The church councils can be rather confusing. The purpose of this page is to offer a brief explanation to the issues, major players, and results of the church councils to promote a better understanding. (Credit: notes assembled based on lectures by Jeff Adams)
2nd Ecumenical Council: 381 AD, Constantinople
Heresy condemned: Apollinarianism
Issue: Christ's nature, humanity, and deity. Supporters of Apollinarianism believed that Jesus Christ, as the Word of God incarnate, lacked a human mind. Instead, Apollinaris taught that in Jesus the place of the mind was taken by the Word. Jesus is part God and part man.
Players:
Results: Jesus was confirmed to be fully God and fully man. Nicene creed published.
3rd Ecumentical Council: 431 AD, Ephesus
Issue: How many persons and natures does Jesus have?
Heresies condemned:
Players:
Other issues: Nestorius’ rejection of Theotokos (‘Bearer of God’) as an appellation for the Virgin Mary. Cyril argued that withholding the title of Theotokos from Mary reduced Christ’s status to that of a mere man and thereby made the Church’s worship of him equivalent to idolatry (see article the Council of Ephesus in Credo Reference).
Results: Nestorianism was condemned but both positions leaned toward heresy. Pelagianism was re-condemned (first condemned at Carthage in 418 A.D.) This doctrine promoted that Adam was mortal and would have died anyway despite his sin and there was no "original sin." Adam's fall was purrely moral and he just set a bad example. Through free will, humans could achieve moral perfection. The problem was that Pelagius seemed to think that Augustine's original sin concept equated to fatalism and encouraged apathy. "God would not demand perfection, as the Bible sometimes suggested, were that impossible to attain. Rather grace made the struggle easier for a sanctity that would not be unreachable even in its absence. Though in the habit of sinning, in consequence of the fall, we have not forfeited the capacity to overcome that habit nor been released from the imperative to do so. For all its moral earnestness this teaching seems to be in conflict with much of the New Testament, especially as interpreted by Augustine, and it was condemned as heresy in 418. The bondage of the will has often been reaffirmed, perhaps most notably by Luther in dispute with Erasmus. Yet Christian theology and practice have always had their sympathizers with Pelagianism and with its reluctance to attest the loss of free will, the inevitability of sin, and the utter necessity of God’s grace." (The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 1999).
4th Ecumentical Council: ca.451 AD, Chalcedon
Issue: Is Christ consubstantial (same substance/nature) with man?
Heresy condemned: Eutychianism
Players:
Additional Background: Dioscorus engineered the Council of Ephesus in 449 A.D. through Emperor Theodosius II. His "stacked" council censured Flavian Theodoret, and the party from Antioch. The "two natures view" was declared heretical. Flavian was not allowed to read a letter from Leo (Bishop of Rome). Both parties appealed to Leo for help. Leo favored Flavian and the party from Antioch so his letter was denied a public reading. Flavian was beaten and died a few days later. Leo called this the "robber's synod." TURNING POINT: Theododius died and was succeeded by his sister, Pulcheria.
Results: Leo's position accepted. Christ is perfect in deity and in humanity. He is consubstantial with the Father and man. He was born of the virgin Mary,the mother of God (theotokos). He is one person with two natures. Creed of Chalcedon (which Dioscrous tried to suppress at Ephesus).
5th Ecumenical Council: 553 A.D. (Second Council of Constantinople)
Issue: The nature of Christ. Is He of the same essence as humans?
Heresy: Monophysiticism (one nature)
Players:
Result: Affirmed the Chalcedonian "two natures" view. They also accepted Cyril's "hypostatic union" of "one flesh." In this view, Christ's humanity possessed no true nature or individuality (hypostasis) of its own. His humanity existed ony as part of a whole that was Christ, the Logos (Incarnate Word). This unity between humanity and the Word had taken place before the Incoarnation. Christ's manhood never had existed apart form the Word (which Origen espoused). This "oe flesh" concept was designed to refute any suggestion of "twoperson" which might be derived form Nestorianism. This settlement was not accepted within both parties universally; most westerners, Antiochenes, and some of Syril's diseiples followed it. Many Monophysites becaome schismatic and formed a new church with its own organization. It was especially strong in Egypt.
6th Ecumenical Council: 680-681 A.D. (Third Council of Constantinople)
Issue: How many wills does Christ have?
Heresy condemned: Monotheletism (one will)
Players:
How it played out: Monophysites believed that if the Chalcedons were right, then Christ had two natures, then he had to have two wills. They preferred one nature and one will. Here are the various viewpoints.
a. Heraclius and several Monophysite bishops agreed with Pope Honorius. They wanted to reunite the church throughout the empire. They used "one divine-human energy" as a point of agreement. When things were too vague, they replaced it with "one will" (hence their name, MONOphysites).
b. Sophronius - opposed the Monophysites. Christ had two natures united in one person. He never explicitly said "two wills." Human nature was made a passive instrument of the divine personality.
c. Successors to Honorius - opposed the Monophysites. Advocated "two wills." If Christ's human nature had not an independent will, then Christ was an imperfect man. Maximus was a good defender of this argument.
Result: Chaldonian dyothelitism (one person, two wills which do not oppose each other) claimed wide-spread triumph because Christian expected a perfect manhood in Christ. Monothelitism had been stimulated my by political and ecclesiastical intrigue than by a search for truth. Also, persecution by the Eastern emperors tended to unite the entire West and a large part of the East against their tyranny.
7th Ecumenical Council: 787 A.D., Second Council of Nicea
Issue: Iconography - the significance of statues and paintings
Heresy condemned: Iconoclasms
Players:
1. Iconoclasts
Players: all emperors
Argument: Iconography violates the 2nd commandment.
2. Image worship
Players: all monks
Argument: use of statues and paintings is traditional. They help teaach valuable lessons to people who can't read.
Background: Iconography was condemned in 306 at the Synod of Elvira. Use of statues encouraged image worship. Leo III and Constatine V opposed images with stiff penalties. Western bishops (popes) Gregory II and Gregory III opposed iconoclasts. Leo IV's wife, Irene favored images. When Leo IV died, Irene took over as regent for their son Constantine VI who was only nine years old. Irene oppsed the army and clergy, which favored iconoclasm (opposed statues) and favored the monks instead and gave them high offices. She continued to manipulate the situation to try and bring the Eastern and Western churches together to endorse images.
Result: Under pressure from Irene, the bishops agreed to allow the bowing down before and kissing of images and to forbid the worshipping of images. Charlemagne endoresed images in the West; however, iconoclasm re-emerged under Leo the Armenian and issued an edict against them in 814. Under Theodora, the decrees were re-established and iconoclasts were persecuted.