P

PADERBORN (777). [Concilium Paderbornense.] Held in 777, to confirm the newly-baptised Saxons in the faith. It was ordered that all should take an oath to abide for ever in the Christian faith; and they that refused to do so, were punished with the loss of all their property.—Tom. vi. Conc. p. 1823.

PADUA (1350). [Concilium Patavianum.] Held in the spring of 1350, by Cardinal Guy d’Auvergne, legate of Pope Clement VI., for the reformation of morals and the good of the Church. Another council was held at the end of the year.—Raynaldus, A.D. 1350. Tom. xi. Conc. p. 1918.

PALENCIA (1388). [Concilium Palentinum.] Held in the Franciscan Convent on October 4, 1388, by Pedro de Luna, Cardinal of St Maria, legate of the antipope Clement VII., in Spain. The king (John 1.), three archbishops, and twenty-five bishops, were present. Seven canons were published.

1. Directs bishops to watch over the conduct of their clergy.

2. Renews the constitution of Valladolid, in 1322, concerning incontinence in the clergy.

3. Directs that if the married clergy will enjoy the privileges of the clerical state, they shall observe the tonsure and the clerical dress. In order that no doubt might exist as to the form of the tonsure, a figure of it was appended to the canon.

5. and 6. Relate to the Jews and Saracens, and order that they shall be compelled to respect the Church festivals.

7. Is directed against adulterers and notorious fornicators.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 2068.

PALESTINE (196 or 198). [Concilium Palæstinum.] Held at Jerusalem in 196 (or 198); fourteen bishops were present, at the head of whom were St Narcissus of Jerusalem, and St Theophilus of Cesarea. The subject before the council was the proper time for the celebration of Easter, which was much disputed in the Church; some held that the Lent fast ought to end, and the fast of the Resurrection be kept, on the fourteenth day of the moon, whatever day of the week it might chance to be; and they supported their opinion by the authority of St John and St Philip, the Apostles, and of St Polycarp, and other illustrious saints of Asia, who (they maintained) had observed this custom. The others, on the contrary, asserted that the festival of the Resurrection ought to be kept, and therefore the Lent fast ought to end on Sunday, and they supported their opinion by the tradition received in the Church from St Peter and St Paul. The decision of this council was in favour of the latter practice.—Eusebius, l. v. c. 22, (23).

In the council of Asia, held at Ephesus in the same year (196), under Polycrates the bishop, a contrary decision was arrived at, and Polycrates wrote to Victor, Bishop of Rome, declaring that the practice of his Church being founded upon the example of St John and St Philip, and other saints, he could not consent to alter it. Upon this, Victor, with more zeal for his cause than Christian charity, threatened to separate the Asiatic Churches from his communion, a step which greatly displeased many even of those who thought with him upon the question; and Irenæus, amongst many others, wrote to him, and in the name of the Gallic bishops exhorted him to preserve unity and charity in the Church. Both parties then continued in the practice which they had received from their predecessors until the first œcumenical council at Nicea, in 325, in which the question was definitively settled in favour of the Latin mode.—Eus., l. v. c. 23. Tom i. Conc. pp. 596 and 600.

PALESTINE (536). A synod gathered from the three provinces of Palestine, was held in September 536, under Peter, Patriarch of Jerusalem, against Anthimus and other heretics.

PALESTRINA (1804). A council was held here in 1804, by Cardinal Alexander Mattei, Bishop of Palestrina. The ancient statutes of the diocese were renewed, and fresh enactments passed. The Acts of this synod were published at Rome in 1804.

PARIS (360). [Concilium Luteciense, or Parisiense.] Held in 360, according to the most common opinion, under Julian the Apostate, who was proclaimed Augustus in Paris, in May, 360. St Hilary had lately arrived in Gaul from Constantinople, and at his entreaty the heretical formulary of Ariminum (A.D. 359) was rejected. Amongst the fragments which remain to us of St Hilary we have a synodical letter from the bishops of this council to those of the East, which appears to have been an answer to one written by the semi-Arians to St Hilary, after their deposition at Constantinople, excommunicating the Arian delegates from Ariminum, and requesting the Gallican bishops to do the same, in which they return thanks to God for having delivered them from the Arian heresy, and for having enabled them to learn the real sentiments of the orientals. They then give an open profession and clear exposition of the doctrine of consubstantiality; they retract all that they had, through ignorance, done at Ariminum, and promised to perform whatever the orientals required of them, to the extent of deposing and excommunicating all in Gaul who should resist. They declared that those who had consented to suppress the word “ousia,” or substance, both at Ariminum and at Nice in Thrace, had been led to do so by the false statement made by the Arian party, that the confession of faith which they were called upon to sign had had the sanction of the oriental bishops, who, as they said, had been the first to introduce the use of this word in the controversy with the Arians. “And we,” they added, “received it, and have always preserved the use of it inviolably; we have used this word ὁμοούιος to express the true and actual generation of the only Son of God. When we say that He is of one and the same substance, it is only to exclude the idea of creation, adoption, &c. We recognise no likeness worthy of Him but that of true God to true God.… We revoke all that we have done ill through ignorance and simplicity, and we excommunicate Auxentius, Ursaces, and Valens, Gajus Megasius, and Justin, and reject all their Apostate bishops.”

About this time several other councils were held in Gaul, by means of St Hilary, upon the same subject.—Tom. ii. Conc. p. 821. Baronius, 302, § 229, and Pagi, note 27.

PARIS (557). Held in 557, under King Childebert; the Archbishops of Bourges, Rouen, and Bordeaux were present. Ten canons were published.

1. Against those who detain Church property.

4. Against marriages within the degrees prohibited; forbids to marry a brother’s widow or wife’s sister.

8. Enacts that the election of the bishop shall be left free to the people and clergy; that no one shall be intruded into a see by the prince, or contrary to the will of the metropolitan and the provincial bishops.

These canons are subscribed by fifteen bishops, amongst whom were St Pretextatus of Rouen, Leo of Bordeaux, Germanus of Paris, and Euphronius of Tours.—Tom. v. Conc. p. 814.

PARIS (573). Held in 573, by thirty-two bishops (six of whom were metropolitans), in order to terminate a difference between Chilperic and Sigebert, the two brothers of the King Gontram. Promotus, who had been uncanonically consecrated bishop of Châteaudun, by Ogidius of Rheims, was deposed, but was not removed, apparently, until the death of Sigebert.—Tom. v. Conc. p. 918.

PARIS (577). Held in the spring of 577, by Chilperic; forty-five bishops were present, who deposed Pretextatus, Bishop of Rouen, upon a false accusation of having favoured the revolt of Merovee, the king’s son, and plotted his death. St Gregory of Tours refused his consent to the act. Pretextatus was banished, and Melanius put into his place.—Tom. v. Conc. p. 925.

PARIS (615). Held in 615, under King Clotaire II. This was the most numerously attended of the Gallic councils up to this period. Seventy-nine bishops from all the newly united provinces of Gaul were present. Fifteen canons have been preserved, but others probably were published.

1. Declares elections of bishops made without consent of the metropolitan, and the bishops of the province, and of the clergy, and people of the city, or made by violence, cabal, or bribery, to be null and void.

2. Forbids bishops to appoint their own successors; forbids to appoint another to the see during the lifetime of the actual bishop, except the latter be incapable of managing his Church.

4. Declares that no secular judge may try or condemn any priest, deacon, or other ecclesiastic, without first giving warning to the bishop.

14. Forbids marriage with a brother’s widow, and other incestuous marriages.

15. Forbids a Jew to exercise any public office over Christians, and in case of his obtaining such an office, contrary to canon, insists upon his being baptised with all his family.

Most of the other canons refer to the property of the Church and of ecclesiastics.

King Clotaire published an edict for the execution of these canons, with some modification however, since he commanded that the bishop elected according to canon 1, should not be consecrated without the leave of the prince.—Tom. v. Conc. p. 1649.

PARIS (825). Held November 1st, 825. The bishops present addressed a synodal letter to the emperors Louis and Lothaire, in which they declare their approval of the letter of Hadrian to the Emperor Constantine and his mother Irene, so far as relates to his rebuke for their audacity and rashness in removing and breaking the images, but his command to adore them (eas adorare) they refuse to approve, styling all such adoration superstitious and sinful, they also declare, that in their opinion the testimonies which he had collected from the holy fathers in support of his view, and had inserted in his letter, were very little to the purpose. They further declare, that without approving the acts of the council of Constantinople in 754, they condemn the second council of Nicea, and hold that it was no light error on the part of those who composed it, to assert not only that images should be venerated and adored (coli et adorari), and called by the title of holy, but that even some degree of holiness was to be attained through their means (verum etiam sanctimoniam ab eis se adipisci professisunt). They also, in this or in another council, condemned Claudius, Bishop of Turin, who, in the excess of his zeal, had broken down the crosses and images of his diocese.

They finally declared their adhesion to the Caroline books.—Goldastus in Dec. Imp. de Imag. Tom. vii. Conc. p. 1542.

PARIS (829). Held June 6th, 829, under Louis le Débonnaire, composed of the four provinces of Rheims, Sens, Tours, and Rouen; twenty-five bishops attended, besides the four metropolitans of the above-mentioned provinces. The council was held in the church of St Stephen the elder. The acts of the council are divided into three Books of Canons.

Book I. relates to ecclesiastical discipline.

Canon 7. Forbids to baptise, except at the canonical times, without necessity.

8. Directs that persons baptised in illness, beyond the proper canonical times for baptism, shall not be admitted to holy orders, according to the twelfth canon of Neocesarea.

16. Declares that all property amassed by bishops and priests after their ordination, shall be considered as belonging to their Churches, and that their heirs shall have no part in it.

18. Declares that the pastors of the Church ought to possess the property of the Church without being possessed by it, and that in the possession of it they ought to despise it. It condemns also all those worldly people who are ever complaining that the Church is too rich.

26. Orders that one or two provincial councils shall be held annually.

27. Is intended as a check upon the Chorepiscopi, forbids them to confirm and to perform any other function peculiar to the episcopate. 44. Forbids women to take the veil until thirty days after their husbands’ death, at which time they were by the emperor’s edict free to marry again.

45. Forbids women to touch the sacred vessels, or to give the vestments to the priests; also forbids them to give the Holy Eucharist to the people: an abuse which it seems had crept in, in some places.

47. Forbids to say mass in private houses, or in gardens and chapels, except when on travel, and in extreme cases when people are very far from a church.

48. Forbids priests to say mass alone.

50. Insists upon the proper observation of Sunday, and directs that a humble supplication should be addressed to the prince, entreating him to stop all pleadings and markets on that day, and to forbid all work.

The second book relates to the duties of princes and lay persons.

Canon 10. Condemns the error of those persons who think, that having been baptised, they must eventually be saved, whatever sins they may commit.

The third book contains a collection of twenty-seven of the foregoing canons, which the bishops forwarded to the emperors Louis and Lothaire, specially requesting the execution of some of the number.—Tom. vii. Conc. p. 1590.

PARIS (847 circ.). In the matter of Ebbo of Rheims.—Ebbo, who had been deposed for treason at Thionville in 835, was reinstated, and again deposed, but endeavoured to regain his see, occupied by Hincmar. A synod was convened at Treves in 847, which was, however, transferred to Paris, where, the legates of Pope Sergius not having arrived at Paris, the cause was given against Ebbo.

PARIS (849). Held in the autumn of the year 849, composed of twenty-two bishops from the provinces of Tours, Sens, Rheims, and Rouen, who addressed a letter to Nomenoi, the Duke of Bretagne, concerning his proceedings in the council of Rennes in the preceding year, on which occasion he had taken for his own use the property of the Church, which, they stated, was the patrimony of the poor. He had driven the lawful occupiers from their sees, and had put mercenaries and thieves in their places; and he had favoured the revolt of Lambert, Count of Nantes, against King Charles.—Tom viii. Conc. p. 58.

PARIS (1050). Held on the 16th October 1050, in the presence of King Henry I. Many bishops attended. A letter from Berenger was read, which gave great offence to the council, and he was condemned, together with his accomplices. Also a book by John Scotus upon the Eucharist, whence the errors which they had condemned were taken. The council declared that if Berenger and his followers would not retract, the whole army of France, with the clergy at their head, in their ecclesiastical vestments, should march to find them, wherever they might be, and should besiege them, until they would submit to the Catholic faith, or should be taken in order to be put to death. (See C. VERCEIL, 1050.)—Tom. ix. Conc. p. 1059.

PARIS (1147). Held some time after Easter, 1147, by Pope Eugene III., assisted by many cardinals and learned men. The errors of Gilbert de la Poirée, Bishop of Poitiers, upon the subject of the blessed Trinity, were examined; two doctors, Adam of Petit Pont and Hugo of Champfleuri, attacking him vigorously. He was accused chiefly on the four following grounds:—

1. Quod videlicet assereret Divinam Essentiam non esse Deum.

2. Quod proprietates Personarum non essent ipsæ personæ.

3. Quod Theologicæ Personæ in nulla prædicarentur propositione.

4. Quod Divina Natura non esset incarnata.

St Bernard, who was present, disputed with Gilbert; but the pope, in default of certain evidence, deferred the decision of the question to a council to be held in the year following. (See C. of RHEIMS, 1148.)—Tom. x. Conc. p. 1105 and 1121.

PARIS (1186). Held in 1186. An assembly of all the French archbishops, bishops, and chief seigneurs, whom the king, Philip Augustus, desired to exhort his subjects to make the voyage to Jerusalem in defence of the Catholic faith.—Tom. x. Conc. p. 1747.

In another council (1188), held three years afterwards by the same king, the payment of the Saladine tenth was ordered, i.e., the tenth of every one’s revenue and goods for the succour of the Holy Land.—Tom. x. Conc. p. 1763.

PARIS (1201). Held in 1201, by Octavian, the pope’s legate, assisted by several bishops. Evraud of Nevers, the governor of the district, said to have been one of the Vaudois, was convicted of heresy; and having been carried to Nevers, was there burnt.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 24.

PARIS (1210). Held in 1210, in which the errors of Amauri, lately dead, were condemned, and fourteen of his followers sentenced to be burnt. Also Aristotle’s Metaphysics and Physics, which had been brought to Paris, and translated into Latin, shared the same fate; and a decree was published, forbidding the book to be transcribed, read, or kept, under pain of excommunication.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 49.

PARIS (1213). Held in 1213, by Robert de Courçon, cardinal and legate, whom the pope had sent into France to preach the crusade. Several canons of discipline were published, which are divided into four parts.

Part I. refers to the secular clergy, and contains twenty canons.

1. Enjoins modesty of deportment, that the hair be kept cut short; forbids talking in church.

9. Forbids to employ a priest to say mass who is unknown, except he have letters from his own bishop.

13. Forbids the division of benefices and prebends.

14. Forbids the temporary or permanent appointment of rural-deans, in consideration of money received.

19. Forbids to possess more than one benefice with cure of souls.

Part II. relates to the regulars, and contains twenty-seven canons.

1. Forbids to take money from any one entering upon the monastic state. Forbids monks to possess property.

2. Forbids to receive any one into the religious life under eighteen years of age.

3. Enjoins bishops to cause the suspicious little doors found in abbeys or priories, to be blocked up.

4 and 5. Exhort to charity and hospitality towards the poor.

9. Forbids monks to wear white leather gloves, fine shoes and stockings, &c., like those used by the laity, to use any other cloth save white or black, and to dine out of the refectory.

Part III. relates to nuns., &c, also to abbots, abbesses, &c., and contains twenty-one canons.

3. Forbids nuns to leave their convent in order to visit their relations, except for a very short time; and directs that then they shall have an attendant with them.

4. Forbids them to dance in the cloisters, or any where else; and declares that it is better to dig or plough on Sunday than to dance.

8. Directs that abbesses who fail in their duty, shall be suspended; and, if they do not amend, shall be deposed.

9. Directs that abbots, priors, and other superiors who offend in the same manner, shall be punished.

11. Directs that they who lead an irregular life shall be deposed.

17. Forbids abbots and priors to threaten or maltreat any who may propose a measure to the chapter for the reformation of the house or of its head.

Part IV. relates to the duty of bishops and archbishops.

1. Directs them to keep their hair cut round, so as never to project beyond the mitre; and gives other directions for their proper conversation.

2. Forbids them to hear matins in bed, and to occupy themselves with worldly business and conversation whilst the holy office is being said.

4. Forbids them to hunt, &c., to wear precious furs, and to play with dice.

5. Directs that they shall cause some good book to be read at the beginning and end of their repasts.

6. Enjoins hospitality and charity.

15. Forbids them to permit duels, or hold courts of justice in cemeteries or holy places.

16. Enjoins the abolition of the Festival of Fools, celebrated every 1st of January.

17. Directs that a synod be held every year. Orders also confirmation, and the correction of disorders in the dioceses.

18. Directs that they shall not permit women to dance in cemeteries or in holy places, nor work to be done on Sundays.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 57.

PARIS (1226). Held January 28, 1226, by a legate from the Roman see, upon the affairs of England and of the Albigenses. In consequence of the decision, Louis VIII. ceased from his pretensions against England, and turned his arms against the Albigenses. The legate, in the pope’s name, excommunicated Raymond, Count of Toulouse, with his accomplices, and confirmed to the king and his heirs for ever the right to the lands of the said count, as being a condemned heretic. Amauri, Count de Montfort, and Guy, his uncle, ceded to the king whatever rights they possessed over the lands in question.—Raynald, Tom. i. p. 554 (note). Tom. xi. Conc. p. 300.

On the 20th of March, same year, the king, Lewis VIII., convoked another council upon the subject of the Albigenses.

PARIS (1255). Held in 1255, by Henry, Archbishop of Sens, and five other archbishops, on occasion of the murder of a chanter of the cathedral church of Chartres. His murderers, Hugo, a canon of Chartres, and Colin, his brother, were banished for five years to a place called “Obtencfort,” in England, and forbidden to return at the expiration of that period without a testimonial of good conduct from the Bishop of those parts: these men had submitted to the sentence of the council. Two others, Gilbert and James, were banished to Jerusalem. In this council the head of the order of preaching friars complained of certain things said and preached by some seculars, doctors in theology, to the prejudice of his order. William de S. Amour and Laurent, both doctors-regent in Theology at Paris, being examined upon the subject by the prelates, denied the justice of the charge. Subsequently S. Amour wrote a book, entitled “The Perils of the Last Days,” in which he vigorously attacked the preaching friars without mercy. At last the dispute between the latter and the university of Paris became so warm, that St Louis was obliged to send to Rome to appease it. The pope, however, sided entirely with the friars.—Tom. xi. Conc. p, 738. Mart., Vet. Scrip. Coll., t. 5. col. 144.

PARIS (1260). Held on the 21st March 1260, by order of St Louis, to implore the aid of heaven against the conquests of the Tartars. It was ordered that processions should be made, blasphemy punished, luxury in dress and at table repressed, tournaments prohibited for two years, and all sports whatever put a stop to, except practice with the bow and cross-bow. In the following year, in another council, all these acts were renewed.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 793. Guil., Nangius, Chronicon.

PARIS (1281). Held in December, 1281, composed of four archbishops and twenty bishops. Much complaint was made of the conduct of the mendicant order, who persisted in preaching and hearing confession in spite of the bishops, upon pretext of having the pope’s privilege for doing so. A bull by Martin IV., bearing date January 10, 1280, was, however, produced, which confirmed the claim of the Franciscan friars; but, nevertheless, with this clause, that those persons who chose to confess to the friars, should be bound to confess also once a year, at the least, to their own priest, according to the order of the council of Lateran; and that the friars should sedulously exhort them to do so.

PARIS (1302). Held on April 10th, 1302, upon occasion of the difference between the king, Philip the Fair, and the pope, Bonifacius VIII. The former, in the preceding year, had thrown into prison Bernard de Saisset, Bishop of Pamiers; upon which the pope wrote to Philip, complaining of the act, accompanying the letter with the bull “Ausculta Fili,” in which he plainly bids him not deceive himself by thinking that he had no superior, and that he was independent of the head of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. Philip assembled his barons with the prelates at Notre Dame, and laid before them his ground of complaint against the pope and his bull, which he caused to be read. Whereupon the barons addressed a letter to the cardinals, in which, in very strong language, they complained of the pope’s conduct in pretending to consider the king as his subject, and that he held his temporal authority of him. The prelates were more backward in delivering their opinion, and endeavoured to excuse the pope, and to maintain peace. This, however, was not suffered, and they were clearly informed, that if anyone of them presumed to hold a contrary opinion to that of Philip and the lords, he would be looked upon as the enemy of the sovereign and kingdom. They then addressed to the pope a letter conceived in a much milder strain than that of the barons, in which they implored him to be cautious, and to preserve the ancient union between the Church and State; and, moreover, to revoke the mandamus, by which he had cited them to appear at Rome.

The answer of the cardinals to the barons was to the effect, that the pope had not absolutely declared that the king ought to acknowledge that he held the temporality of him, a statement which the pope himself in his answer to the bishops by no means corroborates.

This was not strictly speaking an ecclesiastical council, but a national assembly; two others of the same kind were held in the following year, upon the subject of the differences between the king and the pope. In September, in that year, the latter drew up a bull excommunicating Philip, but on the eve of the very day on which he had intended to publish it, he was seized by William de Nogaret, the French general, and though released from confinement almost immediately, he never recovered the mortification and sorrow which this blow inflicted on him, and on the 11th of October 1303, he died at Rome.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 1474.

PARIS (1310). Held in 1310, by Philip de Marigni, Archbishop of Sens, to deliberate upon the case of the Templars; after mature consideration, it was decided that some should be merely discharged from their engagement to the order, that others should be sent freely away, after having accomplished the course of penance prescribed; that others should be strictly shut up in prison, many being confined for life; and lastly, that some, as, for instance, the relapsed, should be given over to the secular arm, after having been degraded by the bishop if in holy orders. All this was accordingly done, and fifty Templars were burnt in the fields near the abbey of St Antony, not one of whom confessed the crimes imputed to them, but on the contrary, to the last they maintained the injustice of their sentence. (See C. of SENLIS.)—Baluze. Tom. xi. Conc. p. 1335.

PARIS (1323). Held on March 3rd, 1323, by William de Melum, Archbishop of Sens. A statute of four articles or canons was published, which was almost word for word identical with that drawn up in the council of Sens, A.D. 1320, under the same prelate.

Canon 1. Directs that the people shall fast on the eve of the holy sacrament.

2. Directs that an interdict shall be laid upon any place in which a clerk is detained by a secular judge.

4. Of the life, conversation, and dress of clerks.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 1711.

PARIS (1346). Held on March 6th, 1346, by the same archbishop, assisted by five bishops. Thirteen canons were published.

1. Complains of the treatment of the clergy by the secular judges, and sets forth that the former were continually imprisoned, put to the torture, and even to death.

10. Directs that beneficed clerks shall employ a part of their revenue in keeping in order and repairing their church and parsonage.

13. Confirms the bull of John XXII., given May 7th, 1327, by which the indulgence of the Angelus is given to those who repeat it three times at night.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 1908.

PARIS (1395). A national council was held at Paris in 1395, at which the Latin patriarchs of Alexandria and Jerusalem were present, together with seven archbishops, forty-six bishops, and a large number of abbots, deans, and doctors in theology.

The object of the council, convoked by Charles VI., was to consider about the best method of putting an end to the schism caused by the rival popes Benedict XIII. and Clement VII. The patriarch of Alexandria, Simon Cramandus, was unanimously elected to preside. The conclusion arrived at (February 2) by the majority, was that the best means of securing the peace of the Church would be for both claimants to resign their pretensions. The king’s uncles, Dukes of Berri and Burgundy, were in consequence sent as ambassadors to Rome.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 2511, Appen.

PARIS (1398). Another national council was held May 22nd, 1398; convoked by the same prince. There were present, besides Simon Cramand, the Latin patriarch of Alexandria, eleven archbishops, sixty bishops, and an immense number of abbots, deputies of universities, and others of the clergy. Simon Cramand opened the council.

In the second session, held in July, it was agreed that the best way of bringing Benedict to reason, was to deprive him not only of the power of collating to benefices, but of the entire exercise of his authority. For this purpose the king published, on the 27th of July, his letters patent, entirely suspending the pope’s authority in the kingdom: this edict was published at Avignon, where Benedict then was, in September. This suspension lasted until May 30th, 1403, when the king revoked it, and promised, in his own name and that of his realm, true obedience to Benedict XIII.—Spicil. tom. vi. p. 157.

PARIS (1046). A national council, composed of clergy from all parts of France, was held in 1406, to take measures for terminating the schism. The council resolved to demand the convocation of a general council, and to withdraw from the obedience of Benedict XIII. The withdrawal was carried into effect on the 7th of August, and the pope was forbidden to take any money out of the country. In the following session, held at St Martin’s, certain theologians and canonists discussed the question, some speaking in favour of Benedict, and others against him; and in the last session, December 20th, the king’s advocate declared his adhesion to the demand of the University for a general council, and an entire withdrawal from the obedience of Benedict; upon a division, both these points were carried.

After this, both Benedict XIII. and Gregory XII. severally promised to renounce the pontificate for the sake of peace, neither of them, however, really purposing to do so; and in 1408, Gregory having created four cardinals, in spite of the opposition of those then existing, the latter withdrew from his obedience, appealing to a general council, and to his successor. In answer to this appeal, Benedict published a bull, excommunicating all persons whatsoever, even kings and princes, who refused to resort to conference as the means of restoring peace to the Church, &c., &c. This bull was condemned at Paris, and torn up as inimical to the king’s majesty. Pedro of Luna was declared to be schismatical, obstinate, and heretical, and every person forbidden to style him any longer either Benedict, pope, or cardinal, or to obey him, &c.

PARIS (1408). A national council was held in 1408, convoked to deliberate upon the government of the Church, and the presentations to benefices. First, The declaration of the favourers and adherents of Pedro of Luna was read; then a great number of articles were drawn up, upon the manner in which the French Church should be governed during the neutrality. These articles come under five principal heads.

1. Concerning the abolition of sins and censures reserved ordinarily for the pope; for these the council permits that recourse be had to the penitentiary of the holy see or, if that cannot be, to the ordinary.

2. Concerning dispensations for irregularities, and for marriage. In these cases recourse was to be had to provincial councils.

3. Concerning the administration of justice, for which purpose it was ordered that the archbishops should hold a council yearly with their suffragans; the monks to do the same.

4. As to appeals, the last court of appeal was declared to be a provincial council.

5. As to presentations to benefices, it was ruled that the election of prelates should be made freely and according to right rule; that the elections of bishops should be confirmed by the metropolitan, and those of archbishops by the primate, or by the provincial council. In fact, the provincial council was made the substitute in all those matters which were usually carried to the pope.

It was further resolved, that the revenue of all benefices enjoyed by the followers of Pedro of Luna, should be seized and put into the king’s hands.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 2518.

PARIS (or SENS) (1429). Held in 1429, from the 1st of March to the 23rd of April, by John de Nanton, Archbishop of Sens, assisted by the Bishops of Chartres, Paris, Meaux, and Troyes, his suffragans, together with the proctors of the Bishops of Auxerre and Nevers, and a great number of abbots and other ecclesiastics. Forty regulations, relating to the duties and conduct of ecclesiastics, monks, and regular canons, the celebration of marriage, and the dispensation of banns, were drawn up. The following are the most remarkable.

1. Orders canons and other clerks connected with the churches to celebrate Divine service in an edifying manner, to chant the Psalms reverently, pausing between the verses, so that one side of the choir should not begin before the other had finished.

4. Exhorts the clergy to act as models of piety and correct behaviour to the laity; not to be careless in doing their duties, and not to accept of any benefice merely for the sake of the income to be derived from it.

8. Excludes from entering the Church for three months, bishops who raise to the priesthood persons of irregular life and ignorant of the epistles, gospels, and other parts of the holy office.

Other regulations refer to the conduct of curates, and direct them to exhort their parishioners to confession five times a year, viz., at Easter, Whitsuntide, the Assumption, All Saints, and Christmas, and also at the beginning of the New Year; others relate to the conduct of abbots, abbesses, priors of the orders of St Benedict and St Augustine, prescribing annual chapters, modesty of apparel and gesture, &c.; and forbids money to be exacted from any one entering upon a monastic life.

Regulation 25. Forbids barbers, and other persons in trade, and merchants, to exercise their calling on Sundays and festivals.

32. and 33. Forbid the celebration of marriages out of the parish church, and too great laxity in dispensations of banns.—Tom. xii. Conc. p. 392.

PARIS (1528). Held in 1528, from the 3rd of February to the 9th of October, in the church of the Great Augustines. Cardinal Antoine du Prat, Archbishop of the Sens, and Chancellor of France, presiding, assisted by seven bishops, viz., the Bishops of Chartres, Auxerre, Meaux, Paris, Orleans, Nevers, and Troyes.

The objects of the council were chiefly to condemn the errors of Luther, and to reform the discipline of the Church. Sixteen degrees were published relating to the faith, and forty upon discipline.

Amongst the first the following are the principal:—

1. Declares that the Church Catholic is one, and cannot err.

2. That it is visible.

3. That the Church is represented by an œcumenical council, which has universal authority in determining questions of faith, &c.

4. That to the Church it belongs to determine the authenticity of the canonical books, and to settle the sense of Holy Scripture.

5. That the apostolical traditions are certain and necessary, and to be firmly believed.

6. That the constitutions and customs of the Church are to be submitted to with respect, and her rule of conduct to be obeyed.

7. That seasons of fasting and abstinence are to be observed under pain of anathema.

8. That the celibacy of the clergy being ordered by the Latin Church, having been always practised and enjoined by the second Council of Carthage, as a law ordained in the apostolical times; they who teach the contrary are to be treated as heretics.

9. That monastic vows are not at variance with Christian liberty, and are to be kept.

10. That they who take from the number of the seven sacraments, and who deny their efficacy to confer grace, are to be treated as heretics. This decree treats of each sacrament in detail.

11. That the necessity of the sacrifice of the mass is supported by several passages of Holy Scripture, especially by St Luke 22. That this holocaust, this victim for sin, this continual sacrifice, is the “pure offering” of which the prophet Malachi speaks.

12. After refuting the opinions of Luther upon the subjects of purgatory and of prayer for the dead, this decree goes on to state that, after baptism, the guilt of sin being remitted, there still remains the temporal penalty to be paid, so that sinners may yet be compelled to expiate their faults in the other world, and that it is a salutary custom to offer the holy sacrifice for the dead.

13. Concerning the worship of saints, they declare it to be firmly established in the Church, that the saints hear our prayers, that they are alive to our sorrows, and feel joy in seeing us happy; and that Holy Scripture proves this.

14. Declares that it is not idolatry to venerate images; that the intention is to honour them whom they represent, and remind us of, and to make us imitate their holy actions.

15. That man’s free-will does not exclude grace; that the latter is not irresistible; that God does predestinate us and choose us, but that He will glorify those only who make their calling and election sure by good works.

16. That faith in no wise excludes works, especially those of charity; and that men are not justified by faith only.

Then follows a list containing thirty-nine errors maintained by the heretics of the time.

Of the forty decrees on discipline the following may be noticed.

3–9. Relate to persons to be admitted to holy orders or to any benefices, and enact that they who are admitted to holy orders without being properly qualified, are to be suspended until they are sufficiently instructed.

By canon 11 curates are compelled to residence, and to instruct their parishioners.

In 16 care is directed to be taken with the psalmody, and all profane tunes upon church organs were to be scrupulously avoided.

33. Forbids printing the Holy Scriptures and works of the fathers without the consent of the diocesan.

34. Orders all persons to bring all books in their possession relating to faith or morals, to their bishop for examination.

36. Of proper persons to be licensed to preach.—Tom. xiv. Conc. p. 432.

PARIS (1612). Held March 13, in 1612. Cardinal du Perron, Archbishop of Sens, presiding. The book of Edmund Richer, concerning the Ecclesiastical and Political power, was condemned.—Tom. xv. Conc. p. 1628.

PAVIA (850). [Concilium Papiense or Ticinense.] Held in December, 850, by order of the Emperor Louis, who attended; Angelbert of Milan presiding. This does not appear to have been strictly an ecclesiastical council. A capitular relating to secular matters was drawn up, and twenty-five canons of ecclesiastical discipline.

1. Directs that bishops shall keep about them priests and deacons of known probity to be witnesses of their secret acts.

2. Directs that bishops shall celebrate mass not only on Sundays and holy days, but, when possible, every day; and that they shall not neglect privately to offer prayers for themselves, their fellow-bishops, kings, all the rulers of God’s Church, and for all those who have desired their prayers, but especially for the poor.

3. Orders them to exercise frugality at table, to receive pilgrims and poor and sick people, and to exhort them and read to them.

4 and 5. Direct that they shall not hunt, hawk, &c, nor mix in worldly pleasures; bids them read the Holy Scriptures, explain them to their clergy, and preach on Sundays and holy days.

7. Directs that priests shall examine whether penitents really perform their acts of penance, give alms largely, &c.; public offenders to be reconciled by the bishop only.

9. Warns all fathers of families to marry their daughters as soon as they are of age, lest they fall into sin; and forbids the marriage blessing to those who marry after fornication.

14. Orders bishops immediately to re-establish those monasteries in their dioceses which have gone to decay through their negligence.

18. Declares that priests and deacons (acephali), who are under no episcopal jurisdiction, are not to be looked upon as belonging to the clergy.

21. Forbids usury.

22. Enjoins bishops to watch over those who have the care of orphans, and to see that they do not injure or oppress them. If such oppressors refuse to listen to their remonstrances, they are ordered to call the emperor’s attention to the case.

23. Orders bishops to arrest clerks and monks who wander about the country, agitating useless questions, and sowing the seeds of error, and to bring them before the metropolitan.

25. Condemns to a very severe course of penance those who deal in magical arts, who pretend to cause love or hatred by their incantations, and who are suspected of having caused the death of others; enjoins that they shall not be reconciled except on their death-bed.—Tom. viii. Conc. p. 61.

PAVIA (876). Held in 876, by Charles the Bald (crowned emperor by John VIII., December 15, 875). Seventeen bishops from Tuscany and Lombardy attended. The Archbishop of Milan presiding. Fifteen canons were published.

1. Orders respect and veneration everywhere for the holy Roman Church, as the head of all Churches.

2 and 3. Also relate to the respect, &c., due to the Roman see and to the Pope John.

4. Orders respect for the priesthood.

5. Orders respect for the imperial dignity.

The three following relate to the duties of bishops.

The acts of this council were confirmed in that of Pontyon, held in the same year.—Tom. ix. Conc. p. 279.

PAVIA (1022). Held in 1022, August 1. Benedict VIII. in this council complained of the licentious life of the clergy, and showed that it dishonoured the Church; he declared that they consumed the wealth given to them by the liberality of princes, in keeping women and providing for their children. A decree in seven articles was published for the reformation of the clergy, which the emperor confirmed, adding temporal penalties against the refractory.—Tom. ix. Conc. p. 819.

PAVIA (1160). Held in 1160, in which the anti-pope, Victor III. (Octavianus), was acknowledged as pope instead of Alexander III., by the emperor, Frederick I,—Tom. x. Conc. p. 1387.

PAVIA (1423). Held in 1423. This council was convoked at the Council of Constance, and was opened in the month of May; some deputies from England, France, and Germany being present. But on the 22nd of June it was transferred to Sienna, on account of the plague, which threatened Pavia.—Tom. xii. Conc. p. 365.

PENNAFIEL (1302). [Concilium Penafelense.] Held April 1, 1302, by Gonsalvo of Toledo and his suffragans. Fifteen articles were published, tending to repress those abuses which are noticed in the councils of this age, viz., incontinence amongst the clergy, usury, &c. Amongst other things, it was enacted, by canon 12, that in every church the “Salve Regina” should be sung after compline. By canon 8, that the priests should make with their own hands the bread to be consecrated at the Eucharist; or cause it to be made by other ecclesiastics in their own presence. By canon 7, that tithe should be paid of all lawful property, thereby to recognise the universal sovereignty of God.—Tom. xi. Conc. Append, p. 2444.

PERTH (1202). [Concilium Perthusanum.] Held in 1202 or 1203, by Cardinal John Salerno, Roman legate in Scotland; in which certain regulations relating to the reform of the clergy were drawn up. The council lasted three days, but two only of the canons are known.

1. That they who had received orders on Sunday should be removed from the service of the altar.

2. That every Saturday from twelve o’clock be kept as a day of rest, by abstaining from work; the holy day to continue till Monday morning.—Skinner, vol. i. p. 280. Tom. xi. Conc. p. 24.

PERTH (1212). Held in 1212. William Malvoisin, Bishop of St Andrews, Walter, Bishop of Glasgow, and others were present. The pope’s instructions for preaching the Crusade were published; upon which, says the author of the Scoti-chronicon, great numbers of all ranks of clergy throughout Scotland, regulars as well as seculars, took the cross, but very few of the rich or great men of the kingdom.—Skinner, vol. i. p. 280. Wilkins’ Conc., vol. i. p. 532.

PETERKAW, see ONESNE.

PHILADELPHIA (1789). A general convention of the bishops, clergy, and laity of the Church in America was held in August, and adjourned to October 2, 1789 (assembled 28th July, and adjourned to 29th September, Bishop White, p. 29), in which the constitution of the American Church, formed in 1786, was reviewed and settled in nine articles.

Article 1. Provides for a triennial general convention on the first Wednesday in October; and orders that no business shall commence until the Church, in the majority of dioceses which shall have adopted this constitution, shall be duly represented.

Article 2. Enacts that the Church in each diocese shall be entitled to be represented by one or more deputies (not exceeding four for the clergy and four for the laity), to be chosen by the convention of the diocese; the concurrence of both orders to be necessary to constitute a vote of the convention. All dioceses having adopted this constitution to be considered bound by the acts of the general convention, even though they neglect to send representatives.

Article 3. Directs that whenever general conventions are held, the bishops, when there shall be three or more present, shall form a separate house, which shall have a negative upon acts passed in the house of deputies. When there are fewer than three bishops present, those who are present shall be ex officio members of the convention, and shall vote with the clerical deputies, and a bishop shall then preside.

Article 4. Provides that the bishop in every diocese shall be chosen according to the rules fixed by the convention of that diocese. Forbids any bishop to interfere in the diocese of another.

Article 5. Provides for the future admission of other churches within the territory of the United States, and for the formation of new dioceses from one or more existing dioceses, under the following restrictions:—

1. No existing diocese to be infringed upon without the consent of the bishops and convention of that diocese, and that of the general convention.

2. Every such new diocese to contain at least eight thousand square miles and thirty presbyters.

3. Where the new diocese is formed by the division of an existing diocese into two, the actual bishop of the existing diocese to choose which of the two bishoprics he will take.

Article 6. Provides that the mode of trying bishops shall be settled by the general convention; the court appointed for that purpose shall be composed of bishops only. And that the mode of trying priests and deacons shall be settled by the diocesan convention. Enacts that the bishop alone shall pronounce sentence of admonition, suspension, or degradation.

Article 7. Orders that persons to be admitted to holy orders shall have been examined by the bishop and two presbyters, and shall subscribe the following declaration:—

“I do believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the word of God, and to contain all things necessary to salvation: and I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrines and worship of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States.”

Forbids to admit any person ordained by a foreign bishop, to minister in any church until he have subscribed the above, and complied with the proper canons.

Article 8. Enacts that a Book of Common Prayer, to be hereafter established, shall be used in all the dioceses adopting this constitution; and that no alteration or addition shall be made therein, unless proposed in one general convention, and adopted by another subsequently.

Article 9. Provides for future alterations in the constitution.

In this convention the Book of Common Prayer now in use in the American Church was prepared; some parts of it were drawn up by the lower house, and some by the bishops (Bishop White and Bishop Seabury appear to have been the only two present). The principal subjects of difference arising between the houses were the Athanasian creed, and the article in the Apostles’ creed, concerning the “descent into hell.” Bishop Seabury desired that permission should be granted in the rubric to use the Athanasian creed, and Bishop White (who was opposed to the use of it, alleging that it was not in use amongst the Lutherans, nor in any part of the Greek Church) consented to his proposals; the lower house, however, refused to allow the use of this creed under any circumstances. The use of this creed was so strongly desired in Connecticut that it was supposed the refusal to admit it into the Book would cause its entire rejection by that state. The question concerning the article “He descended into hell,” after much discussion, was finally settled in the convention of New York, A.D. 1792, where it was ordered that the article should stand in the creed, but that a rubric should be added, permitting the use of the words “He went into the places of departed spirts.” Bishop Provost objected to this substitute, upon the ground that “it exacted a belief in the existence of departed spirits between death and the Resurrection!” Bishop White, Memoirs of the Protestant Episcopal Church, &c. (2nd Edition, 1836). Note I. to p. 30, p. 151.

In the office for the Holy Eucharist, the oblatory words in the Prayer of Consecration, and the Invocation of the Holy Spirit, were added without opposition, apparently at the suggestion of the excellent Bishop Seabury. This prelate felt so strongly on this subject, that he declined to consecrate on the Sunday which occurred during the session, on the ground, as he admitted to Bishop White, that he did “hardly consider the form to be used [i.e., the English] as strictly amounting to a consecration.” The communion office of the American Church is that of the 1st Book of Edw. 6th, and of the Scotch Church.—Bishop White’s Memoirs, pp. 28 and 140.

PHILADELPHIA (1795). At a triennial convention held in September, 1795, Bishop White presiding, a service for the consecrating of churches was ordered; it is substantially the same with that composed by Bishop Andrewes.—Bp. White, p. 30.

PHILADELPHIA (1835). Held in August, 1835; William White, D.D., bishop, presiding. Eight canons were published. All of which were repealed by the subsequent convention in 1838, except the fifth, which declares every minister to be amenable to the bishop for offences committed by him; also relates to the service of citations.

PHILADELPHIA (1838). A general convention held in September, 1838. Bishop Griswold presiding. Eleven canons were published.

1. Relates to the election of bishops. Rules that the house of bishops, at the request of any diocese in union with the American Church, shall nominate to the lower house a fit person for the office of bishop, who shall, upon their concurrence, be consecrated for the said diocese.

Section 2. Enacts that there must be at least six presbyters settled in the diocese, before its convention can elect their own bishop. Allows two or more dioceses, not having “each the required number of presbyters, to unite temporarily, and to choose a bishop.

2. Of missionary bishops. Allows the lower house, from time to time, on the nomination of the house of bishops, to elect a fit person to be bishop, and to exercise episcopal functions in states or territories not organised into dioceses, who (§ 2) shall act in conformity with the canons and constitutions of the Church, and the rules prescribed by the house of bishops.

Section 3. Assigns to such missionary bishop jurisdiction over all clergymen in his district.

Section 4. Permits the consecration of bishops for places out of the territory of the United States.

Section 5. Declares such missionary bishops entitled to a seat in the house of bishops.

Section 6. Orders them to report their proceedings to each general convention, and also an annual report to the board of missions.

Section 7. Repeals canon 2 of 1835.

3. Of the performance of episcopal duties in vacant dioceses.

4. (Repealed by the 9th canon of 1841).

5. Of the learning of those who are to be ordained. Forbids to ordain any person until he shall have satisfied the bishop and examining presbyters that he is well acquainted with the Holy Scriptures, can read the Old Testament in the Hebrew, and the New Testament in the original Greek, and is adequately acquainted with Latin; also that he hath a competent knowledge of natural and moral philosophy, and Church history, and hath paid attention to composition and pulpit eloquence.

Grants to the bishop the power of dispensing with the knowledge of Greek and Latin and Hebrew in certain cases, as well as other qualifications not strictly ecclesiastical.

Repeals canon 13 of 1832.

6. Declares candidates for holy orders ineligible to the general convention.

7. Concerning candidates for holy orders who have been ministers, &c., among other religious denominations.

8. Of the organisation of new dioceses formed out of existing dioceses.

9. Of the mode of publishing authorised editions of the Book of Common Prayer, &c. Enacts that the bishop of the diocese or standing committee shall appoint one or more presbyters, who shall compare and correct all new editions of the Prayer-book, offices, articles, and metre psalms and hymns by some standard book, and that a certificate of the correctness of the said editions shall be published with them. When any book is published without such revision, public notice shall be given that such edition is not authorised by the Church.

Section 2. Declares the stereotype edition of the Prayer-book by the “Female” Episcopal Prayer-book Society of Philadelphia to be the standard edition.

Repeals canon 6 of 1835.

10. Of defraying the expenses of general conventions.

11. Of repealed canons.

PHILADELPHIA (1844). Held October 2, 1844. The right reverend Philander Chase, Bishop of Illinois, presiding over twenty-three bishops. The synod lasted twenty-two days, and the following canons were passed.

1. Of the expenses of general conventions. Enacts that the treasurer of the several diocesan conventions shall forward to the treasurer of the general convention before the meeting one dollar for each clergyman within the diocese.

Repeals canon 10 of 1838.

2. Of the election of bishops. Enacts that to entitle a diocese to choose a bishop, there must have been settled in it for a year previously six officiating presbyters. Permits two or more dioceses not having each the required number of presbyters, to associate for the purpose of electing a bishop, if there have been for a year previously nine officiating presbyters in the two dioceses. When six or more officiating presbyters become settled in either of the dioceses, and shall proceed to elect the bishop of the associated dioceses for their own exclusive diocesan, his connection with the other diocese to cease.

Repeals canon 1 of 1838.

3. Of the trial of a bishop. Repeals canon 4 of 1841.

4. Of episcopal resignations. Orders a bishop to make known, in writing, to the house of bishops, his desire to resign, and the reasons of it, that they may investigate the matter; after which the question to be decided by the majority of votes.

Also provides for the case of a bishop wishing to resign at any period beyond six months from the time of holding the general convention.

Repeals canon 32 of 1832.

5. Of ministers removing from one diocese to another. Enacts that no minister removing from one diocese to another, be received as a stated officiating minister by any parish without a certificate from the ecclesiastical authority of the diocese to which the parish belongs; the said minister removing having previously presented to such ecclesiastical authority a testimonial from the ecclesiastical authority of his last diocese. Then follows a form of testimonial.

Enacts, further, that no clergyman shall be considered to have passed from under the jurisdiction of any diocese to that of any other bishop, until he have received the above testimonial.

Enacts, further, that such letters shall be null and void, if not presented to the bishop to whom they are directed within six months after date, if intended for the United States; and within twelve months, if intended for a foreign country.

Repeals canon 7 of 1841.

6. Of a discretion to be allowed in the calling, trial, and examination of deacons in certain cases.

Allows any bishop, at the request of the convention of his diocese, to admit persons to deacon’s orders who have not been tried and examined, as directed by the canons, under certain restrictions, which follow.

Forbids a deacon so ordained to take charge of a parish; and declares that he shall not be admitted to priest’s orders without first going through all the preparatory exercise for deacon’s orders.

7. Of foreign missionary bishops.

(1.) Enacts that the house of clerical and lay deputies may, from time to time, on nomination by the house of bishops, elect suitable persons to be bishops, to exercise episcopal functions in any place out of the territory of the United States, which the house of bishops may designate; and that if the house of bishops shall consent to the consecration, they shall take order for that purpose.

(2.) Any bishop elected and consecrated under this canon to have no jurisdiction except in the place or country for which he has been elected and consecrated; and not to be entitled to a seat in the house of bishops, nor to be eligible to the office of diocesan bishop in any organised diocese within the United States.

(3.) That any bishop or bishops elected and consecrated under this canon, may ordain deacons or presbyters to officiate within the limits of their respective missions.

(4.) That any foreign missionary bishop, consecrated under this canon, may, by and with the advice of any three missionary presbyters under his charge, at his discretion, dispense with those studies required from a candidate for deacon’s orders by the canons of this Church.

(5.) That in addition to the promise required in the office for the consecration of bishops, of conformity and obedience to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, any foreign missionary bishop elected and consecrated under this canon, shall lodge with the senior bishop, or with the bishop who may act as consecrator, a promise under his hand and seal, that he will, in the exercise of his episcopal functions, conform, so far as may be possible in his peculiar circumstances, in all respects to the constitutions and canons of this Church.

(6.) That any foreign missionary bishop or bishops elected and consecrated under this canon, shall have jurisdiction and government, according to the canons of this Church, over all missionaries or clergymen of this Church resident in the district or country for which he may have been consecrated.

(7.) That every bishop elected and consecrated under this canon, shall report to each general convention his proceedings and acts, and the state of the mission under his supervision. He shall also make a similar report, at least once every year, to the board of missions of this Church.

8. Of missionary bishops within the United States.

(1.) The house of clerical and lay deputies may, from time to time, on nomination by the house of bishops, elect a suitable person to be a bishop, to exercise episcopal functions in states or territories not organised into dioceses; and if the house of bishops shall consent to the consecration, they may take order for that purpose.

(3.) The jurisdiction of this Church, extending in right, though not always in form, to all persons belonging to it within the United States, it is hereby enacted, that each missionary bishop shall have jurisdiction over the clergy in the district assigned him.

(4.) Any bishop or bishops elected and consecrated under this canon, shall be entitled to a seat in the house of bishops, and shall be eligible to the office of diocesan bishop in any organised diocese within the United States.

(5.) Every such bishop shall report to each general convention his proceedings, and the state and condition of his church, and at least once a year make a report to the board of missions.

(6.) Canon 2 of 1838 is hereby repealed.

9. Of clergymen ordained in foreign countries, by bishops in communion with this Church.

(1.) A clergyman coming from a foreign country, and professing to have been ordained out of the United States, by a foreign bishop in communion with this Church, or by a bishop consecrated for a foreign country, by bishops of this Church under article 10 of the constitution, or by a missionary bishop elected to exercise episcopal functions in any place or places out of the United States, shall, before he be permitted to officiate in any parish or congregation, exhibit to the minister, or if there be no minister, to the vestry thereof, a certificate signed by the bishop of the diocese, or, if there be no bishop, the standing committee, duly convened, that his letters of orders are authentic, and given by some bishop in communion with this Church, and whose authority is acknowledged by this Church; and also that he has exhibited to the bishop or standing committee, satisfactory evidence of his pious and moral character, and his theological acquirements; and, in any case, before he shall be permitted to settle in any church or parish, or be received into union with any diocese of this Church, as a minister thereof, he shall produce to the bishop, or if there be no bishop, the standing committee of such diocese, a letter of dismission, from under the hand and seal of the bishop with whose diocese he has been last connected; which letter shall be, in substance, that provided for in section 1 of canon 5 of 1844, and shall be delivered within six months from the date thereof; and when such clergyman shall have been so received, he shall be considered as having passed entirely from the jurisdiction of the bishop from whom the letter of dismission was brought, to the full jurisdiction of the bishop or other ecclesiastical authority by whom it shall have been accepted, and become thereby subject to all the canonical provisions of this Church; provided that no such clergyman shall be so received into union with any diocese, until he shall have subscribed, in the presence of the bishop of the diocese, in which he applies for reception, and two or more presbyters, the declaration contained in article 7 of the constitution; which being done, said bishop or standing committee being satisfied of his theological acquirements, may receive him into union with this church, as a minister of the same; provided also, that such minister shall not be entitled to settle in any parish or church, as canonically in charge of the same, until he have resided one year in the United States subsequent to the acceptance of his letter of dismission.

(2.) And if such foreign clergyman be a deacon, he shall reside in this country at least three years, and obtain in this country the requisite testimonials of character, before he be ordained a priest.

(3.) Canon 6 of 1841 is hereby repealed.

Sentence of suspension was in the seventeenth session, October 21, passed upon Henry V. Onderdonk, Bishop of Pennsylvania, he having first made a written acknowledgment of his unworthiness. Three bishops were consecrated for the dioceses of New Hampshire, Alabama, and Missouri; as were also missionary bishops for China, for Cape Palmas, on the western coast of Africa, for the dominions and dependencies of the Sultan of Turkey, and for the state of Arkansas, together with some portion of the Indian territory.

In the last session a resolution was passed to the effect, that the bishops, as visitors, having visited the general theological seminary, had not found in its interior arrangements any evidences of encouragement given to superstitious or Romish practices. Journal of the General Convention for the year 1844, published at New York.

PIPEWELL, in England (1189). Held September 15, 1189.

PISA (1134). [Concilium Pisanum.] Convoked by Pope Innocentius II. in 1134, who presided at the head of a large assembly of the bishops of France, Germany, and Italy. St Bernard assisted at their deliberations. The anti-pope, Anacletus, was again excommunicated, together with his abettors. Several canons were published.

1. Directs that priests shall be separated from their wives, and nuns from their pretended husbands; and both parties be put to penance.

6. Forbids, under pain of excommunication, to violate the sanctuary of a church or churchyard.—Tom. x. Conc. p. 989.

PISA (1409). Held March 25, 1409. The object of this council was to put an end to the schism then existing. The cardinals of the two obediences, viz., of Benedict XIII. and of Gregory XII., having addressed themselves to Charles VI. of France, exhorting him to concur with them in this important work; they came to the conclusion that the cardinals, under the circumstances, had an undoubted right to convoke a council, which might judge between the two competitors for the popedom, and elect a pope.

Benedict, by the advice of several bishops, sent seven legates to the council; but Gregory, on the other hand, refused to appear either in person or by deputy, although summoned in due form.

The council was opened on the 25th of March 1409. The assembly was one of the most august and numerous ever seen in the Church; there were present twenty-two cardinals; the Latin patriarchs of Alexandria (Simon), Antioch (Wenceslaus), Jerusalem (Hugo), and Grade (Francis Lando); twelve archbishops were present in person, and fourteen by their proctors; eighty bishops, and the proctors of one hundred and two absent; eighty-seven abbots, and the proctors of two hundred others; besides priors; generals of orders; the grand-master of Rhodes, with sixteen commanders; the prior-general of the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre; the deputy of the grand-master and Knights of the Teutonic Order; the deputies of the universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Paris, Florence, Cracow, Vienna, Prague, and many others; more than three hundred doctors in theology; and ambassadors from the kings of England, France, Portugal, Bohemia, Sicily, Poland, and Cyprus; from the Dukes of Burgundy, Brabant, &c.

Session 1. The order of precedency to be observed by the members of the council was laid down.

Session 2. After the usual prayer and sermon, the Archbishop of Pisa read the decree of Gregory X. upon the procession of the Holy Spirit, to which the Greeks had agreed in the Council of Lyons, A.D. 1274, and the canon of Toledo relating to the proper order of ecclesiastical councils. After this the necessary officers were appointed, the letter of convocation read, and the two rival popes summoned at the gates of the church; no one, however, appearing for them.

Session 3. A fresh citation was made, and no one having appeared, the two popes, Pedro of Luna and Angelo Corrario, were declared contumacious by a sentence, which was affixed to the church door.

Session 4. Bishop Ulric, the Ambassador of Robert, King of the Romans, addressed the assembly, endeavouring to frustrate the object of the council.

Session 5. The two contending parties were again declared contumacious, and the promoter of the council produced against them thirty-seven articles, containing the whole history of the schism, and showing the badness of their cause. Although the facts contained in this accusation were sufficiently notorious, commissioners were appointed to prove their truth.

Session 6. The Bishop of Salisbury showed that it was necessary for the cause that there should be a general, and not merely a partial, withdrawal from the obedience of the popes, and declared that he had authority from the King of England to follow out the scheme for unity, and to consent to whatever the council should determine.

Session 7. The difficulties started by the Ambassador of the King of the Romans were answered.

Session 8. The Bishops of Salisbury and Evreux showed that the union of the two colleges of cardinals could not be effected whilst those of the party of Benedict continued to obey him, and that the withdrawal from obedience must be universal. Whereupon the council declared the union of the two colleges to be lawful, and the council itself duly convoked; and a decree was passed to the effect, that each one might, and ought, to withdraw from the obedience both of Gregory and Benedict; since both of them had by their artifices eluded the solemn cession of office, which they had promised upon oath to make.

Session 9. The decree of the preceding session was read.

Session 10. The two contending parties were again cited at the door of the church, in order that they might hear the testimony of the witnesses. Then thirty-seven articles, containing their deposition, were read; and it was noted down by how many witnesses each article was proved.

Session 11. The reading of the depositions was continued.

Session 12. A decree was published declaring the council to be œcumenical, and all contained in the preceding depositions to be true, public, and notorious.

Session 13. One of the deputies from the university of Paris showed that Pedro of Luna was a heretic and schismatic, and that he had forfeited the papacy; and this he declared to be the opinion of the French universities. The Bishop of Navarre also declared that all the doctors in the council, to the number of three hundred, agreed in this view.

Session 14. A declaration was made that the council represented the Catholic Church, that the cognizance of the matter before it of right belonged to it, as being the highest authority on earth; also an act of general withdrawal from the obedience of the two contending parties was drawn up.

Session 15. The definitive sentence was pronounced in the presence of the whole council and of the people who were permitted to enter. The sentence was to the effect, that the holy œcumenical synod, representing the Catholic Church, to which it appertained to take cognizance of and to decide the question, after having examined everything which had been done concerning the union of the Church, declared Pedro of Luna, called Benedict XIII., and Angelo Corrario, called Gregory XII., to be both of them schismatical, abettors of schism, heretics, and guilty of perjury; that they had given offence to the whole Church by their obstinacy, that they had forfeited every dignity, and were, ipso facto, separated from the Church. And forbade all the faithful, under pain of excommunication, to recognise them, or support their cause. Annulled all that they had done against the promoters of unity, and declared the last promotion of cardinals made by them to be null and void.

Session 16. A paper was read, in which the cardinals present all promised, that in the event of any one of them being elected to the papal chair, he would continue the present council, until the Church should be reformed in its head and in its members; and if one of those then absent, or any other not belonging to the college of cardinals, were elected, that they would compel him to make the same promise before publishing his election. Afterwards the council ratified the sentence against Angelo and Pedro.

Session 17. Certain preliminaries concerning the election were settled.

Session 18. A solemn procession was made to implore of the Almighty the grace necessary to guide their election.

Session 19. The cardinals, to the number of twenty-four, entered into conclave under the guard of the Grand Master of Rhodes, and at the end of ten days’ confinement, they unanimously elected Peter of Candia, Cardinal of Milan, of the order of Franciscan Friars, a man seventy years of age, who took the name of Alexander V. As soon as he was elected, John Gerson, Chancellor of the University of Paris, delivered a discourse, exhorting him to the faithful discharge of his duty, &c.

Session 20. The new pope presided and delivered a discourse. The decree of his election was then read, and on the following Sunday he was crowned.

Session 21. A decree was read on the part of the pope, approving and ratifying all the dispensations of marriage, and those relating to the penitentiary, which had been granted by Benedict or Gregory.

Session 22. A decree was published on the part of the pope and council, confirming all collations, provisions, translations, &c., &c., &c., made canonically by the two rival popes.

Session 23. A decree was read, ordering metropolitans to convoke provincial councils, and the generals of orders to hold chapters, having presidents of the pope’s appointment. Finally, Alexander ratified all that the cardinals had done since the 3rd of May 1408, and especially what had passed at Pisa. With regard to Church reform, as many of the prelates had left the council, the pope declared that the subject should be deferred until the following council, which he appointed to be held in 1412; then he dismissed the assembly, giving plenary indulgence to all who had assisted at it, and to all who had adhered to it.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 2114. Hist. du Conc. de Pisa, by Lenfant.

PISA and MILAN (1511). Held in 1511, at the instigation of the Emperor Maximilian and Louis XII. of France, who, having just cause of complaint against Pope Julius II., persuaded the Cardinals of St Croix, Narbonne, and Cosenza to convoke a council to Pisa.

The object of the council was set forth to be the reform of the Church in its head and in its members, and to punish various notorious crimes which for a long time had scandalised the whole Church. It was further stated that there was urgent need of such councils, that Julius had not only neglected to convoke one, but had done all in his power to hinder it; and, finally, the pope was in respectful terms cited to appear at the council.

Besides this, in answer to the complaint made against them by Julius, they published an apology for their conduct, in which they justified the convocation of the Council of Pisa. First, by a decree passed in the thirty-ninth session of the council. Secondly, by the pope’s own vow, according to which he had promised to hold a council. Thirdly, by the oath of the cardinals, and by the necessity of avoiding so great scandal. They further showed that the canons, which vest the power of convoking such councils in the pope, are to be understood as speaking of the ordinary state of things, but that cause may arise in which councils may be called and assembled by others than the sovereign Pontiff.

The pope, in order to parry the blow, convoked a rival council to Rome, and cited the three above-mentioned cardinals to appear there within a certain time, under pain of being deprived.

The Council of Pisa, however, proceeded, and was opened November 1st, 1511. Four cardinals attended, and the proctors of three who were absent, also fourteen French bishops and two archbishops, together with a few abbots and doctors; deputies from the universities of France, and the ambassadors of Louis XII.

Cardinal St Croix presided. The convocation of the Council of Pisa, having for its object the reformation of the Church, was pronounced to be just and lawful, and all that had been or might be done to its prejudice declared null and void.

All that related to the order of the assembly was settled; the canon of Toledo read, and officers appointed. A decree was made to the effect, that the present council could not be dissolved until the reformation of the Church should have been effected. The decrees of the Council of Constance, relating to the authority of œcumenical councils, were renewed.

At this time, the pope having entered into a league with Ferdinand and the Venetians, began to attack the state of Florence, and the fathers judged it expedient to transfer the council to Milan: which accordingly was done; and on the 4th of January 1512, the fourth session was held at Milan.

In the fourth session the assembly was more numerous, the Cardinals of St Severin and St Angelo joined themselves to the others. The proctor general of the order of premonstrants made a long discourse upon the disorders which ravaged the Church; then certain decrees were read, by which thirty days were given to the pope, within which time to determine himself to reform abuses in the Church, or else to assemble an œcumenical council, or to unite with that already assembled.

The decree of the Council of Constance was renewed against those who troubled and maltreated persons coming to the council.

A deputy from the university of Paris delivered a discourse, after which the Pope Julius was again cited in the usual form; and upon his non-appearance, a demand was made that he should be declared contumacious. Several decrees were also published, amongst other subjects, upon the exemplary life which ecclesiastics ought to lead; also upon the order to be observed in councils, with regard to sessions and congregations. The convocation of a council to Rome, made by Julius, was declared null and void.

The promoters of the council required that Julius should be declared, through his contumacy, to have incurred, ipso facto, suspension from all administration of the pontifical office. Consequently he was called upon three times from the foot of the altar, and at the church door: the settlement of the question was then deferred till the next session.

After mass, sung by the Bishop of Maguelonne (now Montpellier), a decree was made suspending Julius, and the council, after reciting all that had been done in order to obtain his protection, exhorted all cardinals, bishops, princes, and people, no longer to recognise Julius as pope, he having been declared contumacious, the author of schism, incorrigible and hardened, and having as such incurred the penalties denounced in the decrees of Constance and Basil.

This was the last session of the council, for the French being obliged to abandon the Milanese, the bishops were compelled to quit Milan; they made an attempt to continue the council at Lyons, but without effect.—Tom. xiii. Conc. p. 1486. Du Pin, Comp. Hist., vol. iv. p. 4.

PLACENZA (1095). [Concilium Placentinum.] Held March 1st, 1095, and concluded March 5th, by Pope Urban II. Two hundred bishops attended, with nearly four thousand other ecclesiastics, and thirty thousand laymen. The first and third sessions of this assembly were necessarily held in the open air. The Empress Praxedis, in person, made complaint against her husband the Emperor Henry, who divorced her and treated her infamously. Ambassadors from the Emperor of Constantinople were present who demanded help against the infidels, with the approbation of the pope. Fifteen canons were published, by which the heresy of Berenger was again condemned, and the truth of the real presence of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist clearly set forth. The sect of the New Nicolaitans (who favoured incontinence in the clergy) were also condemned. The orders conferred by Guibert, the anti-pope, and others who had been excommunicated, were declared null. The Ember fasts were also fixed. After this, Urban proceeded to France, and in the Autumn of the same year held the celebrated council of Clermont.—Tom. x. Conc. p. 500.

PLACENZA (1132). Held after Easter, 1132, by Innocentius II., assisted by several bishops of Lombardy. It was forbidden to receive to penitence those who refused to renounce fornication, hatred and every mortal sin. In this council the anti-pope, Anacletus, was excommunicated.—Tom. x. Conc. p. 988.

POISSI (1561). An assembly of French bishops was held at Poissi in 1561, in consequence of the celebrated conference of the same name. Several regulations relating to discipline were made.

Concerning the election of bishops, it is ordered that the name of the person nominated by the king to a bishopric shall be posted at the cathedral doors, and in other public places, that all persons may have the opportunity of objecting to him if they know anything against him.

Archbishops and bishops are forbidden to absent themselves from their dioceses for more than three months; are exhorted to apply themselves to preaching and visitations, and to hold annual synods.

Archbishops are directed to summon provincial councils every three years, according to the decrees of the Council of Basle. Excommunications, save for weighty reasons, are forbidden. Curates not to be admitted to their benefices until they have been examined by the bishop: they are ordered to proceed to priest’s orders within a year from their admission; to reside constantly; to explain the Gospel to their people, and to teach them to pray. Private masses are forbidden to be said whilst solemn mass is being celebrated.

Priests are enjoined to prepare themselves carefully before approaching the holy altar; to pronounce the words distinctly; to do all with decency and gravity; not to suffer any airs, save those of hymns and canticles, to be played upon the organ; to correct the church books; to try to abolish all superstitious practices; to instruct the people that images are exposed to view in the churches for no other reason than to remind persons of Jesus Christ and the saints. It is further directed that all images which are in any way indecent, or which merely illustrate fabulous and ridiculous tales, shall be entirely removed.

These regulations are closed by a profession of faith, in which the errors of Luther and Calvin, and other sectarians are specially rejected.

POITIERS (593). [Concilium Pictaviense.] Held in 593, in the matter of a nun named Chrodielde, of royal blood, who had rebelled against Leubovera, Abbess of St Croix in Poitiers. She was here called to account for leaving her nunnery, and for the violence which she had committed against Gondegesilus and other bishops; also for the acts of rebellion which she, in concert with Basina, another nun, had committed against their abbess. Being exhorted to ask forgiveness of the abbess, she boldly refused and threatened to kill her. The bishops, after consulting the canons, declared them to be excommunicated. They then re-established the Abbess, Leubovera, in the government of the monastery.—Gregory of Tours. See METZ, 590.

POITIERS (1004). Held January 13th, 1004, convoked by William V., Count of Poitiers and Duke of Aquitaine. Five bishops were present, who published three canons.

1. Pronounces those persons to be under anathema who pillage the churches, rob the poor, or strike the clergy: and further declares, that if they rebel against this sentence, the bishops and barons shall assemble and march against them, ravaging all around them until they submit.

The other two canons forbid bishops to take any fees for penance and confirmation; and priests and deacons to retain women in their houses.—Tom. ix. Conc. p. 780.

POITIERS (1073). Held in 1073, before Cardinal Gerard, the Roman legate, against Berenger. The question of the Holy Eucharist was discussed, and the minds of men were so exasperated against Berenger, that he narrowly escaped with his life.—Tom. x. Conc. p. 346.

POITIERS (1078). Held in 1078 by the legate Hugo, Bishop of Die; who, by the account which he gave of this council to pope Gregory VII., seems to have encountered much opposition to his plans. He complains that the King of France had forbidden the Count of Poitiers to allow the council to be holden within his states; that the Archbishop of Tours and the Bishop of Rennes had rendered themselves almost complete masters of the council, and that the assembly had been disturbed by the armed followers of these prelates. Some attribute to this council, and others to the following, ten canons, of which these are the most worthy of note.

1. Forbids to receive investitures at the hands of kings and other laymen.

2. Forbids simony and pluralities.

4. Forbids bishops to receive any present for conferring holy orders, for consecrating churches, or for giving any benediction.

6. Forbids monks and canons to purchase churches without the bishop’s consent.

8. Forbids the ordination of the children of priests, and of bastards, except they be canons or regular monks.

10. Enjoins that clerks who carry arms, or who deal in usury, shall be excommunicated.—Tom. x. Conc. p. 366.

POITIERS (1100). Held Nov. 18, 1100, by John and Benedict, the two legates of the holy see, who presided in the place of Pascal II. About eighty bishops and abbots were present. Norigaudus, Bishop of Autun, having been found guilty of simony, was condemned to give up his stole and pastoral ring. Upon his refusal to do so, he was further deposed from his bishopric and from the priesthood, and sentence of excommunication was denounced against all who continued to obey him as their bishop. He, nevertheless, persisted in his refusal to submit to the sentence, and retained his stole and ring. In this council, moreover, Philip, King of France, who had taken back to him Bertrade, his wife, was excommunicated by the legates, in spite of the opposition of many of the bishops and of William, Duke of Aquitaine. Lastly, sixteen canons were published.

1. Declares that it is lawful for bishops only to give the tonsure (coronas benedicere) to the clergy, and for abbots to do so to monks.

2. Forbids them to require any fee for performing the operation, or even the scissors and napkin employed.

4. Reserves to the bishop the benediction of the sacerdotal vestments, and of all the vessels, &c., of the altar.

5. Forbids the use of the maniple to all monks who are not in the order of sub-deacons. This canon shows that before this time the use of the maniple was not confined to the sub-deacons, as some suppose. (See also Archbishop Lanfranc, Ep. 13.)

7. Forbids, under excommunication, to buy or sell prebends, and to require any allowance (pastus) for having given one.

10. Gives permission to regular canons to baptise, preach, administer the sacrament of penance, and bury the dead during the bishop’s pleasure.

12. Forbids to allow to preach those who carry about the relics of saints for the sake of gain.

16. Confirms all that the pope had enacted in the Council of Clermont.—Tom. x. Conc. p. 720.

POLOTSK (1839). Held on the 12th of February 1839. by all the Greek Uniate bishops in Russia, assisted by several of the most distinguished of their clergy. In this council a synodal act was drawn up, and signed by Joseph, Bishop of Lithuania; Vasili, Bishop of Orsha; Anthony, Bishop of Brest; and twenty-one other dignitaries; in which they declare their firm and unalterable decision “to acknowledge anew the unity of their Church with the orthodox Catholic Eastern Church; and, consequently, thenceforth, together with the flocks committed to their care, to continue in the same sentiment with the holy Eastern orthodox patriarchs, and in obedience to the holy governing synod of all the Russias.” To this act was appended the declaration of thirteen hundred and five parish priests and monastic brethren, which number was afterwards increased to sixteen hundred and seven. Besides their Act, a petition was drawn up to the Emperor Nicholas, praying him to sanction the union of the Uniate with the orthodox Church; which, together with the synodal Act above, was submitted to the holy governing synod for examination and approval. The synod shortly after issued its decree upon the subject, by which it was ordained:

1. To receive the bishops, clergy, and flocks of the hitherto called Greek Uniate Church into full and complete communion with the holy orthodox, Catholic Eastern Church, and so to be integrally and inseparably incorporated with the Church of all the Russias.

2. To confer the general blessing of the most holy synod on the bishops and clergy in particular, with prayer of faith and love to the Supreme Bishop of our confession, Jesus Christ, that He would confirm them from above in the confession they have made, and that He would rightly direct the work of their ministry, to the perfecting of the saints.

3. That in the governing those flocks which are entrusted to them, they shall take as their fundamental guide the word of God, the canons of the Church, and the laws of the empire, and shall confirm the flocks entrusted to them in the same sentiments with those of the orthodox faith; and that they exhibit an apostolical indulgence to any differences in local customs which do not affect the doctrines or the sacraments, and bring back their people to the ancient uniformity by free persuasion, without violence, with gentleness and long-suffering.

This decree was signed by Seraphim, Metropolitan of Novogorod and St Petersburg, by Philaret of Kieff, Philaret of Moscow, and three prelates, besides two other ecclesiastics. It was confirmed March 25, 1839, by the Emperor’s own hand, with these words: “I thank God, and accept it.”—Mouravieffe, by Blackmore, Append, iv. p. 430.

PONT-AUDEMER (1279). [Concilium Pons-audemarense.] Held in 1279, by William de Flavecour, Archbishop of Rouen, who presided; twenty-four canons were published.

5. Recommends the observance of the Canon of Lateran (“omnis utriusque sexus”) upon confession and communion.

9. Forbids Christians to dwell with Jews.

10. Forbids the keeping of vigils and assemblies, and all dancing, in churches and churchyards.

16. Forbids rural deans to deliver any sentence or excommunication or suspension, unless in writing.

23. Forbids all those of the clergy who have taken the cross to abuse the privileges granted to them.—Tom. xi. Conc. p. 1144.

PONTYON (876). [Concilium Pontigonense.] Held in June and July, 876, by the Cisalpine bishops, the Emperor Charles the Bald, and the Roman legates being present. The pretensions of Ansegisus, Metropolitan of Sens, whom Pope John VIII., at the request of the emperor, had nominated Primate of France and Germany (in violation of the canons and of the rights of the metropolitans) were brought before the council, and so resolutely opposed by the bishops, that the affair, for the time, came to nothing. The acts of the synod of Pavia, in the beginning of the year, were confirmed. Fifty-two bishops and archbishops subscribed the acts, together with five abbots.—Tom. ix. Conc. p. 280.

PRAGUE (1346). [Concilium Pragense.] Held about the year 1346, by Ernest, first Archbishop of Prague; several regulations were drawn up.

1. Relates to the faith.

3. Relates to abuses arising from the use of rescripts from Rome.

8. Forbids to allow a strange priest to assist at communion without letters from his own bishop.

11. Opposes the pretension of the delegates of Rome, upon the subject of interdicts.

21 and 22. Relate to the private life and morals of the clergy.

23. Deprives those who do not reside upon their benefices.—Mansi, Tom. iii. coll. 543, &c.

PRAGUE (1408). By Subinco, Archbishop of Prague, to condemn the heresy of Wiclif, and forbid Jerome of Prague to preach.

PRESBURG (1309). [Concilium Posoniense.] Held November 10, 1309, by Cardinal Gentili de Montefiore, legate of the pope in Hungary. Nine canons of discipline were published, of which the eighth forbids Christian women to marry with infidels, heretics, or schismatics.—Tom. ix. Conc. p. 2453.