OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 22, 2014, 01:22:28 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Filioque Clause  (Read 1127 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Kefx
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


Place Personal Text Here


« on: August 30, 2003, 12:00:44 AM »

In 1995 the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity released a document at the request of the Pope entitled: "The Father as the Source of the Whole Trinity - The Procession of the Holy Spirit in Greek and Latin Traditions"

Below are a couple of links to it.  Petersnet isn't working for me otherwise I wouldn't being using a geocities site as source for this.
http://www.petersnet.net/browse/1176.htm
http://www.geocities.com/athens/atrium/8410/filioque.html

From the the document:
Quote
The Catholic Church acknowledges the conciliar, ecumenical, normative, and irrevocable value, as expression of the one common faith of the Church and of all Christians, of the Symbol professed in Greek at Constantinople in 381 by the Second Ecumenical Council. No profession of faith peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition can contradict this expression of the faith taught by the undivided Church.

It gives an explanation of how the Catholic understanding of the Trinity (with filioque) harmonizes with the Orthodox understanding the Trinity (without filioque).

A few questions:

1. Is the explanation of Orthodox theology in the matter correct (granting the document isn't that long)?  

2. Does the explanation for the proper context in which the filioque must be understood go towards solving the problem?

3. Are there other issues involved with the filioque clause?

Kefx
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2003, 01:13:48 AM »

The document seems to ignore the teachings of the Synod of Blachernae (1285) on the filioque.  I don't have time to go into it now, but you could check Crisis in Byzantium: the Filioque Controversy in the Patriarchate of Gregory II of Cyprus by Aristedeis Papadakis for full coverage.

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2003, 05:58:19 AM »

Don't forget that there are two issues involved with the filioque clause:

1. That it was added to the creed without the concensus and agreement of an ecumenical council.

2. That it is in error or has the potential to lead to error (the wording of the creed was very carefully chosen so that it could NOT be misinterpreted).

Those articles only deal with the latter issue which is considered the more minor of the two in Orthodoxy.

unworthy John.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.041 seconds with 30 queries.