And now for something entirely different…
I was poking through Sylvia’s blogroll and stumbled across A Catechuman’s Tale. This very fine writer just penned an exceptional post on the Filioque. For the non-Orthodox, a catechumen is someone that is preparing to be accepted by the Church, and the Filioque is a Latin word meaning “and the Son.” The original version of the Creed (also called the Apostle’s Creed) ends “And the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father.” The phrase “and the Son” wasn’t part of the Creed by design.
Imagine, for a thousand years something that you can recite practically in your sleep was said a different way. Um, yeah…in a different language, too. Anyway, Tony-Allen has done the research so I don’t need to regurgitate it here. Go read it - it’s great work.
One Comment
Aside from th’ fact that th’ West changed the Creed without an ecumenical council (’n-att’s significant, ol’ s. Jones admits), th’ whole kerfluffle is much ado ’bout nothin’. Byzantine umbrage over it all is based on a whole lotta speculative triadology. But some Orthurdox theologians thank it’s possible to embrace the filioque, long as certain thangs are in place, to wit, the “monarchia* of the Father, which even the Augustinian model will admit in its better momints.
Cain’t quite recall th’ Orthurdox outfit that has set forth the understaindin’ by which th’ filioque cud become acceptable to th’ Orthurdox mind, but see, thar’s a sense in which th’ Spirit is “from” the Son and a sense in which He ain’t. Thar’s the rub.
But here is th’ more important question: wut do Evangelicals like ol’ Ben DeGrow say ’bout th’ matter?