The Filioque

[Orthodoxy]

The "Filioque" is latin for "and the Son. This phrase was added offically by the Roman Church in 1054 ad without full consent of the Church thus the Roman Church cut itself off from the Original Faith delievered by the Saints.

The 381 ad Orthodox Confession of Faith concerning the Holy Spirit is:

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

The 1054 ad Roman Catholic confession of faith concerning the Holy Spirit is:

And 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 together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

The differances are profound. We have 2 versions of Jesus Christ. One version says the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and one says the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father "and the Son".

The Orthodox Christian position is that "all good gifts come from the Father of Lights" James 1:17.

The Orthodox position concerning Jesus Christ is that He eternally proceeds from the Father in His begotten nature.

The Orthodox position concerning the Holy Spirit is that He eternally proceeds from the Father in His procession.

Both proceed from the Father who all good gifts come from.

Now we must remember that the Protestant Reformation confesses the Roman Catholic 1054 ad "model" of the trinity and is rooted in this "belief". The Lutherans confess the Roman Catholic "holy spirit". The Anglicans confess the Roman Catholic "holy spirit". The major non denominational protestant churches confess the Roman Catholic "holy spirit". This theology is really a form of Sabellianism condemned by the 381 ad Creed. Fact is the 381 ad Creed specifically confesses what the Church has always believed.

Why do the Orthodox appear so hard headed and stubborn about this issue? Well it is not what we have always been taught. It is new and improved, innovation and unothodox. Why should we compromise on the plain words of Jesus Christ? Why should we be forced to compromise on the christian faith?

I believe the Protestant reformation is duped by this obvious change in the nature of God. The protestant faith will call the JWs a cult for making Jesus a mere man. The Protestants would condemn Nestorius for robbing Jesus of His Humanity. But altering the basic understanding of the CHurch concerning the nature of God goes unnoticed. The protestant reformation majors on the hate of Mary yet worships the same god as the Romans.

Here is a site to understand this "filioque" and how it changes the nature of God. This is not a flippant issue one can leave to others to decide nor one that can be ignored "it doesnt really matter". No we are to worship God and God alone thus it is imparitive we understand who is it we are directing our worship towards, the One God or an counterfiet imposter.

http://agrino.org/cyberdesert/Valentine.htm

In Love,

Orthodoxy

 

[Scotth1960]

The "Filioque" is latin for "and the Son. This phrase was added offically by the Roman Church in 1054 ad without full consent of the Church thus the Roman Church cut itself off from the Original Faith delievered by the Saints.

The 381 ad Orthodox Confession of Faith concerning the Holy Spirit is:

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

The 1054 ad Roman Catholic confession of faith concerning the Holy Spirit is:

And 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 together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

The differances are profound. We have 2 versions of Jesus Christ. One version says the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and one says the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father "and the Son".

The Orthodox Christian position is that "all good gifts come from the Father of Lights" James 1:17.

The Orthodox position concerning Jesus Christ is that He eternally proceeds from the Father in His begotten nature.

The Orthodox position concerning the Holy Spirit is that He eternally proceeds from the Father in His procession.

Both proceed from the Father who all good gifts come from.

Now we must remember that the Protestant Reformation confesses the Roman Catholic 1054 ad "model" of the trinity and is rooted in this "belief". The Lutherans confess the Roman Catholic "holy spirit". The Anglicans confess the Roman Catholic "holy spirit". The major non denominational protestant churches confess the Roman Catholic "holy spirit". This theology is really a form of Sabellianism condemned by the 381 ad Creed. Fact is the 381 ad Creed specifically confesses what the Church has always believed.

Why do the Orthodox appear so hard headed and stubborn about this issue? Well it is not what we have always been taught. It is new and improved, innovation and unothodox. Why should we compromise on the plain words of Jesus Christ? Why should we be forced to compromise on the christian faith?

I believe the Protestant reformation is duped by this obvious change in the nature of God. The protestant faith will call the JWs a cult for making Jesus a mere man. The Protestants would condemn Nestorius for robbing Jesus of His Humanity. But altering the basic understanding of the CHurch concerning the nature of God goes unnoticed. The protestant reformation majors on the hate of Mary yet worships the same god as the Romans.

Here is a site to understand this "filioque" and how it changes the nature of God. This is not a flippant issue one can leave to others to decide nor one that can be ignored "it doesnt really matter". No we are to worship God and God alone thus it is imparitive we understand who is it we are directing our worship towards, the One God or an counterfiet imposter.

CyberDesert -The Filioque: History and Criticism- T.R. Valentine

In Love,

Orthodoxy

Dear Orthodoxy, GOD BLESS YOU. Well said, well done. You said the matter regarding FILIOQUISM just about perfectly or perfectly for a beginning introduction to this complicated matter. Please see my posts under my username SCOTTH1960, re: "The Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit" by St. Photios and the book by A. Edward Siecienski, The FIlioque: History of a a Doctrinal Controversy. q.v.
GOD SAVE US IN CHRIST. AMEN.
Scott R. Harrington

 

[francisdesales]

The "Filioque" is latin for "and the Son. This phrase was added offically by the Roman Church in 1054 ad without full consent of the Church thus the Roman Church cut itself off from the Original Faith delievered by the Saints.

Oh boy... I can see where this is going, coupled with your anti-statue post.

In my experience in dealing with the filioque with the Orthodox, they have turned an obscure and esoteric matter into a key component of the faith, no doubt to justify their actions based upon more serious political and cultural issues during the 10th and 11th century.

"The Original Faith once delivered by the Saints?" Please. Which "saint" discussed this notion in the first 500 years of Church history???

Furthermore, you got your history wrong, the Filioque was not declared "dogma" until AFTER the Schism, beginning with the Fourth Lateran Council, in 1215. Eastern doctors present at these Councils agreed with the declaration. Simply put, the Orthodox and Latin Churches split over other issues and theology was an side issue.

Regards

 

[Scotth1960]

Oh boy... I can see where this is going, coupled with your anti-statue post.

In my experience in dealing with the filioque with the Orthodox, they have turned an obscure and esoteric matter into a key component of the faith, no doubt to justify their actions based upon more serious political and cultural issues during the 10th and 11th century.

"The Original Faith once delivered by the Saints?" Please. Which "saint" discussed this notion in the first 500 years of Church history???

Furthermore, you got your history wrong, the Filioque was not declared "dogma" until AFTER the Schism, beginning with the Fourth Lateran Council, in 1215. Eastern doctors present at these Councils agreed with the declaration. Simply put, the Orthodox and Latin Churches split over other issues and theology was an side issue.

Regards

Dear francisdesales, The Filioque was declared dogma in 1014 AD when the pope of Rome, Benedict VIII, I believe, began chanting the Filioque in the Latin mass. if we accept the theory that the pope of Rome has ultimate authority in all Christian things, then on his authority, the pope CHANGED the dogma of the Church of Rome from a non-Filioque theology to a Filioque theology. Thus, John Henry Newman would speak later of the "development of doctrine". The Catholic Church is always CHANGING what it believes, developing new doctrines and teachings and innovations. It's just that the Orthodox Church calls these innovations exactly what they are: heresies.
Not even pope Leo III went so far as to say FILIOQUE. He may have seen nothing wrong with it personally, but he didn't go with his own private opinion. HIS CONSCIENCE was BOUND by the ECUMENICAL COUNCIL (of 381 AD). And thus ST. LEO III LOVED THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC FAITH, WITHOUT THE FILIOQUE. IN ERIE PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Scotth1960]

Oh boy... I can see where this is going, coupled with your anti-statue post.

In my experience in dealing with the filioque with the Orthodox, they have turned an obscure and esoteric matter into a key component of the faith, no doubt to justify their actions based upon more serious political and cultural issues during the 10th and 11th century.

"The Original Faith once delivered by the Saints?" Please. Which "saint" discussed this notion in the first 500 years of Church history???

Furthermore, you got your history wrong, the Filioque was not declared "dogma" until AFTER the Schism, beginning with the Fourth Lateran Council, in 1215. Eastern doctors present at these Councils agreed with the declaration. Simply put, the Orthodox and Latin Churches split over other issues and theology was an side issue.

Regards

Dear francisdesales, I suppose YOU DON'T MEAN TO SAY that SOMETHING THAT JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD says is "an obscure and esoteric matter", Do you?
What CHRIST SAYS MATTERS. This is indeed a MATTER OF THEOLOGY (THE WORD OF GOD), not of POLITICS. CHARLEMAGNE MADE IT INTO POLITICS, AND THE ENEMY OF THE BYZANTINES WAS CHARLEMAGNE. IT IS CHARLEMAGNE'S FAULT THAT MUCH OF ROME FELL INTO ERROR. THEY WERE ALL AFRAID OF HIM.
IN ROME. IT IS THE FRANKISH CHURCH, THE GERMAN CHURCH, NOT THE ROMAN CHURCH. CHARLEMAGNE'S WILL TRIUMPHED IN ROME. AND THUS, "FILIOQUE, FILIOQUE, FILIOQUE ..." IT IS DISGUSTING! In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[francisdesales]

Dear francisdesales, I suppose YOU DON'T MEAN TO SAY that SOMETHING THAT JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD says is "an obscure and esoteric matter", Do you?
What CHRIST SAYS MATTERS. This is indeed a MATTER OF THEOLOGY (THE WORD OF GOD), not of POLITICS. CHARLEMAGNE MADE IT INTO POLITICS, AND THE ENEMY OF THE BYZANTINES WAS CHARLEMAGNE. IT IS CHARLEMAGNE'S FAULT THAT MUCH OF ROME FELL INTO ERROR. THEY WERE ALL AFRAID OF HIM.
IN ROME. IT IS THE FRANKISH CHURCH, THE GERMAN CHURCH, NOT THE ROMAN CHURCH. CHARLEMAGNE'S WILL TRIUMPHED IN ROME. AND THUS, "FILIOQUE, FILIOQUE, FILIOQUE ..." IT IS DISGUSTING! In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

What disgusts me is your rife hypocrisy. Jesus never said "ONLY THE FATHER SENDS THE SPIRIT". He says HE will send the Spirit and DOES send the Spirit in John 20. Grow up, Scott. Deal with it.

Jesus said to them again, "Peace be unto you. As the Father has sent me, even so send I you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit."

Unfortunately, Scott won't deal with this, because he prefers to live outside of truth. He himself states this - he thinks that the Orthodox is the truth, but refuses to join them. Nor will he confront the clear words of the Bible. Again and again I will post the words of Jesus so that way, people can know the type of person you are and to ignore your slander.

 

[Vic C.]

A friendly reminder:

9 - Please keep posts down to a respectable length and provide source and/or links for your info. We want to respect copyrighted material. Plus, you stand a better chance of getting your post read if it contains a link with an excerpt from source that's relative to your point.
Refrain from all caps and bold, large fonts. Hotlinking of photos is PROHIBITED! We have a thread which explains how to post a photo.

Thanks. :yes

 

[Scotth1960]

What disgusts me is your rife hypocrisy. Jesus never said "ONLY THE FATHER SENDS THE SPIRIT". He says HE will send the Spirit and DOES send the Spirit in John 20. Grow up, Scott. Deal with it.

Jesus said to them again, "Peace be unto you. As the Father has sent me, even so send I you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit."

Unfortunately, Scott won't deal with this, because he prefers to live outside of truth. He himself states this - he thinks that the Orthodox is the truth, but refuses to join them. Nor will he confront the clear words of the Bible. Again and again I will post the words of Jesus so that way, people can know the type of person you are and to ignore your slander.

Sir, I don't refuse to join the Orthodox. I just haven't received their sacraments yet. You are not stating truth if you think FILIOQUE is not heresy. The problem about this whole thing is that none of us knows exactly where the other is coming from. I hate living outside of the truth. But the truth is not Roman Catholic. Perhaps you should deal with your own cause, which is Roman Catholic. Why all the fuss about saying "and the Son" when a Council of the Catholic Church (381 AD) said, PROCEEDS FROM THE FATHER. Why are you so insistent that I say "AND THE SON", and that there is something wrong with me if I DON'T SAY THAT. What we do is between God and us. But if we are talking about truth, we are going to have to learn what John 15:26 says. FILIOQUE doesn't hold TRUE to this verse of the Bible. In Erie PA Scott Harrington

 

[Scotth1960]

Sir, I don't refuse to join the Orthodox. I just haven't received their sacraments yet. You are not stating truth if you think FILIOQUE is not heresy. The problem about this whole thing is that none of us knows exactly where the other is coming from. I hate living outside of the truth. But the truth is not Roman Catholic. Perhaps you should deal with your own cause, which is Roman Catholic. Why all the fuss about saying "and the Son" when a Council of the Catholic Church (381 AD) said, PROCEEDS FROM THE FATHER. Why are you so insistent that I say "AND THE SON", and that there is something wrong with me if I DON'T SAY THAT. What we do is between God and us. But if we are talking about truth, we are going to have to learn what John 15:26 says. FILIOQUE doesn't hold TRUE to this verse of the Bible. In Erie PA Scott Harrington

Friend. I never said, "Only the Father sends the Holy Spirit". You are committing the "mind reading fallacy". Both the Father and the Son send the Spirit from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father. From the Father alone.
You are becoming rude and mean toward me and I am going to end this discussion now. I don't take it personally. A lot of people probably don't like me.
Scott

 

[francisdesales]

Friend. I never said, "Only the Father sends the Holy Spirit". You are committing the "mind reading fallacy". Both the Father and the Son send the Spirit from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father. From the Father alone.
You are becoming rude and mean toward me and I am going to end this discussion now. I don't take it personally. A lot of people probably don't like me.
Scott

Proceeds from and sends forth are synonymous in the context of the verse.

 

[francisdesales]

Sir, I don't refuse to join the Orthodox. I just haven't received their sacraments yet. You are not stating truth if you think FILIOQUE is not heresy. The problem about this whole thing is that none of us knows exactly where the other is coming from. I hate living outside of the truth. But the truth is not Roman Catholic. Perhaps you should deal with your own cause, which is Roman Catholic. Why all the fuss about saying "and the Son" when a Council of the Catholic Church (381 AD) said, PROCEEDS FROM THE FATHER.

I am not making the fuss. Is someone else posting in your name???

Why are you so insistent that I say "AND THE SON", and that there is something wrong with me if I DON'T SAY THAT.

It doesn't matter to me whether you say "and the Son" or not. Neither is a mistake. You are the one making the big deal over it. I don't understand "and the Son" to mean two principles, since the Father and the Son have the same Divine Will. I understand it more as "and through the Son.

What we do is between God and us.

Then what exactly was your point in coming here and pronouncing all of your anathemas again??? In a polemic mood?

But if we are talking about truth, we are going to have to learn what John 15:26 says. FILIOQUE doesn't hold TRUE to this verse of the Bible.

You still ignore John 20. Even when I put it in giant bold letters. The Spirit issues forth from the Son of God, He BREATHES THE SPIRIT UPON THE DISCIPLES. There is no distinction here between "proceed from" or "send forth" here. Either would work, since the Spirit came out from the Son, the Spirit was not some external force or existence sent by the Son.

 

[Scotth1960]

Proceeds from and sends forth are synonymous in the context of the verse.

Dear francesdesales, I only have a 4 year college education, and even with my limited intelligence, I can tell when someone is not being honest with me. Send means send and proceed means proceed. Christ sends the Spirit within time, that is the temporal mission, and the Spirit proceeds in eternity FROM THE FATHER. To preserve the myth of papal infallibility, you logically must follow the myth of the Filioque. Thomas Aquinas said as much, and he practically "baptized Aristotle" as "the Philosopher" for the Roman Church. Aquinas was a man who tried to "know too much". Why Filioque is wrong is a great mystery, and none of us will ever understand it. We just need to take CHRIST AT HIS WORD. He SENDS THE SPIRIT. THE FATHER SENDS THE SPIRIT. THE SPIRIT PROCEEDS FROM THE FATHER. I really can't say anything else, you are losing patience with me, anyway. God forgive all of us. Amen.
In Erie PA

 

[Vic C.]

Scott, you have requested a 1 on 1 debate on this subject and no one stepped up. I see no reason why this had to be brought to the main Apologetics forum. We've had enough bad blood in the past between our RCC members and those members who disagree with RCC doctrine.

I don;t see the need to more arguing between Joe, our RCC member and other Orthodox members, like yourself.

I have to put this to rest now in the interest of civility.