In their original context, these councils were difficult to distinguish from localized synods of bishops. However, as the church looked back, there were two major factors that separated the two types: 1) Presided over by an emperor (legitimate authority) & 2) Issued universal invitations for all bishops (with apostolic succession and otherwise) to attend. As a corollary of the emperor’s involvement, all of those invited were offered his protection and paid expenses to attend. For 1300 years and beyond, this council was regarded as ecclesiastically authoritative, even though in the midst of its own time, the ecumenical council of Chalcedon (451) was the final judge of an ecumenical council’s authenticity. Christian schisms and denominations since these councils have esteemed and incorporated the councils’ decisions differently, but all reflect positively on the conclusions arrived at early on in the history of their faith.
In their original context, these councils were difficult to distinguish from localized synods of bishops. However, as the church looked back, there were two major factors that separated the two types: 1) Presided over by an emperor (legitimate authority) &
ReplyDelete2) Issued universal invitations for all bishops (with apostolic succession and otherwise) to attend.
As a corollary of the emperor’s involvement, all of those invited were offered his protection and paid expenses to attend. For 1300 years and beyond, this council was regarded as ecclesiastically authoritative, even though in the midst of its own time, the ecumenical council of Chalcedon (451) was the final judge of an ecumenical council’s authenticity.
Christian schisms and denominations since these councils have esteemed and incorporated the councils’ decisions differently, but all reflect positively on the conclusions arrived at early on in the history of their faith.
-CL