8th and 9th Ecumenical Councils

Justin Kissel · Post by **Justin Kissel** » Sun 21 September 2003 12:34 am

Well I don't see that the number is particularly important. I remember one saint of our Church mentioning "four Ecumenical Councils" when there had already been five, and there are other such examples. The exact number isn't important, what is important is the doctrinal weight given. In a perfect world, then, I'd have no problem not calling the 8th and 9th council Ecumenical. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world, and we have Catholics (and even some Orthodox!) saying that the fall of the west caused the East to go into (essentially) a state of stagnation and forced upon us the inability to make any doctrinal/theological decisions, or articulate anew the revealed truth with the full power and authority of the Church. These councils squarely refute these types of assertions by their very existence and acceptance (by the Church Catholic, and God's saints). I think discussing these other councils--even apart from their important doctrinal subjects--helps demonstrate Orthodoxy's fulness and continuity.

Justin Kissel · Post by **Justin Kissel** » Sun 21 September 2003 2:24 am

Some other interesting things I found as I was surfing the net on this subject tonight.

I know how much some of you like Vladimir Moss, so...

For this reason, a Council convened at Constantinople in 867 by St Photios, and which included the archbishops of Treves, Cologne and Ravenna from the West, excommunicated and anathematised Nicolas. Two years later, however, a place revolution enabled another, "anti-Photian" council to be convened, at which the Council of 867 was annulled. Romanists have often counted this anti-Photian council as the Eighth Oecumenical -- not least, one suspects, because Pope Hadrian II demanded that all its members recognise him as "Sovereign Pontiff and Universal Pope."

But a much better claim to oecumenicity can be made for the Great Council convened at Constantinople in 879-80 by St Photios, at which 400 eastern bishops were present together with the legates of Pope John VIII, and which annulled, under the legates' signatures, the acts of the anti-Photian council. - Vladimir Moss, England, Rome and Constantinople, Part II: 865 to 1014

This timeline lists The Photian Council (880) and the Palamite Council (1333) as Ecumenical Councils.

There is what I think to be a very interesting article here.

Some more information.

OrthodoxyOrDeath · Mon 22 September 2003 9:57 am

Justin / Julianna,

I'm not sure if you covered it here since I have not had the time to read everything, but I have read in several places that Peter the Great during the Western reforms in Russia is the birth mother of the idea of 7 ecumenical councils since he was trying to foster warmer relations with the West. And anyone can see, the 8th and 9th ecumenical synods do not sit well with the Latins.

Of course for the ecumenist church, there are really only three ecumenical synods now.

http://ecclesiagoc.org/sections/history ... synods.htm

Justin Kissel · Post by **Justin Kissel** » Mon 22 September 2003 1:21 pm

I think I read somewhere that the (2nd) Council of Lyons in the 13th century tried to use 7 (and only 7) councils as a basis for unity, though obviously the views of this council are largely irrelevant. I'll have to do some research into Peter the Great... find out where and when exactly the belief entered into Orthodoxy.

Daniel · Post by **Daniel** » Mon 22 September 2003 4:07 pm

I'm in the middle of re-reading the History of the Council of Florence, and I don't think in there they mention any definate number of Ecumenical Councils and that was 1439.

Anastasios · Post by **Anastasios** » Wed 24 September 2003 10:02 am

If there were 9 ecumenical councils then every Orthodox Church would agree on the number. As it is they only accept 7. The Peter the Great number may or may not be true, but it's been several hundred years since him and if before the revolution they could restore the patriarchate if everyone thought we needed to accept 9 councils, then we would have them.

I am not against numbering the eighth and ninth councils ecumenical but I just don't see the consensus here. Here is an article by a Roman Catholic priest (the scholar Dvornik who rehabilitated St Photios in Roman minds) about the figuring of councils in east and west:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/tex ... ncils.html

I'm sure you'll find it interesting. I would be interested to see an Orthodox response to his methodology.

anastasios

Justin Kissel · Post by **Justin Kissel** » Wed 24 September 2003 1:25 pm

If there were 9 ecumenical councils then every Orthodox Church would agree on the number.

That sounds nice and logical, but it's not true. Someone could just as easily say "if there was a canon of the Bible that we were suppose to use then every Orthodox Church would agree on it". Of course, that some Greeks might have different views than some Russians on this scriptural book or that doesn't mean that the whole thing should be thrown out. Just because everyone does not recognize the (so-called) Apocryphal books as on the same level as the rest of scripture (just because there is not a 100% consensus), that doesn't mean we can't use those books authoritatively or call them part of scripture. Ecumenical Councils often took decades--and sometimes centuries--to finally realise victory and full acceptance. Some of the individual canons of councils took as long as a thousand years to being accepted by everyone, if I recall correctly.

As to why we didn't "change back to a more acceptable belief regarding councils" if indeed there are more than 7, one could ask the same thing of other issues. Why do we still speak of 7 sacraments, for example? Beats me.