Filioque: The Error Of Eastern Schismatics Explained

 

To My Readers: I am once more indebted to Lee for providing another outstanding post to be published while I catch up on my work and personal life. Please feel free to comment as usual. Any comments or questions specifically directed to me will always be answered as usual, but it might take me a bit longer to respond this week.

God Bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT: I was asked by Mr. Kevin Davis of Catholic Family Podcast to do a series of podcasts on the occult, as I have researched the topic for years, and have written many posts warning of the "Occult Revival" since Vatican II. I told him it would be my honor to get the word out in another excellent form of media. Look for the first podcast to come out later this week.---Introibo

Update 10/25/22: Here is the podcast link 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4I0A0UrKPwU

Qui ex patre FILIOQUE procedit

By Lee

With many people beginning to visualize the problems in the Conciliar religion, it oftentimes will happen that some inadvertently escape a false religion to join another false religion. Some of these people are searching for the truth as they church hop, while others get deceived into thinking that a particular religion is really the true one, when it is in fact not. One religion in particular is the Eastern Orthodox religion. Unfortunately, there is nothing Orthodox (right in its teaching) about it, nor can it claim to have been faithful to the early Church for 900 years prior to its founding by Photius (more on that later).

The Orthodox are most notably known for their schism with Rome because of their refusal to submit to the Roman Pontiff (the pope) as the final authority over the entire Church but what they are not rebuked enough for is the dogmas they deny. One in particular is known as the filioque which was added to the Nicene Creed by the Church.

Who was Photius?

To better understand why Photius held to certain beliefs during the Photian Schism, it's best to read about his background. Fr. John Laux's book Church History gives a very detailed description. He says the following:

In the middle of the ninth century a patriarch of Constantinople made the first deliberate attempt to sever the Greek Church from the West by appealing to the national pride of his countrymen. This man was Photius.

We saw above the St. Theodora re-established the Catholic faith in the East in 842. All went well until her son Michael, known in history as "the Drunkard," came of age and began to reign. This sensual prince fell entirely under the influence of his uncle Bardas, a profligate of the most despicable character, who lived in sin with one of his near relatives. On the feast day of the Epiphany, 857, St. Ignatius, who had succeeded St. Methodius as patriarch of Constantinople in 846, refused to give Bardas Holy Communion. Ignatius was arrested and imprisoned, and upon refusing to resign his office was illegally deposed, while Photius, a layman, was installed as patriarch in his place.

Photius was easily the most learned man of his time, as his monumental work, the Bibliotheca, which consists of abridgments of and extracts from 280 volumes of classical authors amply testifies. But even his greatest admirers admit that he was worldly, crafty, ambitious, and unscrupulous. When he saw that his usurpation caused discontent among the clergy and the people, he persuaded the Emperor to send ambassadors with costly presents to Pope St. Nicholas I in order to secure his approbation. In spite of false statements made by the ambassadors-they said that Ignatius has resigned his see because of his advanced age, and voluntarily retired into a monastery-the Pope refused to decide until he had investigated the matter. The legates whom he sent to Constantinople for this purpose, yielding to threats of bribery, acknowledged Photius as lawful patriarch. But Nicholas saw through their deceit, and in a letter to the Eastern bishops condemned and deposed Photius. 

The rage of the proud intruder knew no bounds. In a letter addressed to all the patriarchs and bishops of the East he railed against all claim to spiritual authority on the part of the Holy See, declaring it intolerable, above all, since the imperial crown of the West had been set by Leo III on the head of Charlemagne, a barbarian Frank. He accused the Latin Church of heresy for adding the word "Filioque" (and from the Son) to the Nicene Creed, and attacked the discipline and the usage of the Latins, particularly their practice of fasting on Saturday, their use of milk and cheese on fast days, and the enforced celibacy of the clergy. His hatred of Rome at last led him to do what none of his predecessors had dared to do: he excommunicated the whole Latin world and pronounced sentence of deposition against Pope Nicholas (867).

The triumph of the arrogant patriarch was short-lived. The drunken and vicious Emperor over whom he had held sway so long was murdered in 867. Basil, his murderer and successor, cast Photius into prison and reinstated Ignatius. A Council-the Eight Ecumenical-which assembled at Constantinople in 869 condemned Photius and his sacrilegious acts, and restored union under the authority of the Apostolic See. After the death of Ignatius in 877, Photius again ascended the patriarchal throne and in order to be approved by Pope John VIII professed in express terms to acknowledge the Roman Primacy. He soon broke his word and was excommunicated once more. He ended ingloriously. In 886 the Emperor Leo the Philosopher deprived him of his office and banished him to a monastery in Armenia. After this, we hear no more of him.

So what is the big deal about Filioque?

Filioque means "and from the son." The Orthodox believe that the Holy Ghost proceeds ONLY from the Father and NOT the Son, whereas Catholics believe the Holy Ghost proceeds from BOTH the Father and the Son.

The Orthodox consider the filioque as heretical because they believe that by adding "and from the son" changes the uniqueness of the hypostasis (of being) in Jesus Christ and conclude that Christ would be giving to the Holy Ghost an origin or being that was both God the Father (Uncreated) and Man (createdness).

The Catholic understanding of the filioque is that the Father, as the "principle without principle," is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that he, as Father of the only Son, is with the Son the single principle from which the Spirit proceeds. It rejects the notion that the Holy Ghost proceeds jointly and equally from two principles (Father and Son) and teaches dogmatically that the Holy Ghost proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles but as from one single principle. Therefore, it would heresy to deny this dogma as the Church teaches it.

Below is the list of quotes from the Councils/Creeds as well as Eastern Fathers which an Eastern Orthodox priest deleted on his video on the filioque in the comment section on YouTube when I posted them. Presumably he did so because it shows where the early church fathers from the East believed the dogma prior to when it was added to the Nicene Creed many centuries later.

The Athanasius Creed

“[W]e venerate one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in oneness. . . . The Father was not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is from the Father alone, not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding” (Athanasian Creed [A.D. 400])

The Second Council of Nicaea

“We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, proceeding from the Father through the Son” (Profession of Faith [A.D. 787]).

St. Basil the Great

“Through the Son, who is one, he [the Holy Spirit] is joined to the Father, one who is one, and by himself completes the Blessed Trinity” (The Holy Spirit 18:45 [A.D. 375]).

“[T]he goodness of [the divine] nature, the holiness of [that] nature, and the royal dignity reach from the Father through the only-begotten [Son] to the Holy Spirit. Since we confess the persons in this manner, there is no infringing upon the holy dogma of the monarchy” (Ibid., 18:47).

Epiphanius of Salamis

“The Father always existed and the Son always existed, and the Spirit breathes from the Father and the Son” (The Man Well-Anchored 75 [A.D. 374]).

St.Gregory of Nyssa

“[The] Father conveys the notion of unoriginate, unbegotten, and Father always; the only-begotten Son is understood along with the Father, coming from him but inseparably joined to him. Through the Son and with the Father, immediately and before any vague and unfounded concept interposes between them, the Holy Spirit is also perceived conjointly” (Against Eunomius 1 [A.D. 382]).

St. Cyril of Alexandria

“Since the Holy Spirit when he is in us effects our being conformed to God, and he actually proceeds from the Father and Son, it is abundantly clear that he is of the divine essence, in it in essence and proceeding from it” (Treasury of the Holy Trinity, thesis 34 [A.D. 424]).

“[T]he Holy Spirit flows from the Father in the Son” (Ibid.).

"Recognize and Resist" (R&R)

There are many parallels between the Orthodox religion and those who call themselves traditional Catholic but who in turn reject their own pope (R&R / Recognize and Resist). It's one thing to believe that bishops who profess the faith can carry on the mission of the Church without a head until a pope is elected, even if for a very long period, but it's quite another to believe that bishops have the power to depose a pope, as if to say the body of bishops (how many is anyone's guess) have equal authority in the church as the pope. This along with calling the man one believes to be pope a heretic is all out blasphemy and heretical itself which many these days fall for. Hence they become the pope's pope. We could say that the SSPX/Resistance PROCEEDS from BOTH the Orthodox and the Gallicans.

The repercussion of not acknowledging the head of the Church as the final authority only creates more damage. Pope Pius XII made it clear:

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. "For in one spirit" says the Apostle, "were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free." As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. And therefore, if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be considered - so the Lord commands - as a heathen and a publican. It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit... For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy. Mystici Corporis Christi, para.  #22 and 23

It is the Magisterium which makes the final say on matters of faith, morality, discipline, and liturgy. As St. Robert Bellarmine put it:

The Pope is the Teacher and Shepherd of the whole Church, thus, the whole Church is so bound to hear and follow him that if he would err, the whole Church would err.

Now our adversaries respond that the Church ought to hear him so long as he teaches correctly, for God must be heard more than men.

On the other hand, who will judge whether the Pope has taught rightly or not? For it is not for the sheep to judge whether the shepherd wanders off, not even and especially in those matters which are truly doubtful. Nor do Christian sheep have any greater judge or teacher to whom they might have recourse. As we showed above, from the whole Church one can appeal to the Pope yet, from him no one is able to appeal; therefore necessarily the whole Church will err if the Pontiff would err. (De Romano Pontifice, Book IV, Chapter 3)

In Volume 1, Fathers Rumbles and Carty gave some of the best answers from Radio Replies. They demonstrated why it is necessary to believe in dogmas of the Church, this is what they had to say:

599. Dogma will not save a single soul.

Alone it will not. But since the Catholic Church is the true Church which Christ commands us to hear, the conscious and deliberate rejection of her dogmas can forfeit salvation.

604. Do you think that your old-fashioned dogmas have any appeal?

The dogmas of the Catholic Church clearly express the exact teaching of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. If they seem old-fashioned to some men, these men have simply out-grown the truth to their own detriment.

608. But by the mere fact of accepting the teachings of the Church, Catholics are accepting other men's reasonings.

They are not. Where other men's reasonings are concerned, Catholics should test them for themselves, and if they prove faulty, should reject them. But the Catholic Church says that when God has revealed a truth it is no longer a question of men's reasonings, and that we are not morally free to assert the opposite. We are obliged to accept doctrines revealed by God, because we know that God cannot be mistaken. But of course we make sure that God did say the things we accept on His authority.

307. How does the Greek Church differ from the Catholic Church?

The Greek Churches are both schismatical and heretical. They are separated from the obedience due to the authority of Christ in His true Church. They acknowledge no infallible head. They may retain valid orders and the Mass—things which Protestantism lost—but they have fallen into errors concerning the Holy Trinity, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, and various other points of Christian doctrine.

Conclusion

In these times of apostasy, one must be very mindful of whom they receive sacraments from when exiting from the new Conciliar religion. Only in danger of death are Catholics permitted to receive the sacrament of Penance from an Orthodox priest provided there is no scandal. However, to receive Holy Communion or even attempt to attend their liturgy is to profess externally that it doesn't matter which religion one belongs to. This is forbidden. St. Hermenegild whose feast is celebrated on April 13th reminds us of why he was such a great saint and martyr. As it says in the Roman Missal he refused to receive Holy Communion from an Arian bishop. Pope St. Agatho said "He who prays with heretics, is a heretic."

To believe in the filioque, one must first believe in the Magisterium. This is where Photius failed and why all Protestantism is futile. In present circumstances Catholics are forced to take the sedevacantist position when the impostors of Catholicism join Protestantism through joint declarations and other official documents approving of heresy, schism, and apostasy. It's impossible because Jesus said "And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren." (St. Luke 22: 31-32).