12 Comments


  1. “Tertullian formulated the Godhead in Latin as tres personae, una substantia. The Greek prospon which meant “face” and later “representative” or “type.” Damasus (c. 304-384) approved the use of persona and substantia as equivalent to hypostasis and ousia respectively, but this was long after Tertullian. The Trinitarian formula which was settled on, was three persons (substances) in one essence.”

    Yes and that is why we have problems today btwn the Catholics and the Orthodox over the Filioque.

    Reply

  2. it was not until the year 589 at the Synod of Toledo that the word ‘filioque’ was added. The East has considered this to be heresy since it was added.

    Reply

  3. Your correct. However the 2nd Ecumenical Council was not recognized as such until Chalcedon in 451. The wests acceptance of that was based on the latin Vulgate translation.

    And wbmoore is correct as well, but given that the creed in 381 was strickly an eastern council which the west was not invited too, and its (the western churches)acceptance is based on Pope Leo the Great’s acceptance of it.
    The Latin translation of the Constantinopolitan Creed in the Greek term for “proceeds” (ekporeusis – “ek tou Patros ekporeuomenon”) was translated into Latin as “procedit” (“ex Patre procedentum”) –a term that, unlike the Greek, does not imply procession from a single source, principal, or cause. It would seem that there was an implicit acknowledgement on the latin side for the filioque especially given Pope Leo the Great Letter 15 To Turribius, Bishop of Asturia in 447 in reference to the Spirit as proceeding from both(eternally).

    On the other hand the Byzantine Catholic Churches recite the Creed without the Filioque, and why Catholics are able to recite the Creed without the Filioque when participating in an Eastern Orthodox Liturgies. This is also why we reject the clause “…kai tou Uiou …” (“…and the Son”) being added to the Creedal expression “ek tou Patros ekporeuomenon” in Greek, even when used by Latin Rite Catholics in Greek-speaking communities.

    Reply

  4. Correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t Rome add the filioque clause after Nicaea? Perhaps you could education a miahypostatic person, but how does that change the Creed?

    Reply

Leave a Reply, Please!