www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Reunion: impossible?

[Why should the Filioque be removed from the Latin Creed when it is theologically permissible even in Orthodoxy?]

Really! When did that happen and where is your reference source. Better read up on it a little more.

OrthoMan

ChristTeen287,

OrthoMan is correct on this topic. The filioque may be an acceptable as a theolegoumena but Orthodoxy does not consider it to be an acceptable addition to the Creed. There are two different issues with the filioque: 1) the theology behind it and 2) the action of adding it to the Creed. If the West had not added it to the Creed I do not think it would have become the major issue it now is.

Since 1985 Pope John Paul has recited the original Creed (without filioque) each year on the feast of Pentecost. The RCC has directed that Greek speaking Roman Catholics (of which there are just a few) not to use it in the Creed. Most Eastern Catholics (Orthodox in communion with Rome) have either dropped it or are in the process of dropping it in favor of the original Creed and the theology behind it.

Admin

Just to add a little input to this thread.
________________________________________________

DECLARATION "DOMINUS IESUS":

ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY OF
JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



INTRODUCTION

1. The Lord Jesus, before ascending into heaven, commanded his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to the whole world and to baptize all nations: "Go into the whole world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; he who does not believe will be condemned" (Mk 16:15-16); "All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the world" (Mt 28:18-20; cf. Lk 24:46-48; Jn 17:18,20,21; Acts 1:8).

The Church's universal mission is born from the command of Jesus Christ and is fulfilled in the course of the centuries in the proclamation of the mystery of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and the mystery of the incarnation of the Son, as saving event for all humanity. The fundamental contents of the profession of the Christian faith are expressed thus: "I believe in one God, the Father, Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets. I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come".1

>snip<
________________________________________________

Full text available at : http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdfunici.htm

Joe Prokopchak
"Save your people O' God, and bless your inheritance."

>>The fundamental contents of the profession of the Christian faith are expressed thus: "I believe in one God,<<

>snip<

...who proceeds from the Father.
_________________________________________________

End of story. That is the final answer.

Joe Prokopchak
archsinner

For those of you who would like to read the "official" declaration Dominus Iejus an "official" Vatican document from an "official" Vatican curia known as the "official" Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, complete without any mention of the filioque in it's "official" creed, please go to the "official" Vatican web site at the url below.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...faith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html [vatican.va]

Joe Prokopchak
"Official Byzantine Catholic"

[ 09-04-2002: Message edited by: Joe Prokopchak ]

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience of June 16, 2000, granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with sure knowledge and by his apostolic authority, ratified and confirmed this Declaration, adopted in Plenary Session and ordered its publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, August 6, 2000, the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord.



Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect

Dear All: Here is my take, fwiw.

I believe reunion will come about in one way only: by the miraculous intervention of Almighty God through the powerful intercession of the Theotokos, Mother of Unity.

I believe that is (in part) the message of Fatima. And (more recently) the message of Soufanieh.

Blessings,

ZT

The "Filioque" question I believe has already been resolved. The Document of the Pontifical Council for Christian Community "The Father as the Source of the Whole Trinity - the Procession of the Holy Spirit in Greek and Latin Traditions" has already expressed that the Father is the source of the Holy Spirit and the Son. I forgot why Latin Catholics added the "Filioque" but it is more or less a "technical point of view".

So in this matter I believe there is unity in the Catholic and Orthodox Church.

From my studies, I see no difference in theology, in fact they can be very supplementary. Just different expressions. It may not be that long for real Church unity as we think.

With God, all things are possible, and in the fullness of time, when God is ready, the Holy Spirit will come upon us, and there will be unity.

Dear Hooded,
I believe the Admistrator hit the nail on the head when it comes to the Filioque if you read his post. I quote him saying "1) the theology behind it and 2) the action of adding it to the Creed. If the West had not added it to the Creed I do not think it would have become the major issue it now is." Look at this way, if I presented you a contract with all the terms that we agree upon then I come back and add something more to it without consulting you how would you feel about it? Would you continue to honor the interpolated contract despite the fact that I should have received your consent as well as your acknowledgement rather taking it upon myself to serve my personal interests?


The theology between the East and the West is different and I do not believe or accept the imposition that we are united together in one Church. This is not about just mere expressions of theology. Our beliefs are the way of life lived out on daily basis. I have a tough time believing in the validity of Western theology and reconciling it to the fullness found in Eastern theology. Even though elements of Orthodoxy can be found in Western theology but it has not met my satisfaction or that of the Orthodox Church's as well. The idea of the Eastern & Western churches are mere expressions of the same truth is found within the teachings of relativism. The matter gets more complicated when the issue centers between the multiple expressions of theology between West & West (Rome & Protestant). It can be argued for example that the Romans and Anglicans provide different theological expressions of the same truth. Instead of Anglicans we can substitute every fragmented group of Protestantism to prove the point I am trying to make. Where do we draw the line or don't we? If the basis of our theologies do not meet & compliment one another then we should be obligated to revisit the basic foundations of our faiths and churches.

Your analysis is breath-takingly legalistic.


This position, if it had any currency among the Orthodox, would represent an enormous development. I had the idea that the degree of unity in faith and theology of the first millenium undivided church was the benchmark. Now you propose to revisit even that?

djs

[ 09-05-2002: Message edited by: djs ]

The Holy Father has recited the Creed on numerous occaisions without the Filioque. I don't think most Latins in the pew would object, and some probably wouldn't even notice. Anyone got some "white-out" on them?

Yes, I've seen some catholic books that put the filioque between ( ) indicating that it is optional.
I've also noticed that in many modern catholic parishes, the Nicean Creed isn't fully recited anymore, and the abreviated versions of it (or the "songs of faith") that are used, do not have the filioque. I don't think that this sign has been really welcomed by Orthodoxy.

About Cardinal Ratzinger, I've admired his defense of the christian faith against modernism and a supporter of true ecumenism.

Woopsies Orthoman and Administrator, I didn't understand the meaning of theolegoumena, so I apoligize for my error. Mea culpa.

ChristTeen287

It is my understanding that in the RCC a profession of faith must be recited on Sundays and certain Holy Days. The normative Creed is the Niceano-Constantinoplitan Creed but the Apostle's Creed is an alternate, especially in children's Masses. In Toronto, the Holy Father recited the Apostle's Creed.