sions nevertheless, under the presidency of Hosius, Bishop of Cordova.
The Council of Sardica was neither convoked nor presided over by the Bishop of Rome. Nor was Hosius there as his legate, as some say, without being able to prove it; nor were his delegates treated with any particular honour.
In his letter, written to the Eastern bishops, in the name of the Roman council,[1] Julius had blamed them for having judged Athanasius and the other bishops, who adhered to the Nicene Creed, without regard to the custom which had obtained, of deciding nothing in the East, without referring to the Apostolic See of the West, "Are you ignorant," he said, "that it is the custom to write first to us?"[2]
The Council of Sardica strengthened that custom by its third canon, which was proposed in these terms by Hosias: "If two bishops of the same province have a discussion, neither of them shall choose as umpire a bishop of another province. If a bishop who has been condemned is so certain of his being right, that he is willing: to be judged again in council — let us honor, if you find it well to do so, the memory of the Apostle St. Peter: let those who have examined the cause write to Julius, Bishop of Rome: if he think well that the case have a rehearing, let him designate the judges; if he think there be no necessity for reviewing, his decision shall be final."
This proposition was approved by the council, and the Bishop Gaudentius added, (canon 4th,) that during the appeal, no bishop should be appointed to the place of the one deposed, until the Bishop of Rome should judge the case.
The council (Can. 5th, Greek — 7th Latin) prescribed the practice of these appeals to Rome.
