Reuniting all the Churches of Christ, East and West

[otjm]

Well, Rome says it is not a big deal but the Orthodox say it is. If the issue is not a big deal to Rome, why not just drop the Filioque? They agreed to the Creed as is stated in the Second Ecumenical Council, there is nothing wrong for them to accept a form without the Filioque as they have already done so in the past.

by “no big deal” I meant that Rome is comfortable with the Eastern rites not using it. and it was my understanding that the theologians (orthodox and Catholic) had come to an agreement and/or understanding on the matter. That does not necessarily mean that the Orthodox Patriarchs acce3pt what was agreed to by the theologians; but it would seem that Rome does. Whether that means we will drop it out of the creed or not I don’t know, in part because it does mean something else in Latin which is not a heretical statement (and from what I was reading, I did not pick up anything that would indicate that the Orthodox were proposing that in Latin it did make a heretical statement).

Some would even say the issue goes all the way back to St. Constantine the Great moving the capital of the Empire from Rome to Constantinople, Or the Third Ecumenical Council when Constantinople was granted the rank of Patriarchate second to Rome. It really is a long and interesting story, which also gives us the realization that healing the wounds is a pretty tall task, if not impossible.

My understanding is that nothing is impossible with the Holy Spirit; but it does take cooperation. and that could well mean that some reconcile and others don’t.

I made it a point as part of my discernment on my conversion to look as some of the issues closely, that is why I can say that the differences are far from subtle. Even though the words themselves may seem to only be nuances from one another, the underlying understanding is really far apart.

And beyond my skill set.

There is a podcast by Fr. Tom Hopko on Ancient Faith Radio where he talked about how Western scholasticism changed during the Reformation. I was shocked and never realized it had such an impact. There was a tremendous shift in worldview and people started looking at things in a different way. A big chunk of the discussion was around how “history” was defined and how we consider things to be factual or not. If you look today, you see people question the validity of Scripture based on inconsistencies of certain accounts, like the birth of Christ or His Resurrection. But those inconsistencies were unquestioned for ages. They just look at witness accounts in a whole different light back then and people really do have a different way of reasoning and analyzing things.

Well, the Enlightenment was the start, along with the regularization of science, of a drift away from the concept of a God and creation dynamic and a teleological view of creation to a much more mechanistic view. That lead to what has been labeled “Modernism” (a term I detest as it seems near impossible to define clearly enough to distinguish it from many other “isms” which have had their own (name removed by moderator)ut into world view). Locke, Barkley, Hume, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and a raft of other philosophers since then have all had their hand in shaping Western views of reality. I would not blame a lot of that on scholasticism, but I also think the last two Popes were significant gifts to the Church in that neither were scholastic oriented although both had scholastic training. And it may take a lot of time before some of that sinks in.

 

[ConstantineTG]

by “no big deal” I meant that Rome is comfortable with the Eastern rites not using it. and it was my understanding that the theologians (orthodox and Catholic) had come to an agreement and/or understanding on the matter. That does not necessarily mean that the Orthodox Patriarchs acce3pt what was agreed to by the theologians; but it would seem that Rome does. Whether that means we will drop it out of the creed or not I don’t know, in part because it does mean something else in Latin which is not a heretical statement (and from what I was reading, I did not pick up anything that would indicate that the Orthodox were proposing that in Latin it did make a heretical statement).

Well, those are not our theologians. We cannot accept the Filioque as it is. I believe we’ve already thrown down a compromise that “through the Son” is acceptable. But we can only modify the Creed via Ecumenical Council, which will happen anyway in the event of a reconciliation.

My understanding is that nothing is impossible with the Holy Spirit; but it does take cooperation. and that could well mean that some reconcile and others don’t.

I’ve been pondering the last few weeks if God is even interested in reuniting the Church, at least in a visible union. The Jewish faith was fragmented in the First Century, and Christ went to all the Jewish Sects and treated them all the same. He never said one sect is above another. Perhaps schism is part of God’s plan, sort of a new Tower of Babel, that if we are all united we will then conspire as one against God. Having our divisions keep us on our toes. Also St. Paul did say that schisms are necessary so that we may be tested and the truly faithful are revealed.

And beyond my skill set.

Anyone can learn if they devote their time to it.

Well, the Enlightenment was the start, along with the regularization of science, of a drift away from the concept of a God and creation dynamic and a teleological view of creation to a much more mechanistic view. That lead to what has been labeled “Modernism” (a term I detest as it seems near impossible to define clearly enough to distinguish it from many other “isms” which have had their own (name removed by moderator)ut into world view). Locke, Barkley, Hume, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and a raft of other philosophers since then have all had their hand in shaping Western views of reality. I would not blame a lot of that on scholasticism, but I also think the last two Popes were significant gifts to the Church in that neither were scholastic oriented although both had scholastic training. And it may take a lot of time before some of that sinks in.

I’m not too familiar in the specifics of the time period on which came before and after, but year the world did change significantly during that time. I believe it will take more than what the Popes have done. The mindset of common man is radically different. CS Lewis, if I recall correctly, said that when we read books we should make it a point to read a book from the past. It opens our mind to the way people think then. Although I find a growing problem in anachronism today where people tend to interpret past events based on today’s understanding. This is why Biblical events seem to be like fairy tales, because how truths are expressed and how it is interpreted and how it is understood is radically different, so without the aid of understanding their era many couldn’t make sense of what they read in the Bible and thus dismiss it as fantasy.

 

[Lucky7]

We cannot accept the Filioque as it is. I believe we’ve already thrown down a compromise that “through the Son” is acceptable.

Can you clarify this? I thought including “through the Son” was the issue.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Can you clarify this? I thought including “through the Son” was the issue.

Filioque means “AND the Son”. The issue here is that the Father and the Son becomes the source of the Holy Spirit, rather than just the Father.

 

[Lucky7]

Filioque means “AND the Son”. The issue here is that the Father and the Son becomes the source of the Holy Spirit, rather than just the Father.

Yes, yes, I knew this. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[chimo]

Is Christian Unity still one of the goals of the Catholic Church? I see little if anything in the Catholic press or hear anything from the pulpit on the matter of ecumenism. The priests in my parish do “same old”, “same old” each Sunday and are content with that. What about including prayers for Christian Unity in the Prayers of the Faithful during Mass? What about our bishops and our priests telling the Catholic faithful that this is something that we have to pray for. And tell them that “Orthodox” is not a dirty word.
(signed) Peter D. Aglione, Hawthorne, NY
Petradom737@aol.com
30 April 2013

The most damaging of all our efforts to unite Christ’s Church is this simple lacking of who the other is. You want unity then do your part and discover what the other is. I call this the undiscovered country. When we start to discover the undiscovered then change becomes a reality. It is a truth that people fear change. The Pharisees crucified Jesus because they were afraid of change. And despite what they did to Jesus, change did come to initiate the new covenant. It is not as different as it is today. Peoples are still afraid of change. They stick to the same status quo (as did the Pharisees) and they will not enter this undiscovered country. What is this undiscovered country but simply what the other can teach and give to me. When two people who are meant for each other want to further and deepen their relationship what do they do? They must let down their guard and let the other in. If Catholics and Orthodox are willing to let their guard down then unity is possible. I will tell you a secret. It will not come from us the adults. We are still stuck on this same status quo. It will come from our children and youth who will decide for this undiscovered country to be part of their lives. And again I will tell you a secret. It will begin here in Canada and the United States. It is here in our two great countries where and when unity will come forth. It here in our two countries where Orthodoxy and Catholicism live side by side. What better place to where this undiscovered country will be discovered! It is coming and no one will be able to stop it. If you do not accept it then in a way you are acting more like the Pharisees who would not accept the new changes by which Jesus started. But it is coming. Our two great countries despite the great immorality and causes of Church persecution within has the potential to live out what God is searching from us. What we need to do is focus our children and youth into the right direction and they will accomplish all of what we could not do. Allow the children and youth to be the lead.