Honorius didn't issue any dogmatic definitions or ex cathedra teachings that were heretical, so for all the overwrought information flood here, nothing about the life or anathematization of Honorius is relevant to the question of Papal Infallibility.
When I get the time or chance (I missed one a week ago, I by chance came across some pope's bull that made the statements I'll be talking about-) I'll post the oft repeated statements of the popes and Councils, in bulls, definitions, (IIRC) canons, that to remain silent in the face of heresy is to profess the heresy.
However, it should also be noted that in receiving the council in the west, Pope Saint Leo II utilized his unique papal prerogatives to amend and further define[/quote]
LOL. It always amuses me how ultramontanists make such claims for Rome in utter oblivion of the rest of the Church, both in that these "unique papal prerogatives" aren't unique (Pope St. Cyril of Alexandria reached an understanding with Patriarch John of Antioch after the Council of Ephesus; cf. also the exagerated claims made for the signature of EP St. John on the Formula of Hormisdas with no mention that EP St. John ammended it first, further defining Constantinople as the equal of Old Rome), and often the case when Rome exercised them it was ignored (that Pope Leo contradicted the degree of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church at Constatninople I and Chalcedon made no impression on the Church). Which such magical thinking, where results and reality count for nothing, they should seek employment in political campaigns (if I was more detailed, we would end up in politics).
In the Legion of Mary account of the Sixth Councilhttp://www.legionofmarytidewater.com/faith/ECUM06.HTM
there is no mention of any "amendment": the Council finished its business, issued the Definition of Faith, and adjurned before Pope Leo II was consecrated.
The doctrinal conclusions of the council were defined in the 17th session and promulgated in the 18th and last session on 16 September 681. The acts of the council, signed both by 174 fathers and finally by the emperor himself, were sent to Pope Leo II, who had succeeded Agatho, and he, when he had approved them, ordered them to be translated into Latin and to be signed by all the bishops of the west. Constantine IV, however, promulgated the decrees of the council in all parts of the empire by imperial edict.
the rulings of the council after it had closed, making it clear that Honorius' condemnation extended only as far as Honorius had failed to teach against the monothelites as forcefully as he should have.
Maybe in his personal opinion, or are you claiming it was an "ex cathedra" statement?
The Sixth Ecumenical Council was much more forceful, saying "To the heretic Honorius, anathema!". However, Leo overrode the council
Pope Leo had no authority to override the Council, particularly since it was convened and closed nearly a year before he was consecrated and nearly before he was elected. (though he are free to contradict yourself on Pope Adrian V again).
The most important act accomplished by Leo in his short pontificate was his confirmation of the acts of the Sixth Oecumenical Council (680-1). This council had been held in Constantinople against the Monothelites, and had been presided over by the legates of Pope Agatho. After Leo had notified the emperor that the decrees of the council had been confirmed by him, he proceeded to make them known to the nations of the West. The letters which he sent for this end to the king and to the bishops and nobles of Spain have come down to us. In them he explained what the council had effected, and he called upon the bishops to subscribe to its decrees. At the same time he was at pains to make it clear that in condemning his predecessor Honorius I, he did so, not because he taught heresy, but because he was not active enough in opposing it. In accordance with the papal mandate, a synod was held at Toledo (684) in which the Council of Constantinople was accepted.
The Council of Constantinople does not depend on Toledo, birthplace of heresy.
No issue was made of this in the east.
LOL. Not much on geography, eh? Toledo is in the West.
It was the unique prerogative of Leo, as Bishop of Rome, to attach amendments to the rulings of even an ecumenical council of the Church.
So you claim. Sort of like the British monarchs claiming to be the rulers of France.
Btw, do you have a copy of those letters to Spain, perhaps in the same file with the Donation of Constantine and Pope Isodore's decretals?