Filioque and Eastern Christian Trinitarian understanding

[Traditional_Ang]

Steve:

This probably is off topic, but when my Father’s Parish became orthodox (they had been a Mission Church of one of the first dissident parshes that left PECUSA in the 1970’s) they weren NOT rebaptized, but they were CONDITIONALLY rechrismated…
steve b:

I’ll get to the URL’s later.

With regards to rebaptism, between the CC and the EO, if both taught this as necessary between both parties for a candidate who jumped one ship for another, this to me would suggest that both parties thinks the other really isn’t the Church regardless of what the rhetoric says. Therefore rebaptism is necessary because each party thinks the other is outside the Church and therefore their sacraments are null and void.

Anyone who was guilty of heresy under Cyprian’s watch was required to be rebaptised before being accepted back into communion, bishops included. And a heretic, even a bishop, couldn’t validly baptise or confect any sacrament until being rebaptised. Pope Stephen at the time disagreed with Cyprian on this.

But this is off the topic of the Trinity and procession

…This proves this is NOT the doctrine of the ANTIOCHAN ORTHODOX CHURCH.

Blessings to you and your parish family.

Michael

 

[prodromos]

Aris:

Greg has extended the list. But I am wondering why he got suspended.

He started a new thread on a topic which had just got an otherwise fine thread locked. It was apalling and I’m glad you missed it

Please comment beside the statements whether you agree with the Catholic beliefs.

1. that the Spirit is eternally the Spirit of the Father and of the Son.

If this is understood in terms of the Holy Spirit being divine then we agree. If it is understood in terms of the origin of the Holy Spirit and the procession of the same then we do not agree.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose:

I wouldn’t be so “triumphalistic” so soon. As I recall, the Orthodox Church allows Divorce and Remarraige in case of ADULTERY, Since you have no way of knowing who’s the “adulterer” or the "victim’, you have NO way of knowing whether you’re bringing together someone in the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony who’s already broken his/her marraige bonds by breaking their marraige vows. Therefore, you have NO way of keeping this person from possibly “breaking the heart” of one of your own Orthodox parishioners.
Fr Ambrose:

Well, I didn’t like to carry my thought through to its ultimate end since it might seem triumphalistic

As the Catholics see the dawning of union and the Popes urge them to embrace their Eastern brethren, many of them will do just that - on account of the more lenient divorce approach. I predict hundreds of thousands of new Orthodox brides and grooms

We also have to remember that the Divorce rate among those who actually keep the teachings of the Catholic Church and dedicate their lives and those of their families to God and the church is extremly low. While the divorce rate among those Catholics who don’t to do those things is much higher (comparable to the rest of society).

That means, you’re primarily getting (with some exceptions) people who weren’t, and aren’t dedicated Catholics. On what basis do you think these people are going to become dedicated Orthodox after they’ve taken advantage of your Church for “Church Weddings” and a place to baptize their children, if they have any?

May God bless you and your congregation.

Michael

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

when my Father’s Parish became orthodox (they had been a Mission Church of one of the first dissident parshes that left PECUSA in the 1970’s) they weren NOT rebaptized, but they were CONDITIONALLY rechrismated

I find this conditional chrismation of interest.

1. The Orthodox Churches do not accept the validity (using Western terminology here) of Confirmation-Chrismation in non-Orthodox Churches, so I do not see how the sacrament could have been administered conditionally?
2. Low-Church Anglicans accept and administer only two sacraments: Baptism and Eucharist, so the great majority of Anglicans have not received any sacramental Confirmation anyway.
3. Christmation is not a once-only sacrament for the Orthodox. It is repeatable. So this makes the concept of conditional chrismation an oxymoron.

Could you make some more enquiries on this point. I’ll see about putting a query about it on the clergy lists.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

That means, you’re primarily getting (with some exceptions) people who weren’t, and aren’t dedicated Catholics.

Believe me, they are!!!

One (a member of my own family) stayed with her husband, also a Catholic but he was divorced so they could not get married in the Catholic Church. They lived in fornication (for her) and adultery (for him) for 20 years. During that time she bore him four children which the local Catholic priest refused to baptize and she took them to a priest in another city. During all this time she waas denied communion in her Catholic church. Every day she said the rosary and every time she went shopping she ‘paid a visit’.

After two decades and with her soul crying out for Christ and communion she came to the Orthodox Church and was received, together with her husband. Both of them have been excellent parishioners for years now.

On what basis do you think these people are going to become dedicated Orthodox after they’ve taken advantage of your Church for “Church Weddings” and a place to baptize their children, if they have any?

My experience is not limited to the above couple. In all the cases I know, in our parish and in others, these people are dedicated Orthodox, attend church, come to confession and communion, keep the fasts and educate their children in the faith. I have no complaints and I don’t feel they are have taken advantage of the Church for a wedding and a place to baptize their children.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

John:

He pretty much gang tackled one of the other posters. I’ve since apologized to him, because it appears they took advantage of my departure to do it. You’re right - It was pretty ugly.

Hopefully, a few says off during LENT will let Greg know that he just can’t do that.

prodromos:

He started a new thread on a topic which had just got an otherwise fine thread locked. It was apalling and I’m glad you missed it
If this is understood in terms of the Holy Spirit being divine then we agree. If it is understood in terms of the origin of the Holy Spirit and the procession of the same then we do not agree.

I seem to recall some Orthodox using the formulation using the formula, “Proceeds from the Father through the Son.” which maintains the “Monarchia” of the Father and potentially allows the dual formulation because the Latin Word for “Proceed” means something completely different from the Greek word that’s actually used in the “Symbol of Nicea” or what we know as the Nicene Creed.

One Single Source: An Orthodox Response to the Clarification on the Filioque
By Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon
orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/john_zizioulas_single_source.htm

Blessings to you and your household.

Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr Ambrose:

I find this conditional chrismation of interest.

1. The Orthodox Churches do not accept the validity (using Western terminology here) of Confirmation-Chrismation in non-Orthodox Churches, so I do not see how the sacrament could have been administered conditionally?
2. Low-Church Anglicans accept and administer only two sacraments: Baptism and Eucharist, so the great majority of Anglicans have not received any sacramental Confirmation anyway.
3. Christmation is not a once-only sacrament for the Orthodox. It is repeatable. So this makes the concept of conditional chrismation an oxymoron.

Could you make some more enquiries on this point. I’ll see about putting a query about it on the clergy lists.

Fr. Ambrose:

On this one, my father could have been wrong. He probably didn’t understand the Orthodox doctrine and was just happy that he and his congregation found a home, esp. after the very real problems of PECUSA (now ECUSA) and the problems their mother parish was having at that time in their efforts to be accepted into the Roman Catholic Church as an Anglican Rite/Use parish.

I’ve discussed that earlier in brief and any more details might be a violation of our Church’s laws regarding “Truthful Gossip” and La’ash a’Torah (“The Evil Tongue”).

I do know that the Antiochan Orthodox Church and Metropolitan Philip seemed to bend over backwards to accommodate them and their needs.

Since Chrismation can be done as often as needed, I can see how my father could have gotten confused.

May God bless you and your congregation.

MIchael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose:

I can only say that you’ve been very lucky…The same goes for your family member who could have been very much hurt.
Fr Ambrose:

Believe me, they are!!!

One (a member of my own family) stayed with her husband, also a Catholic but he was divorced so they could not get married in the Catholic Church. They lived in fornication (for her) and adultery (for him) for 20 years. During that time she bore him four children which the local Catholic priest refused to baptize and she took them to a priest in another city. During all this time she was denied communion in her Catholic church. Every day she said the rosary and every time she went shopping she ‘paid a visit’.

After two decades and with her soul crying out for Christ and communion she came to the Orthodox Church and was received, together with her husband. Both of them have been excellent parishioners for years now.

My experience is not limited to the above couple. In all the cases I know, in our parish and in others, these people are dedicated Orthodox, attend church, come to confession and communion, keep the fasts and educate their children in the faith. I have no complaints and I don’t feel they are have taken advantage of the Church for a wedding and a place to baptize their children.

…I can only say that “Mercy is Greater than shame”, and that, since no one had been able to convince these two to not have a sexual relationship in the first place, you did take care of a spiritual need.

I’m just afraid that you may find yourself confronted by people who will take advantange of the more relaxed rules in the Orthodox Church regarding divorce and remarraige.

Blessing and peace to you. And Good Night - I’m just exhausted.

Michael

PS: St. Michael’s parish was accepted into the Antiochian Orthodox Church some 24 years ago & my father died in 1984, so I’m a bit fuzzy on the details: But here they are…

*On January l8, l981, two thirds of the congregation led by Fr.Trigg vote to apply to the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese to be received as a Western Rite parish of the Archdiocese. The remaining one third of the congregation leave immediately. Fr. Trigg the next week goes to New York to meet with Metropolitan PHILIP to personally present the congregations petition to be received.

On March 22nd and 23 of l981, Archbishop MICHAEL comes to St. Michael’s, chrismates the Faithful and ordains Fr. Trigg an Orthodox priest, James Morse, a Deacon and Michael Perkins, Sub-Deacon. The parish becomes fully integrated into the Archdiocese. *

whittier.stmichael.org/parish/briefhist.html

I thought you’d like that…Good Night!

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

I can only say that you’ve been very lucky…The same goes for your family member who could have been very much hurt.

Yes, well, they were very hurt by their rejection by their former faith community, which had educated and nurtured both of them since their first steps as toddlers.

I’m just afraid that you may find yourself confronted by people who will take advantange of the more relaxed rules in the Orthodox Church regarding divorce and remarraige.

Well, one can’t always hope for 100% accurate discernment but generally speaking clergy have a “feel” for people and don’t get duped too often.

Yes, I suppose you could say that the ‘rules’ are more relaxed in the Church, aa compared to the rules in the Roman Catholic Church. But the Church is not an army with a handbook which must always be observed. The Church is a hospital where men and women can hope to find spiritual healing, a place where their sins are forgiven and they can find the grace to continue their spiritual journey. What is the use to apply inflexible rules to a man or woman who is wounded and in pain? Better for the Church to use the sovereign grace given her by God to bind up the wounds and bring about healing.

 

[Aris]

Aris:

1. We believe in one God
2. We believe in that God is three Persons in one.
3. We believe that each Person is distinct from the other by their relationship, The Father is the unbegotten, the Son is begotten and the Holy Spirit proceeds.
4. that the Persons of the Trinity are consubstantial;
5. that the Persons of the Trinity are distinct by virtue of their Names.
6. that the Persons of the Trinity are all equal; that there is no gradation of power or honor among the Persons.
7. that the Father works ALL things through the Son;
8. that the Spirit is able to comprehend the innermost thoughts of the Father and the Son;
9. that the Spirit is eternally the Spirit of the Father and of the Son.

Still no takers from the Orthodox side? Please write after the item if you agree or not.
SteveB! no more additions to our viewpoints? I think you have a couple more that we can add to the list.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Aris:

Still no takers from the Orthodox side? Please write after the item if you agree or not.
SteveB! no more additions to our viewpoints? I think you have a couple more that we can add to the list.

Originally Posted by Aris

1. We believe in one God
2. We believe in that God is three Persons in one.

Can you please clarify… “three Persons in one” what?

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Originally Posted by Aris

1. that the Persons of the Trinity are distinct by virtue of their Names.

What does this mean? What is in the virtue of the Names that distinguishes the Persons?

1. that the Persons of the Trinity are all equal; that there is no gradation of power or honor among the Persons.

How does this relate to the monarchy of the Father?

1. that the Father works ALL things through the Son;

What is being conveyed by the capitalisation of ALL?

1. that the Spirit is able to comprehend the innermost thoughts of the Father and the Son;

Does this mean that the Father lacks comprehension of the Son and vice versa?

1. that the Spirit is eternally the Spirit of the Father and of the Son.

This is not possible unless the Spirit has an eternal procession from the Son.

 

[steve_b]

prodromos:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=437592#post437592

John, I’m glad you made things easier.

prodromos:

Do you believe the third person of the Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit, is something the Father “possesses”?

Can one possess love? sure! It’s probably not the best way to say it. The problem with language, words don’t adequately describe God.

prodromos:

Is the Holy Spirit now simply a characteristic of the Father which He shares with the Son?

Let’s say it’s all about Divine relationship.

The Spirit is referred to as the Spirit of the Son (Gal. 4:6)
***and this is eternal, and uncreated. ***These terms imply a relation of the Spirit to the Son, which can only be a relation of origin. If it is not of origin, then the Son is not divine and eternal. This conclusion is so much the more indisputable as all admit the similar argument to explain why

The Spirit is refererred to as the Spirit of the Father (Rom 8:9) and this is eternal and uncreated** Augustine asks, Are they different spirits? **Love doesn’t go in one direction. The love between the Father and Son is reciprocal. And in the divinity, It goes both ways from all eternity. There was not a time when it didn’t exist.

---

or as it is said by the Church

• The Holy Ghost is the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity.
• Though really distinct, as a Person, from the Father and the Son, He is consubstantial with Them; being God like Them, He possesses with Them one and the same Divine Essence or Nature.
• He proceeds, not by way of generation, but by way of spiration, from the Father and the Son together, as from a single principle.

"That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father has always been admitted by all Christians; the truth is expressly stated in John, xv, 26.

Butthe Greeks, after Photius, deny that He proceeds from the Son. And yet such is manifestly the teaching of Holy Scripture and the Fathers."

for full context

newadvent.org/cathen/07409a.htm

---

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

JMJ + OBT​

Can. 1364 S1 An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication, without prejudice to the provision of Can. 194 S1, n. 2;

This does not apply to Catholics who become Orthodox, as far as I understand the teachings of Vatican II in regard to the status of the Orthodox.

“an apostate from the faith” - any Catholic moving into Orthodoxy is leaving the Roman Catholic Church but he or she is not apostasizing from the faith. Rome accepts the faith (and the sacraments) of Orthodoxy.

“a heretic” - Rome does not consider the Orthodox as heretics.

“a schismatic” - Rome does not consider the Orthodox as schismatics. It did previously but not any longer.

Therefore no Catholic who is received into Orthodoxy incurs a latae sententiae excommunication nor falls into a state of mortal sin.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Aris:

Fr. Ambrose, John,
Greg has extended the list. But I am wondering why he got suspended.

Aris:

As John said, Greg was suspended for doing something he had absolutely no business doing that I had previously warned him about.

Aris:

1. We believe in that God is three Persons in one.

Fr. Ambrose is right, “…One what?” You didn’t finish your sentence. It should read, “…One God.” So, the sentence should have read:

2. We believe in that God is three Persons in One God.

I can add two:

1. That God’s Nature is Agape (This is the Love which seeks the best for the other person in the relationship).
2. One of God’s Names is that of “Mercy” or “Merciful” (I’ve become acquained with that recently).

Blessings to you on this Friday of fast and abstinence.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose:

I can understand at least some of what they went through, having gone through much of the same as someone who was baptized, raised and confirmed in PECUSA and then watched them do things and say things I and my family just couldn’t live with. I do remember that feeling of rejection, esp. in my father, who had gone out of his way to join that body some 20 years before our leaving.
Fr Ambrose:

Yes, well, they were very hurt by their rejection by their former faith community, which had educated and nurtured both of them since their first steps as toddlers.

The American Bishops of the Catholic Church have been pretty lax about granting annulments. The only on i’ve disagreed with is Sen. Kennady’s annulment of his marraige from his wife of 30 years, because it seemed to be one in a long line of political favors done for his family by the Archdiocese of Boston that got Ted Kennady out of trouble.

I know this is private, but had the divorced man applied for an annulment from his Archbishop in New Zealand? He just might have been entitled to one.
Fr Ambrose:

Well, one can’t always hope for 100% accurate discernment but generally speaking clergy have a “feel” for people and don’t get duped too often.

The Catholic Church is placing that responsibility in the hands of the Archbihops in the process of granting annulments.

But, I think I know what you mean. When I was on the outside, I met a member of my girlfriend’s family, a perpetual Deacon (Deacon Ed) Whom I didn’t think very highly of. I recently had occasion to meet the same man. I was amazed at how wise he was. The change that occured was in me.
Fr Ambrose:

Yes, I suppose you could say that the ‘rules’ are more relaxed in the Church, as compared to the rules in the Roman Catholic Church. But the Church is not an army with a handbook which must always be observed. The Church is a hospital where men and women can hope to find spiritual healing, a place where their sins are forgiven and they can find the grace to continue their spiritual journey. What is the use to apply inflexible rules to a man or woman who is wounded and in pain? Better for the Church to use the sovereign grace given her by God to bind up the wounds and bring about healing.

Fr., one problem is that the Church is both an Army and a Hospital, and that Armies have wounded whose wounds need to bound up, il whose sicknesses need to be treated, scared who need to reassured, lost who need to be led and desserters who need to be brought back.

Another problem is one of the missions of this army, which is go about into the hiways and byways looking for the lost and wounded and to bring them in the Hospital of Grace to save their lives so these may become the soldiers on the front lines later on.

Another problem is that we human beings forget one or the other function of this body, and that often the lines between the Front Lines and the Hospital are sometimes very short.

Blessings to you and your congregation.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

To all - I understand this is accepted by the West but by NOT by the East:

Quicunque Vult also known as The Athanasian Creed

*Whoever wills to be in a state of salvation, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic [apostolic/universal] faith, which except everyone shall have kept whole and undefiled without doubt he will perish eternally.

Now the aatholic faith is that we worship One God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is One, the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.

Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit; the Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated; the father infinite, the Son infinite, and the Holy Spirit infinite; the Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet not three eternals but one eternal, as also not three infinites, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one infinite. So, likewise, the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty; and yet not three almighties but one almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God; and yet not three Gods but one God. So the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord; and yet not three Lords but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by Christian truth to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be both God and Lord; so are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say, there be three Gods or three Lords.

The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, nod made nor created but begotten. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten but proceeding. So there is one Father not three Fathers, one Son not three Sons, and Holy Spirit not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity there is nothing before or after, nothing greater or less, but the whole three Persons are coeternal together and coequal.

So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity is to be worshipped. He therefore who wills to be in a state of salvation, let him think thus of the Trinity.

But it is necessary to eternal salvation that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. The right faith therefore is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.

He is God of the substance of the Father begotten before the worlds, and He is man of the substance of His mother born in the world; perfect God, perfect man subsisting of a reasoning soul and human flesh; equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood.

Who although He be God and Man yet He is not two but one Christ; one however not by conversion of the GodHead in the flesh, but by taking of the Manhood in God; one altogether not by confusion of substance but by unity of Person. For as the reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ.

Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again from the dead, ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, from whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life eternal, and they who indeed have done evil into eternal fire.

This is the catholic faith, which except a man shall have believed faithfully and firmly he cannot be in a state of salvation.*

ewtn.com/library/SOURCES/ATHANASI.TXT

With alternative readings and the original Latin:

spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/athanasn.htm

Latin and English side by Side:

creeds.net/ancient/Quicumque.html

This is as thorough as it gets. I encourage the Orthodox to reply. You may wish to use the latest LINK and re-LINK the quotes in your comments so that we can all follow your commentary.

Thank you and God Bless you.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

To all - I understand this is accepted by the West but by NOT by the East:

Quicunque Vult also known as The Athanasian Creed

*Whoever wills to be in a state of salvation, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic [apostolic/universal] faith, which except everyone shall have kept whole and undefiled without doubt he will perish eternally.

Now the aatholic faith is that we worship One God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is One, the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.

Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit; the Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated; the father infinite, the Son infinite, and the Holy Spirit infinite; the Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet not three eternals but one eternal, as also not three infinites, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one infinite. So, likewise, the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty; and yet not three almighties but one almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God; and yet not three Gods but one God. So the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord; and yet not three Lords but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by Christian truth to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be both God and Lord; so are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say, there be three Gods or three Lords.

The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, nod made nor created but begotten. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten but proceeding. So there is one Father not three Fathers, one Son not three Sons, and Holy Spirit not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity there is nothing before or after, nothing greater or less, but the whole three Persons are coeternal together and coequal.

So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity is to be worshipped. He therefore who wills to be in a state of salvation, let him think thus of the Trinity.

But it is necessary to eternal salvation that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. The right faith therefore is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.

He is God of the substance of the Father begotten before the worlds, and He is man of the substance of His mother born in the world; perfect God, perfect man subsisting of a reasoning soul and human flesh; equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood.

Who although He be God and Man yet He is not two but one Christ; one however not by conversion of the GodHead in the flesh, but by taking of the Manhood in God; one altogether not by confusion of substance but by unity of Person. For as the reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ.

Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again from the dead, ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, from whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life eternal, and they who indeed have done evil into eternal fire.

This is the catholic faith, which except a man shall have believed faithfully and firmly he cannot be in a state of salvation.*

ewtn.com/library/SOURCES/ATHANASI.TXT

With alternative readings and the original Latin:

spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/athanasn.htm

Latin and English side by Side:

creeds.net/ancient/Quicumque.html

This is as thorough as it gets. I encourage the Orthodox to reply

A forgery. Saint Athanasius lived in the East. This Creed was wriiten in the West. So it’s provenance is not known.

It is believed that the clauses relating to the filioque are a later addition since its composition, whoever the author may have really been, predates the Western interpolation of the filioque into the Nicene Creed.

I have a vague recollection that it is printed at the back of one of the Orthodox Service Books, perhaps the Book of Epistles, but it is not used liturgically in the East, and in fact it plays no role at all in the East.

Well, that is as much as I remember off the top of my head

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose.

As I said, I know it’s not accept in the East. Since the Original is in Latin and not Greed, it could be assumed that St. Athanasius, whose Greek was better than his Latin, didn’t write it…
Fr Ambrose:

A forgery. Saint Athanasius lived in the East. This Creed was wriiten in the West. So it’s provenance is not known.

It is believed that the clauses relating to the filioque are a later addition since its composition, whoever the author may have really been, predates the Western interpolation of the filioque into the Nicene Creed.

I have a vague recollection that it is printed at the back of one of the Orthodox Service Books, perhaps the Book of Epistles, but it is not used liturgically in the East, and in fact it plays no role at all in the East.

Well, that is as much as I remember off the top of my head

…It’s just some of the other Catholics were putting together a Statement of Catholic Faith, which I felt wasn’t really going anywhere as far as learning from each other. I figured that, since The Athanasian Creed is accepted in the West, this just might prove to be as good a starting place as any for dialogue and commentary on this.

The line by line is here:

creeds.net/ancient/Quicumque.html

If you to do a Check-off and just note which lines are OK as far as you (and the rest of the Orthodox) are concerned, I’d be grateful. I think we’d be left with 2 or 3 sentences to discuss.

I really believe this would be more fruitful than Catholic posters trying to add to some list while I shrug and you poke holes. If nothing else, we Catholics will learn how to state their own faith more completely and accurately.

If they do that, you will have done us a favor.

God bless you and your congregation.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

I figured that, since The Athanasian Creed is accepted in the West, this just might prove to be as good a starting place as any for dialogue and commentary on this.

But we already have a Creed, the Nicene, which was composed and ratified by the entire Church, East and West. Why don’t we use that rather than a local Creed composed by an unknown person of no known authority in the West.

The Nicene Creed is our common inheritance. It carries the approval of all the Ecumenical Councils and of all the bishops who attended them from every Church in Christendom.

I suppose that what I am saying is, why reinvent the wheel?