Program / Course 9: Christology and Pneumatology / Lesson 6.4
What you will learn
- Define procession and explain its biblical basis in John 15:26.
- Narrate how the word filioque came to be added to the Creed in the West.
- State the Orthodox and Catholic positions in the terms each uses.
- Describe the two questions that are tangled together: the doctrine itself and the right to alter the creed.
The big idea
The Creed of 381 says that the Spirit proceeds from the Father. Later, in the Latin West, the words and the Son (in Latin, filioque) were added to the creed. The Orthodox Church holds that the addition is wrong in two ways: it changes a creed that belongs to the whole church, and it teaches two sources of the Spirit, which confuses the Father’s role as the single origin of the Trinity. Catholics hold that the doctrine is true, that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from one principle, and that the Latin addition was a legitimate clarification. The dispute is one of the long-standing divisions between East and West.
Key terms
- Procession
- The way in which the Holy Spirit comes forth from the source of the Godhead from eternity, distinct from the Son’s begetting. Based on John 15:26.
- Filioque
- Latin for and from the Son. The phrase added to the Latin text of the Nicene Creed so that it says the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
- Monarchy of the Father
- The Eastern teaching that the Father is the single source or origin within the Trinity, from whom both the Son and the Spirit have their being.
- Single principle
- The Latin teaching that the Father and the Son are one source of the Spirit, not two, since they share one divine nature.
- Mission
- The sending of the Son and the Spirit into the world in time, as distinct from their eternal relations within God.
- Patriarch of Constantinople
- The leading bishop of the East. Photius, in the ninth century, attacked the filioque in a public letter.
- Council of Florence
- A council of 1438 to 1445 that sought union of East and West and defined the filioque as consistent with the Greek teaching. The union was not accepted by the Eastern churches.
Background
John 15:26 says: “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.” The text speaks of the Spirit proceeding from the Father and of the Son sending the Spirit. The creed of 381 uses the first phrase.
The history that follows is long and has been told differently in East and West. This lesson sets out the main events and the arguments on each side, and separates two questions that were often mixed: what is true about the Spirit’s origin, and who has the right to change a creed.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: Two questions, one verse
The first question is theological. How is the Spirit related to the Father and the Son within God? The Son is begotten of the Father, and the Spirit proceeds. The Fathers said that these words name distinct relations without explaining them. The second question is practical: whether the Spirit’s relation to the Son should be stated in the creed.
The Greek Fathers often spoke of the Spirit proceeding from the Father through the Son. Gregory of Nyssa and John of Damascus use language of this kind. The Latin Fathers, especially Augustine, taught that the Spirit proceeds from both. Augustine reasoned that because the Spirit is the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, and given by both, the Spirit comes from both. He added that the Father is the principal source.
Step 2: How the addition came to be made
The phrase appears in Spain at the Third Council of Toledo in 589, in a Visigothic church recently converted from Arianism, where it served to emphasize the equality of the Son with the Father. It spread in the Frankish lands. In 809 a council at Aachen under Charlemagne upheld it, and Pope Leo III accepted the doctrine but advised against putting it in the creed, and tradition says he had the creed without it engraved on silver plaques in Rome.
Rome itself began to sing the creed with the addition about 1014, at the request of the German emperor Henry II. By then the East had begun to object. The Council of Ephesus had forbidden the writing of another creed, and Eastern bishops held that the addition violated that rule, whatever the doctrine might be.
Step 3: The Orthodox position
In the ninth century, Patriarch Photius condemned the addition in an encyclical letter. Later Orthodox writers developed his arguments. They hold that the Father alone is the source of the Son and of the Spirit, and that to say that the Spirit also comes from the Son makes two sources and weakens the Father’s role. They also hold that the creed belongs to the whole church and that no one part may change it without a council.
Orthodox theologians usually allow that the Spirit is sent to the world through the Son, and some accept that the Spirit eternally rests on or shines forth through the Son, as long as the Father remains the only cause. They distinguish the eternal procession from the temporal mission of the Spirit in history, and say that John 20:22 and similar texts concern the mission.
Step 4: The Catholic position
Catholic teaching holds that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles but as from one. The Council of Lyons in 1274 and the Council of Florence in 1439 taught this, and Florence also held that the Greek phrase through the Son and the Latin from the Son express the same truth. Aquinas argued that the Spirit is distinguished from the Son only by the relation of origin, so if the Spirit did not come from the Son, there would be no distinction.
Catholics also argue that the addition was a legitimate clarification of the faith made by the church’s authority, and Catholic teaching ties the question to the authority of the Pope to teach for the whole church. The Eastern Catholic Churches in communion with Rome usually recite the creed without the addition. A Vatican clarification in 1995 spoke of the Greek and Latin traditions as complementary expressions of one faith.
Step 5: The Protestant and ecumenical situation
The Reformation churches kept the filioque, and the Lutheran, Reformed and Anglican confessions affirm it. In recent decades some Protestant and Anglican bodies have asked whether the creed should be said in its original form, and the Anglican bishops at the Lambeth Conference of 1978 recommended that the Anglican Communion consider dropping it. Others defend the doctrine as scriptural, citing the Spirit of Christ in Romans 8:9 and Galatians 4:6.
Dialogue between Catholic and Orthodox theologians has produced studies that distinguish the question of the doctrine from the question of the creed’s wording, and that note a measure of agreement. The matter remains unresolved. It is among the issues that separate the churches, together with the authority of the Pope.
- What does John 15:26 say, and what might it leave open?
- Why might the Visigoths have wanted to add the phrase in 589?
- How would you state the Orthodox concern about two sources in your own words?
- How does Aquinas argue that the Spirit must come from the Son?
- What is the difference between a dispute about doctrine and a dispute about authority?
- How might a creed be revised in a way that all churches could accept?
Examples
Silver shields
A medieval report says Pope Leo III had the creed without the addition engraved on silver plaques in Rome. Whether this account is accurate in detail is debated, but it shows the tradition that the pope agreed with the doctrine yet preferred not to change the creed.
Singing the creed
In many Western churches the creed is sung or said with the words and the Son. In Orthodox churches it is chanted without them. Some Catholic Eastern liturgies omit them. The sound of the creed itself marks the difference.
A constructed dialogue
A Catholic student says: the Spirit must come from the Son, or the Spirit would not differ from the Son. An Orthodox student says: the Spirit differs because the Father is the source of each in a different way. They discover they are using different starting points. (A constructed example.)
Different perspectives
Catholic
The Catholic Church teaches that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from one principle, that this is part of the faith, and that the addition to the creed was a legitimate development. It allows Eastern Catholics to omit it in worship.
Orthodox
The Orthodox Church holds that the Father is the sole cause of the Son and the Spirit, that the filioque is a doctrinal error, and that the unilateral addition to the creed was uncanonical. Orthodox theologians differ on how far conciliation is possible.
Protestant
Most Protestant churches retain the filioque as biblical and as part of the Western tradition. A minority, including some Anglicans and ecumenically minded Protestants, favor restoring the original text out of respect for unity with the East.
Oriental Orthodox
The Oriental Orthodox churches use the creed of 381 without the addition, and generally hold that the Spirit proceeds from the Father. The question has been less central to their disputes.
Historians
Historians stress the political dimension, including the rivalry of Charlemagne’s court with Constantinople, and the role of the dispute in the schism of the eleventh century. They note that earlier writers East and West used a range of expressions, which makes it difficult to name a single original teaching.
Why it matters
The filioque is one of the main reasons the Catholic and Orthodox churches remain divided. Knowing both what is in dispute and what is not helps a student read ecumenical documents and see how a difference of one word can carry questions of the Trinity, of authority and of tradition.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: The East and West disagree about whether the Spirit is God.
Correction: They agree entirely on that. The dispute is about the Spirit’s relation of origin to the Father and the Son, and about the creed’s wording.
Misunderstanding: Catholics believe in two sources of the Spirit.
Correction: Catholic teaching says the Spirit comes from the Father and the Son as from one principle. Whether this is adequate is the matter in dispute.
Misunderstanding: The filioque caused the schism of 1054 by itself.
Correction: It was one of several issues, including papal authority, church customs and political tension. Historians treat the schism as the result of a long estrangement.
Knowledge check
What is the filioque?
It is the Latin phrase meaning and from the Son, added to the Nicene Creed in the West so that it says the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. It first appeared in Spain in the sixth century, spread in the Frankish lands, and was adopted by Rome in the early eleventh century.
State the Orthodox objection in two parts.
First, the creed of 381 and the Council of Ephesus belong to the whole church, so no part may change it without a council. Second, the doctrine confuses the Father’s role as the only source of the Trinity by suggesting two origins of the Spirit. Orthodox writers allow that the Spirit is sent through the Son.
State the Catholic position in two parts.
The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from one principle, as taught by Augustine, Aquinas, Lyons and Florence. The addition was a legitimate clarification, though Eastern Catholics may omit it. The Greek through the Son and the Latin from the Son are held to express the same truth.
What has recent dialogue accomplished?
Studies by Catholic and Orthodox theologians, and the Vatican’s 1995 clarification, have distinguished the doctrinal question from the question of the creed’s wording and noted shared concerns. Some Anglicans have suggested omitting the phrase. The matter is not resolved, and it remains one of the issues dividing East and West.
Think it through
- Is the wording of a creed a matter of doctrine, authority or both?
- What would it take for Catholics and Orthodox to agree on this question?
- Why might a phrase added for one purpose have a different effect later?
- How should a Protestant weigh a dispute that arose in a tradition that Protestants inherited and also questioned?
Independent assignment
Two summaries
In your own notebook, write 500 to 700 words. Write a summary of the Orthodox position as an Orthodox theologian would, then a summary of the Catholic position as a Catholic would. Cite John 15:26 and one other text for each. Then write a paragraph on whether you think the two positions are compatible, and what evidence would settle the question. Do not send this to anyone.
Further study
- Augustine of Hippo, On the Trinity Read Book 15 on the Spirit as the gift of the Father and the Son.
- Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae Read the first part on the procession of the Holy Spirit.
- Timothy (Kallistos) Ware, The Orthodox Church Read the account of the filioque from an Orthodox view.
- Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church Read the chapter on the Trinity for the Orthodox argument.
- Council of Nicaea (325) and Council of Constantinople (381), The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed Compare the text of 381 with the Latin text.
- John 15:26 The Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father.
- John 20:22 He breathed on them and said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.
- Galatians 4:6 God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son.