The Creed and the filioque

Catholic_NE · Jul 14, 2009

Note: The following was recently posted on an old thread, but I thought I take the liberty of starting a new thread with my response to it (the other thread is five years old):

ReformedCofE said:
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.

Interesting that you should say that, ReformedCofE. I've often said that I could never be Protestant due to the filioque -- Protestants accept the insertion of the filioque into the Creed, yet reject the very authority that authorized that insertion (the papacy).

Does anyone else feel the same way I do?

Epiphoskei · Jul 14, 2009

There is a difference between truth and authority to infallably produce truth.

We accept the truth of the filioque, and we accept that the pope was true on this point.
We reject the infallability and authority of the creed and the filioque, and we reject the authority and infallability of the one who put it into the creed.

The authority and infallability belong to the scriptures, from which it may be determined that the Spirit proceeds from the father and the son.

Tzaousios · Jul 16, 2009

Epiphoskei said:
The authority and infallability belong to the scriptures, from which it may be determined that the Spirit proceeds from the father and the son.

Which scripture passages are you talking about here?

unkern · Jul 16, 2009

The protestants never really protested much of anything, the foundations that their set of religions are based upon came from catholicism. The creation of the creeds and the like all came from these backgrounds, of course at that time they referred to themselves as christian.

Epiphoskei · Jul 16, 2009

Numerous scriptures that call the Holy Spirit the "spirit of Christ," and Titus 3:6 and Acts 2:33 describing Christ pouring out the spirit.

Epiphoskei · Jul 16, 2009

unkern said:
The protestants never really protested much of anything, the foundations that their set of religions are based upon came from catholicism. The creation of the creeds and the like all came from these backgrounds, of course at that time they referred to themselves as christian.

This is why it's called the "Protestant Reformation," not the "Protestant Replacment." The fallability of the church does not mean everything every Christian ever said between the end of the NT and Martin Luther was bunk, and any good Protestant will tell you that.

Tzaousios · Jul 16, 2009

Epiphoskei said:
Numerous scriptures that call the Holy Spirit the "spirit of Christ," and Titus 3:6 and Acts 2:33 describing Christ pouring out the spirit.

Well, of course Christ had the power of the Holy Spirit, since the Trinity is a consubstantial unity. But what about from whom the Spirit proceeded when it initially came upon the early church?

Epiphoskei · Jul 16, 2009

Acts 2:33 is pretty clear to me. Christ also says in John that if he leaves, he will send another, who is the spirit.

unkern · Jul 16, 2009

Heres the fun part about the discussion. The Lord is spirit and everyone who worships him must worship him in spirit and in truth. In Revelations it talks about 7 spirits, but most important we must remember that he is ONE he call himself ONE, and that was one of the original reasons He blew everyone away was that he was only ONE G-d and not several deities.

Catholic_NE · Jul 16, 2009

Epiphoskei said:
Numerous scriptures that call the Holy Spirit the "spirit of Christ," and Titus 3:6 and Acts 2:33 describing Christ pouring out the spirit.

Hi Epiphoskei,

Without getting into a big discussion of the idea of temporal procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, and the idea of eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son (both of which I, as an RC, believe in) the question I'd like to ask you is Why do you include it in the Creed? I know it's easy to say, We include it because we believe it to be true ... But aren't there a lot of other things that you also believe but aren't included in the Creed?

Epiphoskei · Jul 16, 2009

I didn't write the creed, so I don't get to decide what's in it as a historical document.

I affirm that both versions are true in so far as they go, though the filioque is more complete. I don't include it or disinclude it in the creed. I don't see it as necesarry to decree what the "official" version of the creed is, inasmuch as I don't look to the creed to be the infallable rule of the faith. There are two historical versions, and I'll assent to them both, but with preference for the one that is more complete.

Tzaousios · Jul 16, 2009

Epiphoskei said:
Acts 2:33 is pretty clear to me. Christ also says in John that if he leaves, he will send another, who is the spirit.

Indeed, there are passages in which it appears that Christ is involved in channeling, directing, or mediating the Holy Spirit (not sure which verb to use). But how do you read these verses along side John 15:26, which is quite explicit from whom the Holy Spirit proceeds?

John 15:26

26 But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.

Epiphoskei · Jul 16, 2009

I am not convinced that "proceed" is a technical term. If it is not, then clearly the Spirit comes from the Father, according to John 15:26, and comes from the Son, according to the other verses.

CaliforniaJosiah · Jul 16, 2009

Catholic_NE said:
Note: The following was recently posted on an old thread, but I thought I take the liberty of starting a new thread with my response to it (the other thread is five years old):

Interesting that you should say that, ReformedCofE. I've often said that I could never be Protestant due to the filioque -- Protestants accept the insertion of the filioque into the Creed, yet reject the very authority that authorized that insertion (the papacy).

Does anyone else feel the same way I do?

1. Protestants profess the Creed because it is true and because it is both ecumenical and historic, not because some Pope said, "this is so." It's Authority comes from Scripture and the church - not the RCC or Pope.

2. The exact wording of the creeds has never been "fixed."

All that said, I PERSONALLY am of the view that the addition (while okay theologically) is best left out. It was the addition of one denomination and thus wasn't ecumenical. It's not a big deal to me, but I'd leave it out. BTW, I've seen it done this way, "...from the father (and the Son)...."

.

E.C. · Jul 18, 2009

The Protestants keep the Filioque because they don't realize that it was never there to begin with. It was inserted by a Spanish king, a secular ruler, as a petty attempt to combat Arianism on the Iberian Peninsula. It was not accepted by the entire Church at an E/ecumenical Council.

Epiphoskei · Jul 18, 2009

Guys, you're missing the point. We don't consider it an infallable document in any version, so the provenance of Filioque is unimportant.

Ramon96 · Jul 18, 2009

Most Protestants may not consider the Creed as infallible, but all the Ancient and Apostolic Churches of East (Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, etc) does consider the Creed, and the Holy Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in 325AD infallible and God inspired.

The Fiiloque is a big deal for all Eastern Christians, with the exception of Eastern Catholics, as we see it as heretical, but I will not get into this subject here. It was added by the West, but was never endorsed by the East, and many Western Roman Popes objected to the addition.

In IC.XC,
Ramon

The Creed and the filioque

Newbie

Senior Veteran

Αυγουστινιανικός Χριστιανός

National Guard

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Αυγουστινιανικός Χριστιανός

Senior Veteran

National Guard

Newbie

Senior Veteran

Αυγουστινιανικός Χριστιανός

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Eastern Orthodox Christian

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency