Filioque: How Leo XIV Diverges from the Council of Florence
Leo XIV has omitted the Filioque clause in the Creed in September and during his actual visit in Turkey. Historical backgrounds.
Following the ancient Latin and Alexandrian tradition, the Western Church Fathers like Pope Leo I, Augustine, and Ambrose always confessed and explained the filioque.
The biggest disbute over the filioque was at the Council of Florence (1438–39). There, the Latins cited the numerous Greek Fathers to demonstrate that they also believed that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
The leader of the opposing Greek delegation was Archbishop Mark Eugenikos of Ephesus. He maintained the heresy that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone. His side accepted the phrase “through the Son” only in the sense of manifestation, not origin.
A turning point of the council came when Johannes von Ragusa showed an ancient codex brought from Constantinople by the philosopher–cardinal Nicholas of Cusa. It contained Basil the Great’s Against Eunomius (…More
Saint Thomas Aquinas explains it very well in Summa contra Gentiles, the last part, chapters 24 and 25.
Like prostitutes, the anti-church uses seductive outfits to attract its lovers..
Apostate Robert Prevost attacks the Universal Reign of Christ. He does not seek the conversion of souls.
(Error of Russia)Well well If they can mess with trinity at whim what else do they have up their sleeve .
Dragon stretch forth its neck? Modernist your time is up!
I cannot help but think that there is more than a little of the 'Peter Principle' (Lawrence J., not St. Simon Peter) going on here. Prevost has been elevated to a level beyond his competency, and, no matter his ideological bent (or, if you prefer, bent ideology), it shows.
Is an omission a 'divergence'? It appears more emphatically ideological than that to me.