mls@sfsup.att.com (Mike Siemon) (11/14/90)
In article <Nov.13.04.13.34.1990.1020@athos.rutgers.edu>, mangoe@mimsy.umd.edu (Charley Wingate) writes: > SomeOne writes: > >I don't think any branch of the Reformation even addressed the Filioque. > Not too long about (I think it was in the early '80s) the Episcopal Church > considered dropping it. I'm pretty sure that the issue was done in by the > still-ongoing furor over women's ordination/consecration, sexuality, etc. There were two preliminary editions of the Rite II liturgies now in the BCP. In the earlier of these two ("Services for Trial Use", distinct from the later "zebra" book), which was used in my church when I first entered the Anglican communion in 1972-3, the Creed had no filioque. I asked about this, and was told (by people closely associated with Massey Shephard at CSDP, who was a major influence on these liturgies) that this was specifically done as an ecumenical gesture towards the Orthodox communions. The later edition reinserted "and from the Son" in view of a massive lack of interest in our gesture by the Orthodox. And meanwhile, the discussions with Rome (ARCIC, etc.) were then going quite well. I don't think the matter had anything to do (even by indirect sidetracking because of the furor over these other issues) with women's ordination (nor do I think that omission of filioque would go very far towards uniting a "protestant" church [ however tenuously we may be so-called :-) ] with Orthodoxy, however important that has been as a stumbling-block between Rome and the East. -- Michael L. Siemon "O stand, stand at the window, m.siemon@ATT.COM As the tears scald and start; ...!att!sfsup!mls You shall love your crooked neighbor standard disclaimer With your crooked heart."