Pergi ke kandungan

Majlis Nicaea Kedua

Daripada Wikipedia, ensiklopedia bebas.

Majlis Kedua Nicea diiktiraf sebagai yang terakhir daripada tujuh majlis ekumenikal yang pertama oleh Gereja Ortodoks Timur dan Gereja Katolik . Di samping itu, ia juga diiktiraf sedemikian oleh Katolik Lama dan lain-lain. Pendapat Protestan mengenainya adalah pelbagai.

Ia bertemu pada tahun 787 AD di Nicaea (tapak Majlis Pertama Nicaea ; İznik sekarang, Bursa, di Turki ), untuk memulihkan penggunaan dan penghormatan terhadap ikon (atau imej suci), [1] yang telah ditindas oleh empayar edik dalam Empayar Byzantine semasa pemerintahan Leo III (717–741). Anak lelakinya, Constantine V (741–775), telah mengadakan Majlis Hieria untuk membuat penindasan rasmi.

Latar belakang

[sunting | sunting sumber]

Penghormatan terhadap ikon-ikon tokoh suci Agama Kristian telah diharamkan oleh Maharaja Byzantine Constantine V dan disokong oleh Majlis Hierianya (754 AD), yang secara unilateral didakwa sebagai majlis ekumenikal ketujuh. [2] Majlis Hieria telah dibatalkan oleh Majlis Kedua Nicea hanya 33 tahun kemudian, dan juga telah ditolak oleh gereja Katolik dan Ortodoks, kerana dalam majlis itu tidak ada wakil dari lima patriark utama yang diwakili. Penguatkuasaan tegas maharaja terhadap larangan itu termasuk menganiaya orang-orang yang setia dan sami-sami yang masih memuliakan ikon-ikon tokoh-tokoh suci dan ikonoclasm juga bermotifkan politik supaya orang ramai bukan sahaja menghormati tokoh-tokoh suci Agama Kristian tetapi juga menghormati para penguasa empayar. [3] Kecenderungan ikonoklastik Constantine dikongsi oleh anak lelaki Constantine, Leo IV . Walaubagaimanapun, elepas kematian awal yang terakhir, balunya, Irene dari Athens, sebagai pemangku raja untuk anaknya, memulakan pemulihannya untuk kecenderungan peribadi dan pertimbangan politik.

Pada tahun 784, setiausaha empayar Patriarch Tarasius dilantik sebagai pengganti Patriark Paul IV —dia menerima dengan syarat bahawa perhubungan dengan gereja- gereja lain harus diwujudkan semula; iaitu, imej harus dipulihkan. Walau bagaimanapun, sebuah majlis, yang mendakwa sebagai ekumenikal, telah memansuhkan pemujaan ikon, jadi satu lagi majlis ekumenikal diperlukan untuk pemulihannya.

Pope Adrian I telah dijemput untuk mengambil bahagian, dan dengan senang hati menerima, menghantar seorang uskup agung dari Rom dan seorang kepala biara sebagai wakilnya .

Ikon Majlis Ekumenikal Ketujuh (abad ke-17, Biara Novodevichy, Moscow ).

Pada tahun 786, majlis itu bermesyuarat di Gereja Para Rasul Suci di Constantinople . Walau bagaimanapun, tentera yang bersekongkol dengan pembangkang memasuki gereja, dan memecahkan perhimpunan. [4] Akibatnya, kerajaan telah melakukan muslihat. Dengan alasan kempen, pengawal peribadi ikonoklastik itu telah dihantar keluar dari ibu kota - dilucutkan senjata dan dibubarkan.

Majlis itu sekali lagi dipanggil untuk bermesyuarat, kali ini di Nicaea, memandangkan Konstantinopal (Kustaniyah) masih tidak dipercayai. Majlis itu berhimpun pada 24 September 787 di gereja Hagia Sophia. Ia berjumlah kira-kira 350 ahli; 308 uskup atau wakil mereka menandatangani. Tarasius mempengerusikan, [5] dan tujuh sesi telah diadakan di Nicaea. [6]

Prosiding

[sunting | sunting sumber]
  • First Session (September 24, 787) – There was debate over whether bishops who had accepted iconoclasm when under iconoclast rule could remain in office.
  • Second Session (September 26, 787) – Letters from Pope Adrian I were read out in Greek translation, approving the veneration of images, but severely critical of Byzantine infringement of papal rights. Ignoring the latter, the bishops answered: "We follow, we receive, we admit".
  • Third Session (September 28, 787) — The supposed representatives of the oriental patriarchates presented their credentials. From these it is clear that their patriarchs had not in fact appointed them.
  • Fourth Session (October 1, 787) — Proof of the lawfulness of the veneration of icons was drawn from Exodus 25:19 sqq.; Numbers 7:89; Hebrews 9:5 sqq.; Ezekiel 41:18, and Genesis 31:34, but especially from a series of passages of the Church Fathers;[1] and from hagiography.
  • Fifth Session (October 4, 787) – A further florilegium was read out, "proving" that iconoclasm originated from pagans, Jews, Muslims, and heretics.
  • Sixth Session (October 6, 787) – The definition of the pseudo-Seventh council (754) and a long refutation of the same (probably by Tarasius) were read.
  • Seventh Session (October 13, 787) – The council issued a declaration of faith concerning the veneration of holy images.
    Hagia Sophia of Nicaea, where the Council took place; Iznik, Turkey.
    Hagia Sophia, İznik

    It was determined that

    As the sacred and life-giving cross is everywhere set up as a symbol, so also should the images of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, the holy angels, as well as those of the saints and other pious and holy men be embodied in the manufacture of sacred vessels, tapestries, vestments, etc., and exhibited on the walls of churches, in the homes, and in all conspicuous places, by the roadside and everywhere, to be revered by all who might see them. For the more they are contemplated, the more they move to fervent memory of their prototypes. Therefore, it is proper to accord to them a fervent and reverent veneration, not, however, the veritable adoration which, according to our faith, belongs to the Divine Being alone – for the honor accorded to the image passes over to its prototype, and whoever venerate the image venerate in it the reality of what is there represented.

    This definition of the proper religious veneration of images centers on the distinction between timētikē proskynēsis, meaning the "veneration of honour", and "alēthinē latreia", meaning "true adoration". The former is permitted to images in the same way as to other holy things, notably the cross and the gospel-book, while the latter, "latreia", is reserved for God alone. But the statement that follows, to the effect that the honor paid to the image passes over to its prototype implies on the contrary that there are not two different degrees of veneration, but a single veneration that is not idolatrous since it treats the image as a door or window through which the person praying to the image perceives and adores the heavenly personage who is depicted in it. This could not lead to a worship of images of the Godhead in Byzantium, since no attempt was made to represent Godhead in art. But a problem remains over the human nature of Christ, which is certainly represented in art and which at the same time shares fully in the adoration paid to Christ as God: it would be heretical to worship Christ's Godhead but only honour his humanity.
  • The so-called "Eighth Session" (October 23, 787) held in Constantinople at the Magnaura Palace supposedly in the presence of the emperors Constantine IV and Irene. Erich Lamberz has proved that this "session" is a late ninth-century forgery (see Price, The Acts of the Second Council of Nicaea, 655-6). The purpose of the addition was to do justice to the role of the emperors at this ecumenical council as at its predecessors.

Dua puluh dua kanun [7] yang disusun di Constantinople juga melayani pembaharuan gereja. Pemeliharaan yang cermat terhadap tata cara konsili terdahulu, pengetahuan tentang kitab suci dari pihak pendeta, dan menjaga tingkah laku Kristian diperlukan, dan keinginan untuk pembaharuan kehidupan gerejawi dibangkitkan.

Majlis itu juga menetapkan bahawa setiap mezbah harus mengandungi peninggalan, yang kekal dalam peraturan Katolik dan Ortodoks moden (Kanon VII), dan membuat beberapa dekri mengenai disiplin perkeranian, terutamanya untuk sami apabila bergaul dengan wanita.

Edisi kritikal teks Yunani

[sunting | sunting sumber]
  • Concilium universale Nicaenum Secundum, dalam Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum, ser. 2, jld. 3, dalam 3 bahagian, ed. Erich Lamberz, Berlin 2008-2016. Juga termasuk terjemahan Latin oleh Anastasius Bibliothecarius.

Lihat juga

[sunting | sunting sumber]
  • Plato dari Sakkoudion
  • Sabas dari Stoudios
  • Majlis Konstantinopel Keempat (Otodoks Timur)
  1. ^ a b Gibbon, p.1693
  2. ^ Council of Hieria, Canon 19, "If anyone does not accept this our Holy and Ecumenical Seventh Synod, let him be anathema from the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, and from the seven holy Ecumenical Synods!" http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/icono-cncl754.asp
  3. ^ Warren T. Treadgold (1997). A History of the Byzantine State and Society. Stanford University Press. m/s. 388. ISBN 978-0-8047-2630-6. Dicapai pada 27 January 2013.
  4. ^ Ostrogorsky, p.178.
  5. ^ Gibbon, p.1693.
  6. ^ Ostrogorsky, p.178
  7. ^ "NPNF2-14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils - Christian Classics Ethereal Library". www.ccel.org.

Bacaan lanjut

[sunting | sunting sumber]

Tiada monograf Inggeris terkini sama ada pada majlis atau kontroversi ikonoklas secara umum. Tetapi lihat L. Brubaker dan J. Haldon, Byzantium dalam Era Ikonoklas c. 680 hingga 850: A History (Cambridge 2011).