Normally I reserve this blog to the posting of class notes from St. Michaels. However, we finished our year in June discussing a lot of apologetically issues. Because Orthodoxy is a minority Christian, it not unusual to get strange looks or questions when your religious affiliation comes up in the workplace or everyday life. As a result, we spent some time discussing ways to talk about the faith that is understandable to those with no knowledge of Orthodoxy.
I ran into a blog post that brought up a question that surprises me. Why don't Protestants protest the filioque? This was not a front-burner issue for me in coming to Orthodoxy, however, it did play into my decision to go toward Rome or Constantinople. Now this would be a tough discussion to have with the average lay-person, most people would not know what this little addition to the creed would do to their theology. Though this is a great question for those with more academic backgrounds.
This addition to the creed is held fastly by most Protestant groups, yet it does not fit within their own criterion for truth. If Sola Scriptura was applied to this addition, it clearly would be removed. Also it is apparent that it was not part of the original Nicene formulation and was a much later addition to Roman theology. The normal things that Protestant protest such as the canon of Scripture, Marian doctrines, and iconography provide much less fodder for rejection than the Filioque would. Yet it is ignored. Unfortunately it is a deep part of their theological and philosphical framework that is more Augustinian than Biblical (especially the Reformed traditions).
For a fuller discussion check out the original post at Energetic Procession here.