JLatimer, I think we know that Father John Romanides had a low view of the Frankish Church.
I never quite followed his train of thought.
Quite direct, Father: the Franks adopted the filioque, spread it, and then imposed it on Rome itself. They claimed to be crowned Emperor of the Romans, by the hand of the pontifex maximus at Rome by the power vested in him by the fraudulent Donation of Constantine, and claimed that the true heirs of Constantine and Emperors of the Romans were just "kings of the Greeks." And then the Franks tried to impose their views on the Empire of the Romans through the Crusades, culminating in the Frangokratia, a prelude to the Turkokratia, the sack of New Rome and the erection of a Latin Empire on top of it, along with the erection of usurping, schismatic and heretical Latin patriarchates on top of the Orthodox patriarchates of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem and Cyprus, to refashion them into the Vatican vision. Not much to view highly.
I think he is wrong to believe, as of course de Halleux proposed, that Chalcedon was a Cyrilline council.
Of course it wasn't a Cyrillian Council. Neither was Pope St. Cyril. He was Orthodox, as was it, as was Nicea I, Constantinople I, and Ephesus (I). The Ecumenical Council of Ephesus wasn't Cyrillian, anymore than Constantinople I was Gregorian, or Nicea I was Athanasian. The theology defended at Nicea I, Constantinople I and Ephesus was defended by Pope St. Athanasius, EP Gregory Nazianzus and Pope St. Cyril but it wasn't there own creation: it was, is, the Faith delivered once and for all to the saints, against which Arius, Macedonus and Nestorius promoted their own theology created by themselves or with others. Hence "Arian," "Macedonian" and "Nestorian." We are not Leonines, and you are not Dioscorians.
My view at present is that it was several different things all going on at the same time, with different actors and different agendas.
True enough, but that doesn't distinguish it from most, if not all, other Councils, whether Ecumenical, local, schismatic or heretical.
But I do not believe that it was meant by the Emperor, as a major player, to be a Cyrilline council
Of course not, for the reasons above. He meant it to be an Orthodox Council.
as he had invited Nestorius to attend and be reconciled to the Church.
Do we have some documentation to that effect, Father? Going to the Acts of Chalcedon
, I see no hint of any such thing. Instead, in the Council's acclamations of the Emperor and Empress, it is is explicitely said that "Pulcheria the New Helen...it is you who drove out Nestorius," which is true. Pope St. Leo wrote to the Emperor Marcian to call the Council saying, among other things "From the integrity of the Faith, veered...with...equal impiety Nestorius....utterly abomidable in [his] convictions, which in opposition to the pure light [he] drew from the polluted lakes of diabaolical falsity. Therefore, the earlier [i.e. Ecumenical Council/] Synod of Ephesus deservedly and justly condemned Nestorius, together with his doctrine:whoever persists in that error can have no hope of any remedy."http://books.google.com/books?id=6IUaOOT1G3UC&pg=PA100&dq=%22polluted+lakes+of+diabolical+falsity%22&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22polluted%20lakes%20of%20diabolical%20falsity%22&f=false
I am quite sure that Ibas did not view it as a Cyrilline council, nor Theodoret.
since it forced both of them to explicitely anathematize Nestorius, being told explicitely by the Fathers "Say 'anathema to Nestorius and all who hold his views'....Say publically 'anathema to Nestorius and his teachings, anathema to Nestorius and his friends" (when Theodoret hestitated "the most devout bishops exclaimed 'He is a heretic. He is a Nestorian. Drive out the heretic," until Theodoret said "anathema to Nestorius and to whoever does not say that the Holy Virgin Mary is Theotokos
") neither could, unless they were in deep denial or engaged in enough casuitry to put scholastic Jesuitry to shame, they view it as a Nestorian Council, crypto or blatant.
Given the unaminous reference to Pope St. Cyril by both sides of the Council, the frequent reference to "Cyril, now among the saints," including the first session (the only one that Pope Dioscoros attended) ending with "recognizing that the beliefs of our most divine and most pius master [Marcian] agree with....the two canonical letters of Cyril which were approved and published at the first Council of Ephesus, and does not depart from their Faith in any way," to EP Antatolius, Pope Disocoros' own representative to Constantinople and candidate for the throne of St. John Chrysostom, beginnig the approval of the Tome of Pope St. Leo by stating "the letter of the most sacred and God-beloved archbishop of Leo accords with....the proceedings of the Ecumenical and Holy Council of Ephesus umnder the blessed Cyril [now] among the saints, when it deposed the infamous Nestorius," Chalcedon was more "Cyrillian" than either Council of Ephesus.