Importance of the Filioque

GoingByzantine · Mar 27, 2015

Some EC Churches use the Filioque, others do not. It pretty much has to do with what faith tradition each church is based in.

Those who do not accept it, are not required to believe in it, but they are required to respect the people who do use it.

GlockMeister · Mar 27, 2015

GoingByzantine said:
Some EC Churches use the Filioque, others do not. It pretty much has to do with what faith tradition each church is based in.

Those who do not accept it, are not required to believe in it, but they are required to respect the people who do use it.

A courtesy that is rarely reciprocated, in my experience.

gurneyhalleck1 · Mar 28, 2015

What do you mean, GM?

I hope you don't mind a Springfield Armory fan asking you? Love my XD 45!

GlockMeister said:
A courtesy that is rarely reciprocated, in my experience.

Antoninus · Mar 28, 2015

I agree Gurney that liturgical abuse is pretty much non-existent in Orthodoxy.

I am fortunate enough that I have a Latin Mass, and two Eastern Catholic parishes within 25 minutes all at different times on Sunday. If I miss one I can go to one of the other two. I have no problem with the OF Mass on paper, but the way it is celebrated in most parishes by me makes me stay away and grateful I have other Catholic options.

AXO · Mar 28, 2015

GoingByzantine said:
Those who do not accept it, are not required to believe in it, but they are required to respect the people who do use it.

What do you mean by this?

seekingfreedom · Mar 28, 2015

[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. Some of you on this forum are saying things about the Orthodox and how you never hear Catholics say anything negative about them. What are you doing now? Sheesh.

AXO · Mar 28, 2015

seekingfreedom said:
[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. Some of you on this forum are saying things about the Orthodox and how you never hear Catholics say anything negative about them. What are you doing now? Sheesh.

Huh? What are we doing wrong?

Peter the Roman · Mar 28, 2015

The filioque is a dogma of the faith. All Catholics are bound to believe it. However it is not necessary to be recited in the creed. Some Catholics recite it and others don't but all must believe it. Whether expressed in western in eastern terms.

mark46 · Mar 28, 2015

There are many who believe that there is still a serious dogmatic and doctrinal issue between Orthodoxy and the RCC on this subject. A majority of those may post here on this board.

I don't think that there are theological differences. PERHAPS, there are previous misunderstandings.

Of course, the issue was still historically very important in the life of the Church. The Church, in ecumenical Council, pledged not to make an changes to the Creed, our universally accepted confession of faith. The Roman Church indeed made such a change and started using the new Creed in liturgy. The Orthodox were appalled. There seemed two alternatives. The first was that there was no new dogma, and the Roman Church was simply slapping the face of the East (or ignoring the East) in making the change. The alternative is that the Holy See was actually changing dogma. Neither was acceptable.

GlockMeister · Mar 28, 2015

gurneyhalleck1 said:
What do you mean, GM?

I hope you don't mind a Springfield Armory fan asking you? Love my XD 45!

Hey, I don't fault anyone for their choice of sidearm!

What I mean is that often, Latin Catholics trample all over Eastern traditions and theology as being inferior or merely tolerated. You can see it in this thread. Latins telling Easterners what they are required to believe to be Catholic.

I prefer to let thsee things alone. I'm not qualified to say one way is right and the other wrong. I'm just a layman and I think everyone else here is too.

SalusaSecundus · Mar 28, 2015

gurneyhalleck1 said:
Yes. You'll hear a TON of anti-Western stuff at coffee hours in Orthodoxy in my area. They're caught up in trashing Catholics, do a little beating up of the Protestants here and there, and I don't think it has been good for me at all. And you're correct---all the Catholics I know hold Orthodox Christians in VERY high regard! They admire them and only say and see good things in them. They have all this hope for reunion and this brotherly angle. The Orthodox have ZERO desire for such things. An ecumenist is a sell-out.

One thing I used to buy into when I first went Orthodox was the "we never had a bunch of rebels, break-offs, no Reformation in the East! No need! We're perfect!" But after you look into all the break-off weirdos--Old Calendarists, the "World" Orthodox, "True" Orthodox, and a long list of other non-canonical Orthodox groups, you realize that there is a lot of division. At my parish (now former), it's Serbian. They mock the Greeks down the street. Why? Their icons are "funny-looking" and they "USE AN ORGAN" with their music. Plus they sit down a couple times during the Divine Liturgy.

It's weird.

But what is LOVELY about Orthodoxy is, no matter who the priest is, where you go--- NO LITURGICAL ABUSE! I do love that.

But yeah, your post spoke to me. Kindred spirits I think, you and I, in our crazy journeys!

I agree with you. I spent about six months checking out Orthodoxy after I left the RC. I spent time with a Greek and Russian parish. The Greek priest was awesome, but his congregation was terribly unwelcoming, I knew I could never be a full member of the parish. The Russian parish was far more welcoming but language was a problem. They both spend a great deal of time telling me how much better they were than the RC. It almost bordered on smugness or arrogance. It was off putting. One thing I know is that there is no hope for Union with the RC at the ground level. That's fine for me, I am not a unionist, like at all. But I had to move on to more western liturgical waters.

Rhamiel · Mar 28, 2015

seekingfreedom said:
[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. Some of you on this forum are saying things about the Orthodox and how you never hear Catholics say anything negative about them. What are you doing now? Sheesh.

are you saying that there is no room for criticism?

Lukaris · Mar 28, 2015

Not to derail anything in the thread, but there are Orthodox Churches where positive dispositions towards the Catholic Church exist. Our church is Antiochian (Syrian) Orthodox, & firmly so. There are families intermarried between Orthodox & Catholic. The Syrian Orthodox & Lebanese Maronite communities have always been close in our Pennsylvania area. There is a tiny Christian Arabic village in the Middle East where Orthodox & Catholics are close neighbors; see: Taybeh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

from the link:

The Orthodox Patriarchal School serves over 270 students, and the Roman Catholic (Latin) School serves over 400.[33]

The different Christian denominations worship together on Easter and Christmas. The Latin parish runs a school, a medical center, a hostel for pilgrims and youth programs.[34]

Construction of a new kindergarten and additional classrooms for Al-Taybeh Greek Orthodox School was completed in 2012 with USAID funding of $750,000. The school, built 130 years ago, is the largest in Taybeh. It is attended by 430 students from Taybeh and villages in the vicinity.[35]

MoreCoffee · Mar 28, 2015

I am interested to see the Church proclaiming the filioque to be a dogma of the faith and teaching that one MUST say it when reciting the Nicene creed.

AXO · Mar 29, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
I am interested to see the Church proclaiming the filioque to be a dogma of the faith and teaching that one MUST say it when reciting the Nicene creed.

That man [Mark, Archbishop of Ephesus] too would betray his ignorance of ecclesiastical history who did not know that the union with the Orientals confirmed that they would accept the dogma of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son [...]
Whenever the union of the Greek and Latin Church has been discussed, the chief matter of contention has been the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son. Examination of this point involves a triple aspect, and so is dealt with here under three headings. The first question is whether the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son is a dogma of the Faith. This question has always been firmly answered that there is no room for doubting that this procession is a dogma of the Faith and that every true Catholic accepts and professes this.
Pope Benedict XIV, encyclical Allatae sunt, n. 6 and 30.

We profess faithfully and devotedly that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one principle; not by two spirations, but by one single spiration. This the holy Roman church, mother and mistress of all the faithful, has till now professed, preached and taught; this she firmly holds, preaches, professes and teaches; this is the unchangeable and true belief of the orthodox fathers and doctors, Latin and Greek alike. But because some, on account of ignorance of the said indisputable truth, have fallen into various errors, we, wishing to close the way to such errors, with the approval of the sacred council, condemn and reprove all who presume to deny that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, or rashly to assert that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and not as from one.
Council of Lyons II, session VI, 17 July 1274 (ecumenical council; therefore inspired by the Holy Spirit and infallible)

Before this one, you have also the IV council of the Lateran (1215).

MoreCoffee · Mar 29, 2015

AXO said:
–That man [Mark, Archbishop of Ephesus] too would betray his ignorance of ecclesiastical history who did not know that the union with the Orientals confirmed that they would accept the dogma of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son [...]
–Whenever the union of the Greek and Latin Church has been discussed, the chief matter of contention has been the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son. Examination of this point involves a triple aspect, and so is dealt with here under three headings. The first question is whether the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son is a dogma of the Faith. This question has always been firmly answered that there is no room for doubting that this procession is a dogma of the Faith and that every true Catholic accepts and professes this.
Pope Benedict XIV, encyclical Allatae sunt, n. 6 and 30.

–We profess faithfully and devotedly that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one principle; not by two spirations, but by one single spiration. This the holy Roman church, mother and mistress of all the faithful, has till now professed, preached and taught; this she firmly holds, preaches, professes and teaches; this is the unchangeable and true belief of the orthodox fathers and doctors, Latin and Greek alike. But because some, on account of ignorance of the said indisputable truth, have fallen into various errors, we, wishing to close the way to such errors, with the approval of the sacred council, condemn and reprove all who presume to deny that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, or rashly to assert that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and not as from one.
Council of Lyons II, session VI, 17 July 1274 (ecumenical council; therefore inspired by the Holy Spirit and infallible)

Before this one, you have also the IV council of the Lateran (1215).

Thank you.

There is a discussion on this matter on the EWTN web site - click here.

Peter the Roman · Mar 29, 2015

GlockMeister said:
Hey, I don't fault anyone for their choice of sidearm!

What I mean is that often, Latin Catholics trample all over Eastern traditions and theology as being inferior or merely tolerated. You can see it in this thread. Latins telling Easterners what they are required to believe to be Catholic.

I prefer to let thsee things alone. I'm not qualified to say one way is right and the other wrong. I'm just a layman and I think everyone else here is too.

There is no "what Latins believe" vs "what eastern Catholics believe"
.. one faith, one body and one Catholic Church

The Filioque was proclaimed a dogma at the second council of Lyon and at the council of Florence. It is in the catechism. It is not optional as both declarations have the charge of anathema for any person who denies the filioque.

However like I previously said, it is not necessary to be recited in the creed. That is a Latin tradition

MoreCoffee · Mar 29, 2015

I think our Eastern rites brethren express the faith in slightly different ways and in slightly different terms. But yes, there is one faith just as there is one church.

aChildOfMary · Mar 29, 2015

I always thought that we should talk about the Roman Communion not necessarily one church as there are a numerous of different churches in communion with the Holy See of Rome?

Therefore we speak of the Latin Church when talking about the Traditions of the Roman Rite where other churches in our communion (Melkite, Ukrainian Greek etc) have their unique traditions .

The communion we are a part of are of course obligated to believe in or at least not deny any of the church teachings such as the Filioque.
Since I'm OP at this thread I've come to realize through this very helpful thread and it's posters that I'll trust Rome and the Holy Father on this.

intellectually I struggle with accepting it, but decide to lean on the church on this matter as I do with other matters which I struggle to understand or get a grip on.

Thanks to all of you and especially AXO who refered to the Ecumenical Council of Lyon and the Lateran Council.
God Bless.

Pax Christi
aChildOfMary

MoreCoffee · Mar 29, 2015

aChildOfMary said:
I always thought that we should talk about the Roman Communion not necessarily one church as there are a numerous of different churches in communion with the Holy See of Rome?

Therefore we speak of the Latin Church when talking about the Traditions of the Roman Rite where other churches in our communion (Melkite, Ukrainian Greek etc) have their unique traditions .

The communion we are a part of are of course obligated to believe in or at least not deny any of the church teachings such as the Filioque.
Since I'm OP at this thread I've come to realize through this very helpful thread and it's posters that I'll trust Rome and the Holy Father on this.

intellectually I struggle with accepting it, but decide to lean on the church on this matter as I do with other matters which I struggle to understand or get a grip on.

Thanks to all of you and especially AXO who refered to the Ecumenical Council of Lateran.
God Bless.

Pax Christi
aChildOfMary

There's one church as the creed says "one holy catholic and apostolic church" but there are also more than 20 self governing particular churches/traditions in communion with the see of Rome. Isn't it odd how ambiguous terms can be

God bless you.

Importance of the Filioque

Seeking the Narrow Road

Active Member

Reader

Newbie

Latin and Hispano-Mozarabic Rite, Roman Catholic

Newbie

Latin and Hispano-Mozarabic Rite, Roman Catholic

One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Newbie

Member of the Round Table

Orthodox Christian

Repentance works.

Latin and Hispano-Mozarabic Rite, Roman Catholic

Repentance works.

One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman

Repentance works.

aChildOfMary

Guest

Repentance works.

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency