In fact, they both recognize the first seven ecumenical councils (Nicaea I, Constantinople I, Ephesus, Chalcedon, Constantinople II, Constantinople III, and Nicaea II
The Iconoclasts were excommunicated by the Council of Nicaea II
in AD 787 under the Patriarch Tarasius and by another council that sat in Rome.
(10.) For a long time, the conflict between Nicaea II
and Frankfurt was explained as based on misunderstandings and the bad quality of the Latin translation of the Greek Nicaean texts that the Council in Frankfurt used in its work.
In fact on the model of the canon of the Scriptures, the canon of the councils of the first millennium was fixed by Nicaea II (787), which in its first canon qualified the previous six councils as universal or ecumenical, thus determining the canon of the ecumenical councils held till then.
Volume 1 of COGD (hereafter COGD-I) carries the English title, The Oecumenical Councils from Nicaea I to Nicaea II (325-787).
And yet unlike the canon of Scripture, the canon of tradition has not been fixed since Nicaea II, which determined the canon of the councils.
The oecumenical councils from Nicaea I to Nicaea II
(325-787), general editor Giuseppe Alberigo, Turnhout 2006.
However when scholars examined the work of Cinnamus they found a number of texts that seemed to post-date Nicaea II (787).
However the structure of the codex is built (albeit with several haphazard insertions) upon a chronological sequence of Conciliar texts (from Ephesus to Nicaea II), which are all relatively short, and in many cases are known only from this witness.
Although bishops have for the most part been the determining influence in the councils, others have at times played roles just as important, as with Emperor Charles V at Trent, King Philip IV of France at Vienne, the Empress Irene at Nicaea II
, and, of course, Emperor Constantine at Nicaea.
Especially interesting in most sections are the communications: Pauline Donceel-Voute on the physical setting of the liturgy in the Near-East from the fourth to the ninth centuries, an original piece by Dimitry Afinogenov on the `mainstream', non-Studite arguments against iconoclasm from the time of Nicaea II
onwards (arguments that essentially assert the spiritual independence of the Church from the Emperor), a thoughtful piece by Miguel [M.sup.a] Garijo-Guembe on the role the recognition of the complementarity of traditions might play in Orthodox-Catholic dialogue, and a remarkable piece by Gorazd Kocijancic on the relevance to post-modernism of the Eastern apophatic tradition.
At the same time, he might have paid more attention to the fact that while the bishops at Ephesus, Chalcedon, Constantinople III, and Nicaea II
welcomed the doctrinal judgments of the popes and eventually confirmed them, they insisted that they must first study them in the light of Scripture and tradition before coming to the conciliar decision that would settle the issue.