provincial synods have formed a valuable system of regularly recurring assemblies for disposing of ecclesiastical business. They have been held most frequently, however, in times of stress and of reform, for instance in the I I th, 16th and 19th centuries; at other periods they have lapsed into disuse; it is significant that to-day the prelate who neglects to convene them suffers no penalty. At present the main function of both provincial and oecumenical synods seems to be to facilitate obedience to the wishes of the central government of the Church.

The right to vote (votum definitivum) has been distinguished from early times from the right to be heard (votum consultati vum). The Reform Synods of the 15th century gave a decisive vote to doctors and licentiates of theology and of laws, some of them sitting as individuals, some as representatives of universities. Roman Catholic canonists now confine the right to vote at oecumenical councils to bishops, cardinal deacons, generals or vicars general of monastic orders and the praelati nullius (exempt abbots, etc.) ; all other persons, lay or clerical, who are admitted or invited, have merely the votum consultativum—they are chiefly procurators of absent bishops, or very learned priests.

The numbering of oecumenical synods is not fixed ; the list most used in the Roman Church to-day is that of Hefele (Concilien geschichte, end ed., I. 59 f.) : By including Pisa (1409) and by treating Florence as a separate synod, certain writers have brought the number of oecumenical councils up to 22. These standard lists are of the type which became established through the authority of Cardinal Bellarmine (1542-1621), who criticized Constance and Basle, while defend ing Florence and the fifth Lateran council against the Gallicans. As late as the 16th century, however, "the majority did not re gard those councils in which the Greek Church did not take part as oecumenical at all" (Harnack, History of Dogma, vi. 17) . The Greek Church accepts only the first seven synods as oecumenical; and it reckons the Trullan synod of 692 (the Quinisextum) as a continuation of the sixth oecumenical synod of 680. But con cerning the first seven councils it should be remarked that Con stantinople I. was but a general synod of the East ; its claim to oecumenicity rests upon its reception by the West about two cen turies later. Similarly the only representatives of the West pres ent at Constantinople II. were certain Africans; the pope did not accept the decrees till afterwards and they made their way in the West but gradually.

As the Protestant leaders of the 16th century held fast to the traditional christology, they regarded with veneration the dogmatic decisions of Nicaea I., Constantinople I., Ephesus and Chalcedon. These four councils had enjoyed a more or less fortuitous pre-eminence both in Roman and in canon law, and by many Catholics at the time of the Reformation were regarded, along with the three great creeds (Apostles', Nicene, Athanasian), as a sort of irreducible minimum of orthodoxy. In the 17th cen tury the liberal Lutheran George Calixtus based his attempts at reuniting Christendom on this consensus quinquesaecularis. Many other Protestants have accepted Constantinople II. and III. as supporting the first four councils ; and still others, notably many Anglican high churchmen, have felt bound by all the oecumenical synods of the undivided Church. The common Protestant atti tude toward synods is, however, that they may err and have erred, and that the Scriptures and not conciliar decisions are the sole infallible standard of faith, morals and worship.

Protestant Councils.

The churches of the Reformation have all had a certain measure of synodal life. The Church of England has maintained its ancient provincial synods or convocations, though for the greater part of the i 8th and the first part of the 19th centuries they transacted no business. In the Lutheran churches of Germany there was no strong agitation in favour of introducing synods until the 19th century, when a movement, designed to render the churches less dependent on the govern mental consistories, won its way, until at length Prussia itself fell into line (1873 and 1876). As the powers granted to the German synods are very limited, many of their advocates have been disillusioned ; but the Lutheran churches of America, being independent of the state, have developed synods both numerous and potent. In the Reformed churches outside Germany synodal life is vigorous; its forms were developed by the Huguenots in days of persecution, and passed thence to Scotland and other presbyterian countries. Even many of the churches of congre gational polity have organized national councils (see CONGREGA TIONALISM) ; but here the principle of the independence of the local church prevents the decisions from binding those congre gations which do not approve of the decrees. Moreover, in the last decade of the 19th century a growing desire for a rapprochement between the Free Churches in Great Britain as a whole led to the annual assembly of the Free Church Council for the con sideration of all matters affecting them. This body has no execu tive or doctrinal authority and is rather a conference than a coun cil. In general it may be said that synods are becoming more and more powerful in Protestant lands, and that they are destined to still greater prominence because of the growing sentiment for Christian unity (see REUNION).

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The

most convenient general collection is that of Bibliography.--The most convenient general collection is that of Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum et decretorum nova et amplissima col lectio (Florence, 1759-67; completed Venice, 1769-98, 31 vols.), fac simile reproduction by Welter (Paris, 1901 ff.) with important addi tions. See also Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbolen and Glaubensregeln der alten Kirche (3rd ed. 1897) ; selected documents in Schaff's Creeds of Christendom, 1877 (texts and translations parallel). For further refer ences, see Hastings Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, vol. iv. art. "Councils. Christian" by D. Stone, Schaff, and Thurston, and art. "Creeds, Christian" by A. E. Burn ; the Catholic Encyclopaedia, art.

"Councils" and many special articles ; Herzog-Hauck, Realencyklo pddie, art. "Synoden" by Hauck ; Vacant and Mangeot, Dictionnaire de theologie Catholique, art. "Conciles" by J. Forget. The most convenient general history is that of C. J. von Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, ist ed. 1855 ; 2nd ed. (made after the Vatican council, and not entirely super seding the first) continued by Knopfler and Hergenrother (1873 ff.; see Paul Viollet, Examen de l'histoire des conciles de Mgr. Hefele, Paris, 1876; Extrait de la Revue historique) ; Eng. tr. of part of 2nd ed. (1871 ff.). The subject enters into the general Histories of Dogma (particularly Harnack, Loofs, and Seeberg) . On the general subject Sohm, Kirchenrecht (1892 ff.) is a valuable study.