OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 17, 2014, 01:55:02 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Quinisext Council - accepted by Rome or not?  (Read 1065 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« on: March 15, 2010, 09:34:57 AM »

Did Rome accept the Quinisext Council via the Seventh Ecumenical Council?
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2010, 09:43:09 AM »

Did Rome accept the Quinisext Council via the Seventh Ecumenical Council?

No.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2010, 11:44:21 AM »

No.

Can you elaborate on that, please? Smiley I had a chance to see different opinions on that matter.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,590



« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2010, 12:27:38 PM »

Did Rome accept the Quinisext Council via the Seventh Ecumenical Council?

No.

Yes.
Quote
The Archbishop of Gortyna in Crete added to his signature the phrase “Holding the place of the holy Church of Rome in every synod.”  He had in the same way signed the decrees of III. Constantinople, Crete belonging to the Roman Patriarchate; as to whether his delegation on the part of the Roman Synod continued or was merely made to continue by his own volition we have no information.  The ridiculous blunder of Balsamon must be noted here, who asserts that the bishops whose names are missing and for which blank places were left, had actually signed.

Pope Sergius refused to sign the decrees when they were sent to him, rejected them as “lacking authority” (invalidi) and described them as containing “novel errors.”  With the efforts to extort his signature we have no concern further than to state that they signally failed.  Later on, in the time of Pope Constantine, a middle course seems to have been adopted, a course subsequently in the ninth century thus expressed by Pope John VIII., “he accepted all those canons which did not contradict the true faith, good morals, and the decrees of Rome,” a truly notable statement!  Nearly a century later Pope Hadrian I. distinctly recognizes all the Trullan decrees in his letter to Tenasius of Constantinople and attributes them to the Sixth Synod.  “All the holy six synods I receive with all their canons, which rightly and divinely were promulgated by them, among which is contained that in which reference is made to a Lamb being pointed to by the Precursor as being found in certain of the venerable images.”  Here the reference is unmistakably to the Trullan Canon LXXXII....Thus far Hefele, but it seems that Gratian’s statement on the subject in the Decretum should not be omitted here.  (Pars I. Dist. XVI., c. v.)

“Canon V.  The Sixth Synod is confirmed by the authority of Hadrian.

“I receive the Sixth Synod with all its canons.

“Gratian.  There is a doubt whether it set forth canons but this is easily removed by examining the fourth session of the VIIth [VIth by mistake, vide Roman Correctors’ note] Synod.

“For Peter the Bp. of Nicomedia says:

“C. VI. The Sixth Synod wrote canons.

“I have a book containing the canons of the holy Sixth Synod.  The Patriarch said:  § 1. Some are scandalized through their ignorance of these canons, saying:  Did the Sixth Synod make any canons?  Let them know then that the Sixth Holy Synod was gathered together under Constantine against those who said there is one operation and one will in Christ, in which the holy Fathers anathematized these as heretics and explained the orthodox faith.

“II. Pars § 2. And the synod was dissolved in the XIVth year of Constantine.  After four or five years the same holy Fathers met together under Justinian, the son of Constantine, and promulgated the aforementioned canons, of which let no one have any doubt.  For they who under Constantine were in synod, these same bishops under Justinian subscribed to all these canons.  For it was fitting that a Universal Synod should promulgate ecclesiastical canons.  Item:  § 3. The Holy Sixth Synod after it promulgated its definition against the Monothelites, the emperor Constantine who had summoned it, dying soon after, and Justinian his son reigning in his stead, the same holy synod divinely inspired again met at Constantinople four or five years afterwards, and promulgated one hundred and two canons for the correction of the Church.

“Gratian.  From this therefore it may be gathered that the Sixth Synod was twice assembled:  the first time under Constantine and then passed no canons; the second time under Justinian his son, and promulgated the aforesaid canons.”

Upon this passage of Gratian’s the Roman Correctors have a long and interesting note, with quotations from Anastasius, which should be read with care by the student but is too long to cite here....save its acceptance of the dogmatic decisions of the six Ecumenical Councils, which is contained in the first canon, this council had an exclusively disciplinary character; and consequently if it should be admitted by the particular churches, these would always remain, on account of their autonomy, judges of the fitness or non-suitability of the practical application of these decisions.

2.  That the Easterns have never pretended to impose this code upon the practice of the Western Churches, especially as they themselves do not practise everywhere the hundred and two canons mentioned.  All they wished to do was to maintain the ancient discipline against the abuses and evil innovations of the Roman Church, and to make her pause upon the dangerous course in which she was already beginning to enter.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.ii.html

Rome accepted the canons of the Seventh Council, the first of which states:
Quote
The pattern for those who have received the sacerdotal dignity is found in the testimonies and instructions laid down in the canonical constitutions, which we receiving with a glad mind, sing unto the Lord God in the words of the God-inspired David, saying:  “I have had as great delight in the way of thy testimonies as in all manner of riches.”  “Thou hast commanded righteousness as thy testimonies for ever.”  “Grant me understanding and I shall live.”  Now if the word of prophesy bids us keep the testimonies of God forever and to live by them, it is evident that they must abide unshaken and without change.  Therefore Moses, the prophet of God, speaketh after this manner:  “To them nothing is to be added, and from them nothing is to be taken away.”  And the divine Apostle glorying in them cries out, “which things the angels desire to look into,” and, “if an angel preach to you anything besides that which ye have received, let him be anathema.”  Seeing these things are so, being thus well-testified unto us, we rejoice over them as he that hath found great spoil, and press to our bosom with gladness the divine canons, holding fast all the precepts of the same, complete and without change, whether they have been set forth by the holy trumpets of the Spirit, the renowned Apostles, or by the Six Ecumenical Councils, or by Councils locally assembled for promulgating the decrees of the said Ecumenical Councils, or by our holy Fathers.  For all these, being illumined by the same Spirit, defined such things as were expedient.  Accordingly those whom they placed under anathema, we likewise anathematize; those whom they deposed, we also depose; those whom they excommunicated, we also excommunicate; and those whom they delivered over to punishment, we subject to the same penalty.  And now “let your conversation be without covetousness,” crieth out Paul the divine Apostle, who was caught up into the third heaven and heard unspeakable words.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xvi.xiv.i.html
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2010, 12:44:57 PM »

Can you elaborate on that, please? Smiley I had a chance to see different opinions on that matter.

I suppose everything depends on whom you ask, and what you mean by "Did Rome accept the Quinisext Council via the Seventh Ecumenical Council?"

If you mean "did they in actual practice," then the answer is no. The Quinisext canons are not part of RC canonical corpus. End of story. For the average practicing RC canonist, they are a mere footnote. When Holy Cross had its big symposium on Quinisext, the Roman Catholic participant, an eminent canonist and scholar, had to prepare himself for the conference by reading the text of the canons for the first time.

If you mean "does the wording of Canon I of Nicaea II mean that Rome used to accept them," the answer is less clear. Canon I also states that everyone must accept the Apostolic Canons. However, there were various versions of the Apostolic Canons, and Rome's collection was substantially shorter than the Eastern one. So, has the East agreed to jettison some of the Apostolic Canons via Canon I, or has Rome agreed to add some? Neither, in reality. Local churches accept or reject or interpret canons like this as it suits them.

In the current day, if you check the Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta, it doesn't even bother to print the Quinisext canons, preferring just to say they "have been regarded as decrees of an ecumenical council in eastern canon law; their approval by the pope is disputed." Hardly a mention.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2010, 03:47:32 PM »

Rome accepted the canons of the Seventh Council, the first of which states:
Quote
. . .Seeing these things are so, being thus well-testified unto us, we rejoice over them as he that hath found great spoil, and press to our bosom with gladness the divine canons, holding fast all the precepts of the same, complete and without change . . . set forth by . . . by the Six Ecumenical Councils. . .
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xvi.xiv.i.html

I get it - since the 5th and the 6th Councils left no canons, then when the fathers of the 7th Council were talking about the canons of the Six Ecumenical Councils, they must have had in mind also those of the Council in Trullo (a.k.a. Quinisext Council = 5th/6th Council), right?
Logged
Michał
['mi:hɑʊ]
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic (again!)
Jurisdiction: the Latin Church
Posts: 824


"Mother of God, Virgin, by God glorified Mary..."


« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2010, 03:47:45 PM »

If you mean "does the wording of Canon I of Nicaea II mean that Rome used to accept them,". . .

Yes, that's what my question was about.

Canon I also states that everyone must accept the Apostolic Canons. However, there were various versions of the Apostolic Canons, and Rome's collection was substantially shorter than the Eastern one. So, has the East agreed to jettison some of the Apostolic Canons via Canon I, or has Rome agreed to add some?

Rather the latter, because if Rome (via Canon I) accepted the Council in Trullo, it must have accepted also the longer version of the Apostolic Canons:
Quote
In the latter half of the sixth century, John of Antioch (Joannes Scholasticus), Patriarch of Constantinople from 565 to 577, published a collection of synodal decrees in which he included these eighty-five canons, and this number was finally consecrated for the Greek Church by the Trullan or Quinisext Council of 692. . .
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canons_of_the_Apostles

In the current day, if you check the Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta, it doesn't even bother to print the Quinisext canons, preferring just to say they "have been regarded as decrees of an ecumenical council in eastern canon law; their approval by the pope is disputed."

Well, pope Hadrian I approved them:
Quote
. . .Pope Hadrian I. distinctly recognizes all the Trullan decrees in his letter to Tenasius of Constantinople and attributes them to the Sixth Synod.  “All the holy six synods I receive with all their canons, which rightly and divinely were promulgated by them, among which is contained that in which reference is made to a Lamb being pointed to by the Precursor as being found in certain of the venerable images.”  Here the reference is unmistakably to the Trullan Canon LXXXII.
Source: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.ii.html
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #7 on: March 16, 2010, 02:28:22 PM »

Rather the latter, because if Rome (via Canon I) accepted the Council in Trullo, it must have accepted also the longer version of the Apostolic Canons:
Quote
In the latter half of the sixth century, John of Antioch (Joannes Scholasticus), Patriarch of Constantinople from 565 to 577, published a collection of synodal decrees in which he included these eighty-five canons, and this number was finally consecrated for the Greek Church by the Trullan or Quinisext Council of 692. . .

 Grin But they didn't accept the longer form. They didn't even know there was a longer form. You have to revise your understanding of "acceptance." In the late antique world, acceptance of a council was something that typically happened over generations, especially after Justinian I. It was uneven and inconsistent. Some areas might not even know about it for 100s of years.

Even in that section ialmisry quoted from Schaff -- which is a very limited summary on the matter -- such is manifestly clear. For at least 100 years, the Popes vigorously objected to Quinisext. They did not accept it. Sergius said he would rather die than sign such drivel -- and then threw his copy of the Quinisext canons in the garbage. Then, after several generations, when it didn't really matter anyway, the Popes of Rome charted a more irenic course because they had far bigger political fish to fry with the East. Even then, though, they accepted them only insofar as they "did not contradict the true faith, good morals, and the decrees of Rome." That's like a Lucretian saying: "I accept the Christian faith insofar as it doesn't contradict my materialist principles." It's not unlike what Roman canonists say today: We accept that they are good and holy for you.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 02:30:07 PM by pensateomnia » Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,590



« Reply #8 on: March 16, 2010, 04:22:34 PM »

Rome accepted the canons of the Seventh Council, the first of which states:
Quote
. . .Seeing these things are so, being thus well-testified unto us, we rejoice over them as he that hath found great spoil, and press to our bosom with gladness the divine canons, holding fast all the precepts of the same, complete and without change . . . set forth by . . . by the Six Ecumenical Councils. . .
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xvi.xiv.i.html

I get it - since the 5th and the 6th Councils left no canons, then when the fathers of the 7th Council were talking about the canons of the Six Ecumenical Councils, they must have had in mind also those of the Council in Trullo (a.k.a. Quinisext Council = 5th/6th Council), right?
Yes.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #9 on: July 24, 2010, 01:49:17 AM »

The information posted by Pensateomnia is faily convincing that the ancient and holy Patriarchate of Rome did not accept the Quinisext during the first millennium and that the modern Catholic Church does not accept them in the second millennium.

It occurs to me that most Roman Catholic dioceses have a "priest-canonist" and it is possible to write to them and enquire as to the status of the Quinisext.

If we are all too shy maybe Mary or Irish Melkite or Papist would do the honours.....
« Last Edit: July 24, 2010, 01:50:17 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Tags: Quinisext 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.069 seconds with 37 queries.