Difference between revisions of "Talk:Filioque"

From OrthodoxWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 29: Line 29:
 
[[wikipedia:Wikipedia_talk:Merging_and_moving_pages#Redirecting_from_a_misspelling|This comment]] provides more to think about as well.  I like the idea of commenting in misspellings rather than giving them a more prominent place. Any other ideas? I, for one, need to look up "Irene" to find [[Irene Chrysovalantou]], as I can never remember how the monastery's name is spelled. {{User:Magda/sig}} 15:39, November 26, 2005 (CST)
 
[[wikipedia:Wikipedia_talk:Merging_and_moving_pages#Redirecting_from_a_misspelling|This comment]] provides more to think about as well.  I like the idea of commenting in misspellings rather than giving them a more prominent place. Any other ideas? I, for one, need to look up "Irene" to find [[Irene Chrysovalantou]], as I can never remember how the monastery's name is spelled. {{User:Magda/sig}} 15:39, November 26, 2005 (CST)
  
-----
 
  
 +
==Conciliar condemnation==
 
"''There has never been a specific '''conciliar''' statement in the Orthodox Church which defined the filioque as heresy''" ... except that of The [[Eighth Ecumenical Council]], offcourse ... [[User:Luci83ro|Luci83ro]] 09:47, July 28, 2006 (CDT)
 
"''There has never been a specific '''conciliar''' statement in the Orthodox Church which defined the filioque as heresy''" ... except that of The [[Eighth Ecumenical Council]], offcourse ... [[User:Luci83ro|Luci83ro]] 09:47, July 28, 2006 (CDT)
 +
 +
: That synod did not define the ''filioque'' as heresy but rather forbid alteration to the Creed.  In effect, this precludes the ''filioque'', but it does not define it specifically as heresy, which would instead involved a standard formula such as "To any who teach that the Spirit proceeds from the Son as well as from the Father, anathema."  &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font color="blue"><b><i>Dcn. Andrew</i></b></font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Randompage|<font color="blue">random</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]</sup> 10:24, July 28, 2006 (CDT)

Revision as of 15:24, July 28, 2006

I originally imported this from Wikipedia, but it seems to me that this article needs a major reworking, if not replacement. Its rhetoric is pretty convoluted and unclear. --Rdr. Andrew 19:50, 1 Feb 2005 (CST)

Update: It has, indeed, been significantly reworked! —[[User:ASDamick|—Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!)]] 12:39, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)


No Basilique

The article said:

Charlemagne called for a council at Aix-la-Chapelle in 809 at which Pope Leo III forbade the use of the filioque clause and ordered that the original version of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed be engraved on silver tablets displayed at St. Peter's Basilica in Rome so that his conclusion would not be overturned in the future.

But in at that time there was no "St. Peter's Basilica".


Misspelling?

Do you think it's really necessary to include a misspelled version? It seems that could set a somewhat awkward precedent. I don't see that sort of thing in any encyclopedia with which I'm familiar. —[[User:ASDamick|—Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!)]] 12:39, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Rdr. Andrew, Please feel free to change anything I do. Let me say...I don't know you in the flesh, but have come to appreciate you and your leadership. Maybe the way to approach this is to insert it somewhere in the text or redirect a filoque page to filioque. I just know that this is a very common misspelling (I've done it!). Whatever the community sees fit to do. Maybe we should start something in the style manual about how to address misspellings. --[[User:Joe Rodgers|Joe ( talk » inspect » chat )]] 13:05, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)
I don't think we should put in redirects for misspellings - I don't think it makes the site that much more usable, and such redirects could too easily multiply. Besides, why not just let people learn to spell the words in question correctly? Fr. John
Yes, I thought that the redirect issue could get out of hand. This is why I thought to include the misspelling on the page. --[[User:Joe Rodgers|Joe ( talk » inspect » chat )]] 14:11, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)
Perhaps the Misspellings section could be removed, and the sentence "Filioque may be misspelled as filoque." added to the very end of the first paragraph? Especially in an article of this magnitude, giving a such a brief section to misspellings seems out of balance. —magda 19:31, 5 Jul 2005 (EDT)
Ah yes, here is where the discussion was. Filoque is a common misspelling. I guess I thought we could be indexed by search engines and it would point them in the right direction. I still don't know how important this is, but I care. Joe 16:19 26 Nov 2005
Hmm... the search engine thing is an interesting consideration. Maybe we could put in misspellings in comments, so they don't show for people, but they could for search engines. E.g. at the bottom of the page, near the Categories, we could put <!-- Common misspellings: filoqe filllioque--> and so on? What do other folks think about that idea?

This comment provides more to think about as well. I like the idea of commenting in misspellings rather than giving them a more prominent place. Any other ideas? I, for one, need to look up "Irene" to find Irene Chrysovalantou, as I can never remember how the monastery's name is spelled. —magda (talk) 15:39, November 26, 2005 (CST)


Conciliar condemnation

"There has never been a specific conciliar statement in the Orthodox Church which defined the filioque as heresy" ... except that of The Eighth Ecumenical Council, offcourse ... Luci83ro 09:47, July 28, 2006 (CDT)

That synod did not define the filioque as heresy but rather forbid alteration to the Creed. In effect, this precludes the filioque, but it does not define it specifically as heresy, which would instead involved a standard formula such as "To any who teach that the Spirit proceeds from the Son as well as from the Father, anathema." —Dcn. Andrew talk random contribs 10:24, July 28, 2006 (CDT)