Why Does The Filioque Debate Matter?

[Lord Philip]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1385573' date='Sep 14 2007, 03:27 PM']I think the idea behind Chesterton's quote is good, but I do not think it can be understood in light of the filioque issue. I agree that the Church should never back down from Doctrine when faced with Heresy, but the East is not heresy. The East is not the ones who changed. We were. When you think of "the Church" remember that in Ut Unum Sint JPII said the east and the west are 2 lungs, we are the Church together.

Perspective is important in this issue.[/quote]

I agree with you the the East is not in heresy. Chesterton is not so much making out that the Church struggles with those outside itself in matters of doctrine, but that rather those inside (East and West in this case) and their battles and tremendous zeal concerning a single word should not be criticized by modern man who is trying to find fault with religion.

Chesterton states that there is a very important reason for these battles: the issue of balance. As he says, if one gives too much weight to one idea, the entire structure could topple and destroy the world.

When balancing magnificent pillars of truth it takes great care and the filioque is certainly something the consequences of which matter immensely (the nature of the Son in relation both to the Father and to the Holy Spirit). Mess this up and you end up with something just as bad as Arianism.

God bless,

Philip

[kafka]

this is an interesting discussion. I will post here maybe tommorrow or Sunday with some insights. I am going to wait since I am not familiar enough with the history of the differences between East and West.

[N/A Gone]

c'mon western catholics. How does the filioque effect you?

[Dismas]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1385726' date='Sep 14 2007, 11:14 PM']c'mon western catholics. How does the filioque effect you?[/quote]
I am no scholar. My biblical studies are shoddy and my knowledge of the Catechism is far from encyclopedic. At best, this seems closest to my understanding of performing mathematics on infinite quantities and sets. While there is purpose to it, the mind-bending nature of it is rather taxing. Even so, I have been known to reach some level of Truth through intuition based on what little I know.

Quite frankly, I know little about the situation, and far too little to be satisfied with any treatise on the Western Theological use of the Filioque.

I do know, however, that words have great meaning. Sure, a dictionary can capture much of that meaning. Even so, there are subtleties and allusions that prevent any word from truly being translated between two languages, or two cultures. This can be exacerbated by preexisting feelings of distrust and insult.

As stated, I have no formal theological training. Please bear with me, as I am forced to use mono- and disyllabic words. The Father loves His Son. The Son loves His Father. From that loves springs the person of the Spirit. Does this make God the Son in equal standing as His Father? No, and nobody here is presuming that. Does this make the Father less a source or confused as a mere mode of the Son? No. The Father is the Father.

I admit, much of this is new territory. I suppose Apotheoun can further explain his theological stance, that I may understand. Specifically, when I hear the arguments involving energy and other such, I am greatly confused. Are not all Three Persons Eternal, Perfect, and Immutable? How can energy, which is a product of time and matter be used? Even source and cause demand movement, progression, and time, which directly contradicts immutability. Principle, however, that I can understand, and that I accept.

[Dismas]

Are the only attributes involving a Person of the Trinity involve "person" and "essence"?

What if the West was inferring neither of these per se when including the Filioque?

As I have stated before, translation is not a perfect thing, and ideas get shunted, twisted, tweaked, shifted or expanded inappropriately at times to fit the words. We see that to this day when regarding why Latin Rite Catholics eat fish on Fridays, thanks to the implication of the word "carnis". What is the possibility that such is the case in this matter as well?

[Dismas]

I've done some digging. My intuition proved more correct than I had hoped. I'll give other Latin Rite brethren time to reply as well.

[kafka]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1385726' date='Sep 14 2007, 11:14 PM']c'mon western catholics. How does the filioque effect you?[/quote]

Without getting into a long post this is what it means to me:

The First Person of the Trinity does not proceed from the Second Person of the Trinity or the Third Person of the Trinity.

The Second Person of the Trinity proceeds from the First Person of the Trinity.

The Third Person of the Trinity proceeds primarily from the First Person of the Trinity and secondarily from the Second Person of the Trinity.


The Act of the Father Existing and the Act of the Son proceeding from the Father and the Act of the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son is One Divine Eternal Act.

[N/A Gone]

yup. I know some know the theology. but how does that effect you.? Is jesus less divine without the filioque? It the identity of the Son and Spirit kind of less clear without the filioque?

For lack of better terms I dont want the company line. I want to know what this does for you and why the west should keep it.

btw, Kafka, in your analogy you commited heresy. The Spirit can not proceed from two acts. That is Ditheism. Unless you are citing the father and the son as one act, but then you need to re-set your language.

[kafka]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1386012' date='Sep 15 2007, 03:32 PM']btw, Kafka, in your analogy you commited heresy. The Spirit can not proceed from two acts. That is Ditheism. Unless you are citing the father and the son as one act, but then you need to re-set your language.[/quote]

I didnt commit heresy. I just need to explain more in depth and I will later. The Spirit proceeds once yet He proceeds primarily from the Father and secondarily from the Son. He could not proceed primarily from the Son as the Son proceeds primarily from the Father, since without the Father there is no Son.

More later I dont have enough time now.

[kafka]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1386012' date='Sep 15 2007, 03:32 PM']yup. I know some know the theology. but how does that effect you.? Is jesus less divine without the filioque?[/quote]

I dont understand the question. Filioque simply means "and the Son." It is used in the Creed to profess that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. This statment doesnt make Christ less Divine. All three Persons of the Trinity share the One and same Divine Nature.

[Dismas]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1386012' date='Sep 15 2007, 03:32 PM']yup. I know some know the theology. but how does that effect you.? Is jesus less divine without the filioque? It the identity of the Son and Spirit kind of less clear without the filioque?

For lack of better terms I dont want the company line. I want to know what this does for you and why the west should keep it.[/quote]
It would be convenient to strike the filioque from our Creed. Why, besides the filioque, only the matter of papal supremacy remains for theological union. With utilitarian efficiency, we could bring the East back without objection. But at what cost?

Is this a thought out and deliberate step towards the Truth, or a step away? Would it be a thought out and deliberate step towards Truth for the Orthodox to dismiss their objections without satisfactorily proving its acceptability to themselves?

In this world, we find a hundred thousand million sacrifices of principle, all for convenience. Indeed, is not convenience one of the great idols of this day and age? Is it not more convenient to commit ourselves to servile work on Sundays, even when given the opportunity against? Is it not more convenient to not speak out against impurity? Is it not more convenient to not show up across the street from an abortion clinic, rosary beads in hand? Is it not more convenient to deny Jesus when colleagues mock Him? This is the false spirit of ecumenism that we have observed in the past several decades.

I wrote of the imminent need for communion and common cause before. That imminence is no less burning, and our future without it any less bleak. Even so, principle must not be surrendered, not one iota. The return of communion must only be done in honesty. Should the Catholic Church renounce in convenience the filioque for which she has pronounced in earnest, her re-communion with the Orthodox would be a false one. Should not all the fears and doubts of the Latin Creed be dispelled, and the Orthodox Churches return in grumbling, does not every "Amen" bring calumny upon her? Would not convenience be a new idol, sullying the pure faith of one or the other?

Verily, this controversy must be solved in earnest, not in falsity.

P.S. Should the filioque debate dissolve, I sincerely believe that some other theological barrier would be presented. Pride is the stumbling block here, and will remain so until the Spirit cleaves against our hardened hearts.

[jeffpugh]

There is no guaruntee that the East will come back if we white out the "and the Son" part of the creed. There's more to it. So we gotta work this out the hard way so we don't end up making some big mistake that will hurt later... but anywho, you're right we gotta be authentic here and we gotta get rid of pride. Personally, I lack the pride of this whole matter. I'm slightly partial to the East because I don't fully understand the West. I thought I somewhat understood it the way Kafka was saying it, but now it's being dismissed as heresy. I'm trying to wrap my head around that much... I'm getting a red flag here. Anyone able to help me out? I want in on this thread, too!

[N/A Gone]

Im writing a paper on it right now, so I dont have time to respond here yet. I will monday. Im just checking in to see how apothoun objections/agrees with my questions.

[jeffpugh]

Gotcha. I'll wait for someone else to pick up the slack then I'm sleepy right now though I'll be back Monday, I think. I'll be busy all day tomorrow most likely.

[Resurrexi]

The "Filioque" is important because it is our profession of a divinely revealed dogma.

The spiration of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son was defined at many times by our Holy Mother the Church, but most especially in Second Oecumenical Council Council of Lyons which decreed:

[quote name='D 460']460 In faithful and devout profession we declare that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two beginnings, but from one beginning, not from two breathings but from one breathing. The most holy Roman Church, the mother and teacher of all the faithful, has up to this time professed, preached, and taught this; this she firmly holds, preaches, declares, and teaches; the unchangeable and true opinion of the orthodox Fathers and Doctors, Latin as well as Greek, holds this. But because some through ignorance of the irresistible aforesaid truth have slipped into various errors, we in our desire to close the way to errors of this kind, with the approval of the sacred Council, condemn and reject (those) who presume to deny that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son; as well as (those) who with rash boldness presume to declare that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two beginnings, and not as from one.[/quote]

This dogma was also defined at the Fifth Oecumenical Council of the Lateran:

[quote name='D 428']428 Firmly we believe and we confess simply that the true God is one alone, eternal, immense, and unchangeable, incomprehensible, omnipotent and ineffable, Father and Son and Holy Spirit: indeed three Persons but one essence, substance, or nature entirely simple. The Father from no one, the Son from the Father only, and the Holy Spirit equally from both; without beginning, always, and without end; the Father generating, the Son being born, and the Holy Spirit proceeding; consubstantial and coequal and omnipotent and coeternal; one beginning of all, creator of all visible and invisible things, of the spiritual and of the corporal; who by His own omnipotent power at once from the beginning of time created each creature from nothing, spiritual, and corporal, namely, angelic and mundane, and finally the human, constituted as it were, alike of the spirit and the body. For the devil and other demons were created by God good in nature, but they themselves through themselves have become wicked. But man sinned at the suggestion of the devil. This Holy Trinity according to common essence undivided, and according to personal properties distinct, granted the doctrine of salvation to the human race, first through Moses and the holy prophets and his other servants according to the most methodical disposition of the time.[/quote]

As also at the Oecumenical Council of Florence:

[quote name='D 461']691 [The procession of the Holy Spirit] In the name of the Holy Trinity, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, with the approbation of this holy general Council of Florence we define that this truth of faith be believed and accepted by all Christians, and that all likewise profess that the Holy Spirit is eternally from the Father and the Son and has His essence and His subsistent being both from the Father and the Son, and proceeds from both eternally as from one principle and one spiration; we declare that what the holy Doctors and Fathers say, namely, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, tends to this meaning, that by this it is signified that the Son also is the cause, according to the Greeks, and according to the Latins, the principle of the subsistence of the Holy Spirit, as is the Father also. And since all that the Father has, the Father himself, in begetting, has given to His only begotten Son, with the exception of Fatherhood, the very fact that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, the Son himself has from the Father eternally, by whom He was begotten also eternally. We define in addition that the explanation of words "Filioque" for the sake of declaring the truth and also because imminent necessity has been lawfully and reasonably added to the Creed.[/quote]

It is also important to note that the procession of the Holy Ghost from both the Father and the Son is contained in the creed "Quiqumque" which is called "Athanasian":

[quote name='D 39']39 Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity. -But the Catholic faith is this, that we venerate one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in oneness; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance; for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, (and) another of the Holy Spirit; but the divine nature of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one, their glory is equal, their majesty is coeternal. Of such a nature as the Father is, so is the Son, so (also) is the Holy Spirit; the Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, (and) the Holy Spirit is uncreated; the Father is immense, the Son is immense, (and) the Holy Spirit is immense; the Father is eternal, the Son is eternal, (and) the Holy Spirit is eternal: and nevertheless there are not three eternals, but one eternal; just as there are not three uncreated beings, nor three infinite beings, but one uncreated, and one infinite; similarly the Father is omnipotent, the Son is omnipotent, (and) the Holy Spirit is omnipotent: and yet there are not three omnipotents, but one omnipotent; thus the Father is God, the Son is God, (and) the Holy Spirit is God; and nevertheless there are not three gods, but there is one God; so the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, (and) the Holy Spirit is Lord: and yet there are not three lords, but there is one Lord; because just as we are compelled by Christian truth to confess singly each one person as God and [and also] Lord, so we are forbidden by the Catholic religion to say there are three gods or lords. The Father was not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is from the Father alone, not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding. There is therefore one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits; and in this Trinity there is nothing first or later, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal with one another, so that in every respect, as has already been said above, both unity in Trinity, and Trinity in unity must be venerated. Therefore let him who wishes to be saved, think thus concerning the Trinity.[/quote]

For further information on the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son I heartily recommend Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.