Papal Primacy

IGNATIUS of Antioch (c.105) uses grand (and submissive) titles in addressing Roman Church.

POPE VICTOR excommunicates (c.195) eastern bishops during the Easter Controversy.

POPE JULIUS 1 (350) “.it is the custom to write to us first, [..] here what is just is decided.”

THE SYNOD of SERDICA (385) The Pope may receive and decide appeals from bishops.

POPE ZOSIMUS (418) No one may disagree with the judgment or retract the decisions of the See of Peter.

[4.5] THE GROWING IMPORTANCE of ROME
The Roman Church had been of prominence since the time of Paul. To it that Apostle wrote his most noteworthy letter. At Rome Paul, and probably Peter, died. The church endured the severest of early persecutions under Nero, and survived in vigor. Situated in the capital of the empire, it early developed a consciousness of strength and authority, which was doubtless increased by the fact that, by 100, it was, it would appear, the largest single congregation in Christendom.

Even before the close of the first century Clement, writing anonymously to the Corinthians in the name of the whole Roman congregation (93-97), spoke as for those who expected to be obeyed.^[28] The tone, if brotherly, was big-brotherly. This influence was increased by the well-known generosity of the Roman congregation.^[

Ignatius addressed it as “having the presidency of love.”^[30] The destruction of Jerusalem in the second Jewish war (135) ended any possible leadership of Christianity that might there have been asserted.

The successful resistance to Gnosticism and Montanism strengthened it; and it reaped in abundance the fruits of that struggle. There the creed was formulated, there the canon formed. Above all, it was advantaged by the appeal of the opponents of Gnosticism to the tradition of the Apostolic churches, for Rome was the only church in the western half of the empire with which Apostles had had anything to do.

Irenæus of Lyons, writing about 185, represented the general Western feeling of his time, when he not only pictures the Roman Church as founded by Peter and Paul, but declares “it is a matter of necessity that every church should agree with this church.” ^[31]It was leadership in the preservation of the apostolic faith, not judicial supremacy, that Irenæus had in mind; but with such estimates widespread, the door was open for a larger assertion of Roman authority. Rather late in developing the monarchical episcopate, since Anicetus (154-165) seems to have been the first single head of the Roman Church, the prominence of its bishop grew rapidly in the Gnostic struggle, and with this growth came the first extensive assertion of the authority of the Roman bishop in the affairs of the church at large.

[...] While there is reason to suppose that Easter had been honored from early in Christian history, the first definite record of its celebration is in connection with a visit of Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, to Anicetus, bishop of Rome, in 154 or 155. At that time the practice of Asia Minor, probably the more ancient, was to observe Easter with the Lord’s Supper on the evening of the fourteenth of the month Nisan, like the Jewish Passover, regardless of the day of the week on which it might fall. The Roman custom, and that of some parts of the East, was to hold the Easter feast always on Sunday. The question was, therefore, should the day of the week or that of the month be the norm. Polycarp and Anicetus could not agree, but parted with mutual good-will, each adhering to his own practice. The problem was further complicated by a dispute, about 167, in Laodicea, in Asia Minor itself, as to the nature of the celebration on the fourteenth of Nisan, some holding that Christ died on the fourteenth, as the fourth Gospel intimates, and others placing His death, as do the other Gospels, on the fifteenth. The latter treated the commemoration of the fourteenth of Nisan, therefore, as a Christian continuation of the Hebrew Passover.

About 190 the problem became so acute that synods were held in Rome, Palestine, and elsewhere which decided in favor of the Roman practice. The churches of Asia Minor, led by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, refused conformity. Thereupon Victor, bishop of Rome (189-198), excommunicated the recalcitrant congregations. This high-handed action met with much protest, notably from Irenæus of Lyons, but it was a marked assertion of Roman authority.

These embittered controversies were costly to Asia Minor, and any possible rivalry on equal terms of Ephesus and Rome was out of the question. The collapse of Jewish Christian leadership, the apparent lack at Antioch of men of eminence in the second century, and the decline of the influence of Asia Minor left Rome, by 200, the most eminent and influential center of Christianity—a position of which the Roman bishops had the will and the ability to make full use. The rise of Alexandria and of Carthage to importance in the Christian thought and life of the third century could not rob Rome of its leadership. Their attainment of Christian significance was far younger than that of the capital of the empire.

The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff *	ST. JULIUS I 337-352
[From the Leter of Pope Julius Ανέγνων τὰ γράμματα (21.2.1) to the Church of Antioch contained in Athanasius’ Apologia contra Arianos, 35.5.1. to the Antiochenes, in the year 341]

For if, indeed as you assert, some sin has risen among them, a judicial investigation ought to have been made according to the ecclesiastical canon, and not in this manner. Everyone should have written to us, in order that thus what was might be decided by all; for the bishops were the ones who suffered, and it was not the ordinary churches that were harassed, but which the apostles themselves governed in person. Yet why has nothing been written to us, especially regarding the Alexandrian church? Or do you not know that it is the custom to write to us first, and that here what is just is decided? Certainly if any suspicion of this nature did fall upon the bishop of that city, the fact should have been written to this church. [Dz 57a [130]	35.5.1 εἰ γὰρ καὶ ὅλως͵ ὥς φατε͵ γέγονέ τι εἰς αὐτοὺς ἁμάρτημα͵ ἔδει κατὰ τὸν ἐκκλη σιαστικὸν κανόνα καὶ μὴ οὕτως γεγενῆσθαι τὴν κρίσιν͵ ἔδει γραφῆναι πᾶσιν ἡμῖν͵ ἵνα οὕτως παρὰ πάντων ὁρισθῇ τὸ δίκαιον. ἐπίσκοποι γὰρ ἦσαν οἱ πάσχοντες καὶ οὐχ αἱ τυχοῦσαι ἐκκλησίαι αἱ πάσχουσαι͵ ἀλλ΄ ὧν αὐτοὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι δι΄ ἑαυτῶν καθηγή 35.4 σαντο. διὰ τί δὲ περὶ τῆς Ἀλεξανδρέων ἐκκλησίας μάλιστα οὐκ ἐγράφετο ἡμῖν; ἢ ἀγνοεῖτε͵ ὅτι τοῦτο ἔθος ἦν͵ πρότερον γράφεσθαι ἡμῖν καὶ οὕτως ἔνθεν ὁρίζεσθαι τὰ δίκαια; εἰ μὲν οὖν τι τοιοῦτον ἦν ὑποπτευθὲν εἰς τὸν ἐπίσκοπον τὸν ἐκεῖ͵ ἔδει πρὸς τὴν ἐνταῦθα ἐκκλησίαν γραφῆναι͵ νῦν δὲ οἱ ἡμᾶς μὴ πληροφορήσαντες͵ πράξαντες δὲ αὐτοὶ ὡς 35.5 ἠθέλησαν͵ λοιπὸν καὶ ἡμᾶς οὐ καταγνόντας βούλονται συμψήφους εἶναι.
132 57a Nam si omnino, ut dicitis, aliqua fuit eorum culpa, iudicium secundum ecclesiasticum canonem, nec eo pacto, fieri oportuit. Oportuit omnibus nobis scripsisse, ut ita ab omnibus quod iustum esset decerneretur; episcopi enim erant qui patiebantur, nec vulgares Ecclesiae quae vexabantur, sed quas ipsi Apostoli per se gubernarunt. Cur autem de Alexandrina potissimum Ecclesia nihil nobis scriptum est? An ignoratis hanc esse consuetudinem, ut primum nobis scribatur, et hinc quod iustum est decernatur? Sane si qua hujusmodi suspicio in illius urbis episcopum cadebat, ad hanc Ecclesiam scribendum fuit.
Apologia contra Arianos 35.3.3 to Apologia contra Arianos

COUNCIL OF SERDICA 343-344
The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff *
[57b/133-135] From the epistle "Quod semper" by which the synod transmitted its acts to St. Julius]
[Can. 3] (Isid. 4). Hosius the bishop said: That also, that a bishop may not cross from one province into another province, in which there are bishops, unless perchance on the invitation of his brothers, lest we seem to have shut the door of charity. --That too should be provided; if perchance in any province some bishop has a dispute with a brother bishop, let no one of these summon the bishops from another province.-But if any bishop has been judged in some case, and he thinks he has a good case, so that a new trial may be given,	133 57b ((can.3a) Isidor. can.4) Osius episcopus dixit: Illud quoque (suppl. e graeco: necessario adiciendum est), ut episcopus de provincia ad aliam provinciam, in qua sunt episcopi, non transeat; nisi forte a fratribus suis invitatus, ne videamur ianuam caritatis clausisse. - Illud quoque providendum est: si in aliqua provincia forte aliquis episcopus contra fratrem suum episcopum litem habuerit, non ex his unus ex alia provincia advocet episcopos. - Quod si aliquis episcopus iudicatus fuerit in aliqua causa, et putat bonam causam habere, ut iterum iudicium renovetur,
if it seems good to you, let us honor the memory of the most holy Apostle, Peter:	si vobis placet, sanctissimi Petri Apostoli memoriam honoremus:
either let those who have examined the case or the bishops who reside in the next province write to the Roman bishop; and if he should judge that the judicial investigation ought to be repeated, let it be repeated, and let him appoint judges. But if he should determine that the case is such, that what has been finished should not be reopened, his decree shall be confirmed.	scribatur vel ab his, qui causam examinarunt, vel ab episcopis, qui in proxima provincia morantur, Romano episcopo; et si iudicaverit renovandum esse iudicium, renovetur, et det iudices. Si autem probaverit talem causam esse, ut ea non refricentur quae acta sunt, quae decreverit confirmata erunt.
Is this agreeable to all? The synod replied: It is agreeable.	Si hoc omnibus placet? Synodus respondit: Placet.

134 (Isid. 5). Gaudentius the bishop said: To this very holy opinion which you have offered, if it is agreeable, we ought to add: when any bishop has been deposed by the judgment of those bishops who abide in the neighboring places, and when he has proclaimed that he must plead his case in the city of Rome, another bishop may not be ordained for his place in the same office after the appeal of him who seems to have been deposed, unless his case has been decided by the judgment of the bishop of Rome.	134 57c (Isid. 5). Gaudentius episcopus dixit: Addendum, si placet, huic sententiae, quam plenam sanctitatis protulistis: cum aliquis episcopus depositus fuerit eorum episcoporum iudicio, qui in vicinis commorantur locis, et proclamaverit agendum sibi esse negotium in urbe Roma, alter episcopus in eadem cathedra, post appellationem eius, qui videtur esse depositus, omnino non ordinetur loco ipsius, nisi causa fuerit iudicio Romani episcopi determinata.

135 57d [Can. 3b] (Isid. 6.) Osius the bishop said: However it has been agreed, that, if a bishop has been accused, and the assembled bishops of the same province have judged and deprived him of his office, and he appears to have appealed, and has taken refuge with the most blessed bishop of the Roman church and has desired to be heard, and he has thought it just that an examination be made anew, let him deign to write to these bishops who are in the adjoining and neighboring province so that they themselves may diligently make all inquiries and decide according to their pledge of truth. But if anyone asks that his case be heard again and by his plea moves the Roman bishop to send a presbyter from his own side, what he [the presbyter] wishes or what he determines will be in the power of the bishop; and if he decrees those ought to be sent who in person may judge with the bishops and who have the authority [of him] by whom they have been appointed, it [this decree] will be within his decision. But if he believes that the bishops suffice to put an end to the affair, he will do that which he decides in accordance with his own very wise deliberation.	135 57d ((Can. 3b) Isid. 7) Osius episcopus dixit: Placuit autem, ut, si episcopus accusatus fuerit, et iudicaverint congregati episcopi regionis ipsius, et de gradu suo deiecerint eum, et appellasse videatur, et confugerit ad beatissimum ecclesiae Romanae, episcopum et voluerit audiri et iustum putaverit, (ut) renovetur examen; scribere his episcopis dignetur, qui in finitima et propinqua provincia sunt, (ut) ipsi diligenter omnia requirant et iuxta fidem veritatis definiant. Quod si qui rogat causam suam iterum audiri et deprecatione sua moverit episcopum Romanum, ut e latere suo presbyterum mittat, erit in potestate episcopi, quid velit aut quid aestimet: (et) si decreverit mittendos esse, qui praesentes cum episcopis iudicent, habentes (eius) auctoritatem, a quo destinati sunt, erit in suo arbitrio. Si vero crediderit sufficere episcopos, ut negotio terminum imponant, faciet quod sapientissimo consilio suo iudicaverit.
SIRICIUS
[From the epistle (1) "Directa ad decessorem" to Himerius, Bishop of Taragona Terracina, Feb. 10, 385]	PL 67.237-238
181 Dz 87/181-182 . . . To your inquiry we do not deny a legal reply, because we, upon whom greater zeal for the Christian religion is incumbent than upon the whole body, out of consideration for our office do not have the liberty to dissimulate, nor to remain silent. We carry the weight of all who are burdened; nay rather the blessed apostle Peter bears these in us, who, as we trust, protects us in all matters of his administration, and guards his heirs.	181 87 (Prooem. 1) ... Consultationi tuae responsum competens non negamus, quia officii Nostri consideratione non est Nobis dissimulare, non est tacere libertas, quibus maior cunctis christianae religionis zelus incumbit. Portamus onera omnium qui gravantur; quin immo haec portat in Nobis beatus Apostolus Petrus, qui Nos in omnibus, ut confidimus, administrationis suae protegit et tuetur heredes. ...

Now we encourage your fraternal spirit to observe the canons and to hold firm to the established decretals steadfastly, so that you make known to all our fellow bishops, and not only those situated in your region, what we wrote back in response to your questions. But these things which were set forth by us in salubrious fashion should even be sent by escort of your letter to all the Carthaginians, Baeticians, Lusitanians, and Gallicians (Latin), and those who border you in neighboring provinces on either side. And although there is freedom for no priest of the Lord to be ignorant of the statutes (statuta) of the apostolic see and the venerable definitions and decisions of the canons (canones), it can, nevertheless, be helpful, and because of the antiquity of your see, beloved, exceedingly glorious for you, if those things of a general sort which were written to you by name are brought to the attention of all our brothers through your cooperative solicitude, so that the things which were salubriously established by us, not haphazardly, but prudently, with very great care and deliberation, might remain inviolate, and that in the future access to all excuses should be blocked, which according to us cannot be available now to anyone. Issued on February 11, in the consulship of those most distinguished men Arcadius and Bauto.	Explicuimus, ut arbitror, frater charissime, universa quae digesta sunt in querelam, et ad singulas causas, de quibus per filium nostrum Bassianum presbyterum ad Romanam Ecclesiam, ut pote ad caput tui corporis, retulisti, sufficientia, quantum opinor, responsa reddidimus: nunc fraternitatis tuae animum ad servandos canones et tenenda decretalia constituta magis ac magis incitamus. Ut haec quae ad tua consulta rescripsimus, in omnium coepiscoporum nostrorum perferri facias notionem, et non solum eorum qui in tua sunt dioecesi constituti, sed etiam ad universos Carthaginienses ac Baeticos, Lusitanos atque Gallicos, vel eos qui vicinis tibi collimitant hinc inde provinciis haec quae a nobis sunt salubri ordinatione disposita, sub litterarum tuarum prosecutione mittantur. Et quanquam statuta sedis apostolicae, vel canonum venerabilia definita nulli sacerdotum Domini ignorare sit liberum, ut illius tamen et pro antiquitate sacerdotii tui dilectioni tuae esse admodum poterit gloriosum, si ea quae ad te speciali nomine generaliter scripta sunt, per unanimitatis tuae sollicitudinem in universorum fratrum nostrorum notitiam perferantur, quatenus et quae a nobis non inconsulte, sed provide sub nimia cautela et deliberatione sunt et salubriter constituta, intemerata permaneant, et omnibus in posterum excusationibus aditus, qui jam nulli apud nos patere poterit, obstruatur. Data III idus Februarii, Arcadio et Bauto vv. cc. conss. (An. Christi 385.)
	Libere, Ep. 'Studens paci' aux évêques orientaux, 357
	138 Studens paci et concordiae Ecclesiarum, posteaquam litteras caritatis vestrae de nomine Athanasii et ceterorum factas ad nomen Julii bonae memoriae episcopi accepi, secutus traditionem maiorum presbyteros urbis Romae Lucium, Paulum et Helianum e latere meo ad Alexandriam ad supradictum Athanasium direxi, ut ad urbem Romam veniret ut in praesenti id, quod de Ecclesiae disciplina exstitit, in eum statueretur. Litteras etiam ad eundem per supradictos presbyteros dedi, quibus continebatur, quod si non veniret, sciret se alienum esse ab Ecclesiae Romanae communione. Reversi igitur presbyteri nuntiaverunt eum venire noluisse. Secutus denique litteras caritatis vestrae, quas de nomine supradicti Athanasii ad nos dedistis, sciatis his litteris, quas ad unanimitatem vestram dedi, me cum omnibus vobis et cum universis episcopis Ecclesiae catholicae pacem habere, supradictum autem Athanasium alienum esse a communione mea sive Ecclesiae Romanae et a consortio litterarum et ecclesiasticarum.

[From the epistle (29) "In requirendis" to the African bishops, Jan. 27, 417]
100 (1) In seeking the things of God . . . preserving the examples of ancient tradition . . . you have strengthened the vigor of your religion . . . with true reason, for you have confirmed that reference must be made to our judgment, realizing what is due the Apostolic See, since all of us placed in this position desire to follow the Apostle, from whom the episcopate itself and all the authority of this name have emerged. Following him we know how to condemn evils just as (well as how) to approve praiseworthy things. Take this as an example, guarding with your sacerdotal office the practices of the fathers you resolve that (they) must not be trampled upon, because they made their decisions not by human, but by divine judgment, so that they thought that nothing whatever, although it concerned separated and remote provinces, should be concluded, unless it first came to the attention of this See, so that what was a just proclamation might be confirmed by the total authority of this See, and from this source (just as all waters proceed from their natal fountain and through diverse regions of the whole world remain pure liquids of an uncorrupted source), the other churches might assume what [they ought] to teach, whom they ought to wash, those whom the water worthy of clean bodies would shun as though defiled with filth incapable of being cleansed.

Saint Innocent I, Ep. 'In requirendis' ad episcopos Conc. Carthag., 27 Jan. 417
217 100 (c. 1) In requirendis divinis (Dei) rebus ... antiquae traditionis exempla servantes ... nostrae religionis vigorem non minus nunc in consulendo quam antea, cum pronuntiaretis, vera ratione firmatis (firmastis), qui ad Nostrum referendum adprobastis esse iudicium, scientes, quid Apostolicae Sedi, cum omnes hoc loco positi ipsum sequi desideremus Apostolum, debeatur, a quo ipse episcopatus et tota auctoritas nominis huius emersit. Quem sequentes tam mala iam damnare novimus quam probare laudanda, vel(ut) id vero, quod Patrum instituta sacerdotali custodientes officio non censetis esse calcanda quod illi non humana sed divina decrevere sententia, ut quicquid quamvis de disiunctis remotisque provinciis ageretur, non prius ducerent finiendum, nisi ad huius Sedis notitiam perveniret, ut tota huius auctoritate, iusta quae fuerit pronuntiatio, firmaretur, indeque sumerent ceterae Ecclesiae, velut de natali suo fonte aquae cunctae procederent et per diversas totius mundi regiones puri (latices) capitis incorruptae manarent, quid praecipere, quos abluere, quos velut in caeno inemundabili sordidatos mundis digna corporibus unda vitaret.

(Denzinger-Hünermann 221. Pope St. Zosimus, Council of Carthage, from the letter Quamvis Patrum traditio to the African bishops, March 21, 418)

Although the tradition of the Fathers has attributed such great authority to the Apostolic See that no one would dare to disagree wholly with its judgment, and it has always preserved this judgment by canons and rules, and current ecclesiastical discipline up to this time by its laws pays the reverence which is due to the name of Peter, from whom it has itself descended . . . ; since therefore Peter the head is of such (Treat authority and he has confirmed the subsequent endeavors of all our ancestors, so that the Roman Church is fortified . . . by human as well as by divine laws, and it does not escape you that we rule its place and also hold power of the name itself, nevertheless you know, dearest brethren, and as priests you ought to know, although we have such great authority that no one can dare to retract from our decision, yet we have done nothing which we have not voluntarily referred to your notice by letters… not because we did not know what ought to be done, or would do anything which by going against the advantage of the Church, would be displeasing.

Saint Zosime, Ep. 'Quamvis Patrum' ad Concilium Carthag. 21 mars 418
221 109 (n 1) Quamvis Patrum traditio Apostolicae Sedi auctoritatem tantam tnbuerit, ut de eius iudicio disceptare nullus auderet, idque per canones semper regulasque servaverit et currens adhuc suis legibus ecclesiastica disciplina Petri nomini, a quo ipsa quoque descendit, reverentiam quam debet exsolvat: ...
(3) cum ergo tantae auctoritatis et Petrus caput sit et sequentia omnium maiorum statuta firmaverint, ut iam humanis divinisque legibus disciplinisque omnibus finiretur Romanam Ecclesiam, cuius locum regeret (al.: firmetur Romana Ecclesia, cuius locum Nos regere), ipsius quoque potestatem nominis obtinere...:
(4) tamen, cum Nobis tantum esset auctoritatis, ut nullus de Nostra possit retractare sententia, nihil egimus, quod non ad vestram notitiam Nostris ultro litteris referremus, dantes hoc fraternitati et in commune consulentes, non quia quid deberet fieri nesciremus aut faceremus aliquid, quod contra utilitatem Ecclesiae veniens displiceret, sed pariter vobiscum voluimus habere tractatum de illo (Caelestio accusato).