Quinisext 'Council'


#1

In this council by the orthodox, they condemned weekday Mass during Lent, fasting on Saturdays, lack of alleluia during lent, etc.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinisext_Council

Does anybody know more about this council, and what the Catholic position is? It sounds like a bunch of anti-Latinisms.
Pax


#2

As the article states, it was a council attended only by eastern bishops. What it doesn’t tell you is that the western bishops were not invited. There were bad feelings between east and west even at that early stage. And it was a bunch of anti-Latinisms with regard to the western part of the Church. This council was never ratified as a genuine council by the Church although many of the disciplinary concerns were accepted; but many were not.


#3

Actually This Synod Enjoys Ecumenical Authority in at LEAST one of 3 ways:

  1. Association with the 5th and 6th Ecumenical Synods:

The Council was called by Justinian II in 692. Both the Fifth and Sixth Ecumenical Councils fully occupied their time with the Christological problem and issued no canons pertaining to ecclesiastical government and order. Actually, the Quinisext may be considered to be the continuation of all the preceding Ecumenical Councils inasmuch as by its 2nd canon ( fordham.edu/halsall/basis/trullo.html ) it received and ratified all of their canons and decisions. It also ratified the so-called “Eighty-five Apostolic Canons”, the canons of local synods, and the most important of the canons of the principal Fathers of the Church, thus empowering all of them with Ecumenical authority.

  1. Being Confirmed by the 7th Ecumenical Council (The Second at Nicea) :

Act 4 of the 7th Ecumenical Council, just to give one example of the use of the Quinisext canons at that council records the following:

“Some men who are painfully ignorant in regard to these canons are scandalized and blatantly say, “We wonder whether there really are canons of the Sixth Council.” Let such men become conscious of the fact that the holy and great Sixth Council was convoked in the reign of Constantine against those who were asserting the energy and the will of Christ to be a signle energy and a single will, and that the bishops who attended it anathematized the heretics and stated clearly and emphatically the Orthodox faith, after which they left for home in the year fourteen of Constantine’s reign. Thereafter, however, let it not be forgotten that… the same fathers gathered themselves together in the reign of Constantine’s son Justinian and promulgated the aforementioned Canons, and let no one have any doubt about them. For those who signed their names in the reign of Constantine are the same ones who signed their names to the present paper in the reign of Justinian, as becomes plainly evident from the exact likeness of their respective signatures as written by their own hands. For it was incumbent on them after declaring an Ecumenical Council to proceed to promulgate also ecclesiastical Canons”

  1. The Acceptance and therefore implicit Ratification by Pope Hadrian I in the letter to Terasius of Constantinople attributes them to the Sixth Synod:

“All the Holy Six Synods I receive with all their canons, which rightly and divinely were promulgated by them, among which is contained that in which reference is made to a lamb being pointed to by the precursor as being found in certain of the venerable images.” Here the reference is unmistakably to the Trullan canon LXXXII." That is 82. Here ya go:

CANON LXXXII.

“IN some pictures of the venerable icons, a lamb is painted to which the Precursor points his finger, which is received as a type of grace, indicating beforehand through the Law, our true Lamb, Christ our God. Embracing therefore the ancient types and shadows as symbols of the truth, and patterns given to the Church, we prefer “grace and truth,” receiving it as the fulfilment of the Law. In order therefore that “that which is perfect” may be delineated to the eyes of all, at least in coloured expression, we decree that the figure in human form of the Lamb who taketh away the sin of the world, Christ our God, be henceforth exhibited in images, instead of the ancient lamb, so that all may understand by means of it the depths of the humiliation of the Word of God, and that we may recall to our memory his conversation in the flesh, his passion and salutary death, and his redemption which was wrought for the whole world.”

And here is exactly what your buddy was reffering to about some being accepted but not all:

Catholic Encyclopedia Entry For Pope Constantine:

“Strange to say, this cruel prince ( Justinian) received the pope with the greatest honour, prostrating himself before him and kissing his feet. After receiving Holy Communion at the hands of the pope, he renewed all the privileges of the Roman Church. Exactly what passed between them on the subject of the Quinisext Council is not known. It would appear, however, that Constantine approved those canons which were not opposed to the true Faith or to sound morals, and that with this qualified approval of his council the emperor was content.”

That should zip it up.


#4

It was ratified:
The decrees were signed first by the Emperor, the next place was left vacant for the Pope, then followed the subscriptions of the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Antioch, the whole number being 211, bishops or representatives of bishops. It is not quite certain whether any of the Patriarchs were present except Paul of Constantinople; but taking it all in all the probability is in favour of their presenceBlank places were left for the bishops of Thessalonica, Sardinia, Ravenna and Corinth. The Archbishop of Gortyna in Crete added to his signature the phrase “Holding the place of the holy Church of Rome in every synod.” He had in the same way signed the decrees of III. Constantinople, Crete belonging to the Roman Patriarchate; as to whether his delegation on the part of the Roman Synod continued or was merely made to continue by his own volition we have no information.
Pope Sergius refused to sign the decrees when they were sent to him, rejected them as “lacking authority” (invalidi) and described them as containing “novel errors.” With the efforts to extort his signature we have no concern further than to state that they signally failed. Later on, in the time of Pope Constantine, a middle course seems to have been adopted, a course subsequently in the ninth century thus expressed by Pope John VIII., “he accepted all those canons which did not contradict the true faith, good morals, and the decrees of Rome,” a truly notable statement! Nearly a century later Pope Hadrian I. distinctly recognizes all the Trullan decrees in his letter to Tenasius of Constantinople and attributes them to the Sixth Synod. “All the holy six synods I receive with all their canons, which rightly and divinely were promulgated by them, among which is contained that in which reference is made to a Lamb being pointed to by the Precursor as being found in certain of the venerable images.” Here the reference is unmistakably to the Trullan Canon LXXXII.
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.ii.html


#5

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.