Synod of Carthage (251)
The first Synod of Carthage was a church assembly in May 251 . She dealt mainly with the question of the treatment of the so-called Lapsi .
prehistory
A new wave of persecution of Christians began under Emperor Decius around 249/250 . An edict from the year 250 required all subjects to make an offering to the gods. This led to a mass apostasy among Christians, also in Carthage , which at that time was one of the ecclesiastical metropolises. Bishop Cyprianus fled into exile during the persecution and did not return to the city until March 251.
After the persecution of Christians soon ended, the mass of apostates wanted a return to the lost faith community. The question arose whether, and if so which, penalties should be imposed on returnees.
Cyprian advocated strictness towards the lapsis on this issue, but found himself confronted with resistance from the ranks of his own clergy. There was a party there that had already rejected Cyprian's appointment as bishop (248 or 249). So it happened that a group of clerics under the leadership of the deacon Felicissimus began to reconciliate Lapsi with so-called letters of peace . Felicissimus and his supporters were then excommunicated by party members of Cyprian.
While still in exile, Cyprian wrote De lapsis and De ecclesiae catholicae unitate , which dealt with the problem of the lapsi and the appendix of Felicissimus. He also announced that he would deal with the questions at a council (the terms council and synod were still synonymous at the time) that would take place after his return.
The Synod
The synod files have not survived, which is why the events can only be reconstructed on the basis of Cyprian's letters.
The synod probably began in Carthage in early April. The meeting favored the fact that Emperor Decius was hindered by the incursions of the Goths and also had to fight off an opposing emperor. Numerous bishops, priests and deacons from the near and far area gathered for the occasion. The Synod Fathers were probably housed by the Carthaginian clergy. Not only the bishops took part in the negotiations, but also the rest of the clergy and the faithful, with the last word, according to tradition, being with the bishops.
The Roman Bishops Question
At about the same time as the beginning of the Synod, two (not preserved) letters arrived in Carthage, which presumably determined the first negotiations of the Synod. In one letter, Cornelius announced that Cyprian was taking office; in the other, the presbyter Novatian accused Cornelius, above all of accusing him of being too lenient towards those who had fallen out of the persecution. Novatian intended to be able to overthrow Cornelius again from the Roman bishopric with the help of Cyprian.
The letters were read by the synod in camera. The bishops Caldonnius and Fortunatus were sent to Rome to clarify the situation in Rome. However, their return was delayed after the Synod.
Towards the end of the council, a Novatian embassy arrived in Carthage. Novatian had meanwhile had himself proclaimed the Roman counter-bishop, which resulted in a schism there. However, the synod refused allegiance to the followers of Novatian and declared itself neutral until the return of the bishops named.
The Lapsi's problem
The decisions of the Synod on the question of the Lapsi were largely based on the Letter De Lapsis , which, as mentioned, Cyprian had written while still in exile. Since the synod files have not been preserved, the content of the decision can only be inferred from Cyprian's letter to the Numidian Bishop Antonian. Accordingly, the synod had decided that the apostates should not be deprived of the hope of reintegration into the church, but that an appropriate penance should in any case be imposed. In addition, each case should be carefully examined. This was a compromise between the rigorous side, which pursued a final exclusion, and the laxist side, which, like the circle around the excommunicated Felicissimus, sought an easy reopening.
The examination of the individual cases should be done individually, a distinction was made between libellatici and sacrificati . The former had not actually made the sacrifice to the gods demanded by Emperor Decius, but obtained the necessary evidence in another way. The latter had actually sacrificed, which is why their guilt was rated higher. If it can be concluded from the letter to Antonian that the penance of the sacrificati should be lifelong, then another practice emerges from cases handed down later.
The bishops among the sacrificati should also be allowed to return to the church, but they were dismissed from the clergy.
The synodal resolution on the question of the Lapsi came unanimously.
The Fall of Felicissimus
The synod also dealt with the fall of the deacon Felicissimus and his followers, among whom were five presbyters. Since Felicissimus had withdrawn from unity with the rightful bishop (Cyprian), there was a schism in this regard . The Synod therefore repeated and confirmed the exclusion of Felicissimus and his followers from the Church and also threatened penalties for those who acted against the decision.
Conclusion of the synod
The synod ended with the neutrality resolution described above. After receiving positive news about Cornelius, however, Cyprian recognized him unconditionally as the rightful bishop of Rome. The bishops and believers of Africa soon joined him. Cyprian sent Cornelius the resolutions of the Synod on the question of the Lapsi, the Synod Fathers sent the regulations regarding the Causa Felicissimus.
Follow-up time
The question of the Lapsi also occupied the further Carthage synods of 252 , 253 and 254 . The resolutions of the Synod of 251, however, remained an important guideline in dealing with those who had apostatized in the persecution.
literature
- Joseph Anton Fischer, Adolf Lumpe: The synods from the beginnings to the eve of the Nicaenum in: Walter Brandmüller (ed.), Konziliengeschichte, Ferdinand Schöningh, Paderborn 1997 ISBN 3-506-74674-X
Web links
- www.newadvent.org (English)
Individual evidence
- ^ A b c Fischer / Lumpe, Konziliengeschichte, p. 165
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, pp. 166, 178
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 167
- ↑ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 168
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 169
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 170
- ↑ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 179
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 171
- ↑ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 172
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, pp. 174f
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 175f
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 177
- ↑ a b Fischer / Lumpe, Konziliengeschichte, p. 178
- ^ Fischer / Lumpe, Council History, p. 180