The Second Council of Constantinople, held in the vibrant heart of the Byzantine Empire, represents the fifth of the initial seven ecumenical councils, pivotal gatherings recognized as foundational by both the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church. These "ecumenical" councils, meaning "worldwide" or "universal," played a crucial role in defining Christian doctrine and upholding the unity of the nascent global church. Beyond these two major traditions, the council also finds recognition among Old Catholics, a communion of churches that separated from Rome primarily over the doctrine of papal infallibility in the 19th century, and various other Christian groups. Protestant perspectives on the council are notably diverse; while some traditions, such as many Calvinist churches, typically acknowledge the authority of only the first four ecumenical councils, Lutherans often accept the first six, and a significant portion of Anglo-Catholics—a movement within Anglicanism emphasizing its Catholic heritage—recognize all seven.

This significant ecclesiastical event was convoked by the powerful Byzantine Emperor Justinian I, a ruler deeply invested in both the political and religious unity of his vast empire. The council convened from May 5 to June 2, 553, under the spiritual leadership and presidency of Patriarch Eutychius of Constantinople. While Justinian's ambition was to forge religious harmony, the composition of the council itself revealed an underlying tension: the participants were overwhelmingly Eastern bishops. Out of a total of 152 bishops, a mere sixteen Western bishops were present, comprising nine from the imperial province of Illyricum and seven from Africa. Notably, not a single bishop from Italy, the traditional heartland of Western Christianity and the seat of the papacy, attended the proceedings. This significant absence was tied to the contentious stance of Pope Vigilius, who, despite being physically in Constantinople at the time, initially refused to participate due to his reservations about the council's agenda and the perceived imperial coercion.

The Condemnation of the Three Chapters

The primary undertaking of the Second Council of Constantinople was to formally confirm a condemnation previously issued by imperial edict in 551 by Emperor Justinian. This condemnation targeted what became known as the "Three Chapters," a collection of controversial Christological writings and, by extension, the theological legacy of certain figures. These included the person and Christological writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia (who died in 428), regarded by many as a precursor to Nestorianism due to his emphasis on the distinctness of Christ's two natures. Also targeted were specific writings by Theodoret of Cyrrhus (died c. 466) which had criticized Cyril of Alexandria's Twelve Anathemas—doctrinal statements accepted at the Council of Ephesus. Finally, a letter attributed to Ibas of Edessa (died 457) that opposed Cyrillianism and the Council of Ephesus also fell under the council's scrutiny. The posthumous condemnation of Theodore, who had once been widely respected as a pillar of orthodoxy, proved particularly contentious, especially in the West.

Addressing Nestorianism and the Term "Theotokos"

The underlying purpose of condemning these "Three Chapters" was to unequivocally assert that the "Great Church"—the mainstream, Chalcedonian-following body of Christianity—stood firmly against Nestorianism. Nestorianism, named after the exiled Patriarch Nestorius, was a doctrine accused of dividing Christ into two separate persons, one divine and one human, rather than recognizing a single person with two natures. This theological perspective was largely associated with the Antiochene school, which was perceived to have either directly supported Nestorius or inspired the teachings for which he was anathematized and exiled. To further underscore its Chalcedonian fidelity, the council also re-affirmed its condemnation of any teaching that denied Mary the rightful title of Theotokos (Greek for "Mother of God"). This title was crucial for affirming the full divinity of Christ from the moment of his conception, countering alternative terms like anthropotokos (mother of the man) or Christotokos (mother of Christ), which were deemed insufficient as they could imply a division in Christ's person.

Justinian's Quest for Unity and Unintended Schisms

Emperor Justinian harbored a profound hope that by explicitly condemning the Three Chapters, he could foster a crucial reunion between the Chalcedonians (those who upheld the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon) and the various Monophysite factions in the eastern provinces of his empire, particularly Egypt and Syria. Monophysitism, a broad term for doctrines asserting that Christ possessed only one nature, or a single complex nature in which the human was absorbed by the divine, represented a significant religious and political challenge to imperial unity. Numerous emperors, over the four centuries following the Council of Ephesus, had attempted various reconciliation efforts between these theological parties within the Byzantine Empire, yet none had proven ultimately successful.

Ironically, this very attempt at reconciliation, marked by the condemnation of the Three Chapters and the unprecedented posthumous anathematization of Theodore of Mopsuestia, actually led to further schisms and heresies. The most immediate consequence was the "Schism of the Three Chapters," a major split that saw Western regions, particularly in Italy, Africa, and Illyricum, reject the council's decisions, leading to a significant rupture with Rome for several decades. Furthermore, the relentless imperial quest for theological compromise inadvertently gave rise to new, nuanced Christological positions intended to bridge the gap between Chalcedonian orthodoxy and Monophysitism. These included emergent semi-Monophysite compromises such as monoenergism and monotheletism.

Monoenergism, promulgated between 610 and 622 by Emperor Heraclius under the advice of Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople, proposed that Christ possessed no human "energy" but only a single, divine "function" or "principle of operation." This doctrine was deliberately formulated in an equivocal and vague manner. Monotheletism, promulgated in 638 by the same emperor and patriarch, asserted that Christ possessed no human will but only a divine will—"will" here understood to mean the desires and appetites inherent in a nature. Both of these propositions, however, were seen by orthodox theologians, most notably Saint Maximus the Confessor, as subtly undermining the full humanity of Christ, eventually leading to their condemnation at the Third Council of Constantinople in 680–681.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is an Ecumenical Council?

An Ecumenical Council is a formal synod or assembly of bishops and other church leaders from across the Christian world, recognized by the Church as having the authority to define doctrine and establish practices universally applicable to Christians. The first seven ecumenical councils, including the Second Council of Constantinople, are particularly significant for establishing core Christological doctrines.

Why was the Second Council of Constantinople convened?

The council was primarily convened by Emperor Justinian I to resolve lingering theological disputes, particularly those related to Nestorianism and Monophysitism, which were causing significant disunity within his empire. By condemning the "Three Chapters," Justinian hoped to reconcile Chalcedonian orthodoxy with the Monophysite factions in the Eastern provinces.

What were the "Three Chapters" and why were they condemned?

The "Three Chapters" referred to specific theological writings and the person of Theodore of Mopsuestia, along with certain writings by Theodoret of Cyrrhus and a letter by Ibas of Edessa. These were condemned because they were perceived as providing implicit support for Nestorianism, a heresy that was seen to divide the person of Christ. By condemning them, the council aimed to firmly establish the unity of Christ's person and affirm his full divinity and humanity as defined at Chalcedon.

How did the Council aim to resolve the Nestorian and Monophysite controversies?

The council sought to unequivocally clarify Christological doctrine, particularly by condemning the Three Chapters, which were associated with Nestorian tendencies. Justinian hoped this would demonstrate to Monophysites that the Chalcedonian position was sufficiently anti-Nestorian, thereby creating a bridge for their return to communion with the Great Church.

What was the impact of the Council, particularly in the West?

Far from achieving universal unity, the council triggered a significant schism in the West known as the "Schism of the Three Chapters." Many Western bishops and churches, especially in Italy, Africa, and Illyricum, vehemently opposed the condemnation, viewing it as a betrayal of the Council of Chalcedon and an unjustified attack on figures they considered orthodox. This resistance lasted for decades and highlighted the growing cultural and theological divide between East and West.

Did the Council achieve its goal of unity?

Ultimately, no. While it clarified Chalcedonian doctrine and solidified the condemnation of Nestorianism, it failed to reconcile with the Monophysites. Instead, it led to a new schism in the West and inadvertently paved the way for new theological compromises (like monoenergism and monotheletism) that further complicated efforts at unity in the centuries that followed.

How is this Council viewed by different Christian denominations today?

The Second Council of Constantinople is recognized as an authoritative ecumenical council by both the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches, along with Old Catholics and some other Christian traditions, upholding its doctrinal pronouncements. Protestant recognition, however, is more varied; some denominations accept it alongside other early councils, while others, due to their emphasis on early creeds or Scripture alone, do not officially recognize it.