Yes, the Filioque is important.

ArmyMatt · Feb 10, 2019

Erik Nelson said:
Who "sends" the HS, the Father (John 14:26), or the Son (John 15:26, 16:7) ? If the Son, then the HS is the "servant" of the Son (John 13:16).

Jhn 14:26

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send G3992 in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Jhn 15:26

But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send G3992 unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
Tools

Jhn 16:7

Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send G3992 him unto you.

Jhn 13:16

Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent G3992 him.

that has nothing to do with the Filioque.

Erik Nelson · Feb 10, 2019

GregConstantine said:
What difference does any of that make? And no, it was not just a political thing, it is a dogmatic issue. Please, try very hard to accept the possibility that there are real dogmatic differences between the Orthodox and RC's and it's not just cultural/political.

Rome agreed not to change the Creed, and she did, and she was wrong to do so, cultural, political, dogmatic or not, it was wrong, period. It's that simple.

Not if, hypothetically, the HS inspired & guided the "update"

Christians tell Jews that there is a whole entire brand New Covenant... how can Christians deny God, who can institute whole new covenants, a comparatively minor, single phrase, two word, revision to an existing one ?

Erik Nelson · Feb 10, 2019

ArmyMatt said:
that has nothing to do with the Filioque.

b/c the Filioque speaks to ultimate origin, not designated delegated authority & control, of the HS ?

ArmyMatt · Feb 10, 2019

Erik Nelson said:
b/c the Filioque speaks to ultimate origin, not designated delegated authority & control, of the HS ?

not just that, but also how the Spirit relates in the inner life of the Trinity with the other Two Persons. this is different than how God acts within creation.

plus, using your argument, the Son is also the servant of the Spirit, since the Spirit drives the Son into the wilderness.

ArmyMatt · Feb 10, 2019

Erik Nelson said:
Not if, hypothetically, the HS inspired & guided the "update"

Christians tell Jews that there is a whole entire brand New Covenant... how can Christians deny God, who can institute whole new covenants, a comparatively minor, single phrase, two word, revision to an existing one ?

except the Spirit would not guide an update that contradicted what came before.

Erik Nelson · Feb 10, 2019

Rohzek said:
Augustine clearly here demarcates the procession of the Father from the procession of the Son. Does he mean then that the procession from the Son is eternal or temporal? We don't know..

Revelation 22:1 ?

Erik Nelson · Feb 10, 2019

ArmyMatt said:
not just that, but also how the Spirit relates in the inner life of the Trinity with the other Two Persons. this is different than how God acts within creation.

plus, using your argument, the Son is also the servant of the Spirit, since the Spirit drives the Son into the wilderness.

that makes sense in English, what about Greek? The Spirit did not "send" (pempo) Jesus into the Wilderness, but "brought/lead up" (ana-ago) Jesus. A servant could hypothetically lead a superior

Erik Nelson · Feb 10, 2019

ArmyMatt said:
except the Spirit would not guide an update that contradicted what came before.

what is the difference between (provisionally acceptable) St. Augustine, "HS principally from the Father yet also from the Son", and the Filioque addition to the Creed?

ArmyMatt · Feb 10, 2019

Erik Nelson said:
that makes sense in English, what about Greek? The Spirit did not "send" (pempo) Jesus into the Wilderness, but "brought/lead up" (ana-ago) Jesus. A servant could hypothetically lead a superior

sure, hypothetically, but again, we are talking about the Divine Economy, not the inner life. the Filioque involves the inner life.

Erik Nelson · Feb 10, 2019

ArmyMatt said:
sure, hypothetically, but again, we are talking about the Divine Economy, not the inner life. the Filioque involves the inner life.

how are you using the first term?

Also, speaking of language issues, the apparent problem arises from "et filioque" in Latin... has the RCC released an official translation of their version of the Creed in Greek? How does / would "et filioque" appear in (say) an Eastern Catholic Greek text of the Creed ?

Would / is that Greek translation still (as) problematic ?

dzheremi · Feb 10, 2019

I don't think the Greek Catholics recite it with the filioque. When Pope Benedict and Patriarch Bartholomew recited it together in Greek, it did not have the filioque clause.

Barney2.0 · Feb 10, 2019

Everything the Son has is from the Father, so I’m pretty sure they are a joint principle in everything except when it comes to authority in general since the Son received that from the Father. The Father sends the Holy Spirit through the Son, so both the Father and the Son send the Holy Spirit. Everything the Son has is from the Father.

Barney2.0 · Feb 10, 2019

dzheremi said:
I don't think the Greek Catholics recite it with the filioque. When Pope Benedict and Patriarch Bartholomew recited it together in Greek, it did not have the filioque clause.

Greek Catholics recite it like Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox do.

ArmyMatt · Feb 10, 2019

Erik Nelson said:
what is the difference between (provisionally acceptable) St. Augustine, "HS principally from the Father yet also from the Son", and the Filioque addition to the Creed?

nothing, that's why we reject both. while a saint for sure, St Augustine had some theological errors.

ArmyMatt · Feb 10, 2019

Erik Nelson said:
how are you using the first term?

Also, speaking of language issues, the apparent problem arises from "et filioque" in Latin... has the RCC released an official translation of their version of the Creed in Greek? How does / would "et filioque" appear in (say) an Eastern Catholic Greek text of the Creed ?

Would / is that Greek translation still (as) problematic ?

the Divine Economy is how God works within creation.

ArmyMatt · Feb 10, 2019

Al Masihi said:
Everything the Son has is from the Father, so I’m pretty sure they are a joint principle in everything except when it comes to authority in general since the Son received that from the Father. The Father sends the Holy Spirit through the Son, so both the Father and the Son send the Holy Spirit. Everything the Son has is from the Father.

that's not how the Western Councils in the Middle Ages defined it. it wasn't just through the Son, but from the Son as the Son is the Spirit's origin as well.

this is heretical.

Light of the East · Feb 10, 2019

dzheremi said:
I don't think the Greek Catholics recite it with the filioque. When Pope Benedict and Patriarch Bartholomew recited it together in Greek, it did not have the filioque clause.

Well, they USED TO!!!

I have seen old prayer books in both the Ukrainian Catholic Church and the Ruthenian Byzantine Church with the filioque clause in the Creed. In fact, one of my priests when I first came into the faith told me to gather up the prayer books and white out the filioque in them to be sure people understood they were not to say it. Where I go now **sigh** it is still in the books but has been scratched over with pencil.

dzheremi · Feb 10, 2019

Well yeah. When I visited the Ruthenians in 2009 on my way out the door from Catholicism, I didn't recite it with the filioque because I was under the impression that they would be following Rome's call that they return to their traditions. I was kind of shocked when I found that I was the only one who did not do so, even though I was the guest. I asked the priest after liturgy if I had done something wrong and he just sort of sighed and said "We have a lot of work to do to return to our traditions."

Light of the East · Feb 10, 2019

dzheremi said:
Well yeah. When I visited the Ruthenians in 2009 on my way out the door from Catholicism, I didn't recite it with the filioque because I was under the impression that they would be following Rome's call that they return to their traditions. I was kind of shocked when I found that I was the only one who did not do so, even though I was the guest. I asked the priest after liturgy if I had done something wrong and he just sort of sighed and said "We have a lot of work to do to return to our traditions."

Wonder what this priest thinks now that the Teal Terror and the Inclusive Prayer language (all reference to "men" or "mankind" has been feminized) have take place. I've watched a dozen of my good friends all "dox" because they had enough of the nonsense that is killing the Ruthenians. Even the little pockets of somewhat orthodox praxis are infected.

What that priest needs to do is just go to the true Church and be finished with Latinizations and a church that is dying.

Lukaris · Feb 10, 2019

The original Apostles’ Creed specifically stated that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. St. Augustine quoted this in His work: The Enchiridion (chptr 38, I believe).

Yes, the Filioque is important.

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

I'm Just a Singer in an OCA Choir

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

I'm Just a Singer in an OCA Choir

Orthodox Christian

Similar threads