Jump to: navigation, search

Talk:Ecumenical Councils

3,351 bytes added, 16:21, March 12, 2010
: --[[User:ASDamick|Rdr. Andrew]]
::Is the {stub} notice still required? This seems a rather large stub to me. &mdash; edited by [[User:Pistevo|<font color="red">Pι</font>]][[Special:Listusers/sysop|s]][[User talk:Pistevo|<font color="yellow">τ</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Pistevo|é]][[User:Pistevo|<font color="blue">vο</font>]] at 01:28, June 30, 2006 (CDT)
== Eight ==
Isn't it the case that some within the EOC would number the Ecumenical Councils to 8? If this is the case then why are only the 7 and 9 theories featured? [[User:Deusveritasest|Deusveritasest]] 22:09, March 17, 2009 (UTC)
: Is there a written source by a notable author which makes the case for eight? &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 01:26, March 19, 2009 (UTC)
::The numbering in the 1848 "Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs" appears to be eight. [[User:Deusveritasest|Deusveritasest]] 03:07, March 19, 2009 (UTC)
== Infallibility ==
I think there were decisions of ecumenical councils, like iconoclasm, that were explicitly rejected by later ecumenical councils many years later? That makes me think that a council widely considered ecumenical could made a mistaken decision, and therefore not be infallible. Obviously the ecumenical council that accepted iconoclasm was not infallible. Likewise, if the decision was not received by much of the church, like the article describes about the Council of Chalcedon, then receptionism would say it probably wasn't really an ecumenical council. So would it be a protestant heresy to say you or I don't consider the ecumenical councils infallible? Maybe not really- Luther accepted the councils' decisions on which books to put in the bible and how to make the Nicene Creed, so he must have thought those particular decisions were infallible. If he thought the decision on bible-book selection was fallible, he would not consider the bible to be infallible. Oh my, there is another example of Luther's confusing theology, just as he did not use the term "justification" the same way he thought that St James did. [[User:Rakovsky|Rakovsky]] 08:14, March 12, 2010 (UTC)
So, can Orthodox accept the decisions of all the ecumenical councils, and yet allow the possibility that they may have been wrong, like the Council fo Chalcedon, based on receptionism, etc.? [[User:Rakovsky|Rakovsky]] 08:14, March 12, 2010 (UTC)
:In reality, it is the Church that is infallible. And the Church’s infallibility is expressed chiefly through the seven Ecumenical Councils. I suppose the article should make more clear what is meant by an Ecumenical Council. Bishops can err, and councils of bishops can err. What cannot error is the Church. An Ecumenical Council, is a council of bishops that has borne witness to the faith of the Ecumenical Church, not for any other reason. Ecumenical Councils are the councils that the Church believes teach the truth. A council would not be called Ecumenical by the Church if it was in error. - [[User:Andrew|Andy]] 16:21, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Navigation menu