Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Councils · On the Authority of Councils, Book I
Chapter 17: How Many Bishops Are Required for a General Council
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Conciliis (De Conciliorum Auctoritate), On Councils, Book I (of the controversy On Councils and the Church). The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Besides these arguments of the heretics, the Catholics move one doubt concerning those who ought to be present at a Council; for either all the Bishops of the whole world are required to make a general Council, or only some. If all, then there has hitherto been no general Council, nor does one seem likely to be hereafter; if only some, who are they? for there seems no greater reason for one than for another.
I answer that this question cannot be better solved than from the custom of the Church, and from those Councils which by the consent of all were general, such as are the first four. And from the custom of the Church we gather that four conditions both suffice and are required for a general Council.
The first is that the summons be general, so that it be made known to all the greater Christian provinces. For it is established that this was always observed, so much so that the seventh Synod, act 6, therefore judged the Council of Constantinople against images not to have been general, because its sound did not go out into all the earth.
The second, that of the Bishops none be excluded, from wherever he come, provided it be established that he is a Bishop and not excommunicated.
The third, that there be present, in person or through others, the four chief Patriarchs, besides the supreme Pontiff — namely of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem — because to these were subject all the other Bishops. This is plain both from usage and from the seventh Synod, act 6, where it is judged that the Council of Constantinople against images was not a general Council because it had not the Patriarchs; and in the eighth Synod, act 9, the Vicar of the Patriarch of Alexandria is received with joy, as though without him something had been lacking to the fullness of the Synod. But this third was judged not altogether necessary, but only for the well-being; for the third Synod without the Patriarch of Antioch condemned Nestorius of Constantinople, and the Synod of Chalcedon without the Patriarch of Alexandria concluded almost everything; and now these Patriarchs are not necessary, because they are heretics or at least schismatics.
The fourth, that at least from the greater part of the Christian provinces some come; and indeed, if the Council is held in the East, it always seemed to suffice if from all the provinces of the East many Bishops came together, but from the whole West some were sent by the supreme Pontiff to supply the place of the rest. And on the contrary, if it is celebrated in the West, that from all the provinces of the West many come together, but from the East some few come in the name of the rest. So in the first Council of Nicaea, from the West there were only two Presbyters sent from Italy, one Bishop from Gaul, one from Spain, one from Africa. In the second and third Councils there were none from the West, yet the Pontiffs Damasus and Celestine confirmed those Councils, in their own name and in the name of the other Bishops of the West, whom they had gathered at Rome. In the fourth Council there were only the legates of Leo, and besides he sent the consent of the other Bishops of Spain, Gaul, and Italy, who, having celebrated Councils in their provinces, had written to Leo that in all things they followed his opinion. See the volumes of the Councils.
On the contrary, to the Councils of the West — as the Lateran under Innocent III, that of Lyons under Gregory X, that of Vienne under Clement V, and lately Trent — came frequent Bishops from the whole West, but from the East only some few. From which it follows that sometimes national Councils can be much greater than general ones as to the number of Bishops, and yet less as to authority; for the second Council had only 130 Bishops from various provinces and nations, and the national Council of Carthage, of Africa alone, in the time of blessed Augustine, had 217 Bishops, as Prosper relates in the Chronicle of the year 420.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XVII. Quot Episcopi requirantur ad generale Concilium. Praeter haec argumenta haereticorum, mo¬ vent Catholici unum dubium de his, qui in- teresse debent in Concilio ; nam vel ad ge¬ nerale Concilium faciendum requiruntur omnes Episcopi totius orbis , vel aliqui tan¬ tum ; si omnes, nullum fuit ergo hactenus Concilium generale, neque etiam videtur deinceps futurum ; si aliqui tantum, quinam illi sunt? non enim videtur major ratio de uno, quam de alio. Respondeo , non posse istam quaestionem solvi melius, quam ex consuetudine Eccle¬ siae, et ex iis Conciliis, quae omnium con¬ sensu generalia fuerunt, qualia sunt quatuor prima. Ex consuetudine autem Ecclesiae col¬ ligimus quatuor conditiones et sufficere et requiri ad generale Concilium. Prima est, ut evocatio sit generalis, ita ut innotescat om¬ nibus majoribus Christianis provinciis. Id enim constat semper fuisse servatum , adeo ut septima Synodus, act. 6. ideo judicaverit Concilium Constantinopolitanum contra ima¬ gines, non fuisse generale, quia non exiit sonus ejus in omnem terram. Secunda, ut ex Episcopis nullus exclu¬ datur, undecumque veniat, modo constet eum esse Episcopum et non exoommunica- tum. Tertia, ut adsint perse, vel per alios, qua¬ tuor praecipui Patriarchae, praeter summum (1) III. Reg. XVIII, 24. Pontificem , videlicet Gonstantinopolitanus, Alexandrinus, Antiochenus, Hierosolymita¬ nus, quia istis suberant omnes alii Episcopi. Id patet tum ex usu, tum ex VII Synodo, act. 6. ubi censetur, Constantinopolitanum contra imagines, non fuisse generale Conci¬ lium, quia non habuit Patriarchas : et in VIII Synodo, act. 9. recipitur cum gaudio Vicarius Patriarchae Alexandrini, tanquam sine illo aliquid defuisset Synodi plenitudi¬ ni. Porro haec tertia non omnino necessaria, sed tantum ad bene esse judicabatur; nam Synodus tertia sine Patriarcha Antiocheno damnavit Nestorium Constantinopolitanum; et Synodus Chalcedonensis , sine Patriarcha Alexandrino omnia fere conclusit ; et nunc non sunt necessarii isti Patriarchae, quia hae¬ retici vel certe schismatici sunt. Quarta, ut saltem ex majori parte Chris¬ tianarum provinciarum aliqui adveniant , et si quidem Concilium fit in Oriente, semper visum est sufficere, si ex provinciis omnibus Orientis Episcopi conveniant multi ; ex toto autem Occidente mittantur aliqui a summo Pontifice, qui suppleant aliorum locum. Et e contrario, si celebretur in Occidente, con¬ veniant, ex omnibus provinciis Occidentis multi; ex Oriente autem pauci aliqui ve¬ niant nomine aliorum. Sic in Concilio Nicae¬ no I, ex Occidente solum fuerunt duo Presby¬ teri missi ex Italia, unus Episcopus ex Gallia, unus ex Hispania, unus ex Africa. In Conci¬ lio II et III, nulli fuerunt qx Occidente , sed tamen Pontifices Damasus et Coelestinus Concilia illa confirmarunt, nomine suo, et aliorum Episcoporum Occidentis , quos ipsi Romae collegerant. In Concilio IV, solum fuerunt legati Leonis, et praeterea misit ipse consensum aliorum Episcoporum Hispaniae, Galliae, et Italiae, qui in suis provinciis cele¬ bratis Conciliis ad Leonem scripserant, se in omnibus sententiam ejus sequi. Vide tomos Conciliorum. E contrario vero ad Concilia Occidentis, ut Lateranense sub Innocentio III, Lugdu¬ nense, sub Gregorio X, Viennense , sub Cie- mente V, ac nuper Tridentinum venerunt Episcopi frequentes ex toto Occidente, ex Oriente vero pauci quidam dumtaxat. Ex quo sequitur, posse interdum Concilia na- tionalia esse multo majora generalibus, quoad numerum Episcoporum , et tamen minora quoad auctoritatem ; nam Concilium II tan¬ tum habuit 130 Episcopos ex variis provin¬ ciis, et nationibus, et Gon cilium Carthagi¬ niense nationale ex sola Africa, tempore B . Augustini, habuit Episcopos 217, ut relert Prosper in Chronico anni 420.