Nicene Creed

[djns9437]

What is nonsense and why do you say it is so?

Trying to explain the primacy of Peter by histrical method without Biblical history is nonsense!

 

[SolomonVII]

Trying to explain the primacy of Peter by histrical method without Biblical history is nonsense!

But Dvornik doesn't do this. He correctly (from my understanding) gives the history of the idea of papal primacy in which the Roman bishop was in the beginning in a good positon to be looked upon as a first among equals simply due to his location in the capital of the empire. The verse in Matthew about the keys to the kingdom is a later justification for the Roman pope's claim of primacy, and came about in the context of the ascendancy of the Patriarch of Constantinople. (and unlike the Donation of Constantine, these verses in Matthew were not forgeries)! From what I understood about the Dvornik article, even the eastern patriarchs did not have a problem with this interpretation of Matthew in the early pre-schism times. However, as the Constantinople Patriarch became more powerful, there was a late effort in the centuries before the schism to enhance their prestige by claiming that their patriarchal see was founded by St Andrew. History just does not bear this out. ( If it did, then it would be possible to announce their See as greater than Peter's due to the scripture in which it is Andrew who brings Peter to Jesus).
Again though, this claim comes after the Photian schism, and even Photius, according to Dvornik, recognized the primacy of the See of Peter in matters of faith and dogma.
Common to Orthodox and Catholic after all these centuries is the idea of infallibility in Church teaching. For Catholics the fuller revelation of this claim is the infallibility of the Chair of Peter. As long as the Orthodox and Catholic remain in schism, this view can never really be a shared by them. Dvornik's understanding of early church history seeks a common basis in history in order that this claim no longer serve as a stumbling block against reentering into full communion between the two largest branches of the Christian family.

 

[SolomonVII]

Actually the councils do say "honor," not "authority." Rome had the primacy of honor because it was the capital of the Empire. Constantinople was later created and given second in honor because it was the new capital. It's pretty clearly written.

Rome's ultimate claim primacy was always based upon its association with Peter. It was very easy for people in the empire to look to the Roman bishop as the ultimate authority due to location, but the claim that theirs was Peter's See was considered very important to them right from the beginning.

 

[Oblio]

Lotar is correct, IIRC the third canon of the council of Constantinople proclaims this.

"The Bishop of Constantinople shall have the perogatives of honor after the Bishop of Rome, because Constantinople is New Rome" (Canon III)

This was later confirmed in the Council of Chalcedon by Canon XXVIII which confirmed Canon III of the Council of Constantinople.

At this point the 5 Sees of the Church are in place, with all given equal authority in matters of sacraments and teaching with no Bishop above the rest.

Rome's ultimate claim primacy was always based upon its association with Peter.

For a single Bishop to claim such is just that, a claim, and it is made outside the Conciliar Church polity attested to in Scripture.

 

[Jay2004]

Constantinople lost it's authority after the fall of Constantinople, and what drove the nail in the coffin so to speak, was in the 1500's, when the Tsar declared Moscow the 3rd Rome and decreed that the Russian orthodox church would appoint it's own Patriarch instead of having one chosen by the Patriarch of Constantinople....
With the Orthodox churches biggest body (i.e. the Russian church) declaring independence, the EP had no choice to accept it. The Tsars reason for doing this is since Constantinople was now and for 100 years under Turkish rule, the EP was basically a puppet of the Sultan. The Tsar wanted to assure independence of his church from Turkish influence.

The Primacy of Honour dogma appeared around this time.

 

[Iacobus]

Constantinople lost it's authority after the fall of Constantinople, and what drove the nail in the coffin so to speak, was in the 1500's, when the Tsar declared Moscow the 3rd Rome and decreed that the Russian orthodox church would appoint it's own Patriarch instead of having one chosen by the Patriarch of Constantinople....
With the Orthodox churches biggest body (i.e. the Russian church) declaring independence, the EP had no choice to accept it. The Tsars reason for doing this is since Constantinople was now and for 100 years under Turkish rule, the EP was basically a puppet of the Sultan. The Tsar wanted to assure independence of his church from Turkish influence.

The Primacy of Honour dogma appeared around this time.

That is simply untrue. The primacy of honor notion is far more ancient than that -- in fact, it is ante-nicene.

James

 

[linden branch]

Constantinople lost it's authority after the fall of Constantinople, and what drove the nail in the coffin so to speak, was in the 1500's, when the Tsar declared Moscow the 3rd Rome and decreed that the Russian orthodox church would appoint it's own Patriarch instead of having one chosen by the Patriarch of Constantinople....
With the Orthodox churches biggest body (i.e. the Russian church) declaring independence, the EP had no choice to accept it. The Tsars reason for doing this is since Constantinople was now and for 100 years under Turkish rule, the EP was basically a puppet of the Sultan. The Tsar wanted to assure independence of his church from Turkish influence.

The Primacy of Honour dogma appeared around this time.

Jay, this would appear to be historically inaccurate. This link, written by the Russians themselves, would give a different account of Russia's independence (autocephaly) from Constantinople as prior to the fall of Constantinople in 1453, and thus obviously predating any influence the Turkish government had over the Patriarch:

After the Council of Florence in 1440, Constantinople had accepted union with the Roman Catholic Church and Russia could not accept a Metropolitan from there. Finally, in 1448, a council of Russian Bishops elected their own Metropolitan and from this date the Russian Church has reckoned her independence. In 1453 Constantinople fell to the Turks and from this date the Russian Church remained the sole free branch of Orthodoxy.

This account is well supported by multiple reputable sources.

 

[OrthodoxTexan]

All this talk about the primacy of the Pope of Rome makes me wonder whatever happened to those plaques Leo had made with the Creed, sans filioque, etched on them. Are they still on display in Rome?

Wasn't Leo's decision rejecting the filioque insertion binding upon the Roman Church? As the Bishop of Rome, infallible when acting ex cathedra, shouldn't this have been the last word on the matter within the Roman Patriarchate? At what point did the Roman Church revoke the decision of Pope Leo regarding the filioque and establish the filioque variant of the Creed as the norm?

 

[linden branch]

Leo's plaques are not considered an indictment against the filioque, but rather an assertion of unity within the Church by emphasising the ecumenical creed over and above regional assertions that the creed sans filioque (and particularly those who recited it that way) was inadequate or even heretical. This was a favorite of the Frankish empire in their struggle to assert their claim for the legacy of the Roman Empire over and against the Byzantine Empire (which was the actual continuation of the Roman empire, to the extent that they called themselves not Byzantine, but Roman).

To combat this divisive maneuvering, Leo reasserted the Nicene Creed as the ecumenical, and hence universally representative, creed of Christendom. None of this should be construed as a condemnation of the filioque. Far from it, for Leo was quite loyal to the Western tradition, and followed in the footsteps of its theological luminaries in agreeing to the orthodoxy of the filioque. He just didn't believe it ought to be inserted in the Creed.

As far as I know, this is still the party line for Catholicism, that the Nicene Creed sans the filioque is THE CREED of the Catholic Church, with the filioque being an orthodox regional addition (Eastern Catholics have to agree to the filioque's orthodoxy, but do not, and in fact should not, say it when reciting the Nicene Creed).

 

[Peter]

St. John 15:26

"When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit Of Truth, who proceeds from the Father, He will bear witness of Me."

Peace.

Peter

 

[orthodoxos]

To use the words of the Holy Synods.

Πιστεύω είς ενα Θεόν, Πατέρα, παντοκράτορα, ποιητήν ουρανού καί γής, ορατών τε πάντων καί αοράτων.

Καί είς ενα Κύριον, Ίησούν Χριστόν, τόν Υιόν του Θεού τόν μονογενή, τόν εκ του Πατρός γεννηθέντα πρό πάντων τών αιώνων. Φώς εκ φωτός, Θεόν αληθινόν εκ Θεού αληθινού γεννηθέντα, ού ποιηθέντα, ομοούσιον τώ Πατρί, δι’ ού τά πάντα εγένετο.

Τόν δι’ ημάς τούς ανθρώπους καί διά τήν ημετέραν σωτηρίαν κατελθόντα εκ τών ουρανών καί σαρκωθέντα εκ Πνεύματος ‘Αγίου καί Μαρίας τής Παρθένου καί ενανθρωπήσαντα.

Σταυρωθέντα τε υπέρ ημών επί Ποντίου Πιλάτου καί παθόντα καί ταφέντα.

Καί αναστάντα τή τρίτη ημέρα κατά τάς Γραφάς.

Καί ανελθόντα είς τούς ουρανούς καί καθεζόμενον εκ δεξιών τού Πατρός.

Καί πάλιν ερχόμενον μετά δόξης κρίναι ζώντας καί νεκρούς, ού τής βασιλείας ουκ εσται τέλος.

Καί είς τό Πνεύμα τό ¨Αγιον, τό Κύριον, τό ζωοποιόν, τό εκ τού Πατρός εκπορευόμενον, τό σύν Πατρί καί Υιώ συμπροσκυνούμενον καί συνδοξαζόμενον, τό λαλήσαν διά τών Προφητών.

Είς μίαν, αγίαν, καθολικήν καί αποστολικήν Έκκλησίαν.

‘Ομολογώ εν βάπτισμα είς άφεσιν αμαρτιών.

Προσδοκώ ανάστασιν νεκρών.

Καί ζωήν τού μέλλοντος αιώνος. Άμήν.



And the words of many Roman Pontiff's like Pope Leo III, Pope John VIII and Pope John Paul II,

Credimus in unum Deum Patrem omnipotentem; factorem coeli et terrae, visibilium.

Et in unum Dominum Jesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, natum ex Patre ante omnia saecula,Lumen de Lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, natum, non factum, consubstantialem Patri; per quem omni facta sunt; qui propter nos homines et propter salutem nostram descendit de coelis et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria virginine et humanatus [homo factus] est; et crucifixus est pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato [passus] et sepultus est; et resurrexit tertia die [secundum scripturas]; ascendit in coelum [coelos], sedet ad dexteram Patris; interum venturus, cum gloria, judicare vivos et mortuos; cujus regni non erit finis.

Et in Spritum Sanctam, Dominum et vivificatorem, ex Patre procedentem, cum Patre et Filio adorandum et conglorificandum, qui locutus est per sanctos prophetas. Et unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam. Confitemur unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. Expectamus resurrectionem mortuorum et vitam futuri saeculi.

Amen..

 

[Cjwinnit]

Almost...

And the words of many Roman Pontiff's like Pope Leo III, Pope John VIII and Pope John Paul II,

Credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem; factorem coeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium.

Et in unum Dominum Jesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, (et) ex Patre natum ante omnia saecula. Deum de Deo, Lumen de Lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, natum, non factum, consubstantialem Patri; per quem omni facta sunt; qui propter nos homines et propter salutem nostram descendit de coelis et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria virginine et humanatus [homo factus] est; et crucifixus est pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato [passus] et sepultus est; et resurrexit tertia die [secundum scripturas]; ascendit in coelum [coelos], sedet ad dexteram Patris; interum venturus, cum gloria, judicare vivos et mortuos; cujus regni non erit finis.

Et in Spritum Sanctam, Dominum et vivificatorem, ex Patre procedentem, cum Patre et Filio adorandum et conglorificandum, qui locutus est per sanctos prophetas. Et unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam. Confitemur unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. Expectamus resurrectionem mortuorum et vitam futuri saeculi.

Amen..

 

[orthodoxos]

Bardus bardus hommo ergo sum.
Mea culpa.

However, this is a received text from the 2nd Oecumenical Council of the Catholic Church, that was the point.

God bless.

 

[Dismas]

Here is a audio download regarding the Nicene Creed from ACORN (America's Christian Orthodox Radio Network) http://saintig.org/ACORN/NiceanCreed.asf

For additional programs click on http://orthotracts.org/ACORN/acorn.html

Peace,
Dismas

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

To use the words of the Holy Synods.

Πιστεύω είς ενα Θεόν, Πατέρα, παντοκράτορα, ποιητήν ουρανού καί γής, ορατών τε πάντων καί αοράτων.

Καί είς ενα Κύριον, Ίησούν Χριστόν, τόν Υιόν του Θεού τόν μονογενή, τόν εκ του Πατρός γεννηθέντα πρό πάντων τών αιώνων. Φώς εκ φωτός, Θεόν αληθινόν εκ Θεού αληθινού γεννηθέντα, ού ποιηθέντα, ομοούσιον τώ Πατρί, δι’ ού τά πάντα εγένετο.

Τόν δι’ ημάς τούς ανθρώπους καί διά τήν ημετέραν σωτηρίαν κατελθόντα εκ τών ουρανών καί σαρκωθέντα εκ Πνεύματος ‘Αγίου καί Μαρίας τής Παρθένου καί ενανθρωπήσαντα.

Σταυρωθέντα τε υπέρ ημών επί Ποντίου Πιλάτου καί παθόντα καί ταφέντα.

Καί αναστάντα τή τρίτη ημέρα κατά τάς Γραφάς.

Καί ανελθόντα είς τούς ουρανούς καί καθεζόμενον εκ δεξιών τού Πατρός.

Καί πάλιν ερχόμενον μετά δόξης κρίναι ζώντας καί νεκρούς, ού τής βασιλείας ουκ εσται τέλος.

Καί είς τό Πνεύμα τό ¨Αγιον, τό Κύριον, τό ζωοποιόν, τό εκ τού Πατρός εκπορευόμενον, τό σύν Πατρί καί Υιώ συμπροσκυνούμενον καί συνδοξαζόμενον, τό λαλήσαν διά τών Προφητών.

Είς μίαν, αγίαν, καθολικήν καί αποστολικήν Έκκλησίαν.

‘Ομολογώ εν βάπτισμα είς άφεσιν αμαρτιών.

Προσδοκώ ανάστασιν νεκρών.

Καί ζωήν τού μέλλοντος αιώνος. Άμήν.



And the words of many Roman Pontiff's like Pope Leo III, Pope John VIII and Pope John Paul II,

Credimus in unum Deum Patrem omnipotentem; factorem coeli et terrae, visibilium.

Et in unum Dominum Jesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, natum ex Patre ante omnia saecula,Lumen de Lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, natum, non factum, consubstantialem Patri; per quem omni facta sunt; qui propter nos homines et propter salutem nostram descendit de coelis et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria virginine et humanatus [homo factus] est; et crucifixus est pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato [passus] et sepultus est; et resurrexit tertia die [secundum scripturas]; ascendit in coelum [coelos], sedet ad dexteram Patris; interum venturus, cum gloria, judicare vivos et mortuos; cujus regni non erit finis.

Et in Spritum Sanctam, Dominum et vivificatorem, ex Patre procedentem, cum Patre et Filio adorandum et conglorificandum, qui locutus est per sanctos prophetas. Et unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam. Confitemur unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. Expectamus resurrectionem mortuorum et vitam futuri saeculi.

Amen..

I knew I should have stayed awake during Latin class at the Seminary

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

You base this on ...

Is Oblio still around?

 

[ReformedCofE]

This problem shows the domination of Augustine's thought on the Trinity over and against those that went before him. The Cappadocian Fathers came up with the orthodox understanding of the Trinity but Augustine couldn't read it well as his Greek was bad. One of the main causes of problems were language barriers.

The filioque was put into the creed without ecumenical consent. The East still reject it as a papal addition and thus see it as a question of authority. The pope has no authority to change creeds except in his own mind according to them.

I wouldn't say the filioque clause because of those reasons.

 

[PaladinValer]

**Waggles his fingers**

Threadus resurrectus!