TRULLANO, COUNCIL. — In the autumn of 691 the emperor Justinian II summoned a Council at Constantinople, subsequently called T. after the great domed hall (τροῦλος) where it assembled, or also πεν-θέντη (Quinisext), because it was intended to supplement the disciplinary legislative work of the Fifth (553) and Sixth (680) Ecumenical Councils. In view of the ascendancy acquired by the Roman See in 680, an effort was made to accentuate the central authority of the new Rome. Certain practices were therefore censured, not only those of the Roman Church, but also those of the Armenians, Iberians, and Africans. Of the acts of the Council, only the Council’s address to the Emperor and 102 canons with the signatures of the participants have been preserved. Beneath the Emperor’s signature space was left for that of the Pope.
But Sergius I, despite the threats, refused to consent, and the punitive mission of the protospatharios Zac-
There were, however, contradictory testimonies concerning the date of the Council, the number of participants, and its authority. The Greeks regarded it as ecumenical, while the Latins considered it spurious. The signatures of the three Eastern patriarchs were found there, although these sees were vacant or, at least, their holders could not come to Constantinople. No signatures of Roman legates are found in the manuscripts; according to the account of the Liber Pontificalis, they were said to have been present and, having been “deceived,” to have subscribed. Canonists and polemicists therefore viewed this Synod with great distrust. Bede the Venerable calls it «reprobra», Paul the Deacon «synodus erratica», Binius «synodus erratica, conventus malignantium et synagoga diaboli», and Baronius rejects it, explaining Adrian I’s citation by the example of David, who used the sword of the wicked Goliath. G. S. Assemani and many others likewise want nothing to do with II.
The chiefly reprehensible features of the Synod were its anti-Roman canons: canons 3 and 13 criticize the practice of celibacy prevailing in the Roman Church; canon 36 renews what canon 3 of the Second and canon 28 of the Fourth Ecumenical Council had decreed concerning the rights of the see of the new Rome; canon 55 rejects the fast on Saturday; canon 67 prescribes abstinence from blood and from strangled animals, etc. Yet it cannot be denied that most of the canons are inspired by sound zeal and by the desire to reform abuses.
There are useful laws concerning the discipline of the clergy, monasticism, and the duties of the laity; fundamental are the canons on the marriage of clerics (can. 3), the age of those to be ordained (can. 14), and the matrimonial impediments arising from spiritual kinship (can. 53) and affinity (can. 54). Canon 2 officially recognizes for the first time the Collection of the canons of the ecumenical and local councils, as well as those of the Holy Fathers, which would remain the basis of Byzantine canon law.