filioque

[MariaRegina]

As one little boy stated, "the whole thing is incomprehensible."

 

[nikephoros_spatharios]

yea i understand that. i'm jsut not getting why if God and Jesus are the same and the Holy Spirit is the same as to why it's wrong to say that the Holy Spirit came from them both? they're all the same :scrathc: just ignore me i'm not usually up this late

The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not the same. If they were exactly the same then they would all be exactly the same person. All three share in the divine essence, but they are also differentiated from each other. Each of the three persons has his own individuality:

The Father is the head and origin of the divinity and has no cause.

The Son was begotten from the Father.

The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.

Note that the Son and the Spirit differ in the way they are related to the Father, by begetting and by procession respectively.

We don't try to understand what "begetting" or "proceeds" means, because we can't rationalize about God.

 

[MariaRegina]

The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not the same. If they were exactly the same then they would all be exactly the same person. All three share in the divine essence, but they are also differentiated from each other. Each of the three persons has his own individuality:

The Father is the head and origin of the divinity and has no cause.

The Son was begotten from the Father.

The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.

Note that the Son and the Spirit differ in the way they are related to the Father, by begetting and by procession respectively.

We don't try to understand what "begetting" or "proceeds" means, because we can't rationalize about God.

Good post.

 

[Michael G]

I thought the whole Filioque was started over Cardinal Humbert's dislike of Philo dough?

 

[nikephoros_spatharios]

I thought the whole Filioque was started over Cardinal Humbert's dislike of Philo dough?

The Filioque started when the Visigoths tried to combat the Arian heresy which denied the divinity of Christ. They thought that by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Son that they exalted the Son, making him even more divine. The Patriarchs of Rome forbade the use of the filioque in their church, but didn't condemn its use by the various Germanic peoples. When the Franks took control of the patriarchal throne of Rome from the Romans (in the 11th century), they introduced the filioque to Rome, and then via Cardinal Humbert tried to impose it on the eastern church, but they failed. Ever since then, the western church follows the Franko-Latin doctrine of the filioque which is rejected by the Orthodox, and so they are outside the Church.

 

[Michael G]

The Filioque started when the Visigoths tried to combat the Arian heresy which denied the divinity of Christ. They thought that by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Son that they exalted the Son, making him even more divine. The Patriarchs of Rome forbade the use of the filioque in their church, but didn't condemn its use by the various Germanic peoples. When the Franks took control of the patriarchal throne of Rome from the Romans (in the 11th century), they introduced the filioque to Rome, and then via Cardinal Humbert tried to impose it on the eastern church, but they failed. Ever since then, the western church follows the Franko-Latin doctrine of the filioque which is rejected by the Orthodox, and so they are outside the Church.

I know the origins of the filioque, and all of the historical peculiarities which are tied into it. Interesting that when push came to shove, the Pope accepted the filioque into the Creed rather than tell Charlemage that he was unwilling to do so. I was quoting an essay from theOnionDome.com from a few weeks ago which equated the filioque with greek pastry!