The Filioque: A Church-Dividing Issue?

(USCCB) ^ | 29th October 2003 | North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Fr. Francis Dvornik - The Photian Schism, published 1948.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

That sounds like he rejects the principle that the Pope has immediate jurisdiction to do anything he pleases in ayn Church.

The Byzantines and Ukranians have long been furious over papal meddling regarding their privileges, such as married priests, in the western world and Poland. They have recently taken it upon themselves to just go ahead and ordain them.

For what it is worth, the Ukranian Orthodox and Ruthenian Orthodox, along with a large chunk of the OCA are all ex-Byzantine/Ukranian Catholics returned to Constantinople becuase of papal/American/Canadian interference with the guarantees of the unia, such as married priests.

[FormerLib]

I do know the "Old Catholics" reject Vatican...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the "Old Catholics" become one of the most liberal splinter (if you will) groups to have come out of the Roman Catholic Church?

[The_Reader_David]

It would be ironic, but it will not happen. You really don't understand the Orthodox very well if you think either that reconciliation is possible without the Roman papacy abandoning positions it seems unwilling to concede, and moreover showing this by action not bland declarations which lack the force for members of your confession of papal declarations, or if you think that I or any Orthodox would be offended or leave the Church if the Roman Patriarchate embraced the Holy Orthodox Faith.

[The_Reader_David]

The confession which changed its approach to divorce/annulment/remarriage was the Roman Patriarchate. There is aboslutely no record of any objection from the Roman Papacy, or any other bishop or patriarch for that matter, to Justinian's Novella which extended the grounds for divorce from adulterty only to include abandonment, forced prostitiution, and one other I have forgotten.

Note that this was at a time when Rome was inside the Empire again, thanks to Justinian's efforts, and at a time when there was no specific Christian rite of marriage: marriages between Christians were Roman civil marriages followed by the reception of the Holy Eucharist by the couple together.

The no fourth marriage rule is quite old, as the scandalous 'affair of tetragamy' which took place before the Western schism attests.

[The_Reader_David]

Give it up. It's really quite useless trying to convince the Latins that NFP is a form of contraception. They seem quite unable to grasp that the keeping of temperature charts or measurement of mucous consistency on which the practice depends are in fact sexual practices designed to prevent conception. I've tried on numerous threads before, and it really is pointless.

Interesting, isn't it though, how when a thread about the original Latin deviation from the Faith expressed in the Creed comes up how they turn the discussion to the hard line taken by papacy on a few matters of morality, rather than actually engaging the topic at hand.

[The_Reader_David]

Oh, come now, "Greek schismatics", "Eastern schismatics" were standard terms of reference for us Orthodox among members of your confessions for centuries.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Oh, come now, "Greek schismatics", "Eastern schismatics" were standard terms of reference for us Orthodox among members of your confessions for centuries.

Yes, but now we have thankfully grown up and moved beyond that.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the "Old Catholics" become one of the most liberal splinter (if you will) groups to have come out of the Roman Catholic Church?

To be fair, your Church had a hand in giving them valid orders as well.

They actually run the gamut, from the Polish National Catholics, who are very traditional, to extreme left-wing wacky groups.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

It's really quite useless trying to convince the Latins that NFP is a form of contraception.

What is really mystifying is that our Catholic Moral Theology handbooks explicitly call it birth control and contraception. They denote, however, that it is natural, and not artificial.

I can't see why my fellow Catholics get all worked up about this.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Interesting, isn't it though, how when a thread about the original Latin deviation from the Faith expressed in the Creed comes up how they turn the discussion to the hard line taken by papacy on a few matters of morality, rather than actually engaging the topic at hand.

That is because most Catholics neither know nor care about the filioque. All the more reason it should be explained away as something intended to be in line with Blachernae's Tomus of 1285, which is the basic intent of this article.

The Orthodox are right - Rome needs to make the steps forward to unity, since they caused the problem with the interpolation (we can hardly demand the Orthodox give up the received faith - that hasn't worked for about 1200 years now). That can only occur by making a useful theological demonstration that what is intended by the filioque is what was explained by Gregory II and St. Gregory Palamas (which the Orthodox have patiently tried to do for us). In other words, Palamism needs to be synthesized inside Thomism to bring the Latin Catholics around to the position already inhabitated by the Melkite and Byzantine Catholics.

Gennadius Scholarius observered the only problem with Aquinas was that he held to the filioque, and was a Barlaamite on the Divine Energies. The two questions are really related.

[The_Reader_David]

Quite remarkable, and of course that is where our approach and yours end up differing. We don't get the distinction made in your confession's moral teachings between 'natural' and 'artificial'. The keeping of temperature charts and regular monitoring of mucous seem as much an artifice as ingesting concentrated horomones.

On the other hand, Orthodox are not supposed to use contraception of any sort or get sterilized without a blessing from their spiritual father, and are to welcome any child conceived in spite of their blessed intent, for a time, to use the conjugal act only as a way of binding the marriage closer as a blessing from God.

[The_Reader_David]

The two questions are indeed related, and its precisely that fact which suggests the even were the other issues of Papal jurisdiction and ecclesiology suddenly resolved by a manifest intervention of the Holy Spirit, the road to reunion might still be long: there is a fair vein of opinion, especially among our monastics, that the Roman Patriarchate's doctrinal development, piety and mysticism since the schism has been driven by Barlaamism. (Witness Gennadius Scholarius's comment on Aquinas.)

Even on the narrow issue, it will be hard to reconcile the Tomus of 1285 with Lyons, since Blachernae explicitly anathematized Lyons. However, an explicit embrace of Palamism by the Roman Papacy, would go a long way toward reunion on a lot of fronts, not just the filioque.

[The_Reader_David]

I would also point out that I analogized the artifice of NFP to that of 'the pill' because both involve a regimen of activity intended to prevent conception taking place regularly and outside of the context of sexual intercourse. Hormonal contraception is not blessed by knowledgeable Orthodox spiritual fathers because of the potential for secondary abortifacient action.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

The two questions are indeed related, and its precisely that fact which suggests the even were the other issues of Papal jurisdiction and ecclesiology suddenly resolved by a manifest intervention of the Holy Spirit

My understanding of the Orthodox position on the Papacy is that it is essentially similar what we Catholics would call "sedevacantism". The Orthodox would be happy to follow a Pope who taught their theology and recognized inherent limitations in the exercise of his plenary jurisdiction. In this sense, authority in the Church is a simpler issue than the filioque. The Orthodox agree the Pope is the first Bishop.

there is a fair vein of opinion, especially among our monastics, that the Roman Patriarchate's doctrinal development, piety and mysticism since the schism has been driven by Barlaamism

As Fr. John Romanides has pointed out, this theological trend stems from certain misinterpretations in St. Augustine concerning the manifestation of the Lord of Glory, or the Angel of the Lord if you will, in the Old Testament, not from any real desire of Catholics to be Barlaamites. Our theological manuals, such as Ott's "Fundementals of Catholic Dogma" are good enough to point out St. Augustine's glaring contradiction of all the other Fathers in this regard. That being said, one wonders how the misinterpretation survives give the decree of Trent concerning the interpretation of Scriptures to be made with the Fathers, and not with one Father set up against a unanimity of all the rest (there is even a proposition condemned by the Popes to the effect that "One can hold a theological position if found in St. Augustine, even if it contradicts the universal Magisterium" - I have to woner how it does not apply here, or rather, why it has not been made to apply here).

Even on the narrow issue, it will be hard to reconcile the Tomus of 1285 with Lyons, since Blachernae explicitly anathematized Lyons.

Well, the start to framing it from the Catholic perspective would be to dogmatically state that the definition and condemnation of Lyons are not aimed at the position staked out in Blachernae. From there it would remain to interpret the distinction between the origin of the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit, and the origin of the commonality of the essence/energy. The original intent of the western filioque was not about hypostatic origin but consubstantiality.

However, an explicit embrace of Palamism by the Roman Papacy, would go a long way toward reunion on a lot of fronts, not just the filioque.

Lets pray about it.

[Catholicguy]

T Y. Now, any idea where I could buy it? I googled the heck out of it and came up empty

[Catholicguy]

I hear so little about them I don't know. It would be funny were that the case.

[Catholicguy]

LOL, well, despite your reframing of the issue, the Holy Spirit sees avenues of reconciliation you and I cannot, and although those avenues may be so anfractuous neither you nor I can see any end in sight, the avenue may be so configured it is, literally, right around the corner.

Fortunately, for the world, for the cause of unity, for the cause of having both lungs breathing together again, neither me nor thee have authority.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Used bookstore?

You should also get a hold of Meyendorff's "The Primacy of Peter" and "An Introduction to Gregory Palamas".

[FormerLib]

What is really mystifying is that our Catholic Moral Theology handbooks explicitly call it birth control and contraception.

I think it is clear that we have seen cases were both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic positions have been mistated, particularly when one is looking for someone to bash over the head of the other.