vendredi 10 octobre 2025

Jael and Mary


Hans-Georg Lundahl
9.X.2025
Totus Catholica doesn't go far enough:

Mary in Judges? This Verse Makes Protestant Scholars SWEAT
Totus Catholica | 9 Oct. 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coSHNPkUwWg





[My original comments under the video are also copied to under above FB status, and when a debate or start of it says "youtube" it means the debate took place on youtube, under the video. If comments turn up under mine, I'll mark that "FB"]




2:19 The angel had already called Mary Blessed among women before She was pregnant.

The parallel between Mary and Jael is even closer. We must ask, "who is Mary's Sisera" and if we also see a parallel in Judith to this wording "who is Mary's Holophernes" ... this must be exactly what She wondered "what kind of greeting this might be" ...

Given Luke 1:42 adding "and blessed is the fruit of thy womb" we have another echo clearing it up. Genesis 3:15. It wasn't a human person, but a serpent ... or fallen angel ... that She had "killed with a tent peg" ...

There is only one way for a human being to have basically killed Satan. Reversing the way in which Satan killed Adam and Eve. And that means, being without sin.

Youtube

arcadio jr. navarro
@arcadiojr.navarro8303
@hglundahl

In Genesis 3 God metes out various judgments against those who brought sin into His perfect world. Adam, Eve, and the serpent all hear of the consequences of their rebellion. To the serpent God says, in part, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel” (Genesis 3:15, KJV).

@hglundahl

Even in this judgment, there is mercy. God’s curse on the serpent, in particular, was laced with words of hope. The woman mentioned in Genesis 3:15 is Eve. The serpent, addressed directly, is the animal that Satan used to deceive the woman. Some of the curse was directed at the animal (verse 14); at the same time, the curse of God falls upon Satan, who had taken the serpent’s form or body in Eden (cf. the dragon in Revelation 12:9).

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@hglundahl
@arcadiojr.navarro8303 "The woman mentioned in Genesis 3:15 is Eve."

No.

First, since all of the OT is about Christ, but not all of the OT has its Christological meaning stated in NT writings, we need the tradition of the Church to access what Jesus told the disciples of Emmaus in Luke 24. And the Church says Mary.

Second, "blessed among women" is in all of the Jewish-Protestant OT only said about Jael, and in the Catholic-Orthodox OT also about Judith. So, since the angel greeted Mary with these words, she wondered who Her Sisera and Holophernes was supposed to be. But when Elisabeth repeated and added "and blessed is the fruit of thy womb" She saw the parallel to Genesis 3:15 and knew Her "Sisera and Holophernes" was Satan and She therefore had to be without sin, since that was the only move by which a man could defeat the fallen angel.

arcadio jr. navarro
@hglundahl

In Genesis 3 God metes out various judgments against those who brought sin into His perfect world. Adam, Eve, and the serpent all hear of the consequences of their rebellion. To the serpent God says, in part, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel” (Genesis 3:15, KJV).

@hglundahl

The woman mentioned in Genesis 3:15 is Eve. The serpent, addressed directly, is the animal that Satan used to deceive the woman. Some of the curse was directed at the animal (verse 14); at the same time, the curse of God falls upon Satan, who had taken the serpent’s form or body in Eden (cf. the dragon in Revelation 12:9).

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@arcadiojr.navarro8303 It seems the Hebrew has "complete enmity" which is more appropriate about a sinless person against Satan than about Eve and her far of children against snakes.

Also, the Blessed Virgin Mary recognised the allusion, once St. Elizabeth greeted Her.

@arcadiojr.navarro8303 Btw, KJV is not a Bible.

Use Douay Rheims instead. Just a tip.

arcadio jr. navarro
@hglundahl

The gifts of the apostles and prophets were foundational and necessary in the early days of the church, but their purpose has been completed. There are no apostles or prophets today. Once the Holy Spirit had fulfilled His ministry of guiding the disciples into all the truth (John 16:13) and inspiring prophecy (2 Peter 1:20–21), He began using evangelists and pastors and teachers to accomplish the next stage of the building.

@hglundahl

Douay-Rheims Version - Translation method

The Douay-Rheims Bible is a translation into English of the Latin Vulgate Bible which St. Jerome (342-420) translated into Latin from the original languages. The Vulgate quickly became the Bible universally used in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. In their preface, the translators of the 1582 DRV New Testament gave 10 reasons for using the Vulgate as their primary text, rather than the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, stating that the Latin Vulgate "is not only better than all other Latin translations, but than the Greek text itself, in those places where they disagree."

@hglundahl

King James Version - Translation method

The King James translation was done by 47 scholars, all of whom were members of the Church of England. In common with most other translations of the period, the New Testament was translated from the Textus Receptus (Received Text) series of the Greek texts. The Old Testament was translated from the Masoretic Hebrew text, while the Apocrypha was translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate. In 1769, the Oxford edition, which excluded the Apocrypha, became the standard text and is the text which is reproduced almost unchanged in most current printings.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@arcadiojr.navarro8303 I'm sorry, but that's not how the NT portrays things.

Apostles insofar as having seen Jesus, and Prophets insofar as adding prophecy to Acts or Revelation (St. Paul being both), adding to the Deposit of faith, that no longer exists.

But they were also bishops, as you can see from Peter being able to lay hands on Simon Magus (and refusing) and Paul having been consecrated in this manner (Acts 13), consecrating St. Tim in this manner and telling him whom not to ordain priests and whom to ordain priests ... possibly even whom to consecrate bishop or not consecrate bishop (depending on whether 1st C terminology covers our own or not), shows there was a foreseen mechanism or strategy or plan to give successors to the Apostles in their capacity of bishops.

Matthew 28:16 to 20 shows the Eleven were meant to have successors to the end of time. You totally misrepresent the ecclesiology of the NT, you fail to account for typological questions existing as per Luke 24 and you pretend those following immediately after the Apostles for some reason got it wrong, but you or whoever more than a millennium and a half afterwards got it right. This is not even remotely credible.

The Holy Spirit certainly led the Apostles into all truth, meaning perhaps even things they had never understood while disciples, and this has ended, but they also got Him to remind them of all He had said, which the Holy Ghost is doing to this day and will continue doing to Doomsday.

@arcadiojr.navarro8303 As to Vulgate vs Manuscripts, unfortunately, KJV betrayed even manuscripts in Matthew 6:7 to fit Calvin's Geneva Bible and the Protestant disgust for Rosaries. Which is a very evil thing.





2:22 Not just the Church teaches that, but St. Luke in chapter 24.

And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to them in all the scriptures, the things that were concerning him
[Luke 24:27]

Did you note "all the prophets" and again "all the scriptures" ... exactly. Precisely all of the OT. Excellent proof text for tradition, since it's the Church that has the recollection of this typological teaching, only small bits of it are mentioned in the NT actual texts.

Youtube

arcadio jr. navarro
@hglundahl

Jesus shows up often in the Old Testament—not by that name, and not in the same form as we see Him in the New Testament, but He is there nonetheless. The theme of the entire Bible is Christ.

@hglundahl

Jesus Himself confirmed the fact that He is in the Old Testament. In John 5:46 He explained to some religious leaders who had challenged Him that the Old Testament was talking about Him: “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.” According to Jesus, God’s work with man since time began all pointed to Him. Another time when Jesus showed that He is in the Old Testament was on the day of His resurrection. Jesus was walking with two of His disciples, and “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Earlier, before His crucifixion, Jesus had pointed to Isaiah 53:12 and said, “It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’ and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment” (Luke 22:37).

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@arcadiojr.navarro8303 Indeed.

I had missed John 5:46 and Luke 22:37, but it's Luke 24:27 where it clearly says all the scriptures and prophets as well as Moses, i e all of the OT.





3:49 She had crushed the serpent even before the fiat mihi.

And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women
[Luke 1:28]

That's verse 28. In verse 31, Mary's pregnancy is said to be a future event. In verse 38, only, Mary answers:

And Mary said: Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her
[Luke 1:38]

So, while she arguably RE-crushed the serpent by that yes, or rather that yes resumed every crushing of the serpent she had ever done, she had been crushing the serpent for a long time. And that means sinlessness.

Youtube

arcadio jr. navarro
[4 comments which I'm not sharing.]

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@arcadiojr.navarro8303 Thank you, I think I'll leave it here.

You are just trying to promote the standard Protestant arguments against Catholic Mariology, without lifting one finger to deal with my arguments for Catholic Mariology.

I'm blocking you after this.

mercredi 20 août 2025

Attempts on my FB access


This is the third time I get this kind of extra verification:



The first two times I filled in, I got returned to a normal FB login, and each time, as after the first login, I was thrust onto an extra verification.

It may be mentioned that FB France is managed by moderators who are Qataris, and that I've lately showed myself critical against Islam.*

The government continued to censor or ban print and social media religious material it considered objectionable. In June the government deported an Arabic-speaking evangelical Christian pastor after interrogating him for three days on charges of leading a place of worship without authorization and inviting non-Christians to his church. Conversion to another religion from Islam is defined by the law as apostasy and illegal, although there have been no recorded punishments for apostasy since the country’s independence in 1971


Source:

2019 Report on International Religious Freedom: Qatar
US Department of State
https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/qatar


It may also be mentioned, I contacted the son of Katarina Taikon, whose mother's autobiography i enjoyed, explaining why I, while supporting Gypsy Rights, am a Fascist and why that doesn't equal Nazi. It's possible that a certain campaign to stamp me as a Nazi or my Fascist alignment as a racist (including anti-gypsy) one is not very amused by this initiative on my part./HGL

PS, Fixed, but the guy didn't answer. I'm still a fan of his mother, though./HGL

PPS, if you didn't get it, it's the access that's fixed./HGL

* A certain Muslim attitude about polemics from non-Muslims, specifically against Islam is calling it "maligning" ... now the true religion is certainly in one sense maligned by any polemics against it, but this is not always due to an intent of misrepresenting. I think some Protestants have also pretended I maligned the Deformation, on their view "Reformation" ... by showing it is opposed to an implication of Matthew 28:20. Oh, I misrepresent the intention of the Reformers, Luther never intended to create a new church ... the problem is, they agree that the Church that eventually came out of Luther, namely Lutherans, and a few more, that came out of him indirectly, are new. And Matthew 28:20 requires for there to be a true Church that's from "AD 33" (exact year somewhat disputed), that's not a pure abstraction and that's still there. A Conclavist doesn't agree that the papacy of Vatican in Exile is a new papacy, we say it's the old papacy that got a fresh start after a 32 year long pause (a record long sedevacancy). We say that it's the popes currently in the Vatican who are very recent transformers comparable to the Deformers (one proposed year of limit being 1958). Again, a Vatican-II-ist may tactically pretend I'm "maligning" the Vatican because of my convictions about it ... but would be less eager to openly consider my intent as that of maligning./HGL

jeudi 14 août 2025

Distant Starlight Problem, Hugh Ross and Me


Hugh Ross
July 31 (2025) at 6:47 PM
Question of the Week: What do you say to people who assert only God was there to observe the past state of the universe and, therefore, we can only trust what God says about the past and not astronomers?

My Answer: God has not granted us access to the future. He is our only source of information about what will happen in the future. He has, however, granted us access to the past thanks to the finite and constant velocity of light. While astronomers have no access to the present when they observe stars and galaxies, they have direct access to the past. For example, when they observe the Sun, they do not see the Sun as it is now but as it was about 8 minutes ago when light departed from the Sun on its way to Earth. Likewise, when astronomers observed the Andromeda Galaxy, they do not see it as it is now, but as it was 2.5 million years ago.

Astronomers can prove that the velocity of light has not changed, The degree of splitting in hyperfine spectral lines of stars and galaxies reveals the velocity of light when that light left the star and galaxy. The velocity measures the same for all stars and galaxies astronomers observe.

Astronomers can also prove that the light came from the stars and galaxies they observe and not from a location near to Earth. As light travels through interstellalr space, the gas in insterstellar space broadens the spectral lines in proportion to the light travel distance. The dust in interstellar space reddens the continuum radiation between spectral lines in proportion to the light travel distance.

Thus, astronomers do possess direct, trustworthy access to the past state of the universe. Astronomers can confirm that what the Bible says about the past state of the universe is true. It is no accident that the most powerful, unambiguous scientific evidence for the God of the Bible is observational astrophysics.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Likewise, when astronomers observed the Andromeda Galaxy, they do not see it as it is now, but as it was 2.5 million years ago.


Supposing there is a verification of the 2.5 million lightyears.

New blog on the kid: Have you heard the expression "von Neumann chain"?
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2022/08/have-you-heard-expression-von-neumann.html


Hugh Ross
Hans-Georg Lundahl Astronomers have achieved an assumption-free verification. They have made trigonometric distance measurements to galaxies as far away as 470 million light years.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
The trigonometry depends on the assumption earth is moving two astronomic units per year, right?

How's that "assumption free"?

Next Day

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Hugh Ross With Earth moving two astronomic units between January and July, there is trigonometry by 1 known distance and 3 known angles (with a very narrow angle, we assume the other two angles are very close to 90°, obviously).

With the Earth staying still and the star moving between January and July, as we cannot know it moves 2 astronomic units, we only have three angles (pointing the other way). 3 known angles and 0 known distance = no calculated distance either.

Prove alpha Centauri and Andromeda are not both in a shell of fix stars 1 light day up, please!


14.VIII.2025, on the Vigil of Our Lady's Assumption, this was pubished and I notified him./HGL

samedi 26 juillet 2025

It Seems I Lost a Friend on FB


New blog on the kid: Did I Mention Trump Had Commie Tendencies? · HGL's F.B. writings: It Seems I Lost a Friend on FB

I'm not revealing Return to Tradition is called Anthony Stine, he says so on the patreon. I do however take care not to reveal his middle name initial and his face, which are not revealed on the youtube. Well, the face is revealed on some youtubes, but he may remove them or reboot them, so, I prefer discretion.

There the face of Belloc takes the place, and this I inserted instead of his photo on FB, so here is a photoshopped version of the dialogue, not changing the words, only the profile info of Anthony Stine:



Indeed, he removed me from his friends. He can however not remove Chesterton from my friends:

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WORLD
by G.K. Chesterton
https://catholiclibrary.org/library/view?docId=/Contemporary-EN/XCT.152.html


I'll cite the first paragraph of the first chapter:

A book of modern social inquiry has a shape that is somewhat sharply defined. It begins as a rule with an analysis, with statistics, tables of population, decrease of crime among Congregationalists, growth of hysteria among policemen, and similar ascertained facts; it ends with a chapter that is generally called "The Remedy." It is almost wholly due to this careful, solid, and scientific method that "The Remedy" is never found. For this scheme of medical question and answer is a blunder; the first great blunder of sociology. It is always called stating the disease before we find the cure. But it is the whole definition and dignity of man that in social matters we must actually find the cure before we find the disease .


I think you can see how the bill of Trump truly fits this description. So do actual Marxist policies in the countries where Marxism had a monopoly. Or a predominant place, like the French President Vincent Auriol, in whose time homeless were made as invisible, because as unfree, and therefore as "sheltered" from the public, as Trump is initiating.

To some, Marxism simply means solidarity with the poor. In that case, Franco was Marxist. He subsidised living accomodations with tax money and made it pretty hard for a landlord to get rid of a poor tenant. Now, another kind of solidarity with the poor, preached by Chesterton, is not to persecute a poor who no longer is a tenant and also does not own his home, but instead lives without one. The exact fault Mr. Trump is committing. There, as well as with taking interest, Marxism is one with Capitalistic bourgeoisie. Note the tone where Chesterton says "growth of hysteria among policemen" ... the kind of hysteria in which every quarrel between a homeless man and someone passing him by becomes a proof the homeless man is a menace, not that some of those passing him are a nuisance to him. Which even in France they are, as said some of them, and the United States, in many states, is much more Puritan./HGL

PS, the screenshot doesn't show (on your computer or some time in the future)? I'll copy the dialogue, here:

Hans-Georg Lundahl
The Marxist is about Trump's new Soviet policy about the homeless, right?

Anthony P Stine
Hans-Georg Lundahl no, I'm not retarded enough to believe something like that

Hans-Georg Lundahl
I thought you were a fan of Belloc and Chesterton.

Trump's policy remind me of 1910's England, what Chesterton fought against, Prussia, and their fulfilment, the Soviet Union.

His tax policy also mirrors Marxist Sweden.

Anthony P Stine
-Georg Lundahl I am. I'm also not gay enough to call his policies Marxist. I'm not politically or economically illiterate


I'm sorry, his studies in political science may have made him precisely that. And if he just called me gay, he's either voicing a very heavy prejudice against all and any Trump critics ... or relying on calumny.

If he has from priests in Paris that I'm gay, they are committing calumny (and that calumny could be a reason why they avoid me). If they pretend I cross dress, they rely on the poorer judgement of Muslims or Jews less familiar with European historic and geographic variation of the male costume./HGL




I tried to notify Anthony Stine via FB mail, on one of my accounts (they are two). About a month ago, I was obliged to change the password on the account, I did so quickly, and then forgot the exact password. As you know computers depend on exact passwords. This means, I was not able to reuse it. I tried to change it again, then I got in a loop about what computer I'm habitually using. For those who speak French, the post LH110 shows screenshots. I'm right now again in a loop of screenshot 5 and 6. Meaning, if he answered, I cannot access his answer./HGL

mardi 22 juillet 2025

Let's Recall Our Own Girls, Oppressed by Delayed Marriage If in Certain Situations (Pregnant, In Love, or Otherwise 1 Cor. 7:9)


International Christian Concern
Read more: https://www.persecution.org/2025/06/13/underage-marriage-outlawed-in-islamabad/

[Pray with us. Praise God that underage marriage has been outlawed in Islamabad.]

Hans-Georg Lundahl
The bill addresses the growing concern of female children getting pregnant in their early teens before they can mature or pursue education. It also highlights the widespread issues many girls face, of being kidnapped, forced into marriage, and forced by their captors to convert to Islam. At least 1,000 girls are subject to this annually.


There are two sides to it.

On the one hand, some Christians are better protected, at least if they are in Islamabad.

Also some young teen Muslimas who were not wanting the marriage.

On the other hand the law as such is at least if it were generalised unjust.

In France, every year (my stats are from before the Covid) 1000 girls under 15 get pregnant and 772 of the pregnancies end in abortion. I think that was lower back before 2006, meaning abortion and than 772, when the marital age of girls was raised from 15 to 18.

Traditionally among Christians, 18 has not been the limit.

From Agnes of Sagan*, who married Ludwik I of Brieg to 6 generations later, for instance two daughters of James II of Scotland (not to be confused with James II of England who was James VII of Scotland), there were 32 married women with known ages, or tolerably known, and depending on whether you go with the higher or lower age of a person, the median was either 17 (both n. 16 and 17 were married at 17) or between 17 and 18 (n. 16 was married at 17, n. 17 at 18). The lower quartile similarily varied as either 14 (both 8 and 19 were married at 14), or between 14 and 15 (8 was married at 14, 9 at 15).**

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: Seven Generations Women, Age at First Marriage
https://filolohika.blogspot.com/2023/09/seven-generations-women-age-at-first.html


I am happy the law as such is not applicable outside Islamabad. I'd be even happier if they all converted from Islam, stopped forced marriages and the limit could be lowered to 16 for girls all over the country. Or even lower than 16.

The canonic minimum age for ladies was 12 and the youngest in the sample was 11 or 12 when married. In the Christian Middle Ages.

Notes:
* Henryk IV of Poland is also known as Henryk II of Żagań. Agnes or Agnieszka was his daughter.
** The oldest lady at her marriage was married at 33. 32 and 33 are two outliers, the oldest younger than that were married at 25. And it's questionable if they were two or just one, over 30.

vendredi 20 juin 2025

If the Church is Very Reduced, the Pope Is at Some Risk of Being Bamboozled by Bigger Actors


HGL's F.B. writings: If the Church is Very Reduced, the Pope Is at Some Risk of Being Bamboozled by Bigger Actors · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Brian Holdsworth and Myself on Why Not Orthodox · Heschmeyer and Myself on Why Not Orthodox?

Vatican In Exile
7 h ago
The Filioque

The Visigoths, upon converting from Arianism to Nicene Christianity, adopted the Filioque clause in the Nicene Creed at the Third Council of Toledo in 589, called by King Reccared I (King of Spain and southern France) This addition, meaning "and from the Son," affirmed that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, a point of theological contention that later contributed to the East-West Schism.

Elaboration:
Visigothic Conversion:

The Visigoths, initially adherents of Arianism (which viewed the Son as subordinate to the Father), converted to Nicene Christianity, which affirms the full divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit.

The Filioque Clause:

The Filioque ("and from the Son") clause was added to the Nicene Creed to clarify the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Specifically, it stated that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, not just the Father.

Third Council of Toledo (589):

This council, invoked and controlled by King Reccared I (King of Spain and southern France) held in Visigothic Spain in Toledo 45 miles south of Madrid, marked the official adoption of the Filioque clause into the Western Christian tradition.

Theological Significance:

The Filioque became a point of contention between the Western (Latin) and Eastern (Greek) branches of Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox Church generally rejected the Filioque, emphasizing the Holy Spirit's procession from the Father alone.

Traditional Triadology (Holy balance in the Trinity):

Nicene theology (325 ad) particularly in the East, emphasizes that each person of the Trinity has unique characteristics, but certain attributes (like Godhood and eternality) are shared by all. The filioque, by linking the Spirit's procession to the Son, is seen as introducing a shared characteristic that isn't universal to all three persons, thus upsetting the balance in the Trinity.

East-West Schism:

The Filioque controversy, among other factors, contributed to the Great Schism of 1054, which formally divided the Western (Catholic) and Eastern (Orthodox) churches.

Continued Debate:

While the Filioque is a standard part of the Nicene Creed in the Catholic Church, it remains a point of theological discussion and sometimes disagreement between the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

Painting of King Reccared I below

[painting omitted]

Hans-Georg Lundahl
The Visigoths, upon converting from Arianism to Nicene Christianity, adopted the Filioque clause in the Nicene Creed at the Third Council of Toledo in 589, called by King Reccared I (King of Spain and southern France)


False History.

At the Third Council of Toledo, there was no discussion of the Filioque.

The council opened with a Latin text of the Nicene Creed, and the Filioque was already there.

If it didn't come from the original autograph at Constantinople (Nicaea ended at "and the Holy Ghost, Amen"), it was probably a contamination from the topical creed against Priscillianism, issued by FIRST Council of Toledo, in 400 AD, well before the Visigoths arrived.

I've treated this in the page here, most of which is a Latin text of that creed and my English parallel translation:

Trento - Philaret (Catechisms) : Filioque far older than III Council of Toledo
https://trentophilaret.blogspot.com/p/filioque-far-older-than-iii-council-of.html


Hans-Georg Lundahl
Correction to previous, I spoke as per memory of a text I perused in a book and probably missed parts of.

Filioque is reaffirmed in Toledo III, but was, as mentioned, already affirmed in Toledo I.

Pater ex quo sit filius, ipse vero ex nullo sit alio. Filius quia habeat patrem, sed sine initio et sine diminutione, in ea qua patri coęqualis et coaeternus est divinitate subsistat. Spiritusque sanctus confitendus a nobis, et praedicandus est a patre et filio procedere, et cum patre et filio unius esse substantiae.


Third Synod of Toledo / Synodus Toletana Tertia:
https://www.benedictus.mgh.de/quellen/chga/chga_045t.htm


Credimus [c] in unum verum deum patrem et filium et spiritum sanctum visibilium et invisibilium factorem, per quem creata sunt omnia in caelo et in terra, unum deum et unam esse divinae substantiae trinitatem. Patrem autem non esse filium ipsum, sed habere filium qui pater non sit. Filium non esse patrem, sed filium dei de patris esse natura. Spiritum quoque esse paraclitum, qui nec pater sit ipse, nec filius, sed a patre filioque procedens. Est ergo ingenitus pater, genitus filius, non genitus paraclitus, sed a patre filioque procedens.


First Council of Toledo / Concilium Toletanum primum:
https://www.benedictus.mgh.de/quellen/chga/chga_043t.htm