How to take this medicine before. Common mistakes in taking medications. Antibiotics: before or after meals
From 775 to 780, the son of Constantine Copronymus, Leo IV Khazar, ruled (his mother was the daughter of a Khazar kagan). His wife was the Athenian Irene. Before the wedding of his son, Constantine Copronymus took an oath from the Athenian beauty that she would not worship icons, which she was accustomed to at home. Irina took an oath, but did not change her heart. There is a well-known story when her husband discovered two icons under her pillow, and she had difficulty justifying herself. However, relations grew increasingly tense, and if Lev had not died suddenly, Irina most likely would not have remained in the palace.
After the death of her husband, she was appointed regent for Leo's son Constantine VI. This was a challenge to the iconoclastic party. They tried to install Copronymus's son by his third wife by means of a coup. But the plot was discovered, the conspirators were exiled, and the applicant and his brothers were tonsured into monasticism.
Having thus strengthened her position on the throne, Irina abolished the persecution of icon veneration and gradually began preparations for the Ecumenical Council. Patriarch Paul spoke about the need to convene it before his death (784).
The imperial secretary Tarasius was elected as the new patriarch, who, as an indispensable condition for his consent to the patriarchate, decreed the restoration of communion between the Church of Constantinople and the Orthodox Church of the East and West through the Ecumenical Council. The condition was accepted, and on December 25, 784 Tarasius was ordained patriarch. Measures were immediately taken to convene an Ecumenical Council. Peace had recently been concluded with the Arabs (782), so it was possible to send invitations to the council on behalf of the patriarch and empress not only to Rome, but also to the eastern patriarchs.
Pope Adrian I sent a reply message to the Empress, in which he spoke about the uselessness of the council and put forward a number of demands that were incomprehensible and unacceptable to the Greeks.
The Pope strongly recommended that the Empress imitate Constantine and Helen, who “exalted your holy, catholic and apostolic, spiritual mother, the Roman Church, and, together with other Orthodox emperors, revered as the head of all churches.” Prosperity and glory are promised “if, following the traditions of the Orthodox faith, you accept the judgment of the Church of Blessed Peter, the prince of the supreme apostles, and love their vicar with all your heart.” As an example of such relations to the Roman Church, the pope cites the legend of the baptism of St. Equal-to-the-Apostles Constantine in Rome. The “catholic and apostolic Roman Church” is declared “flawless, sinless and infallible” (irreprehensibilis).
The pope's message also contained other demands: a) to begin the matter with a solemn anathema imposed on the council of 754, in the presence of the legates of Pope Adrian; b) send him, the pope, on behalf of the emperors, the patriarch and the senate, a written act with an oath guarantee that complete impartiality will be maintained at the upcoming council, there will be no violence for the papal legates, their honor will be guaranteed, and if the matter fails, they will be safely will be sent home; c) if emperors return to the Orthodox faith, then they must return the entire patrimonia Petri, i.e. regions of Southern Italy, selected by Leo the Isaurian for the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople, and also return to the popes the ancient right to install bishops there. “The Roman Church had primacy over all the churches of the Universe; it was responsible for the approval of councils”; d) the pope sharply objects to the usual title of the Patriarch of Constantinople - “ecumenical”.
“We do not know whether the title “ecumenical” was written (in the imperial decree) out of ignorance, or due to the schism or heresy of the wicked. In any case, we earnestly ask your imperial power that the title universalis not be used in your writings, for it is contrary to the decrees of the holy canons and the decisions of the saints. fathers. After all, if someone describes himself as “ecumenical,” placing himself above the superior holy Roman Church, which is the head of all the churches of God, then, obviously, he declares himself an opponent of the holy councils and a heretic. Because if he is “ecumenical,” then he has primacy over the pulpit even of our Church. And this is ridiculous for all faithful Christians, since throughout the entire universe the Redeemer of the world Himself has given primacy and power (principatus ac potestas) to the blessed Apostle Peter and through this Apostle, whose substitutes, although unworthy, are we, the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church constantly, to this day and forever, contains the primacy and authority of power... This commandment of the Lord to the Apostle Peter about the government of the church by no other see of the universal church should be carried out to a greater extent than by the primacy of Rome, which each council affirms with its authority, and protects with continuous guidance."
“Therefore, if anyone, which we do not even believe, would call the Patriarch of Constantinople ecumenical, or agree to this, let him know that he is alien to the Orthodox faith and an opponent of our holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.”
What a striking change from the argument of St. Pope Gregory the Great, who also opposed the title “ecumenical” of the Patriarchs of Constantinople!
Of course, in Constantinople all these statements were met with great surprise. However, dad was very needed. In view of the precariousness of the situation and the strong opposition to icon veneration, the authority of the department of Old Rome could turn out to be decisive and tip the scales in the right side. At the same time, in Constantinople they understood that the eastern bishops of the message would never accept this message, and therefore they translated it very selectively, omitting all controversial issues.
The first attempt to open a cathedral in Constantinople in 786 failed. The army remembered and revered Copronymus, so the council meetings had to be evacuated from the capital.
2. The VII Ecumenical Council was opened only in 787 in Nicaea, which was very symbolic. Up to 350 bishops and many monks were present. There were 8 meetings of the Council in total; the first took place in Nicaea, in the church of St. Sophia, on September 24, 787, and the last in the presence of the emperors in Constantinople on October 23. Thus, the Council was relatively short.
The two legates of the Pope sat and signed first; but the actual chairman directing the course of the matter was Patriarch Tarasius. The Empress was not personally present: she was represented at the Council by two dignitaries who had no noticeable influence on the external procedure of the meetings.
The Gospel was placed in the middle of the temple. Only at the 5th meeting, at the suggestion of the Roman legates, was it decided to bring the icon and venerate it. This episode is very typical and showed how, over the years of persecution, everyone had become unaccustomed to the presence of icons in churches.
Another feature of the Council was the presence at it of several bishops who were named, but not yet ordained, in the rank of locum tenens of their sees, as well as the active participation in it of abbots or their representatives: they signed the final oros of the Council along with the bishops. This illustrates that important role, which was played by the monastics at the Council.
At the Council, a very important question from a canonical point of view arose about the admission into communion of bishops who expressed heretical views or were ordained by heretics. This is the only case when a question of this kind was raised and investigated in detail at the Ecumenical Council. The bishops involved in the iconoclastic turmoil were divided into three categories.
The bishops of the first category were, apparently, so little involved in iconoclasm that their acceptance did not cause any difficulty. They only brought their sincere repentance, confessed Orthodox faith and were immediately accepted into fellowship.
The adoption of the second category was discussed for quite some time. A thorough investigation was carried out. In the end, the Council came to the following conclusion: the iconoclast bishops, who were not “teachers of heresy” in the strict sense, should be accepted into communion in their existing rank due to their repentance; if their conversion to Orthodoxy is a deception, then may God judge them.
After this, the Council began to address the issue of icon veneration. Serious theological research work was carried out, preparing the basis for oros. Each quote was verified with its source. On October 5 (6), the Oros of the Copronimov Council and an extremely detailed, “six-volume” refutation of it were read out.
On October 13, at the 7th session of the Council, Bishop Theodore of Taurus (Southern Italy) read the Oros of the VII Ecumenical Council. Here he is:
“And to put it briefly, we keep in a non-new way all church traditions established for us in writing or without writing. One of them is an image in icon painting, as consistent with the story of the Gospel sermon, serving us as evidence of the genuine, and not the ghostly, incarnation of God the Word; for things that mutually point to each other, without a doubt, make each other clear.
Therefore, we, walking as if on the royal path and following the God-specified teaching of the saints. fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church and the Holy Spirit living in it, we determine with all care and prudence: like the image of the Honest and Life-giving Cross, to be placed in the holy churches of God, on sacred vessels and clothes, on walls and on boards, in houses and on paths , honest and bright icons, painted with paints and made from mosaics and other suitable substances, icons of the Lord and God and our Savior Jesus Christ, our immaculate Lady the Holy Mother of God, also honest angels and all saints and reverend men. For the more often they are visible through the image on icons, the more those who look at them are encouraged to remember the prototypes themselves and to love them, and to honor them with kisses and reverent worship (fymzfikzn rspukenzuyn), not that which is true in our opinion. faith by service (lbfseYabn), which befits the Divine nature alone, but by veneration according to the same model as it is given to the image of the Honorable and Life-giving Cross and St. the Gospel and other shrines, incense and lighting candles, as was done according to the pious custom of the ancients.
For the honor given to the image goes back to the prototype, and the one who worships the icon worships the hypostasis of the person depicted on it. This is the teaching of St. our father, i.e. the tradition of the Catholic Church, from end to end of the earth, which has accepted the Gospel.
Those who dare to think or teach differently, or in agreement with the wicked heretics, reject church traditions and invent some kind of innovation, or reject something from the sacred Church, the Gospel, or the image of the cross, or icon painting, or St. the remains of a martyr, or plotting anything with cunning and deceit to subvert any of the traditions accepted in the Catholic Church, or giving extensive use to sacred vessels or holy monasteries, we decree, if they are bishops or clergy, to depose them, if monks or the laity - excommunicate.”
Thus, the oros indicates: 1) the basis for the veneration of icons - the tradition of the Church; 2) an indisputable example of icon veneration, which was not disputed by the iconoclasts - the veneration of the Cross; 3) places where icons are supposed to be depicted; 4) materials for making icons (it is interesting that Oros says nothing about carved icons); 5) image objects; 6) the moral meaning of venerating icons; 7) its dogmatic norms; 8) and, finally, church punishments for the disobedient.
Having signed the protocol, the fathers exclaimed: “Such is our faith, such is the teaching of the apostles! Anathema to those who do not adhere to it, who do not honor icons, which they call idols and accuse Christians of idolatry for them. Long live the emperors! Eternal memory to the new Konstantin and new Elena! May God bless their reign! Anathema to all heretics, Theodosius, the false bishop of Ephesus, Sisinnius Pastilla and Basil Tricocaus. Anathema to Anastasius, Constantine and Nikita, who were successively patriarchs of Constantinople. They are Arius II, Nestorius II, Dioscorus II! Anathema to the heresiarchs John of Nicomedia and Constantine of Nakolia! Eternal memory to Herman (Constantinople), John (Damascus), George (Cyprus) - these heroes of truth!
Orthodox teaching about the church image was not accepted by his opponents. As has often happened in the history of the Church, both before and after iconoclasm, not everyone was willing or able to accept the solemnly proclaimed truth. The peace lasted 27 years. It was followed by a second iconoclastic period.
Introduction. Reasons for convening the Council
The Holy and Ecumenical Council, convened by God's grace and the most pious command of our divinely crowned and Orthodox emperors Constantine and Leo in this God-protected and reigning city in the venerable Temple... determined the following. The cause and completion of everything is the Divine, Who, by His goodness, called everything from non-existence into being, determined that everything should be in a beautiful and well-ordered form, so that, possessing the well-being bestowed by grace, everything would continue its existence unchanged and remain in its true position, without deviating in any way. one way or the other. Lucifer (light-bringer), so named because of his former glory, occupying his appointed place near God, directed his thought above the Creator of him and through this became darkness along with apostate power. Having fallen from the glorious, light-giving and most luminous rulership of God, He appeared instead as the creator, inventor and teacher of all evil. He cannot see that man, created by God, is now elevated to the glory in which he was placed. He exhausted all his malice against him, by flattery he made him a stranger to the glory and lordship of God, persuading him to worship the creature instead of the Creator. Therefore, the Creator God did not want to see the work of His hands go to final destruction, but through the law and the prophets he took care of his salvation. And when even with these means it could not return to its former glory, then God in the last and predestined times deigned to send His Son and Word to earth. He, by the benevolence of the Father and with the assistance of the life-giving Spirit, equal to Him in power, settled in the virgin wombs and from the holy and immaculate flesh of the Virgin received into His substance or Hypostasis the flesh consubstantial with us. He rallied and formed it through the medium of a rational thinking soul, was born from it above all word and reason, voluntarily endured the cross, accepted death and in three days rose from the dead, having completed the entire economy of salvation. He (God the Word) delivered us from the corrupting teachings of demons, or, in other words, from delusion and idolatry, and gave us worship in spirit and truth. And then He ascended into heaven with our assumed nature, leaving His holy disciples and apostles as teachers of this faith leading to salvation. They, having adorned our Church as His Bride with various pious and light-shedding dogmas, presented her as beautiful and radiant, as if dressed in various golden garments.
Our divine fathers and teachers, as well as the six saints and Ecumenical Councils, having received it in this way adorned, preserved its glory undiminished. The above-mentioned creator of evil, unable to bear the splendor of the Church, did not stop different times And different ways deception to subjugate the human race to its power. Under the guise of Christianity, he introduced idolatry, convincing with his false wisdom the pagans who were leaning towards Christianity not to fall away from the creature, but to worship it, honor it and honor the creature under the name of Christ as God. Therefore, just as the ancient leader and perfecter of our salvation, Jesus sent everywhere His wise disciples and apostles, endued with the power of the All-Holy Spirit, to reduce such idolaters, so now He has raised up His servants, like the apostles, our faithful emperors, wise by the power of the same Spirit, for our improvement and instruction, for the destruction of demonic strongholds erected against the knowledge of God, and for exposing the devil’s cunning and delusion. They, driven by zeal for God and unable to see the Church of believers plundered by the deceit of devils, convened the entire sacred assembly of God-loving bishops in order to gather together to examine the Scriptures about the seductive custom of making images that distract the human mind from the high and pleasing service of God to the earthly. and material veneration of the creature. And also to express what will be determined by them, since they know that it is written in the prophets: “For the mouth of the priest shall keep knowledge, and the law shall be sought at his mouth, because he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts” (Mal. 2:7 ). And here we, gathered at this sacred Council, numbering 338 people, following the council’s decrees, lovingly accept and preach the teachings and traditions that the councils approved and firmly commanded to keep.
Ecumenical Councils- meetings of Orthodox Christians (priests and other persons) as representatives of the entire Orthodox Church (entire totality), convened for the purpose of deciding pressing issues in the area and .
This means that the conciliar decrees were formulated and approved by the fathers not according to the rule of a democratic majority, but in strict accordance with the Holy Scriptures and Tradition of the Church, according to the Providence of God, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit.
As the Church developed and spread, Councils were convened in the most different parts ecumene. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the reasons for the Councils were more or less private issues that did not require representation of the entire Church and were resolved by the efforts of the pastors of the Local Churches. Such Councils were called Local Councils.
Issues that implied the need for a church-wide discussion were investigated with the participation of representatives of the entire Church. The Councils convened in these circumstances, representing the fullness of the Church, acted in accordance with God's law and the norms of church governance, secured the status of Ecumenical. There were seven such Councils in total.
How were the Ecumenical Councils different from each other?
The Ecumenical Councils were attended by the heads of local Churches or their official representatives, as well as the episcopate representing their dioceses. The dogmatic and canonical decisions of the Ecumenical Councils are recognized as binding for the entire Church. For the Council to acquire the status of “Ecumenical”, reception is necessary, i.e., the test of time, and the acceptance of its resolutions by all local Churches. It happened that, under severe pressure from the emperor or an influential bishop, the participants in the Councils made decisions that contradicted the truth of the Gospel and Church Tradition; over time, such Councils were rejected by the Church.
First Ecumenical Council took place under the emperor, in 325, in Nicaea.
It was dedicated to exposing the heresy of Arius, an Alexandrian priest who blasphemed the Son of God. Arius taught that the Son was created and that there was a time when He did not exist; He categorically denied the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father.
The Council proclaimed the dogma that the Son is God, consubstantial with the Father. The Council adopted seven members of the Creed and twenty canonical rules.
Second Ecumenical Council, convened under the Emperor Theodosius the Great, took place in Constantinople in 381.
The reason was the spread of the heresy of Bishop Macedonius, who denied the Divinity of the Holy Spirit.
At this Council, the Creed was adjusted and supplemented, including a member containing the Orthodox teaching about the Holy Spirit. The Fathers of the Council compiled seven canonical rules, one of which prohibited making any changes to the Creed.
Third Ecumenical Council took place in Ephesus in 431, during the reign of Emperor Theodosius the Small.
It was dedicated to exposing the heresy of the Patriarch of Constantinople Nestorius, who falsely taught about Christ as a man united with the Son of God by a grace-filled bond. In fact, he argued that in Christ there are two Persons. In addition, he called the Mother of God the Mother of God, denying Her Motherhood.
The Council confirmed that Christ is the True Son of God, and Mary is the Mother of God, and adopted eight canonical rules.
Fourth Ecumenical Council took place under Emperor Marcian, in Chalcedon, in 451.
The Fathers then gathered against the heretics: the primate of the Alexandrian Church, Dioscorus, and Archimandrite Eutyches, who argued that as a result of the incarnation of the Son, two natures, Divine and human, merged into one in His Hypostasis.
The Council made a determination that Christ is the Perfect God and at the same time the Perfect Man, One Person, containing two natures, united inseparably, immutably, inseparably and inseparably. In addition, thirty canonical rules were formulated.
Fifth Ecumenical Council took place in Constantinople in 553, under Emperor Justinian I.
It confirmed the teachings of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, condemned the ism and some writings of Cyrus and Willow of Edessa. At the same time, Theodore of Mopsuestia, the teacher of Nestorius, was convicted.
Sixth Ecumenical Council was in the city of Constantinople in 680, during the reign of Emperor Constantine Pogonatus.
His task was to refute the heresy of the Monothelites, who insisted that in Christ there are not two wills, but one. By that time, several Eastern Patriarchs and Pope Honorius had already propagated this terrible heresy.
The Council confirmed the ancient teaching of the Church that Christ has two wills in Himself - as God and as Man. At the same time, His will, according to human nature, agrees in everything with the Divine.
Cathedral, held in Constantinople eleven years later, called the Trullo Council, is called the Fifth-Sixth Ecumenical Council. He adopted one hundred and two canonical rules.
Seventh Ecumenical Council took place in Nicaea in 787, under the Empress Irene. The iconoclastic heresy was refuted there. The Council Fathers compiled twenty-two canonical rules.
Is the Eighth Ecumenical Council Possible?
1) The currently widespread opinion about the completion of the era of the Ecumenical Councils has no dogmatic basis. The activity of Councils, including Ecumenical Councils, is one of the forms of church self-government and self-organization.
Let us note that Ecumenical Councils were convened as the need arose to make important decisions concerning the life of the entire Church.
Meanwhile, it will exist “until the end of the age” (), and nowhere is it stated that throughout this entire period the Universal Church will not encounter difficulties that arise again and again, requiring the representation of all Local Churches to resolve them. Since the right to carry out its activities on the principles of conciliarity was granted to the Church by God, and, as is known, no one took this right away from it, there is no reason to believe that the Seventh Ecumenical Council should a priori be called the last.
2) In the tradition of the Greek Churches, since Byzantine times, there has been a widespread opinion that there were eight Ecumenical Councils, the last of which is considered to be the Council of 879 under St. . The Eighth Ecumenical Council was called, for example, St. (PG 149, col. 679), St. (Thessalonian) (PG 155, col. 97), later St. Dositheus of Jerusalem (in his tomos of 1705), etc. That is, in the opinion of a number of saints, the eighth ecumenical council is not only possible, but already was. (priest )
3) Usually the idea of the impossibility of holding the Eighth Ecumenical Council is associated with two “main” reasons:
a) With the indication of the Book of Proverbs of Solomon about the seven pillars of the Church: “Wisdom built herself a house, hewed out its seven pillars, slaughtered a sacrifice, dissolved her wine and prepared a meal for herself; sent her servants to proclaim from the heights of the city: “Whoever is foolish, turn here!” And she said to the weak-minded: “Come, eat my bread and drink the wine that I have dissolved; leave foolishness, and live and walk in the path of reason”” ().
Considering that in the history of the Church there were seven Ecumenical Councils, this prophecy can, of course, with reservations, be correlated with the Councils. Meanwhile, in a strict interpretation, the seven pillars do not mean the seven Ecumenical Councils, but the seven Sacraments of the Church. Otherwise, we would have to admit that until the end of the Seventh Ecumenical Council there was no stable foundation, that it was a limping Church: at first it lacked seven, then six, then five, four, three, two supports. Finally, it was only in the eighth century that it was firmly established. And this despite the fact that it was the early Church that became famous for its host of holy confessors, martyrs, teachers...
b) With the fact of Roman Catholicism falling away from Ecumenical Orthodoxy.
Since the Universal Church has split into Western and Eastern, supporters of this idea argue, then the convening of a Council representing the One and True Church, alas, is impossible.
In reality, according to God's determination, the Universal Church was never subject to division in two. Indeed, according to the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, if a kingdom or house is divided against itself, “that kingdom cannot stand” (
Ecumenical Councils (in Greek: Synod of Oikomeniki) - councils, compiled with the assistance of secular (imperial) power, from representatives of the entire Christian Church, convened from various parts of the Greco-Roman Empire and the so-called barbarian countries, to establish mandatory rules regarding the tenets of faith and various manifestations church life and activities. The emperor usually convened the council, determined the place of its meetings, assigned a certain amount for the convocation and activities of the council, exercised the right of honorary chairmanship at it and affixed his signature to the acts of the council and (in fact) sometimes exerted influence on its decisions, although in principle he did not have the right to judge in matters of faith. Bishops, as representatives of various local churches, were full members of the council. The dogmatic definitions, rules or canons and judicial decisions of the council were approved by the signature of all its members; The consolidation of the conciliar act by the emperor gave him the binding force of church law, the violation of which was punishable by secular criminal laws.
Only those whose decisions were recognized as binding in the entire Christian Church, both Eastern (Orthodox) and Roman (Catholic) are recognized as true Ecumenical Councils. There are seven such cathedrals.
The era of the Ecumenical Councils
1st Ecumenical Council (Nicene 1st) met under Emperor Constantine the Great in 325, in Nicaea (in Bithynia), regarding the teaching of the Alexandrian presbyter Arius that the Son of God is the creation of God the Father and therefore is not consubstantial with the Father ( Arian heresy ). Having condemned Arius, the council drew up a symbol of the true teaching and approved the “consubstantial” (ohm O usia) Son with the Father. Of the many lists of rules of this council, only 20 are considered authentic. The council consisted of 318 bishops, many presbyters and deacons, of which one, the famous Afanasy, led the debate. The council was presided over, according to some scholars, by Hosea of Corduba, and according to others, by Eustathius of Antioch.
First Ecumenical Council. Artist V.I. Surikov. Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow
2nd Ecumenical Council – Constantinople, gathered in 381, under Emperor Theodosius I, against the Semi-Arians and the Bishop of Constantinople Macedonius. The first recognized the Son of God not as consubstantial, but only “similar in essence” (ohm And usios) Father, while the latter proclaimed the inequality of the third member of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, declaring him only the first creation and instrument of the Son. In addition, the council examined and condemned the teaching of the Anomeans - followers of Aetius and Eunomius, who taught that the Son is not at all like the Father ( anomoyos), but consists of a different entity (etherousios), as well as the teaching of the followers of Photinus, who renewed Sabellianism, and Apollinaris (of Laodicea), who argued that the flesh of Christ, brought from heaven from the bosom of the Father, did not have a rational soul, since it was replaced by the Divinity of the Word.
At this council, which issued that Symbol of faith, which is now accepted in the Orthodox Church, and 7 Rules (the count of the latter is not the same: they are counted from 3 to 11), 150 bishops of one eastern church were present (it is believed that Western bishops were not invited). Three chaired it successively: Meletius of Antioch, Gregory the Theologian and Nektarios of Constantinople.
Second Ecumenical Council. Artist V. I. Surikov
3rd Ecumenical Council , Ephesus, gathered in 431, under Emperor Theodosius II, against the Archbishop of Constantinople Nestorius, who taught that the incarnation of the Son of God was His simple dwelling in the man Christ, and not the union of Divinity and humanity in one person, why, according to the teachings of Nestorius ( Nestorianism), and the Mother of God should be called “Christ Mother of God” or even “Mother of Man”. This council was attended by 200 bishops and 3 legates of Pope Celestine; the latter arrived after the condemnation of Nestorius and only signed the council’s definitions, while Cyril of Alexandria, who presided over it, had the voice of the pope during the sessions of the council. The Council adopted 12 anathematisms (curses) of Cyril of Alexandria, against the teachings of Nestorius, and 6 rules were included in his circular message, to which two more decrees were added on the cases of Presbyter Charisius and Bishop Regina.
Third Ecumenical Council. Artist V. I. Surikov
4th Ecumenical Council . image, so that after the union in Jesus Christ there remained only one divine nature, which in visible human form lived on earth, suffered, died and was resurrected. Thus, according to this teaching, the body of Christ was not of the same essence as ours and had only one nature - divine, and not two inseparably and unmergedly united - divine and human. From the Greek words “one nature” the heresy of Eutyches and Dioscorus received its name Monophysitism. The council was attended by 630 bishops and, among them, three legates of Pope Leo the Great. The Council condemned the previous Council of Ephesus of 449 (known as the “robber” Council for its violent actions against the Orthodox) and especially Dioscorus of Alexandria, who presided over it. At the council, a definition of the true teaching was drawn up (printed in the “book of rules” under the name of the dogma of the 4th Ecumenical Council) and 27 rules (the 28th rule was compiled at a special meeting, and the 29th and 30th rules are only extracts from Act IV).
5th Ecumenical Council (Constantinople 2nd), met in 553, under Emperor Justinian I, to resolve the dispute about the orthodoxy of the bishops Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus and Willow of Edessa, who, 120 years earlier, in their writings turned out to be partly supporters of Nestorius (such recognized as scriptures: Theodore - all the works, Theodoret - criticism of the anathematisms adopted by the 3rd Ecumenical Council, and Iva - a letter to Mara, or Marin, Bishop of Ardashir in Persia). This council, consisting of 165 bishops (Pope Vigilius II, who was at that time in Constantinople, did not go to the council, although he was invited, due to the fact that he sympathized with the views of those against whom the council was meeting; despite this, however, he , as well as Pope Pelagius, recognized this council, and only after them and until the end of the 6th century the Western Church did not recognize it, and the Spanish councils even in the 7th century do not mention it; but in the end it was recognized in West). The Council did not issue rules, but was engaged in considering and resolving the dispute “On Three Chapters” - this was the name of the dispute caused by the emperor’s decree of 544, in which, in three chapters, the teaching of the three aforementioned bishops was considered and condemned.
6th Ecumenical Council (Constantinople 3rd), met in 680 under Emperor Constantine Pogonatus, against heretics- monothelites, who, although they recognized two natures in Jesus Christ (like the Orthodox), but at the same time, together with the Monophysites, allowed only one will, conditioned by the unity of personal self-consciousness in Christ. This council was attended by 170 bishops and legates of Pope Agathon. Having drawn up a definition of the true teaching, the council condemned many Eastern patriarchs and Pope Honorius for their adherence to the teaching of the Monothelites (the latter’s representative at the council was Macarius of Aptiochi), although the latter, as well as some of the Monothelite patriarchs, died 40 years before the council. The condemnation of Honorius was recognized by Pope Leo II (Agatho had already died at this time). This council also did not issue rules.
Fifth-Sixth Cathedral. Since neither the 5th nor the 6th Ecumenical Councils issued rules, then, as if in addition to their activities, in 692, under Emperor Justinian II, a council was convened in Constantinople, which was called the Fifth-Sixth or after the meeting place in the hall with round vaults (Trullon) Trullan. The council was attended by 227 bishops and a delegate from the Roman Church, Bishop Basil from the island of Crete. This council, which did not draw up a single dogmatic definition, but issued 102 rules, has a very important, since it was the first time on behalf of the entire church that a revision of all canon law in force at that time was carried out. Thus, the apostolic decrees were rejected, the composition of the canonical rules, collected in collections by the works of private individuals, was approved, the previous rules were corrected and supplemented, and, finally, rules were issued condemning the practice of the Roman and Armenian churches. The Council forbade “forging, or rejecting, or adopting rules other than the proper ones, with false inscriptions compiled by some people who dared to trade in the truth.”
7th Ecumenical Council (Nicene 2nd) convened in 787 under Empress Irene, against heretics- iconoclasts, who taught that icons are attempts to depict the unrepresentable, offensive to Christianity, and that their veneration should lead to heresies and idolatry. In addition to the dogmatic definition, the council drew up 22 more rules. In Gaul, the 7th Ecumenical Council was not immediately recognized.
The dogmatic definitions of all seven Ecumenical Councils were recognized and accepted by the Roman Church. In relation to the canons of these councils, the Roman Church adhered to the view expressed by Pope John VIII and expressed by the librarian Anastasius in the preface to the translation of the acts of the 7th Ecumenical Council: it accepted all conciliar rules, with the exception of those that contradicted papal decretals and “good Roman customs.” " But in addition to the 7 councils recognized by the Orthodox, the Roman (Catholic) Church has its own councils, which it recognizes as ecumenical. These are: Constantinople 869, anathematized Patriarch Photius and declaring the pope “an instrument of the Holy Spirit” and not subject to the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Councils; Lateran 1st (1123), on ecclesiastical investiture, ecclesiastical discipline and the liberation of the Holy Land from infidels (see Crusades); Lateran 2nd (1139), against doctrine Arnold of Breshian about the abuse of spiritual power; Lateran 3rd (1179), against the Waldensians; Lateran 4th (1215), against the Albigensians; 1st Lyon (1245), against Emperor Frederick II and the appointment of a crusade; 2nd Lyon (1274), on the issue of uniting the Catholic and Orthodox churches ( union), proposed by the Byzantine emperor Mikhail Paleolog; at this council, the following was added to the Creed in accordance with Catholic teaching: “The Holy Spirit also comes from the son”; Viennese (1311), against the Templars, Beggards, Beguins, Lollards, Waldensians, Albigensians; Pisa (1404); Constance (1414 - 18), at which Jan Hus was convicted; Basle (1431), on the issue of limiting papal autocracy in church affairs; Ferraro-Florentine (1439), at which a new union of Orthodoxy and Catholicism took place; Trent (1545), against the Reformation and Vatican (1869 - 70), which established the dogma of papal infallibility.
