Which is your favorite ecumenical council?

Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
beng:
Because AFAIK Arius’ personality was not bad.
Arius was not even a bishop. He was a priest who refused to be in obedience to his own bishop. IMHO, pride is not a good personality trait.

John.
 
Nicaea I, definitely. I knew that it would be a dead heat between Trent and Nicaea. It seems that more traditional Catholics (not radical traditionalist, but just in the old-fashioned sense) really like Trent. But what’s not to like? The great Counter-Reformation council!

But Nicaea definetely set the precedent. Arianism was definietely a huge thing back then, and like another poster mentioned, without it, we’d all be Jehovah’s Witnesses. :bounce:
 
I voted for the Council of Trent. It’s the one that clarified the nature of justification and salvation against the reformers. It also, during that time, instituted a lot of counter reforms that would affect the Church for centuries onward (like the promulgating of the Latin Mass [a.k.a. “Tridentine Mass”] as the official rite of the Latin Church).

Miguel.
 
I voted for Trent. But then the SN makes that obvious, I suppose. 😃

Justin
 
I’m for Lyons 2. Someday the Eastern and Western churches will be reunited for good.
 
I voted for Ephesus. It put the big smack down on Nestorius. It has been incredibly useful in debating those who deny Mary as the Mother of God.
 
I vote for Trent, but hold the incompleted Vatican I in reserve. The protestant revolt started a tsunami of heresy built on a foundation of “do your own thing” and “whatever feels good” which has re-infected the hierarchy and laity after Vatican II. Trent and Vatican I re-established the authority of infallible dogma and depedence on Sacred Tradition. We desparately need “anathema sit” to be the most used words in papal encyclicals again.
 
It was between Trent and Lateran IV, but I have to go with Lateran IV on this one. Many of the great Ecumenical councils are called to put down a heresy like Arianism, Nestorianism, Monophysitism, Iconoclasm, Protestantism, etc. However, The Fourth Lateran Council was primarily concerned with discipline. This council is many ways seems to be the crowning of the Gregorian reforms started by Pope St. Leo IX and named after Pope St. Gregory VII (aka Hildebrand). This is Christendom. The council of the High Middle Ages and the Age of Faith.

Furthermore, the council called a crusade, and that is just icing on the cake. It also set the requirement that Catholics receive Communion at least once a year, a dicipline still observed today. It also cracked down on uncelebate and worldly clergy.

Almost more than Trent, I think that the 4th Lateran is a council for our times.
 
I must admit that I have never read even 1 of them - so I would be a fraud to participate in the poll. :ehh:
I guess this is my assignment for the year. As if I needed more things on my list.
 
40.png
prodromos:
Arius was not even a bishop. He was a priest who refused to be in obedience to his own bishop. IMHO, pride is not a good personality trait.

John.
Since 80% of the Bishops were Arian during the peek of the controversy it would be hard to conclude that Arius force his way through the hierarchy. It seems that he was making a pretty strong case.
 
My top reason for picking Lateran IV is, admittedly, kind of quirky. I like it for what it could have done for the Church. In many respects, it sought to bring about reform in the life of the Church.

I think that today, if it is known at all, people recognize it as the council that legislated one’s ‘Easter duty’ of going to confession and receiving communion.

However, from my graduate study of Medieval Church history, I also know that it sought to better the state of the priesthood. Although it did not legislate the establishment of seminaries as Trent did, Lateran IV did inspire a large number of literary works over the course of the next century or so whose aim was to increase the knowledge of the clergy.

Among these were versed commentaries on the Bible. Because they were in verse, they could be easily memorized, a help to those whose reading level might have been that high.

Sadly, many of the improvements in the life of the clergy following Lateran IV came to a hault by something over which the Church had no control: the outbreak of various forms of the plague in the Black Death in 1347 and the regular recurrences of the plague in the years after that.

I also think that that council was the product of a Church who truly helped to shape the entirety of Western European culture, a Church led by Pope Innocent III, arguably one of the most wise and able leaders of the Church in the Middle Ages.

Finally, I picked Lateran IV because, like Phil, pink is great. 😃
 
I thought I would post some highlights

Canon 16 of the 4th Lateran Council:
Clerics shall not hold secular offices or engage in secular and, above all, dishonest pursuits. They shall not attend the performances of mimics and buffoons, or theatrical representations. They shall not visit taverns except in case of necessity, namely, when on a journey. They are forbidden to play games of chance or be present at them. They must have a becoming crown and tonsure and apply themselves diligently to the study of the divine offices and other useful subjects. Their garments must be worn clasped at the top and neither too short nor too long. They are not to use red or green garments or curiously sewed together gloves, or beak-shaped shoes or gilded bridles, saddles, pectoral ornaments (for horses), spurs, or anything else indicative of superfluity. At the divine office in the church they are not to wear cappas with long sleeves, and priests and dignitaries may not wear them elsewhere except in case of danger when circumstances should require a change of outer garments. Buckles may under no condition be worn, nor sashes having ornaments of gold or silver, nor rings, unless it be in keeping with the dignity of their office. All bishops must use in public and in the church outer garments made of linen, except those who are monks, in which case they must wear the habit of their order; in public they must not appear with open mantles, but these must be clasped either on the back of the neck or on the bosom.
Canon 18:
No cleric may pronounce a sentence of death, or execute such a sentence, or be present at its execution. If anyone in consequence of this prohibition (hujusmodi occasions statuti) should presume to inflict damage on churches or injury on ecclesiastical persons, let him be restrained by ecclesiastical censure. Nor may any cleric write or dictate letters destined for the execution of such a sentence. Wherefore, in the chanceries of the princes let this matter be committed to laymen and not to clerics. Neither may a cleric act as judge in the case of the Rotarrii, archers, or other men of this kind devoted to the shedding of blood. No subdeacon, deacon, or priest shall practice that part of surgery involving burning and cutting. Neither shall anyone in judicial tests or ordeals by hot or cold water or hot iron bestow any blessing; the earlier prohibitions in regard to dueling remain in force.
Part of Canon 21:
Let the priest be discreet and cautious that he may pour wine and oil into the wounds of the one injured after the manner of a skilful physician, carefully inquiring into the circumstances of the sinner and the sin, from the nature of which he may understand what kind of advice to give and what remedy to apply, making use of different experiments to heal the sick one. But let him exercise the greatest precaution that he does not in any degree by word, sign, or any other manner make known the sinner, but should he need more prudent counsel, let him seek it cautiously without any mention of the person. He who dares to reveal a sin confided to him in the tribunal of penance, we decree that he be not only deposed from the sacerdotal office but also relegated to a monastery of strict observance to do penance for the remainder of his life.
fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.html
 
<< The Fourth Lateran Council was primarily concerned with discipline. This council is many ways seems to be the crowning of the Gregorian reforms started by Pope St. Leo IX and named after Pope St. Gregory VII (aka Hildebrand). This is Christendom. The council of the High Middle Ages and the Age of Faith. >>

Yeah, that and because its pink. 😛

Sorry, my humor a little overdone. I’m so glad to see these boards…

Phil P
 
I have to jump on board the Nicea bandwagon. The Creed is what its all about after all.

John
 
40.png
Lurch104:
I have to jump on board the Nicea bandwagon. The Creed is what its all about after all.

John
Entering pedantry mode

The Creed actually is the Nicene-Constanople Creed. And in the West it also has the filioque.

exiting pedantry mode

Trent. It is to Lateran V as a Vatican III of Bob Cat will be to Vatican II.
 
I picked Trent because it is still so relevant today in a real sense regarding Catholicism and more importantly defending it.

Have you ever had a debate with a non-catholic, without referencing Trent?
 
40.png
beng:
Source?

Because AFAIK Arius’ personality was not bad.
What does “AFAIK” mean?

I always imagine Arius as having a good personality. He strikes me as being just like many of my theology professors. He is very soft spoken. He gives many deep and penetrating analyses. He is polite. He is well-read. He is informed. He is au-courant on many of the cutting edge issues of the day.

St. Nicholas, on the other hand, is a big loud mouth. He heckles Arius and other pleasant and important people at the council. He makes rude noises when they speak. He breaks out in fits of rage. And ultimately punches Arius directly in the mouth.

maybe i’m just projecting. many of my professors and co-students were so irritating. and it was the loud, brash, and rude ones that i liked to go pubbing with on the weekends.

At any rate, the more polite a heretic is, the more satisfying it would be to punch him directly on the mouth.
 
Yes, Arius was not a bishop, but rather a heretical priest. The reason St. Nicholas came up and punched Arius was because Arius had been a student of St. Nicholas. The holy man was proably so incensed at the blatant heresy of Arius he came up and smacked him :whacky: !
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top