De locis theologicis

HERE THE VARIOUS KINDS OF SYNODS ARE SET OUT

I think I have explained sufficiently in the previous chapter what kind of gathering an ecclesiastical synod represents. Now the term must be divided so that we may see what truth and authority belong to each kind of council. Gratian, 3 dist. cap. Regula, divides synods into general and provincial. But in this division one most important kind has been omitted, and omitting anything is a serious fault in a division. Synods are not only general and provincial but also episcopal. If it pleases you, let us name and coin these terms as needed: as Cicero tells us, new things call for new names. Although this usage is recent, it has nevertheless been adopted by our people, and not only by barbarians but by Latins as well. I call those councils general that are held by summoning all Christian prelates. There has often been dispute among many people whether a general summons is enough, or whether a general gathering is also necessary. For if the Supreme Pontiff called a general council, yet only ten bishops from Italy assembled,

such a synod would not deserve to be called general. On the other hand, if all the bishops must assemble, perhaps no such council has yet existed in the Church, one to which all the bishops came. Further, any thoroughly bad bishop, if he scorned to attend a synod not merely through negligence but out of malice, would claim that it was not general. And any prince in a commonwealth could easily disrupt a synod if it displeased him, alleging that his bishops could not attend the council because of illness or disturbances. Since it is not the purpose of this work to pursue all such controversies, we answer this question briefly. A general summons is not enough for a general council if so few assemble that the greater and better part of the provinces seems to have been left out, especially if the bishops had a legitimate reason for not attending the synod. But if one or another province is absent because of the malice of very wicked men, the council does not for that reason lose the name “general.” Nor will a general council lose its name if some bishops are absent through negligence or any other cause, unless we question whether those four councils—the Councils of Nicaea, Ephesus, Constantinople, and Chalcedon—were general. Therefore, as the faithful do, we speak here in a way that defines a general synod by the lawful summons of all the bishops, even if not all of them assemble. For when we speak about the things and words of the Church, we must follow the common understanding of all the faithful. The wise have done the same. Still, a general summons is not enough for a general council unless there is also a general gathering. But a general gathering does not require all the bishops to assemble. We define here only what is common in the Church. We know that general councils can sometimes be held without a summons, but that is very rare and irregular. We shall discuss this more carefully later. Now let us return to the other parts of the proposed division. Provincial councils are those in which the Metropolitan or Primate summons all the prelates of one province or even of a region. Episcopal synods are gatherings of priests, which each bishop now usually holds in his own diocese for the particular needs of the individual churches. Such synods were formerly not in use, especially in Spain, except for the reason stated in 18 dist., capite postremo. With this division laid down and approved by everyone, another is introduced: some councils—whether general, provincial, or episcopal—are convened by the authority of the Roman Pontiff, and others are not; again, some are confirmed by that same Roman Pontiff, and others are not. For the Second Council of Ephesus was indeed convened under Leo’s authority, but was not approved by Leo or any other Supreme Pontiff. Eugenius IV also called the Council of Basel but did not confirm it. Martin V, however, confirmed the Council of Constance, although at the beginning it had been convened under the authority of no Roman bishop. The Council of Milevis, which both Innocent and Celestine approved, was also convened without the authority of the Supreme Pontiff. Since what Gratian thought was a twofold division is found to need division into three parts, and each of the three is then divided in two, we must first discuss the general council in its two forms, then the provincial council in the same way, and finally the episcopal council.