Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T08:13:14.745Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Development of the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Roman See

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Extract

The jurisdiction of the Roman see is, and always has been, a point of controversy, not merely between the adherents of that see and all other Christians, but even among those who look with reverence akin to devotion to the successor of St. Peter. It is not merely a legal question, it is essentially a theological question, and as a doctrine it must be dejure divino. Accordingly, it has been discussed with that acrimony which as from a psychological necessity is characteristic of so many theological disputes. But discussion of the development of the doctrine and practice does not necessarily involve polemics. For a doctrine may be true or false, and to show this is a matter of exegesis and systematic theology, but to show that as finally stated it was the result of a long development is not to touch upon the question of its truth at all. Thus one may ask as to a doctrine closely connected with that we are to discuss, does the teaching of the Church as stated in the Bull, Unam Sanctam, appear in the second or third century as an article of belief required to be held by all Christians as a condition for receiving the sacraments? To show that it does not so appear, is merely to show what nearly every one acknowledges as to almost any doctrine not involved in modern polemics, that in the earliest ages they were not formulated with any great precision, in fact were expressed in forms sometimes afterward regarded as even heretical. Such a doctrine as the appellate jurisdiction may be studied in the same historical and non-polemical spirit as the doctrines of the atonement, incarnation, grace, or the sacraments.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1932

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Cf. Rosshirt, Gesch. des Kirchenrechts, p. 13.Google Scholar

2. Cf. , GfrörerKirchengeschzchte, i., 253.Google Scholar

3. cc. 59, 62, 63.

4. Langen, , Geschzchte d. Römzschen Krche, i., 89Google Scholar, endeavors to minimize the authoritative character of this letter from the Roman to the Corinthian Church.

5. Digest., I. Tit. 3, I. 32. Cf. Gieseler, , Church History, Am, . ed., vol. 1. p. 382, n. 18.Google Scholar

6. So Harnack interprets the words of Ignatius, pointing Out the meaning of προκάληται, by reference to the Epistle to the Trallians where it describes the relation of bishops and clergy to the congregation. Cf Dogmengeschichte, i., p. 404, n. 4.

7. Praesertim cum sit manifestum, in omnem Italiam, Gallias, Hispanias, Africam atque Siciliam, et insulas interjacentes, nullum instituisse Ecciesias, nisi eos, quos venerabilis Apostolul Petrus aut ejus successores constituerint sacerdotes. Aut legant, si in his prinvinciis alius Apostolorum invenitur, aut legitur docuisse.

8. As to what canons, it is no easy matter to say.

9. In the time of Damasus, the rescript of Gratian had given the right to try bishops to the Roman see, but in this he was not to act apart from his synod. By Valentinian's decree the Roman bishop himself was to act not merely as judge but as lawgiver.