Part 77 (2/2)
The holy council said: After we had reconsidered, according to our promise made to your highness,(305) the doctrinal letter written by Sergius, at one time patriarch of this royal G.o.d-preserved city, to Cyrus, who was then bishop of Phasis, and to Honorius, sometime Pope of Old Rome, as well as the letter of the latter to the same Sergius, and finding that the doc.u.ments are quite foreign to the apostolic dogmas, to the definitions of the holy councils, and to all the approved Fathers, and that they follow the false teachings of the heretics, we entirely reject them, and execrate them as hurtful to the soul.
But the names of those men whom we execrate must also be thrust forth from the holy Church of G.o.d, namely, that of Sergius, sometime bishop of this G.o.d-preserved royal city, who was the first to write on this impious doctrine; also that of Cyrus of Alexandria, of Pyrrhus, Paul, and Peter, who died bishops of this G.o.d-preserved city, and were like-minded with them; and that of Theodore, sometime bishop of Pharan, all of whom the most holy and thrice-blessed Agatho, Pope of Old Rome, in his suggestion to our most pious and G.o.d-preserved lord and mighty Emperor, rejected because they were minded contrary to our orthodox faith, all of whom we declare are subject to anathema. And with these we decree that there shall be expelled from the holy Church of G.o.d and anathematized Honorius, who was Pope of Old Rome, because of what we found written by him to Sergius, that in all respects he followed his view and confirmed his impious doctrine.
We have also examined the synodal letter(306) of Sophronius, of holy memory, sometime patriarch of the holy city of our G.o.d, Jerusalem, and have found it in accordance with the true faith and with apostolic teachings, and with the teachings of the holy and approved Fathers.
Therefore, we have received it as orthodox and salutary to the holy and Catholic and Apostolic Church, and have decreed that it is right that his name be inserted in the diptychs of the holy churches.
108. Rome, Constantinople, and the Lombard State Church in the Seventh Century
The Sixth General Council was the last great diplomatic triumph of Rome in the East in matters of faith, though two centuries after, in the matter of Photius, Rome played a brilliant part in the internal affairs of the Eastern Church. Immediately after the council of 681, it was felt that the West, of which the Greeks had grown very jealous, had triumphed over the East, especially as several of the leading patriarchs had been condemned.
Monotheletism, furthermore, was too strongly intrenched in the East to be removed by a single conciliar action. It was felt necessary to take action to confirm the results of Constantinople in 681. The fifth and sixth general councils had been occupied entirely with doctrinal matters and had not issued any disciplinary canons. A new council might be gathered to complete the work of the Sixth General Council, not only to reaffirm it, but in connection with some much-needed legislation to retort upon the West by condemning some Roman practices. In this way the Second Trullan Council, or Concilium Quinis.e.xtum, came about in 692. The Roman see, in the meanwhile, although it had triumphed at Constantinople in 681, did not enjoy an independent political position in Italy. It was still under the Roman Emperor at Constantinople, as had been most painfully perceived in the treatment of Martin I by Constans. Although the Pope had his apocrisiarius, or nuncio, at Constantinople, he came into immediate contact with the exarch of Ravenna, the Emperors representative in Italy.
In Italy, furthermore, the Arian heresy long persisted among the Lombards, although greater toleration was shown the Catholic Church.
Additional source material: The canons of the Quinis.e.xt Council may be found complete in Percival, _Seven Ec.u.menical Councils_, PNF, ser. II, vol. XIV.
(_a_) Concilium Quinis.e.xtum, A. D. 692, _Canons_. Bruns, I, 34, _ff._
This council was commonly regarded as the continuation of the Sixth General Council, and has been received in the East, not as a separate council, but as a part of the sixth. The West has never accepted this opinion and has only to a limited extent admitted the authority of its canons, though some have been current in the West because, like much conciliar action, they were re-enactments of older canons. Occasionally some of the canons have been cited by popes as belonging to the Sixth Council. The canons given here are, for the most part, those which were in some point in opposition to the Roman practice.
Canon 1. _Renewal of the Condemnations of the Sixth Council._
We, by divine grace at the beginning of our decrees, define that the faith set forth by the G.o.d-chosen Apostles, who themselves had both seen the Word and were ministers of the Word, shall be preserved without any innovation, unchanged and inviolate. Moreover the faith of the three hundred and eighteen holy and blessed Fathers, etc.
[Here follows a detailed statement of the first five general councils.]
Also we agree to guard untouched the faith of the Sixth Holy Synod, which first a.s.sembled in this royal city in the time of Constantine, our Emperor, of blessed memory, which faith received still greater confirmation from the fact that the pious Emperor ratified with his own signet what was written, for the security of every future age. And again we confess that we should guard the faith unaltered and openly acknowledged; that in the Economy of the incarnation of our one Lord Jesus Christ, the true G.o.d, there are two natural wills or volitions and two natural operations; and have condemned by a just sentence those who adulterated the true doctrine and taught the people that in the one Lord, our G.o.d, Jesus Christ, there is but one will and operation, that is to say, Theodore of Pharan, Cyrus of Alexandria, Honorius of Rome, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, and Peter, who were bishops of this G.o.d-preserved city, Macarius, who was bishop of Antioch, Stephen who was his disciple, and the insane Polychronius, depriving them henceforth of the communion of the body of Christ our G.o.d.
Canon 2. _On the Sources of Canon Law._
This canon opposed Rome in two respects: it accepted eighty-five Apostolic Canons, whereas Rome received but fifty; it drew up a list of councils and of Fathers whose writings should have authority as canons, and omitted the important Western councils, except Carthage, and all the papal decrees. With this canon should be compared the decretal of Gelasius, _De Libris Recipiendis, v.
supra_, 92.
It has also seemed good to this holy synod that the eighty-five canons received and ratified by the holy and blessed Fathers before us, and also handed down to us in the name of the holy and glorious Apostles, should from this time forth remain firm and unshaken for the cure of souls and the healing of disorders. And since in these canons we are bidden to receive the _Const.i.tutions of the Holy Apostles_ by Clement, in which, in old time, certain spurious matter entirely contrary to piety was introduced by heterodox persons for the polluting of the Church, which obscures to us the elegance and beauty of the divine decrees; we, therefore, for the edification and security of the most Christian flock, reject properly such const.i.tutions; by no means admitting the offspring of heretical error, and cleaving to the pure and perfect doctrine of the Apostles. But we set our seal likewise upon all the other holy canons set forth by our holy and blessed Fathers, that is, by the three hundred and eighteen G.o.d-fearing Fathers a.s.sembled at Nica, and those at Ancyra; further, those at Neo-Csarea and at Gangra, and besides these those at Antioch in Syria [A. D. 341], those too at Laodicea in Phrygia, and likewise those of the one hundred and fifty a.s.sembled in this G.o.d-preserved imperial city and of the two hundred, who a.s.sembled for the first time in the metropolis of the Ephesians, and of the six hundred and thirty holy and blessed Fathers at Chalcedon; in like manner those of Sardica and those of Carthage; those also who a.s.sembled in this G.o.d-preserved imperial city under Nectarius [A. D. 394], and under Theophilus, archbishop of Alexandria; likewise too the canons(307) of Dionysius, formerly archbishop of the great city of Alexandria, and of Peter, archbishop of Alexandria, and martyr; of Gregory the Wonder-worker, archbishop of Neo-Csarea; of Athanasius, archbishop of Alexandria; of Basil, archbishop of Csarea in Cappadocia; of Gregory, bishop of Nyssa; of Gregory the Theologian;(308) of Amphilochius of Iconium; of Timothy, archbishop of Alexandria; of the first Theophilus, archbishop of the same metropolis of Alexandria; of Gennadius, patriarch of the G.o.d-preserved imperial city; moreover the canons set forth by Cyprian, archbishop of the country of the Africans, and martyr, and by the synod under him,(309) which have been kept in the country of the aforesaid bishops and only according to the custom delivered down to them. And that no one be allowed to transgress the aforesaid canons, or to receive other canons besides them, supposit.i.tiously set forth by some who have attempted to make a traffic of the truth. But should any one be convicted of innovating upon them, or attempting to overturn any of the aforementioned canons, he shall be condemned to receive the penalty which the canon imposes and so to be cured of his transgressions.
<script>