Which will happen first?

  • Thread starter Thread starter friendster324
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

friendster324

Guest
Presupposing a reunification of the East and West, which would happen first: The insertion of the filioque in the East or the removal of it in the West? If reunion is to happen, one of these must occur, so which is it?
 
When I said East and West, I meant Orthodox and Catholic. Sorry for the misuse of terms.
 
I’m not so sure that either would have to happen, and I’m pretty sure that it wouldn’t be demanded. Look to the Eastern Churches in union with Rome–they don’t use the Filioque in the Creed, and neither should they. Reunion does not have to come at the expense of one’s theological expressions.

-ACEGC
 
Truth and error shouldn`t be allowed to coexist, though; so, surely the dispute should be thrashed out. 🤷

The truth about the inner Life of God isn`t just a minor thing.
 
Did not know that. I feel incredibly small and ignorant now…

Then when the Pope, who is Roman, is in the midst of Eastern Catholics, he would not say it? I know that has been the case with the Orthodox out of ecumenical generosity but shouldn’t the creed be a point of unity rather than expression? Wouldn’t this be betraying his “freedom of expression” if you will?

I’m under the impression that the creed is much more important than just when and how many times you cross yourself. Ya know, ‘lex orandi, lex credendi’ stuff…
 
The west would most likely end up removing the Filioque from the Creed. Benedict has already chosen not to use it on certain occasions. The Eastern Orthodox would never accept it being inserted into their creeds and Eastern Catholics currently do not use the Filioque in our creeds.
 
My opinion on the matter is that a new Creed will be written for a united Church. Because we have been divided in belief for so long, we need to state clearly our united beliefs once again through a new Creed, and affirm the unity of the Church on earth.
 
Fink said:
Truth and error shouldn`t be allowed to coexist, though; so, surely the dispute should be thrashed out. 🤷

The truth about the inner Life of God isn`t just a minor thing.
Click to expand...
And no such thing is occuring. 🤷
 
friendster324 said:
Did not know that. I feel incredibly small and ignorant now…
Click to expand...
Please don’t. 🙂
Then when the Pope, who is Roman, is in the midst of Eastern Catholics, he would not say it? I know that has been the case with the Orthodox out of ecumenical generosity but shouldn’t the creed be a point of unity rather than expression? Wouldn’t this be betraying his “freedom of expression” if you will?
Click to expand...
I’m under the impression that the creed is much more important than just when and how many times you cross yourself. Ya know, ‘lex orandi, lex credendi’ stuff…
Click to expand...
You might be interested in the The Filioque: a Church-Dividing Issue? An Agreed statement of the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation.

And Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I and HH Benedict XVI recite the Creed in Greek.
 
friendster324 said:
Presupposing a reunification of the East and West, which would happen first: The insertion of the filioque in the East or the removal of it in the West?
Click to expand...
Neither, it is not necessary that the Latins change their Traditional use, nor would it be just for them to impose it on us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top