nor bring confusion into their Churches; but, according to the Canons, the Bishop of Alexandria must have the sole administration of the affairs of Egypt, and the Bishops of the East must administer the East only, the privileges which were assigned to the Church of Antioch by the Canons made at Nice being preserved; and the Bishops of the Asian Diocese must administer the affairs of the Asian only; and those of the Pontic Diocese, the affairs of the Pontic only; and those of Thrace, the affairs of Thrace only. Moreover, Bishops may not, without being called, go beyond the bounds of their Diocese for the purpose of ordaining, or any other Ecclesiastical function. The above-written Canon respecting the Dioceses being observed, it is plain that the Synod of each Province must administer the affairs of the Province, according to what was decreed at Nice. But the Churches of God which are amongst the Barbarians must be administered according to the customs of the Fathers which have prevailed.

III. The Bishop of Constantinople shall have the Primacy of honor (1) after the Bishop of Rome, because that Constantinople is new Rome.

IV. With respect to Maximus the Cynic (1) and the disorder which took place in Constantinople on his account, it is decreed, that Maximus neither was nor is a Bishop, and that those who have been ordained by him are not in any rank whatever of the Clergy; and all things which have been done, either about him or by him, are made void.

V. As regards the book of the Western Bishops (1), we have also received those in Antioch who confess the one Divinity of the Father, and Son, and Holy Ghost.

VI. Since some persons, from a wish to confound and overthrow the good order of the Church, do contentiously

and falsely frame charges against orthodox Bishops who have the administration of the Churches, attempting nothing else but to stain the reputation of the Priests, and excite tumults amongst a peaceable people; on this account the Holy Synod of Bishops assembled at Constantinople (1) has determined not to admit accusers without inquiry; and neither to allow all persons to make accusation against the rulers of the Church, nor to exclude all from doing so. If then any person brings against a Bishop any private charge, i. e. relating to his own affairs, as that he has been defrauded, or suffered any other thing contrary to justice from him, in such accusations neither the person of the accuser nor his religion is to be inquired into; for it is by all means necessary that the conscience of the Bishop should be clear, and that he who complains of being injured should obtain his rights, of whatever religion he may be. But if the accusation brought against the Bishop be ecclesiastical, then it is necessary that the persons of the accusers should be examined; that, in the first place, heretics (2) may not be allowed to make charges concerning ecclesiastical matters against orthodox Bishops. And we include under the name of heretics, those who have been formerly cast off by the Church, and those who have since been anathematized by us; and in addition to these, those also, who do indeed pretend to confess the sound faith, but have separated themselves, and formed congregations in opposition to our Canonical Bishops (3). Moreover also, if there are any that have been condemned, and cast out of the Church, or excommunicated for any faults, whether they are of the Clergy or Laity, such persons may not accuse a Bishop before they have first cleared themselves of their own offences. In like manner also, those who are under a prior accusation must

not be admitted as accusers of a Bishop, or any other of the Clergy, before they have proved themselves innocent of the charges which have been brought against them. If, however, any persons, being neither heretics, nor excommunicate, nor condemned, nor under accusation for any faults, shall say that they have certain ecclesiastical accusations against the Bishop, the Holy Synod orders them, first to advance their charges before all the Bishops of the Province, and to prove before them the accusations which they bring against the Bishop. But if it should happen that the Bishops of the Province are unable to set to rights the matters charged against the Bishop, then they must have recourse to the greater Synod of the Bishops of the Diocese called together for this purpose. They must not, however, advance the charges before they have agreed in writing to submit to an equal penalty, if, upon examination of the matter, they should be convicted of bringing false charges against the Bishops whom they accuse. But if any one, disregarding what has been decreed with respect to the before specified matters, shall dare either to address the Emperor, or the secular judicatures, or to trouble an Ecumenical Synod, dishonoring all the Bishops of the Diocese, such a person is not by any means to be admitted to make accusations, as insulting the Canons and destroying the good order of the Church.

VII. As regards those heretics (1) who come over to the orthodox faith, and the part of those who are saved, we receive them according to the following order and custom. We receive the Arians, and Macedonians, and Sabbatians, and Novatians, who call themselves Cathari and Aristeri, and the Quartodecimans or Tetradites, and the Appollinarians, upon their giving in a written renunciation of their errors, and anathematizing every heresy,

which does not agree in opinion with the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of God: and having first sealed them, or anointed them with the holy ointment, upon the forehead, and eyes, and nostrils, and ears, we say, The seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit. But the Eunomians who baptize with one immersion, and the Montanists who are here called Phrygians, and the Sabellians, who teach the identity of the Father and the Son, and do besides many other pernicious things; and the followers of all the other heresies (for there are many in these parts, especially those who come from the country of the Galatians), all of these, if they wish to be joined to the orthodox faith, we receive as heathens, and on the first day we make them Christians (2); on the second, Catechumens; then on the third we exorcise them with blowing three times in their faces and ears; and then we instruct them, and oblige them to remain some time in the church and hear the Scriptures, and then we baptize them.

NOTES UPON THE CANONS.

I. 1. Every heresy.] In the edition of the Canons of this Council, as contained in the collection of Councils, the two first heresies anathematized are, "that of the Eunomeans or Anomæans, and Arians or Eudoxians." The tenets of the different heretics mentioned in this Canon are as follows:

The Eunomians were so called from Eunomius, a disciple of Aetius (from whom this sect were also sometimes called Aetians), and Bishop of Cyzicus, the Metropolis of the Province of Hellespont. The tenets of Eunomius were those of the more rigid Arians. He taught that the Son was of a different substance from the Father (whence the name of Anomæans or dissimilar), that the Son was created by the Father, and the Holy Ghost by the Son; and that the Holy Ghost is destitute of all divinity, or creative power.

The Eudoxians derived their name from Eudoxius, who was Bishop first of Germanicia in the Province of Euphrates, afterwards of Antioch, and lastly of Constantinople. Their tenets were in all respects the same as those of the Eunomians.

The Semi-arians or Pneumatomachi. The Semi-arians were properly those who neither agreed with the Catholics in holding that the Son is of the same substance (óμooúσtov) with the Father, nor with the rigid Arians in asserting that he is altogether dissimilar (ávóμotov), but maintained that he is, although a creature, yet of a different nature from all other creatures, and in a peculiar manner like to the Father (Spoloíciov), but that the Holy Ghost is in all respects a creature, and different from the Father and the Son. On this account they are classed with the Pneu matomachi in the Canon. The Pneumatomachi, properly so called, were orthodox in their opinions respecting the Father and the Son, and held that they were of one and the same substance, but they would not acknowledge this of the Holy Ghost, whom they asserted to be a mere creature. Augustin, Hær. 52, says, that some persons called them Semi-arians on this account, as agreeing partly with the orthodox, and partly with the Arians. The founder of this sect was Macedonius, Bishop of Constantinople, from whom they were commonly called Macedonians. It was chiefly against these heretics that the Council of Constanti. nople was assembled by Theodosius, and two of the principal leaders of the sect, Eleusius Bishop of Cyzicus, and Marcian of Lampsacus, were present at it.

The Sabellians, from Sabellius, a native of Lybia, held that the Son and the Holy Ghost are not only the same God with the Father, but the same Person; so that the Godhead is not only one in substance, but one in Person, and Father, Son and Holy Ghost, only three appellations of the same person, who appeared or manifested himself at different times as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and who is therefore sometimes called the Father, sometimes the Son, and sometimes the Holy Ghost: They are therefore called by the Latin Fathers, Patripassians, since it necessarily follows from their doctrines that the Father was incarnate, and suffered on the Cross.

The Marcellians, so called from Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyra,