• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Please explain CCC 536 regarding Jesus and the Spirit: 'possessed in fullness' yet 'comes to rest on him'.

AetheriusLamia

Regular Member
Aug 13, 2007
310
45
Region or City
✟31,144.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says

The Spirit whom Jesus possessed in fullness from his conception comes to "rest on him."

  1. What does it mean for the Spirit 'to rest on him'?
  2. Why wasn't He already doing so?
  3. What does it mean for Jesus to possess the Spirit?
  4. What does it mean to do so 'in fullness'? Doesn't this imply one can do so partially?
  5. Does anyone possess the Spirit only partially?
  6. Do those who haven't yet received the Sacrament of Confirmation possess the Spirit only partially?
  7. Do we, like Jesus, come to possess the Spirit 'in fullness' after the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation?

Thank you for your time.
 
Jun 26, 2003
9,022
1,616
Visit site
✟308,989.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says



  1. What does it mean for the Spirit 'to rest on him'?
  2. Why wasn't He already doing so?
  3. What does it mean for Jesus to possess the Spirit?
  4. What does it mean to do so 'in fullness'? Doesn't this imply one can do so partially?
  5. Does anyone possess the Spirit only partially?
  6. Do those who haven't yet received the Sacrament of Confirmation possess the Spirit only partially?
  7. Do we, like Jesus, come to possess the Spirit 'in fullness' after the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation?

Thank you for your time.
To begin to understand this, we have to look at the Baptism of Our Lord

Matthew 3

16 And Jesus being baptized, forthwith came out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him. 17 And behold a voice from heaven, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.


Luke 3

21 Now it came to pass, when all the people were baptized, that Jesus also being baptized and praying, heaven was opened; 22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape, as a dove upon him; and a voice came from heaven: Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased




Scripture says that the Spirt came to rest upon Him. We see this as a demonstration of the Holy Trinity. Yes, it is difficult for us to understand, but we say that there are three distinct Persons in rhe Holy Trinity, yet one God. The Father is not the Son, nor the Spirit, yet all three are God. Jesus also commanded His Apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. How can this be? It is a mystery for us to contemplate in prayer
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
16,370
4,110
✟402,411.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The Holy Spirit was sent down as a dove to rest on Jesus to confirm to John the Baptist, who witnessed this, that He was the Chosen One. Jesus was never apart from the Holy Spirit but many occurrences had to do with His incarnation and mission.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 26, 2003
9,022
1,616
Visit site
✟308,989.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
The Holy Spirit was sent down as a dove to rest on Jesus to confirm to John the Baptist, who witnessed this, that He was the Chosen One. Jesus was never apart from the Holy Spirit but many occurrences had to do with His incarnation and mission.
John already knew He was the chosen One before He was baptized, but chosen one is misleading. He is God beside Him there is no other. What is there to choose?

Jesus is not seperated from the Holy Spirt but He is a different person of the Trinity. Father, Son and Holy Spirit are different persons but one God.

We see the three persons in the Baptism. The Father’s voice from heaven, the Son baptized, and the Holy Spirit as a dove.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
16,165
8,572
51
The Wild West
✟824,194.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
It is also interesting to contemplate that the God the Holy Spirit sent Christ our True God into the world by causing the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Theotokos - the Mother of God, to conceive Him, while Christ our True God in turn sent God the Holy Spirit into the world to serve as the Comforter and Paraclete to the Christians who had been grated onto the Body of Christ - the Church.

In Orthodox theology we, for this reason, really prefer to stress that the uncreated Son and Word of God, our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ, begotten of the Father before all worlds, and the uncreated Holy and Life Giving Spirit, our Lord and God who is everywhere present and fills all things, the Comforter and Paraclete, who proceeds eternally from the Father, both share in the divine essence of God the unoriginate Father, rather than allowing the Divine Essence to be regarded as some sort of impersonal field of divinity in which the three persons of the Trinity subside, which is deeply unsatisfactory. And regarding the Divine Essence as shared by the Father with His Only Begotten Son and His Holy Spirit, three uncreated, coequal and coeternal persons, ever One God, does not require one reject a belief in the filioque, since there have been Orthodox tolerant of it, such as St. Maximus the Confessor, who played a vital role in defeating the heresy of Monothelitism that infected the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox churches as a result of a disastrously misguided attempt at reunification (which ironically probably caused the schism between the Maronites and the Syriac Orthodox).

However we do of course officially disagree with the Filioque, and for good reason, a position also taken by our Oriental Orthodox and Assyrian brethren.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 26, 2003
9,022
1,616
Visit site
✟308,989.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
It is also interesting to contemplate that the God the Holy Spirit sent Christ our True God into the world by causing the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Theotokos - the Mother of God, to conceive Him, while Christ our True God in turn sent God the Holy Spirit into the world to serve as the Comforter and Paraclete to the Christians who had been grated onto the Body of Christ - the Church.

In Orthodox theology we, for this reason, really prefer to stress that the uncreated Son and Word of God, our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ, begotten of the Father before all worlds, and the uncreated Holy and Life Giving Spirit, our Lord and God who is everywhere present and fills all things, the Comforter and Paraclete, who proceeds eternally from the Father, both share in the divine essence of God the unoriginate Father, rather than allowing the Divine Essence to be regarded as some sort of impersonal field of divinity in which the three persons of the Trinity subside, which is deeply unsatisfactory. And regarding the Divine Essence as shared by the Father with His Only Begotten Son and His Holy Spirit, three uncreated, coequal and coeternal persons, ever One God, does not require one reject a belief in the filioque, since there have been Orthodox tolerant of it, such as St. Maximus the Confessor, who played a vital role in defeating the heresy of Monothelitism that infected the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox churches as a result of a disastrously misguided attempt at reunification (which ironically probably caused the schism between the Maronites and the Syriac Orthodox).

However we do of course officially disagree with the Filioque, and for good reason, a position also taken by our Oriental Orthodox and Assyrian brethren.
Your thoughts and knowledge of liturgical history and of the faith are appreciated and well taken, but have you considered, without thinking about another person, just you and Our Lord, that there is never a “good reason” for schism?

Sure we have theological disputes and our will tells us that schism is justified. It’s human nature, but we are called to deny ourselves.

Jesus taught hard teachings and when Peter did not understand, he said, “Lord, to whom would we go? You alone have the words of eternal life.”
Or David when faced with the clearly evil king Saul, and would have been perfectly justified in killing him said, I cannot lift my hand against God’s anointed.
That is what I contemplate
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
16,165
8,572
51
The Wild West
✟824,194.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Your thoughts and knowledge of liturgical history and of the faith are appreciated and well taken, but have you considered, without thinking about another person, just you and Our Lord, that there is never a “good reason” for schism?

Sure we have theological disputes and our will tells us that schism is justified. It’s human nature, but we are called to deny ourselves.

Jesus taught hard teachings and when Peter did not understand, he said, “Lord, to whom would we go? You alone have the words of eternal life.”
Or David when faced with the clearly evil king Saul, and would have been perfectly justified in killing him said, I cannot lift my hand against God’s anointed.
That is what I contemplate

The schism between the RCC and the EO is not justified and should end; we are already in the process of ending our schism with the Oriental Orthodox, contrary to the views of some members in The Ancient Way, and indeed the Melkites even proposed union with the Antiochians but faced criticism from within the RCC and meanwhile the Antiochians were legitimately concerned and asked for clarification. Also the fact that the Roman Catholic Church now allows Eastern Christians to receive the sacraments from its clergy and for its members to receive the Roman Catholics from us (the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, the Assyrian Church of the East, and most likely the Ancient Church of the East), and some of these churches, particularly the Assyrian Church of the East, will always allow Roman Catholics to receive the Eucharist, since they allow anyone who adheres to the Nicene Creed and believes in the Real Presence to approach the chalice, is a huge leap forward. A lot of the credit for getting this particular ball rolling goes to Pope St. John XXIII.
 
Upvote 0

AetheriusLamia

Regular Member
Aug 13, 2007
310
45
Region or City
✟31,144.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
However we do of course officially disagree with the Filioque, and for good reason, a position also taken by our Oriental Orthodox and Assyrian brethren.
I've yet to hear a good reason; let's hear it.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
16,165
8,572
51
The Wild West
✟824,194.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I've yet to hear a good reason; let's hear it.

There’s too much criticism of Roman Catholics on this forum and I am not going to debate my Catholic friends on this issue, particularly since if I wanted to go to a Catholic liturgy without the filioque, most Byzantine Rite Catholics omit it (the RCC doesn’t use the filioque in Greek, which raises the possibility that indeed, as some have argued, the issue was one caused by the differences between the Greek and Latin language, and what troubled the mainly Greek speaking Orthodox under St. Photius would not have occurred to the Latin speaking Christians in Spain who added the Filioque while dealing with a major outbreak of Adoptionism).

Also its obviously the case that our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ sent God the Holy Spirit to be our comforter and Paraclete (of course, God the Holy Spirit sent God the Son and Word into the world by descending upon the Blessed Virgin Mary, causing her to conceive, and become the Theotokos, the immaculate* Mother of God, while remaining a virgin, a status she retains even now.

*Although in Orthodoxy our model of original sin, which also used to be favored in the West, based on the writings of St. John Cassian rather than those of St. Augustine, who we also venerate, does not cause a need for the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, our hymns, which are of great antiquity, do frequently refer to the our most glorious lady Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary as Immaculate, for we believe she did not commit any sins in her life, and additionally the Dormition or Assumption was for us dogmatic at least 1500 years before being recognized as a dogma by Pope Pius XII.
 
Upvote 0

AetheriusLamia

Regular Member
Aug 13, 2007
310
45
Region or City
✟31,144.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
There’s too much criticism of Roman Catholics on this forum [...]
Of course there is no 'need' for the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception; it's merely a statement of fact, as you yourself share 'she did not commit any sins'.

The Pope did not "recognize" that dogma as if it was new to the Church: He merely clarified that this dogma exists and is true for others who were doubting it.

I would encourage you to read the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia articles at newadvent.org about 'Photius'.
 
Upvote 0