Talk:Second Council of Nicaea

Sensual Sculptures?

I wonder if anyone has a citation for the claim that sculptures were condemned as "sensual." (note the use of quotation marks in the article, as if it's from a source).

Untitled

There a request for Nicaea I & Nicaea II from Wikipedia:ACF Regionals 2000 answers

If this is another name for a page that already exists could someone more knowledgeable than me make a redirect. Or if not could some make an article.--BirgitteSB 16:34, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

This was already done I got confused Sorry--BirgitteSB 16:34, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I'd like to see some discussion on whether the 7th council of Nicea opened the door for idolatry within the church. Lord willing, this will be a part of my doctoral dissertation.

There was no 7th council of Nicaea (so far anyway). If you're aiming for a Ph.D. with this sort of sloppiness, the Lord help you. Also, it is customary to sign your contributions to the talk page. Freederick 16:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Hadrian?

The article says:

...the patriarch sent a full account of the proceedings of the council to Hadrian, who had it translated.

Now emperor Hadrian, to whose page the text links, died (as a stalwart pagan) in 138 AD; the council met in 787 AD; what gives?

Was there a (major!) miracle involved, or was it actually Pope Adrian I to whom the text was sent? I have edited the text, provisionally, as I can only guess what the author meant. Freederick 16:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Pope Adrian I is also know as Hadrian I. The same applies to later popes with the same name. See Hadrian - the page must have been updated since last checked, since it indicates this point. --Samuelel (talk) 11:08, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Strike the "A"

"Nicea" is significantly more common than "Nicaea." Why not employ it here (and for the first council too)? Doctordido 15:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

"Cesar" is more common than "Caesar". But it is a modern Americanism too far to transliterate Νικαια --Rumping (talk) 01:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

POV

The assertion that the Second Council of Nicaea was the Seventh Ecumenical Council (and even that there even was a Seventh Ecumenical Council) is POV and must be edited. Deusveritasest (talk) 04:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Possibly. Do you have any reliable sources that question this? The current version is sourced to Ostrogorsky, one of the most respected treatments of the Byzantine period. Even if you had such a source: Your version was not acceptable from a language point of view. If there is non-fringe doubt that it really "is" the 7th ecumenical council, I would suggest "is accepted as the 7th ... by ...", possibly with a footnote listing dissenters. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:17, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Whether a Council was Ecumenical or not is not simply a matter of objective reality of what people call it, but actual subjective considerations of the quality of the council. Ostrogorsky is simply not the judge of whether ANY council is ecumenical or not.

Those who object? Ask ANY of the 75 million Oriental Orthodox Christian. Point proven. Now let's move on. Deusveritasest (talk) 02:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

The final paragraph is incorrect. The Sunday celebrated by the Eastern Orthodox on the 1st Sunday of Great Lent ("Sunday of Orthodoxy") is Constantinople 843, which restored iconography after yet another period of iconoclasm. Emperess Theodora (acting as regent for her son) called that council, with Patriarch Methodius (or Methodios)of Constantinople presiding. The Synodikon of that council (843) is the center-piece of the special celebration that day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.188.43.128 (talk) 10:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Wrong image-right assertion

The image deleted was incorrect. It is a representation of first (First Ecumenical) not the second (Seventh Ecumenical) council of Nicaea. See the article Arius in Catalan, Spanish, French and Russian Wikipedia. The man on the earth is condemned Arius. Just right of the cross is the emperor Constantine I. If it were Constantine VI, his mother Irene should had been also depicted.

Whether a council was ecumenical or not, depends on the acceptance of the Churches. Both Greek-Orthodox and Roman-Catholic Church accept it and also some Protestant Churches. See Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1782, revised 1845, Chapter XLIX: Conquest Of Italy By The Franks. -Part III : «But the decrees of a general council [of Hieria] could only be repealed by a similar assembly [of Nicaea]» and «In the West, Pope Adrian the First accepted and announced the decrees of the Nicene assembly, which is now revered by the Catholics as the seventh in rank of the general councils» and, by all means, by the Orthodox Church.---Pagaeos (talk) 23:55, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Repudiation by John Calvin

I've added a section on the repudiation by John Calvin, of the second council of Nicaea, because it's historically informative and intellectually interesting.

Acceptance of council

None of the oriental orthodox churches have accepted Nicaea II,and unsurprisingly, no sources are cited for this “partial” acceptance. 142.181.49.206 (talk) 20:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)