From: George Murphy (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jun 18 2003 - 05:56:30 EDT
Iain Strachan wrote:
> George Murphy:
> > gordon brown wrote:
> > >
> > > I just looked at the ASA web page's link to the Nicene Creed, and it
> > > raises a question in my mind. The discussion indicates that there is
> > > than one version. Which one is intended by our statement of faith--the
> > > with the filioque clause or the one without it? In other words, are
> > > Eastern Orthodox thereby excluded from the ASA?
> > I'm glad you brought this up because it does highlight a problem in
> linking to a
> > text of the creed. We were deliberately non-specific about this for just
> the reason you
> > point out. Our intention was certainly _not_ to exclude Orthodox
> > It might be a good idea to drop the link until a proper treatment of this
> can be
> > discussed. A suitably placed asterisk may be in order.
> > FWIW I think that the filioque is correct as a theological opinion but
> that the
> > western church had no business unilaterally inserting it in the creed.
> But hold on a minute ... even without the link, you can still find the creed
> if you really want to & possibly get offended by it if you're an Orthodox
> Christian. The real issue here is whether you want to say you accept the
> creed at all. It's no good just saying you believe it, but then making it
> difficult to find because you think someone might get offended by it!
No, because the Orthodox - with good historical justification - will say that
the "Nicene Creed" is the text _without_ the filioque, and that the text containing it
is a much later western interpolation. (Actually it's the Niceo-Constantinopolitan
Creed that's usually referred to by both east & west as "Nicene".)
George L. Murphy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jun 18 2003 - 05:58:19 EDT