The Filioque Done Right

This is a safe harbor for inquirers and catechumen to ask questions and share their journey into Holy Orthodoxy. Please be kind to our newcomers and warmly welcome them.

Moderator: Maria

User avatar
Bishop_Irineos
Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri 20 September 2013 7:22 pm
Faith: True Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC-A
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: The Filioque Done Right

Postby Bishop_Irineos » Thu 7 September 2017 7:00 pm

sedevacantist wrote:
HieromonkIrineos wrote:
sedevacantist wrote:lol as if I don't know the original creed....the point is Filioque doesn't take away anything from the creed, the Catholic Church didn't add it out of thin air, please read what the church fathers have said...do you disagree with the quote I posted?


At least you rightly admit that it was added. This also contravenes the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils and is an act of schism.

the act of schism came from the orthodox Church, why can't you answer the simple question about the quote I provided? you can reply with any quote that states the Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Son.


I answered you long ago with scripture. I also answered you with the wording of the Creed. Both scripture and ecumenical council outweigh and trump any private opinion of a church father. Your lack of understanding of basic Tradition and ecclessiology is staggering for one who purports to instruct others. Of course, it is not surprising to see one who follows the schismatic Romans to be far removed from understanding the Church.

sedevacantist
Newbie
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri 12 February 2016 10:24 pm
Jurisdiction: Traditional Catholic

The Filioque Done Right

Postby sedevacantist » Thu 7 September 2017 8:23 pm

HieromonkIrineos wrote:
sedevacantist wrote:
HieromonkIrineos wrote:
At least you rightly admit that it was added. This also contravenes the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils and is an act of schism.

the act of schism came from the orthodox Church, why can't you answer the simple question about the quote I provided? you can reply with any quote that states the Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Son.


I answered you long ago with scripture. I also answered you with the wording of the Creed. Both scripture and ecumenical council outweigh and trump any private opinion of a church father. Your lack of understanding of basic Tradition and ecclessiology is staggering for one who purports to instruct others. Of course, it is not surprising to see one who follows the schismatic Romans to be far removed from understanding the Church.

you didn't answer the quote, in your pride you believe you know more than the church fathers, the creed mentions a truth, the spirit proceeds from the father, but it doesn't state to the effect the spirit doesn't proceed from the son..staggering how you don't care more for your soul and have separated from the Church of Christ..the Church of St Francis of Assisi

User avatar
Bishop_Irineos
Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri 20 September 2013 7:22 pm
Faith: True Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC-A
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: The Filioque Done Right

Postby Bishop_Irineos » Thu 7 September 2017 9:06 pm

sedevacantist wrote:
HieromonkIrineos wrote:
sedevacantist wrote:the act of schism came from the orthodox Church, why can't you answer the simple question about the quote I provided? you can reply with any quote that states the Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Son.


I answered you long ago with scripture. I also answered you with the wording of the Creed. Both scripture and ecumenical council outweigh and trump any private opinion of a church father. Your lack of understanding of basic Tradition and ecclessiology is staggering for one who purports to instruct others. Of course, it is not surprising to see one who follows the schismatic Romans to be far removed from understanding the Church.

you didn't answer the quote, in your pride you believe you know more than the church fathers, the creed mentions a truth, the spirit proceeds from the father, but it doesn't state to the effect the spirit doesn't proceed from the son..staggering how you don't care more for your soul and have separated from the Church of Christ..the Church of St Francis of Assisi


Sorry, but you don't get to dictate the terms on which your error is properly refuted. If you understood the basic principles, you wouldn't be suffering in error to begin with. Why in the world would I further indulge your error by responding on the very terms that led to it.

So the Creed doesn't say That the Spirit doesn't proceed from the Son? That's really your exegetical principle? Lord, have mercy. The Creed also does not state that Christ was not begotten of Lucifer or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Would those be "open" topics for discussion? Would holding those opinions not put you outside the faith expressed by the Creed? Since you are Latin at heart, I suggest you learn the principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius , lest you fall further into error. As I said, your purpose here is not sincere and I do not wish to discuss further with you. Good day.

sedevacantist
Newbie
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri 12 February 2016 10:24 pm
Jurisdiction: Traditional Catholic

Re: The Filioque Done Right

Postby sedevacantist » Fri 8 September 2017 8:13 pm

HieromonkIrineos wrote:
sedevacantist wrote:
HieromonkIrineos wrote:
I answered you long ago with scripture. I also answered you with the wording of the Creed. Both scripture and ecumenical council outweigh and trump any private opinion of a church father. Your lack of understanding of basic Tradition and ecclessiology is staggering for one who purports to instruct others. Of course, it is not surprising to see one who follows the schismatic Romans to be far removed from understanding the Church.

you didn't answer the quote, in your pride you believe you know more than the church fathers, the creed mentions a truth, the spirit proceeds from the father, but it doesn't state to the effect the spirit doesn't proceed from the son..staggering how you don't care more for your soul and have separated from the Church of Christ..the Church of St Francis of Assisi


Sorry, but you don't get to dictate the terms on which your error is properly refuted. If you understood the basic principles, you wouldn't be suffering in error to begin with. Why in the world would I further indulge your error by responding on the very terms that led to it.

So the Creed doesn't say Christ doesn't proceed from the Son? That's really your exegetical principle? Lord, have mercy. The Creed also does not state that Christ was not begotten of Lucifer or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Would those be "open" topics for discussion? Would holding those opinions not put you outside the faith expressed by the Creed? Since you are Latin at heart, I suggest you learn the principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius , lest you fall further into error. As I said, your purpose here is not sincere and I do not wish to discuss further with you. Good day.

can you show me 1 church father that states Christ was begotten of Lucifer or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?? but I can show you church fathers stating The Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son ....do you get it now? leave this to others more informed than yourself

d9popov
Member
Posts: 119
Joined: Sat 10 June 2017 12:29 am

Re: The Filioque Done Right

Postby d9popov » Fri 8 September 2017 8:57 pm

sedevacantist wrote:
d9popov wrote:
sedevacantist wrote: All I want is an honest answer to a simple question, can you do that much for me?
.


Dear Sedevantist,

In short: there is a difference between eternal procession and temporal procession. When Orthodox Fathers state that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son," they are speaking about temporal procession, not eternal procession. The Creed is speaking about eternal procession, so "and the Son" is not appropriate in the Creed. The ancient patristic consensus (Rome and all of the East) was to NOT have the Filioque in the Creed. The East remained faithful to that ancient patristic consensus, whereas the West perverted the Catholic consensus and fell away from the Catholic Church. If you do not clearly understand the difference between eternal and temporal procession, then you will misunderstand the entire issue. Please read the following carefully:


SAINT GREGORY PALAMAS AND THE COUNCIL OF 1351 IN CONSTANTINOPLE (THE "NINTH ECUMENICAL" COUNCIL)
[The Holy Spirit] proceeds from the Father. He is co-beginningless with the Father and the Son as being outside time, but not without beginning, as Himself also having the Father as root, source, and cause, not as generated, but as proceeding; for He also came forth from the Father before all ages immutably and impassibly, not by generation, but by procession, being indivisible from the Father and the Son, as proceeding from the Father and resting in the Son, having union without confusion and division without division. He is God and is Himself from God, not one thing insofar as He is God, but another insofar as He is the Paraclete; He is the self-subsistent Spirit, proceeding from the Father and sent, that is manifested, through the Son, the cause of all that came into being, since They were perfected in Him; the same equal in honor with both the Father and the Son, without ingenerateness and generation. He was sent from the Son to His own disciples, that is, He was manifested. For how otherwise would He Who is not separated from Him be sent by Him? How otherwise, pray tell, would He come Who is everywhere? Wherefore, He is sent not only from the Son, but also from the Father and through the Son; and He comes from Himself when He is being manifested. For the sending, that is the manifestation, of the Spirit is a common action. He is manifested, not according to essence, for no one has ever either seen or declared the nature of God, but according to the grace, power, and energy that is common to the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. For the hypostasis of each, and whatever belongs to it, is peculiar to each of these. Not only is the super-essential Essence, which is entirely nameless, inexpressible, and incapable of participation, since it is above every name, expression, and participation, common to Them all, but also the grace, the power, the energy, the radiance, the kingdom, and the incorruption, and in general everything according to which God communicates and is united by grace with both holy angels and holy men. Departing from His simplicity neither on account of the distinction and difference of the hypostases, nor on account of the distinction and variety of powers and energies, we thus have one all-powerful God in one Deity [θεότης, theótēs]. For neither from perfect hypostases, could there ever come about any composition, nor could what is potential, because it has power or powers, ever truly be called composite by reason of potentiality itself.

User avatar
Bishop_Irineos
Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri 20 September 2013 7:22 pm
Faith: True Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC-A
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: The Filioque Done Right

Postby Bishop_Irineos » Sat 9 September 2017 3:10 am

sedevacantist wrote:can you show me 1 church father that states Christ was begotten of Lucifer or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?? but I can show you church fathers stating The Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son ....do you get it now? leave this to others more informed than yourself


Support of the Church fathers is a different question than the exegetical principle you expounded. Try to keep up and answer the question, even though I know it is uncomfortable to face the fallacies of your exegetical approach. Whether the Church Fathers would support a begetting by the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a wholly different question than whether I could hold such an opinion without offending the Creed itself. Your argument is that if the Creed doesn't forbid it, then holding the position cannot by itself offend the Creed. Are you changing your position now? (you should)

User avatar
Maria
Archon
Posts: 7617
Joined: Sat 12 June 2004 12:39 am
Faith: True Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOC
Location: USA

Re: The Filioque Done Right

Postby Maria » Sat 9 September 2017 7:56 am

sedevacantist wrote:you didn't answer the quote, in your pride you believe you know more than the church fathers, the creed mentions a truth, the spirit proceeds from the father, but it doesn't state to the effect the spirit doesn't proceed from the son..staggering how you don't care more for your soul and have separated from the Church of Christ..the Church of St Francis of Assisi


Dear Sedevacantist,

Please do not resort to the use of an ad hominem, which I have bolded in your quote above.
Avoiding the use of you and your will help prevent personal attacks.

This is an preliminary warning. Any further offenses will result in warnings or even bannings.

In Christ,
Maria
Administrator
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.


Return to “Inquiring into Orthodoxy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests