[HarleyD]

Not what we "consider" the "early form", it is actually the original Nicene Creed as adopted by the Councils. That's just a fact, Harley.

I'm just quoting the Greek Orthodox's website.

[don-o]

I'm just quoting the Greek Orthodox's website. <.i>

Actually, you did not. The quote you pasted is not from the link you posted. May we have the source for the quote you pasted?

[Kolokotronis]

The article, written by a parish priest in Tasmania, a man more noted for the troubles in his parish than his theological acumen, says nothing about what we “consider” an “earlier version” of the Creed, Harley. There is no “earlier” or “later” “version” of the Creed...just the Creed.

BTW, despite what the village priest says in the article, the filioque is not a stumbling block to unity with the Latins and hasn’t been for many years. The Pope’s public, liturgical recitation of the Creed without the Spanish/Frankish filioque addition is proof enough of that. There are all sorts of stumbling blocks to Rome’s reunion with the other Churches, mostly ecclesiological but there are some serious theological ones too, but the filioque isn’t one of them. You always want to check the bona fides of your sources, HD.