How many ecumenical councils does the history of Christianity include? A Brief History of Christianity: Ecumenical Councils

The custom of convening Councils to discuss important church issues dates back to the first centuries of Christianity. The first of the famous Councils was convened in 49 (according to other sources - in 51) in Jerusalem and received the name Apostolic (see: Acts 15: 1-35). The Council discussed the issue of compliance by pagan Christians with the requirements of the Mosaic Law. It is also known that the apostles gathered to make common decisions earlier: for example, when the apostle Matthias was elected instead of the fallen Judas Iscariot or when seven deacons were elected.

The councils were both Local (with the participation of bishops, other clergy and sometimes laity of the Local Church) and Ecumenical.

Cathedrals Ecumenical convened on particularly important ecclesiastical issues of significance for the entire Church. Where possible, they were attended by representatives of all Local Churches, pastors and teachers from all over the Universe. Ecumenical Councils are the highest ecclesiastical authority; they are carried out under the leadership Holy Spirit active in the Church.

The Orthodox Church recognizes seven Ecumenical Councils: I of Nicaea; I of Constantinople; Ephesian; Chalcedonian; II of Constantinople; III of Constantinople; II Nicene.

First Ecumenical Council

It took place in June 325 in the city of Nicaea during the reign of Emperor Constantine the Great. The Council was directed against the false teaching of the Alexandrian presbyter Arius, who rejected the Divinity and the pre-eternal birth of the second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Son of God, from God the Father and taught that the Son of God is only the highest Creation. The Council condemned and rejected the heresy of Arius and approved the dogma of the Divinity of Jesus Christ: the Son of God is the True God, born of God the Father before all ages and is as eternal as God the Father; He is begotten, not created, one in essence with God the Father.

At the Council, the first seven members of the Creed were compiled.

At the First Ecumenical Council, it was also decided to celebrate Easter on the first Sunday after the full moon, which falls after the spring equinox.

The Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council (20th Canon) abolished prostrations on Sundays, since the Sunday holiday is a prototype of our stay in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Other important church rules were also adopted.

It took place in 381 in Constantinople. Its participants gathered to condemn the heresy of Macedonius, the former Arian bishop. He denied the Divinity of the Holy Spirit; He taught that the Holy Spirit is not God, calling Him a created power and, moreover, a servant of God the Father and God the Son. The Council condemned the destructive false teaching of Macedonius and approved the dogma of the equality and consubstantiality of God the Holy Spirit with God the Father and God the Son.

The Nicene Creed was supplemented with five members. Work on the Creed was completed, and it received the name of Niceno-Constantinople (Constantinople was called Constantinople in Slavic).

The council was convened in the city of Ephesus in 431 and was directed against the false teaching of the Archbishop of Constantinople Nestorius, who claimed that the Blessed Virgin Mary gave birth to the man Christ, with whom God later united and dwelt in Him as in a temple. Nestorius called the Lord Jesus Christ himself a God-bearer, and not a God-man, and the Most Holy Virgin not the Mother of God, but the Mother of Christ. The Council condemned the heresy of Nestorius and decided to recognize that in Jesus Christ, from the time of the Incarnation, two natures were united: Divine And human. It was also determined to confess Jesus Christ perfect God And perfect Man, and the Blessed Virgin Mary - Mother of God.

The Council approved the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed and forbade changes to it.

The story in the “Spiritual Meadow” by John Moschus testifies to how evil Nestorius’s heresy is:

“We came to Abba Kyriakos, presbyter of the Kalamon Lavra, which is near the Holy Jordan. He told us: “Once in a dream I saw a majestic Woman dressed in purple, and with Her two husbands, shining with holiness and dignity. Everyone stood outside my cell. I realized that this was our Lady Theotokos, and the two men were Saint John the Theologian and Saint John the Baptist. Leaving the cell, I asked to come in and say a prayer in my cell. But She did not deign. I did not stop begging, saying: “May I not be rejected, humiliated and disgraced” and much more. Seeing the persistence of my request, She answered me sternly: “You have My enemy in your cell. How do you want Me to come in?” Having said this, she left. I woke up and began to grieve deeply, imagining whether I had sinned against Her at least in thought, since there was no one else in the cell except me. After testing myself for a long time, I did not find any sin against Her. Immersed in sadness, I stood up and took a book to dispel my grief by reading. I had in my hands the book of Blessed Hesychius, presbyter of Jerusalem. Having unfolded the book, I found at the very end of it two sermons of the wicked Nestorius and immediately realized that he was the enemy of the Most Holy Theotokos. I immediately got up, went out and returned the book to the one who gave it to me.

- Take your book back, brother. It brought not so much benefit as harm.

He wanted to know what the harm was. I told him about my dream. Filled with jealousy, he immediately cut out two words of Nestorius from the book and set it on fire.

“Let no enemy of our Lady, the Most Holy Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary, remain in my cell,” he said!

It took place in 451 in the city of Chalcedon. The council was directed against the false teaching of the archimandrite of one of the Constantinople monasteries, Eutyches, who rejected human nature in the Lord Jesus Christ. Eutyches taught that in the Lord Jesus Christ human nature is completely absorbed by the Divine, and recognized in Christ only the Divine nature. This heresy was called Monophysitism (Greek. mono- the only one; physics- nature). The Council condemned this heresy and defined the teaching of the Church: the Lord Jesus Christ is True God and true man, like us in everything except sin. At the incarnation of Christ, Divinity and humanity were united in Him as one Person, unmerged and unchangeable, inseparable and inseparable.

In 553, the V Ecumenical Council was convened in Constantinople. The Council discussed the writings of three bishops who died in the 5th century: Theodore of Mopsuet, Theodoret of Cyrus and Willow of Edessa. The first was one of Nestorius' teachers. Theodoret sharply opposed the teachings of St. Cyril of Alexandria. Under the name of Iva there was a message addressed to Marius the Persian, which contained disrespectful comments about the decision of the Third Ecumenical Council against Nestorius. All three writings of these bishops were condemned at the Council. Since Theodoret and Iva renounced their false opinions and died in peace with the Church, they themselves were not condemned. Theodore of Mopsuetsky did not repent and was condemned. The Council also confirmed the condemnation of the heresy of Nestorius and Eutyches.

The council was convened in 680 in Constantinople. He condemned the false teaching of the Monothelite heretics, who, despite the fact that they recognized two natures in Christ - Divine and human, taught that the Savior had only one - Divine - will. The fight against this widespread heresy was courageously led by the Patriarch of Jerusalem Sophronius and the Constantinople monk Maximus the Confessor.

The Council condemned the Monothelite heresy and determined to recognize in Jesus Christ two natures - Divine and human - and two wills. The human will in Christ is not repulsive, but submissive Divine will. This is most clearly expressed in the Gospel story about the Savior’s Gethsemane prayer.

Eleven years later, conciliar sessions continued at the Council, which received the name Fifth-sixth, since it supplemented the acts of the V and VI Ecumenical Councils. It dealt mainly with issues of church discipline and piety. The rules according to which the Church should be governed were approved: the eighty-five rules of the holy apostles, the rules of six Ecumenical and seven Local Councils, as well as the rules of the thirteen fathers of the Church. These rules were subsequently supplemented by the rules of the VII Ecumenical Council and two more Local Councils and constituted the so-called Nomocanon - a book of church canonical rules (in Russian - “Kormchaya Book”).

This cathedral also received the name Trullan: it took place in the royal chambers, called Trullan.

It took place in 787 in the city of Nicaea. Sixty years before the Council, the iconoclastic heresy arose under the Emperor Leo the Isaurian, who, wanting to make it easier for the Mohammedans to convert to Christianity, decided to abolish the veneration of holy icons. The heresy continued under subsequent emperors: his son Constantine Copronymus and grandson Leo the Khazar. The VII Ecumenical Council was convened to condemn the heresy of iconoclasm. The council determined to venerate holy icons along with the image of the Cross of the Lord.

But even after the VII Ecumenical Council, the heresy of iconoclasm was not completely destroyed. Under three subsequent emperors there were new persecutions of icons, and they continued for another twenty-five years. Only in 842, under Empress Theodora, did the Local Council of Constantinople take place, which finally restored and approved the veneration of icons. A holiday was established at the Council Celebrations of Orthodoxy, which we have since celebrated on the first Sunday of Lent.

the highest authority in the Orthodox Church. Churches whose dogmatic decisions have the status of infallibility. Orthodox The Church recognizes 7 Ecumenical Councils: I - Nicaea 325, II - K-Polish 381, III - Ephesus 431, IV - Chalcedon 451, V - K-Polish 553, VI - K-Polish 680-681, VII - Nicene 787. In addition, the authority of the rules of V.S. is assimilated by the 102 canons of the K-Polish Council (691-692), called Trullo, Sixth or Fifth-Sixth. These Councils were convened to refute heretical false teachings, authoritative presentation of dogmas and resolve canonical issues.

Orthodox Ecclesiology and the history of the Church testify that the bearer of the highest church authority is the ecumenical episcopate - the successor of the Council of the Apostles, and the V.S. is the most perfect way of exercising the powers of the ecumenical episcopate in the Church. The prototype of the Ecumenical Councils was the Jerusalem Council of the Apostles (Acts 15. 1-29). There are no unconditional dogmatic or canonical definitions regarding the composition, powers, conditions for convening the Supreme Council, or the authorities authorized to convene it. This is due to the fact that the Orthodox Church. Ecclesiology sees in V.S. the highest authority of church power, which is under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit and therefore cannot be subject to any kind of regulation. However, the absence of canonical definitions regarding V.S. does not prevent the identification, on the basis of a generalization of historical data about the circumstances under which the Councils were convened and took place, certain basic features of this extraordinary, charismatic institution in the life and structure of the Church.

All 7 Ecumenical Councils were convened by emperors. However, this fact is not a sufficient basis for denying the possibility of convening a Council on the initiative of other, ecclesiastical authorities. In terms of composition, V.S. is an episcopal corporation. Presbyters or deacons could attend as full members only in cases where they represented their absent bishops. They often participated in cathedral activities as advisers in the retinue of their bishops. Their voice could also be heard at the Council. It is known how important participation in the actions of the First Ecumenical Council of St. was for the Ecumenical Church. Athanasius the Great, who arrived in Nicaea as a deacon in the retinue of his bishop - St. Alexander of Alexandria. But conciliar decisions were signed only by bishops or their deputies. The exception is the acts of the VII Ecumenical Council, signed in addition to the bishops by the monks who participated in it and did not have the episcopal rank. This was due to the special authority of monasticism, acquired by it thanks to its firm confessional stand for icon veneration in the era of iconoclasm preceding the Council, as well as the fact that some of the bishops who participated in this Council compromised themselves by making concessions to the iconoclasts. The signatures of the emperors under the definitions of V.S. had a fundamentally different character than the signatures of bishops or their deputies: they conveyed to the oros and canons of the Councils the force of imperial laws.

Local Churches were represented on the V.S. with varying degrees of completeness. Only a few persons representing the Roman Church took part in the Ecumenical Councils, although the authority of these persons was high. At the VII Ecumenical Council, the representation of the Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem Churches was extremely small, almost symbolic. Recognition of the Council as Ecumenical was never conditioned by the proportional representation of all local Churches.

V.S.’s competence was primarily in resolving controversial dogmatic issues. This is the predominant and almost exclusive right of the Ecumenical Councils, and not of local Councils. Based on the Holy Scripture and Church Tradition, the fathers of the Councils, refuted heretical errors, contrasting them with the help of conciliar definitions of Orthodoxy. confession of faith. The dogmatic definitions of the 7 Ecumenical Councils, contained in their oros, have thematic unity: they reveal a holistic Trinitarian and Christological teaching. The presentation of dogmas in conciliar symbols and oros is infallible; which reflects the infallibility of the Church professed in Christianity.

In the disciplinary field, the Councils issued canons (rules), which regulated church life, and the rules of the Fathers of the Church, which the Ecumenical Councils accepted and approved. In addition, they changed and clarified previously adopted disciplinary definitions.

V.S. held trials over the Primates of the autocephalous Churches, other hierarchs and all persons belonging to the Church, anathematized false teachers and their adherents, and issued court rulings in cases related to violations of church discipline or illegal occupation of church positions. V.S. also had the right to make judgments about the status and boundaries of local Churches.

The question of church acceptance (reception) of the resolutions of the Council and, in connection with this, the criteria for the universality of the Council is extremely difficult. There are no external criteria for an unambiguous determination of infallibility, universality, or the Council, because there are no external criteria for absolute Truth. Therefore, for example, the number of participants in a particular Council or the number of Churches represented at it is not the main thing in determining its status. Thus, some of the Councils, not recognized by the Ecumenical Councils or even directly condemned as “robbers,” were not inferior to the Councils recognized by the Ecumenical Councils in terms of the number of local Churches represented at them. A. S. Khomyakov linked the authority of the Councils with the acceptance of its decrees by Christ. by the people. “Why were these councils rejected,” he wrote about the gatherings of robbers, “which do not represent any outward differences from the Ecumenical Councils? Because the only thing is that their decisions were not recognized as the voice of the Church by all the church people” (Poln. sobr. soch. M., 18863. T. 2. P. 131). According to the teachings of St. Maximus the Confessor, those Councils are holy and recognized which correctly set out dogmas. At the same time, Rev. Maxim also rejected the Caesar-papist tendency to make the ecumenical authority of the Councils dependent on the ratification of their decrees by the emperors. “If the previous Councils were approved by the orders of emperors, and not by the Orthodox faith,” he said, “then those Councils would also be accepted, which spoke out against the doctrine of consubstantiality, since they met by order of the emperor... All of them, indeed, gathered by order of the emperors, and yet all are condemned because of the godlessness of the blasphemous teachings established on them” (Anast. Apocris. Acta. Col. 145).

The claims of the Roman Catholics are untenable. ecclesiology and canons, which make the recognition of conciliar acts dependent on their ratification by the Bishop of Rome. According to the remark of Archbishop. Peter (L "Huillier), "the fathers of the Ecumenical Councils never considered that the validity of the decisions made depended on any subsequent ratification... The measures adopted at the Council became binding immediately after the end of the Council and were considered irrevocable" (Peter ( L "Huillier), archimandrite. Ecumenical Councils in the life of the Church // VrZePE. 1967. No. 60. pp. 247-248). Historically, the final recognition of the Council as ecumenical belonged to the subsequent Council, and the VII Council was recognized as Ecumenical at the Local Polish Council of 879.

Despite the fact that the last, VII Ecumenical Council took place more than 12 centuries ago, there are no dogmatic grounds for asserting the fundamental impossibility of convening a new Supreme Council or recognizing one of the earlier Councils as Ecumenical. Archbishop Vasily (Krivoshein) wrote that the Polish Council of 879 “both in its composition and in the nature of its resolutions... bears all the signs of an Ecumenical Council. Like the Ecumenical Councils, he made a number of decrees of a dogmatic-canonical nature... Thus, he proclaimed the immutability of the text of the Creed without the Filioque and anathematized everyone who changes it” ( Vasily (Krivoshein), archbishop Symbolic texts in the Orthodox Church // BT. 1968. Sat. 4. pp. 12-13).

Source: Mansi; ACO; COD; SQS; ICE; Book of rules; Nicodemus [Milash], bishop. Rules; Canones apostolorum et conciliorum: saeculorum IV, V, VI, VII / Ed. H. T. Bruns. B., 1839. Torino, 1959r; Pitra. Juris ecclesiastici; Michalcescu J. Die Bekenntnisse und die wichtigsten Glaubenszeugnisse der griechisch-orientalischen Kirche im Originaltext, nebst einleitenden Bemerkungen. Lpz., 1904; Corpus Iuris Canonici/Ed. A. Friedberg. Lpz., 1879-1881. Graz, 1955r. 2 vol.; Jaffe. RPR; Lauchert F. Die Kanones der wichtigsten altkirchlichen Concilien nebst den apostolischen Kanones. Freiburg; Lpz., 1896, 1961r; RegImp; RegCP; Mirbt C. Quellen zur Geschichte des Papsttums und des römischen Katholizismus. Tüb., 19345; Kirch C. Enchiridion fontium historiae ecclesiasticae antiquae. Barcelona, ​​19659; Discipline générale antique / Ed. P.-P. Joannou. T. 1/1: Les canons des conciles oecuméniques. Grottaferrata, 1962; T. 1/2: Les canons des synodes particuliers. Grottaferrata, 1962; T. 2: Les canons des pères Grecs. Grottaferrata, 1963; Denzinger H., Schönmetzer A. Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum. Barcelona, ​​196533, 197636; Bettenson H. Documents of the Christian Church. Oxf., 1967; Dossetti G. L. Il simbolo di Nicea e di Costantinopoli. R., 1967; Καρμίρης ᾿Ι. Τὰ δογματικὰ καὶ συμβολικὰ μνημεῖα τῆς ὀρθοδόξου καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκ λησίας. ᾿Αθῆναι, 1960. Τ. 1; Hahn A., Harnack A. Bibliothek der Symbole und Glaubensregeln der Alten Kirche. Hildesheim, 1962; Neuner J., Roos H. Der Glaube der Kirche in den Urkunden der Lehrverkündigung, Regensburg, 197910.

Lit.: Lebedev A. P . Ecumenical Councils of the 4th and 5th centuries. Serg. P., 18962. St. Petersburg, 2004p; aka. Ecumenical Councils of the VI, VII and VIII centuries. Serg. P., 18972. St. Petersburg, 2004p; aka. On the origin of the acts of the Ecumenical Councils // BV. 1904. T. 2. No. 5. P. 46-74; Gidulyanov P. IN . Eastern Patriarchs during the period of the first four Ecumenical Councils. Yaroslavl, 1908; Percival H. R. The Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church. N. Y.; Oxf., 1900; Dobronravov N. P., prot. Participation of clergy and laity at councils in the first nine centuries of Christianity // BV. 1906. T. 1. No. 2. P. 263-283; Lapin P. The conciliar principle in the eastern patriarchates // PS. 1906. T. 1. P. 525-620; T. 2. P. 247-277, 480-501; T. 3. P. 72-105, 268-302, 439-472, 611-645; 1907. T. 1. P. 65-78, 251-262, 561-578, 797-827; 1908. T. 1. P. 355-383, 481-498, 571-587; T. 2. P. 181-207, 333-362, 457-499, 571-583, 669-688; 1909. T. 1. P. 571-599; T. 2. P. 349-384, 613-634; Bolotov. Lectures. T. 3-4; Hefele, Leclercq. Hist. des Conciles; Strumensky M. The attitude of emperors to the ancient Ecumenical Councils // Wanderer. 1913. No. 12. P. 675-706; Spassky A. History of dogmatic movements in the era of the Ecumenical Councils. Serg. P., 1914; Beneshevich V. Synagogue in 50 titles and other legal collections of John Scholasticus. St. Petersburg, 1914; Kartashev. Cathedrals; Krüger G. Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte. Tüb., 1923-19312. 4 Bde; Jugie M. Theologia dogmatica Christianorum orientalium ab Ecclesia catholica dissidentium. P., 1926-1935. 5 t.; Afanasyev N. N., protopr. Ecumenical Councils // The Path. 1930. No. 25. P. 81-92; Harnack A. Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte. Tüb., 19315. 3 Bde; Troitsky S. IN . Theocracy or Caesaropapism? // VZPEPE. 1953. No. 16. P. 196-206; Meyendorff I. F., protopr. What is an Ecumenical Council? // VRSHD. 1959. No. 1. P. 10-15; No. 3. P. 10-15; Le concile et les conciles: Contribution à l "histoire de la vie conciliaire de l"église / Ed. O. Rousseau. Chevetogne, 1960; Peter (L "Huillier), archim. [archbishop] Ecumenical councils in the life of the Church // VrZePE. 1967. No. 60. P. 234-251; Loofs Fr. Leitfaden zum Studium der Dogmengeschichte. Tüb., 19687; Zabolotsky N. A. The theological and ecclesiological significance of the Ecumenical and Local Councils in the Ancient Church // BT. 1970. Collection 5. pp. 244-254; Jedin H. Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte. Freiburg, 1973-1979. 7 Bde; Vries W., de . Orient et Occident: Les structures ecclésiales vues dans l "histoire des sept premiers conciles oecuméniques. P., 1974; Lietzmann H. Geschichte der alten Kirche. B., 1975; Grillmeier A. Christ in Christian Tradition. L., 19752. Vol. 1; 1987. Vol. 2/1; 1995. Vol. 2/2; 1996. Vol. 2/4; idem. Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche. Bd. 1: Von der Apostolischen Zeit bis zum Konzil von Chalcedon. Freiburg e. a., 19903; Bd. 2 / 1: Das Konzil von Chalcedon (451), Rezeption und Widerspruch (451-518). Freiburg e. a., 19912; Bd. 2 / 2: Die Kirche von Konstantinopel im 6. Jahrhundert. Freiburg e. a., 1989; Bd. 2 / 3: Die Kirchen von Jerusalem und Antiochien nach 451 bis 600. Freiburg e. a., 2002; Bd. 2.4: Die Kirchen von Alexandrien mit Nubien und Äthiopien ab 451. Freiburg e. a., 1990; Andresen C. e. a. Handbuch der Dogmen- und Theologiegeschichte. Gött., 1982. Bd. 1; Winkelmann F. Die östlichen Kirchen in der Epoche der christologischen Auseinandersetzungen. 5.-7. Jh. B., 1983; Davis L. D. The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787): Their History and Theology. Wilmington, 1987; Sesboüé B. Jésus-Christ dans la tradition de L"Église. P., 1990; Παπαδόπουλος Σ. Γ. Πατρολογία. ᾿Αθήνα, 1990. Τ. Β´; Beyschlag K. Grundriss der Dogmengeschichte. Bd. 2. T. 1: Das christologische Dogma. Darmstadt, 1991; Alberigo G. Geschichte der Konzilien: Vom Nicaenum bis zum Vaticanum II. Düsseldorf, 1993; Averky (Taushev), Archbishop of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. M., St. Petersburg, 1996; Die Geschichte des Christentums. Bd. 2: Das Entstehen der einen Christenheit (250-430). Freiburg, 1996; Studer B. Schola christiana: Die Theologie zwischen Nizäa und Chalkedon // ThLZ. 1999. Bd. 124. S. 751-754; Hauschild W.-D Lehrbuch der Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte. Gütersloh, 20002. Bd. 1; L"Huillier P., Archbp. The Church of the Ancient Councils. N.Y., 2000; Meyendorff I., prot. Jesus Christ in Eastern Orthodox theology. M., 2000; Tsypin V., prot. Church law course. M.; Klin, 2004. pp. 67-70, 473-478.

Prot. Vladislav Tsypin

Hymnography

Several Ecumenical Councils are dedicated to the remembrance of the Ecumenical Councils. days of the liturgical year. Close to modern the system of celebrated memories of the Ecumenical Councils is already present in the Typikon of the Great Church. IX-X centuries The hymnographic sequences of these days have many common readings and chants

In the Typikon of the Great Church. there are 5 commemorations of the Ecumenical Councils, which have a hymnographic sequence: in the 7th week (Sunday) of Easter - I-VI Ecumenical Councils (Mateos. Typicon. T. 2. P. 130-132); September 9 - III Ecumenical Council (Ibid. T. 1. P. 22); September 15 - VI Ecumenical Council (Ibid. P. 34-36); October 11 - VII Ecumenical Council (Ibid. T. 1. P. 66); July 16 - IV Ecumenical Council (Ibid. T. 1. P. 340-342). Associated with the latter memory is the memory of the Council of 536 against Sevier of Antioch in the week after July 16th. In addition, the Typikon marks 4 more commemorations of Ecumenical Councils, which do not have a special sequence: May 29 - the First Ecumenical Council; August 3 - II Ecumenical Council; July 11 - IV Ecumenical Council (together with the memory of the Great Martyr Euphemia); July 25 - V Ecumenical Council.

In the Studite Synaxar, compared with the Typikon of the Great Church. the number of commemorations of the Ecumenical Councils was reduced. According to the Studian-Alexievsky Typikon of 1034, the memory of the Ecumenical Councils is celebrated 3 times a year: on the 7th week after Easter - 6 Ecumenical Councils (Pentkovsky. Typikon. pp. 271-272), October 11 - VII Ecumenical Council (together with the memory of St. Theophan the hymn-writer - Ibid., p. 289); in the week after July 11 - the IV Ecumenical Council (at the same time, instructions are given on commemorating the Council in the week before or after July 16 - Ibid. pp. 353-354). In the studio Typicons of other editions - Asia Minor and Athos-Italian XI-XII centuries, as well as in the early Jerusalem Typicons, the memory of the Ecumenical Councils is celebrated 1 or 2 times a year: in all Typicons the memory of the Ecumenical Councils is indicated on the 7th week after Easter ( Dmitrievsky. Description. T. 1. P. 588-589; Arranz. Typicon. P. 274-275; Kekelidze. Liturgical cargo monuments. P. 301), in some southern Italian and Athos monuments the memory of the IV Ecumenical Council is also noted in July (Kekelidze. Liturgical cargo monuments. P. 267; Dmitrievsky. Description. T. 1. P. 860).

In later editions of the Jerusalem Charter, a system of 3 commemorations was formed: on the 7th week of Easter, in October and in July. In this form, the memory of the Ecumenical Councils is celebrated according to modern times. printed Typikon.

Commemoration of the 6 Ecumenical Councils on the 7th week of Easter. According to the Typikon of the Great Church, on the day of remembrance of 6 V.S. a festive service is performed. On Saturday at Vespers, 3 proverbs are read: Gen 14. 14-20, Deut. 1. 8-17, Deut. 10. 14-21. At the end of Vespers, the troparion of the plagal 4th, i.e., 8th, tone is sung with the verses of Ps 43: ( ). After Vespers, pannikhis (παννυχίς) is performed. At Matins on Ps 50, 2 troparions are sung: the same as at Vespers, and the 4th tone ῾Ο Θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν (). After Matins, the “proclamations of the holy councils” are read. At the liturgy readings: prokeimenon Dan 3.26, Acts 20.16-18a, 28-36, alleluia with a verse from Ps 43, John 17.1-13, communion - Ps 32.1.

In studio and Jerusalem Typicons of various editions, including modern ones. printed publications, the system of readings on the 7th week of Easter has not undergone significant changes compared to the Typikon of the Great Church. During the service, 3 hymnographic sequences are sung - Sunday, the post-feast of the Ascension of the Lord, St. fathers (in the Evergetid Typikon, the sequence of the post-feast is presented only partially - self-concord and troparion; at Matins, the Sunday canons and the Holy Fathers). According to the Studian-Alexievsky, Evergetidsky and all Jerusalem Typikons, figurative troparions are sung at the liturgy, Sunday troparia and troparia from the morning canon of St. fathers (canto 3 according to Studiysko-Alexievsky, 1st - according to the Evergetid Typikon); in the South Italian Typicons the singing of the blessed with troparions (from the canon) of St. is indicated. Fathers, then - daily antiphons, the chorus to the 3rd antiphon is the troparion of St. fathers ῾Υπερδεδοξασμένος εἶ ( ).

According to modern Greek parish Typikon (Βιολάκης . Τυπικόν. Σ. 85, 386-387), on the 7th week the memory of the First Ecumenical Council is celebrated; All-night vigil is not celebrated.

Commemoration of the Third Ecumenical Council, September 9. Indicated in the Typikon of the Great Church. with liturgical follow-up: on Ps 50 the troparion of the plagal 1st, i.e. 5th, voice: ῾Αγιωτέρα τῶν Χερουβίμ (The Most Holy of the Cherubim), heavy, i.e. 7th, voice: Χαῖρ ε, κεχαριτωμένη Θεοτόκε Παρθένε, λιμὴν καὶ προστασία (Rejoice, blessed Virgin Mary, refuge and intercession). At the liturgy: prokeimenon from Ps 31, Heb 9. 1-7, alleluia with the verse Ps 36, Lk 8. 16-21, involved in Proverbs 10. 7. This memory is not present in the Studio and Jerusalem Typicons.

Commemoration of the VI Ecumenical Council September 15 According to the Typikon of the Great Church, the following of St. fathers on this day includes: troparion ῾Ο Θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν (), readings at the liturgy: prokeimenon from Ps 31, Heb 13. 7-16, alleluia with the verse Ps 36, Mt 5. 14-19, involved Ps 32 .1 Before the Apostle at the liturgy, it is prescribed to read the oros of the VI Ecumenical Council.

This memory is absent in the Studite and Jerusalem statutes, but certain monuments indicate the reading of the oros of the VI Ecumenical Council in the week after the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross on September 14. (Kekelidze. Liturgical cargo monuments. P. 329; Typikon. Venice, 1577. L. 13 vol.). In addition, in the manuscripts there is a description of a special rite “in the Chamber of Trullo”, which takes place on the eve of the Exaltation after Vespers and includes antiphons from the verses of Ps 104 and 110 and acclamations in honor of the bishop and the emperor, which may also be a trace of the celebration of the memory of the VI Ecumenical Council (Lingas A . Festal Cathedral Vespers in Late Byzantium // OCP. 1997. N 63. P. 436; Hannick Chr. Étude sur l "ἀκολουθία σματική // JÖB. 1970. Bd. 17. S. 247, 251).

Commemoration of the VII Ecumenical Council in October. In the Typikon of the Great Church. this memory is indicated on October 11, the sequence is not given, but the performance of a solemn service in the Great Church is indicated. with the singing of pannikhis after Vespers.

According to the Studian-Alexievsky Typikon, the memory of St. Fathers is celebrated on October 11, the observance of St. Fathers is connected with the following of St. Theophanes the hymn writer. At Matins, “God is the Lord” and troparia are sung. Some hymns are borrowed from the sequence of the week of the 1st Great Lent: troparion of the 2nd tone , kontakion 8th tone. According to the 3rd song of the canon, ipakoi are indicated. At the liturgy readings: prokeimenon from Ps 149, Heb 9. 1-7, alleluia with the verse Ps 43, Lk 8. 5-15. Slav's instructions. the Studian Menaions correspond to the Studian-Aleksievsky Typikon (Gorsky, Nevostruev. Description. Dept. 3. Part 2. P. 18; Yagich. Service Minaions. P. 71-78).

In the Evergetian, South Italian, early Jerusalem Typicons of the October memory of the VII Ecumenical Council there is no. It again begins to be indicated in later editions of the Jerusalem Charter, among Mark’s chapters (Dmitrievsky. Description. T. 3. P. 174, 197, 274, 311, 340; Mansvetov I. D. Church Charter (typical). M., 1885. P. 411; Typikon. Venice, 1577. L. 102; Typikon. M., 1610. 3rd Markov chapter L. 14-16 volumes), after. the instructions of Mark's chapter are transferred to the months. The sequence for this day is completely different from that given in the Studios-Alexievsky Typikon and the Studite Menaions and in many ways repeats the sequence of the 7th week of Easter. The Sunday and St. feasts are united. fathers, like a connection with the following of the sixfold saint, with certain features: reading proverbs, singing the troparion of St. fathers according to “Now you let go.” The observance of the holy day is transferred to another day or to Compline. In the Moscow editions of the Jerusalem Typikon (from the 17th century to the present time) there is a noticeable tendency to increase the status of the memory of St. fathers by changing the ratio of the chants of Octoechos and St. fathers. At Vespers the same readings are read as according to the Typikon of the Great Church. Various readings at the liturgy are indicated: Greek. old printed Typikon - Titus 3. 8-15, Matthew 5. 14-19 (prokeimenon, alleluia and sacrament are not indicated - Τυπικόν. Venice, 1577. L. 17, 102); Moscow editions, early printed and modern: prokeimenon Dan 3.26, Heb 13.7-16, alleluia with the verse Ps 49, John 17.1-13, involved Ps 32.1 (Ustav. M., 1610. Markova ch. 3. L. 16 vol.; Typikon. [Vol. 1.] pp. 210-211).

In modern Greek parish Typikon (Βιολάκης . Τυπικὸν. Σ. 84-85) this memory is celebrated in the week after October 11, the all-night vigil is not celebrated. The service charter generally corresponds to that given in the Jerusalem Typicons. Readings at the liturgy - Titus 3. 8-15, Luke 8. 5-15.

Commemoration of the Ecumenical Councils in July. According to the Typikon of the Great Church, on July 16 the memory of the IV Ecumenical Council is celebrated, the observance includes troparia: at Vespers and Matins the 4th tone ῾Ο Θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν (), at the liturgy of the same tone Τῆς καθολ ικῆς ἐκκλησίας τὰ δόγματα (Conciliar Church dogma) . Readings at the liturgy: prokeimenon from Ps 149, Heb 13. 7-16, alleluia with the verse Ps 43, Mt 5. 14-19, communion Ps 32. 1. After the Trisagion, the oros of the IV Ecumenical Council is read.

According to the Studian-Alexievsky Typikon, the memory of the IV Ecumenical Council is celebrated in the week after July 11 - the memory of the Great Church. Euphemia - or on Sunday before or after July 16th. The Sunday services are united, St. fathers and daily saint, the succession of St. Fathers includes the troparion (the same as in the Typikon of the Great Church on the 16th): () and the canon. As a hymn to St. Fathers use stichera vmts. Euphemia (in modern books - stichera on “Glory” in the evening stichera). At the liturgy readings: prokeimenon from Ps 149, Heb 13. 7-16, alleluia with the verse Ps 43, Mt 5. 14-19 (participant not indicated).

The further history of the July commemoration of the Ecumenical Councils is similar to that of October; it is absent from most Studite and early Jerusalem Typicons. In the Typikon of George Mtatsmindeli of the 11th century, reflecting the Athonite edition of the Studite Charter, the arrangement of the July commemorations of the Councils (see below) and their successions largely follow the Typikon of the Great Church. July 16 - commemoration of the IV Ecumenical Council, the sequence includes: 3 readings at Vespers, 2 troparions (as in the Typikon of the Great Church), at the liturgy a service of choice: as in the 7th week of Easter or as according to the Typikon of the Great Church. July 16.

In the Jerusalem Typicons, the charter for the July service in memory of the 6 Ecumenical Councils is described in Mark’s chapters, together with the October memory or separately from it; after these instructions were transferred to the months. According to the old printed Greek. Typikon (Τυπικόν. Venice, 1577. L. 55 vol., 121 vol.), on July 16 the memory of the 6 Ecumenical Councils is celebrated, the charter of the service is like that of a sixfold saint. At the liturgy, the service is the same as according to the Typikon of the Great Church. per week after July 16 (Gospel - Matthew 5. 14-19, involved Ps. 111. 6b). In the Moscow printed editions of the Typikon it is indicated to commemorate 6 V.S. per week before or after July 16. The charter of services and readings at Vespers and Liturgy - as well as for the October memory (Charter. M., 1610. L. 786 vol. - 788 vol.; Typikon. [Vol. 2.] pp. 714-716).

According to modern Greek parish Typikon (Βιολάκης . Τυπικόν. Σ. 85, 289-290), in the week before or after July 16 (July 13-19) the memory of the IV Ecumenical Council is celebrated. The service is performed in the same way as for October memory. At the liturgy, the Gospel is Matthew 5. 14-19.

Hymnographic sequences of the Ecumenical Councils

According to modern liturgical books, following St. fathers on the 7th week of Easter includes: troparion of the 4th plagal, i.e. 8th, tone ( ); the kontakion of the 4th plagal, i.e. the 8th, voice is similar to “Like the first fruits”: γματα ( ); canon of the plagal 2nd, i.e. 6th, voice, with an acrostic Τὸν πρῶτον ὑμνῶ σύλλογον ποιμένων (), irmos: ῾Ως ἐν ἠπ είρῳ πεζεύσας ὁ ᾿Ισραήλ ( ), beginning: Τὴν τῶν ἁγίων πατέρων ἀνευφημῶν, παναγίαν Σύνοδον (); 2 cycles of stichera-podnov and 4 samoglas. Succession of glory. and Greek books are completely identical.

Follow-up in honor of the VII Ecumenical Council, located in modern times. Greek and glory liturgical books under October 11, includes: the same troparion as on the 7th week of Easter; the kontakion of the 2nd tone is similar to the “Handwritten Image”: ῾Ο ἐκ Πατρὸς ἐκλάμψας Υἱὸς ἀρρήτως (), canon of the 4th plagal, i.e. 8th, voice, the creation of Theophanes according to Greek or Herman according to slav. Menaeus with acrostic ῾Υμνῶ μακάρων συνδρομὴν τὴν βδόμην (), irmos: ῾Αρματηλάτην Θαραὼ ἐβύθ ισε ( ), beginning: ῾Υμνολογῆσαι τὴν βδόμην ἄθροισιν, ἐφιεμένῳ μοι νῦν, τὴν τῶν π τὰ δίδου ( ); 2 cycles of stichera-podnov and 4 samoglas; all are self-agreeable and the 2nd cycle of similar ones (on praise) coincides with those given in the sequence of the 7th week of Easter. The chants are dedicated not only to the VII, but also to all other Ecumenical Councils.

In modern Greek In liturgical books, the week before or after July 16 is located after July 13 and is designated as the memory of the IV Ecumenical Council. In glory books indicate the memory of the I-VI Ecumenical Councils, the succession is placed under July 16 and has a number of differences from the Greek. Troparion: ῾Υπερδεδοξασμένος εἶ, Χριστὲ ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν, ὁ φωστήρας ἐπὶ γῆς τοὺς πατέρας ἡμῶν θεμελιώσας ( ); kontakion: Τῶν ἀποστόλων τὸ κήρυγμα, καὶ τῶν Πατέρων τὰ δόγματα ( ); 2 canons: 1st tone, with acrostic Πλάνης ἀνυμνῶ δεξιοὺς καθαιρέτας (I sing praises to the right destroyers of deception), with the name Philotheus in the Mother of God, irmos: Σοῦ ἡ τροπαιοῦχος δεξιὰ ( ), beginning: Πλάνης καθαιρέτας δεξιοὺς, νῦν ἀνυμνῆσαι προθέμενος Δέσποτα (Crush the deceptions of the right Lord, now commanded to sing praises to the rulers), in glory. The minae is missing; 4th plagal, i.e. 8th, voice, irmos: ῾Αρματηλάτην Θαραώ ἐβύθισε ( ), beginning: ῾Η τῶν πατέρων, εὐσεβὴς ὁμήγυρις ( ); 2 cycles of stichera-like ones, one of them does not coincide with the one given in glory. Minee, and 3 self-agreed. In glory Minaeus 1st canon at Matins another, 6th tone, creation of Herman, irmos: , start: ; there is a 4th samoglas, absent in the Greek. All 4 samoglas, the 2nd cycle of similarities (on khvatitech) coincide with those given in other successions of the fathers, certain stichera from the 1st cycle of similarities coincide with the stichera of the week around October 11. (711-713) ordered the destruction in the palace of the image of the VI Ecumenical Council, which condemned monothelitism. On the vault of the Milion Gate located opposite the palace, he ordered to depict the 5 Ecumenical Councils, his portrait and the portrait of the heretic Patriarch Sergius. In 764, under the iconoclast emperor Constantine V, these images were replaced by scenes at the hippodrome. About the actions of the imp. Philippika Vardana reported to Pope Constantine I the deacon. Agathon, after which in the old basilica of St. Peter in Rome, Pope Constantine ordered to depict the six Ecumenical Councils. Images of the Ecumenical Councils were also in the narthex c. ap. Peter in Naples (766-767).

The earliest ones that have survived to this day. time, images of the Ecumenical Councils are the mosaics of the central nave of the Basilica of the Nativity in Bethlehem (680-724). To the north on the wall there are preserved images of three of the six local Cathedrals; in the south there are fragments of the one restored in 1167-1169, under the emperor. Manuel I Komnenos, images of the Ecumenical Councils. The scenes are symbolic in nature - devoid of any figurative images. On complex architectural backgrounds in the form of arcades, culminating in turrets and domes, thrones with the Gospels are depicted under the central arches, texts of cathedral decrees and crosses are placed above. Each image of the Ecumenical Council is separated from the other by a floral ornament.

The next most recent image is in the manuscript of the Words of St. Gregory the Theologian (Parisin. gr. 510. Fol. 355, 880-883), where the First Polish Council (II Ecumenical) is presented. In the center, on the royal throne with a high back, an open Gospel is depicted; below, on the Church Throne, there is a closed book between 2 scrolls outlining the teachings being discussed. The participants of the Council sit on the sides: the right group is headed by the imp. Theodosius the Great, depicted with a halo; all bishops are presented without halos. This composition combines the previous tradition of depicting Ecumenical Councils with the Gospel in the center and the restored custom of presenting portraits of the Council participants.

The Seven Ecumenical Councils are depicted in the narthex of the cathedral of the Gelati Monastery (Georgia), 1125-1130. All scenes are uniform: the emperor is on the throne in the center, bishops are sitting on the sides, the rest of the Council participants are standing below, heretics are depicted on the right.

The tradition of placing the cycle of Ecumenical Councils in the narthexes of churches has become widespread in the Balkans, where the image is often supplemented by a Serb presented in the same pattern. Cathedral. The Seven Ecumenical Councils are depicted in the churches: Holy Trinity Monastery Sopočani (Serbia), ca. 1265; Annunciation at Gradac Monastery on Ibar (Serbia), ca. 1275; St. Achille, ep. Larissa in Arilje (Serbia), 1296; Our Lady of Leviski in Prizren (Serbia), 1310-1313; Vmch. Demetrius, Patriarchate of Peć (Serbia, Kosovo and Metohija) 1345; Nativity of the Virgin Mary at Matejce Monastery, near Skopje (Macedonia), 1355-1360; Dormition of the Virgin Mary of the Ljubostinja monastery (Serbia), 1402-1405. Six Ecumenical Councils (there is no seventh) are depicted in c. Christ Pantocrator Monastery Decani (Serbia, Kosovo and Metohija), 1350

In Russian In art, the earliest surviving depiction of the Ecumenical Councils is the cycle in the Nativity Cathedral of the Ferapont Monastery (1502). Unlike Byzantium. traditions, Ecumenical Councils are depicted not in the narthex, but in the lower register of the wall paintings of the naos (on the south, north and west walls). There are also compositions on the walls of the naos: in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin (on the southern and northern walls), 1642-1643; in the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Vologda, 1686; in the Annunciation Cathedral of Solvychegodsk (on the northern wall), 1601. At the end. XVII century the V.S. cycle is placed on the porch, for example. in the gallery of the Cathedral of the Transfiguration of the Savior at the Novospassky Monastery in Moscow. The Seven Ecumenical Councils are also depicted in the upper register of the icon “Wisdom Created a House for Herself” (Novgorod, 1st half of the 16th century, Tretyakov Gallery).

The iconography of the scenes was completely formed by the beginning. XII century In the center on the throne is the emperor presiding over the Council. St. are sitting on the sides. bishops. Below, in 2 groups, are the participants of the Council, the heretics are depicted on the right. Texts containing information about the Council are usually placed above the scenes. According to Erminius Dionysius Furnoagrafiot, the Councils are written as follows: I Ecumenical Council - “Among the temple under the shadow of the Holy Spirit, sitting: King Constantine on the throne, on both sides of him are the saints in bishop’s vestments - Alexander, Patriarch of Alexandria, Eustathius of Antioch, Macarius of Jerusalem, St. . Paphnutius the Confessor, St. James of Nisibian [Nisibinsky], St. Paul of Neocaesarea and other saints and fathers. Before them stand the amazed philosopher and St. Spyridon of Trimifuntsky, with one hand stretched out to him, and with the other clutching a tile from which fire and water come out; and the first strives upward, and the second flows down to the floor over the fingers of the saint. Standing right there is Arius in priestly vestments and in front of him St. Nicholas, menacing and alarmed. Like-minded people sit below everyone else. St. sits to the side. Athanasius the deacon, young, beardless, and writes: I believe in one God even to the words: and in the Holy Spirit”; II Ecumenical Council - “... King Theodosius the Great on the throne and on both sides of him the saints - Timothy of Alexandria, Meletius of Antioch, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory the Theologian, Patriarch of Constantinople, who writes: and in the Holy Spirit (to the end), and other saints and fathers. The heretics Macedonians sit separately and talk among themselves”; III Ecumenical Council - “... King Theodosius the Younger is on the throne, young, with a beard barely showing, and on both sides are Saint Cyril of Alexandria, Juvenal of Jerusalem and other saints and fathers. Before them stand an elderly Nestorius in bishop’s clothing and like-minded heretics”; IV Ecumenical Council - “... King Marcian, an elder, on the throne, surrounded by dignitaries who have golden-red bands on their heads (skiadia) and on both sides of him - Saint Anatoly, Patriarch of Constantinople, Maximus of Antioch, Juvenal of Jerusalem, bishops Paschazian [Paschazin] and Lucentius [Lucentius] and presbyter Boniface [Boniface] - trusted locums of Leo, the Pope, and other saints and fathers. Dioscorus in bishop’s vestments and Eutyches stand before them and talk to them”; V Ecumenical Council - “... King Justinian is on the throne and on both sides of him are Vigilius, the Pope, Eutyches of Constantinople and other fathers. Heretics stand before them and talk to them”; VI Ecumenical Council - “. .. Tsar Constantine Pogonatus with gray hair in a long forked beard, on a throne, behind which spearmen are visible, and on both sides of him - St. George, Patriarch of Constantinople, and the papal locums, Theodore and George, other fathers. Heretics talk to them”; VII Ecumenical Council - “... Tsar Constantine the Youth and his mother Irina and are holding Constantine - the icon of Christ, Irina - the icon of the Mother of God. On both sides of them sit St. Tarasius, Patriarch of Constantinople, and papal locum tenens Peter and Peter the bishops, and other fathers holding icons; among them, one bishop writes: if anyone does not worship icons and the honorable cross, let him be anathema” (Erminia DF. pp. 178-181).

In Russian tradition recorded in iconographic originals (Bolshakovsky), the composition of the First Ecumenical Council includes “The Vision of St. Peter of Alexandria" (in the painting of the Ferapontov Monastery it is depicted separately in 2 scenes on the southern and western walls). The IV Ecumenical Council is depicted with the miracle of the Great Church. Euphemia the All-Praised and her tomb is presented; the composition of the Third Ecumenical Council, which condemned Nestorius, includes an episode of the removal of his robe.

Lit.: DACL. Vol. 3/2. P. 2488; LCI. Bd. 2. Sp. 551-556; Bolshakov. The original is iconographic. pp. 117-120, pp. 21, 185-190 (ill.); Stern H. Le representation des Conciles dans l"église de la Nativite à Bethleem // Byzantion. 1936. Vol. 11. P. 101-152; Grabar A. L"Iconoclasme byzantin: Dossier archéol. P., 1957. P. 48-61; Walter C. L "iconographie des Conciles dans la tradition byzantine. P., 1970; Lazarev V. N. History of Byzantine painting. M., 1986. P. 37, 53, 57; Malkov Yu. G. Theme of Ecumenical Councils in Old Russian painting XVI-XVII centuries // DanBlag. 1992. No. 4. P. 62-72.

N. V. Kvlividze

On May 31, the Church celebrates the memory of the holy fathers of the seven Ecumenical Councils. What decisions were made at these councils? Why are they called “universal”? Which of the holy fathers took part in them? Andrey Zaitsev reports.

The First Ecumenical Council (Nicaea I), against the heresy of Arius, convened in 325 in Nicaea (Bithynia) under Constantine the Great; 318 bishops were present (among them St. Nicholas, Archbishop of Myra of Lycia, St. Spyridon, Bishop of Trimifuntsky). Emperor Constantine is depicted twice - greeting the participants of the council and presiding over the council.

To begin with, let us clarify the very concept of “Ecumenical” in relation to councils. Initially, it only meant that it was possible to gather bishops from all over the Eastern and Western Roman Empire, and only a few centuries later this adjective began to be used as the highest authority of the council for all Christians. In the Orthodox tradition, only seven cathedrals have received this status.

For most believers, the most famous, undoubtedly, remains the First Ecumenical Council, held in 325 in the city of Nicaea near Constantinople. Among the participants in this Council, according to legend, were Saints Nicholas the Wonderworker and Spyridon of Trimyfutsky, who defended Orthodoxy from the heresy of the Constantinople priest Arius. He believed that Christ was not God, but the most perfect creation, and did not consider the Son equal to the Father. We know about the course of the first council from the Life of Constantine by Eusebius of Caesarea, who was among its participants. Eusebius left a beautiful portrait of Constantine the Great, who was the organizer of the convening of the council. The Emperor addressed the audience with a speech: “Contrary to all expectations, having learned about your disagreement, I did not leave this unattended, but, wanting to help heal evil with my help, I immediately gathered all of you. I rejoice to see your gathering, but I think that my desires will only be fulfilled when I see that you are all animated by one spirit and observe one common, peaceful agreement, which, as dedicated to God, you must proclaim to others.”

The wish of the emperor had the status of an order, and therefore the result of the work of the council was the oros (the dogmatic decree that condemned Arius) and most of the text known to us as the Creed. Athanasius the Great played a huge role at the council. Historians still argue about the number of participants in this meeting. Eusebius speaks of 250 bishops, but traditionally it is believed that 318 people participated in the Council.

The Second Ecumenical Council (Constantinople I), against the Macedonian heresy, convened in 381 under Emperor Theodosius the Great (pictured top center), attended by 150 bishops, among them Gregory the Theologian. The Nicene Creed was confirmed, to which 8 to 12 members were added to respond to heresies that had arisen since the First Council; thus, the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, which is still professed by the entire Orthodox Church, was finally approved.

The decisions of the First Ecumenical Council were not immediately accepted by all Christians. Arianism continued to destroy the unity of faith in the empire, and in 381, Emperor Theodosius the Great convened the Second Ecumenical Council in Constantinople. It added to the Creed, decided that the Holy Spirit emanates from the Father, and condemned the idea that the Holy Spirit is not consubstantial with the Father and the Son. In other words, Christians believe that all persons of the Holy Trinity are equal.

At the Second Council, the pentarchy was also approved for the first time - a list of Local Churches, located according to the principle of “primacy of honor”: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Before this, Alexandria occupied second place in the hierarchy of Churches.

150 bishops were present at the council, while a fairly large part of the hierarchs refused to come to Constantinople. Nevertheless. The Church recognized the authority of this council. The most famous saint of the council fathers was St. Gregory of Nyssa; St. Gregory the Theologian did not take part in the meetings from the very beginning.

The Third Ecumenical Council (Ephesus), against the heresy of Nestorius, convened in 431 under Emperor Theodosius the Younger (pictured top center) in Ephesus (Asia Minor); 200 bishops were present, among them Saints Cyril of Alexandria, Juvenal of Jerusalem, Memnon of Ephesus. The Council condemned the heresy of Nestorius.

Heresies continued to shake the Christian Church, and therefore the time soon came for the Third Ecumenical Council - one of the most tragic in the history of the Church. It took place in Ephesus in 431 and was organized by Emperor Theodosius II.

The reason for its convening was the conflict between the Patriarch of Constantinople Nestorius and St. Cyril of Alexandria. Nestorius believed that Christ had a human nature until the moment of the Epiphany and called the Mother of God “Christ Mother”. Saint Cyril of Alexandria defended the Orthodox view that Christ, from the very moment of His incarnation, was “perfect God and perfect man.” However, in the heat of controversy, Saint Cyril used the expression “one nature,” and for this expression the Church paid a terrible price. Historian Anton Kartashev in his book “Ecumenical Councils” says that St. Cyril demanded more from Nestorius to prove his Orthodoxy than Orthodoxy itself required. The Council of Ephesus condemned Nestorius, but the main events were still ahead.

St. Cyril’s reservation about the one divine nature of Christ was so tempting to the minds that the saint’s successor at the See of Alexandria, Pope Dioscorus, in 349 convened another “Ecumenical Council” in Ephesus, which the Church began to consider as a robber’s one. Under terrible pressure from Dioscorus and a crowd of fanatics, the bishops reluctantly agreed to talk about the predominance of the divine nature in Christ over the human, and about the absorption of the latter. This is how the most dangerous heresy in the history of the Church appeared, called Monophysitism.

The Fourth Ecumenical Council (Chalcedon), convened in 451, during the reign of Emperor Marcian (depicted in the center), in Chalcedon, against the heresy of the Monophysites led by Eutyches, which arose as a reaction to the heresy of Nestorius; The 630 fathers of the council proclaimed “One Christ, the Son of God... glorified in two natures.”
Below are the relics of the Holy Great Martyr Euphemia the All-Praised. According to church tradition, Patriarch Anatoly of Constantinople proposed that the Council resolve this dispute by turning to God through the relics of Saint Euphemia. The shrine with her relics was opened and two scrolls with the Orthodox and Monophysite confession of faith were placed on the saint’s chest. The cancer was closed and sealed in the presence of Emperor Marcian. For three days, the participants of the Council imposed strict fasting on themselves and prayed intensely. With the onset of the fourth day, the king and the entire cathedral came to the holy tomb of the saint, and when, having removed the royal seal, they opened the coffin, they saw that the holy great martyr was holding the scroll of the faithful in her right hand, and the scroll of the evil believers lay at her feet. The most amazing thing was that she, holding out her hand as if alive, gave the king and patriarch a scroll with the right confession.

Many Eastern Churches never accepted the decision of the IV Ecumenical Council, held in 451 in Chalcedon. The driving force, the real “engine” of the council that condemned the Monophysites, was Pope Leo the Great, who made enormous efforts to defend Orthodoxy. The meetings of the council were very stormy, many participants were inclined towards Monophysitism. Seeing the impossibility of agreement, the fathers of the cathedral elected a commission, which miraculously, in a few hours, developed a dogmatically flawless definition of two natures in Christ. The culmination of this orosis was 4 negative adverbs, which still remain a theological masterpiece: “One and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only Begotten, known in two natures (εν δύο φύσεσιν) unmerged, unchangeable, inseparable, inseparable; the difference of His natures never disappears from their union, but the properties of each of the two natures are united in one person and one hypostasis (εις εν πρόσωπον και μίαν υπόστασιν συντρεχούση) so that He is not divided and is not divided into two persons.”

Unfortunately, the struggle for this definition continued for several more centuries, and Christianity suffered the greatest losses in the number of its followers precisely because of the supporters of the Monophysite heresy.

Among other acts of this Council, it is worth noting Canon 28, which finally secured Constantinople second place after Rome in the primacy of honor among the Churches.


Fifth Ecumenical Council (Constantinople II), convened in 553 under Emperor Justinian (depicted in the center); 165 bishops were present. The Council condemned the teaching of three Nestorian bishops - Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus and Willow of Edessa, as well as the teaching of the church teacher Origen (III century)

Time passed, the Church continued to fight heresies, and in 553, Emperor Justinian the Great convened the Fifth Ecumenical Council.

In the hundred years since the Council of Chalcedon, Nestorians, Orthodox, and Monophysites continued to argue about the divine and human natures in Christ. The unifier of the empire, the emperor also wanted the unity of Christians, but this task was much more difficult to solve, since theological disputes did not stop after the issuance of royal decrees. 165 bishops took part in the work of the council, condemning Theodore of Mopsuestia and his three works written in the Nestorian spirit.

The Sixth Ecumenical Council (Constantinople III), convened in 680-681. under Emperor Constantine IV Pogonata (depicted in the center) against the heresy of the Monothelites; 170 fathers confirmed the confession of faith about two, Divine and human, wills in Jesus Christ.

Much more dramatic was the situation at the Sixth Ecumenical Council, the real “hero” of which was St. Maximus the Confessor. It took place in Constantinople in 680-681 and condemned the heresy of the Monophilites, who believed that in Christ there are two natures - divine and human, but only one divine will. The number of participants at the meetings fluctuated constantly, with a maximum of 240 people present when drawing up the council rules.

The dogmatic oros of the council is reminiscent of Chalcedon and speaks of the presence of two wills in Christ: “And two natural wills or desires in Him, and two natural actions, inseparably, immutably, inseparably, unmerged, according to the teaching of our holy fathers, we also preach two natural desires, not contrary, so that it will not be, like the wicked heretics, reproaching, but His human a desire that follows, and is not opposed or opposed, but rather submits to His Divine and Almighty will.”

Let us note that 11 years after this determination, the bishops gathered in the royal chambers called Trullo and adopted a number of disciplinary church rules. In the Orthodox tradition, these decisions are known as the rules of the Sixth Ecumenical Council.


The Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicaea II), convened in 787, under Emperor Constantine VI and his mother Irene (depicted on the throne in the center), in Nicaea against the heresy of the iconoclasts; Among the 367 holy fathers were Tarasius of Constantinople, Hippolytus of Alexandria, and Elijah of Jerusalem.

The last, Seventh Ecumenical Council, held in 787 in Constantinople, was dedicated to the protection of holy images from the heresy of iconoclasm. 367 bishops took part in it. An important role in the protection of holy icons was played by the Patriarch of Constantinople Tarasius and Empress Irene. The most important decision was the dogma of the veneration of holy icons. The key phrase of this definition is: “The honor given to the image passes to the original, and the one who worships the icon worships the being depicted on it.”

This definition put an end to the debate about the difference between the veneration of icons and idolatry. In addition, the decision of the Seventh Ecumenical Council still encourages Christians to protect their shrines from attacks and sacrilege. It is interesting that the decision of the council was not accepted by Emperor Charlemagne, who sent the Pope a list of mistakes made by the participants in the meetings. Then the pope stood up to defend Orthodoxy, but there was very little time left before the great schism of 1054.

Frescoes of Dionysius and the workshop. Murals of the Cathedral of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary at the Ferapontov Monastery near Vologda. 1502 Photos from the website of the Dionysius Fresco Museum

For many centuries, since the birth of the Christian faith, people have tried to accept the revelation of the Lord in all its purity, and false followers distorted it with human speculation. To expose them and discuss canonical and dogmatic problems in the early Christian church, Ecumenical Councils were convened. They united adherents of the faith of Christ from all corners of the Greco-Roman Empire, shepherds and teachers from barbarian countries. The period from the 4th to the 8th centuries in church history is usually called the era of strengthening the true faith; the years of the Ecumenical Councils contributed to this in all their strength.

Historical excursion

For living Christians, the first Ecumenical Councils are very important, and their significance is revealed in a special way. All Orthodox and Catholics should know and understand what the early Christian Church believed in and what it was moving toward. In history one can see the lies of modern cults and sects that claim to have similar dogmatic teachings.

From the very beginnings of the Christian church, there was already an unshakable and harmonious theology based on the basic doctrines of faith - in the form of dogmas about the Divinity of Christ, the spirit. In addition, certain rules of internal church structure, time and order of services were established. The first Ecumenical Councils were created specifically in order to preserve the dogmas of faith in their true form.

First holy meeting

The first Ecumenical Council took place in 325. Among the fathers present at the holy meeting, the most famous were Spyridon of Trimifuntsky, Archbishop Nicholas of Myra, Bishop of Nisibius, Athanasius the Great and others.

At the council, the teachings of Arius, who rejected the divinity of Christ, were condemned and anathematized. The unchangeable truth about the Face of the Son of God, his equality with the Father God, and the Divine essence itself were affirmed. Church historians note that at the cathedral, the definition of the very concept of faith was announced after lengthy tests and research, so that no opinions would arise that would give rise to a split in the thoughts of Christians themselves. The Spirit of God brought the bishops to agreement. After the end of the Council of Nicaea, the heretic Arius suffered a difficult and unexpected death, but his false teaching is still alive among sectarian preachers.

All the decisions that the Ecumenical Councils adopted were not invented by its participants, but were approved by the church fathers through the participation of the Holy Spirit and solely on the basis of Holy Scripture. In order for all believers to have access to the true teaching that Christianity brings, it was set out clearly and briefly in the first seven members of the Creed. This form continues to this day.

Second Holy Assembly

The Second Ecumenical Council was held in 381 in Constantinople. The main reason was the development of the false teaching of Bishop Macedonius and his adherents of the Arian Doukhobors. Heretical statements ranked the Son of God as not consubstantial with God the Father. The Holy Spirit was designated by heretics as the ministering power of the Lord, like angels.

At the second council, the true Christian teaching was defended by Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nyssa, and George the Theologian, who were among the 150 bishops present. The Holy Fathers established the dogma of the consubstantiality and equality of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In addition, the church elders approved the Nicene Creed, which continues to guide the church to this day.

Third Holy Assembly

The Third Ecumenical Council was convened in Ephesus in 431, and about two hundred bishops gathered there. The Fathers decided to recognize the union of two natures in Christ: human and divine. It was decided to preach Christ as a perfect man and a perfect God, and the Virgin Mary as the Mother of God.

Fourth Holy Assembly

The Fourth Ecumenical Council, held in Chalcedon, was convened specifically in order to eliminate all the Monophysite disputes that began to spread around the church. The Holy Assembly, consisting of 650 bishops, defined the only true teaching of the church and rejected all existing false teachings. The Fathers decreed that the Lord Christ is the true, unshakable God and true man. According to his deity, he is eternally reborn from his father; according to his humanity, he was brought into the world from the Virgin Mary, in all likeness to man, except for sin. At the Incarnation, the human and the divine were united in the body of Christ unchangeably, inseparably and inseparably.

It is worth noting that the heresy of the Monophysites brought a lot of evil to the church. The false teaching was not completely eradicated by conciliar condemnation, and for a long time disputes continued to develop between the heretical followers of Eutyches and Nestorius. The main reason for the controversy was the writings of three followers of the church - Fyodor of Mopsuet, Willow of Edessa, Theodoret of Cyrus. The mentioned bishops were condemned by Emperor Justinian, but his decree was not recognized by the Universal Church. Therefore, a dispute arose about the three chapters.

Fifth Holy Assembly

To resolve the controversial issue, the fifth council was held in Constantinople. The bishops' writings were harshly condemned. To highlight the true adherents of the faith, the concept of orthodox Christians and the Catholic Church arose. The Fifth Council failed to achieve the desired results. The Monophysites formed into societies that completely separated from the Catholic Church and continued to instill heresy and generate disputes within Christians.

Sixth Holy Assembly

The history of the Ecumenical Councils says that the struggle of orthodox Christians with heretics lasted for quite a long time. The sixth council (Trullo) was convened in Constantinople, at which the truth was finally to be established. At the meeting, which brought together 170 bishops, the teachings of the Monothelites and Monophysites were condemned and rejected. In Jesus Christ two natures were recognized - divine and human, and, accordingly, two wills - divine and human. After this council, Monothelianism fell, and for about fifty years the Christian church lived relatively calmly. New vague trends appeared later regarding the iconoclastic heresy.

Seventh Holy Assembly

The last 7th Ecumenical Council was held in Nicaea in 787. 367 bishops took part in it. The holy elders rejected and condemned the iconoclastic heresy and decreed that icons should not be given God-worship, which befits only God alone, but reverence and reverence. Those believers who worshiped icons as God himself were excommunicated from the church. After the 7th Ecumenical Council was held, iconoclasm troubled the church for more than 25 years.

The Meaning of Holy Assemblies

The Seven Ecumenical Councils are of paramount importance in the development of the basic tenets of Christian doctrine, on which all modern faith is based.

• The first - confirmed the divinity of Christ, his equality with the Father God.
• The second condemned the heresy of Macedonius, who rejected the divine essence of the Holy Spirit.
• The third - eliminated the heresy of Nestorius, who preached about the split faces of the God-man.
• The fourth dealt the final blow to the false teaching of Monophysitism.
• The fifth - completed the defeat of heresy and established the confession of two natures in Jesus - human and divine.
• The sixth - condemned the Monothelites and decided to confess two wills in Christ.
• The seventh - overthrew the iconoclastic heresy.

The years of Ecumenical Councils made it possible to introduce certainty and completeness into orthodox Christian teaching.

Eighth Ecumenical Council

Instead of a conclusion

Ecumenical councils

Ecumenical councils - meetings of the highest clergy and representatives of local Christian churches, at which the foundations of Christian doctrine were developed and approved, canonical liturgical rules were formed, various theological concepts were evaluated and heresies were condemned. The Church, as the Body of Christ, has a single conciliar consciousness, guided by the Holy Spirit, which receives its definite expression in the decisions of church councils. The convening of councils is an ancient practice for resolving emerging church issues (in Acts 15, 6 and 37, the rule of St. App.). Due to the emergence of issues of general church significance, Ecumenical Councils began to be convened, which precisely formulated and approved a number of basic doctrinal truths, which thus became part of the Holy Tradition. The status of the council is established by the Church on the basis of the nature of the decisions of the council and their correspondence with the church experience, the bearer of which is the church people.

The Orthodox Church recognizes seven Councils as “Ecumenical”:

• I Ecumenical Council - Nicaea 325
• II Ecumenical Council - Constantinople 381
• III Ecumenical Council - Ephesus 431
• IV Ecumenical Council - Chalcedon 451
• V Ecumenical Council - 2nd Constantinople 553
• VI Ecumenical Council- Constantinople 3rd (680-)
• VII Ecumenical Council - Nicaea 2nd. 787

FIRST ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

SIXTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The Sixth Ecumenical Council was convened in 680, in Constantinople, under Emperor Constantine Pogonatus, and consisted of 170 bishops. The Council was convened against the false teaching of the heretics - the Monothelites, who, although they recognized in Jesus Christ two natures, Divine and human, but one Divine will. After the 5th Ecumenical Council, the unrest caused by the Monothelites continued and threatened the Greek Empire with great danger. Emperor Heraclius, wanting reconciliation, decided to persuade the Orthodox to make concessions to the Monothelites and, by the force of his power, commanded to recognize in Jesus Christ one will with two natures. The defenders and exponents of the true teaching of the Church were Sophronius of Jerusalem and the Constantinople monk Maximus the Confessor. The Sixth Ecumenical Council condemned and rejected the heresy of the Monothelites, and determined to recognize in Jesus Christ two natures - Divine and human - and according to these two natures - two wills, but in such a way that the human will in Christ is not contrary, but submissive to His Divine will.

After 11 years, the Council again opened meetings in the royal chambers called Trullo, to resolve issues primarily related to church deanery. In this respect, it seemed to complement the Fifth and Sixth Ecumenical Councils, which is why it is called the Fifth and Sixth. The Council approved the rules by which the Church should be governed, namely: 85 rules of the Holy Apostles, rules of 6 Ecumenical and 7 local Councils, and rules of 13 Fathers of the Church. These rules were subsequently supplemented by the rules of the Seventh Ecumenical Council and two more Local Councils, and constituted the so-called “Nomocanon”, or in Russian “Kormchaya Book”, which is the basis of the church government of the Orthodox Church.

At this Council, some innovations of the Roman Church were condemned that did not agree with the spirit of the decrees of the Universal Church, namely: forced celibacy of priests and deacons, strict fasts on the Saturdays of Great Lent, and the image of Christ in the form of a lamb (lamb).

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The Seventh Ecumenical Council was convened in 787, in Nicaea, under Empress Irene (widow of Emperor Leo the Khazar), and consisted of 367 fathers. The Council was convened against the iconoclastic heresy, which arose 60 years before the Council, under the Greek emperor Leo the Isaurian, who, wanting to convert the Mohammedans to Christianity, considered it necessary to destroy the veneration of icons. This heresy continued under his son Constantine Copronymus and grandson Leo the Khazar. The Council condemned and rejected the iconoclastic heresy and determined - to deliver and place in St. churches, together with the image of the Honest and Life-giving Cross of the Lord, and holy icons, venerate and give them worship, raising the mind and heart to the Lord God, the Mother of God and the Saints depicted on them.

After the 7th Ecumenical Council, the persecution of holy icons was again raised by the subsequent three emperors (Leo the Armenian, Michael Balbus and Theophilus) and worried the Church for about 25 years. Veneration of St. icons was finally restored and approved at the Local Council of Constantinople in 842, under Empress Theodora. At this Council, in gratitude to the Lord God, who gave the Church victory over the iconoclasts and all heretics, the holiday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy was established, which is supposed to be celebrated on the first Sunday of Great Lent and which is still celebrated throughout the entire Ecumenical Orthodox Church.

A number of councils were convened as Ecumenical Councils, but for some reason were not recognized by the Orthodox Church as Ecumenical. Most often this happened because the Pope refused to sign their decisions. Nevertheless, these councils enjoy the highest authority in the Orthodox Church and some Orthodox theologians believe that they should be included in the Ecumenical Councils.

• Fifth-sixth Cathedral (Trullo)
• IV Council of Constantinople -880
• V Council of Constantinople - gg.

Trullo Cathedral

The Council of Trullo was created by Emperor Justinian II in 691 in Constantinople. The Fifth and Sixth Ecumenical Councils did not make any definitions, focusing on the dogmatic needs of the Church and the fight against heresies. Meanwhile, the decline of discipline and piety intensified in the Church. The new Council was conceived as an addition to previous Councils, designed to unify and supplement church norms. The council was assembled in the same hall as the VI Ecumenical Council, clearly representing its continuation, and with the same universal significance. The same hall with vaults, the so-called "trulls", and the entire cathedral was officially given the name of Trullo in documents. And the task of completing the canons of two ecumenical councils - V and VI - is indicated by the addition to its name: “Fifth-Sixth - πενθεκτη” (Quinsextus).

The result of the activities of the Trullo Council were 102 canonical rules adopted at it (some of these canons repeat the rules of previous Ecumenical Councils). They formed the basis for the development of Orthodox canon law.

The Orthodox Church united the Trullo Council with the VI Ecumenical Council, considering it as a continuation of the VI Council. Therefore, the 102 canons of the Trullo Council are sometimes called the Rules of the VI Ecumenical Council. The Roman Catholic Church, recognizing the Sixth Council as Ecumenical, did not recognize the resolutions of the Trullo Council, and, of necessity, considers it as a separate council.

The 102 canons of the Trullo Council openly paint a broad picture of ecclesiastical and moral disorders and strive to eliminate all of them, thereby reminding us of the tasks of our Russian councils: the Vladimir Council of 1274 and the Moscow Council of 1551.

Canons of Trullo Cathedral and the Roman Church

Many of the canons were polemically directed against the Roman Church or, in general, were alien to it. For example, canon 2 asserts the authority of 85 canons of the apostolic and other eastern councils, which the Roman Church did not consider binding on itself. The Romans used a collection of 50 apostolic rules of Dionysius the Less, but they were not considered binding. Canon 36 renewed the famous 28th canon of the Council of Chalcedon, which was not accepted by Rome. Canon 13 went against the celibacy of the clergy. Canon 55 went against the Roman post on the Sabbath. And other canons: the 16th about the seven deacons, the 52nd about the liturgy of the presanctified, the 57th about giving milk and honey into the mouth of the newly baptized - all this was against the customs of the Roman Church, sometimes openly called so.

Papal representatives in Constantinople signed the acts of the Council of Trullo. But when these acts were sent to Pope Sergius for signature in Rome, he flatly refused to sign them, calling them errors. Subsequently, before the division of churches, Constantinople made repeated attempts to convince Rome to accept the acts of the Trullo Council (from an attempt to forcefully bring the Pope from Rome to Constantinople to “resolve” this issue, to persuasion to revise the 102 rules, correct, reject what the pope finds necessary, and accept the rest), which gave varying results, but in the end the Roman Church never recognized the Council of Trullo.

Robber Cathedrals

Robber councils are church councils that the Church rejected as heretical; such councils were often held under external pressure or with violations of procedure. Below are the robber councils, which were organized as ecumenical councils:

• Ephesus "robber" council of 449
• Iconoclastic Cathedral
• Constantinople Robber Council 869-870.
• Florentine Cathedral 1431-1445 - revered by Catholics as Ecumenical.