The Nicene Creed - Exploring different traditions' understanding

[“Paisios”]

This thread is a result of a question I asked on another thread for recommendations on readings or websites that would compare and contrast different Christian traditions' ideas and perceptions about the Nicene Creed. In some responses with @~Anastasia~, it seemed that a new thread might be helpful.

I doubt such really exists, because everyone tends to write from their own point of view. Even if they try to be fair and unbiased.

I have seen websites that attempted to contrast some of these in general, and they really needed tweaking that could only be provided by people well-taught in each of the groups mentioned.

And "Protestant" is really too wide a label to be useful. Essentially it really only means "not Catholic or Orthodox" although there are going to be things they have in common with either or both of those - which things depending on which Protestants.

It's something worth exploring though. It would be the best idea, IMO, to start a new thread here in Traditional Theology. We might be able to find some points.

I suspect the Creed itself would find mostly agreement between us all. Offhand there are differences in the procession of the Holy Spirit of course. And some Protestants (depending on what kind) may vary on their understanding of the Church and baptism particularly. The phrase "His Kingdom shall have no end" also seems to be at odds with Millenialism, so they may understand that differently as well. These are just my guesses.

If you do, I'll watch for it.

I once did a thread of the Nicene Creed line by line in the Orthodox forum (I think that's where it was) and I got GREAT responses.

Rather than just asking "what are the differences" ... we might not know each other's beliefs well enough to answer. But if you get details bit by bit of what we all believe, that might be a starting place.

I think it's a great question you ask, btw.

What I would like to see is a line by line exploration of the Nicene Creed, with posts by those from the various Christian traditions - Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Protestant (of all varieties), and Roman Catholic - exploring and illuminating their traditions' views on what the statements in the Creed mean to them. I hope in this way to better understand the different (please note these are in alphabetical order to not favor one over the other, and other traditions are welcome if I have overlooked you) faiths within Christianity, and to better see where are our commonalities, and where are our differences.

I understand that this could become heated, and raise some disagreement, so I would ask that everyone try to remain calm, see this as an informational thread rather than a debate, and to remain patient and civil in the face of opposing viewpoints.

The Nicene Creed

Anglican (from Anglicans Online | The Nicene Creed)

WE BELIEVE in one God,

the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.

For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come.

Amen.

Eastern Orthodox (from the Greek Orthodox Church The Nicene Creed - Personal and Devotional Prayers - Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America)

I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages;

Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not created, of one essence with the Father
through Whom all things were made.

Who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven and was incarnate
of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.

He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate,
and suffered and was buried;

And He rose on the third day,
according to the Scriptures.

He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father;

And He will come again with glory to judge the living
and dead. His kingdom shall have no end.

And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life,
Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the
Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who
spoke through the prophets.

In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the age to come.

Amen.

Oriental Orthodox Church (from the Coptic Orthodox Diocese of Los Angeles The Creed of Faith)

We believe in one God, God the Father the Pantocrator who created heaven and earth, and all things seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-Begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not created, of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made; Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy spirit and the Virgin Mary and became Man. And He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried. And on the third day He rose from the dead, according to the scriptures, ascended to the heavens; He sits at the right hand of his Father, and He is coming again in His glory to judge the living and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have no end.

Yes, we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Life-Giver, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets.

And in one holy, catholic and apostolic church. We confess one baptism for the remission of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the coming age. Amen.


(An example of) Protestant Churches (from Protestant Reformed Churches of America Nicene Creed)

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the living and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life; who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.

Amen

Roman Catholic Church (from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops What We Believe)

I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

1.My first question before even reaching the words of the Nicene Creed itself, is, in your tradition, what significance does the Creed have, and how important is it? Is it used regularly in your worship services?

2. There are differences in the use of "I" or "we" between the different traditions. How important is the use of the singular versus plural pronoun, and why has your tradition chosen this particular one for use?

(Thank you in advance for reading and contributing to this thread, which I hope will provide some clarity for me into the meaning of the Creed. I apologize for the length of the post, but aimed for not offending any faith group by trying to include the different forms in which the Nicene Creed is presented.)

 

[“Paisios”]

This thread is a result of a question I asked on another thread for recommendations on readings or websites that would compare and contrast different Christian traditions' ideas and perceptions about the Nicene Creed. In some responses with @~Anastasia~, it seemed that a new thread might be helpful.

What I would like to see is a line by line exploration of the Nicene Creed, with posts by those from the various Christian traditions - Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Protestant (of all varieties), and Roman Catholic - exploring and illuminating their traditions' views on what the statements in the Creed mean to them. I hope in this way to better understand the different (please note these are in alphabetical order to not favor one over the other, and other traditions are welcome if I have overlooked you) faiths within Christianity, and to better see where are our commonalities, and where are our differences.

I understand that this could become heated, and raise some disagreement, so I would ask that everyone try to remain calm, see this as an informational thread rather than a debate, and to remain patient and civil in the face of opposing viewpoints.

The Nicene Creed

Anglican (from Anglicans Online | The Nicene Creed)

WE BELIEVE in one God,

the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.

For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come.

Amen.

Eastern Orthodox (from the Greek Orthodox Church The Nicene Creed - Personal and Devotional Prayers - Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America)

I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages;

Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not created, of one essence with the Father
through Whom all things were made.

Who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven and was incarnate
of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.

He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate,
and suffered and was buried;

And He rose on the third day,
according to the Scriptures.

He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father;

And He will come again with glory to judge the living
and dead. His kingdom shall have no end.

And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life,
Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the
Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who
spoke through the prophets.

In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the age to come.

Amen.

Oriental Orthodox Church (from the Coptic Church English versions of the Nicene Creed - Wikipedia)

In truth we believe in one God, God the Father the Pantocrator, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father, by whom all things came into being. This is he, who for us humans and our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin Mary, and became human. And he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried. And he rose from the dead on the third day according to the Scriptures. He ascended into the heavens and sits at the right hand of the Father. And he is also coming in his glory to judge the living and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end. Yes, we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father. With the Father and the Son, we co-worship him and we co-glorify him, who spoke by the prophets. And in one holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. We confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come. Amen

(An example of) Protestant Churches (from Protestant Reformed Churches of America Nicene Creed)

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the living and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life; who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.

Amen

Roman Catholic Church (from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops What We Believe)

I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

1.My first question before even reaching the words of the Nicene Creed itself, is, in your tradition, what significance does the Creed have, and how important is it? Is it used regularly in your worship services?

2. There are differences in the use of "I" or "we" between the different traditions. How important is the use of the singular versus plural pronoun, and why has your tradition chosen this particular one for use?

(Thank you in advance for reading and contributing to this thread, which I hope will provide some clarity for me into the meaning of the Creed. I apologize for the length of the post, but aimed for not offending any faith group by trying to include the different forms in which the Nicene Creed is presented.)

1. My first question before even reaching the words of the Nicene Creed itself, is, in your tradition, what significance does the Creed have, and how important is it? Is it used regularly in your worship services?

In the communion to which I belong (the Charismatic Episcopal Church),the Creed is seen as "the sufficient statement of the Christian faith", and "The Nicene Creed is the creed of the universal Church and is used in our Eucharistic Liturgy. The Nicene Creed is the Faith of the universal Church.". As such it is recited at every worship service.

2. There are differences in the use of "I" or "we" between the different traditions. How important is the use of the singular versus plural pronoun, and why has your tradition chosen this particular one for use?

As explained by my bishop through my priest, we use the singular pronoun to emphasize our individual belief in the statements made.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I do not wish to speak for all Anglicans. Perhaps one wiser will be along shortly to correct my misstatements, but I offer this.

1. The Creed is of great importance in our worship services. It is recited at nearly every mass. One exception is a Baptismal service when the people witnessing reaffirm their Baptismal vows. The Apostle's Creed is recited on that occasion.
2. We use "we." I suspect it is because "we" are about common worship. We believe that all the church - those gathered today, the company of heaven, the saints that have come before us, and those that will come after us - worship together, offer the same prayers, affirm the Creed and worship the First Born of All Creation, The Head of the Church, and the Author of our Salvation -- Jesus Christ, Our Lord. (Hint: Think The Book of Common Prayer.)

 

[“Paisios”]

I do not wish to speak for all Anglicans. Perhaps one wiser will be along shortly to correct my misstatements, but I offer this.

1. The Creed is of great importance in our worship services. It is recited at nearly every mass. One exception is a Baptismal service when the people witnessing reaffirm their Baptismal vows. The Apostle's Creed is recited on that occasion.
2. We use "we." I suspect it is because "we" are about common worship. We believe that all the church - those gathered today, the company of heaven, the saints that have come before us, and those that will come after us - worship together, offer the same prayers, affirm the Creed and worship the First Born of All Creation, The Head of the Church, and the Author of our Salvation -- Jesus Christ, Our Lord. (Hint: Think The Book of Common Prayer.)

Thank you for the reply. I believe that the lesser reason we use "I" in our worship is that it helps differentiate us from the Episcopal Church of the USA, as, though we have "episcopal" in our name reflecting our governance, we are not in formal communion with the Anglican Church. But when we changed from "we" to "I" in our service, your explanation is exactly what I argued to our priest to protest the change!

 

[~Anastasia~]

1.My first question before even reaching the words of the Nicene Creed itself, is, in your tradition, what significance does the Creed have, and how important is it? Is it used regularly in your worship services?

Probably more important than I can explain. There are so MANY things one can learn, and I haven't gotten around to asking all of the questions yet.

It is recited in EVERY Divine Liturgy (the service that consecrates the Eucharist, and the main service we have for Sundays, Feast Days, etc.). While it is being said by all the people, the priest uses what I think is properly considered part of his vestments to contain the smoke from the censor and cease the gifts, which will become the Eucharist. Perfect time for me to learn more about this as I've been wondering for quite some time.

I do know there is also an element of community there, as we all affirm what we believe as our foundational truths, and we further believe that doctrinal unity is necessary for Eucharistic fellowship, which IS the fellowship of the early Church.

So it is absolutely vitally significant, as I said, probably more than I really know or can explain.

2. There are differences in the use of "I" or "we" between the different traditions. How important is the use of the singular versus plural pronoun, and why has your tradition chosen this particular one for use?

We use the "I believe" format. I understand it is because in a sense, we renew our baptism at every Divine Liturgy, and it was used (and still is) as a Baptismal Creed, affirming agreement with the rest of the Church on these essential beliefs.


I would greatly appreciate if those who know more can add to what little I've been able to say here. I know it's much richer than I have knowledge of.

 

[“Paisios”]

Probably more important than I can explain. There are so MANY things one can learn, and I haven't gotten around to asking all of the questions yet.

It is recited in EVERY Divine Liturgy (the service that consecrates the Eucharist, and the main service we have for Sundays, Feast Days, etc.). While it is being said by all the people, the priest uses what I think is properly considered part of his vestments to contain the smoke from the censor and cease the gifts, which will become the Eucharist. Perfect time for me to learn more about this as I've been wondering for quite some time.

I do know there is also an element of community there, as we all affirm what we believe as our foundational truths, and we further believe that doctrinal unity is necessary for Eucharistic fellowship, which IS the fellowship of the early Church.

So it is absolutely vitally significant, as I said, probably more than I really know or can explain.

We use the "I believe" format. I understand it is because in a sense, we renew our baptism at every Divine Liturgy, and it was used (and still is) as a Baptismal Creed, affirming agreement with the rest of the Church on these essential beliefs.


I would greatly appreciate if those who know more can add to what little I've been able to say here. I know it's much richer than I have knowledge of.

Thank you for suggesting I make this thread and for your reply.
So in both those answers, the Orthodox position seems similar to that of my church. We say it each time, and use it for baptism, and the idea that it is the sufficient statement of the Christian faith stresses its importance in our view. Interesting about the censing...I would be interested to hear if you learn the answer. I wonder if it has to do with incense being the prayers of the saints, and recitation of the Creed connecting the present to past Church? (Speculating, as I am not Orthodox, nor, as you know, particularly familiar with the Orthodox tradition)

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Here`s a link to The Nicene Creed - line by line that many people from many denominations participated in that you may find helpful.

 

[“Paisios”]

Here`s a link to The Nicene Creed - line by line that many people from many denominations participated in that you may find helpful.

Thank you. Yes, it's helpful. I think ~Anastasia~, who started that thread, alluded to it in a reply to me. Interesting to see different perspectives.

 

[St_Worm2]

While in a discussion here concerning the Filioque, the "origin" of both the HS and the Son were brought up, as both the RCC and the EOC believe/teach that the Father is the "Source" of the Godhead.

So I asked a question, not so much about the Filioque but rather, about the members of Trinity and the understanding of the nature (and "origin"?) of the Godhead (i.e. how can Someone w/o a beginning have a "source", etc.).

But I got far more than I bargained for AMR, who not only answered the "source" question, but went on into quite a bit of detail concerning the Filioque. And while his article is decidedly in support of the understanding of the Filioque from the West's POV, I believe all may find in valuable to consider (no matter which side of the fence you fall on). He writes:

We are entering deep waters here of the mysteries of God, so let's approach the subject with much fear and trembling.

Think of the phrase, "In the unity of the Godhead."

Western theology begins at this point. One God possessing full Godhead.

I think using the word "source" opens up too many distractions based upon modern notions that require much qualifications to prevent misunderstandings. The Father is unbegotten. As such God the Father is the ever-flowing fountain of the divine essence. He communicates this essence to the Son. He with the Son communicates this essence to the Spirit. The communication is eternal. It did not happen one time and then stop.

The first communication is called begetting; the second communication is called procession. Call the communication whatever one pleases, it is the communication itself which is important. So we say the Father begets the Son, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from Father and the Son. The begetting is also often termed generation. The procession is also sometimes called spiration.

Berkhof writes:

• This procession of the Holy Spirit, briefly called spiration, is his personal property. Much of what was said respecting the generation of the Son also applies to the spiration of the Holy Spirit, and need not be repeated. The following points of distinction between the two may be noted, however:
  (1) Generation is the work of the Father only; spiration is the work of both the Father and the Son.
  (2) By generation the Son is enabled to take part in the work of spiration, but the Holy Spirit acquires no such power.
  (3) In logical order generation precedes spiration.
  
  It should be remembered, however, that all this implies no essential subordination of the Holy Spirit to the Son.
  
  In spiration as well as in generation there is a communication of the whole of the divine essence, so that the Holy Spirit is on an equality with the Father and the Son
  
  The doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son is based on John 15:26, and on the fact that the Spirit is also called the Spirit of Christ and of the Son, Romans 8:9; Galatians 4:6, and is sent by Christ into the world. Spiration may be defined as that eternal and necessary act of the first and second persons in the Trinity whereby they, within the divine Being, become the ground of the personal subsistence of the Holy Spirit, and put the third person in possession of the whole divine essence, without any division, alienation or change.
  
  When one begins with the unity of God these personal properties are the means by which Godhead is understood to belong to a distinct mode of subsistence within the undivided substance.

Altering the personal properties so as to deny the filioque (fill-ee-oh-qwee) serves to create a new "stream" (using the above analogy of "fountain").

Once the filioque is denied, there is now no longer one stream
--> Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

A second stream has been created
--> Father, Son; Father, Holy Spirit.

There is no longer an unity of three but two unities of two.

Accordingly, the unity of God is maintained in the western theological tradition by what is called the communication of Godhead begetting and procession. "Person" or "subsistence" depends on personal properties, i.e., properties which are unique to a person in relation to other persons. In the words of our Larger Catechism, there is something "proper" in these relations, that is, "divinely proper." To detract from any property of the Son in relation to the Holy Spirit is to make Him inferior to the Father.

The EO objection in relation to the Holy Spirit is removed by a simple acknowledgement that the unique person of the Holy Spirit also consists in a unique property, and that property is to proceed from the Father and the Son from all eternity.

If this were not accepted as the Holy Spirit's distinct property He would not be the third person of the Trinity but would be a second second person. This means He would be a second Son. His very name, Spirit, is suggestive of an altogether unique relation in union with Father and Son which nullifies the objection. The Holy Spirit is the person upon whom the communication of Godhead finally terminates. In this capacity the Spirit is Himself the bond of union and communion between Father and Son. Likewise, in the ad extra works (works outside the Godhead) of the Trinity, this unique relation finds expression in His distinctive function in connection with the creation of, providence over, and redemption of, the world He is the Spirit of life and communion. ~AMR
​

--David

 

[“Paisios”]

While in a discussion here concerning the Filioque, the "origin" of both the HS and the Son were brought up, as both the RCC and the EOC believe/teach that the Father is the "Source" of the Godhead.

So I asked a question, not so much about the Filioque but rather, about the members of Trinity and the understanding of the nature (and "origin"?) of the Godhead (i.e. how can Someone w/o a beginning have a "source", etc.).

But I got far more than I bargained for AMR, who not only answered the "source" question, but went on into quite a bit of detail concerning the Filioque. And while his article is decidedly in support of the understanding of the Filioque from the West's POV, I believe all may find in valuable to consider (no matter which side of the fence you fall on). He writes:

We are entering deep waters here of the mysteries of God, so let's approach the subject with much fear and trembling.

Think of the phrase, "In the unity of the Godhead."

Western theology begins at this point. One God possessing full Godhead.

I think using the word "source" opens up too many distractions based upon modern notions that require much qualifications to prevent misunderstandings. The Father is unbegotten. As such God the Father is the ever-flowing fountain of the divine essence. He communicates this essence to the Son. He with the Son communicates this essence to the Spirit. The communication is eternal. It did not happen one time and then stop.

The first communication is called begetting; the second communication is called procession. Call the communication whatever one pleases, it is the communication itself which is important. So we say the Father begets the Son, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from Father and the Son. The begetting is also often termed generation. The procession is also sometimes called spiration.

Berkhof writes:

• This procession of the Holy Spirit, briefly called spiration, is his personal property. Much of what was said respecting the generation of the Son also applies to the spiration of the Holy Spirit, and need not be repeated. The following points of distinction between the two may be noted, however:
  (1) Generation is the work of the Father only; spiration is the work of both the Father and the Son.
  (2) By generation the Son is enabled to take part in the work of spiration, but the Holy Spirit acquires no such power.
  (3) In logical order generation precedes spiration.
  
  It should be remembered, however, that all this implies no essential subordination of the Holy Spirit to the Son.
  
  In spiration as well as in generation there is a communication of the whole of the divine essence, so that the Holy Spirit is on an equality with the Father and the Son
  
  The doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son is based on John 15:26, and on the fact that the Spirit is also called the Spirit of Christ and of the Son, Romans 8:9; Galatians 4:6, and is sent by Christ into the world. Spiration may be defined as that eternal and necessary act of the first and second persons in the Trinity whereby they, within the divine Being, become the ground of the personal subsistence of the Holy Spirit, and put the third person in possession of the whole divine essence, without any division, alienation or change.
  
  When one begins with the unity of God these personal properties are the means by which Godhead is understood to belong to a distinct mode of subsistence within the undivided substance.

Altering the personal properties so as to deny the filioque (fill-ee-oh-qwee) serves to create a new "stream" (using the above analogy of "fountain").

Once the filioque is denied, there is now no longer one stream
--> Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

A second stream has been created
--> Father, Son; Father, Holy Spirit.

There is no longer an unity of three but two unities of two.

Accordingly, the unity of God is maintained in the western theological tradition by what is called the communication of Godhead begetting and procession. "Person" or "subsistence" depends on personal properties, i.e., properties which are unique to a person in relation to other persons. In the words of our Larger Catechism, there is something "proper" in these relations, that is, "divinely proper." To detract from any property of the Son in relation to the Holy Spirit is to make Him inferior to the Father.

The EO objection in relation to the Holy Spirit is removed by a simple acknowledgement that the unique person of the Holy Spirit also consists in a unique property, and that property is to proceed from the Father and the Son from all eternity.

If this were not accepted as the Holy Spirit's distinct property He would not be the third person of the Trinity but would be a second second person. This means He would be a second Son. His very name, Spirit, is suggestive of an altogether unique relation in union with Father and Son which nullifies the objection. The Holy Spirit is the person upon whom the communication of Godhead finally terminates. In this capacity the Spirit is Himself the bond of union and communion between Father and Son. Likewise, in the ad extra works (works outside the Godhead) of the Trinity, this unique relation finds expression in His distinctive function in connection with the creation of, providence over, and redemption of, the world He is the Spirit of life and communion. ~AMR
​

--David

This discussion went deep quickly. There's a lot to think on in that. Thank you for your response.

 

[~Anastasia~]

This discussion went deep quickly. There's a lot to think on in that. Thank you for your response.

LOL, you do run the risk of very, very deep when discussing the Creed. I fear I'm only somewhere around the surface myself, and quite satisfied with that, as never before could I really understand how 3 Persons could possibly really equal 1 God.


And there is always, always danger in going too far. We have been handed down certain things we can know, but in trying to fully comprehend the incomprehensible, it is easy to make mistakes. We just have to go into it with the understanding that we will never completely understand, no analogy is perfect, and so on, and embrace the necessary Mystery of that. At least from our (Orthodox) point of view.

 

[“Paisios”]

LOL, you do run the risk of very, very deep when discussing the Creed. I fear I'm only somewhere around the surface myself, and quite satisfied with that, as never before could I really understand how 3 Persons could possibly really equal 1 God.

And there is always, always danger in going too far. We have been handed down certain things we can know, but in trying to fully comprehend the incomprehensible, it is easy to make mistakes. We just have to go into it with the understanding that we will never completely understand, no analogy is perfect, and so on, and embrace the necessary Mystery of that. At least from our (Orthodox) point of view.

Yes, that seems true. But it is always rewarding to dive as far as my (limited) understanding will take me...as long as I don't drown.

(And of course with jumping into the filioque question/ controversy this early, I feel the depths enveloping me.)

 

[Halbhh]

I notice they are essentially all the same, with no meaningful differences, which is encouraging. We recite the Nicene once every month or two, and it may be any of the above, from reciting it about 20 times now. Church name is a mere label to me.

 

[“Paisios”]

I notice they are essentially all the same, with no meaningful differences, which is encouraging. We recite the Nicene once every month or two, and it may be any of the above, from reciting it about 20 times now. Church name is a mere label to me.

No meaningful differences on the surface, and it is encouraging that it provides some common ground. Thank you for the reply.

 

[St_Worm2]

I notice they are essentially all the same, with no meaningful differences, which is encouraging. We recite the Nicene once every month or two, and it may be any of the above, from reciting it about 20 times now. Church name is a mere label to me.

No meaningful differences on the surface, and it is encouraging that it provides some common ground. Thank you for the reply.

Actually, one of those minor differences (known as the Filioque*) was a big part of what caused the "Great Schism" in 1054 when the church divided into RCC and EOC, but I do agree that as a whole, the Creed provides a lot of easily accessible common ground (for the simple reason that, in reality, there is a lot of common ground between all the Christian churches/denominations ).

We hold about 90% of the faith in perfect unity with one another (save perhaps for our differences in terminology and what we actually mean by some of the words we use), but we only focus on that 90% of the faith about 10% of the time. Conversely, while there are real differences in about 10% of what we believe about the faith, we spend 90% of our time discussing those differences (which is not surprising, of course, but perhaps seeking a little more balance wouldn't be a bad idea for all of us ).

If you don't mind me asking @Halbhh, which church/denomination are you a part of (I think it's great that your church chooses to recite the Creed as part of your services occasionally ).

Yours and His,
David

*The EOC
And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life,
Who proceeds from the Father.....

*The Filiogue of the West/RCC and Protestants
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
​

 

[“Paisios”]

Actually, one of those minor differences (known as the Filioque*) was a big part of what caused the "Great Schism" in 1054 when the church divided into RCC and EOC, but I do agree that as a whole, the Creed provides a lot of easily accessible common ground (for the simple reason that, in reality, there is a lot of common ground between all the Christian churches/denominations ).

We hold about 90% of the faith in perfect unity with one another (save perhaps for our differences in terminology and what we mean by it), but we only focus on that 90% about 10% of the time. Conversely, while there are differences in only 10% of what we believe about the faith, we spend 90% of our time on those differences (which is not surprising, of course, but perhaps seeking a little more balance wouldn't be a bad idea for all of us ).

If you don't mind me asking @Halbhh, which church/denomination are you a part of (I think it's great that your church chooses to recite the Creed as part of your services occasionally ).

Yours and His,
David

*The EOC
And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life,
Who proceeds from the Father.....

*The Filiogue of the West/RCC and Protestants
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
​

Yes, I am aware of the repercussions of the filioque controversy, which is why I said on the surface. I'm not trying to avoid exploring it in this thread, but didn't want to start with that...hoping to find the common ground before exposing those long festering open wounds...

But understanding the differences in how we perceive the meaning even when we agree on the words is part of my interest here.

 

[St_Worm2]

Yes, I am aware of the repercussions of the filioque controversy, which is why I said on the surface. I'm not trying to avoid exploring it in this thread, but didn't want to start with that...hoping to find the common ground before exposing those long festering open wounds...

But understanding the differences in how we perceive the meaning even when we agree on the words is part of my interest here.

I figured you understood the filioque controversy from what you said, but I thought I'd point it out, at least in a general sense, for those who might not (esp. since I've already posted AMR's article).

As for your intention to find common ground and understand our differences in language/terminology, I think that is GREAT I'm truly looking forward to seeing where this thread of yours might take us

--David

 

[“Paisios”]

I figured you understood the filioque controversy from what you said, but I thought I'd point it out, at least in a general sense, for those who might not (esp. since I've already posted AMR's article).

As for your intention to find common ground and understand our differences in language/terminology, I think that is GREAT I'm truly looking forward to seeing where this thread of yours might take us

--David

Never hurts to make things plain and clear. I usually have to be bludgeoned over the head before I understand things. I'm curious where this will lead, as well. I have quite the curiosity to understand these things. But a small point of correction - I hope that it is not "my" thread, but rather "our" thread, given the hope for the development of a common understanding, and that my contribution is likely to be the least meaningful.

 

[Halbhh]

No meaningful differences on the surface, and it is encouraging that it provides some common ground. Thank you for the reply.

Well, not many people realize it, but no 2 human beings totally agree in all details about things they even say they agree on (superficially), it seems. I know it sounds like hyperbole, and it's a trivial everyday knowledge that people understand (without depth) that some other person thinks "just like me" about something. But they don't, actually, if they discuss it enough, though they are willing to say they agree anyway, being pragmatic. And that's fine. It's just as it should be. One can learn how profoundly unique each person's views are often after an hour or 2 to sometimes a dozen hours of in depth conversation with someone so that they feel really comfortable to tell you what they really think (some people get there sooner, and some slower). That's not the usual social conversation. It helps a lot that they can sense that I've got nothing whatsoever against their being different than me. I was not able to find another human being on Earth so far that thinks precisely the identical (in all details) way that another human being does about anything, even, in my experience of about 20 to 40 instances of people getting to the point where they say "I've never told anyone that before", where I know they are really saying their true thoughts.

So.....it's wrong to imagine that people understand things the same way past a narrow detail.

They are mostly willing though to say they agree anyway.

It's good and right to agree to agree....to say I see something the same way you do, knowing what actually is real is that I see it largely or at least in some key way a lot like you.

So, it definitely would be a real error me, having this knowledge, to argue too much and stir up the inevitable ability of each, every and all humans to debate for the sake of debating, and get their egos involved, which by the way is the only real explanation for all the splits.

It wasn't that everyone really believed those differences mattered, but instead that they got offended. That's where any split comes from.

Otherwise, we just live in peace without bothering to get into argument. What I mean is that I know for sure my brother can stumble and sin, in part because I have found out that I can.....so, therefore, at this point, I'm all about forgive and forgive, and put love first, and then I noticed the difference becomes unimportant! So even when I finally found a person here in my local church that disagreed on one of my favorite pet topics....they ended up being one of my most beloved of fellows in Christ. I must have prayed the Lord's Prayer that day!

 

[Halbhh]

(double post removed)