On the contrary, its referral is quite relevant. The Christian East, before and after the Schism, never held the Second Council of Orange in any high regard.
The east never even knew about it. That’s why they said nothing. It was a synod of the West. Hundreds of synods were held and most weren’t popular or know ln about apart from their regions. Only a few are well known. It’s partristic authority is proven by the authority it held amongst those it was relevant to and was known by. The west upheld it completely. And in the event the east knew about it, more importantly, the east never denied. Not once.. The way if the church is to repudiate heretical councils. Silence is to accept its decisions.
No ecumenical Council overruled nor any papal act. The west upheld it and brought it back to light to call on its authority later as you have mentioned proving its church approval.
And the fact that it only became popular during the latter half of the ninth century adds weight to any cautious approach to its teachings. The teachings of a local synod, just as those of any individual Father, are not infallible.
Lol I didn’t claim it was Infallible of itself ever. I said it was a true because it is the only church ruling on this matter and the final word. It was the tradition of the church retaught to refute an error. It’s the ordinary magisterium in our modern jargon and that is infallible.
As for the rest, I’m going to just leave the subject. I’m currently translating excerpts of St. Faustus’ work in anticipation of a blog post.
All the best with your transalation sincerely. Send me a link to the blog post.