Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

The Filioque Controversy

THE CATHOLIC ANSWER:

Pulling out your Catechism of the Catholic Church, you explain to Theo that the Catholic Church has always acknowledged the Creed of Constantinople I from AD 381 since Pope Leo I ratified both the Council and the Symbol (the Creed) in AD 451. The addition of the filioque is a development of the Creed that in no way denies the earlier version any more than the development and subsequent change of the Creed between Nicea I and Constantinople I represented a corruption of the Creed then. Moreover, the Catholic Church acknowledges that the Father is the first origin of the Divine Life of the Trinity. As such, the Father is "the principle without principle." We agree with the Orthodox on this point. Together with Theo, you read the CCC 245-248:

The apostolic faith concerning the Spirit was confessed by the second ecumenical council at Constantinople (381): "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father." By this confession, the Church recognizes the Father as "the source and origin of the whole divinity." But the eternal origin of the Spirit is not unconnected with the Son's origin... he is not called the Spirit of the Father alone. . . but the Spirit of both the Father and the Son....

The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque.)" The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: "The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has His nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration. . And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom He is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son."

The affirmation of the filioque does not appear in the Creed confessed in 381 at Constantinople. But Pope St. Leo I, following an ancient Latin and Alexandrian tradition, had already confessed it dogmatically in 447 (Quam laudabiliter) even before Rome, in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon, came to recognize and receive the Symbol of 381. The use of this formula in the Creed was gradually admitted into the Latin liturgy between the eighth and eleventh centuries.

At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father's character as first origin of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as He "who proceeds from the Father," it affirms that he comes from the Father through the Son. The Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque). It says this, "legitimately and with good reason," for the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as "the principle without principle," is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, He is, with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds. This legitimate complementarity, provided it does not become rigid, does not affect the identity of faith in the reality of the same mystery confessed.

***

What is “Filioque”?

Filioque is the word that was inserted in the Western version of the Nicene Creed to assert the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son as well as from the Father. This was an innovation in the Western Church and done without an Ecumenical Council. It was one of the central issues in the Great Schism of 1054. It is still a difference in doctrine between the East and the West.

Why is this change so significant?
It is precisely because it changes the nature of God. It upsets the balance of the three persons of the Holy Trinity. If the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son then it puts the Son in a superior position to the Holy Spirit. Traditional thought about the Trinity is that for any given trait, it must be either common to all Persons of the Trinity or unique to one of them. Thus, Fatherhood is unique to the Father, while begottenness is unique to the Son, and procession unique to the Spirit. Godhood, however, is common to all, as is eternality, uncreatedness, and so forth. Positing that something can be shared by two Persons (i.e., being the source of the Spirit's procession), but not the other, is to elevate those two Persons at the expense of the other. Thus, the balance of unity and diversity is destroyed. Many view that this change undermines the role of the Holy Spirit in the Church. Thus, with the role Spirit being denigrated, his traditional ministries are effaced or replaced. The Church's unity becomes dependent on an office, spirituality becomes adherence to the letter of the law rather than its spirit, sacraments come to be understood in terms of validity, and a spirit of legalism prevails. This is the orientation that did develop in the Western church.

1 posted on 02/16/2014 9:39:18 PM PST by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: NKP_Vet

Ping you know the Trinity was adjusted a few times the Nicene Creed is a product of man trying to make sense of the Godhead so a group of clergy put together their version.

It did not come from an anointed servant of the Lord such as a prophet or an apostle it was those who had no authority, maybe good intentions, and some of among them had other designs?


2 posted on 02/16/2014 9:43:39 PM PST by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: restornu

Question? Did you actually read what you posted?


15 posted on 02/18/2014 11:32:51 AM PST by svcw (Not 'hope and change' but 'dopes in chains')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: restornu

Resty as you know the Trinity is mentioned in the Bible..

God the Father is the First Person of the Trinity

God the Son, the Word, the LORD Jesus Christ is the Second Person of the Trinity..

God the Holy Ghost, the Holy Spirit is the Third Person of the Trinity..

no man could have dreamed the Trinity up...

after all no Mormon leader has ever been able to explain the Trinity of God...

that’s why Mormons have denied God from Joey Smith on down...


16 posted on 02/18/2014 11:33:01 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: restornu
restornu; does your BISHOP know you're out here on FR bothering Catholics?

You know that if you read their stuff, the Spirit of Apostasy will be nagging at your heels; don't you?

18 posted on 02/18/2014 11:38:03 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: restornu; Tax-chick; GregB; Berlin_Freeper; SumProVita; narses; bboop; SevenofNine; ...

At a meeting with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople, Pope John Paul II called for clarification of the filioque clause of the Creed--'proceeds from the Father and the Son.'
Text from the
Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. Found on the
web pages of a Papal Catholic.
An
Orthodox commentary on the document can also be found at this site, as well as a history of the Filioque, and traditional Orthodox objections. The views expressed in this piece are not those of this web -site but are presented for fairness and so that the can be seen in context.

THE FILIOQUE: A VIEW FROM THE VATICAN

38 posted on 02/18/2014 3:24:04 PM PST by NYer ("The wise man is the one who can save his soul. - St. Nimatullah Al-Hardini)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: restornu

All your links are meshugga


77 posted on 02/19/2014 9:18:13 AM PST by AppyPappy (Obama: What did I not know and when did I not know it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson