The Second Council of Nicaea

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

SeventhEcumenical Council of theCatholicChurch, held in 787. (For an account of the controversies which occasioned this council and the circumstances in which it was convoked, seeICONOCLASM, Sections I and II.) An attempt to hold a council at Constantinople, to deal withIconoclasm, having been frustrated by theviolence of theIconoclastic soldiery, thepapal legates left that city. When, however, they had reachedSicily on their way back toRome, they were recalled by the Empress Irene. She replaced the mutinous troops at Constantinople with troops commanded by officers in whom she had every confidence. This accomplished, in May, 787, a new council was convoked at Nicaea in Bithynia. Thepope's letters to the empress and to the patriarch (seeICONOCLASM, II) prove superabundantly that theHoly See approved the convocation of the Council. Thepope afterwards wrote toCharlemagne: "Et sic synodum istam, secundum nostram ordinationem, fecerunt" (Thus they have held the synod in accordance with our directions).

The empress-regent and her son did not assist in person at the sessions, but they were represented there by two high officials: the patrician and former consul, Petronius, and the imperial chamberlain and logothete John, with whom was associated as secretary the former patriarch, Nicephorus. The acts represent as constantly at the head of theecclesiastical members the two Romanlegates, thearchpriest Peter and theabbot Peter; after them come Tarasius,Patriarch of Constantinople, and then two Orientalmonks andpriests, John and Thomas, representatives of the Patriarchs of Alexandria,Antioch, andJerusalem. The operations of the council show that Tarasius, properly speaking, conducted the sessions. Themonks John and Thomas professed to represent the Orientalpatriarchs, though these did notknow that the council had been convoked. However, there was nofraud on their part: they had been sent, not by thepatriarchs, but by themonks andpriests of superior rank actingsedibus impeditis, in the stead and place of thepatriarchs who were prevented from acting for themselves. Necessity was their excuse. Moreover, John and Thomas did not subscribe at the Council as vicars of thepatriarchs, but simply in the name of the Apostolic sees of the Orient. With the exception of thesemonks and the Romanlegates, all the members of the Council were subjects of theByzantine Empire. Their number,bishops as well as representatives ofbishops, varies in the ancient historians between 330 and 367; Nicephorus makes a manifest mistake in speaking of only 150 members: the Acts of the Council which we still possess show not fewer than 308bishops or representatives ofbishops. To these may be added a certain number ofmonks,archimandrites, imperial secretaries, andclerics of Constantinople who had not theright to vote.

The first session opened in thechurch of St. Sophia, 24 September, 787. Tarasius opened the council with a short discourse: "Last year, in the beginning of the month of August, it was desired to hold, under my presidency, a council in theChurch of the Apostles at Constantinople; but through the fault of severalbishops whom it would be easy to count, and whose names I prefer not to mention, since everybody knows them, that council was made impossible. The sovereigns have deigned to convoke another atNicaea, and Christ will certainly reward them for it. It is this Lord and Saviour whom thebishops must also invoke in order to pronounce subsequently an equitable judgment in a just and impartial manner." The members then proceeded to the reading of various official documents, after which threeIconoclasticbishops who had retracted were permitted to take their seats. Seven others who had plotted to make the Council miscarry in the preceding year presented themselves and declared themselves ready to profess the Faith of the Fathers, but the assembly thereupon engaged in a long discussion concerning the admission ofheretics and postponed their case to another session. On 26 September, the second session was held, during which thepope's letters to the empress and the Patriarch Tarasius were read. Tarasius declared himself in full agreement with thedoctrine set forth in these letters. On 28, or 29, September, in the third session, somebishops who had retracted theirerrors were allowed to take their seats, after which various documents were read. The fourth session was held on 1 October. In it the secretaries of the council read a long series of citations from theBible and the Fathers in favour of the veneration of images. Afterwards the dogmaticdecree was presented, and was signed by all the members present, by thearchimandrites of themonasteries, and by somemonks; thepapal legates added a declaration to the effect that they were ready to receive all who had abandoned theIconoclastic heresy. In the fifth session on 4 October, passages form the Fathers were read which declared, or seemed to declare, against the worship of images, but the reading was not continued to the end, and the council decided in favour of the restoration and veneration of images. On 6 October, in the sixth session, the doctrines of theconciliabulum of 753 were refuted. The discussion was endless, but in the course of it several noteworthy things were said. The next session, that of 13 October, was especially important; at it was read thehoros, or dogmatic decision, of the council [seeVENERATION OF IMAGES (6)]. The last (eighth) was held in the Magnaura Palace, at Constantinople, in presence of the empress and her son, on 23 October. It was spent in discourses, signing of names, and acclamations.

The councilpromulgated twenty-two canons relating to points of discipline, which may be summarized as follows:

CONTACT US |ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT