given a right of appeal on the part of a bishop who had been deposed by his fellow-bishops to Julius the bishop of Rome. But it is a matter of dispute whether this was intended to refer only to this particular pope or also to his successors, and further how far he might take the initiative. It is to be observed that in this council the Eastern as well as the Western Church was represented; there were bishops from Egypt, Arabia, Palestine, Thessaly, and other Oriental districts. But since the Eusebian bishops had withdrawn and Hosius of Cordova was presiding, it is possible that there was a majority of Western bishops when the canon was voted. Then Leo the Great (a.d. 440–461) put forth high papal claims, referring to Peter and his successors as constituting the rock on which the Church is founded.[1] Peter is the pastor and prince of the whole Church. To resist his authority is an act of impious pride and the sure way to hell. Considering the many times in which the popes make great demands in various ways, it is difficult to think Gregory the Great wholly disinterested when he rebukes his brother at Constantinople for arrogance in calling himself the "Œcumenical Bishop." Gregory claims some merit for not adopting the title for himself on the ground that it has been allowed to earlier popes; but liere he is not accurate, for the previous use of the term has been generic, applying to all the patriarchs,[2] whereas now the question turns on the exclusive use of it for one patriarch in particular.
The conflict between pope and patriarch reached an acute condition in the ninth century. Ignatius, the patriarch of Constantinople, had dared to rebuke the immorality of the Cæsar Bardas, refusing to administer the sacrament to him on Advent Sunday, a.d. 857. No ecclesiastic in the Eastern Church could follow with impunity the bold example of Ambrose in the West, when he stood at his church door and refused admission to the Emperor Theodosius. Ignatius was arrested and im-
