Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Catholic-Orthodox Accord on Filioque


N/A Gone

Recommended Posts

Great article...anyone know a life link to this?

on a side note, Good friday is really off here. Even with my research on this I can tell he is wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kenrockthefirst

[quote name='Katholikos' post='63973' date='Nov 28 2003, 09:42 PM']It wasn't until last month, however, that the two sides reached
an accord.

The Roman Catholics should drop filioque from the creed, said the
North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation in a
statement issued in Washington Oct. 25.[/quote]

This doesn't seem so much like reaching "an accord" as it does caving. Unity with the Orthodox Church(es) is hugely important, especially given how much common ground we share, but the filioque is a critical element of our understanding of God, of the Trinity, IMHO. It speaks both to the equality of the Father and the Son, as well as the relationship between them, which expresses itself through / as the Holy Spirit. I'm concerned that dropping the filioque is tantamount to "demoting" the Son within the Godhead (although I'm sure that there's no question of the Orthodox Church(es) meaning that), into an order of primary that looks like

1. The Father
2. The Son
2. The Holy Spirit

(yes, the two "2's" are intentional), which I presume was the whole point of the filioque in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be awesome for the churches to once again unite, however it is still a long way off. Compromise ? where does compromise begin and end and where does standing for ones fundamental beliefs interact?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 cents here...
In my opinion...

The Catholic explanation highlights the equality of the members of the Trinity and their distinctness.

The Orthodox explanation sounds more monotheistic.

There is a difference between the doctrines. It is not just semantics. It is just something that does not SEEM important to most of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

goldenchild17

" 'But the Orthodox were very upset that they were not consulted.
That's why it became an issue," Metropolitan Maximos said.' "

Grow up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

goldenchild. That is a big deal. A very big deal.

Here are some basic thoughts.

The original creed is primary. The creed not including the filioque. The filioque is to be seen as a clarification in time of need (silent, but assumed in theology) what could happen is we either mandate one formula, or allow multiple expressions as theology. A great example would be the Byzantines in which they are not forced to say the filioque, but they MUST understand it as an orthodox example of theology.

Basically, in order for the west to take the filioque out of the creed, the east would NEED to affirm it as an orthodox expression; thus not assuming the western church of heresy.

We can get into individual issues here, the systematic forumlas of the west are dependant on the filioque (thomas, augustine) where as the idea that the G.O. feel the H.S. is being subordanitante (ironic really, for 3 reasons) but the political issues and the relations with it are far more important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]'But the Orthodox were very upset that they were not consulted.
That's why it became an issue," [/quote]

If it is a matter of 'not being consulted' then that is not an issue about the 'content' but the 'process' in which case it should be able to be agreed upon easily. However entrenched positions are hard to move from without 'losing face' and therefore the 'excuse' that it is a matter of process is just that... an excuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Paddington' post='1195676' date='Feb 15 2007, 02:30 AM']
2 cents here...
In my opinion...

The Catholic explanation highlights the equality of the members of the Trinity and their distinctness.

The Orthodox explanation sounds more monotheistic.

There is a difference between the doctrines. It is not just semantics. It is just something that does not SEEM important to most of us.
[/quote]
Silly Catholic theologians playing power politics that split the Cath church. Maybe it was an important question to theologians, but did an answer have to be forced in a time and manner that caused that caused the split? Why not a Council with both sides that stayed until it was decided? There is no unified college of Bishops now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article glosses over the fact that while the creed did not need to be added, it was and thus cannot be taken out.

The real developement will be when each side can see the nuances in the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1196287' date='Feb 15 2007, 05:46 PM']
Wanna source your theories there Anomaly?
[/quote]They are my theories, based on common sense. Try reading "A Concise History of the Catholic Church".

When Patriarch Ignatius was replaced with Photius by the Byzantine Emperor, Latin Pope Nicholas totally sought only political goals in supporting Photius, beginning the schism between the east and west for non-theological reasons. Later, under John VII, the East confirmed the Latin Church’s heavy handedness in a council, and the Latin Church practically confirmed this when Pope Leo appointed his young brother as the Patriarch over the Eastern Church. It spiraled out of control from there.

What’s up with that? Even you Roman Catholics have to admit the Pope is only infallible in matters of faith and morals and must also have to operate WITH the College of Bishops. Since the Schism, isn’t the College of Bishops fractured. The two Churches recognize the legitimacy of the other Church’s Sacrament of Ordination and Sacrament of Eucharist.

The effort to force the supremacy of the Latin Pope over both Churches was not done properly and not done with all the Traditions of the Whole Catholic Church. It may very well be reasonable and appropriate to have 1 Bishop of Bishops, but the circumstances, conditions, and limitations of that Bishop’s authority and power cannot be infallibly determined or defined or established outside of ALL the legitimate Traditions of the Whole Catholic Church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

anomaly, you sound eastern friendly in this post. where as the last one you seemed anti-eastern and rather rad-trad. (This is why phisy needs an explaination) you brought up some good talking points I will try and hit them this afternoon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...