In recent months I’ve increasingly heard the claim that the Latin West initially resisted the Council of Nicaea II before embracing it a few centuries after the fact. Usually, it’s traditional Anglicans making this claim because, presumably, they don’t want to fall under the same condemnation that they pronounced over the Anabaptists who departed from the received faith of their “catholic” episcopate. In other words, it seems to me that many Anglicans would feel uncomfortable if Nicaea II met the exact same criteria for an “Ecumenical Council” that the first Six Councils did (save, in their minds, orthodoxy), due to it being repudiated by the Thirty-Nine Articles. However, even the late Pope Benedict XVI expressed a similar sentiment about the West never fully embracing Nicaea II, at least in practice,
The Reception of Nicaea II in the Latin West
The Reception of Nicaea II in the Latin West
The Reception of Nicaea II in the Latin West
In recent months I’ve increasingly heard the claim that the Latin West initially resisted the Council of Nicaea II before embracing it a few centuries after the fact. Usually, it’s traditional Anglicans making this claim because, presumably, they don’t want to fall under the same condemnation that they pronounced over the Anabaptists who departed from the received faith of their “catholic” episcopate. In other words, it seems to me that many Anglicans would feel uncomfortable if Nicaea II met the exact same criteria for an “Ecumenical Council” that the first Six Councils did (save, in their minds, orthodoxy), due to it being repudiated by the Thirty-Nine Articles. However, even the late Pope Benedict XVI expressed a similar sentiment about the West never fully embracing Nicaea II, at least in practice,