Second Council of Constantinople

The Second Council of Constantinople is the fifth of the first

Second Council of
seven ecumenical councils recognized by both the Eastern
Constantinople
Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church. It is also recognized by
the Old Catholics and others. Protestant opinions and recognition
of it are varied. Some Protestants, such as Calvinists, recognize the
first four councils,[2] whereas Lutherans and most Anglo-Catholics
accept all seven. Constantinople II was convoked by the Byzantine
Emperor Justinian I under the presidency of Patriarch Eutychius of
Constantinople. It was held from 5 May to 2 June 553. Participants
were overwhelmingly Eastern bishops—only sixteen Western
bishops were present, including nine from Illyricum and seven
from Africa, but none from Italy—out of the 152 total.[1][3] Artistic rendition of Second Council
of Constantinople by Vasily Surikov
The main work of the council was to confirm the condemnation
issued by edict in 551 by the Emperor Justinian against the Three Date 553
Chapters. These were the Christological writings and ultimately the Accepted by Catholic Church
person of Theodore of Mopsuestia (died 428), certain writings Eastern
against Cyril of Alexandria's Twelve Anathemas accepted at the Orthodox
Council of Ephesus, written by Theodoret of Cyrrhus (died c. 466), Church
and a letter written against Cyrillianism and the Ephesian Council Anglican
by Ibas of Edessa (died 457).[4] Communion

The purpose of the condemnation was to make plain that the Great Old Catholic
Church, which followed a Chalcedonian creed, was firmly Church
opposed to Nestorianism as supported by the Antiochene school Lutheran Church
which had either assisted Nestorius, the eponymous heresiarch, or Some other
had inspired the teaching for which he was anathematized and Protestant
exiled. The council also condemned the teaching that Mary could churches
not be rightly called the Mother of God (Greek: Theotokos) but Previous Council of
only the mother of the man (anthropotokos) or the mother of Christ council Chalcedon
(Christotokos).[4]
Next council Third Council of
The Second Council of Constantinople is also considered as one of Constantinople
the many attempts by Byzantine Emperors to bring peace in the Convoked by Emperor
empire between the Chalcedonian and Monophysite fractions of Justinian I
the church which had been in continuous conflict since the times of President Eutychius of
the Council of Ephesus in AD 431. Constantinople
Attendance 152[1]
Proceedings Topics Nestorianism
The council was presided over by Eutychius, Patriarch of Origenism
Constantinople, assisted by the other three eastern patriarchs or Documents and 14 canons on
their representatives.[5] Pope Vigilius was also invited; but even statements Christology and
though he was at this period resident in Constantinople (to avoid against the
the perils of life in Italy, convulsed by the war against the Three Chapters.
Ostrogoths), he declined to attend, and even issued a document 15 canons
forbidding the council from proceeding without him (his 'First condemning the
Constitutum'). For more details see Pope Vigilius.[6] teaching of
Origen and
The council, however, proceeded without the pope to condemn the Evagrius.
Three Chapters. And during the seventh session of the council, the
Chronological list of ecumenical
bishops had Vigilius stricken from the diptychs for his refusal to councils
appear at the council and approve its proceedings, effectively
excommunicating him personally but not the rest of the Western Church. Vigilius was then imprisoned in
Constantinople by the emperor and his advisors were exiled. After six months, in December 553, he agreed,
however, to condemn the Three Chapters, claiming that his hesitation was due to being misled by his
advisors.[4] His approval of the council was expressed in two documents, (a letter to Eutychius of
Constantinople on 8 December 553, and a second "Constitutum" of 23 February 554, probably addressed
to the Western episcopate), condemning the Three Chapters,[7] on his own authority and without mention of
the council.[3]

In Northern Italy the ecclesiastical provinces of Milan and Aquileia broke communion with Rome. Milan
accepted the condemnation only toward the end of the sixth century, whereas Aquileia did not do so until
about 700.[3][8] The rest of the Western Church accepted the decrees of the council, though without great
enthusiasm. Though ranked as one of the ecumenical councils, it never attained in the West the status of
either Nicaea or Chalcedon.

In Visigothic Spain (Reccared having converted a short time prior) the churches never accepted the
council;[9] when news of the later Third Council of Constantinople was communicated to them by Rome it
was received as the fifth ecumenical council,[10] not the sixth. Isidore of Seville, in his Chronicle and De
Viris Illustribus, judged Justinian a tyrant and persecutor of the orthodox[11] and an admirer of heresy,[12]
contrasting him with Facundus of Hermiane and Victor of Tunnuna, who was considered a martyr.[13]

Despite the conflict between the council and the pope, and the inability to reconcile Chalcedonians and
non-Chalcedonians, the council still made a significant theological contribution. The canons condemning
the Three Chapters were preceded by ten dogmatic canons which defined Chalcedonian Christology with a
new precision, bringing out that Christ has two natures, the human and the divine, in one person. The 'two
natures' defined at Chalcedon were now clearly interpreted as two sets of attributes possessed by a single
person, Christ God, the Second Person of the Trinity.[14] Later Byzantine Christology, as found in Maximus
the Confessor and John of Damascus, was built upon this basis. It might have proved sufficient, moreover,
to bring about the reunion of Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians, had it not been for the severance of
connections between the two groups that resulted from the Muslim conquests of the next century.

Acts
The original Greek acts of the council are lost,[15] but an old Latin version exists, possibly made for
Vigilius, of which there is a critical edition[16] and of which there is now an English translation and
commentary,[17] and a modern Greek translation and commentary.[18] It has been alleged (probably falsely)
that the original Acts of the Fifth Council had been tampered with[19] in favour of Monothelitism.[3] It used
to be argued that the extant acts are incomplete, since they make no mention of the debate over Origenism.
However, the solution generally accepted today is that the bishops signed the canons condemning
Origenism before the council formally opened.[20] This condemnation was confirmed by Pope Vigilius and
the subsequent ecumenical council (third Council of Constantinople) gave its "assent" in its Definition of
Faith to the five previous synods, including "... the last, that is the Fifth holy Synod assembled in this place,
against Theodore of Mopsuestia, Origen, Didymus, and Evagrius ...";[21] its full conciliar authority has only
been questioned in modern times.[22]

There is a Syriac account of the council in the Melkite Chronicle of 641.[23]

Also, one of the Acts of the Council at Constantinople, were the Anathemas issued against those who
rejected the Perpetual Virginity of Mary.[24]

Aftermath
Justinian hoped that this would contribute to a reunion between the Chalcedonians and Monophysites in the
eastern provinces of the Empire. Various attempts at reconciliation between these parties within the
Byzantine Empire were made by many emperors over the four centuries following the Council of Ephesus,
none of them successful. Some attempts at reconciliation, such as this one, the condemnation of the Three
Chapters and the unprecedented posthumous anathematization of Theodore—who had once been widely
esteemed as a pillar of orthodoxy—causing further schisms and heresies to arise in the process, such as the
aforementioned schism of the Three Chapters and the emergent semi-monophysite compromises of
monoenergism and monotheletism. These propositions assert, respectively, that Christ possessed no human
energy but only a divine function or principle of operation (purposefully formulated in an equivocal and
vague manner, and promulgated between 610 and 622 by the Emperor Heraclius under the advice of
Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople) and that Christ possessed no human will but only a divine will, "will"
being understood to mean the desires and appetites in accord with the nature (promulgated in 638 by the
same and opposed most notably by Maximus the Confessor).[4]

Notes
1. "NPNF2–14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils, Introduction" (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/
npnf214.xii.ii.html). CCEL. Retrieved 2014-08-23.
(3 names, 3 bishops and 145 other, plus 1 pope, total 152)
2. See, e.g. Lutheran–Orthodox Joint Commission, Seventh Meeting, The Ecumenical
Councils, Common Statement, 1993, available at Lutheran–Orthodox Joint Commission (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20140106233748/http://www.helsinki.fi/~risaarin/lutortjointtext.html#
unde) (B. I. 5a. "We agree on the doctrine of God, the Holy Trinity, as formulated by the
Ecumenical Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople and on the doctrine of the person of
Christ as formulated by the first four Ecumenical Councils.").
3. One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the
public domain: Thomas J. Shahan (1913). "Councils of Constantinople". In Herbermann,
Charles (ed.). Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
4. Leo Donald Davis (1983), "Chapter 6 Council of Constantinople II, 553" (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=fMhzlnY0P0QC&q=Vigilius+Judicatum+diptychs&pg=PA242), The First
Seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787): Their History and Theology, Collegeville,
Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, pp. 242–248, ISBN 978-0814656167, retrieved 2014-08-23
5. Meyendorff 1989, pp. 241–243.
6. "Vigilius | pope | Britannica" (https://www.britannica.com/biography/Vigilius).
www.britannica.com. Retrieved 2022-06-15.
 7. Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, vol. IX, pp. 414–420, 457–488;
cf. Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, vol. II, pp. 905–911.
8. Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, vol. II, pp. 911–927. (For an equitable appreciation of the
conduct of Vigilius see, besides the article VIGILIUS, the judgment of Bois, in Diet. de theol.
cath., II, 1238–39.)
9. Herrin (1989) pp. 240–241
10. Herrin (1989) p. 244
11. Herrin (1989) p. 241 and the references therein
12. Isidore of Seville, Chronica Maiora, no. 397a
13. Herrin (1989) p. 241
14. Price (2009) vol. I, p. 73–75
15. "NPNF2–14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils, Excursus on the Genuineness of the Acts of
the Fifth Council" (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xii.iii.html). Christian Classics
Ethereal Library. 1 June 2005. Retrieved 2014-08-23.
16. Straub, Johannes (1971), Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum. Tomus IV, volumen I, Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter
17. Price (2009)
18. Kalamaras, Meletios (1985), The 5th Ecumenical Council [in Greek], Athens, Greece: Holy
Diocese of Nicopolis
19. Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, vol. II, pp. 855–858
20. Price (2009) vol. 2, pp. 270-86.
21. "NPNF2–14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils, The Definition of Faith" (http://www.ccel.org/c
cel/schaff/npnf214.xiii.x.html). Christian Classics Ethereal Library. 1 June 2005. Retrieved
2014-08-23.
22. Price (2009) vol. 2, pp. 270ff.
23. Hubert Kaufhold (2012), "Sources of Canon Law in the Eastern Churches", in Wilfried
Hartmann; Kenneth Pennington (eds.), The History of Byzantine and Eastern Canon Law to
1500, Catholic University of America Press, p. 223.
24. "Perpetual Virginity: Dogmatic Status and Meaning : University of Dayton, Ohio" (https://web.
archive.org/web/20210419084901/https://udayton.edu/imri/mary/p/perpetual-virginity-dogmat
ic-status-and-meaning.php). Archived from the original (https://udayton.edu/imri/mary/p/perpe
tual-virginity-dogmatic-status-and-meaning.php) on 2021-04-19.

Bibliography
Herrin, Judith (1989). The Formation of Christendom, revised, illustrated paperback edition.
London: Princeton University Press and Fontana.
Meyendorff, John (1989). Imperial unity and Christian divisions: The Church 450–680 A.D. (h
ttps://books.google.com/books?id=6J_YAAAAMAAJ) The Church in history. Vol. 2.
Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press. ISBN 978-0-88-141056-3.
Price, Richard (2009). The Acts of the Council of Constantinople of 553 – 2 Vol Set: With
Related Texts on the Three Chapters Controversy. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
pp. 270–286. ISBN 978-1846311789.
Hefele, Karl Josef von (2014) [The seven volumes of this work were first published between
1855 and 1874]. A History of the Councils of the Church: To the Close of the Council of
Nicea, A.D. 325 (original, "Conciliengeschichte"). Vol. 2. Translated and edited by Edward
 Hayes Plumptre, Henry Nutcombe Oxenham, William Robinson Clark. Charleston, South
Carolina: Nabu Press. ISBN 978-1293802021.

External links
Second Council of Constantinople (http://www.legionofmarytidewater.com/faith/ECUM05.HT
M)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Second_Council_of_Constantinople&oldid=1180741861"