What happened at the Second Council of Constantinople?

He was induced by the promise of a safe-conduct to come forth, but fled again to Chalcedon, and took shelter in the church. At length the emperor, seeing no probability of peace otherwise, consented to call a council, and the pope returned to Constantinople. Vigilius desired it should be held in Sicily or Italy, but the emperor would not consent. After a great deal of contention, the emperor summoned the council to meet at Constantinople. It was called the Fifth General Council.

It met in May, 553. A hundred and sixty-five bishops attended, including all the eastern patriarchs, but only six African bishops. Vigilius did not consider that the western church was at all adequately represented, and he would not attend, though urgently requested to do so by the other patriarchs. Vigilius drew up a paper, with the concurrence of sixteen bishops, endeavouring to make a compromise by condemning the writings which were in question, but without condemning the authors. But the emperor would not receive it. He presented to the council the secret compact he had made with Vigilius, and desired that his name should be erased from the church diptychs (lists of those in communion). The council proceeded without the attendance of the pope.

The council condemned the Three Chapters and pronounced a curse against all who should defend them, or should pretend that they were countenanced by the council of Chalcedon. The persons of Theodoret and Ibas were spared, but Theodore was condemned as well as his writings. The four previous general councils were confirmed; and the edicts of the emperor were approved. As usual, the emperor issued an edict enforcing the decrees of the council.

142 The Fifth General Council is too plain in its history to need more than the plain statement of facts. There had been a great contest about the merits of Origen, and the monks had been breaking into each other's monasteries, and in the course of the disputes which followed, blood had been shed in the churches, indeed it was far from being the first time. However, they got the Emperor to condemn Origen's doctrine. As to the merits of the case, there was reason enough. He was a powerful prince, and recovered Italy and Africa from the barbarians, and liked his own way. A certain Theodore of Caesarea, a great favourite with the Emperor, was fond of Origen and of Eutychianism, and determined to have his revenge, and he engaged Justinian to condemn three persons' writings, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Ibas, and Theodoret, all three opposed to Cyril, who had his way in the Council of Ephesus. These three persons had been pronounced to be in full communion in the Council of Chalcedon, which had rather tended to set up Nestorius' reputation again, whom Cyril and Ephesus had condemned. Justinian published a long decree condemning the three chapters, as the writings of the three prelates above-named were called. He had a kind of council, and the Oriental patriarchs and prelates were obliged to condemn them too. Pope Vigilius condemned them and excommunicated the patriarch of Constantinople and all who had condemned the three chapters. However Justinian thought he would be more tractable at Constantinople, and made him come. There, in fact, he joined in communion again with the excommunicated ones, and condemned the three chapters. But then all the prelates of Illyria and Africa, in fact of all the West in general separated from his communion as unfaithful — a bad business according to modern Romanist notions. To get out of the scrape he acceded to the proposal by some of these prelates of a general council, and withdrew his condemnation of the chapters, and forbade any resolution till there was a council. The Emperor persecuted him (indeed he had exiled him and afterwards brought him to Constantinople); he fled to Chalcedon, and the Emperor compromised, and he came back He then pressed for a council in Italy. That did not suit the Emperor, and he refused, but called one at Constantinople. Vigilius would not go there, and he signed his private judgment with eighteen other Western prelates, while one- hundred and sixty or one hundred and seventy sat in the council under the Emperor's authority. This letter of his, called Constitutive, was given to the Emperor, but is taken no notice of in the council. To say the truth, it was on the whole the most sensible paper in the whole miserable business, and he forbade by the authority of the apostolic see in any way to contravene what he then pronounced. However, the Emperor went on with his council, when, save a very few renegades, there were no Western prelates. The council condemned altogether the three chapters, which was quite different from Vigilius' constitutive; and Vigilius refused to sign as he had refused to be present. Justinian banished him again, and he gave way, and signed; and it became thereby, say Baronius and the Romanists, a general council. If that does not make a sure foundation for faith, what will? Yet universal confusion was the result.

The next act of Justinian was to issue an edict against the doctrines of Origen. Few held with Origen, or cared for his teaching, but the emperor drew up an edict detailing ten heresies drawn from his works. A council was called, and the wishes of the emperor were confirmed. This is a matter now of very little moment, except that it shews how the emperor was the prime mover of that which, if needful, should have been cared for by the church generally.

Justinian still laboured to bring about a union with the Monophysite party and those called orthodox. He determined to write a treatise that should convince the former of their error. While he contemplated this, it was artfully suggested to him that his object would be more easily obtained by condemning certain writings approved at Chalcedon, but which the Monophysites disliked, and which they alleged the orthodox ought also to disavow.

Three articles were especially named to be condemned: 1, The writings and person of Theodore of Mopsuestia; 2, The treatise of Theodoret against Cyril; and 3, a letter written by Ibas, bishop of Edessa, to the Persian bishop Maris. These have been called the "Three Chapters," from the words used in the original; but may be more rightly termed three articles of the indictment.

It has been judged that his wife Theodora was really the instigator of this suggestion. If the emperor fell into the snare, he would really be condemning the council of Chalcedon, without openly appearing to do so; and if he could be brought to issue an edict condemning the three articles, he would, for very shame, be compelled to enforce its reception. Unhappily, Justinian fell into the trap laid for him, and thus kindled a needless flame that burnt long and did much damage.

V. Held at Constantinople in A.D. 553, against the errors of Origen.

Pelagius succeeded Vigilius, but he was unpopular at Rome, and there was in the West great opposition to the Fifth General Council which Pelagius sought to enforce. Persecution followed. Many bishops were banished and imprisoned in convents, and in north Italy some of the bishops broke communion with Rome rather than receive the decrees of the council.

He at first refused to sign the condemnation of the Three Chapters. Then he attempted to draw up a compromise, called the Judicatum, namely, to condemn the Three Chapters, but without touching the decisions of the council of Chalcedon. His own clergy compelled him to withdraw his compromise. He asked for a general council.

In A.D. 548 Theodora died, but the emperor had so far committed himself to the line of things he was pursuing, that he would not alter his course. He persecuted those in Africa who refused compliance, and extorted a secret oath from Vigilius to condemn the three articles.

Chapter 2. Justinian Emperor, A.D. 527-565. � He rules the church. � Upholds the Council of Chalcedon, as to the two natures in Christ. � His wife, Theodora, a Monophysite. � Justinian aims to unite the Monophysite party with the orthodox. � The three Chapters. � Fifth general council held, A.D. 553. � Justinian's schemes useless.

N*. Well, I should have thought it wrong every way to worship idols. A worshipper of idols is a strange security for faith. But we will turn to some other instances equally notorious: Pope Vigilius in the dispute about what are called the three chapters, two of which were sanctioned by the great General Council of Chalcedon. In truth Vigilius was elevated to the See of Rome on purpose to favour Monophysite heresy, and restore Anthinus, the heretic, to the See of Constantinople, the Empress putting him in by force, by means of Belisarius, and banishing Silverius. When once in, he turned right round, but quailed before the Emperor as soon as he got to Constantinople, and intrigued in vain. Then he condemned the three chapters as the Emperor had done. Then, when the fifth General Council was called, though at Constantinople, he defended the three chapters. The Council of Constantinople broke communion with him, and approved the Emperor's condemnation of the three chapters, and Vigilius, the following year, assented to the decrees of the council, and his successor, Pelagius I, acknowledged the orthodoxy of the council. Where is the security for faith here anywhere? The Council of Constantinople condemned the Council of Chalcedon, both being accounted ecumenical, nominally saving its credit, and the pope, ex cathedra, condemned, approved, and then condemned the same doctrine, what all held to be a vital question as to the Person of the Lord! You cannot deny this.

Any one can judge whether such proceedings can be a foundation for a Christian's faith, or whether it is by wading through all this, instead of reading the Lord's and the apostles' words, a poor man will get at the truth. Here the pope contradicts himself, and one general council, let them say what they will, contradicts another; for Chalcedon had acquitted and Constantinople condemns the three writers we have spoken of.

Here is Baronius' remark: "If you compare this synod with all that of which a synod ought to consist in order to be called a general council legitimately congregated in the Holy Spirit, things standing as the acts plainly shew they do, you will agree that it does not merit the name, not merely of a general council, but not even of a private one, being one which was gathered, the Roman pontiff resisting, and judgment pronounced by it in like manner against his decrees." "We will say farther on how it came to obtain the name of a general council." He then abuses it (his annotator, Pagi, approving it) and cites Pope Gregory and others as disapproving it too; however, though he says certainly Vigilius did not consent to it by letters, as either he or his successor, Pope Pelagius, consented to it, it became ecumenical, as the first of Constantinople had done, which was gathered in spite of Damasus (Bar. Acc., 553, 220-224).