A View of QuinSext (Fifth Sixth) 'Ecumenical' Council

The writer states, "There was no such thing as the "Fifth-Sixth" or "Quinsext" Council. The Synod of Trullo was a local synod, and was not ratified (or even mentioned) by the Sixth Council. "In fact, at the time, Trullo was not highly thought of. Among its "canons" was an anathema against serving Holy Communion in a spoon. There was a lot of other antic stuff as well. "In fact, every "canon" of Trullo that was exclusive to Trullo, and not an affirmation of earlier canons, was rejected, except for the requirement that bishops must be "monastic." "This didn't raise too many eyebrows at the time, because: "a. Many bishops at the time were church-planting evangelists,. and the monasteries trained and supported the evangelists; "b. Many bishops were also abbots. Many of these abbots were in fact what we would, today, call "oblates," and were married with families. "c. Whether married or single, most bishops already were monastics. "So, the only "canon" of this synod not dismissed out of hand was one that didn't make any difference to anything, and didn't exclude married men, anyway. And even then, the custom of only consecrating monks didn't catch on until the twelve-hundreds. "So, the "Quinsext Council" is a myth--something dreamed up in recent years to give some sort of legitimacy to a practice which, when it finally became regarded as mandatory, did violence to both Scripture and Tradition--and even to the circumstances of the original edict, itself!" The conclusions of this writer are hard to argue about and I find myself agreeing with this position more and more, which is why, immediately after Bright Week, I will be doing the limited release of Vladika Ioan's paper on Human Sexuality. +SYMEON