|
This council, designated as
the eighth ecumenical council by western canonists, is not found in any
canonical collections of the Byzantines; its acts and canons are completely
ignored by them. Modern scholars have shown that it was included in the list of
ecumenical councils only later, that is, after the eleventh century. We have
decided to include the council, for the sake of historical completeness.
Emperor Basil I and the
patriarch Ignatius, after being restored to his see of Constantinople, asked
Pope Nicholas I to call a council to decide about the bishops and priests who
had been ordained by Photius. It was held at Constantinople after the
arrival of legates from Pope Hadrian II, who had meanwhile succeeded Nicholas.
These legates were Donatus, Stephen and Marinus and they presided at the
council. It began in the cathedral of Hagia Sophia on 5 October 869. The
tenth and last session was held on 28 February 870, when 27 canons were
read out and approved by the council. All who were willing to sign the Liber
satisfactionis, which had been sent by Pope Hadrian II, were admitted to the
council. The account made by Anastasius contains the authentic list of those
who signed the acts of the council. Emperor Basil I and his sons, Constantine
and Leo, signed the acts after the patriarchs and in the same year they
promulgated the council's decisions, after drawing up a decree for this
purpose.
As regards the canonical
authority of these deliberations, various facts regarding the council held in the cathedral of Hagia
Sophia in November 879, so that Photius might be restored to the see of
Constantinople, should be remembered. Peter, a Roman cardinal, presided at this
council. It took account of a letter of Pope John VIII, which had been sent to
the emperor and translated into Greek. This reads (chapter 4): "We declare
that the synod held at Rome against the most holy patriarch Photius in the time
of the most blessed pope Hadrian, as well as the holy synod of Constantinople
attacking the same most holy Photius (i.e., in 869-870), are totally condemned
and abrogated and must in no way be invoked or named as synods. Let this not
happen". Some people have thought that this text had been altered by
Photius; but in the so-called "unaltered" text of the letter this
passage is replaced by dots (. . .), and the following passage reads: "For
the see of blessed Peter, the key-bearer of the heavenly kingdom, has the power
to dissolve, after suitable appraisal, any bonds imposed by bishops. This is so
because it is agreed that already many patriarchs, for example Athanasius .. ..
after having been condemned by a synod, have been, after formal acquittal by
the apostolic see, promptly reinstated". Ivo of Chartres explicitly
affirms: "The synod of Constantinople which was held against Photius must
not be recognised. John VIII wrote to the patriarch Photius (in 879): We make
void that synod which was held against Photius at Constantinople and we have
completely blotted it out for various reasons as well as for the fact that Pope
Hadrian did not sign its acts". Ivo adds from the instructions that John
VIII gave to his legates for the council in 879: "You will say that, as
regards the synods which were held against Photius under Pope Hadrian at Rome
or Constantinople, we annul them and wholly exclude them from the number of the
holy synods". For these reasons there is no ground for thinking that the
text was altered by Photius.
An authentic copy of the
acts of the council of 869-870 was sent to Rome, as of right. Anastasius, the
librarian, ordered a complete copy to be made for himself. Then, when the
legates' copy was stolen, he translated his own copy into Latin, on Pope
Hadrian's orders, making a word for word translation. Anastasius also makes it
plain that the Greeks adopted every means to distort the acts, "by abbreviating
here and by expanding or changing there". He adds: "Whatever is found
in the Latin copy of the acts of the eighth synod is completely free from the
alloy of falsehood; however, whatever more is found in the Greek text is
thoroughly infected with poisonous lies".
The Greek text has been
partly preserved from total destruction in the summary of an anonymous writer
who copied out anti-Photian texts. This summary has 14 canons, as opposed to
the 27 of Anastasius, and only contains excerpts, dealing with the most
important points, of these canons. Where comparison is possible, the Latin
version of Anastasius hardly departs from the Greek text. Indeed it is so
literal that at times it can only be understood by comparison with the Greek
text, and when the latter is missing we must sometimes rely on conjecture.
The documents printed below
are taken from the following: the "Definition" from the Roman
edition, (Concilia generalia Ecclesiae catholicae [Editio Romana], Rome 4 vols,
1608-1612) 3, 284-287; the canons from Les canons des conciles oecumeniques,
ed. P-P. Jouannou (Pontificia commissione per la redazione del codice di
diritto canonico orientale. Fonti.
Fasc. IX: Discipline generale antique [IIe-IXe s.] tome 1 part 1), Grottaferata
1962 289-342.
The English translation is
from the Latin text, for the reasons mentioned above. The material in curly
brackets { } has been added by the hypertext editor, as also has some of the
formatting
|