Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Talk:Filioque

1,126 bytes added, 01:54, July 29, 2006
Which filioque?
:::Okay. That was very enlightening, I have to admit. And thank You very much for Your prompt response, Father. But I still can't help myself at asking yet another ''Silly question #2a'': how is something "against, or contrary to, the Orthodox faith", yet "''not'' condemned" by the very same Orthodoxy that it contradicts? And yet another ''Silly question #2b'': how does Orthodoxy not contradict something that contradicts Orthodoxy? [[User:Luci83ro|Luci83ro]] 13:50, July 28, 2006 (CDT)
 
::::Conciliar condemnations are not issued simply because a heterodox teaching arises. There needs to be a sort of "critical mass" of controversy in order for a synod to meet and issue an anathema. If, for instance, a local parishioner had a few bizarre ideas about the Church, they may never affect anyone but for a few of his fellow parishioners. If, however, a bishop began teaching something heterodox and instructed all his priests to do the same, gaining support from outside his diocese, as well, that would be a clear case for a synodal condemnation (assuming, of course, that the heterodoxy isn't something already covered by previous anathema).
 
::::In short, anathemas really are for pastoral necessity in the Church body, not to keep every person doctrinally pure in every expressed opinion. &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> 20:54, July 28, 2006 (CDT)
I think the distinction is rather straightforward. A heresy is a teaching that the Orthodox Church has formally condemned as theological error. Presumably there are many, many heterodox claims that have been made that the Church has never formally condemned. Part of what I was saying before is that the notion of "filioque" is patient of an Orthodox interpretation, as when St Maximos Confessor speaks of the Spirit proceeding "through" the Son. One need not take it in the heterodox sense of taking the Son to be a second, eteranl cause of the Spirit. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 20:22, July 28, 2006 (CDT)
interwiki, renameuser, Administrators
13,544
edits

Navigation menu