Prior popes have done this in a mistaken attempt at diplomacy with Orthodoxy, the vast majority of whom have bupkis interest in unity with Rome. The almost a thousand years effort of the popes to resolve the schism has been a chase after wind.
And The Son
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
This action was not Inspired. It could not have been.
Disappointing. Again. But I remain hopeful.
Every week, my Melkite parish recites the Creed without the Filoque. Ditto every Eastern Catholic Church. When the Ukrainian Orthodox were received into the Church in the 16th Century, their demand that the Divine Liturgy be celebrated without the Filoque was honored without the slightest push back from Rome.
“omitting the Filioque clause” Then it is not the Nicene Creed.
Synods with lay people are not synods.
Christians without Christ are not Christians.
Dale Price:
“their demand that the Divine Liturgy be celebrated without the Filoque was honored without the slightest push back from Rome.”
Coming into another’s house and the house of God and demanding….
Sounds not too friendly.
My theory for Leo’s pontificate is “peace and unity at any price”
I pray that God will prove me wrong.
I’m of two minds on this. I think people undervalue the importance of the filioque. Its theological implications are profound. To deny that the Holy Spirit also precedes from the Son is to picture a very different internal structure (wrong word, I’m sure) of God’s nature. But excluding the filioque isn’t denying the doctrine. If a priest dropped the filioque from a Mass, it’d be worthy of investigation, but this is the Pope at a prayer service. He knows the distinction between dropping the word and denying the doctrine.
The history of the Melkites and the popes has been an interesting one Dale since the union in the Eighteenth Century, although a good deal calmer since the death of Pio Nono. The last Pope named Leo of course drafted the seminal document Orientalium Dignitas regarding the status of the Eastern Catholic Churches in Union with Rome.
“At this place it is opportune to notice the fact that the sacred rites, although not instituted specifically for proving the truth of the dogmas of the Catholic Faith incontrovertibly, are effectively the living voice of Catholic Truth, the oft-sounded expression of it. For that very reason the true Church of Christ, even as she shows great zeal to guard inviolate those forms of divine worship – since they are hallowed and are not to be changed – sometimes grants or permits something novel in the performance of them in certain instances. This she does especially when they are in conformity with their venerable antiquity. By this means, her vitality does not appear ever-aging; she stands out more wondrously as the very Bride of Christ whom the wisdom of the Holy Fathers recognized in prefigurement in the words of David: The queen stood at your right hand arrayed in apparel embroidered with spun gold she is clothed with embroidery of diverse figures and spun gold fringe2.
Inasmuch as this diversity of liturgical form and discipline of the Eastern Churches is approved in law, besides its other merits, it has redounded tremendously to the glory and usefulness of the Church. They ought not figure any less as subjects of Our charge. So much is this the case that it is in the best interest of all that their discipline not haphazardly borrow anything that would be ill-suited from Western ministers of the Gospel whom love for Christ compels to go to those peoples. The decisions that Our illustrious Predecessor Benedict XIV in his wisdom and foresight decreed in the Constitution of 24 December 1743 remain in force. This constitution was addressed as a letter to the Greek Melkite Patriarch of Antioch and to all the Bishops of that rite subject to him. The truth is that in the long course of time, given that the state of affairs has changed in those regions, that Latin rite missionaries and institutes have multiplied there as well, it now happens that some of the special concerns of the Apostolic See on the new conditions should be set out.”
“My theory for Leo’s pontificate is “peace and unity at any price” “
It’s unfortunately starting to look that way.. and if so neither will be achieved. Having promoted NFP and having had Diocesan personnel literally hate you.. has been good training.
Mary De Voe:
The Ukrainian Catholic Church is a church of confessors and martyrs who have and continue to pay in blood for their union with Rome.
I strongly urge that you learn more about your Eastern Catholic brethren before popping off about their “unfriendliness.” After all, there is nothing less friendly than saying they are without Christ.
I agree with Dale Price. I have friends – some from high school – who are Ukrainian Greek Catholics. I wish I had half the zeal and dedication that they have.
Dale Price:
God is Love. God needs a Beloved. The Holy Spirit is the Love, perfect and sovereign Person of the Blessed Trinity.
God’s Beloved is God’s Son. God’s infinite Word.
God’s Infinite Word, Jesus Christ Who does the will of His Father perfectly.
Those who would deny our Father in heaven His Beloved Son, Whom He can love makes no sense.
The Eastern Rites are beautiful and reverent and obedient to Rome. In some parts of the western world they are the heartbeat of Christianity where the nation has forgotten it. In some Parishes they are the ones keeping the Parishes afloat. They are producing seminarians. The parishioners are many. They are at the forefront of the culture wars. We Christians have enough of a struggle with Islam and Atheism. The Eastern Church is not our enemy. Far from it.
Ezabelle
“ The Eastern Church is not our enemy. Far from it.”
The Eastern Church is the “enemy” of the Filioque.
The Eastern Church is “unfriendly” to the Filioque.
It may be the Incarnation that bothers them.
I do not know. I write what I know.
Dale Price:
“After all, there is nothing less friendly than saying they are without Christ.”
I have not said it. The Ukrainian Catholic Church is saying it.
It is my understanding that there is an exchange of love between the Father and the Son that produces the Holy Spirit. Three Persons in one Godhead. In the Orthodox view I wonder how the Son is supposed to return the Father’s love, if the Holy Spirit doesn’t proceed from both the Father and the Son. With God being eternal the act of proceeding describes the nature of the relationship between the Three Divine Persons. To me the Orthodox view appears to be unidirectional, and that the Catholic view is fully bidirectional, which you need for an exchange to take place.
“The Eastern Church is the “enemy” of the Filioque.”
Sorry Mary you lost me. Rome only requested that Eastern Catholics not dismiss the Filioque as not being heretical. They did not demand they recite it as a mystery of Faith. Those that refused to remained Orthodox and separate from the Catholic Faith. Rome allowed Eastern Catholic to preserve the “monarchy” of God the Father, in line with their tradition of their expression of Faith. That was the trade-off. The Eastern Catholic tradition is not the Latin Catholic Tradition. And thats ok.
Don, my dear friend: I am about to lose my temper in a truly unfortunate way.
GregB:
The Eastern principle is that of the “Monarchy of the Father,” or the first principle of the Trinity, to use a more western phrasing. The Father begat the Son, even though it is in eternity in a way that we can not fully comprehend. This is something Latin theology accepts. This, in the Trinity, the Father preceded the Son, and the Son receives all He has from the Father, sharing it fully. Yet, it “starts” with the Father, which is why there is that emphasis in the original Nicene Creed before it was altered.Though I can understand why it was altered without having a speckle flecked response like some Orthodox or denying the Christianity of those who added it.
For my part, that does not prevent a formulation like “through the Son,” which still affirms the full divinity of the Son and Spirit. And that’s a formulation that you can get the East to embrace in principle.
There is an excellent Vatican document on the profession question from the JPII era which charitably explains the issue and looks at possible solutions. The title escapes me, but it’s worth a read.
Dale Price:
*
To me the main issue is what it means to be a person and the exercise of free will. The issue of will is important enough that in the Hypostatic Union Christ has both a Divine will and a human will, and that love is associated with the will. The will played a major part in Christ’s Agony in the Garden. This issue goes beyond the proceeding of the Holy Spirit and also touches on the issue of the Beatific Vision. If we are in the image and likeness of God, children by adoption, then the Beatific Vision should be in the image and likeness of the Father’s relationship with the Son. Is the Son a full Person or is He simply a placeholder? If I make the grade and become a participant in the Beatific Vision am I a person or am I simply a placeholder? Can a placeholder really be said to be capable of the exchange that is a part of love? One of the purposes for giving children a parental allowance is to teach them how to handle things of value. One thing that concerns me about some of the writings of the mystics about union with God is that I have a hard time telling if I am a full person or simply a placeholder. Not even having so much as a parental allowance with which to express my love with. If we don’t get the Trinity right we can’t get ourselves right.
I am but a simple communicant in the pew but it seems to me that long ago both sides should simply have placed the issue on the same shelf as the number of angels on the head of a pin and let the matter age for a while. (maybe eternally)
Greg:
I can assure you, Christ is no placeholder in the Eastern Catholic tradition, nor do we fail to honor the Trinity in its fullness. We say “Christ God” or “Christ our God” multiple times. Thus, the Divine Liturgy has a very high Christology and I lose track of the number of times we cross ourselves when the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are invoked.
I like the way Donald Link is thinking here! To me, the Western Church always seemed more driven to develop dogmatic definitions whereas the Eastern Churches seemed more comfortable with accepting dogmatic mysteries … but if I’m remembering my Church history correctly (and I grew up in Detroit so who knows how much nonsensical propaganda I was fed) the problem with the filioque is as much ecclesiastical as it is theological. In other words, it was imposed on the Church by a local council, not a universal one. The Orthodox believe this invalidates it.
“I lose track of the number of times we cross ourselves when the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are invoked.”
Yes – It is made a lot. The Sign of the Cross expresses the power of the Trinity and the power of the Cross of our Lords suffering and death. The core dogmas of faith being expressed each time the Sign of the Cross is made. And to signify reverence for the presence of Jesus, His Crucifixion and Death. There is no hint or doubt of Jesus being sidelined of the centrality in the Holy Trinity in the Eastern rites.
The Orthodox believe this invalidates it.
It wasn’t imposed on the Church. It was embraced by the Church in the West and rejected by the Church in the East, although that greatly simplifies a complicated and drawn out process.
Point taken Don, but what the West embraced was kinda offered to the East in a “take it or leave it” sort-of-way, yes? A universal council never voted on it (or even discussed it), and the Orthodox were never consulted.
But like I said, AB Dearden’s catechesis almost certainly has some bias built in.
kinda offered to the East in a “take it or leave it” sort-of-way, yes?
It played out over four centuries. It probably gets more attention than it deserves in regard to the schism of 1054. The simple truth is that the Church in the West and the East developed in very different ways and had a lot of heart felt differences.
“ It probably gets more attention than it deserves in regard to the schism of 1054.”
I agree with this completely … I truly feel the filioque issue could’ve resolve itself if the East wanted it to … But they don’t because the real issue is Papal primacy.
Maybe Francis was more cunning than we give him credit for? Maybe his whole schtick was just an elaborate act meant to undermine the primacy of the Roman Pontiff in order to achieve unity with the Orthodox? If only he had another year or two 😉
Wait a minute. Omitting the filioque was the Eastern Church’s doing, not the Western Church. How did this get turned around and blame the Western Church for the imposition of the omission?
Jesus did the will of His Father perfectly as did the Perpetual Virgin Mary.
Without the Filioque, the Mother of God is unnecessary.
It helps to understand infinity. Aquinas said that man cannot grasp infinity.
Jesus said that the Father is greater then me because Jesus willed to do the will of His Father in heaven perfectly. This is a free will act of an infinite sovereign Person. The infinite sovereign person of the Father and of the consubstantial being of Jesus Christ. Consubstantial being with the Father means the Son is God.
Without the Filioque, the Mother of God is unnecessary.
Without the Filioque, the Mother of God is unnecessary.
For those willing to listen and read with open hearts, the following are undisputed facts:
But some Eastern Catholics can braying jackasses, it must be admitted. Sinning self included.
==
Haven’t noticed that. I have noticed now and again a ‘if-you-have-to-ask-you-don’t-deserve-to-know’ mentality. .Not everywhere.
==
I was associated with a Melkite parish between 2004 and 2012. The pastor was a fine preacher. For some reason I never understood, his congregation had melted away underneath him. There were only about two dozen of us when I had to move out of town. He had to retire in 2010 and died not long after. They sent the strangest and rudest character to replace him. Supposedly, the parish is still in operation but I cannot imagine how.
==
If you pass through Syracuse, you should pay a visit to the local Ukrainian Church, St. John the Baptist. I couldn’t get there often, but the forty mile commute was worth it when I could.
If I may add: The venerable Fulton J. Sheen had faculties to offer both the Latin rite Mass and the Byzantine Divine Liturgy. He had no problem reciting the creed without the filioque. Also, his devotion to Our Lady was (is) profound.
John Henry Newman: Development of Doctrine.
If you have read any of Bishop Sheen’s 95 books you will find as I have that Bishop Sheen referred to sovereign persons as “that” instead of “Who”. “Who” being the pronoun to define the sovereign person. “that” being a thing. Things have no soul as do human beings made in the image and likeness of God. The Holy Spirit is “Who”.
The Infinite Sovereign Persons of the Father and of the Son are “who”.
Some KJV bibles refer to God as “which” and some refer to God as “she” because Wisdom is “she”
Mary is the Seat of Wisdom”. Wisdom being a virtue, a gift from God. Wisdom is not a person. So how can God be “she”?
Not true Mary De Voe:
“Those who love God do not protest, whatever He may ask of them, nor doubt His kindness when He sends them difficult hours. A sick person takes medicine without asking the physician to justify its bitter taste because the patient trusts the doctor’s knowledge; so the soul that has sufficient faith accepts all the events of life as gifts of God in the serene assurance that God knows best.”
~ Bishop Fulton Sheen
Oh CAG:
AI says God is “she”
Thank you CAG. It is possible that Bishop Sheen accepted the Holy Spirit in this matter. and I have some of his DVDs.
In the 1950s students were assigned Bishop Sheen for homework.
I am so happy you found this. I love you.
Mary which comments at TAC,
Mary that comments at TAC.
Mary who comments at TAC.
Your choice is how you will be addressed.
Can my battle for “who” be over?
“It does little good to water last year’s crop.”
~ Bishop Fulton Sheen
CAG:
Only when you save the seeds and pray over your crop.