How do I read Ecumenical Councils without speaking Latin?

Solution
Skitarii
Simony said:
What was Trent, then?
Click to expand...
An ecumemical council, by definition, is an empire-spanning council presided over by the Roman Emperor, this is the distinction between it and a local synod. We haven't had an ecumenical council in centuries because the Roman empire, and the office of the emperor, along with it, no longer exists. The Synod of Iasi is considered by some to be an ecumenical council, but it does not have official recognization by the Church. The Synod of Jerusalem is considered an ecumenical council by some, but lacks universal recognization. The 1872 Synod of Constantinople set the grounds for the rejection of phyletism, but it is not an ecumenical council because, which emperor was supposed to preside over it? The Ottoman...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Simony said:
What was Trent, then?
Click to expand...
An ecumemical council, by definition, is an empire-spanning council presided over by the Roman Emperor, this is the distinction between it and a local synod. We haven't had an ecumenical council in centuries because the Roman empire, and the office of the emperor, along with it, no longer exists. The Synod of Iasi is considered by some to be an ecumenical council, but it does not have official recognization by the Church. The Synod of Jerusalem is considered an ecumenical council by some, but lacks universal recognization. The 1872 Synod of Constantinople set the grounds for the rejection of phyletism, but it is not an ecumenical council because, which emperor was supposed to preside over it? The Ottoman sultan? Trent was presided over by schismatics anyway, so it's just a cope synod
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Fetish Roulette, Alligator Alcatraz, Simony and 1 other person
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
Skitarii said:
An ecumemical council, by definition, is an empire-spanning council presided over by the Roman Emperor, this is the distinction between it and a local synod. We haven't had an ecumenical council in centuries because the Roman empire, and the office of the emperor, along with it, no longer exists. The Synod of Iasi is considered by some to be an ecumenical council, but it does not have official recognization by the Church. The Synod of Jerusalem is considered an ecumenical council by some, but lacks universal recognization. The 1872 Synod of Constantinople set the grounds for the rejection of phyletism, but it is not an ecumenical council because, which emperor was supposed to preside over it? The Ottoman sultan? Trent was presided over by schismatics anyway, so it's just a cope synod
Click to expand...
Orthocucks still seething over filioque and it shows

Edit heres an english translation of all the canons and decrees: https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Canons_and_Decrees_of_the_Council_of_Trent
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Simony said:
How does this honour God?
Click to expand...
Minor bantz mainly, but im assuming because you want to read the council of trents rulings and so forth youre a catholic and he gave the orthodox meaning of an ecumenical council and not the catholic one one which is merely any major meeting with a ton of bishops.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JJLiautaud said:
Minor bantz mainly, but im assuming because you want to read the council of trents rulings and so forth youre a catholic and he gave the orthodox meaning of an ecumenical council and not the catholic one one which is merely any major meeting with a ton of bishops.
Click to expand...
I wanted to read Trent because I'm a Lutheran and, I heard it was formulated as a response to The Augsburg Confession.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back