Is your creed catholic, Catholic, or Christian?

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
IMO, the Holy Spirit creates the church by His giving of faith...

Christ established the Christian Ekklesia, Which is His Holy Body, upon the earth...

The Holy Spirit has always been on earth...

The Incarnate Christ but once...

We are members of Christ's Body,
having been Baptized into Christ
through His Apostles...

That is Biblical...

Arsenios
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,115
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Maximus the Confessor: "By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten (Questions to Thalassium 63 [A.D. 254]).
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,115
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
"we 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]).
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Maximus the Confessor: "By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten (Questions to Thalassium 63 [A.D. 254]).

Do you know where I can find this citation in its original Greek, MC?

There is a way that the Latin formulaic can be understood in an Orthodox manner via the term "through"... It is the "Substantial Origin" of this quote that has my attention here in this translation... Substantial as in Hypostasis (which is literal), or Physis? or Ousia?

I always get a little nervous when the Latins prove something by reference to the Greek in English translation BY a Latin Father... And If I should ever try to prove to you something using an English translation of a Latin Father, I would expect you to get a little nervous too! :)

Arsenios
 
Last edited:

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,647
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
One aspect of sin is a desire to be "god", to be "lord over all", to be powerful and controlling, to be seen as powerful and infallible.


It is undeniable that while Christians are clean ("saints") via the Blood of the Lamb, they are also sinners - and sadly, that means there is a struggle with that desire for power. And this impacts individual persons, congregations, denominations and sects.


While Jesus left the church (the corpus of ALL believers, ALL with the gift of faith in Christ as THE Savior) with only a few imperatives: Love one another even as Christ first loved us, Go and make disciples of all people, Do not lord it over others as the Romans do.... ironically, the first denomination (established by Rome for Rome in the 4th Century) was, well.... Roman, and was a reflection of the Roman obsession with POWER, CONTROL, AUTHORITY, LORDING (created as it was in the image of Rome), and sin impacted the church (since all its members are sinful).


As this Roman Church struggled with the other powers at work in the Empire and with each other, there developed a struggle for POWER - CONTROL - AUTHORITY - LORDSHIP and a call for docilic submission to IT (rather than Jesus' call to love, humility and service). As the real power moved East.... and as the once grand city of Rome became a conquered cow town, the Bishop of Rome sought to regain the power and lordship and "godness" that he once had when his palace was next to Ceasars. The ploy became that Jesus founded the Church of the Roman Empire (the Roman Church) and made the Bishop of Rome essentially god on Earth - the powerful one, the authoritative one, the Lord, the infallible/unquestionable Voice. It was a power ploy, a desire to control, to be the unquestioned/unaccountable Lord. This ploy simply grew and grew.... But it required that "Catholic" be especially a denomination (itself) - the denomination controlled by the Bishop of Rome, IT being the Body of Christ, the Voice of God, with all the Authority and Lordship of God - essentially IT (that singular denomination) being God on Earth, the Incarnation of God. (Very Roman, very unbiblical and unhistorical.... a position formed from a sinful desire for the power of God not a desire to love as God first loved us, to avoid lording it over others as the Romans did). There must be an earthly IT with all this unmitigated, unquestionable, infallible, divine POWER to which all must docilicly submit. Thus, "church" in its fullest sense becomes it itself - the institution, the denomination.


We see exactly the same thing in the LDS and additionally in every "cult" known to me. Where the church - denomination - sect - cult is (in fullness) is it itself. It is a power ploy and it is a result of the felt need to avoid accountability and to simply call all to docilic submission, even to make IT essential (or at least very important) for salvation/eternal life itself, thus with the POWER of the Father and the role of SAVIOR. The felt need for POWER/CONTROL/LORDSHIP simply requires it itself to insist that it itself alone is essentially God, Christ, the Voice of God. Now, when this is pointed out, members of the denominations/churches/sects/cults that do this will respond, "But that's EXACTLY what Jesus did" which just proves my point, equating self with God and claiming the authority of Christ.



WE are the children of God, the family of God, the church. We are such solely by the mercy of God via Christ and in no way because of ourselves, so that NONE of us (individually or collectively) have reason to boast or claim or grab power or lord it over another. We are to be marked by our LOVE for one another, not our Roman obsession with power, control, authority, institutionalism, centrality, lording it over others. Submission is to be to CHRIST (not some denomination) who is the Lord (He never resigned from that role). We are to SERVE one another, not lord it over one another. WE are family (oikos), a holy community - one marked by love, service and morality NOT by being a mirror image of secular Rome. Sadly, that mark of sin can be found.... including in denominations/churches/sects/cults... and it's ugly.


I have nothing against congregations/parishes or the denominations of them (such as the RCC or LCMS), but they are OUR creations and they exist to empower Christians, not the other way around. A good church/denomination/sect is one what points people to CHRIST - not itself, who uphold Christ as THE one and only Lord - not itself, that points to God as the Authority and Voice and Infallible one - not itself, that calls on all to submit to Christ - not itself, that lifts high the Cross - not itself, that desires to agree with God rather than insist God must agree with itself (or God would be wrong) as itself appoints itself to correct God and fill in what God neglected. The church should be marked by love and humility, not sin and an mitigated quest for the POWER of God.



- Josiah





.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,115
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Do you know where I can find this citation in its original Greek, MC?
Yes, it is from Questions to Thalassium 63. I do not have a web link to a sample of the Greek text used in the translation that I posted. I imagine that the Greek text exists online somewhere, such things usually do, but I do not have a link for you.
There is a way that the Latin formulaic can be understood in an Orthodox manner via the term "through"
The council of Florence offered the Greek speaking Eastern churches the form "and through the Son" in the creed as recited in the Latin Liturgy, it was accepted by the Orthodox representatives who attended the council but it was rejected by the people of Constantinople after they returned to that city. That was some time around 1445 AD.
... It is the "Substantial Origin" of this quote that has my attention here in this translation... Substantial as in Hypostasis (which is literal), or Physis? or Ousia?

I always get a little nervous when the Latins prove something by reference to the Greek in English translation BY a Latin Father... And If I should ever try to prove to you something using an English translation of a Latin Father, I would expect you to get a little nervous too! :)

Arsenios

The translation is by a scholar. I doubt he was Latin :)
 

TurtleHare

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2015
Messages
1,057
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
My church says Christian and I don't have a problem with that.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,492
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Maybe then we should find some alternate term for Apostolic, too? For instance, we could affirm our belief in the One, Holy, Christian, and Really Old church.

After all, there is a Pentecostal denomination that is named Apostolic and we wouldn't want any visitor to think our church is one of theirs.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
We see exactly the same thing in the LDS and additionally in every "cult" known to me.
Josiah

Including the Lutheran, Presbyterian, Church of Christ, EOC, RCC, and OOC cults?

Or being a Lutheran, are you merely confessing your own Lutheran Cultitude?

Confession and Accusation are polar opposites, you know...

Christians love the former...

Their opposites the latter...

Actions have outcomes...


Arsenios
 
Last edited:

George

Tis Theos Megas
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Messages
908
Age
29
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
My church says Christian and the reason is so that visitors who come to the service don't panic upon hearing "catholic" and not knowing it's not "Catholic". Even when printed out not everyone will read.

But does that not modify the Creed to pacify the ears of others?
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Maybe then we should find some alternate term for Apostolic, too? For instance, we could affirm our belief in the One, Holy, Christian, and Really Old church.

After all, there is a Pentecostal denomination that is named Apostolic and we wouldn't want any visitor to think our church is one of theirs.

And for One we could substitute "a multitude" or a "Legion..."

For Catholic we could substitute "Biblical"...

For Holy we might substitute "emotionally supportive"...

For proceeds we might prefer "wanders forth"...

We could make it all up as we go along!

hee hee hah hah hoh hoh hoo hoo...

They're coming to take us away!!

I mean, it gets crackers right away...

Great comment, Albion...

Arsenios
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,115
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Including the Lutheran, Presbyterian, Church of Christ, EOC, RCC, and OOC cults?

Or being a Lutheran, are you merely confessing your own Lutheran Cultitude?

Confession and Accusation are polar opposites...

Christians love the former...

Their opposites the latter...


Arsenios

In face to face conversations people who hold beliefs similar to Josiah or MennoSota will state their peace and not bother to condemn anybody who disagrees - even if in their minds they think ill of any who disagree - because in face to face conversation people (most people I mean) have learned that differences exist and no amount to name calling or verbal condemnation changes the existence of differences. Prayer works better and works more wonders of conversion than name calling or condemnation ever could. But in chat forums something happens and people lose their manners and common sense.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
The council of Florence offered the Greek speaking Eastern churches the form "and through the Son" in the creed as recited in the Latin Liturgy,
it was accepted by the Orthodox representatives who attended the council
but it was rejected by the people of Constantinople
after they returned to that city.

Proving there IS a God!

And all the signers repented except one who fled to Rome, i think to become a Cardinal...

The one who did not sign had to flee Papal forces overland to save his life - He was not given transport by ship... Saint John of Ephesus is his name... The persecution of that council by the Latins was unrelenting and horriffic, and all but one finally caved in under its pressures...

When the Pope heard that John had not signed, he said: "Then we have lost..."

Arsenios
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
In face to face conversations people who hold beliefs similar to Josiah or MennoSota will state their peace and not bother to condemn anybody who disagrees - even if in their minds they think ill of any who disagree - because in face to face conversation people (most people I mean) have learned that differences exist and no amount to name calling or verbal condemnation changes the existence of differences. Prayer works better and works more wonders of conversion than name calling or condemnation ever could. But in chat forums something happens and people lose their manners and common sense.

Exactly so...

Arsenios
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,115
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Proving there IS a God!

And all the signers repented except one who fled to Rome, i think to become a Cardinal...

The one who did not sign had to flee Papal forces overland to save his life - He was not given transport by ship... Saint John of Ephesus is his name... The persecution of that council by the Latins was unrelenting and horriffic, and all but one finally caved in under its pressures...

When the Pope heard that John had not signed, he said: "Then we have lost..."

Arsenios

I am no historian so I have no idea what the Pope of that time (or popes if there were several during the council) said but it is unlikely that the pope would say "Then we have lost ..." and more likely that he might reflect that the matter did not go as well as one could wish. Anyway, it is a fight of 600 years ago and not my fight today.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,647
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
In face to face conversations people who hold beliefs similar to Josiah or MennoSota will state their peace and not bother to condemn anybody who disagrees - even if in their minds they think ill of any who disagree - because in face to face conversation people (most people I mean) have learned that differences exist and no amount to name calling or verbal condemnation changes the existence of differences. Prayer works better and works more wonders of conversion than name calling or condemnation ever could. But in chat forums something happens and people lose their manners and common sense.



I remind you yet again, I have publicly and clearly stated my position concern The Catholic Church and Catholics. I have stated (repeatedly) many very positive things. And you refused to return EVEN ONE OF THEM to me or any Protestant.


I DISAGREE with a tiny few things your denomination TEACHES (all exactly the same issues which RC denomination disagrees with the LCMS on - same issues to the same degree). But I have stated that I accept the RC denomination as perfectly valid in every sense (indeed, I have stated I consider it one of the best denominations in the world and agree with it more than many Protestant ones), that I hold all its clergy and Sacraments as completely valid, that I consider all registered in parishes owned and operated by it to be my FULL, in every sense EQUAL, and in every sense equally blessed and UNDIVIDED brothers and sisters in Christ and equally a part of Christ's church which is one, holy, catholic communion of saints.

Yes, i would tell you that to your face and yes I have told you that at least a dozen times here at CH. You won't return any of that to me or my denomination so I think the proverbial shoe is on the other foot, so to speak.




.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,115
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I remind you yet again, I have publicly and clearly stated my position
It's very commendable if you've stated your position in public and clearly.
concern The Catholic Church and Catholics.
I see, so you state a position concerning Catholics and the Catholic Church. Why? You get it wrong in your posts. So why state your position when it is in error?
I have stated (repeatedly) many very positive things. And you refused to return EVEN ONE OF THEM to me or any Protestant.
I rarely state any position about any particular Protestant denomination and only occasionally comment on some specific belief raised in CH as a distinctly Protestant belief. For example, "sola scriptura" is in error, but why labour that point unless it is repeatedly brought up? You are most welcome to find the posts that you think do Protestants and Protestantism a disservice and show them to me. I cannot recall many, perhaps none.
I DISAGREE with a tiny few things your denomination TEACHES (all exactly the same issues which RC denomination disagrees with the LCMS on - same issues to the same degree). But I have stated that I accept the RC denomination as perfectly valid in every sense (indeed, I have stated I consider it one of the best denominations in the world and agree with it more than many Protestant ones), that I hold all its clergy and Sacraments as completely valid, that I consider all registered in parishes owned and operated by it to be my FULL, in every sense EQUAL, and in every sense equally blessed and UNDIVIDED brothers and sisters in Christ and equally a part of Christ's church which is one, holy, catholic communion of saints.
Your posts do mention Catholicism, Catholics, and the Catholic Church a lot. Often under the form of "the unique singular ... Catholic denomination ...". I could give a list of such posts if you like, not an exhaustive one just a sampler if you like. Here is one:
http://christianityhaven.com/showthread.php?p=65829#post65829
Yes, i would tell you that to your face and yes I have told you that at least a dozen times here at CH. You won't return any of that to me or my denomination so I think the proverbial shoe is on the other foot, so to speak.
You are welcome to post a list of the alleged offences if you like.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
I am no historian so I have no idea what the Pope of that time (or popes if there were several during the council) said but it is unlikely that the pope would say "Then we have lost ..." and more likely that he might reflect that the matter did not go as well as one could wish. Anyway, it is a fight of 600 years ago and not my fight today.

Not mine either, except that the issues have not been resolved...

He may have said: "No Mark of Ephesus? Then we have failed..." It was along those lines... He knew who had to sign in order for it to "take"... The returning Fathers were taken out of Communion for years for their consent... And wept bitterly... They had early realized it was not a Council but a war of attrition by affliction, and they just wanted to go home and escape from the afflictions imposed on them there...

I have been queried often by RC's as to why we did not keep our word, because the whole matter was settled at the Council of Florence, but we reneged...

So I read up on what happened there, and why the agreement, and why the rejection of the agreement by the Church upon arrival in Constantinople... Their decision was to enter under the yoke of the Islamic Turks who were clearly non-Christian rather than to submit to Rome's authority... There are not many Christians left in Constantinople today, 1-2 thousand maybe... It was that level of a theological issue... Worth sacrificing Constantinople to the Turks over...

Arsenios
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,115
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Not mine either, except that the issues have not been resolved...
In theological disputes it seems that almost no difference is ever resolved.
He may have said: "No Mark of Ephesus? Then we have failed..." It was along those lines... He knew who had to sign in order for it to "take"... The returning Fathers were taken out of Communion for years for their consent... And wept bitterly... They had early realized it was not a Council but a war of attrition by affliction, and they just wanted to go home and escape from the afflictions imposed on them there...
What you write is one perspective, one way of retelling the history it is not the only one I'd hazard.
I have been queried often by RC's as to why we did not keep our word, because the whole matter was settled at the Council of Florence, but we reneged...
I do not believe that anybody living today had a word to give or take back 600 years ago. The words on both sides were spoken by people long since gone from our earthly hearing.
So I read up on what happened there, and why the agreement, and why the rejection of the agreement by the Church upon arrival in Constantinople... Their decision was to enter under the yoke of the Islamic Turks who were clearly non-Christian rather than to submit to Rome's authority... There are not many Christians left in Constantinople today, 1-2 thousand maybe... It was that level of a theological issue... Worth sacrificing Constantinople to the Turks over...
Perhaps it is an issue of importance but I am not so sure that it was important theologically speaking. To say "and the son" in English meaning "and through the son" or "through the son" (in Latin filioque) does not challenge the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.
 
Top Bottom