My whole problem with this is that Catholic doctrine appears to teach that an Ecumenical Council is what it is because of how it is recognized by the Pope.
884 “The college of bishops exercises power over the universal Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council.” But “there never is an ecumenical council which is not confirmed or at least recognized as such by Peter’s successor.”
The Council of Trent was declared to be Ecumenical by the Pope of Rome in clear terms:
When, on consulting the opinions of the princes whose consent in this matter we deemed particularly useful and expedient, we found them at that time not averse to so holy a work, we, as our letters and records attest, summoned an ecumenical council and a general assembly of those bishops and fathers, whose duty it is to attend, to be opened in the city of Mantua on the twenty-third of May in the year 1537 of our Lord’s incarnation and the third of our pontificate
-From the Bull calling the Council.
And concerning the very section which started this question of mine:
Though the holy, ecumenical and general Council of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, the same legate and nuncios of the holy Apostolic See presiding, has in the decree on justification, by reason of a certain necessity induced by the affinity of the subjects, given much consideration to the sacrament of penance, yet so great is in our days the number of errors relative to this sacrament, that it will be of no little general benefit to give to it a more exact and complete definition, in which all errors having under the guidance of the Holy Ghost been pointed out and refuted, Catholic truth may be made clear and resplendent, which [truth] this holy council now sets before all Christians to be observed for all time.
These are pretty clear terms.
“Most blessed Father, in a decree regarding the close of the ecumenical Council of Trent, published on the fourth of December last, it was declared that through the legates and presidents of Your Holiness and of the holy Apostolic See, confirmation of each and all of the things which were therein established and defined under Paul III and Julius III, of happy memory, as well as under Your Holiness, should be requested in the name of the Council from Your Holiness. Wherefore, we, Cardinal John Morone and Cardinal Louis Simoneta, who were then legates and presidents, wishing to execute what is ordained in that decree, do humbly petition in the name of the said ecumenical Council of Trent that Your Holiness deign to confirm each and all of the things which have been decreed and defined therein under Paul III and Julius III, of happy memory, as well as under Your Holiness.”
This is from the letter confirming the Council. The Pope further stated:
Moreover, in virtue of holy obedience and under the penalties prescribed by the holy canons, and others more severe, even of deprivation, to be imposed at our discretion, we command each and all of our venerable brethren, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, and all other prelates of churches, whatever may be their state, rank, order and dignity, even though distinguished with the honor of the cardinalate, to observe diligently the said decrees and ordinances in their churches, cities and dioceses both in and out of the court of justice, and to cause them to be observed inviolately, each by his own subjects whom it may in any way concern; restraining all opponents and obstinate persons by means of judicial sentences, censures and ecclesiastical penalties contained in those decrees, every appeal being set aside, calling in also, if need be, the aid of the secular arm. We admonish and by the bowels of the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ conjure our most beloved son the Emperor elect and the other Christian kings, states and princes, that they, with the same piety and zeal which they manifested through their ambassadors at the council, for the honor of God and the salvation of their people, in reverence also toward the Apostolic See and the holy council, support, if need be, with their aid and encouragement, the prelates in enforcing and observing the decrees of the council, and not to permit opinions contrary to the sound and salutary doctrine of the council to be received by the people under their jurisdiction, but to forbid them absolutely.
This is why I am very suspicious of NOT seeing Trent as Ecumenical.
And indeed, of what real value is the argument that since the Orthodox did not participate (or even Eastern Catholics) then the Council is not Ecumenical?
The teaching of the Church, as the Catechism noted, is that a Council is Ecumenical because of its recognition by the Pope as such.
This is one of the reasons why I am not Orthodox, namely my belief that because we have the Pope we also have the ability to continue to have Ecumenical Councils…something the Orthodox are powerless to do.
I simply cannot understand, truly, how my Eastern Catholic brethren can NOT see Trent as Ecumenical when it was clearly declared to be such by the Pope.
I mean, if one’s view of an Ecumenical Council’s authenticity is anything less than the belief that it is the Pope’s recognition of a Council that makes it Ecumenical…then Catholic ecclesiology breaks down does it not?
I am a firm believer that the Catholic faith can be expressed in both Latin and Eastern emphases and terms.
However I do not believe it is possible for those emphatic differences to contradict and this is what I fear is happening, especially in light of the fact that the modern Catechism (at least the index of citations) calls Trent ecumenical as well as the fact that Trent was recognized as Ecumenical by the Papacy.
Then there is the further question about Councils like the Lateran councils which clearly dealt with local issues, yet were called ecumenical and seen as such in the West consistently.
This realization that my Eastern brethren do not share my understanding that there have been 21 Ecumenical Councils is causing me a certain amount of distress as it seems to not only show a contradictions in the theology behind Ecumenical Councils within the Catholic Church, but also evidence for the Orthodox polemic that the Eastern Catholic Churches are not as “catholic” as we Latins tout them to be.
Forgive me if my words have offended, I am young and learning and I am only seeking an answer.
Currently, there have been official agreements between all the OOC and the CC regarding Christology. The same is not true in the relationship between the OOC and the EOC, and I think the hard-line views of Mt. Athos has much to do with that fact. As I’ve always believed, I think there is a greater chance of reconciliation between the OOC and the CC than between the OOC and the EOC, or the CC and the EOC.
