Summa summae S. Thomae, Tomus III

It belongs to the Supreme Pontiff alone, certain and undoubted, to convoke a general council.¹

It is proved. 1° Julius, in his letter to the Orientals, in Socrates, lib. II, chap. 13, says: « The ecclesiastical canon forbids that decrees be sanctioned for the churches without the opinion of the Roman Bishop; » or, as Cassiodorus reads it in the Hist. tripart., « that councils must not be celebrated without the opinion of the Roman Pontiff. » This is related in cap. Regula of the cited place, dist. 17; and this canon, renewed by the synod of Nicaea, the Alexandrian synod writes, epist. to Pope Felix.

Pelagius II, epist. 1, chap. 1, to the bishops who had not come together at the convocation of John of Constantinople, says: « By many apostolic again, and canonical, and ecclesiastical rules we are instructed that councils must not be celebrated without the opinion of the Roman Pontiff. » It is related in cap. Multis, dist. 17.

In the Council of Chalcedon, act. I, Dioscorus was forbidden to sit among the bishops, « because, say the Fathers, he dared make a synod without the authority of the Apostolic See; which was never licit, never done. »

If you say that from these it follows that even diocesan or provincial councils cannot be convoked except by the Roman Pontiff, especially since in cap. Nec licuit, of the same dist. 17, Pelagius II says that neither is it licit to celebrate a particular synod without the authority of the Apostolic See — but the consequent is not admitted. Therefore.

I answer: that the laws and the Pontiffs themselves grant, nay command, bishops and archbishops to celebrate particular councils; and thus they are celebrated not without their authority. The chapter Nec licuit speaks of particular synods gathered against a universal synod. It is plain from the rubric, which runs thus: « Without the authority of the Apostolic See it is not licit for some to gather a particular synod against a universal one. »

It is proved. 2° To those alone belongs the right of convoking a general council who have the care of the whole Church and authority over the bishops to be convoked. Yet this is the Roman Pontiff, as appears from the preceding dissertation. Therefore. — Of the major also it is established; because a general council regards the universal Church, and without authority over the bishops, by which they are compelled to appear at the council, the convocation would be fruitless and impotent.

You will say: The eastern councils were for the most part convoked by the authority of emperors. Therefore.

I answer: that no council of the orientals was convoked without at least the assent of the Supreme Pontiff, consequently without his authority. For although, speaking absolutely, authority and assent are not the same, nevertheless in him who has authority to do something, to consent to it is for it to be done by his authority. Whence, since the authority of convoking councils rests with the Pope alone, as has been proved, it is the same thing with respect to him to give consent to the convocation of a council and to convoke it through another.

[I said in the conclusion: « of a Pontiff certain and undoubted; » because in the case of schism, in which there would be doubtful popes, as happened at the time of the Council of Constance, the Church could, through her prelates, convoke a council to succor the present necessity, namely, to provide herself with a certain Pope. But if it should further define anything in the matter of faith and morals, or in things pertaining to the universal Church, it will not be ratified and firm unless confirmed by the subsequent Pope, as was said already before.]