Filioque and JImmy Akin's "Fathers Know Best"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dave_in_Dallas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dave_in_Dallas

Guest
I was wondering if any Eastern folks have read Jimmy Akin’s book “Fathers KNow Best”, in particular the section about the filioque and the quotes from the Fathers he uses? Curious to know thoughts.
 
Dave_in_Dallas said:
I was wondering if any Eastern folks have read Jimmy Akin’s book “Fathers KNow Best”, in particular the section about the filioque and the quotes from the Fathers he uses? Curious to know thoughts.
Click to expand...
link?
 
TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE

I believe the Spirit to proceed from no other source than from the Father through the Son [Against Praxeas 4 (C. A.D. 218) ]

St Hilary Of Poiters

CONCERNING THE HOLY SPRIT… THERE IS NO NEED TO SPEAK, BECAUSE WE ARE BOUND TO CONFESS HIM, PROCEEDING, AS HE DOES, FROM FATHER AND SON

[The Trininty 2:29 (C. A.D. 3570]

ST EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS

The Father always existed, and the Son always existed, and the Spirit breathes from the Father and the Son

[Man Well Anchored 75 ( ad 374) ]

ST BASIL OF CAESAREA

One, moreover, is the Holy Spirit, and we speak of him singly, conjoined as he is to the one father through the Son , and through himself completing the adorable Blessed Trinity

[The Holy Spirit 18:45 (AD 375) ]

ST CYRIL OF ALEXADRIA

Since the Holy Spirit when he is in us effects our being conformed to God, and he actually proceeds from the Father and the Son, it is abundantly clear that he is of the divine essence, in it in essence and proceeding from it [Treasury of the Holy Trinity, thesis 34 (AD 424) ]
 
I find that many of the quotes of the Greek Fathers that are used by this website and Jimmy Akins are taken out of context. To me it is mind boggling why a site or Jimmy would use some of the Greek Fathers to support the filioque. As much as Akins is a jewel to CAF and the West, he is not infallible, and I see this more often than not in that he takes the Western approach with every Greek Father and Eastern topic. It is interesting that he uses Tertullian and Basil, because without examining further both of their quotes depict the Eastern concept of the trinity rather than the West. Not that he cannot use these, but to an Easterner it looks awkward since he is trying to validate a Western concept with Eastern Fathers.
 
Mojo674 said:
I find that many of the quotes of the Greek Fathers that are used by this website and Jimmy Akins are taken out of context. To me it is mind boggling why a site or Jimmy would use some of the Greek Fathers to support the filioque. As much as Akins is a jewel to CAF and the West, he is not infallible, and I see this more often than not in that he takes the Western approach with every Greek Father and Eastern topic. It is interesting that he uses Tertullian and Basil, because without examining further both of their quotes depict the Eastern concept of the trinity rather than the West. Not that he cannot use these, but to an Easterner it looks awkward since he is trying to validate a Western concept with Eastern Fathers.
Click to expand...
Yes, It does seem like they are quoted out of context, kind of like protestants do with Holy Scripture…

Would you please enlighten us what the Holy Fathers actually meant in these quotes?
 
I read thru Basil’s quote at another spot on the web and well it doesn’t look out of context from the surrounding text… but then again I am not an expert on Basil either (nor much of anything else 🙂 )
 
In fact, both Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that the Father is the sole Origin of both the Son and the Holy Spirit.

RC Trinitarian theology refers to the Spirit’s spiration from the Son as “passive” only. The Father “actively” spirates the Holy Spirit.

So, in fact, this matter should really be laid to rest once and for all, with the dropping of the Filioque from the Creed where it never was to begin with.

Alex
 
Alexander_Roman said:
In fact, both Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that the Father is the sole Origin of both the Son and the Holy Spirit.

RC Trinitarian theology refers to the Spirit’s spiration from the Son as “passive” only. The Father “actively” spirates the Holy Spirit.

So, in fact, this matter should really be laid to rest once and for all, with the dropping of the Filioque from the Creed where it never was to begin with.

Alex
Click to expand...
👍
 
Mojo674 said:
I find that many of the quotes of the Greek Fathers that are used by this website and Jimmy Akins are taken out of context. To me it is mind boggling why a site or Jimmy would use some of the Greek Fathers to support the filioque. As much as Akins is a jewel to CAF and the West, he is not infallible, and I see this more often than not in that he takes the Western approach with every Greek Father and Eastern topic. It is interesting that he uses Tertullian and Basil, because without examining further both of their quotes depict the Eastern concept of the trinity rather than the West. Not that he cannot use these, but to an Easterner it looks awkward since he is trying to validate a Western concept with Eastern Fathers.
Click to expand...
Tertullian was a Western Father.
 
Alexander_Roman said:
In fact, both Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that the Father is the sole Origin of both the Son and the Holy Spirit.

RC Trinitarian theology refers to the Spirit’s spiration from the Son as “passive” only. The Father “actively” spirates the Holy Spirit.

So, in fact, this matter should really be laid to rest once and for all, with the dropping of the Filioque from the Creed where it never was to begin with.

Alex
Click to expand...
👍 as well.

It would be nice if Roman Catholic apologists would learn the Eastern doctrine (and, along the way, better understand their own) before trying to “refute” it.
 
Alexander_Roman said:
So, in fact, this matter should really be laid to rest once and for all, with the dropping of the Filioque from the Creed where it never was to begin with.

Alex
Click to expand...
I strongly disagree with this. As Marduk pointed out elsewhere, what needs to occur is theological understanding between the East and the West - not a compromise that leaves unresolved the apparent contradiction between Filioque vs. non-Filioque and appears to say that the “Filioque” was wrong. It isn’t wrong (at least in English and Latin), and dropping it from the Creed will not teach either side anything. Instead, we need to proclaim the common Trinitarian faith promulgated by the Ecumenical Councils of Florence and IV Constantinople, that the Holy Spirit hypostatically proceeds from the Father, and that His divinity is received (as energy, not hypostasis) through His eternal manifestation from the Son.

The Orthodox need to understand that the Roman Catholics do not mean and never meant that the Holy Spirit proceeds hypostatically from the Father, something that Roman Catholics would understand better if they were still taught Aquinas. Roman Catholics need to understand the essence/energy distinction, and that the East does teach a very precise relation by which the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son even within the immanent Trinity, an understanding much farther developed and more nuanced than the Western expression. The West should preserve the Filioque in their Creed, just as the East should get rid of it (by “the East” I mean the local UGCC parish here :rolleyes:).

Besides, one of the most beautiful polyphonic settings of the Creed was done by the Orthodox composer Arvo Part, in Latin. Would be a shame if it could no longer be sung because the Roman Catholic Church got rid of the Filioque.
 
Dear Cecilianus,

Well, unless there is a unilateral agreement on the text of the Nicene Creed - there won’t be unity.

We should all just return to the original text of the Creed without calling anyone anything for having the Filioque or not.

I don’t see why you aren’t an enthusiastic, ebullient supporter of this . . .😉

Alex
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top