Importance of the Filioque

[GoingByzantine]

Benedict XIV is about as "anti"-Eastern Catholic of a Pope as there has been (I'm not sure he saw himself that way, I doubt he did. However his encyclical contrasted true unity that the Church seeks). This is the same man who said that the Latin Rite is superior to all the Eastern Catholic rites and that it is not ok for a Latin Catholic to switch rites to become an EC under any circumstance, but it is ok for a EC to switch to the Latin Rite since it is "the mother church".

Subsequent Popes and Councils would reverse/nullify much of his rhetoric pertaining to the ECs. I note that when talking about the Filioque the Catechism does not force any EC to use the Filioque.

Edit: Some of what Benedict XIV said is still upheld today.

 

[GoingByzantine]

"On the same day our predecessor Clement VIII joyfully communicated the news of this happy event to the world by the Apostolic constitution Magnus Dominus et laudabilis nimis. How great was the joy and goodwill with which the Roman Church welcomed the Ruthenian people on their reception into the unity of the fold may be seen also from the Apostolic Letter Benedictus sit Pastor, issued on 7th February 1596, in which the supreme pontiff informed the metropolitan and the other Ruthenian bishops of the happy establishment of the union of their whole Church with the Apostolic See. In this letter the Roman pontiff briefly set forth what had been done in the matter at Rome; he gratefully extolled the work they had by God's mercy at length undertaken, and then decreed that the legitimate uses and rites of the Ruthenian Church could be preserved inviolate. "In the same manner as the council of Florence permitted, we too permit you to retain your rites and ceremonies, which in no way injure the integrity of the Catholic faith or our union." He goes on to say that he has asked the king of Poland to extend the protection of his patronage to the bishops and all appertaining to them, and also to pay them the fullest honor and, as they desired, to admit them to the senate of the kingdom. Finally he fraternally exhorts the bishops to meet as soon as possible in a full provincial council to ratify and confirm the union of the Ruthenians with the Catholic Church." - Orientales Omnes Ecclesias, encyclical of Pope Pius XII (1945).

Clement VII (January 30, 1592 - March 5, 1605) confirmed the Union of Brest with Magnus Dominus, and Pope Pius XII clearly concurred with that decision.

The Union of Brest only applies to Ruthenians and Slavs but within it, it clearly says:

"Since there is a quarrel between the Romans and Greeks about the procession of the Holy Spirit, which greatly impede unity really for no other reason than that we do not wish to understand one another—we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors, that is, that the Holy Spirit proceeds, not from two sources and not by a double procession, but from one origin, from the Father through the Son." - Union Of Brest signed by Metorpolitan Michael Rohoza of Kiev, Bishop Cyril Terletsky of Lutsk and Bishop Ostrih Pelchytsky of Pinsk (1595).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Credo unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam Ecclesiam", the Church is one, that is vitally important. However within the church there can be different expressions of faith, and one must not necessarily agree with other rites on all things, but one must accept the other traditions as licit. The Filioque is a licit expression of Catholic faith, as is the Filioque-free creed. As both are Catholic expressions, it can not be said that one is right and the other is wrong. Pope Saint John Paul II famously said:

"Of course, in today's outlook it appears that true union is possible only in total respect for the other's dignity without claiming that the whole array of uses and customs in the Latin Church is more complete or better suited to showing the fullness of correct doctrine; and again, that this union must be preceded by an awareness of communion that permeates the whole Church and is not limited to an agreement among leaders." - Orientale Lumen (1995)

Hence respect is key in these matters, respect for both the Filioque and Filioque-free creed.

 

[GlockMeister]

Thank you GB. I wish there were an ECC in my area. I get so tired of Latin legalism that it nearly drives me from the Church some days. Fortunately, I know the hard line approach is strong on the internet, but real life Catholics are much more welcoming.

 

[Tallguy88]

I too do not fully accept the Filioque. The Eastern Catholic and Orthodox position is the better one theologically. The Filioque messes up the monarchy of the Father and basically makes the Holy Spirit a lesser member of the Trinity than the Father and Son.

 

[pdudgeon]

I too do not fully accept the Filioque. The Eastern Catholic and Orthodox position is the better one theologically. The Filioque messes up the monarchy of the Father and basically makes the Holy Spirit a lesser member of the Trinity than the Father and Son.

I've never seen it that way, because i understood that The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit were all before the existence of time,(thus no one is first, no one second, and no one third, but each of equal being and one in God) and that both The Son and the Holy Spirit came from The Father; each one with their own gifts and purpose, and each one as part of the uniqueness that is God. Thus God is God, The Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.

It seems to me that the problems come when we try to understand the spiritual relationship of God in the terms of a human family relationship, (or anything created by man) where each individual is unique, but also in a dependent relationship to the other family members. Whether we are talking about families or buildings, the problem of dependency is always there, whereas it is not there when speaking of God.

Thus i was taught and accepted the Filioque before i ever knew there was such a conflict.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Thank you GB. I wish there were an ECC in my area. I get so tired of Latin legalism that it nearly drives me from the Church some days. Fortunately, I know the hard line approach is strong on the internet, but real life Catholics are much more welcoming.

Don't let folk worry you with fine theological distinctions. The blessed Trinity is one God and the notions of monarchy, begetting, and procession have their importance mainly in opposing heresy. The faithful need not fear error so long as heart and faith rest in God. Let the church be guide and conscience too.

I too do not fully accept the Filioque. The Eastern Catholic and Orthodox position is the better one theologically. The Filioque messes up the monarchy of the Father and basically makes the Holy Spirit a lesser member of the Trinity than the Father and Son.

I am not sure why there is difficulty with the filioque for some but I accept that it is so and that the faith of God's people, their love for one another, and hope in the mercy and goodness of God must receive our high loyalty, as saint Paul said, And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I've never seen it that way, because i understood that The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit were all before the existence of time,(thus no one is first, no one second, and no one third, but each of equal being and one in God) and that both The Son and the Holy Spirit came from The Father; each one with their own gifts and purpose, and each one as part of the uniqueness that is God. Thus God is God, The Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.

It seems to me that the problems come when we try to understand the spiritual relationship of God in the terms of a human family relationship, (or anything created by man) where each individual is unique, but also in a dependent relationship to the other family members. Whether we are talking about families or buildings, the problem of dependency is always there, whereas it is not there when speaking of God.

Thus i was taught and accepted the Filioque before i ever knew there was such a conflict.

You are right dear sister. The Athanasian creed says, The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made nor created but begotten. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten but proceeding. So there is one Father not three Fathers, one Son not three Sons, and Holy Spirit not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity there is nothing before or after, nothing greater or less, but the whole three Persons are coeternal together and coequal.

 

[Peter the Roman]

"On the same day our predecessor Clement VIII joyfully communicated the news of this happy event to the world by the Apostolic constitution Magnus Dominus et laudabilis nimis. How great was the joy and goodwill with which the Roman Church welcomed the Ruthenian people on their reception into the unity of the fold may be seen also from the Apostolic Letter Benedictus sit Pastor, issued on 7th February 1596, in which the supreme pontiff informed the metropolitan and the other Ruthenian bishops of the happy establishment of the union of their whole Church with the Apostolic See. In this letter the Roman pontiff briefly set forth what had been done in the matter at Rome; he gratefully extolled the work they had by God's mercy at length undertaken, and then decreed that the legitimate uses and rites of the Ruthenian Church could be preserved inviolate. "In the same manner as the council of Florence permitted, we too permit you to retain your rites and ceremonies, which in no way injure the integrity of the Catholic faith or our union." He goes on to say that he has asked the king of Poland to extend the protection of his patronage to the bishops and all appertaining to them, and also to pay them the fullest honor and, as they desired, to admit them to the senate of the kingdom. Finally he fraternally exhorts the bishops to meet as soon as possible in a full provincial council to ratify and confirm the union of the Ruthenians with the Catholic Church." - Orientales Omnes Ecclesias, encyclical of Pope Pius XII (1945).

Nobody here has claimed eastern Catholics must forsake their traditions nor their rites

Clement VII (January 30, 1592 - March 5, 1605) confirmed the Union of Brest with Magnus Dominus, and Pope Pius XII clearly concurred with that decision.

The Union of Brest only applies to Ruthenians and Slavs but within it, it clearly says:

"Since there is a quarrel between the Romans and Greeks about the procession of the Holy Spirit, which greatly impede unity really for no other reason than that we do not wish to understand one another—we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors, that is, that the Holy Spirit proceeds, not from two sources and not by a double procession, but from one origin, from the Father through the Son." - Union Of Brest signed by Metorpolitan Michael Rohoza of Kiev, Bishop Cyril Terletsky of Lutsk and Bishop Ostrih Pelchytsky of Pinsk (1595).

This is the filioque. As Florence clearly stated that the filioque can equally be expressed as "from the father through the son" so this is again not against what anyone here has claimed. It still demands belief in the filioque, just rendered in eastern terms.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Credo unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam Ecclesiam", the Church is one, that is vitally important. However within the church there can be different expressions of faith, and one must not necessarily agree with other rites on all things, but one must accept the other traditions as licit. The Filioque is a licit expression of Catholic faith, as is the Filioque-free creed. As both are Catholic expressions, it can not be said that one is right and the other is wrong. Pope Saint John Paul II famously said:

"Of course, in today's outlook it appears that true union is possible only in total respect for the other's dignity without claiming that the whole array of uses and customs in the Latin Church is more complete or better suited to showing the fullness of correct doctrine; and again, that this union must be preceded by an awareness of communion that permeates the whole Church and is not limited to an agreement among leaders." - Orientale Lumen (1995)

Hence respect is key in these matters, respect for both the Filioque and Filioque-free creed.

Amen . As has been said numerous times. Nobody can deny the theology of the filioque, all must believe it but it is not necessary for it to be present in the creed. If you are trying to advocate that these texts allow for non-belief in the filioque then you grossly mistaken.

 

[GoingByzantine]

Amen . As has been said numerous times. Nobody can deny the theology of the filioque, all must believe it but it is not necessary for it to be present in the creed. If you are trying to advocate that these texts allow for non-belief in the filioque then you grossly mistaken.

"In whatever way it pleases the Holy Spirit to proceed from the Godhead, that I believe." - That is the Catholic principle I follow.

I misspoke earlier, I meant that a Catholic need not agree with the wording of the Filioque, but they need to respect all variations of the Creed deemed licit by the episcopacy. I can see why my earlier words would cause confusion, as they inferred that the Latin and Greek creeds were in opposition to one another, but this is not the case...

 

[seekingfreedom]

"Joy comes from Faith, not doctrine." Says the Pope.

CNS STORY: Joy comes from faith, not doctrine, pope says

 

[aChildOfMary]

"Joy comes from Faith, not doctrine." Says the Pope.

CNS STORY: Joy comes from faith, not doctrine, pope says

Sola Fide, LOL.
And if so, which faith?

I have my fair share of dogmas and doctrine that I struggle to understand or see eye to eye with, but still it's a part of my catholic faith to believe in em.

If I understand this correctly (English is my second language or maybe third.) Being Catholic doesn't seem to be considered all to important for the pope, what really matters are the feeling of faith in which ever self proclamed Christian faith community?

Stupid me, I thought that there was one church and one faith where apparently everything is relative and unimportant as long as one has faith...

Isn't dogmas and church doctrine binding to the pope as much as it is to laity and other clergy?



I hope I misunderstood this I really do hope so...

 

[Tallguy88]

His point is that theological knowledge will not save you. No matter how well you know the faith, without HAVING faith, it is meaningless. The Pharisees were experts in the teachings of the Old Covenant, but they lacked faith and thus could not even see our Lord when he came in the flesh.

 

[aChildOfMary]

His point is that theological knowledge will not save you. No matter how well you know the faith, without HAVING faith, it is meaningless. The Pharisees were experts in the teachings of the Old Covenant, but they lacked faith and thus could not even see our Lord when he came in the flesh.

Ok, thanks Tallguy
Unfortunately I have an mishabit of jumping to negative conclusions when reading much of The Holy Fathers comments as I'm rather conservative and dear I admit even bigoted


God Bless

 

[seekingfreedom]

He talked about doctrine. This thread is about doctrine.

"The 78 year old Pontiff continued saying that it was sad to be a believer without joy. Without joy, he said, there is no faith, only "cold doctrine."

Concluding his homily, Pope Francis said that the joy of faith and the Gospel is the touchstone of one's faith. Without it, one is not a "true believer."

This thread is a joy killer.

 

[aChildOfMary]

He talked about doctrine. This thread is about doctrine.

"The 78 year old Pontiff continued saying that it was sad to be a believer without joy. Without joy, he said, there is no faith, only "cold doctrine."

Concluding his homily, Pope Francis said that the joy of faith and the Gospel is the touchstone of one's faith. Without it, one is not a "true believer."

This thread is a joy killer.

If there is supposed to be a unity in faith (which there is in our church) there must be a doctrine which upon everyone must believe or at least not outright deny.

The way I see things, doctrinal and dogmatic issues and debates arise mainly after people have got their faith.
This means that when you love Christ and have decided to be his deciple for the rest of one's life then it's only natural wanting to know him and through doctrine we're able to do so.

How on earth is a question and debate about the Filioque a joy killed?
It was important enough to trigger the great schism.
In my world that means that it's at least to some degree interesting and controversial.

The reason as for why we listen to the pope to begin with is due to dogma and doctrines made by his presessource so if he will erase dogma and doctrine he will only marginalise himself.

My experience is that whenever a person says that people are to hung up in dogma and doctrine it's mainly because he or she aren't capable of following the reasoning and the arguments of the different minded person.

Doctrine is the spinal course of the church and without it it's nearly useless.

 

[AXO]

This is the same man who said that the Latin Rite is superior to all the Eastern Catholic rites and that it is not ok for a Latin Catholic to switch rites to become an EC under any circumstance, but it is ok for a EC to switch to the Latin Rite since it is "the mother church".

What is this accusation based upon?

It is to remain clear that I fully respect the tradition of the Eastern church by which the clause was not added to the symbol. I adhere to the position of Peter the Roman.

In this case we are talking about phrasing.

 

[GoingByzantine]

What is this accusation based upon?

It is to remain clear that I fully respect the tradition of the Eastern church by which the clause was not added to the symbol. I adhere to the position of Peter the Roman.

In this case we are talking about phrasing.

It's in the 20th and 21st point of his encyclical Allatae Sunt.

 

[seekingfreedom]

If there is supposed to be a unity in faith (which there is in our church) there must be a doctrine which upon everyone must believe or at least not outright deny.

The way I see things, doctrinal and dogmatic issues and debates arise mainly after people have got their faith.
This means that when you love Christ and have decided to be his deciple for the rest of one's life then it's only natural wanting to know him and through doctrine we're able to do so.

How on earth is a question and debate about the Filioque a joy killed?
It was important enough to trigger the great schism.
In my world that means that it's at least to some degree interesting and controversial.

The reason as for why we listen to the pope to begin with is due to dogma and doctrines made by his presessource so if he will erase dogma and doctrine he will only marginalise himself.

My experience is that whenever a person says that people are to hung up in dogma and doctrine it's mainly because he or she aren't capable of following the reasoning and the arguments of the different minded person.

Doctrine is the spinal course of the church and without it it's nearly useless.

I understand that you are seeking for Truth. This was not directed toward you and the topic of your thread. I have had the same questions and I have resolved in my mind this issue. It's the direction the thread is going. What would you do if, in the future, Pope Francis made concessions to bring the two Churches together?

 

[aChildOfMary]

I understand that you are seeking for Truth. This was not directed toward you and the topic of your thread. I have had the same questions and I have resolved in my mind this issue. It's the direction the thread is going. What would you do if, in the future, Pope Francis made concessions to bring the two Churches together?

It depends, which churches?
The Eastern Orthodox Church and ours?

 

[Peter the Roman]

I understand that you are seeking for Truth. This was not directed toward you and the topic of your thread. I have had the same questions and I have resolved in my mind this issue. It's the direction the thread is going. What would you do if, in the future, Pope Francis made concessions to bring the two Churches together?

Concessions to bring the Eastern Orthodox back? The Catholic Church is the Church of Christ. No lay person, deacon, priest, bishop , patriarch nor even the Pope can change doctrine. He can make disciplinary concessions for the sake of unity but not doctrinal ones. Any doctrinal concession would brings false unity which would be blasphemous. He would make himself a formal heretic and instead of uniting schismatic bodies to the true church, he would alienate himself from the Church through his actions and only create a united heretical church.