www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology The Ecumenical Councils: Are there 21 or only 7?

Recently, I was browsing through this site. I found that in the old page for "Faith and Worship" there was a section that said "The Seven Ecumenical Councils," and then at the bottom it says "The General Councils in the West." What's that about? Is this making the other councils from Contantinople IV to Vatican II inferior?

May God bless you.

The reasoning is that councils after the first seven cannot fairly be described as "Ecumenical" as the Church was divided and the East was not adequately represented; there were Eastern Catholics present at many, to be sure, but whole patriarchates were missing.
However, if you are a Catholic the "General Councils of the West" still would carry more weight than a merely local council in light of the Papal endorsement of their teachings.
However there must be a distinction made between dogma and the particular expression of that dogma, which would reflect Western intellectual habits and devotional tradition....
-Daniel
ps: Welcome to the forum!

Here's a good article by Francis Dvornik on this topic:

Which Councils are Ecumenical? [orthodoxchristianity.net]

From the point of view of the Catholic Church, there have been 21 Ecumenical Councils.

From the point of the Orthodox, generally there have been only 7 Ecumenical Councils. Some Orthodox say there is an 8th and others say there is also a 9th.

Not surprisingly, their number and which version to follow are a gnawing problem for the Eastern Catholics.

Amado

I'm still confused. I thought that the Eastern Rites were required to accept the Councils from Constantinople IV to Vatican II as Ecumenical. It seems that the rejection of these councils as Ecumenical would mean that they're fallible and thus no need to believe in certain doctrines.

There is not an officially promulgated list of Councils by neither Bishops nor Councils; therefore I think it is somewhat incorrect to say the Catholic Church claims 21 Ecumenical Councils.

You�re mixing apples and oranges (or pirohi and holupki!).

The �ecumenical� status of councils does not necessarily have anything to do with its teaching authority. The fact that the Eastern Catholic Churches place the Seven Ecumenical Councils on a much higher pedestal than the later �General Councils in the West� (to use Pope Paul VI�s term for them) cannot be equated to a rejection of the teaching authority of these later councils. Fallibility or infallibility has nothing to do with ecumenical status.

Rome has no official list of which councils are ecumenical and which are not. Such lists that one sees in history and theology books often differ and have no real official standing. Even Rome itself uses the term �ecumenical� to mean differing things at different points in history.

A very poor but perhaps easily understandable non-theological parallel would be to consider the higher pedestal we Americans historically place on the �Bill of Rights� (the first ten amendments to the Constitution). They are qualitatively different than the later amendments. Yet the later amendments are no less valid because we place the Bill of Rights on a higher level. But these later amendments are built upon the earlier amendments (and really could not have happened without them). Likewise, the later councils are no less valid. Yet we in a special way acknowledge the firm foundation the Church gave to us in the Seven Ecumenical Councils. We have yet to designate any special day on the liturgical calendar to commemorate the fathers of these later Councils.

The point that the list currently on offer from Roman Catholic sources is an unofficial one is quite true.

The Church, East, West or in combination, has never specifically taught that Ecumenical Councils or General Councils are infallible.

Incognitus

The way I see it is that even a council that is General can be considered an Ecumenical Council. Here's what certain councils say:


"In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit. Amen. In the year of our Lord's nativity one thousand etc., I, N., elected pope, with both heart and mouth confess and profess to almighty God, whose church I undertake with his assistance to govern, and to blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, that as long as I am in this fragile life I will firmly believe and hold the catholic faith, according to the traditions of the apostles, of the general councils and of other holy fathers, especially of the eight holy universal councils-namely the first at

Nicaea, the second at
Constantinople, the third at
Ephesus, the fourth at
Chalcedon, the fifth and sixth at
Constantinople, the seventh at
Nicaea, and the eighth at
Constantinople--as well as of the general councils at the
Lateran,
Lyons and
Vienne,

-Council of Constance

"For behold, western and eastern fathers after a very long period of disagreement and discord, submitting themselves to the perils of sea and land and having endured labours of all kinds, came together in this holy ecumenical council, joyful and eager in their desire for this most holy union and to restore intact the ancient love." -Council of Florence (Session 6)

"For these and other just and necessary reasons which are stated in full in the decree of translation, with the advice of our venerable brothers the cardinals of the holy Roman church, and with the approval of very many venerable brothers and sons, archbishops, bishops, elected persons, abbots and other prelates of churches, masters and doctors, we transferred the aforesaid council of Basel to this city of Ferrara, where we established with the Lord's help an ecumenical council of the western and the eastern church." -Council of Florence (Session 7)

"We decree and declare, with the approval of this same sacred council, that this sacred ecumenical council, justly, reasonably, and for true and lawful purposes duly and rightly summoned, has begun to be celebrated, and that each and every thing which has been and shall be done and executed in it, will be just, reasonable, settled and valid, and that it possesses and holds the same strength, power, authority and stability which other general councils approved by the sacred canons, especially the Lateran council, possess and hold. -Lateran V (Session 2)

The above quote from Lateran V, shows that the preceding general councils (especially the previous Lateran councils) have the same authority and infallibility as an ecumenical council. This is why it is tradition of the Roman Church that those other General Councils also be Ecumenical. That's why theologians list all of those General Councils as Ecumenical.

"Our predecessor of happy memory, pope Julius II, since he was concerned about the well-being of the faithful and anxious to protect it, had summoned the ecumenical Lateran council for many other reasons indeed, but also because a constant complaint was being pressed concerning the officials of the Roman curia." -Lateran V (Session 8; Bull of Reform)

So what about all the councils (like the ones I've quoted) that called themselves as Ecumenical and/or Universal? They're still going to be labeled "General Councils in the West"? I can keep going on quoting instances in other councils where they called the council Ecumenical or Universal. However, it's too much work.

Ah, might as well post some more examples:

"The holy, great and universal synod, which was assembled by God's will and the favour of our divinely approved emperors Basil and Constantine, the holy friends of Christ, in this royal and divinely protected city and in the most famous church bearing the name of holy and great Wisdom, declared the following." -Contantinople 4

"Whereas the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has, from the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, taught, in sacred councils, and very recently in this oecumenical Synod, that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls there detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful..." -Council of Trent (Session 25)

"This we shall do
with the bishops of the whole world as our co-assessors and fellow-judges, gathered here as they are in the holy Spirit by our authority in this ecumenical council, and
relying on the word of God" -Vatican 1 (Session 3)

With all due respect, the Church does not take its guidance from you. What you personally believe matters not at all to us. We know the mind of the Church on these issues. We live it on a daily basis as Eastern Catholics. You really ought not to be so arrogant as to suggest that you know better then the Church itself on these issues.

If you have come here to learn about the Eastern Churches you are most welcome to stay, reading and asking questions.

If you have come to judge us with a measuring stick that you have invented yourself, one that is not of the Church, then I must ask you to go away. Those with only a surface knowledge of Catholicism should not presume to teach us the faith we actually live on a daily basis.

I highly recommend that you study the teachings of the Church on these matters, starting with the teachings of Pope John Paul the Great. If you pray over them you�ll find that your arrogance will be replaced with understanding. You might start by understanding that �ecumenical� has different shades of meaning depending on how it is used and over time. To learn a bit about the different ways the Church applies the term �ecumenical� check out the letter of Pope Paul VI to Cardinal Willebrands in October 1974. You can find it in the �Information Service� of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, n. 25 (1974/III) pages 8-10. If you�re at a library while researching this you might also look at the text of the homily preached by Cardinal Willebrands for the 700th Anniversary of the Second Council of Lyons which directly follows. Both give excellent and clear summaries of how the Seven Ecumenical Councils are in a category that is different than those that followed.

Again, the question you have raised is not one of the validity of the later Councils. It is one of categorizing them, of putting the Seven Ecumenical Councils on a very high pedestal of authority and honor because they gave us the bulk of the foundation of the Church�s theology.

With all due respect Moderator, I don't believe Roman Army should be so hastily labeled "arrogant". He has posted four posts here. He seems willing to learn, cut him some slack and let him continue to offer questions and/or comments.

I am deeply offended. I was just presenting my understanding and my confusion of the issue. I have never seen in any Catholic Site a such thing as 7 Ecumenical Councils and then "General Councils of the West." I have always seen "The 21 Ecumenical Councils" only. I'm trying to understand that's all. Jesus Christ, peace please!

Lets all just relax here, Admin...I don't think he was near as obnoxious as alot of people that post. Roman it is hard to explain the council relationship to those in the Latin West (I should know I'm switching from West to East) but they are huge in the East. THe First Seven are signifigant because they represent a fully present West and a FULLY PRESENT EAST. Since the schism the east is not fully present in the Catholic Church, some of us are here but most of us are still seperate and this seperation is a lot more noticable to Eastern Catholics than Western. Well thats my two cents.


Chris

P.S. Some of your quotes Roman come from Western Patriarchs talking on behlf of the East and West and that really is annoying. It would be like the Bishop of Orlando speaking on behalf of the Church in England.

Chris