Sounds like it's your agenda, not mine. I think your deep-seated hatred for anthing Catholic is influencing you posts here Hermi. Please take a few moments and read this FROM YOUR OWN CHURCH:
A fews point from the site:
We are convinced from our own study that the Eastern and Western theological traditions have been in substantial agreement, since the patristic period, on a number of fundamental affirmations about the Holy Trinity that bear on theFilioque debate:
•both traditions clearly affirm that the Holy Spirit is a distinct hypostasis or person within the divine Mystery, equal in status to the Father and the Son, and is not simply a creature or a way of talking about God’s action in creatures;
•although the Creed of 381 does not state it explicitly, both traditions confess the Holy Spirit to be God, of the same divine substance (homoousios) as Father and Son;
blah blah EDITED FOR SPACE
•that our Churches commit themselves to a new and earnest dialogue con-cerning the origin and person of the Holy Spirit, drawing on the Holy Scriptures and on the full riches of the theological traditions of both our Churches, and to looking for constructive ways of expressing what is central to our faith on this difficult issue;
•that all involved in such dialogue expressly recognize the limitations of our ability to make definitive assertions about the inner life of God;
•that in the future, because of the progress in mutual understanding that has come about in recent decades, Orthodox and Catholics refrain from labeling as heretical the traditions of the other side on the subject of the procession of the Holy Spirit;
•that Orthodox and Catholic theologians distinguish more clearly between the divinity and hypostatic identity of the Holy Spirit, which is a received dogma of our Churches, and the manner of the Spirit’s origin, which still awaits full and final ecumenical resolution;
•that those engaged in dialogue on this issue distinguish, as far as possible, the theological issues of the origin of the Holy Spirit from the ecclesiological issues of primacy and doctrinal authority in the Church, even as we pursue both questions seriously together;
•that the theological dialogue between our Churches also give careful consideration to the status of later councils held in both our Churches after those seven generally received as ecumenical.
•that the Catholic Church, as a consequence of the normative and irrevocable dogmatic value of the Creed of 381, use the original Greek text alone in making translations of that Creed for catechetical and liturgical use.
•that the Catholic Church, following a growing theological consensus, and in particular the statements made by Pope Paul VI, declare that the condemnation made at the Second Council of Lyons (1274) of those “who presume to deny that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son” is no longer applicable.
I FORGOT THIS PART:
The North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation
SCOBA Chairman: Metropolitan Maximos of Pittsburgh
Catholic Chairman: Archbishop Daniel E. Pilarczyk of Cincinnati
If you knew Orthodoxy you would have the knowledge that Bishop Maximus is known as an ecumenist so this is no suprise. I have read many articles by respected Orthodox that have real troubling issues with Bishop Maximus and his ecumenist views. They believe, as I do , that he would compromise the True Faith. By the way Mr. Orthodox Expert, have sat and had coffee with Bishop Maximus=just my wife, my daughter and 1. Foe about 1 1/2 hours.A PhD Philosophy. A Brilliant and most humble man. So Ill talk to the Bishop and you go looking for more crud on the internet cause you just cant be wrong and let it go-that is becoming a Catholic dogma here