INNOCENZO I, POPE, saint. — According to the Liber Pontificalis, he was a native of Albano and succeeded Pope Anastasius I in 401. His pontificate fell in a very critical period for the Western Empire, owing to the incursions of the barbarians. Rome itself, besieged for three years, was occupied by Alaric’s hordes on 24 August 410. I. was spared the sight of the devastation, since he had gone to Ravenna with an embassy from the Senate to implore aid and instructions. His activity as supreme pastor, and his affirmation of the primacy and privileged authority of Rome in the universal Church, make I. the Pope who, together with Leo I, contributed most to the theoretical and practical development of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome. One may perhaps find a reason for this in the political crisis: seeing the impending disintegration of the Empire, I. wished to strengthen the ecclesiastical structure and reaffirm the unity of the Church under the successor of Peter.
One must first consider his activity in the affairs of the Western Church. The bishops of Italy, Gaul, and Spain requested from I. directives concerning various aspects of ecclesiastical life: the liturgy, the Sacraments, persons to be admitted to Holy Orders, the celibacy of the clergy, the canon of Sacred Scripture, and ecclesiastical litigation. I. answered them all, as is attested by the letters to Vittricius of Rouen, to Exsuperius of Toulouse, to the Spanish bishops who took part in the Council of Toledo, to Decentius of Gubbio, to three bishops of Apulia, and others. He does not limit himself to indicating the solution of the cases submitted to him, but proposes the practices of the Roman Church as a model, demanding that everyone conform to them: “what has been taught to the Roman Church by the Prince of the Apostles and is observed there must be followed by all” (Epist. to Decentius of Gubbio), and he justifies this command by the fact—though not entirely corresponding to the truth—that all the Churches of the West were founded by envoys of St Peter and his successors. Likewise, while recognizing the competence of provincial councils in ecclesiastical cases, he requires that Rome’s prerogative to receive appeals be safeguarded; indeed, he demands that the most important cases, after the judgment of the bishops, be referred to the Apostolic See.
Closely connected with the activity undertaken to affirm the primacy in the West was that carried out in Illyricum. His predecessors, beginning with Damasus, had established close relations with the metropolitan of Thessalonica and granted him special powers. From the beginning of his pontificate, I. confirmed this right; then, in 412, he created the vicariate of Thessalonica, appointing Bishop Rufus his vicar with special prerogatives over all the metropolitans of the prefecture of Illyricum. By this means he affirmed the rights of the Apostolic See over those regions and at the same time diverted the Bishop of Thessalonica from looking toward Constantinople.
The misfortune of St John Chrysostom required his intervention in the East. To the initial reports from Chrysostom and his supporters, and from Theophilus of Alexandria, he replied that he maintained communion with both parties and proposed that the matter be examined in a Council of Easterners and Westerners. Then, having been informed by new envoys from John’s party and by those of Theophilus, who brought the Acts of the Council of the Oak, of the grave injustices that had been perpetrated, he convened a Synod at which the convocation of a Council at Thessalonica was decided. He informed the emperor Honorius of this and urged him to communicate the decision to Arcadius in a letter carried by Western and Eastern bishops. The embassy produced no result: when the bishops reached Eastern territory, they were imprisoned, their letter was taken from them, the Westerners were sent back, and the Easterners were exiled. I. then excluded John’s enemies from his communion and wrote several letters of consolation to John. After John’s death, he made the inscription of his name in the diptychs a condition for the restoration of communion.
I.’s pontificate is finally important because of the condemnation of Pelagianism. The rehabilitation obtained by Pelagius at the Synod of Diospolis (415) deeply affected the African bishops. In the summer of 416 they held two Councils, at Carthage and Milevis, in which they confirmed the sentence pronounced at the Carthaginian Synod of 411 against the Pelagian errors and their authors. To lend greater force to their judgment, they appealed to the Pope in three urgent letters, asking him to condemn the errors by his apostolic authority. On 27 January 417 I. replied with an equal number of letters in which, while adopting the judgment of the Africans and excommunicating Pelagius and Caelestius by virtue of his apostolic authority until they repented, he praised the Africans for having turned to the Apostolic See, from which “as from a source answers flow to those who make requests.” For “especially when the faith is at issue, this is what I think: all the bishops, our brothers and colleagues, ought to turn only to Peter, the author of their name and dignity, as your affection has recently done” (Epist., 30, to the Council of Milevis). The letters filled the Africans with joy, so that Augustine, in a discourse delivered at Carthage on 23 September 417, could exclaim: “The decrees of two Councils concerning this matter have been sent to the Apostolic See; from there the rescripts came. The case is finished. Would that the error might also come to an end” (Serm., 131, 10). But I. had already died on 12 March. The Church venerates him as a saint and celebrates his feast on 28 July.