the hoop jumping continues

Ah, so you deny that the Father and the Son are one in essence, so that what is said of one is also said of the other, or that what is understood of the Father is understood of the Son

by your amazing logic, so did everyone at the council of nicea

What about Constantinople II?

Theodoret’s teachings were condemned

He professed what you believe about the HS

Is that also just mental gymnastics?

It is just an example of how you shouldn't just go around claiming how people "overturn councils". If we have any council declared as ecumenical that contradicts another such council, say so, and point to the specific canons

what i believe about the Holy Spirit is what is professed through the nicene creed

Was Constantinople II not Orthodox?

I don't know if you noticed, but

The Creed isn't supposed to be the entire Christian doctrine in a couple sentenes

I'm late as hell to the party but that sounds awful, marrying someone and you can't get any kids out of them

feed her to the lions

Also, what you say is false, because the orthodox use the nicene-constantinopolitan creed

at least make that the ultimatum smh

Also, Council of Nicea translates to additions to the faith, not creed

πίστιν

```The Creed isn't supposed to be the entire Christian doctrine in a couple sentenes```
so dont go around fucking with it lmao

Pistin

What changes it is denying what is implicit in it

Because that rivals with the faith of the Creed

filioque is 👌

still hasn’t addressed Constantinople II

Guess Theodoret was an ok dude

You could as well complain that the creed exists, saying "don't mess around with Scripture". The purpose of the Creed is to combat heresies, which is why some minor things are explicitely added to combat further heresies

Which is why the orthodox also use a version with additions

Literally had to agree with filioque to avoid further heresies

which were

Most threatening, Theodoret’s teachings

Which again, were condemned in Constantinople II

i meant the filioqie

what was it used to combat

The idea that the Holy Spirit does not come from the Son, so that the Spirit of Christ is a different one from the Spirit of the Father

Things like this:

_ Against IX. ... We shall confess that the Spirit of the Son was His own if he spoke of it as of the same nature and proceeding from the Father, and shall accept the expression as consistent with true piety. But if he speaks of the Spirit as being of the Son, or as having its origin through the Son we shall reject this statement as blasphemous and impious. For we believe the Lord when He says, "The spirit which proceedeth from the Father_

That in turn gave way to the 13th anathema

_ If anyone defends the heretical writings of Theodoret which were composed against the true faith, against the first holy synod of Ephesus and against holy Cyril and his Twelve Chapters, and also defends what Theodoret wrote to support the heretical Theodore and Nestorius and others who think in the same way as the aforesaid Theodore and Nestorius and accept them or their heresy and if anyone, because of them, shall accuse of being heretical the doctors of the church who have stated their belief in the union according to subsistence of God the Word; and if anyone does not anathematize these heretical books and those who have thought or now think in this way, and all those who have written against the true faith or against holy Cyril and his twelve chapters, and who persist in such heresy until they die: let him be anathema._

this is constantinople II?

Second thing he quoted is

right