against the Monophysitism of the East, rejected the Henoticon of the emperor Zeno, as an unwarrantable intrusion of a layman in matters of faith, and ventured even the excommunication of the bishop Acacius of Constantinople. Acacius replied with a counter anathema, with the support of the other Eastern patriarchs ; and the schism between the two churches lasted over thirty yeare, to the pontificate of Hormisdas. Gelasius I. (492-496) clearly announced the principle, that the priestly power is above the kingly and the imperial, and that from the decisions of the chair of Peter there is no appeal. Yet from this pope we have, on the other hand, a remarkable testimony against what he pronounces the " sacrilege " of with- holding the cup from the laity, the corn/munio sub una specie. Anastasius II. (496-498) indulged in a milder tone toward Constantinople, and incurred the suspicion of consent to its heresy.'' His sudden death was followed by a contested papal elec- tion, which led to bloody encounters. The Ostrogothic king Theodoric (tlie Dietrich of Bern in the Niehelungenlied), the conqueror and master of Italy (493-526), and, like Odoacer, an Arian, was called into consultation in this contest, and gave his voice for Stmmachus against Laurentius, because Symma- chus had received the majority of votes, and had been conse- crated first. But the party of Laurentius, not satisfied with this, raised against Symmachus the reproach of gross iniquities, even of adultery and of squandering the church estates. The bloody scenes were renowned, priests were murdered, cloisters were burned, and nuns were insulted. Theodoric, being again ' This was the fifth (al. fourth) council under Symmachus, held in Nov. 502, therefore later than the synodus palmaris. Comp. Hefele, ii. p. 625 sq. ^ Dante puts him in hell, and Baronius ascribes bis sudden death to an evident judgment of God, § 64. THE PAPACY FKOM LEO I. TO GREGORY I. 325 called upon by the senate for a decision, summoned a council at Rome, to which Symmachus gave his consent ; and a synod, convoked by a heretical king, must decide upon the pope! In the course of the controversy several councils were held in rapid succession, the chronology of which is disputed.' The most important was the sy nodus palmaris^ the fourth council under Symmachns, held in October, 501. It acquitted this pope without investigation, on the presumption that it did not behove the council to pass judgment respecting the successor of St. Peter. In his vindication of this comieil — for the oppo- sition was not satisfied with it — the deacon Ennodius, after- ward bishop of Pavia (f 521), gave the first clear expression to the absolutism upon which Leo had already acted : that the Roman bishop is above every human tribunal, and is re- sponsible only to God himself.' JSTevertheless, even in the middle age, popes were deposed and set up by emperors and general councils. This is one of the points of dispute between the absolute