Author Topic: Keep the Filioque  (Read 63343 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,332
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #540 on: May 03, 2015, 10:31:51 AM »
The filioque has been part of the faith since the beginning. The western fathers have always taught it explicitly and ecumenical councils praise these fathers explicitly and specifically, as true expressions of the orthodox faith concerning the trinity... like St Hilary for example yet he explicitly taught the filioque

You made this point about St. Hilary over a year ago, and you were refuted:
Catholic apologists like to play the "church Fathers" game which proves nothing.None of the early church Fathers are espousing the Latin's filioque, that the Father and Son are the eternal source of the Holy Spirit. They speak of the Orthodox understanding of the Son's role in the temporal procession of the Holy Spirit. St .Hilary of Poitiers is an example: " In the fact that before times eternal your(the Father's) only begotten Son was born of you, when we put an end to every ambiguity of words and difficulty of understanding, there remains only this: he was born. So too, even if I do not gasp it in my understanding, I hold fast in my consciousness to the fact that your Holy Spirit is from Him THROUGH HIM." Maximus the Confessor: 'By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten.

The filioque addition goes against the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils. The 3rd Ecumenical Council condemns changes to the Creed. Canon VII. The filioque was added by a local council, Toledo, and even after 400 years after Toledo Rome condemned anyone from adding it due to it not being seen as Orthodox.

"From" and "through" are one and the same as the Catholic Church explicitly teaches or else how do you reconcile what St. Hilary also said here :

Quote
Hilary of Poitiers

"Concerning the Holy Spirit . . . it is not necessary to speak of him who must be acknowledged, who is from the Father and the Son, his sources (The Trinity 2:29)

No need to reconcile anything, for St. Hilary wrote in that passage, "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est." To read the ablative, "Patre et Filio auctoribus" as being an ablative of separation (which is how the two translations you gave are interpreting it) is questionable grammatically, because to use the ablative in such a manner without some preposition (ab, ex, de, etc.) or verb signalling motion away from or lack or want would be highly unusual. Likewise, to read it as an ablative of origin or descent would also be unusual (also possibly the interpretation of those who made the translations you provided), as there is no verb in the clause which signals origination or birth or any preposition which signals that this is the sense in which the ablative is used. It would be far more reasonable to read it as an ablative of means or of cause (both of which are not preceded by a preposition), such that the Father and the Son are the cause or means by which the Holy Spirit is to be believed, leading to Siecienski's suggested reading of, "we are bound to confess him on the evidence of the Father and the Son."

Since you're making the same argument again, it seems safe to say that you're intentionally lying.
Quote
“A goose to hatch the Crystal Egg after an Eagle had half-hatched it! Aye, aye, to be sure, that’s right,” said the Old Woman of Beare. “And now you must go find out what happened to it. Go now, and when you come back I will give you your name.”
- from The King of Ireland's Son, by Padraic Colum

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,022
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #541 on: May 03, 2015, 01:06:15 PM »
The filioque has been part of the faith since the beginning. The western fathers have always taught it explicitly and ecumenical councils praise these fathers explicitly and specifically, as true expressions of the orthodox faith concerning the trinity... like St Hilary for example yet he explicitly taught the filioque

You made this point about St. Hilary over a year ago, and you were refuted:
Catholic apologists like to play the "church Fathers" game which proves nothing.None of the early church Fathers are espousing the Latin's filioque, that the Father and Son are the eternal source of the Holy Spirit. They speak of the Orthodox understanding of the Son's role in the temporal procession of the Holy Spirit. St .Hilary of Poitiers is an example: " In the fact that before times eternal your(the Father's) only begotten Son was born of you, when we put an end to every ambiguity of words and difficulty of understanding, there remains only this: he was born. So too, even if I do not gasp it in my understanding, I hold fast in my consciousness to the fact that your Holy Spirit is from Him THROUGH HIM." Maximus the Confessor: 'By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten.

The filioque addition goes against the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils. The 3rd Ecumenical Council condemns changes to the Creed. Canon VII. The filioque was added by a local council, Toledo, and even after 400 years after Toledo Rome condemned anyone from adding it due to it not being seen as Orthodox.

"From" and "through" are one and the same as the Catholic Church explicitly teaches or else how do you reconcile what St. Hilary also said here :

Quote
Hilary of Poitiers

"Concerning the Holy Spirit . . . it is not necessary to speak of him who must be acknowledged, who is from the Father and the Son, his sources (The Trinity 2:29)

No need to reconcile anything, for St. Hilary wrote in that passage, "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est." To read the ablative, "Patre et Filio auctoribus" as being an ablative of separation (which is how the two translations you gave are interpreting it) is questionable grammatically, because to use the ablative in such a manner without some preposition (ab, ex, de, etc.) or verb signalling motion away from or lack or want would be highly unusual. Likewise, to read it as an ablative of origin or descent would also be unusual (also possibly the interpretation of those who made the translations you provided), as there is no verb in the clause which signals origination or birth or any preposition which signals that this is the sense in which the ablative is used. It would be far more reasonable to read it as an ablative of means or of cause (both of which are not preceded by a preposition), such that the Father and the Son are the cause or means by which the Holy Spirit is to be believed, leading to Siecienski's suggested reading of, "we are bound to confess him on the evidence of the Father and the Son."

Since you're making the same argument again, it seems safe to say that you're intentionally lying.

Lol as if st Hilary has one quote teaching the filioque? Nevermind that all that is said there is quite speculative in its explanation and really goes against all the various translations of the passage in question. I guess this one man knows better than all the translators who translated the passage in nearly  identical ways as to the way it was presented in my quote. But to some, logic is overrated you know... St Hilary teaches the filioque in numerous places.  :

"Concerning the Holy Spirit I ought not to be silent, and yet I have no need to speak; still, for the sake of those who are in ignorance, I cannot refrain. There is no need to speak, because we are bound to confess Him, proceeding, as He does, from Father and Son."

"Accordingly He receives from the Son, Who is both sent by Him, and proceeds from the Father. Now I ask whether to receive from the Son is the same thing as to proceed from the Father. But if one believes that there is a difference between receiving from the Son and proceeding from the Father, surely to receive from the Son and to receive from the Father will be regarded as one and the same thing."

There are other instances of him teaching the filioque. Even Eastern Orthodox writers such as Pelikan admit  that St. Augustine derived his notion of the  procession of the Holy Spirit from St. Hilary of Poitiers, who also wrote a treatise called The Trinity.

Pelikan says this of St. Hilary's work:
Quote
"For although he was still somewhat equivocal in his doctrine of the full deity of the Holy Spirit, he was more explicit in his doctrine of the Holy Spirit as 'proceeding from the Father and the Son
« Last Edit: May 03, 2015, 01:26:21 PM by Wandile »
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today


You are welcome to send me private messages but I don't post publicly anymore

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,647
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #542 on: May 03, 2015, 02:09:48 PM »
YO, Look, The west wants to keep the Filiioque Right?  The East wants to keep the Creed in the Original approved form Right?
Whats the problem?  We know that we belong to THE Church and that's all that matters.  They want their addition .......so be it. Let'm keep it.

Offline xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,321
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #543 on: May 03, 2015, 02:13:06 PM »
YO, Look, The west wants to keep the Filiioque Right?  The East wants to keep the Creed in the Original approved form Right?
Whats the problem?  We know that we belong to THE Church and that's all that matters.  They want their addition .......so be it. Let'm keep it.

Indeed. The Catholic Church holds the faith of Nicaea, while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.
This profile is defunct as of 11/8/2017. I created it before Orthodoxy, and have used it after Orthodoxy.

I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

I will likely lurk on this forum under a different name.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Laser Basileus.
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,707
  • St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus, pray for us!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #544 on: May 03, 2015, 02:41:21 PM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,879
  • Excelsior
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #545 on: May 03, 2015, 02:48:55 PM »
YO, Look, The west wants to keep the Filiioque Right?  The East wants to keep the Creed in the Original approved form Right?
Whats the problem?  We know that we belong to THE Church and that's all that matters.  They want their addition .......so be it. Let'm keep it.

Indeed. The Catholic Church holds the faith of Nicaea, while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Bzzzt. Thanks for playing!
My only weakness is, well, never mind

Offline xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,321
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #546 on: May 03, 2015, 03:05:24 PM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Quote
CCC 841

« Propositum salutis et eos amplectitur, qui Creatorem agnoscunt, inter quos imprimis musulmanos, qui fidem Abrahae se tenere profitentes, nobiscum Deum adorant unicum, misericordem, homines die novissimo iudicaturum »

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
This profile is defunct as of 11/8/2017. I created it before Orthodoxy, and have used it after Orthodoxy.

I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

I will likely lurk on this forum under a different name.

Offline Wyatt

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,465
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Latin Church
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #547 on: May 03, 2015, 03:55:50 PM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Quote
CCC 841

« Propositum salutis et eos amplectitur, qui Creatorem agnoscunt, inter quos imprimis musulmanos, qui fidem Abrahae se tenere profitentes, nobiscum Deum adorant unicum, misericordem, homines die novissimo iudicaturum »

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
You have brought up that nonsense in the private forum too and have been corrected on its meaning. Now you are just wanting to unfairly attack our Church.

Offline xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,321
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #548 on: May 03, 2015, 04:01:43 PM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Quote
CCC 841

« Propositum salutis et eos amplectitur, qui Creatorem agnoscunt, inter quos imprimis musulmanos, qui fidem Abrahae se tenere profitentes, nobiscum Deum adorant unicum, misericordem, homines die novissimo iudicaturum »

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
You have brought up that nonsense in the private forum too and have been corrected on its meaning. Now you are just wanting to unfairly attack our Church.

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.
This profile is defunct as of 11/8/2017. I created it before Orthodoxy, and have used it after Orthodoxy.

I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

I will likely lurk on this forum under a different name.

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,941
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #549 on: May 03, 2015, 04:55:27 PM »
The filioque has been part of the faith since the beginning. The western fathers have always taught it explicitly and ecumenical councils praise these fathers explicitly and specifically, as true expressions of the orthodox faith concerning the trinity... like St Hilary for example yet he explicitly taught the filioque

You made this point about St. Hilary over a year ago, and you were refuted:
Catholic apologists like to play the "church Fathers" game which proves nothing.None of the early church Fathers are espousing the Latin's filioque, that the Father and Son are the eternal source of the Holy Spirit. They speak of the Orthodox understanding of the Son's role in the temporal procession of the Holy Spirit. St .Hilary of Poitiers is an example: " In the fact that before times eternal your(the Father's) only begotten Son was born of you, when we put an end to every ambiguity of words and difficulty of understanding, there remains only this: he was born. So too, even if I do not gasp it in my understanding, I hold fast in my consciousness to the fact that your Holy Spirit is from Him THROUGH HIM." Maximus the Confessor: 'By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten.

The filioque addition goes against the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils. The 3rd Ecumenical Council condemns changes to the Creed. Canon VII. The filioque was added by a local council, Toledo, and even after 400 years after Toledo Rome condemned anyone from adding it due to it not being seen as Orthodox.

"From" and "through" are one and the same as the Catholic Church explicitly teaches or else how do you reconcile what St. Hilary also said here :

Quote
Hilary of Poitiers

"Concerning the Holy Spirit . . . it is not necessary to speak of him who must be acknowledged, who is from the Father and the Son, his sources (The Trinity 2:29)

No need to reconcile anything, for St. Hilary wrote in that passage, "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est." To read the ablative, "Patre et Filio auctoribus" as being an ablative of separation (which is how the two translations you gave are interpreting it) is questionable grammatically, because to use the ablative in such a manner without some preposition (ab, ex, de, etc.) or verb signalling motion away from or lack or want would be highly unusual. Likewise, to read it as an ablative of origin or descent would also be unusual (also possibly the interpretation of those who made the translations you provided), as there is no verb in the clause which signals origination or birth or any preposition which signals that this is the sense in which the ablative is used. It would be far more reasonable to read it as an ablative of means or of cause (both of which are not preceded by a preposition), such that the Father and the Son are the cause or means by which the Holy Spirit is to be believed, leading to Siecienski's suggested reading of, "we are bound to confess him on the evidence of the Father and the Son."

Since you're making the same argument again, it seems safe to say that you're intentionally lying.

Lol as if st Hilary has one quote teaching the filioque? Nevermind that all that is said there is quite speculative in its explanation and really goes against all the various translations of the passage in question. I guess this one man knows better than all the translators who translated the passage in nearly  identical ways as to the way it was presented in my quote. But to some, logic is overrated you know... St Hilary teaches the filioque in numerous places.  :

"Concerning the Holy Spirit I ought not to be silent, and yet I have no need to speak; still, for the sake of those who are in ignorance, I cannot refrain. There is no need to speak, because we are bound to confess Him, proceeding, as He does, from Father and Son."

"Accordingly He receives from the Son, Who is both sent by Him, and proceeds from the Father. Now I ask whether to receive from the Son is the same thing as to proceed from the Father. But if one believes that there is a difference between receiving from the Son and proceeding from the Father, surely to receive from the Son and to receive from the Father will be regarded as one and the same thing."

There are other instances of him teaching the filioque. Even Eastern Orthodox writers such as Pelikan admit  that St. Augustine derived his notion of the  procession of the Holy Spirit from St. Hilary of Poitiers, who also wrote a treatise called The Trinity.

Pelikan says this of St. Hilary's work:
Quote
"For although he was still somewhat equivocal in his doctrine of the full deity of the Holy Spirit, he was more explicit in his doctrine of the Holy Spirit as 'proceeding from the Father and the Son

Which word in "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est" means "proceeds"?
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Laser Basileus.
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,707
  • St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus, pray for us!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #550 on: May 03, 2015, 04:59:10 PM »
Which word in "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est" means "proceeds"?

I don't like the word "auctor"  either when describing inter-trinitarian relations. Sounds too ambiguous.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2015, 04:59:36 PM by Cyrillic »

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,941
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #551 on: May 03, 2015, 05:14:31 PM »
Which word in "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est" means "proceeds"?

I don't like the word "auctor"  either when describing inter-trinitarian relations. Sounds too ambiguous.

It sounds very pneumatomachian, doesn't it? God is the auctor of creation. Are we supposed to believe that the staunchly trinitarian St. Hilary wished for us to confess the Father and Son as being the auctores of the Holy Spirit?
« Last Edit: May 03, 2015, 05:15:58 PM by Cavaradossi »
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Laser Basileus.
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,707
  • St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus, pray for us!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #552 on: May 03, 2015, 05:17:50 PM »
Which word in "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est" means "proceeds"?

I don't like the word "auctor"  either when describing inter-trinitarian relations. Sounds too ambiguous.

It sounds very pneumatomachian, doesn't it? God is the auctor of creation. Are we supposed to believe that the staunchly trinitarian St. Hilary wished for us to confess the Father and Son as being the auctores of the Holy Spirit?

It might make more sense if it's about the temporal sending of the Holy Spirit.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2015, 05:17:56 PM by Cyrillic »

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,941
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #553 on: May 03, 2015, 05:20:37 PM »
Which word in "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est" means "proceeds"?

I don't like the word "auctor"  either when describing inter-trinitarian relations. Sounds too ambiguous.

It sounds very pneumatomachian, doesn't it? God is the auctor of creation. Are we supposed to believe that the staunchly trinitarian St. Hilary wished for us to confess the Father and Son as being the auctores of the Holy Spirit?

It might make more sense if it's about the temporal sending of the Holy Spirit.

Or auctoribus is being used in the sense of the guarantors or promoters by Whom we are to confess the Spirit. It really is the most sensible reading of the passage.
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Laser Basileus.
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,707
  • St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus, pray for us!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #554 on: May 03, 2015, 05:23:49 PM »
Which word in "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est" means "proceeds"?

I don't like the word "auctor"  either when describing inter-trinitarian relations. Sounds too ambiguous.

It sounds very pneumatomachian, doesn't it? God is the auctor of creation. Are we supposed to believe that the staunchly trinitarian St. Hilary wished for us to confess the Father and Son as being the auctores of the Holy Spirit?

It might make more sense if it's about the temporal sending of the Holy Spirit.

Or auctoribus is being used in the sense of the guarantors or promoters by Whom we are to confess the Spirit. It really is the most sensible reading of the passage.

I've found a book that explains this passage. It makes sense.

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,941
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #555 on: May 03, 2015, 05:32:25 PM »
Which word in "qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est" means "proceeds"?

I don't like the word "auctor"  either when describing inter-trinitarian relations. Sounds too ambiguous.

It sounds very pneumatomachian, doesn't it? God is the auctor of creation. Are we supposed to believe that the staunchly trinitarian St. Hilary wished for us to confess the Father and Son as being the auctores of the Holy Spirit?

It might make more sense if it's about the temporal sending of the Holy Spirit.

Or auctoribus is being used in the sense of the guarantors or promoters by Whom we are to confess the Spirit. It really is the most sensible reading of the passage.

I've found a book that explains this passage. It makes sense.

Yes, Siecienski does a good job of explaining the controversy. As a classics student though you can help me confirm for those who may doubt, that the word proceeds in fact does not appear in the passage, but rather is being supplied by the translators who read it in to the passage on account of the words Patre et Filio auctoribus appearing in the ablative.
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Laser Basileus.
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,707
  • St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus, pray for us!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #556 on: May 03, 2015, 05:33:37 PM »
Yes, Siecienski does a good job of explaining the controversy. As a classics student though you can help me confirm for those who may doubt, that the word proceeds in fact does not appear in the passage, but rather is being supplied by the translators who read it in to the passage on account of the words Patre et Filio auctoribus appearing in the ablative.

That's right, yes. The verb procedere is lacking.

"Qui Patre et Filio auctoribus confitendus est" can be translated as "He who (Qui - 3rd singular nominative) is to be confessed (confidendus est - 3rd singular nominative gerundive, goes with qui), the Father and the Son giving account. (patre et filio auctoribus)" as well. That would solve the problematic use of auctor.

« Last Edit: May 03, 2015, 05:49:54 PM by Cyrillic »

Offline Cyrillic

  • Laser Basileus.
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,707
  • St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus, pray for us!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #557 on: May 04, 2015, 12:26:46 PM »
Vulgar Latin vs. classical?

Neither, it's Greek.

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,647
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #558 on: May 05, 2015, 09:49:09 PM »
YO, Look, The west wants to keep the Filiioque Right?  The East wants to keep the Creed in the Original approved form Right?
Whats the problem?  We know that we belong to THE Church and that's all that matters.  They want their addition .......so be it. Let'm keep it.

Indeed. The Catholic Church holds the faith of Nicaea, while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Bzzzt. Thanks for playing!



Was that a Buzzinga?
« Last Edit: May 05, 2015, 09:49:28 PM by JoeS2 »

Offline Wyatt

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,465
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Latin Church
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #559 on: May 06, 2015, 11:15:32 PM »
YO, Look, The west wants to keep the Filiioque Right?  The East wants to keep the Creed in the Original approved form Right?
Whats the problem?  We know that we belong to THE Church and that's all that matters.  They want their addition .......so be it. Let'm keep it.

Indeed. The Catholic Church holds the faith of Nicaea, while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Bzzzt. Thanks for playing!



Was that a Buzzinga?
*Bazinga

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,647
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #561 on: May 08, 2015, 12:43:13 AM »
What do you think?

http://www.keepthefilioque.com/2013/09/reasons-why-the-filioque-should-be-maintained/

This is what I think:

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/english/68134.htm

Referring to the Father as the "Cause" of the other two persons seems like it does imply Arianism, at least if the word "cause" is interpreted in a temporal, deterministic or linear sense (I.e, cause and effect) which is what Westerners tend to do.

I suppose it wouldn't be a problem as long as the word cause were understood in a strictly atemporal and non-linear manner. A mathematician could say, for example, that the positions of the nontrivial zeroes of the Riemann zeta function "cause" the prime numbers to cluster in certain ways, but this doesn't mean that the prime numbers are any less eternal or unchangeable than the Riemann zeta function is. The problem is that's not what most people mean when they use the word cause. So I'm wondering if there's a word that could be used instead that wouldn't be as vulnerable to being misunderstood (and thus leading to heresy).
« Last Edit: May 08, 2015, 12:43:46 AM by Minnesotan »
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline Father H

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,680
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Nea Roma
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #562 on: May 11, 2015, 11:19:50 PM »
What do you think?

http://www.keepthefilioque.com/2013/09/reasons-why-the-filioque-should-be-maintained/

This is what I think:

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/english/68134.htm

Referring to the Father as the "Cause" of the other two persons seems like it does imply Arianism, at least if the word "cause" is interpreted in a temporal, deterministic or linear sense (I.e, cause and effect) which is what Westerners tend to do.

I suppose it wouldn't be a problem as long as the word cause were understood in a strictly atemporal and non-linear manner. A mathematician could say, for example, that the positions of the nontrivial zeroes of the Riemann zeta function "cause" the prime numbers to cluster in certain ways, but this doesn't mean that the prime numbers are any less eternal or unchangeable than the Riemann zeta function is. The problem is that's not what most people mean when they use the word cause. So I'm wondering if there's a word that could be used instead that wouldn't be as vulnerable to being misunderstood (and thus leading to heresy).

No.  Who cares what "most westerners" (or for that matter, what "most easterners") think?  What is true?  But furthermore, it is clear that what is claimed is that the Father is the eternal (pre-temporal or extra-temporal--not atemporal as you suggest) arche, source, and cause of the Trinity.  To say that any expression of truth leads to heresy is ridiculous.  That is like saying that to include more people, I should, instead of saying that grass is green or brown, that I should say that it is "not purple."  I want you to repent of what you said.   

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,647
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #563 on: June 08, 2015, 11:36:20 PM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Quote
CCC 841

« Propositum salutis et eos amplectitur, qui Creatorem agnoscunt, inter quos imprimis musulmanos, qui fidem Abrahae se tenere profitentes, nobiscum Deum adorant unicum, misericordem, homines die novissimo iudicaturum »

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
You have brought up that nonsense in the private forum too and have been corrected on its meaning. Now you are just wanting to unfairly attack our Church.

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.

Borders on Apostacy.

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,879
  • Excelsior
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #564 on: June 08, 2015, 11:39:05 PM »
He's already "apostate," he's in a different church.  ::)
My only weakness is, well, never mind

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,647
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #565 on: June 08, 2015, 11:43:30 PM »
He's already "apostate," he's in a different church.  ::)

Correction...... Yes.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,102
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #566 on: June 09, 2015, 10:21:28 AM »
He's already "apostate," he's in a different church.  ::)

That's not what that term means.
Please don't project meta-debates onto me.

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,022
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #567 on: June 15, 2015, 05:17:17 AM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Quote
CCC 841

« Propositum salutis et eos amplectitur, qui Creatorem agnoscunt, inter quos imprimis musulmanos, qui fidem Abrahae se tenere profitentes, nobiscum Deum adorant unicum, misericordem, homines die novissimo iudicaturum »

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
You have brought up that nonsense in the private forum too and have been corrected on its meaning. Now you are just wanting to unfairly attack our Church.

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.

Well as per this canon, the Ecumenical Patriarch and all the EO delegates over the past 50 years who have prayed with the CC ans its bishops and clergy at the Vatican and in the respective countries as well as attended papal inauguration ceremonies and patriarchal enthronement ceremonies, are in a a bit of a pickle  :


Here is a picture from Jerusalem where the EP prayed with the "heretic" Pope of Rome and this all done with the consent of the Patriarch of Jerusalem and the orthodox delegates present who participated


Here is an image capturing participation the EP praying summit for the invocation of peace in the middle east  praying with a Heretic Bishop, a Jew and a Muslim as well as attending the ceremony ans participating in it where all 4 faiths has delegates (Catholics, Orthodox, Jews and Muslims) praying for peace in the middle east in a joint ceremony.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2015, 05:28:21 AM by Wandile »
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today


You are welcome to send me private messages but I don't post publicly anymore

Offline Cyrillic

  • Laser Basileus.
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,707
  • St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus, pray for us!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #568 on: June 15, 2015, 06:04:46 AM »

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.

Does anyone else suspects xOrthodox4Christx to really be Isa's alternative account?
« Last Edit: June 15, 2015, 06:05:02 AM by Cyrillic »

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,022
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #569 on: June 15, 2015, 07:03:27 AM »

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.

Does anyone else suspects xOrthodox4Christx to really be Isa's alternative account?

I could believe that  ;D
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today


You are welcome to send me private messages but I don't post publicly anymore

Offline Lazarus1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #570 on: June 15, 2015, 07:19:34 PM »
In regards to the Muslim comments from Lumen Gentium, according to Rome's traditional ecclesiology :

"The Holy Catholic Church teaches that God cannot truly be adored except within its fold." Pope St. Gregory the Great

"The Catholic Church alone preserves true worship." Pope Pius XI

"A true worshipper is one whose mind has not been defiled with any false belief." Pope St. Leo the Great


It would be impossible for Muslims to worship the one true God along with Catholics, according to traditional ecclesiology.

And according to traditional Roman Catholic ecclesiology,  Lumen Gentium is heretical.
Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,197
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #571 on: June 15, 2015, 07:29:41 PM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Quote
CCC 841

« Propositum salutis et eos amplectitur, qui Creatorem agnoscunt, inter quos imprimis musulmanos, qui fidem Abrahae se tenere profitentes, nobiscum Deum adorant unicum, misericordem, homines die novissimo iudicaturum »

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
You have brought up that nonsense in the private forum too and have been corrected on its meaning. Now you are just wanting to unfairly attack our Church.

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.

Well as per this canon, the Ecumenical Patriarch and all the EO delegates over the past 50 years who have prayed with the CC ans its bishops and clergy at the Vatican and in the respective countries as well as attended papal inauguration ceremonies and patriarchal enthronement ceremonies, are in a a bit of a pickle  :
but we are not, as we do not set any of them up as Pastor Aeternus.
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

Offline Lazarus1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #572 on: June 15, 2015, 07:45:55 PM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Quote
CCC 841

« Propositum salutis et eos amplectitur, qui Creatorem agnoscunt, inter quos imprimis musulmanos, qui fidem Abrahae se tenere profitentes, nobiscum Deum adorant unicum, misericordem, homines die novissimo iudicaturum »

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
You have brought up that nonsense in the private forum too and have been corrected on its meaning. Now you are just wanting to unfairly attack our Church.

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.

Well as per this canon, the Ecumenical Patriarch and all the EO delegates over the past 50 years who have prayed with the CC ans its bishops and clergy at the Vatican and in the respective countries as well as attended papal inauguration ceremonies and patriarchal enthronement ceremonies, are in a a bit of a pickle  :
but we are not, as we do not set any of them up as Pastor Aeternus.

Precisely.  That makes all the difference in the world.
Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,879
  • Excelsior
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #573 on: June 15, 2015, 09:01:27 PM »

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.

Does anyone else suspects xOrthodox4Christx to really be Isa's alternative account?

Very clever, Mr. Clouseau.
My only weakness is, well, never mind

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,022
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #574 on: June 16, 2015, 03:47:04 AM »
In regards to the Muslim comments from Lumen Gentium, according to Rome's traditional ecclesiology :

"The Holy Catholic Church teaches that God cannot truly be adored except within its fold." Pope St. Gregory the Great

"The Catholic Church alone preserves true worship." Pope Pius XI

"A true worshipper is one whose mind has not been defiled with any false belief." Pope St. Leo the Great


It would be impossible for Muslims to worship the one true God along with Catholics, according to traditional ecclesiology.

And according to traditional Roman Catholic ecclesiology,  Lumen Gentium is heretical.
No you are just failing to apply basic comprehension skills to fit your agenda.


You misunderstand basic words. All that you quoted discusses true worship. Lumen Gentium only says Muslims adore the true God but never says they do so properly/truthfully. You are reading into the text something it does not say.  Behind that, various fathers believed Islam to be a Christian heresy which in honesty, it is. A huge portion of its core beliefs are based on the teachings of heretical Christian sects of the east at that time.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2015, 04:05:00 AM by Wandile »
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today


You are welcome to send me private messages but I don't post publicly anymore

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,022
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #575 on: June 16, 2015, 03:58:34 AM »
while the Vatican can keep the faith of Islam.

Huh?

Quote
CCC 841

« Propositum salutis et eos amplectitur, qui Creatorem agnoscunt, inter quos imprimis musulmanos, qui fidem Abrahae se tenere profitentes, nobiscum Deum adorant unicum, misericordem, homines die novissimo iudicaturum »

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
You have brought up that nonsense in the private forum too and have been corrected on its meaning. Now you are just wanting to unfairly attack our Church.

Sorry, but I don't kiss the Qur'an or pray in a Mosque. Neither do the Catholics.





Quote from: Constantinople 681
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.

Well as per this canon, the Ecumenical Patriarch and all the EO delegates over the past 50 years who have prayed with the CC ans its bishops and clergy at the Vatican and in the respective countries as well as attended papal inauguration ceremonies and patriarchal enthronement ceremonies, are in a a bit of a pickle  :
but we are not, as we do not set any of them up as Pastor Aeternus.

You are as your bishops and clergy prayed with "heretics" (Catholics), Muslims and Jews. This is in direct contravention of the canon. This canon condemns all of us and our clergy whether CC ,EO, OO or ACoE as all the top clergy have prayed with each other. No amount of sophistry will change that you prayed with people that the canon forbids
« Last Edit: June 16, 2015, 04:00:57 AM by Wandile »
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today


You are welcome to send me private messages but I don't post publicly anymore

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,647
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #576 on: June 19, 2015, 11:14:48 AM »
So, do you, like St.Maximus, confess that the Father is the sole source of the Holy Spirit and the Son?

Not just me but the Catholic Church teaches monarchy of the father.
This source goes into the issue and does a good job of showing this:

Quote
In the seventh century, the Byzantines were shocked by a confession of faith made by the Pope and including the Filioque with reference to the procession of the Holy Spirit; they translated the procession inaccurately by ekporeusis. St. Maximus the Confessor then wrote a letter from Rome linking together the two approaches — Cappadocian and Alexandrian — to the eternal origin of the Spirit: the Father is the sole Principle without Principle (in Greek, aitia) of the Son and of the Spirit; the Father and the Son are consubstantial source of the procession (to proienai) of this same Spirit. "For the procession they (the Romans) brought the witness of the Latin Fathers, as well, of course, as that of St. Cyril of Alexandria in his sacred study on the Gospel of St. John. On this basis they showed that they themselves do not make the Son cause (aitia) of the Spirit. They know, indeed, that the Father is the sole cause of the Son and of the Spirit, of one by generation and of the other by ekporeusis — but they explained that the latter comes (proienai) through the Son, and they showed in this way the unity and the immutability of the essence" (Letter to Marin of Cyprus, PG 91, 136 A-B).

According to St. Maximus, echoing Rome, the Filioque does not concern the ekporeusis of the Spirit issued from the Father as source of the Trinity, but manifests his proienai (processio) in the consubstantial communion of the Father and the Son, while excluding any possible subordinationist interpretation of the Father's Monarchy.

The fact that in Latin and Alexandrian theology the Holy Spirit proceeds (proeisi) from the Father and the Son in their consubstantial communion does not mean that it is the divine essence or substance that proceed in him, but that it is communicated from the Father and the Son who have it in common. This point was confessed as dogma in 1215 by the fourth Lateran Council: "The substance does not generate, is not begotten, does not proceed; but it is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, the Holy Spirit who proceeds: so that there is distinction in persons and unity in nature. Although other (alius) is the Father, other the Son, other the Holy Spirit, they are not another reality (aliud), but what the Father is the Son is and the Holy Spirit equally; so, according to the orthodox and catholic faith, we believe that they are consubstantial. For the Father, generating eternally the Son, has given to him his substance... It is clear that, in being born the Son has received the substance of the Father without this substance being in any way diminished, and so the Father and the Son have the same substance. So the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from them both, are one same reality" (DS 804-805).

In 1274, the second Council of Lyons confessed that "the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles but as from one single principle (tamquam ex uno principio)" (DS 850). In the light of the Lateran Council, which preceded the second Council of Lyons, it is clear that it is not the divine essence that can be the "one principle" for the procession of the Holy Spirit. The Catechism of the Catholic Church interprets this formula in no.248 as follows: "The eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as the 'principle without principle,' is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, he is, with the Son, the single principle from which the Spirit proceeds" (Council of Lyons II, DS 850).
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=1176&CFID=10011463&CFTOKEN=62100802
 

 

Even Bishop Kalistos Ware taught that after years of study into the filioque, he realized that the west and the east are teaching the same thing bit rather the issue was all due to semantics and misunderstandings. :

I believe this is one area of skepticism that exists in some of the good bishops writings viewed by Orthodox in general. Me thinks he has some old baggage he needs to off load.

Offline Pravoslavac

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 714
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #577 on: June 21, 2015, 01:06:19 PM »
Saint Photius was very clear on Filioque.

It is interesting that saint Photius, saint Mark of Ephesus and saint Grygory Palama pointed out that Vatican used forgeries to "prove" Filioque. Just like Papacy was forgery. There is no proof of Papacy in the early Church, all Latins have are few quotes, and sola scriptura on Bible quotes about saint Peter, all that goes against the Holy Tradition. And i wouldn't be suprised if those quotes were forged too.

After all, in so called 8th Ecumenical Council for the Orthodoxl, Pope John of Rome condemned Filioque and the idea of Rome's claim that pope is the bishop of bishops. It was in 880. The Rome rejected and condemned this Council in 12th CENTURY, 300 years later. lol
First Filioque mass in Rome was served in 1014.

That is why Latins are now celebrating clown mass, a smallest departure from the doctrine leads to the destruction of the Faith, as saint Photius predicted.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2015, 01:07:22 PM by Pravoslavac »
"Bullets comrades! Not candies! Bullets will save us from the US imperialists!" - Comrade Kim Jong Il

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,647
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #578 on: June 21, 2015, 01:18:39 PM »
Saint Photius was very clear on Filioque.

It is interesting that saint Photius, saint Mark of Ephesus and saint Grygory Palama pointed out that Vatican used forgeries to "prove" Filioque. Just like Papacy was forgery. There is no proof of Papacy in the early Church, all Latins have are few quotes, and sola scriptura on Bible quotes about saint Peter, all that goes against the Holy Tradition. And i wouldn't be suprised if those quotes were forged too.

After all, in so called 8th Ecumenical Council for the Orthodoxl, Pope John of Rome condemned Filioque and the idea of Rome's claim that pope is the bishop of bishops. It was in 880. The Rome rejected and condemned this Council in 12th CENTURY, 300 years later. lol
First Filioque mass in Rome was served in 1014.

That is why Latins are now celebrating clown mass, a smallest departure from the doctrine leads to the destruction of the Faith, as saint Photius predicted.

The proper title for this topic should have read: "YOU Keep the Filioque"

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,647
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #579 on: June 21, 2015, 01:21:02 PM »
Saint Photius was very clear on Filioque.

It is interesting that saint Photius, saint Mark of Ephesus and saint Grygory Palama pointed out that Vatican used forgeries to "prove" Filioque. Just like Papacy was forgery. There is no proof of Papacy in the early Church, all Latins have are few quotes, and sola scriptura on Bible quotes about saint Peter, all that goes against the Holy Tradition. And i wouldn't be suprised if those quotes were forged too.

After all, in so called 8th Ecumenical Council for the Orthodoxl, Pope John of Rome condemned Filioque and the idea of Rome's claim that pope is the bishop of bishops. It was in 880. The Rome rejected and condemned this Council in 12th CENTURY, 300 years later. lol
First Filioque mass in Rome was served in 1014.

That is why Latins are now celebrating clown mass, a smallest departure from the doctrine leads to the destruction of the Faith, as saint Photius predicted.

The Clown Mass has nothing on a Mainly Spanish Catholic church in center city Philly where the Priest sings and dances while holding the Host high above his head and everyone is also dancing.  Quite the spectacle. 

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,022
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #580 on: June 21, 2015, 02:35:11 PM »
Saint Photius was very clear on Filioque.

It is interesting that saint Photius, saint Mark of Ephesus and saint Grygory Palama pointed out that Vatican used forgeries to "prove" Filioque. Just like Papacy was forgery. There is no proof of Papacy in the early Church, all Latins have are few quotes, and sola scriptura on Bible quotes about saint Peter, all that goes against the Holy Tradition. And i wouldn't be suprised if those quotes were forged too.

After all, in so called 8th Ecumenical Council for the Orthodoxl, Pope John of Rome condemned Filioque and the idea of Rome's claim that pope is the bishop of bishops. It was in 880. The Rome rejected and condemned this Council in 12th CENTURY, 300 years later. lol
First Filioque mass in Rome was served in 1014.

That is why Latins are now celebrating clown mass, a smallest departure from the doctrine leads to the destruction of the Faith, as saint Photius predicted.

A lot of polemics, false unsubstantiated claims and some laughable stuff not worth attention. Funny thing is how you equate Latins with forgeries when the Greeks have the most colorful history of that. But that's none of my business . Read Bessarion and George Scholarius' comments on the debates on the filoque at Florence.
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today


You are welcome to send me private messages but I don't post publicly anymore

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,941
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #581 on: June 21, 2015, 03:14:44 PM »
Saint Photius was very clear on Filioque.

It is interesting that saint Photius, saint Mark of Ephesus and saint Grygory Palama pointed out that Vatican used forgeries to "prove" Filioque. Just like Papacy was forgery. There is no proof of Papacy in the early Church, all Latins have are few quotes, and sola scriptura on Bible quotes about saint Peter, all that goes against the Holy Tradition. And i wouldn't be suprised if those quotes were forged too.

After all, in so called 8th Ecumenical Council for the Orthodoxl, Pope John of Rome condemned Filioque and the idea of Rome's claim that pope is the bishop of bishops. It was in 880. The Rome rejected and condemned this Council in 12th CENTURY, 300 years later. lol
First Filioque mass in Rome was served in 1014.

That is why Latins are now celebrating clown mass, a smallest departure from the doctrine leads to the destruction of the Faith, as saint Photius predicted.

A lot of polemics, false unsubstantiated claims and some laughable stuff not worth attention. Funny thing is how you equate Latins with forgeries when the Greeks have the most colorful history of that. But that's none of my business . Read Bessarion and George Scholarius' comments on the debates on the filoque at Florence.

Have you?
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Pravoslavac

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 714
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #582 on: June 21, 2015, 03:28:11 PM »
Saint Photius was very clear on Filioque.

It is interesting that saint Photius, saint Mark of Ephesus and saint Grygory Palama pointed out that Vatican used forgeries to "prove" Filioque. Just like Papacy was forgery. There is no proof of Papacy in the early Church, all Latins have are few quotes, and sola scriptura on Bible quotes about saint Peter, all that goes against the Holy Tradition. And i wouldn't be suprised if those quotes were forged too.

After all, in so called 8th Ecumenical Council for the Orthodoxl, Pope John of Rome condemned Filioque and the idea of Rome's claim that pope is the bishop of bishops. It was in 880. The Rome rejected and condemned this Council in 12th CENTURY, 300 years later. lol
First Filioque mass in Rome was served in 1014.

That is why Latins are now celebrating clown mass, a smallest departure from the doctrine leads to the destruction of the Faith, as saint Photius predicted.

A lot of polemics, false unsubstantiated claims and some laughable stuff not worth attention. Funny thing is how you equate Latins with forgeries when the Greeks have the most colorful history of that. But that's none of my business . Read Bessarion and George Scholarius' comments on the debates on the filoque at Florence.

Well, we know that saint Mark of Epheus at the Robber Council of Florence accused Latins that "quotes of the Fathers" which were supporting Filioque were forged. What was proven to be forgery at that Robber Council is Latin's fake claim that Fathers of the 7th Ecumenical Council used Creed with the Filioque, while the truth was that they used legal Creed without Filioque.
St. Mark of Ephesus said he was certain that the works of Augustine had been corrupted by later forgeries. As in many other Councils, the true faith was defended by single or few champions.
Even St. Gregory Palamas (2nd Sunday of Great Lent) admits that the ..... Filioque to the Creed with Judas Iscariot is a 14th century forgery.
 St Mark of Ephesus, st. Gregory Palamas and st Photius the great all cited forgeries  against the Latins when claiming that 1 the filoque, 2 concept of purgatory were all imposed and claimed to be supported by the greek orthodox fathers.

Another point we must emphasize is that it took a long time for this doctrine to prevail in the West. As a matter of fact, in the seventh century, St. Maximos the Confessor, in his well-known letter to Marinos, said that, in those days, the Romans clearly distinguished between the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the temporal sending of the same Spirit by the Father and the Son, acting together for the economy of our salvation. The confusion (between the sending in time, in human history, and the timeless procession in eternity) was made widespread for the first time by Frankish theologians who, as we have said, were ignorant of the first principles of Patristic theology.

In the West, during the Middle Ages, the transcribers of manuscripts in the monasteries, being theologically ignorant and relying upon a false certainty--namely, that the filioque was actually to be found in the Holy Scriptures - were induced to falsify Patristic writings. Wherever they saw a statement to the effect that the Holy Spirit proceeds form the Father, they immediately added: and from the Son (filioque), perhaps believing that they were restoring the text. Some, in fact, may have been sincere; but many others certainly made these alterations knowingly, as did, for example, Pope Urban IV (the fourth), who wished to win the Orthodox over by any means he could. He had Patristic texts falsified, and false texts forged, in the workshops of the Vatican. These forged documents were collected by the Pope and used by Thomas Aquinas in his polemics against the Orthodox. Thus, the famous book by the great Theologian of the West, entitled Against the errors of the Greeks, is constituted of forged and truncated texts. In this respect, the medieval doctrine of the filioque should be considered as a disgrace to the West when one thinks that for many centuries this doctrine has depended on a vast number of forgeries and falsehoods made to impute to the Fathers doctrines alien to them.

It is worthy of note that Adam Zernikaw, as far back as the 17th (seventeenth) century had rightly detected all the forgeries made in Patristic literature by medieval copyists. Zernikaw was an earnest Lutheran who once attended a lecture by a bishop from Constantinople. The bishop spoke about the heretical character of the addition of the filioque Zernikaw out of love for the Truth, could not rest until he learned the genuine doctrine of the Fathers concerning the difficult question of the procession of the Holy Spirit.

He visited all the libraries in European countries where he could find ancient manuscripts of Church Fathers: Germany, France, England and Spain; there he discovered the above-mentioned forgeries. Convinced that the Orthodox Faith is the Truth, he left for Moscow for the sake of further research. On his way to Moscow, while going through Little Russia, he became an Orthodox Christian and a monk with the name of Adam. He is said by some authors to have lived afterwards in the monastery of the Kiev Caves. Before he died, he wrote his book on the procession of the Holy Spirit, in which he mentions all the forgeries.

The book was written in Latin and translated into Russian in the 18th (eighteenth) century, and later into Greek by Eugene Bulgaris. In the 19th (nineteenth) century, Kyriakos Lampryllos, a pious man from the Greek island of Cephalonia, wrote a book entitled The Fatal Mystification, an Orthodox Study on the Filioque. He wrote it in French, with a missionary aim in view - to make the basic points of Zernikaw's book widely known.

One can see what kind of zeal and love for the Truth motivated Zernikaw, Lampryllos and the Bishoips from Constantinople who came to preach the Truth in Germany during the 17th (seventeenth) century. Despite all cultural or political relativism, a zeal such as Zernikaw's testifies...... to the world of the Scriptures: To him that knocketh it shall be opened (Mt. 7,8). Nowadays, our missionary efforts must be governed by the same zeal.
"Bullets comrades! Not candies! Bullets will save us from the US imperialists!" - Comrade Kim Jong Il

Offline Cyrillic

  • Laser Basileus.
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,707
  • St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus, pray for us!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #583 on: June 21, 2015, 03:30:19 PM »
Another point we must emphasize is that it took a long time for this doctrine to prevail in the West. As a matter of fact, in the seventh century, St. Maximos the Confessor, in his well-known letter to Marinos, said that, in those days, the Romans clearly distinguished between the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the temporal sending of the same Spirit by the Father and the Son, acting together for the economy of our salvation. The confusion (between the sending in time, in human history, and the timeless procession in eternity) was made widespread for the first time by Frankish theologians who, as we have said, were ignorant of the first principles of Patristic theology.

Indeed. It is worth noting that the Latins at Florence (with the exception of the Latin Archbishop of Rhodes, Andrew) claimed that St. Maximus' letter to Marinus was a forgery.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2015, 03:30:49 PM by Cyrillic »

Offline Pravoslavac

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 714
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Re: Keep the Filioque
« Reply #584 on: June 21, 2015, 03:34:07 PM »
And then Latins, not long after the Robber Council of Florence, somehow ended up with another Council that proclaimed pope to be able to excommunicate angles, and now they together celebrate clown mass. As saint Photius said, a smallest departure from the doctrine leads to the destruction of the faith. And if we look at Vatican now, it is clear what our most beloved Patriarch predicted. Saint Photius the great was the bright example of true Patriarch and true Orthodoxy, patriarch Bartholomew should learn something from him.

This is why i am worried with Liturgical Theology of the Orthodox in Greece and America. They are already pew sitters and organ players. In few decades, we will see clown Liturgy with swaying hippies enjoying electrical guitars Cherubym Hymn.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2015, 03:41:02 PM by Pravoslavac »
"Bullets comrades! Not candies! Bullets will save us from the US imperialists!" - Comrade Kim Jong Il