Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [Czechlist] councils of nations

Expand Messages
  • Pilucha, Jiri
    get this: -Council of Chalcedon (451) repudiated the Eutychian
    Message 1 of 7 , May 12 11:48 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      get this:

      -Council of Chalcedon<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Chalcedon> (451) repudiated the Eutychian<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutyches> doctrine of monophysitism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monophysitism> ... Reinstated those deposed in 449 and deposed Dioscorus of Alexandria<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioscorus_of_Alexandria> (THIS IS MY FAVORITE!!!)
      -This and all the following councils in this list are rejected by Oriental Orthodox churches<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriental_Orthodoxy>.
      -Second Council of Constantinople<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Council_of_Constantinople> (553) repudiated the Three Chapters<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Chapter_Controversy> as Nestorian, condemned Origen of Alexandria<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen_of_Alexandria>,
      -The Ecumenical status of this council was repudiated by the western churches.
      -Second Council of Nicaea<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Council_of_Nicaea> (787) restored the veneration of icons<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icon> (condemned at the Council of Hieria<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Hieria>, 754) and repudiated iconoclasm<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iconoclasm_(Byzantine)>.





      From: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Czechlist@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Pilucha, Jiri
      Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 8:43 PM
      To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [Czechlist] councils of nations



      Still can't help being doubtful.

      Checking the Wiki link suggested by Mary:

      First council repudiated Arianism
      Second council repudiated Arianism and Macedoniasm
      Second council of Ephesus... attacked its opponents

      Does it sound like "these arguments had hardly been such as to disturb the councils of nations" of councils of nations were to mean the church councils?

      Jiri

      From: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:Czechlist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Pilucha, Jiri
      Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 8:34 PM
      To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com>
      Subject: RE: [Czechlist] councils of nations

      You're probably right.
      Such was the only interpretation that made any sense to me too, but I was -and still am- confused why they should be called "councils of nations".
      Plus the main reason why I am still not convinced is that debates over the nature of Christ were, rather than were not, exactly the single biggest issue, and subject of fierce disputes, at the first ecumenical councils.
      I still have the impression that the author is trying to say something like: [despite being a subject of internal debate within the church] the issues had little effect upon secular politics
      But despite my doubts, your and mary's version still looks more likely to be true than mine
      Jiri

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:Czechlist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jakub Skrebsky
      Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 8:08 PM
      To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com>
      Subject: Re: [Czechlist] councils of nations

      yes. Mary's link points to the right direction. These councils have never been ofically called councils of nations, but they were the only assemblies where such essential issues were disscussed, with the result usually proclaimed as the official church line of teaching.

      to avoid falling in to the trap of catholic/ecumenical, etc., I suggest using a general "cirkevni koncily".

      Jakub

      On 12 May 2013, at 18:17, Pilucha, Jiri wrote:

      Hello, May I have your thoughts, please, on what the author means by "councils of nations" in the text below

      Indeed, Christians had wrangled over the nature of Christ for quite as long as Muslim scholars would go on to debate the nature of Our'an. Admittedly, in the early years of the Christian faith, these arguments had hardly been such as to distrb the councils of nations; but during late antiquity, when emperors and kings started to wrestle with them too, whole empires were transformed by the arcana of such debates.

      Thanks
      Jiri

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      ------------------------------------

      Yahoo! Groups Links

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.