Are the Ecumenical Councils valid?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,083
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I have nothing to say at the present moment...and I think that this, in itself, proves that I am not "riled up." For if I were "riled up", I would be talking up a storm.

I also have somewhere to go in a few moments; and will be back to the computer later today.
Fine
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,283
1,633
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The ecumenical councils were a series of conferences (major and minor) which include ecclesiastical dignitaries (Bishops) who convened to discuss and settle matters of Church doctrine and practices in which those entitled to vote represented a whole range of Christian beliefs and churches.

Of course the Catholic Church is going to affirm all of these. But the point of interest is that within the concept of fundamentalism the councils represent one of the unique scenario where Protestants will sometimes recognize significant Christian events outside the Holy Bible. Some Protestant denominations have official statements on this. My interests are the opinions of individuals. Then on the other hand, what category does the first council of Jerusalem fall in? (Acts chapter 15) Do you recognize any of the Ecumenical Councils?

Out of these councils came the official Catholic definitions of heresy. But again my interests are; what are the opinions of individuals, and that includes Catholics? The rulings of these councils were taken so seriously that excommunications and murders occurred. So there are some questions that arise for the individuals; Do you base heresy on some of the rulings of the councils? Or is heresy a disagreement between denominations? Is heresy a disagreement of one’s own beliefs? Then how serious are these heresies? How should an individual respond to what they consider a heresy? Or even if there is such a thing as heretical beliefs anymore?

I have provided a list of councils for reference.
  1. First Council of Nicaea (325) repudiated Arianism, declared that Christ is "homoousios with the Father" (of the same substance as the Father), and adopted the original Nicene Creed, fixed Easter date; recognized primacy of the sees of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch and granted the See of Jerusalem a position of honor.
  2. First Council of Constantinople (381) repudiated Arianism and Macedonianism, declared that Christ is "born of the Father before all time", revised the Nicene Creed in regard to the Holy Spirit
  3. Council of Ephesus (431) repudiated Nestorianism, proclaimed the Virgin Mary as the Theotokos ("Birth-giver to God", "God-bearer", "Mother of God"), repudiated Pelagianism, and reaffirmed the Nicene Creed. This and all the following councils in this list are not recognized by the Assyrian Church of the East.
    • Second Council of Ephesus (449) declared Eutyches orthodox and attacked his opponents. Though originally convened as an ecumenical council, this council is not recognized as ecumenical and denounced as a Robber Council by the Chalcedonians (Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Protestants).
  4. Council of Chalcedon (451) repudiated the Eutychian doctrine of monophysitism, adopted the Chalcedonian Creed, which described the hypostatic union of the two natures of Christ, human and divine. Reinstated those deposed in 449 and deposed Dioscorus of Alexandria. Elevation of the bishoprics of Constantinople and Jerusalem to the status of patriarchates. This is also the last council explicitly recognized by the Anglican Communion. This and all the following councils in this list are rejected by the Oriental Orthodoxy.
  5. Second Council of Constantinople (553) repudiated the Three Chapters as Nestorian, condemned Origen of Alexandria, decreed the Theopaschite Formula.
  6. Third Council of Constantinople (680-681) repudiated Monothelitism and Monoenergism.
    • Quinisext Council, also called Council in Trullo (692) addressed matters of discipline (in amendment to the 5th and 6th councils). The Ecumenical status of this council was repudiated by the western churches.
  7. Second Council of Nicaea (787) restored the veneration of icons (condemned at the Council of Hieria (754) repudiated iconoclasm. This council is rejected by some Protestant denominations, which condemn the veneration of icons.
  8. Fourth Council of Constantinople (869-870) deposed Patriarch Photios I of Constantinople as an usurper and reinstated his predecessor Saint Ignatius. Photius had already been declared deposed by the Pope, an act which the Church of Constantinople accepted at this council.
  9. First Council of the Lateran (1123) addressed investment of bishops and the Holy Roman Emperor's role therein.
  10. Second Council of the Lateran (1139) reaffirmed Lateran I and addressed clerical discipline (dress, marriages).
  11. Third Council of the Lateran (1179) restricted papal election to the cardinals, condemned simony, and introduced minimum ages for ordination (thirty for bishops).
  12. Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215) defined transubstantiation, addressed papal primacy and clerical discipline.
  13. First Council of Lyon (1245) deposed Emperor Frederick II and instituted a levy to support the Holy Land.
  14. Second Council of Lyon (1274) attempted reunion with the Eastern churches, approved Franciscan and Dominican orders, a tithe to support crusades, and conclave procedures.
  15. Council of Vienne (1311-1312) disbanded the Knights Templar.
    • Council of Pisa (1409) attempted to solve the Great Western Schism. The council is not numbered because it was not convened by a pope and its outcome was repudiated at Constance.
  16. Council of Constance (1414-1418) resolved the Great Western Schism and condemned John Hus. Also began conciliarism.
    • Council of Siena (1423-1424) addressed church reform. Not numbered as it was swiftly disbanded.
  17. Council of Basel, Ferrara and Florence (1431-1445) addressed church reform and reunion with the Eastern Churches, but split into two parties. The fathers remaining at Basel became the apogee of conciliarism. The fathers at Florence achieved union with various Eastern Churches and temporarily with the Eastern Orthodox Church.
  18. Fifth Council of the Lateran (1512-1514) addressed church reform.
  19. Council of Trent (1545-1563, with interruptions) addressed church reform and repudiated Protestantism, defined the role and canon of Scripture and the seven sacraments, and strengthened clerical discipline and education. Temporarily attended by Lutheran delegates.
  20. First Council of the Vatican (1870; officially, 1870-1960) defined pope's primacy in church governance and his infallibility, repudiated rationalism, materialism and atheism, addressed revelation, interpretation of scripture and the relationship of faith and reason.
  21. Second Council of the Vatican (1962-1965) addressed pastoral and disciplinary issues dealing with the Church and its relation to the modern world, including liturgy and ecumenism.
Hi Grail Hunter,

This is a very fascinating post that I am sure will garner many responses. Thank you!!

I get the gist of what you are saying: Those are all "Catholic" councils. But wouldn't it be fair to say that all the councils up to the time of the Reformation were Church Councils since there was only "one" church? After all there really was no other Church (except for what later came to be called the Catholic Church) until The Reformation.

With that said Scripture says that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth and that Jesus started a church (singular). So if one does not accept the councils (teachings) of The Church why should they accept any teachings of Protestant Churches?

Once again....thank you for this post. I look forward to the responses.

Respectfully, Mary
 

Giuliano

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2019
5,978
3,676
113
Carlisle
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
He certainly has a right to be here and try to convert us...and we also have the right to try to convert him while he is here.

I don't think that the Lord is afraid of dissenting opinions. His word is sufficient to give us all the truth; so that if we seek the truth and will submit to the authority of His word, we will find it.
I have no desire to try to convert people here. Why would I come here to convert people when the people here are already Christians -- or at least most of them.
 

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,083
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hi Grail Hunter,

This is a very fascinating post that I am sure will garner many responses. Thank you!!

I get the gist of what you are saying: Those are all "Catholic" councils. But wouldn't it be fair to say that all the councils up to the time of the Reformation were Church Councils since there was only "one" church? After all there really was no other Church (except for what later came to be called the Catholic Church) until The Reformation.

With that said Scripture says that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth and that Jesus started a church (singular). So if one does not accept the councils (teachings) of The Church why should they accept any teachings of Protestant Churches?

Once again....thank you for this post. I look forward to the responses.

Respectfully, Mary

Mary, thank you.
Christ does not start a named Church...not trying to confuse you.
The names "The Way" and "Christian" are names men came up with.
Fundamentalism is the practice of keeping your faith to the Bible...It is not a horrible thing.
But Christianity continued on after "the end of the Bible" so after the Apostles, there is a lot of Christian history.
But for Protestants they stay with the Bible and the rest is lost for them. Still not a horrible thing.
But in the meantime Christianity and the Roman Empire merge. Christianity survived.
Shortly after the merge, Constantine sets up and funds the Ecumenical Councils.
The point of the question was that there are Protestant denominations that will step out of the Bible to agree with some of the councils. Usually the first seven.
Then even though, if they do not admit it or know it....the councils and the Early Church Father formed some of their beliefs.
It is more or less a discussion on what the councils did for Christianity or did not do.
To learn Christian history, a Protestant has to do that on their own. There not going to usually get that in church.
So mostly a discussion.
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,283
1,633
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mary, thank you.
Christ does not start a named Church...not trying to confuse you.
Your welcome.....:)

Jesus said, Upon this rock I will build my Church (singular).

Where is that Church today? OR Which Church is that today?

Mary
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,283
1,633
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Shortly after the merge, Constantine sets up and funds the Ecumenical Councils.
Thank you....Where is your evidence that Constantine set up and funded Ecumenical Councils (plural)?

Historical Mary
 

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,083
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thank you....Where is your evidence that Constantine set up and funded Ecumenical Councils (plural)?

Historical Mary

We can talk about this. but do you see what I mean...there are people that could see this for the first time. This is all history, not a lot of mystery. History bores people. lol.
I will be back in a 45 minutes ...Get your questions together
 

Giuliano

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2019
5,978
3,676
113
Carlisle
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thank you....Where is your evidence that Constantine set up and funded Ecumenical Councils (plural)?

Historical Mary
I don't know about the plural, but he did fund the first one. I include the link here in case you want to read the whole article -- CCEL says:

Hither, in the year 325, the twentieth of his reign (therefore the festive vicennalia), the emperor summoned the bishops of the empire by a letter of invitation, putting at their service the public conveyances, and liberally defraying from the public treasury the expenses of their residence in Nicaea and of their return. Each bishop was to bring with him two presbyters and three servants.1318 They travelled partly in the public post carriages, partly on horses, mules, or asses, partly on foot. Many came to bring their private disputes before the emperor, who caused all their papers, without reading them, to be burned, and exhorted the parties to reconciliation and harmony.

Then to the time before the council ended, and we how religion and the government got mixed with there being civil penalties for disagreeing with the Church -- the government was taking on the power to impose its idea of order on the Church as if the authority of Bishops needed help:

Almost all the bishops subscribed the creed, Hosius at the head, and next him the two Roman presbyters in the name of their bishop. This is the first instance of such signing of a document in the Christian church. Eusebius of Caesarea also signed his name after a day’s deliberation, and vindicated this act in a letter to his diocese. Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicaea subscribed the creed without the condemnatory formula, and for this they were deposed and for a time banished, but finally consented to all the decrees of the council. The Arian historian Philostorgius, who however deserves little credit,1331 accuses them of insincerity in having substituted, by the advice of the emperor, for ὁμο-ούσιος(of the same essence) the semi-Arian word ὁμοι-ούσιος(of like essence). Only two Egyptian bishops, Theonas and Secundus, persistently refused to sign, and were banished with Arius to Illyria. The books of Arius were burned and his followers branded as enemies of Christianity.

This is the first example of the civil punishment of heresy; and it is the beginning of a long succession of civil persecutions for all departures from the Catholic faith. Before the union of church and state ecclesiastical excommunication was the extreme penalty. Now banishment and afterwards even death were added, because all offences against the church were regarded as at the same time crimes against the state and civil society.

The two other points on which the council of Nicaea decided, the Easter question and the Meletian schism, have been already spoken of in their place. The council issued twenty canons in reference to discipline. The creed and the canons were written in a book, and again signed by the bishops. The council issued a letter to the Egyptian and Libyan bishops as to the decision of the three main points; the emperor also sent several edicts to the churches, in which he ascribed the decrees to divine inspiration, and set them forth as laws of the realm. On the twenty-ninth of July, the twentieth anniversary of his accession, he gave the members of the council a splendid banquet in his palace, which Eusebius (quite too susceptible to worldly splendor) describes as a figure of the reign of Christ on earth; he remunerated the bishops lavishly, and dismissed them with a suitable valedictory, and with letters of commendation to the authorities of all the provinces on their homeward way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grailhunter

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,083
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I don't know about the plural, but he did fund the first one. I include the link here in case you want to read the whole article -- CCEL says:

Hither, in the year 325, the twentieth of his reign (therefore the festive vicennalia), the emperor summoned the bishops of the empire by a letter of invitation, putting at their service the public conveyances, and liberally defraying from the public treasury the expenses of their residence in Nicaea and of their return. Each bishop was to bring with him two presbyters and three servants.1318 They travelled partly in the public post carriages, partly on horses, mules, or asses, partly on foot. Many came to bring their private disputes before the emperor, who caused all their papers, without reading them, to be burned, and exhorted the parties to reconciliation and harmony.

Then to the time before the council ended, and we how religion and the government got mixed with there being civil penalties for disagreeing with the Church -- the government was taking on the power to impose its idea of order on the Church as if the authority of Bishops needed help:

Almost all the bishops subscribed the creed, Hosius at the head, and next him the two Roman presbyters in the name of their bishop. This is the first instance of such signing of a document in the Christian church. Eusebius of Caesarea also signed his name after a day’s deliberation, and vindicated this act in a letter to his diocese. Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicaea subscribed the creed without the condemnatory formula, and for this they were deposed and for a time banished, but finally consented to all the decrees of the council. The Arian historian Philostorgius, who however deserves little credit,1331 accuses them of insincerity in having substituted, by the advice of the emperor, for ὁμο-ούσιος(of the same essence) the semi-Arian word ὁμοι-ούσιος(of like essence). Only two Egyptian bishops, Theonas and Secundus, persistently refused to sign, and were banished with Arius to Illyria. The books of Arius were burned and his followers branded as enemies of Christianity.

This is the first example of the civil punishment of heresy; and it is the beginning of a long succession of civil persecutions for all departures from the Catholic faith. Before the union of church and state ecclesiastical excommunication was the extreme penalty. Now banishment and afterwards even death were added, because all offences against the church were regarded as at the same time crimes against the state and civil society.

The two other points on which the council of Nicaea decided, the Easter question and the Meletian schism, have been already spoken of in their place. The council issued twenty canons in reference to discipline. The creed and the canons were written in a book, and again signed by the bishops. The council issued a letter to the Egyptian and Libyan bishops as to the decision of the three main points; the emperor also sent several edicts to the churches, in which he ascribed the decrees to divine inspiration, and set them forth as laws of the realm. On the twenty-ninth of July, the twentieth anniversary of his accession, he gave the members of the council a splendid banquet in his palace, which Eusebius (quite too susceptible to worldly splendor) describes as a figure of the reign of Christ on earth; he remunerated the bishops lavishly, and dismissed them with a suitable valedictory, and with letters of commendation to the authorities of all the provinces on their homeward way.

That will get her started. Check please! We are not going to get a dollar amount but....
Of the seven councils recognized in whole or in part by both the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox Church as ecumenical, all were called by a Roman emperor. The emperor gave them legal status within the entire Roman Empire. All were held in the eastern part of the Roman Empire. The early councils were convoked by emperors who summoned the bishops, paid their expenses, and gave their decisions binding force. Whether or not a council was finally accepted as ecumenical was, in fact, based on later recognition by the church rather than on its actual characteristics.
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I have no desire to try to convert people here. Why would I come here to convert people when the people here are already Christians -- or at least most of them.

All I'm saying is that if you were here to attempt to convert any of us to what you believe...I don't see anything wrong with that.

It is dialogue in the long run that will bring us to a consensus on what it is that the Bible actually teaches.

If we want to have unity of doctrine; both concerning essentials and concerning non-essentials (which are more important than one might think...see Luke 16:10), then the hashing out of doctrines through discussion (not debate) will be essential.

What is the difference between discussion and debate? Debate is an attempt to prove that my pov is right, to the exclusion of having an open enough mind to see whether the pov of the other person may be right.

Discussion is bringing the word of the Lord to bear on an issue; and we let the chips fall where they may.
 

Philip James

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
4,275
3,091
113
Brandon
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I have no desire to try to convert people here. Why would I come here to convert people when the people here are already Christians -- or at least most of them.

To invite them to the wedding feast!

The master then ordered the servant, 'Go out to the highways and hedgerows and make people come in that my home may be filled.

Peace be with you!
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your welcome.....:)

Jesus said, Upon this rock I will build my Church (singular).

Where is that Church today? OR Which Church is that today?

Mary
It would be the body of Christ, composed of all those who truly believe in Him.
 

lforrest

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Admin
Aug 10, 2012
5,546
6,793
113
Faith
Christian
Beloved,

Have I broken the rules of this board?


Are you the leader of this community that I should submit to your authority?
If so, you should make that clear both in your rules and in your profile.

If not, call a moderator if you feel I am acting contrary to the rule established here.

Peace be with you!

Should have gone without saying...

Catholics are welcome here and the board's leadership recognizes them as a Christian denomination.
 

Giuliano

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2019
5,978
3,676
113
Carlisle
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Discussion is bringing the word of the Lord to bear on an issue; and we let the chips fall where they may.
I think so too. If people seriously want to come to know the truth, they want to know if they're wrong about something. People interested only in proving they're right . . . well, I think you know what I mean.
 

Giuliano

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2019
5,978
3,676
113
Carlisle
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
To invite them to the wedding feast!

The master then ordered the servant, 'Go out to the highways and hedgerows and make people come in that my home may be filled.

Peace be with you!
I would hope the people here have all been invited to the wedding feast. If they don't attend, then we may have to go find others, "both good and bad."
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
He certainly has a right to be here and try to convert us...and we also have the right to try to convert him while he is here.

I don't think that the Lord is afraid of dissenting opinions. His word is sufficient to give us all the truth; so that if we seek the truth and will submit to the authority of His word, we will find it.
then go with that bro, if you think ppl who worship someone between you and Christ is a Christian, then your definitions are going to be applied to you, not me. I have no probs with Catholics, ok, but then i have no probs with...ppl who ID with other pagans groups that are not as socially acceptable, too. And i am not interested in converting anyone, i understand if you are though ok.

He is someone who kneels to someone, another living person iow, who claims to be "lord of lords," and you can call that Christian for as long as you like bro, no problem for me ok. But fwiw i suggest you keep in mind that his daugter cannot marry your son with his blessing, awright?
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,283
1,633
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It would be the body of Christ, composed of all those who truly believe in Him.
Thank you justbyfaith.

There are several billion "who truly believe in Him" (Christians). That means, according to your theory, there are several billion churches.

Which one of these several billion churches is the pillar and foundation of truth? (1 Timothy 3:15)

Which one of these several billion churches do we go to that fulfills "the church" in Matthew 18:17?

Which one of these several billion churches is the rock that Jesus built his Church on? (Matthew 16:18)

Mary
 

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,083
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thank you justbyfaith.

There are several billion "who truly believe in Him" (Christians). That means, according to your theory, there are several billion churches.

Which one of these several billion churches is the pillar and foundation of truth? (1 Timothy 3:15)

Which one of these several billion churches do we go to that fulfills "the church" in Matthew 18:17?

Which one of these several billion churches is the rock that Jesus built his Church on? (Matthew 16:18)

Mary

Hello Marymog,
So I see you have it all straighten out. lol.
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,283
1,633
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hello Marymog,
So I see you have it all straighten out. lol.
Would you care to refute what I have written with an articulate defense using Scripture?

Or do you prefer only to interject in other's conversations with sniping?