OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 24, 2014, 12:06:06 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why Filioque Is a Christological Error  (Read 31541 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,965


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #720 on: July 07, 2011, 11:27:32 AM »

Actually, the fact that the Father and the Son are one in essence almost seems to make the filioque a logical necessity. If they are really one in their essence and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, then he must also proceed from the Son as a result of the oneness between the Father and the Son.

By this reasoning, the Holy Spirit must also beget the Son, since the Holy Spirit is also one in essence with the Father.

"Homoousios" does not erase distinctions between the hypostases.

I made the exact same argument on another forum! Consubstantiality is a property of essence while procession is a property of hypostasis.
Actually, that is not a good argument on your part, as the Holy Spirit is already distinguished From the Father by proceeding from Him, and from the Son because the Holy Spirit proceeds through Him.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,633



« Reply #721 on: July 07, 2011, 11:52:03 AM »

Actually, the fact that the Father and the Son are one in essence almost seems to make the filioque a logical necessity. If they are really one in their essence and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, then he must also proceed from the Son as a result of the oneness between the Father and the Son.

By this reasoning, the Holy Spirit must also beget the Son, since the Holy Spirit is also one in essence with the Father.

"Homoousios" does not erase distinctions between the hypostases.

I made the exact same argument on another forum! Consubstantiality is a property of essence while procession is a property of hypostasis.
Actually, that is not a good argument on your part, as the Holy Spirit is already distinguished From the Father by proceeding from Him, and from the Son because the Holy Spirit proceeds through Him.
The hypostasis of the Spirit is defined by His procession from the Father.  Procession through the Son does not define the hypostasis of the Spirit (filioque says it does, which is why it is a heresy), but rather describes the periochoresis of the Son and the Spirit.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,633



« Reply #722 on: July 07, 2011, 12:15:10 PM »

Btw, filioque isn't really a Christological error, its a Pneumatological one.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #723 on: July 07, 2011, 12:16:53 PM »

The hypostasis of the Spirit is defined by His procession from the Father.  Procession through the Son does not define the hypostasis of the Spirit (filioque says it does, which is why it is a heresy),

This is quite false.  You and St. Photius make the same error.  

The Catholic Church explicitly teaches that filioque is not a statement concerning the source of the Holy Sprit, and explicitly teaches that the Father is the source of all divinity.

So you are in error here.  Just another way in which you set out to distort the teaching of the Catholic Church, the Church of my baptism.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,633



« Reply #724 on: July 07, 2011, 12:24:26 PM »

The hypostasis of the Spirit is defined by His procession from the Father.  Procession through the Son does not define the hypostasis of the Spirit (filioque says it does, which is why it is a heresy),

This is quite false.  You and St. Photius make the same error.
Glad you put me in the same camp with the Pillar of Orthodoxy, showing that my statement is quite true.

The Catholic Church explicitly teaches that filioque is not a statement concerning the source of the Holy Sprit, and explicitly teaches that the Father is the source of all divinity.
The Catholic Church doesn't teach filioque at all.

As for the Vatican, it is quite good at saying one thing and teaching another.

So you are in error here.

Not according to the Orthodox Faith that the Catholic Church confesses.

Just another way in which you set out to distort the teaching of the Catholic Church,
I never distort the teachings of the Vatican, let alone the Catholic Church.  As to the Vatican, is it possible to distort a distortion?

the Church of my baptism.
Not if the Vatican installed the priest who baptized and your sponsors confessed the filioque (or communed with those who did), it isn't.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #725 on: July 07, 2011, 12:33:56 PM »

The hypostasis of the Spirit is defined by His procession from the Father.  Procession through the Son does not define the hypostasis of the Spirit (filioque says it does, which is why it is a heresy),

Nonetheless the statement above is false.
Logged

Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,080


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #726 on: July 07, 2011, 12:50:54 PM »

What does "as from one principle" mean here?

Quote
The Catechism of Trent states:

"With regard to the words immediately succeeding: who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, the faithful are to be taught that the Holy Ghost proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son, as from one principle. This truth is proposed for our belief by the Creed of the Church, from which no Christian may depart, and is confirmed by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures and of Councils."

Quote
Florentine states:

In the name of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, we
define, with the approval of this holy universal council of Florence,
that the following truth of faith shall be believed and accepted by
all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the Holy Spirit is
eternally from the Father and the Son, and has His essence [οὐσίαν]
and His subsistent being [ύπαρχτιχόν είναι] from the Father together
with the Son, and proceeds [ἐκπορεύεται] from both eternally as from
one principle [μίᾶς άρχής] and a single spiration. We declare that
when Holy Doctors and Fathers say that the Holy Spirit proceeds
[ἐκπορεύεσθαι] from the Father through the Son, this bears the sense
that thereby also the Son should be signified, according to the Greeks
indeed as cause [αἰτίαν], and according to the Latins as principle
[άρχήν] of the subsistence [ύπἁρξεως] of the Holy Spirit, just like the
Father.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2011, 01:04:47 PM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,633



« Reply #727 on: July 07, 2011, 01:33:43 PM »

The hypostasis of the Spirit is defined by His procession from the Father.  Procession through the Son does not define the hypostasis of the Spirit (filioque says it does, which is why it is a heresy),

Nonetheless the statement above is false.
No, this statement below is false:
Nonetheless the statement above is false.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #728 on: July 07, 2011, 01:44:02 PM »

What does "as from one principle" mean here?

Quote
The Catechism of Trent states:

"With regard to the words immediately succeeding: who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, the faithful are to be taught that the Holy Ghost proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son, as from one principle. This truth is proposed for our belief by the Creed of the Church, from which no Christian may depart, and is confirmed by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures and of Councils."

Quote
Florentine states:

In the name of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, we
define, with the approval of this holy universal council of Florence,
that the following truth of faith shall be believed and accepted by
all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the Holy Spirit is
eternally from the Father and the Son, and has His essence [οὐσίαν]
and His subsistent being [ύπαρχτιχόν είναι] from the Father together
with the Son, and proceeds [ἐκπορεύεται] from both eternally as from
one principle [μίᾶς άρχής] and a single spiration. We declare that
when Holy Doctors and Fathers say that the Holy Spirit proceeds
[ἐκπορεύεσθαι] from the Father through the Son, this bears the sense
that thereby also the Son should be signified, according to the Greeks
indeed as cause [αἰτίαν], and according to the Latins as principle
[άρχήν] of the subsistence [ύπἁρξεως] of the Holy Spirit, just like the
Father.


"As from one principle" is the language that references the scriptural description of the relationship between the Father and the Son.  The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.

So that the statement made by Isa above is false.

The Catholic Church [papal] explicitly teaches that the Father is the cause of all divinity.

Logged

Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,080


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #729 on: July 07, 2011, 02:00:44 PM »

  The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.
The Son doesn't share omniscience with the Father.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,393


« Reply #730 on: July 07, 2011, 02:03:04 PM »

  The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.
The Son doesn't share omniscience with the Father.
How do you figure that?
Logged
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,080


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #731 on: July 07, 2011, 02:12:52 PM »

  The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.
The Son doesn't share omniscience with the Father.
How do you figure that?
Matthew 24:36
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #732 on: July 07, 2011, 02:19:41 PM »

 The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.
The Son doesn't share omniscience with the Father.
How do you figure that?
Matthew 24:36

How many ways is that pericope translated?

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/catena1.ii.xxiv.html

Quote
36. “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

37. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

38. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

39. And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

40. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

41. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.”

Chrys.: The Lord having described all the tokens that shall precede His coming, and brought His discourse to the832 very doors, yet would not name the day; “Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no not the Angels Of heaven, but my Father only.”

Jerome: In some Latin copies is added here, “neither the Son:” but in the Greek copies, and particularly those of Adamantius and Pierius, it is not found. [ed. note: The addition is found in a very few Greek MSS., and ancient versions, in Chrys. and Theophylact. It is in the Old Italic version, and is acknowledged by Hilary, Ambrose, and Pseudo-Chrys.; but the preponderance of evidence is greatly against it, and it is not admitted into the text of the G. T. by any editors. It probably crept in from the parallel passage in S. Mark. Adamantius is a surname of Origen. Pierius was a presbyter of Alexandria in the third century, whose learning occasioned him to be styled ‘Origen the younger.’] But because it is read in some, it seems to require our notice.

Remig.: And Mark has the addition. [Mark 13:32]

Jerome: Whereat Arius and Eunomius rejoice greatly; for say they, He who knows and He who is ignorant cannot be both equal. Against these we answer shortly; Seeing that Jesus, that is, The Word of God, made all times, (for “By him all things were made, and without him was not any thing made that was made, [1 John 1:3]) and that the day of judgment must be in all time, by what reasoning can He who knows the whole be shewn to be ignorant of a part?

This we will further say; Which is the greater, the knowledge of the Father, or the knowledge of the judgment? If He knows the greater, how can He be ignorant of the less?

Hilary: And has indeed God the Father denied the knowledge of that day to the Son, when He has declared, “All things are committed to me of my Father?” [Luke 10:22] but if any thing has been denied, all things are not committed to Him.

Jerome: Having then shewn that the Son of God cannot be ignorant of the day of the consummation, we must now show a cause why He should be said to be ignorant. When after the resurrection He is demanded concerning this day by the Apostles, He answers more openly; “It is not for you to know the times or the seasons which the Father has put in his own power.” [Acts 1:7] Wherein He shews that Himself knows, but that it was not expedient for the Apostles to know, that being in uncertainty of the coming of their Judge, they should live every day as though they were to be judged that day.

Aug., de Trin., i, 12: When He says here, “Knows not,” He means, ‘makes others not to know;’ i.e. He knew not then, so as to tell His disciples; as it was said to Abraham, “Now I know that thou fearest God;” [Gen 22:19] i.e. ‘Now have I caused that thou shouldest know,’ because by the temptation he came to know himself.

Aug., Serm., 97, 1: That833 He says that the “Father knoweth,” implies that in the Father the Son also knows. For what can there be in time which was not made by the Word, seeing that time itself was made by the Word!

Aug., Lib. 83, Quaest. Q60: That the Father alone knows may be well understood in the above-mentioned manner of knowing, that He makes the Son to know; but the Son is said not to know, because be does not make men to know.

Origen: Otherwise; So long as the Church which is Christ’s body knows not that day and hour, so long the Son Himself is said not to know that day and hour. The word “know” is used according to its proper usual meaning in Scripture. The Apostle speaks of Christ, as “him who knew no sin,” [1 Cor 5:21] i.e. sinned not. The knowledge of that day and hour the Son reserves in store for the fellow-heirs of the promise, that all may know at once, i.e. in the day when it shall come upon them, “what things God hath prepared for them that love him.” [1 Cor 2:9]

Raban.: I have read also in some one’s book, that “the Son” here is not to be taken of the Only-begotten, but of the adopted, for that He would not have put the Angels before the Only-begotten Son, saying, “Not the Angels of heaven, neither the Son.” [ed. note: See further on this Passage, Hil. de Trin. ix. 58, cited in the Catena on Mark, xiii. 32, and Basil adv. Eunom. iv.]

Aug., Ep. 199, 16: The Gospel then says, “Of that day and hour knoweth no man;” but you say, That neither the month nor the year of His coming can be known. This exactness of yours up to this point seems as if you meant that the year could not be known, but that the week or the decade of years might be known, as though it was possible to fix or assign it to some seven, ten, or a hundred, or some number of years more or less. If you allow that you cannot so limit it, you think with me.

Chrys.: That you may perceive that it is not owing to ignorance that He is silent of the day and hour of the judgment, He brings forward another token, “As it was in the days of Noe, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be.” By this He means that He shall come sudden and unlooked for, and while men are taking their pleasure; of which Paul also speaks, “When they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them.” [1 Thess 5:3]
« Last Edit: July 07, 2011, 02:26:48 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,080


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #733 on: July 07, 2011, 02:25:52 PM »

  The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.
The Son doesn't share omniscience with the Father.
How do you figure that?
Matthew 24:36

How many ways is that pericope translated?
You said that the "Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father". I show that the Son's words say otherwise.

How this verse is subsequently interpreted, is another issue.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #734 on: July 07, 2011, 02:29:05 PM »

  The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.
The Son doesn't share omniscience with the Father.
How do you figure that?
Matthew 24:36

How many ways is that pericope translated?
You said that the "Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father". I show that the Son's words say otherwise.

How this verse is subsequently interpreted, is another issue.

The question is not that simple because not all of the Fathers believe that the part of the text that is contradictory actually belongs there since there are other texts that agree fully with what I said.

So you just tossed out a well chewed bone like it's news...but it's not.
Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,965


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #735 on: July 07, 2011, 02:30:03 PM »

What does "as from one principle" mean here?

Quote
The Catechism of Trent states:

"With regard to the words immediately succeeding: who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, the faithful are to be taught that the Holy Ghost proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son, as from one principle. This truth is proposed for our belief by the Creed of the Church, from which no Christian may depart, and is confirmed by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures and of Councils."

Quote
Florentine states:

In the name of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, we
define, with the approval of this holy universal council of Florence,
that the following truth of faith shall be believed and accepted by
all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the Holy Spirit is
eternally from the Father and the Son, and has His essence [οὐσίαν]
and His subsistent being [ύπαρχτιχόν είναι] from the Father together
with the Son, and proceeds [ἐκπορεύεται] from both eternally as from
one principle [μίᾶς άρχής] and a single spiration. We declare that
when Holy Doctors and Fathers say that the Holy Spirit proceeds
[ἐκπορεύεσθαι] from the Father through the Son, this bears the sense
that thereby also the Son should be signified, according to the Greeks
indeed as cause [αἰτίαν], and according to the Latins as principle
[άρχήν] of the subsistence [ύπἁρξεως] of the Holy Spirit, just like the
Father.

It means that the Son doesn't act as a source of the Holy Spirit on his own. Rather, the Father is the source, and the Son, collaborates in a subordinate way, in the procession of the Holy Spirit.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,393


« Reply #736 on: July 07, 2011, 02:37:33 PM »

  The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.
The Son doesn't share omniscience with the Father.
How do you figure that?
Matthew 24:36
Yes, but does that mean that the Son eternally does not know the day or the hour of the apocolypse, or does that just mean He did not know while on earth? I find it hard to believe that He still does not know now that He is at the right hand of the Father.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #737 on: July 07, 2011, 02:42:08 PM »

  The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father...accept for that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity...the Father, and only the Father is that.
The Son doesn't share omniscience with the Father.
How do you figure that?
Matthew 24:36
Yes, but does that mean that the Son eternally does not know the day or the hour of the apocolypse, or does that just mean He did not know while on earth? I find it hard to believe that He still does not know now that He is at the right hand of the Father.

IF you look back up through the responses you'll find something from the holy fathers: offering a bit of what they had to say about this particular chapter and verse in Matthew.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,633



« Reply #738 on: July 07, 2011, 03:27:39 PM »

What does "as from one principle" mean here?

Quote
The Catechism of Trent states:

"With regard to the words immediately succeeding: who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, the faithful are to be taught that the Holy Ghost proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son, as from one principle. This truth is proposed for our belief by the Creed of the Church, from which no Christian may depart, and is confirmed by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures and of Councils."

Quote
Florentine states:

In the name of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, we
define, with the approval of this holy universal council of Florence,
that the following truth of faith shall be believed and accepted by
all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the Holy Spirit is
eternally from the Father and the Son, and has His essence [οὐσίαν]
and His subsistent being [ύπαρχτιχόν είναι] from the Father together
with the Son, and proceeds [ἐκπορεύεται] from both eternally as from
one principle [μίᾶς άρχής] and a single spiration. We declare that
when Holy Doctors and Fathers say that the Holy Spirit proceeds
[ἐκπορεύεσθαι] from the Father through the Son, this bears the sense
that thereby also the Son should be signified, according to the Greeks
indeed as cause [αἰτίαν], and according to the Latins as principle
[άρχήν] of the subsistence [ύπἁρξεως] of the Holy Spirit, just like the
Father.

It means that the Son doesn't act as a source of the Holy Spirit on his own. Rather, the Father is the source, and the Son, collaborates in a subordinate way, in the procession of the Holy Spirit.
Thus the filioque blaspheme subordinates the Son and the Spirit.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,633



« Reply #739 on: July 07, 2011, 03:35:57 PM »

What does "as from one principle" mean here?

Quote
The Catechism of Trent states:

"With regard to the words immediately succeeding: who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, the faithful are to be taught that the Holy Ghost proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son, as from one principle. This truth is proposed for our belief by the Creed of the Church, from which no Christian may depart, and is confirmed by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures and of Councils."

Quote
Florentine states:

In the name of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, we
define, with the approval of this holy universal council of Florence,
that the following truth of faith shall be believed and accepted by
all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the Holy Spirit is
eternally from the Father and the Son, and has His essence [οὐσίαν]
and His subsistent being [ύπαρχτιχόν είναι] from the Father together
with the Son, and proceeds [ἐκπορεύεται] from both eternally as from
one principle [μίᾶς άρχής] and a single spiration. We declare that
when Holy Doctors and Fathers say that the Holy Spirit proceeds
[ἐκπορεύεσθαι] from the Father through the Son, this bears the sense
that thereby also the Son should be signified, according to the Greeks
indeed as cause [αἰτίαν], and according to the Latins as principle
[άρχήν] of the subsistence [ύπἁρξεως] of the Holy Spirit, just like the
Father.


"As from one principle" is the language that references the scriptural description of the relationship between the Father and the Son.
 No, the "as from one principle" usurps the scriptural description between the Father and the Son.

The Son, by his own words, shares everything with the Father
not His Own begetting, nor the procession of the Spirit.

...accept
except?

or that the Son is not revealed as the cause of all divinity
and hence the Spirit does not proceed from Him.

...the Father, and only the Father is that.
Which is how we know that the Spirit proceeds from Him alone.

So that the statement made by Isa above is false.
It is the Gospel Truth.  That you want to preach another gospel doesn't change that.

The Catholic Church [papal]


Quote
explicitly teaches that the Father is the cause of all divinity.
The Catholic Church does so teach.

The Vatican teaches jesuitry to obfuscate what it says.


[/quote]
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Tags: filioque 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17   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 0.131 seconds with 47 queries.