Friday, February 27, 2009

Monarchy of the Father: Pensées

Very Succinct Explanation of Harmony of Monarchy and Filioque
1. From what I understand after reading abundant literature on the Filioque, the Filioque clause does not infringe on the precious Monarchy of the Father, and does not violate the Cappadocian Principle, because it does not attribute to the Son a property distinctive of the Father.{1} It would only infringe on the Monarchy and Cappadocian Principle if it made the Son the unoriginate source of divinity, i.e., gave the Son the notions of innascibility and paternity. But Filioque manifestly does no such thing.

Harmony of Cappadocian Fathers with Filioque
2. I don't believe that the Cappadocian Fathers, viz., Patriarch St. Gregory Nazianzen the Great Theologian of Constantinople, Bishop St. Basil the Great of Caesarea, and Bishop St. Gregory the Great of Nyssa exclude Filioque. St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Basil the Great clearly state that the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son.{2} But they also clearly express that the Holy Spirit has His hypostasis from the Son in light of the Son's participation in the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit.{3} Would they not be of one mind on the Trinity? Even St. Gregory the Great of Nazianzus, with his very powerful emphasis on the Monarchy of the Father, does not exclude the Filioque.{4}

Energetic Manifestation

Notes & References
{1} "Compatibility of Cappadocian Principle and Filioque." The Banana Republican. 10 Oct. 2008. 27 Feb. 2009 <>.
{2} "Filioque: Fathers, Popes, & Councils." The Banana Republican. 25 July 2008. 27 Feb. 2009 <>.
{3} Ibid.
{4} "On Filioque, Against Mark of Ephesus, et al." The Banana Republican. 16 Oct. 2008. 27 Feb. 2009 <>.

No comments: