www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Do we need a "Roman Indult" to remove the filioque?

You would not get one if one was asked for one. So who was it that wanted one?

P

Dear Stephanos,

You are right - but only partially.

The West should NOT include the Filioque if for no other reason than the Nicene Creed is a universal one intended to express the faith of the entire Church, East, West, North and South.

That is the main issue - not the Filioque itself which can remain as a local Latin Particular expression.

Alex

Just a point of information. There was once an Eastern Catholic Liturgy brodcasted from the Chapel in Irondale Alabama. During the Liturgy the creed was chanted with out the Filioque in English!!

So ... have the rules of this forum been changed recently, or what?

Dear Peter,

In using the term "Uniates," we are NOT referring to all Greek-Catholics, but to a certain mentality that accepts a kind of spiritual second-class citizenship as "Roman Catholics of the Eastern Rite" and toward Latinizations as "necessary" badges of one's "true Catholicism.

As far as I know, the rules of this forum are still in force, with the Administrator and his Moderators out in full force enforcing them!

A tour de force, one might say.

Alex

Could we perhaps agree to move the Filioque from the Creed to the Litany of the Saints?

Just think: Sancte Filoque, ora pro nobis!

Incognitus

Incognitus,

Sounds like it might have a good ring to it. Now you have it running in my head. :rolleyes:

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

The fact that "Uniates" is being used to refer to a subset of Eastern Catholics rather than all Eastern Catholics makes it MORE offensive, not less.

I, for one, plan to boycott this thread until there is a satisfactory resolution to this outrage.

Blessings to all.
-Peter.

In order to preserve peace on this thread, I would ask all to refrain from using the term "uniate". In times past, many have objected to this term being used because they have found the term offensive. Other terms can be substituted that will not be deemed as offensive.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+
Administrator/Moderator

Alex,
I thought that is what I said, was it not?
Stephanos I

http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=1176

I have read this text from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity before, but now it is starting to make more sense to me. (As the German's say, "Dripping water breaks the rock.")

I thought it might offer some insight into this conversation.

My own preference has been to take the posture of St. Ephrem, my favorite Church Father, who directs us to "build a fence around the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit" (paraphrase) and don't attempt to penetrate the infinite Mystery with finite minds. (Some, such as my own, are more finite than others when it comes to the nuances of Trinitarian theology... :p )

God bless,

Gordo

Happy Feast of Penetcost, BTW! (Tomorrow is today where I am now! )

I am curious. I see Church documents which refer to the Unia. Members of the Unia refer to themselves in certain contexts as the Unia.

So would it be offensive of me to ask what is the terrible outrage in using a term that is used in formal ecclisiastical documents? I honestly don't see it and I have been a Mick and a Pape all my life, and I don't find outrage in that so I find much less in the language of the Unia.

Eli

PS: Please don't close this thread because of my curiousity. I have no dog in this hunt actually. I ask ONLY because I am curious.

Eli

Eli,

As an Orthodox Christian I have never understood the precise reason why so many Eastern Rite Catholics find the word(s) Unia and Uniate so offensive. Perhaps some of our Eastern Rite Catholics here can explain why they find these terms offensive.

It happens often enough that some word or other applied to a specific group becomes, over time, perceived as pejorative - frequently because it has been used as a pejorative term in practice by the opponents of that group. Such is the case with "Unia" and "Uniate".

All this is part of the phenomenon that languages are subject to change. One can easily find words and phrases which were socially acceptable some time ago and are not acceptable now. One can also find the coining of new terms which seem redundant but which apparently have at least a shade of meaning which makes these terms useful ("Islamist" is a case in point - I have no idea what would distinguish an Islamist from a Moslem, particularly as both words have the same Arabic root: SLM).

Perhaps one could carry on discussions exclusively in some dead language. But that would only work for a while - over time the dead language would come alive again and the process of change would begin (modern Hebrew is a good example).

There are also geographic variations of a similar nature. On arrival in London once I was given a leaflet with information about the bus system - including the advice "if you are not sure of the correct stop, please inform the conductor, and he will tell you where to get off"! I'm still recovering from that one.

Incognitus