[nanetteclaret]

No, I'm not still a Protestant at heart. If you must insist on arguing, I view Holy Communion as St. Thomas Aquinas does - the Aristotelian view of reality rather than the Platonian. I also believe that the Filioque Clause is correct, and think the Orthodox were wrong to take it out. As you are well aware, there are many Eastern rite churches in the Roman flock. I could just as easily argue with you about why you insist on being separated, but I presume you have thought it out to your satisfaction. I would ask that you accord me the same courtesy. After all, I was baptized and brought up Presbyterian and have gone through the Anglican Church to the Roman Catholic Church, so I have given a lot of thought to and prayer about my journey, and it's taken me thirty years to get to this point.

[Graves]

It is this statement that comes across as being typically Protestant in tone,
"I just take Jesus at His word, literally. I also take Jesus literally when He prayed 'that they all may be one.'"

You don't see that?

[Graves]

Come again?
"I...think the Orthodox were wrong to take [filioque ]out [of the Nicene Creed]."

When did we do that, pray tell?

To the others copied:
Yes. Nanette really said that, and in the year of our Lord 2005. And I thought nobody said this anymore in the West. I guess I was wrong. The damnable lie continues to be told. I wonder who the priest was who told her this.

[kosta50]

I also believe that the Filioque Clause is correct, and think the Orthodox were wrong to take it out

Last time this was said in those words was in the 9th century by semi-iconoclast Frankish stormtroopers.

The Creed was established and finalized by Ecumenical Councils and could not be changed by someone's opinion. Some Eastern Fathers (i.e. St. John Chrystostom) seem to have thought it was correct, but they didn't change the Creed in their Liturgies. The Roman Catholic Church recognizes the Councils that infallibly decreed the Symbol of Faith without the Filioque. That didn't stop the Latins from blatantly violating them by adding it to ther Creed. That alone makes the RCC non-Chalcedonian, or -- shall we say? -- beyond schismatic.

Yet, curiously, while the rest of Catholics say the Filioque, the Vatican does not profess it even to this day but sings the Creed in the original Greek, without the Filioque. The silver plates on the Vatican walls are without it too. The Roman Bishops refused to add it for 600 years.

As you are well aware, there are many Eastern rite churches in the Roman flock

Most Eastern-rite churches in communion with Rome are going back to their Orthodox roots, undergoing active de-latinization and returning to the original Creed without the Filioque.