MEDIEVAL COUNCILS(1)

Isaac Padinjarekuttu

Between the schism of the eastern and western churches beginning in the eleventh century and the further divisions within the western church resulting from the Reformation in the sixteenth century, ten councils have found their place in the Roman Catholic Church’s traditional list of ecumenical councils. Lateran I (1123), Lateran II (1139), Lateran III (1179), Lateran IV (1215), Lyons I (1245), Lyons II (1274), Vienne (1311-1312), Constance (1414-1418), Basel-Florence (1431-1445) and Lateran V (1512-1517).

The ecumenical councils belong to the ancient tradition of the Church, tracing their roots to apostolic times (Acts chapter 15). In the first millennium, they were decisive in formulating the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, especially, the first four councils. The other four were not as influential but important. They not only clarified doctrine but also regulated the life of the church through the many disciplinary canons. Nicaea II in 787 was the last generally recognized ecumenical council because the eighth council, Constantinople IV (869-870) was rejected by the eastern churches as an ecumenical council. More than two hundred years elapsed between this council and the next council, Lateran I in 1123. By this time fundamental changes had taken place in the Church. The Eastern schism divided the church and the two churches went their own way for all practical purposes. In the western church, there was a desire for reform and renewal after the chaotic situation in the ninth and tenth centuries, through the Gregorian Reform which freed the church from lay control to some extent. Papal concern for reform showed itself in these councils which had mixed results. Obviously all these councils were held in the western church and were convoked by the Popes (in the first millennium calling councils was the prerogative of the emperor); at least five of them were held also in the principal papal residence, the Lateran palace, and hence the name, Lateran councils. The eastern churches were not represented at these councils.

What therefore is the status of these councils? The Orthodox Churches and the churches of the Reformation do not accept them as ecumenical councils for the obvious reason that they were not represented at these councils. Even in the Catholic Church itself there is a discussion about the status of these councils, whether they are truly ecumenical councils. The medieval people themselves were uncertain about the status of these councils and the clear weight of opinion was that they were not ecumenical. The attempt to promote the medieval councils to ecumenical status came about during the Counter-Reformation. Roman Catholic apologists sought to defend the true church as they saw it against the attacks of the Reformation by an appeal to its medieval heritage and the councils of the medieval period formed an important part of this heritage. Influential churchmen like Robert Bellarmine and Cesare Baronius were instrumental in this who drew up a list of nineteen “ecumenical” councils in the history of the Church, from Nicaea I up to the Council of Trent. The list came to be widely accepted within the Roman Catholic Church and all these councils were normally called ecumenical councils thereafter. The issue was reopened after the Second Vatican Council. The impetus came from the theologian Yves Congar who published an article in 1974 in which he discussed the criteria for ecumenicity in councils and questioned the list of ecumenical councils (twenty-one from Nicaea I to Vatican II) in the Catholic Church. In the same year Pope Paul VI, too, referred to these councils as “general councils of the West.” And there has been a tendency thence to follow the lead of Paul VI and call the medieval councils “general councils of the western church” rather than cling to the ecumenical title for them. But in official Catholic usage, they are still called ecumenical councils. However, the reason for the distinction and the discussion should be kept in mind because they have important in ecumenical significance. But we should keep in mind that even as general councils of the West, they are of great significance. They regulated the life of the western church in which the large majority of Christians lived and to where the mainstream of life and development in the church moved after the East-West schism.

Isaac Padinjarekuttu
(Professor of Church History at Oriens Theological College, Shillong)

Leave a Comment

*
*