THE FIFTH, SIXTH, & SEVEN ECUMENICAL COUNCILS

THE FIFTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

Held in Constantinople in 553. Under Emperor Justinian the Great. 165 Bishops were present.

THE FIFTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The Council was called in hope of putting an end to the Nestorian

and the Eutychian (Monophysite) controversies).

NESTORIANISM

This doctrine is identified with Nestorius (c. 386–c. 451), Patriarch of Constantinople. This view of Christ was condemned at the Council of Ephesus in 431, and the conflict over this view led to the Nestorian Schism, separating the Assyrian Church of the East from the Byzantine Church.

NESTORIANISM

Nestorianism is the Christian doctrine that Jesus existed as two persons,

the man Jesus and the divine Son of God,

or Logos, rather than as a unified person

NESTORIUS

Nestorius (c. 386–c. 451) was a pupil of Theodore of Mopsuestia in Antioch in Syria and later became Patriarch of Constantinople.

He taught that the human and divine aspects of Christ were distinct natures, not unified.

He preached against the use of the title Mother of God (Theotokos) for the Virgin Mary and would only call her Mother of Christ (Christotokos).

He also argued that God could not suffer on the cross, as he is omnipotent. Therefore, the human part of Christ died on the cross, but not the divine.

His opponents accused him of dividing Christ into two persons: they claimed that proposing that God the Word did not suffer and die on the cross, while Jesus the man did, or that God the Word was omniscient, while Jesus the man had limited knowledge, implied two separate persons with separate experiences.

Opposed by Cyril of Alexandria, Nestorius was condemned at the Council of Ephesus in 431.

The Council held that Christ is one person, and that the Virgin Mary is the mother of God. The condemning pronouncement of the Council resulted in the Nestorian schism and the separation of the Assyrian Church of the East from the Byzantine Church. However, even Ephesus could not settle the issue, and the Byzantine Church was soon split again over the question of whether Christ had one or two natures, leading to the Chalcedonian schism.

MODERN NESTORIANISM

Some Protestant and Reformed church organizations foster or tolerate doctrine that could be seen as Nestorian, specifically the doctrine that the Virgin Mary is merely the mother of "Christ's humanity" and denying that she could be seen as the mother of God. From the point of view that Christ was both God incarnate and man, it would seem logical to call the Virgin Mary the mother of God, hence Christ already had His divine as well as His human nature before birth. The common Protestant as well as Nestorian argument againest this, is that only Christs human body was born from the Virgin Mary, and that the Divine nature, or more precisely, the Incarnate Word, as it is usually described in the Bible, existed before the human Jesus, and it was eternal and itself unchanged by being incarnated. The argument is that Mary did not bring forth the Word, just the humanity of Jesus.

The New Age occult system of Theosophy teaches a Nestorian doctrine regarding Jesus Christ

The common Protestant as well as Nestorian argument againest this, is that only Christs human body was born from the Virgin Mary, and that the Divine nature, or more precisely, the Incarnate Word, as it is usually described in the Bible, existed before the human Jesus, and it was eternal and itself unchanged by being incarnated. The argument is that Mary did not bring forth the Word, just the humanity of Jesus.

The New Age occult system of Theosophy teaches a Nestorian doctrine regarding Jesus Christ

Modern Nestorianism

THE FIFTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The second main heresy was Monophysitism

MONOPHYSITISM

Monophysitism (from the Greek monos meaning 'one, alone' and physis meaning 'nature'), or Monophysiticism, is the Christological position that Christ has only one nature, his humanity being absorbed by his Deity, as opposed to the Chalcedonian position which holds that Christ maintains two natures, one divine and one human

MONOPHYSITISM

There are two major doctrines that can indisputably be called Monophysite :

Eutychianism holds that the human and divine natures of Christ were fused into one new single (mono) nature: His human nature was "dissolved like a drop of honey in the sea".

Apollinarism or Apollinarianism holds that Christ had a human body and human "living principle" but that the Divine Logos had taken the place of the "thinking principle", analogous but not identical to what might be called a mind in the present day.

MODERN MONOPHYSITISM???

Do you see the

image of the Huma

n brain?

ORIGEN

Origen of Alexandria was a Christian of the early third century who was the first theologian to formulate a systematic system.

He lived in a turbulent period for the Christian Church, a period of Roman persecutions and loose doctrinal consensus.

He was a priest, ordained under controversial conditions. His writings were extensive, much of which is not existant.

He was anathematized by the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, specifically in its eleventh Canon:

If anyone does not anathematize Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, Apollinarius Nestorius, Eutyches and Origen, as well as their heretical books, and also all other heretics who have already been condemned and anathematized by the holy, catholic and apostolic church and by the four holy synods which have already been mentioned, and also all those who have thought or now think in the same way as the aforesaid heretics and who persist in their error even to death: let him be anathema.

Origen's full name was Origenes Adamantius. His dates of birth and death are not known exactly. He was born about 185, most probably in Alexandria. He was born into a Christian family. He is believed to have been educated by his father, Leonides. He used this education to revive and teach, as didaskalos, at the ‘'catechetical school in Alexandria in 203, under the jurisdiction of Demetrius, the bishop of Alexandria. This was after his father died a martyr in 202 in the persecutions under Septimius Severus. Origen was then seventeen and apparently succeeded Clement of Alexandria who had been driven out of Alexandria by the persecutions.

In around 215 he went to Palestine where he was invited to preach by Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, and Theoctistus, bishop of Caesarea, evne though he was not ordained. His teaching there was considered a breach of discipline by Demetrius.

In 230, he was ordained a priest in Palestine by Bishops Alexander and Theoctistus. This was without the authority of Demetrius who subsequently expelled him from Alexandria. Following his expulsion he moved to Caesarea where he founded a school.

He died a martyr's death in the persecutions of 250, probably in 254, and most probably in Caesarea. It was claimed that he died in Tyr and that his sepulchre was behind the high altar of the cathedral there. The evidence for him moving to Tyr remains unclear.

THE FIFTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The Council was called in hope of putting an end to the Nestorian and the Eutychian (Monophysite) controversies).

The Council confirmed Church's teaching regarding the two natures of Christ (human and divine) and condemned certain writings with Nestorian learnings.

Emperor Justinian himself confessed his Orthodox faith in a form of the famous Church hymn "Only begotten Son and Word of God" which is sung during the Divine Liturgy.

THE SIXTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The Third Council of Constantinople is believed to have been the Sixth Ecumenical Council by the Eastern Orthodox, the Roman Catholics.

It met on November 7, 680 for its first session; it ended its meetings, said to have been eighteen in number, on September 16 of 681.

The number of bishops present was under three hundred and the minutes of the last session have only 174 signatures attached to them.

SIXTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The conclusion of the council was that Jesus has two wills as well as two natures (divine and human), and that those two wills did not conflict with or strive against each other.

It thus refuted the heresy of monothelitism, which held that Jesus Christ had only one (divine) will. Further, it posthumuously restored Pope Martin I and Maximus the Confessor to communion with the church

MONOTHELITISM

Monothelitism (a Greek word meaning "one will") is a particular teaching about how the divine and human relate in the person of Jesus, known as a Christological doctrine, that formally emerged in Armenia and Syria in 629 AD.

Specifically, Monothelitism teaches that Jesus Christ had two natures but only one will.

This is contrary to the orthodox Christology that Jesus Christ has two wills (human and divine) corresponding to his two natures.

Monothelitism is a development of the Monophysite position in the Christological debates. It enjoyed considerable support in the 7th century before being rejected as heretical.

FIRST ATTEMPT: DOCTRINE OF ONE ENERGY

Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople was the driving force behind this doctrine, with the full blessing of the emperor Heraclius.

Coming to the imperial throne in 610 AD, the Patriarch had long since converted the emperor to the new doctrine, as by 622, Heraclius had communicated with Bishop Paul of Armenia where the emperor asserted that the energy, or the active force, of Christ was single. This doctrine of Monoenergism was the precursor of Monotheletism.

With the successful conclusion to the Persian war, Heraclius could devote more time to promoting his compromise, which was now more urgent due to the administration of the recovered Monophysite provinces of Syria and Egypt. So in 629 a meeting took place between the emperor and Athanasius the Jacobite at Hierapolis. An agreement was struck whereby the Jacobites were to return to the Imperial Church on the basis of the single energy doctrine, and Athanasius was to be made Patriarch of Antioch. Then in 630, Bishop Cyrus was made Patriarch of Alexandria, and he soon won over another Non-Chalcedonian group. Very soon three of the five Patriarchates – Constantinople, Antioch and Alexandria – were teaching about Christ’s "one theandric energy“.

FIRST ATTEMPT: DOCTRINE OF ONE ENERGY

Heraclius’ interest at the time was focused on Armenia, and it was probably at this time that the emperor decided to use Monotheletism as a political weapon and reconcile the Non-Chalcedonian Church of Armenia with the Imperial Church.

To help bring this about, a synod was held in 622 at Theodosiopolis, called the synod of Garin where Monoenergism was discussed. Over the next few years Heraclius was preoccupied with his prosecution of the war against the Sassanids, but by 626 he had issued a decree to Arcadius, Bishop of Cyprus, requesting that he teach the doctrine of "one hegumenic energy". By all accounts this was met with notable success, particularly as there was a large colony of Armenians on the island at that time, and this encouraged Heraclius to attempt to seek a wider approval of his compromise. In 626 he asked Patriarch Sergius to approach Cyrus, Bishop of Phasis to secure his cooperation

FIRST ATTEMPT: DOCTRINE OF ONE ENERGY

But not everyone was convinced, in particular a monk of Palestine named Sophronius, who believed there was something unsound in the doctrine, and he became the champion of Dyothelitism – the doctrine of the two wills of Christ. He was concerned that for the sake of ecclesiastical unity, doctrinal expressions were being compromised For the first few years Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople managed to keep him silent, but when Sophronius was appointed Patriarch of Jerusalem in 634, he used his newfound position of authority to challenge the validity of the doctrine of Monoenergism.

Determined to prevent this formidable challenge to his Christological compromise, Sergius wrote to the Patriarch of the West, Pope Honorius I at Rome, asking him to endorse a position that Church unity should not be endangered by having any discussions or disputes over Christ’s possessing one energy or two. Pope Honorius’ reply in 635 not only endorsed this view that all discussions should cease, but he also agreed with the doctrine of Monoenergism. In the meantime the epistola synodica of Sophronius appeared, the outcome of the synod of Cyprus, and this attempted to show that the new doctrine was inconsistent with orthodoxy. He declared that it was nothing more than a form of Monophysitism, and consequently it went against the hard fought achievements at Chalcedon. Suddenly, support for the doctrine began to subside and soon former supporters were busy finding flaws and inconsistencies in the proposal. Soon, Sergius and Heraclius abandoned it as a doctrine.

SECOND ATTEMPT: DOCTRINE OF ONE WILL

Yet Sergius and the emperor refused to give up. Three years later the Patriarch came up with a slightly modified formula, which Heraclius released as the Ecthesis in 638.

This edict was considered to be the official response to Sophronius letter. It forbad all mention of Christ possessing one or two energies; instead, it now proclaimed that Christ, while possessing two natures, had but a single will. This approach seemed to be a more acceptable compromise, and once again it secured widespread support throughout the east. Sophronius had died before the release of the new doctrine, and his replacement as Patriarch of Jerusalem approved the modified formula. Patriarch Sergius died by the end of 638, and his replacement Pyrrhus was also a devoted Monothelite and a close friend of Heraclius. The two remaining patriarchs in the east also gave their approval to the doctrine now referred to as Monothelitism, and so it looked as if Heraclius would finally heal the divisions in the Imperial church.

SECOND ATTEMPT: DOCTRINE OF ONE WILL

Unfortunately he hadn’t counted on the Popes at Rome. During that same year of 638, Pope Honorius I too had died. His successor Pope Severinus condemned the Ecthesis outright, and so was forbidden his seat until 640. His successor Pope John IV also rejected the doctrine completely, leading to a major schism between the eastern and western halves of the Chalcedonian Church. When news reach Heraclius of the Pope’s condemnation, he was already old and ill, and the news only hastened his death, declaring with his dying breath that the controversy was all due to Sergius, and that the Patriarch had pressured him to give his unwilling approval to the Ecthesis

SECOND ATTEMPT: DOCTRINE OF ONE WILL

Conflict with Rome This state of schism remained for the next few years. The

death of Heraclius in 641 had thrown the political situation in Constantinople into chaos, and his young grandson Constans II eventually succeeded him. Meanwhile in Africa, a monk named Maximus the Confessor carried on a furious campaign against Monotheletism, and in 646 he convinced the African councils to draw up a manifesto against the doctrine. This they forwarded to the new pope Theodore I, who in turn wrote to Patriarch Paul II of Constantinople, outlining the heretical nature of the doctrine. Paul, another devoted Monothelite, replied in a letter directing the Pope to adhere to the doctrine of one will. Theodore in turn excommunicated the Patriarch in 649, declaring Paul a heretic.

CONFLICT WITH ROME

n Rome and the west, the opposition to Monothelitism was reaching fever pitch, and the Type of Constans did nothing to defuse the situation; indeed it made it worse by implying that either doctrine was a good as the other.

Theodore planned the Lateran Council of 649 to condemn the Ecthesis, but died before he could convene it, which his successor, Pope Martin I, did. Not only did the Council condemn the Ecthesis, it also condemned the Type as well. After the synod, Pope Martin wrote to Constans, informing the emperor of its conclusions and requiring him to condemn both the Monothelite doctrine and his own Type. Unfortunately, Constans was not the sort of emperor to take such a rebuke of imperial authority lightly

CONFLICT WITH ROME

Even while the Lateran Synod was sitting, Olympius arrived as the new exarch of Ravenna, with instructions to ensure that the type was followed in Italy, and to use whatever means necessary to ensure that the Pope adhered to it. He was unable to complete his mission and soon died, but his successor Theodore I Calliopas seized Pope Martin and abducted him to Constantinople. Here he was imprisoned and tortured before being condemned for breaking the imperial commands and was banished before dying from his treatment at the hands of the emperor.

The emperor continued to persecute any who spoke out against Monothelitism, including Maximus the Confessor and a number of his disciples – Maximus lost his tongue and his right hand in an effort to have him recant. Nevertheless, his brutality did have an effect, with the Patriarchs, including the Popes, remaining silent throughout the remainder of his reign.

CONDEMNATION OF MONOTHELITISM With Constans death in 668, the throne passed to

his son Constantine IV. Pope Vitalian, who had hosted the visit of Constans II to Rome in 663, almost immediately declared himself in favor of the doctrine of the two wills of Christ.

In response Patriarch Theodore I of Constantinople and Macarius, Patriarch of Antioch both pressed Constantine to take some measures against the Pope. Constantine, however, decided to let the Monothelite question to be decided entirely by a church council

CONDEMNATION OF MONOTHELITISM He asked if the Pope (by this stage Pope Agatho)

would be willing to send delegates to an Ecumenical Council to be held at Constantinople to put an end to this question finally.

Agatho agreed, but first held a preliminary synod at Rome 680 in order to obtain the opinion of the western theologians

All the western synods condemned Monothelitism, and a report of the Roman synod’s acts was sent to Constantinople, along with the western delegates to the council.

CONDEMNATION OF MONOTHELITISM This council met from 680 to 681. Apart from the Roman

representatives, it also hosted representatives from the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Jerusalem, while the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Antioch were present in person. It unanimously, with the exception of two individuals, condemned the Monothelite doctrine as one that diminished the fullness of Christ’s humanity, and asserted that Dyothelitism was the true doctrine, with Christ possessing "two natural wills and two natural energies, without division, alteration, separation or confusion."It also anathematized the chief representatives of the discredited doctrine, including Pope Honorius

SIXTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

Held in Constantinople in 680. Under Emperor Constantine IV. 170 Bishops were present.

THE MONOTHELITE CONTROVERSY It concerned the last attempt to compromise with the Monophysites. Although Christ did have

two natures (divine and human) He nevertheless, acted as God only. In other words, His divine nature made all the decisions and His human nature only carried and acted them out. Hence, the name: "Monothelitism"  (" mono " one and " thelesis " will.)

THE COUNCIL'S PRONOUNCEMENT "Christ had two natures with two activities: as God working miracles, rising from the dead and

ascending into heaven; as Man, performing the ordinary acts of daily life. Each nature exercises its own free will." Christ's divine nature had a specific task to perform and so did His human nature. Each nature performed those tasks set forth without being confused, subjected to any change or working against each other. The two distinct natures and related to them activities were mystically united in the one Divine Person of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."

DEFENDER OF ORTHODOXY St. Maximus the Confessor (580-662) A simple, but enlightened monk; died in exile (Caucasus). St. Andrew of Crete (+740)

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

Held in Nicea, Asia Minor in 787. Under Empress Irene. 367 Bishops were present.

THE ICONOCLAST CONTROVERSY It centered around the use of icons in the Church and the

controversy between the iconoclasts and iconophiles. The Iconoclasts were suspicious of religious art; they demanded that the Church rid itself of such art and that it be destroyed or broken (as the term "iconoclast" implies).

The iconophilles believed that icons served to preserve the doctrinal teachings of the Church; they considered icons to be man's dynamic way of expressing the divine through art and beauty. The Iconoclast controversy was a form of Monophysitism: distrust and downgrading of the human side

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The Controversy Disputes concerning the Person of Christ did not end with the sixth Council

in AD 681, but continued through the eighth and ninth centuries. This time, the controversy focused on icons—pictures of Christ, the Theotokos, the saints, and holy events—and lasted for 120 years, starting in AD 726. Icons were kept and venerated in both churches and private homes. The two groups in the controversy were:

Iconoclasts  also called "icon-smashers," they were suspicious of any art depicting God or humans; they demanded the destruction of icons because they saw icons as idolatry. Iconodules  also called "venerators of icons," they defended the place of icons in the Church. The controversy, however, was more than a struggle over different views of Christian art. Deeper issues were involved, and it is these the Council addressed:

The character of Christ's human nature The Christian attitude toward matter The true meaning of Christian redemption and the salvation of the entire

material universe

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The controversy falls into two periods: From AD 726 when Leo III began his

attack on icons until AD 780 when Empress Irene ended the attacks

Again from AD 815 through AD 843 when Empress Theodora stamped out the attacks permanently

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The iconoclasts had support from both inside and outside the Church. Outside the Church, there may have been influence from Jewish and Muslim ideas, and it is important to note that just prior to the iconoclast outbreak Muslim Caliph Yezid ordered the removal of all icons with his territory. Inside the Church there had always existed a "puritan" outlook which saw all images as latent idolatry

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

Largely through the work of St. John of Damascus (AD 759-826), who, ironically, was housed in Muslim-controlled lands and therefore outside the reach of the Empire, the iconodules' position won out. He addressed the charges of the iconoclasts thus:

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

Concerning the charge of idolatry: Icons are not idols but symbols, therefore when an Orthodox venerates an icon, he is not guilty of idolatry. He is not worshipping the symbol, but merely venerating it. Such veneration is not directed toward wood, or paint or stone, but towards the person depicted. Therefore relative honor is shown to material objects, but worship is due to God alone. We do not make obeisance to the nature of wood, but we revere and do obeisance to Him who was crucified on the Cross... When the two beams of the Cross are joined together I adore the figure because of Christ who was crucified on the Cross, but if the beams are separated, I throw them away and burn them. —St. John of Damascus

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The Decision of the Council Restoration of the Icons Concerning the teaching of icons 

Venerating icons, having them in churches and homes, is what the Church teaches. They are "open books to remind us of God." Those who lack the time or learning to study theology need only to enter a church to see the mysteries of the Christian religion unfolded before them.

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

Concerning the doctrinal significance of icons  Icons are necessary and essential because they protect the full and proper doctrine of the Incarnation.

While God cannot be represented in His eternal nature ("...no man has seen God", John 1:18), He can be depicted simply because He "became human and took flesh." Of Him who took a material body, material images can be made. In so taking a material body, God proved that matter can be redeemed.

He deified matter, making it spirit-bearing, and so if flesh can be a medium for the Spirit, so can wood or paint, although in a different fashion

SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

The seventh and last Ecumenical Council upheld the iconodules' postion in AD 787. They proclaimed: Icons... are to be kept in churches and honored with the same relative veneration as is shown to other material symbols, such as the 'precious and life-giving Cross' and the Book of the Gospels. The 'doctrine of icons' is tied to the Orthodox teaching that all of God's creation is to be redeemed and glorified, both spiritual and material.

THE SEVEN ECUMENICAL COUNCILS OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH

First Ecumenical Council - Nicea, Asia Minor, 325 A.D. - Formulated the First Part of the Creed. Defining the divinity of the Son of God.

Second Ecumenical Council - Constantinople, 381 A.D. - Formulated the Second Part of the Creed, defining the divinity of the Holy Spirit.

Third Ecumenical Council - Ephesus, Asia Minor, 431A.D. - Defined Christ as the Incarnate Word of God and Mary as Theotokos.

Fourth Ecumenical Council - Chalcedon, Asia Minor, 451A.D. - Defined Christ as Perfect God and Perfect God and Perfect Man in One Person.

Fifth Ecumenical Council - Constantinople II, 553 A.D. - Reconfirmed the Doctrines of the Trinity and Christ.

Sixth Ecumenical Council - Constantinople III, 680 A.D. - Affirmed the True Humanity of Jesus by insisting upon the reality of His Human will and action.

Qinisext Council (Trullo) - Constantinople, 692 A.D. - Completed the 5th and 6th Ecumenical Councils

Seventh Ecumenical Council - Nicea, Asia Minor, 787 A.D. - Affirmed the propriety of icons as genuine expressions of the Christian Faith.

THE COUNCILS PRECEDING NICEA 30 - 33 AD - Ministry of Christ

- Death on the Cross- Christ's Resurrection after three days on the Cross- Ascension, forty days after the Resurrection- Pentecost, fifty days after the Resurrection

33 or 34 AD - The First Convention : The Apostles meets to discuss who

should take the place of Judas. Mathias was selected. Acts chapter 1.

- The sixth convention met "when all of the elders were present." (Acts 21:18)

The 85 Canons of the Apostles

THE COUNCILS PRECEDING NICEA Councils between 34 - 56 AD - The Second Convention : The Apostles meet to discuss believers

who would sell their possession s and give the moneys to the Apostles for the ministries. (Acts 4:31-37)

- The Third Convention : The Apostles meet to discuss which deacons should be selected to serve at the table. (Acts 6:2)

- The Fourth Convention : The Apostles meet after Peter had baptized the heathen Cornelius and his family. (Acts 11:2-3)

- The Fifth Convention : This is considered to be the first general council of the Church. Acts 15 explains that the Apostles met to discuss the matter as to what extent gentile converts should be subject to the law of Moses (i.e., circumcision,). The apostles and the elders of the Church met and decided after much prayer and debate that these are the necessary things for gentiles : "that [they] abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from the blood of what is strangled and from unchastity." (Acts 15:29)

THE COUNCILS PRECEDING NICEA The sixth convention met "when all of the elders were present." (Acts 21:18) The 85 Canons of the Apostles These first canons of the Church focus upon the maintenance of the worshipping community.

Specifically, they provide detail as to the way clergy and laity are to conduct themselves and what books of the faith they ought to read. The Canons of the Apostles are confirmed by c.II of the 6th Ecumenical Council and c.I of the 7th Ecumenical Council.

Canon I - A Bishop must be ordained by two or three other Bishops. Canon IX - All those faithful who enter and listen to the Scriptures, but do not stay for prayer and

Holy Communion must be excommunicated, on the ground that they are causing the Church a breach of order.

Canon XXXIX - Let Presbyters and Deacons do nothing without the consent of the Bishop. For he is the one entrusted with the Lord's people, and it is from him that an accounting will be demanded with respect to their souls.

Canon XLIX - If any Bishop or Presbyter baptizes anyone not into the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit in accordance with the Lord's ordinance, but into three beginningless beings or into three sons or into three comforters, let him be deposed.

Canon L - If any Bishop or Presbyter does not perform three immersions (literally, "three baptisms") in making one baptism (literally, "one initiation"), but only a single immersion (literally, "a single baptism"), that given into the death of the Lord, let him be deposed from office. For the Lord did not say, "Baptize me into my death," but, "Go ye and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." (Matthew 28:19)