'''''Filioque''''' is a Latin word meaning "and the Son" which was interpolated into added to the [[Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed]] by the [[Church of Rome]] in the 11th century, one of the major factors leading to the [[Great Schism]] between East and West. This inclusion in the Creedal article regarding the [[Holy Spirit]] thus states that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father '''''and the Son'''''."

The Its inclusion of the word in the Creed is a violation of the [[canons]] of the [[Third Ecumenical Council]] in 431, which forbade and [[anathema]]tized any additions to the Creed, a prohibition which was reiterated at the [[Eighth Ecumenical Council]] in 879-880. This word was not included by the [[First Ecumenical Council|Council of Nicea]] nor of [[Second Ecumenical Council|Constantinople]]. The term itself has been interpreted in both an Orthodox fashion and a heterodox fashion. It may be read as saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father through (''dia'') the Son. This was the position of St [[Maximus the Confessor]]. On this reading, the Son is not an eternal cause (''aition'') of the Spirit. The heterodox reading sees the Son, along with the Father, as an eternal cause of the Spirit. Most in the [[Orthodox Church]] consider this latter reading to be a [[heresy]].

The addition must be either a merely verbal modification, or a fully verbal and doctrinal modification. If doctrinal, then it is either an extension description of the truth, or ''filioque'' as a corruption of the truth. The filioque primarily violates the canons by virtue of doctrinal doctrine deviance, rather than linguistic variance. The word heresy was not included iterated most clearly and definitively by the great [[First Ecumenical CouncilChurch Fathers|Council Father]] and [[Pillars of NiceaOrthodoxy|Pillar]] nor of the Church, St. [[Second Ecumenical Council|ConstantinoplePhotius the Great]], nor was another phrase, "Deum de Deo" ("God from God"); in his ''On the Mystagogy of the latter was accepted Holy Spirit''. He describes it as orthodoxa heresy of [[Triadology]], whereas striking at the very heart of what the former was notChurch believes about God.

The term itself has been interpreted in both an Orthodox fashion and a heterodox fashion. ==Preliminary Issues: A Summary of Historical Terms===== Early Linguistic Uncertainty ===It may should first be read as saying noted that the Spirit proceeds from the Father through (''dia'') the Son. This was the position of St [[Maximus the Confessor]], among others. [citation needed] On much confusion over this reading, the Son is topic historically may be due to philosophical and terminological gaps which had to be filled in order to accurately discuss God--and not an eternal cause (''aition'') of the Spiritmisconstrue Him. The heterodox reading taught sees the SonOver time, along within Orthodoxy (especially with the Fatherhelp of Sts. Athanasios and Gregory of Palamas), as an eternal cause of the Spirit. Most in the [[Orthodox Church]] consider this latter reading ideological framework seems to be a [[heresy]]have emerged.

=== The description Terms in a Physical Context ===First, it is perhaps important to contextualize these concepts with a created-world example. * When one discusses someone (say, John Doe), one might ask '''''what John Doe is'''''. The answer would be a human being (a creature with a mind/[[nous]], a body, and a life). * If, however one asked '''''what John Doe does''''', that would be a different question. The answer might be running, building, teaching, etc. Note that we may often say John Doe ''is'' a runner, builder, or teacher; but such is simply a method of the speaking. These attributes (all acquired through time) have no relation to what John Doe actually ''filioqueis'' as by nature (i.e. a heresy human being).<ref>This distinction was iterated most clearly and definitively clarified by St. Athanasius, but "was further refined by St. Basil the great [[Church Fathers|Father]] and [[Pillars St. Gregory of Palamas among others." Clark Carlton, The Life (Salisbury, MA: Regina Orthodox Press, 2000), p. 76.</ref>* Both of those questions, however, are different from '''''who John Doe is'''''. The answer to "who John Doe is," is what makes John Doe different from Jim Doe (or Jane Doe, etc.). This is a specific person who distinctly uses the characteristics he/she shares with others (ex. sharing the same humanity, but also perhaps the same activity, like running). === The Framework & Its Importance: The Three Realities in God ===Those (albeit in a different order below) constitute what St. Gregory of Palamas described as the three realities of Orthodoxy|Pillar]] God.<ref>The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters 75, tr. by Robert Sinkewicz (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1988), p. 171.</ref> It is within this developed framework that the Orthodox articulate realities that the Orthodox Churchhas held from the beginning. Below, Steach reality heads a list of terms which historically have been used in attempts to express each said reality.  ==== Who God Is: ==== References the [[Photius the GreatTrinity]]: Father, Son, in his and Holy Spirit* '''person'''* '''hypostasis''' - (''lit.''On “standing~under”); from the Mystagogy preferred Greek term designating the concept of person* '''prosopon''' (pl. prosopa) - (lit. “face/mask”) An early, but less-preferred, Greek term. It is less-preferred because it lends itself to confusion with [[Sabellianism]]. ==== What God Is: ==== References God's eternal/unchangeable characteristics (ex. divinity/trinity/immortality/life/love…). This is what "theology" studies.* '''nature'''* '''essence'''* '''substance''' - (from the Holy Spiritpreferred Latin term)* '''homoousion''' - (''lit. '' same + essence/being; from Greek ''ὁμοούσιος'' [ὁμός + οὐσία + -ῐος]) ==== What God Does: ==== Some References temporal characteristics (As the acts exist within time, they are variable; ex. create/reveal/save…)* '''activities'''* '''energies'''* '''attributes'''* '''economy''' - (from Greek οἰκονομία [oikonomia]; ''lit.'' household + management/activities; presumably referencing what God does to "manage His household")  The confusion/non-recognition of the above concepts in Western (i.e. Roman Catholic and Protestant) theology is integral to the different theologies which developed in "the West held "<ref>"The West" is an orthodox interpretationover-simplification referencing how the Western Roman Empire fell to the Barbarians, and consequently developed various heterodox beliefs. This, however, obfuscates the fact that some "Westerners" in fallen Rome (and Celtic territories) maintained Orthodox beliefs for a long time. In other words, not all Christians in the East held the and around fallen Western Rome accepted heterodoxbeliefs. Photius Hence the Antiochian Archdiocese, addressing the arguments themselvesin particular, decries the heretical [[Triadology]] has within its jurisdiction a canonical Western Rite. </ref> and which strikes at underly the very heart of what the Church believes about God''filioque''.

Although the [[Second Ecumenical Council]] in 381 had expanded and completed the [[Nicene Creed]] begun at the [[First Ecumenical Council]], the [[Third Ecumenical Council]] (Ephesus, 431) had forbidden any further changes to the theology and/or wording of the Creedit, except for by another [[Ecumenical Council]]. By this time, then, the text of the [[Nicene Creed]] had acquired a certain definitive authority, of ecumenical value and importance.

Rome received the [[Fourth Ecumenical Council]], which referred to preceding councils, citing the authority of the text of the Creed. However, at this time, central Italy was in a state of collapse. In 410 and 455, Rome was vandalized and sacked by barbarian invasions. In 476, the Western Roman Empire fell, with the exile of Romulus Augustulus, the last emperor. Chaos followed.

After generations of social upheaval, strong leadership appeared in the person of Pepin the Short, king of the Franks, and his son, [[Charlemagne]], crowned as emperor in 800. Charlemagne intended to restore the Roman Empire in the West, with himself in charge, to the chagrin of the leaders of the Eastern Roman Empire. These , whom he denigrated, labelling them referred to as "Greeks" (and, by implication, thus not-Romans), despite the Roman capital being in the East and the continued use by Easterners of ''Roman'' to describe themselves. Charlemagne called for a council at Aix-la-Chapelle in 809 at which Pope [[Leo III of Rome|Leo III]] forbade the use of the ''filioque'' clause and ordered that the original version of the [[Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed]] be engraved on silver tablets displayed at St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, apparently so that his conclusion would not be overturned in the future.

Some historians have suggested that the Franks in the 9th century pressured the Pope to adopt the ''filioque'' in order to drive a wedge between the Roman Church and the other patriarchates. Despite this action, It is true that the ''filioque'' had come into wide use in the West and became was widely thought to be an integral part of the Creed, while Rome, renowned for its stability and conservatismin Orthodoxy, resisted. Similarly, unleavened bread had come to be thought of as normative for the [[Eucharist]]; diocesan priests were expected to be unmarried. In such cases, in the West, ancient tradition was forgotten. Contemporary usage was thought to be normative and authentic. In these matters of discipline, the influence of the Franks is certain. They intended to exalt Charlemagne, as the new Roman Emperor. The Catholic religion, as they knew it, was to be part of the package. Meanwhile, from cca. 726 to 843, the Eastern Roman Empire, under the thumb of successive emperors, was dominated by the heresy of [[iconoclasm]]. Both Franks and Greeks, in their own way, departed from ancient tradition. Unlike the East, however, where iconoclasm was repudiated at the [[Seventh Ecumenical Council]] and the use of icons later confirmed by the [[Theodora (9th century empress)|Empress Theodora]], the West to date never recovered from its departure.

Within a couple of generations, in 858, a new situation came to pass. The Eastern Emperor Michael III removed [[Ignatius of Constantinople|Ignatius I]] as patriarch of Constantinople. The emperor replaced him with a layman, St. [[Photius the Great]], who was the first Imperial Secretary and Imperial Ambassador to Baghdad. However, Ignatius refused to bow to secular authorityabdicate. Michael and Photius invited Pope [[Nicholas I of Rome]] to send legates to preside over a synod in Constantinople to settle the matter. With the council, the legates confirmed the patriarchate of Photius, much to Nicholas's chagrin, who then declared that they had "exceeded their authority."

In opposition to this removal of Ignatius, the bishop of Rome supported Ignatius as legitimate patriarch. Moreover, in violation contrary to existing canons, Photius had been ordained to the office of bishop very quickly. Some scholarship <font size="1">(who?)</font> suggests that violation of these canons was the main reason the bishop of Rome rejected the appointment of Photius. J. M. Hussey argues that the pope also wanted to regain ecclesiastic control of Bulgaria, a program in which Ignatius would not interfere, though Photius would (and did) (Hussey <i>The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire</i> Oxford History of the Christian Church 1986). This and other major actions by Nicholas to bolster his power and position as pope puts his intervention in Eastern ecclesiastical matters more firmly in the context of his general programme of the growth of papal monarchy.

Therefore, after the arrival of an embassy from Ignatius, in 862, Nicholas said that Photius was deposed, as well as the bishop who ordained him and all the clergy Photius had appointed. The sheer temerity of this action did not even generate a response from Constantinople. However, several years later in 867, Photius finally rejected the Pope's assertion, particularly because of the activities of Latin missionaries in Bulgaria, who were, as St. Photius says, turning the Orthodox Christians there away from their pure Orthodox faith and leading them into [[heresy]]&mdash;most notably, the ''filioque''. Photius' response cited the ''filioque'' as proof that Rome had a habit of overstepping its proper limits.

In 867 and 869-70, synods in Rome and Constantinople (the [[Robber Council of 869-870]]) restored Ignatius to his position as patriarch and deposed Photius. In 877, after the death of Ignatius, Photius again resumed office, by order of the emperor and by the request of Ignatius himself, to whom Photius had been reconciled. In 879-880, he was officially restored to his see and the ''filioque'' effectively condemned by the [[Eighth Ecumenical Council]], a council at which papal legates participated and which the current pope, [[John VIII of Rome|John VIII]], eventually confirmed. He was deposed in 886 when Leo VI took over as emperor, who had had a dispute with his father and turned his animosity for his father toward one of his father's friends, Photius. Photius spent the rest of his life as a monk in exile in Armenia; he is revered by the Orthodox today as a [[saint]], one of the great [[Pillars of Orthodoxy]]. He was the first important [[theologian]] to accuse Rome of [[heresy]] in the matter of the ''filioque''.

In 1054, however, the argument contributed to the [[Great Schism]] of the East and West, and the West went so far as to accuse the East of heresy for not including the ''filioque'' in the Creed. There were many other issues involved, in large part based on misunderstandings between Greek and Latin traditions, as well as the irascible temperament of the antagonists. These were Cardinal [[Humbert of Silva Candida|Humbert]] from Rome and Patriarch [[Michael I Cerularius of Constantinople|Michael Cerularius]] of Constantinople. In addition to the actual difference in wording and doctrine in the ''filioque'', a related issue was the right of the Pope to make a change in the [[Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed]] on his own, apart from an [[Ecumenical Council]].

In the thirteenth century, philosophical theologian and Roman saint Thomas Aquinas was one of the dominant Scholastic theologians. He dealt explicitly with the processions of the divine Persons in his ''Summa Theologica''. While the theology of Aquinas and other Scholastics was dominant in the Western Middle Ages, for all its apparent clarity and brilliance, it remains theology, not official [[Roman Catholic Church]] teaching.

In 1274, the Second [[Councils of Lyons|Council of Lyons]] said that the [[Holy Spirit]] proceeds from the [[God the Father|Father]] and the [[Christ|Son]], in accord with the ''filioque'' in the contemporary Latin version of the [[Nicene Creed]]. Reconciliation with the East, through this council, did not last. Remembering the Crusaders' sack of Constantinople in 1204, Orthodox Christians did not want to be reconciled with the West in terms of capitulation to Latin [[Triadology]] and [[ecclesiology]]. In 1283, Patriarch [[John XI Bekkos of Constantinople|John Beccus]], who supported reconciliation with the Latin Church, was forced to abdicate; reunion failed.

The Crusaders in question were the Venetians of the [[Fourth Crusade]], who had earlier been excommunicated for attacking other Christians. In 1204, they were avenging the getting even for a slaughter of Venetian merchants, in rioting, that took place in 1182. Pope Innocent III had sent them a letter, asking them not to attack Constantinople; after hearing of the sack of the city, he lamented their action and disowned them. Nevertheless, the people of Constantinople had a deep hatred for the people they called the "Latins" or the "Franks," and of course the Western church's major "endowment" from the spoils carried away now still largely rests in the hands of the Vatican.

At the [[Council of Florence]] in 1439, Emperor [[John VIII Palaeologus]], Patriarch Joseph of Constantinople, and other bishops from the East travelled to northern Italy in hope of reconciliation with the West, mainly in order to solicit military assistance to fend off the encroaching Turkish invaders. After extensive discussion, in Ferrara, then in Florence, they acknowledged that some Latin Fathers spoke of the procession of the Spirit differently from the Greek Fathers. Since the general consensus of the Fathers was held to be reliable, as a witness to common faith, the Western usage was held not to be a heresy and not a barrier to restoration of full communion. All but one of the Eastern patriarchs Orthodox bishops present, but one, agreed and signed a decree of union between East and West, ''Laetentur Coeli'' in 1439. The one bishop who refused to sign and was later heralded as a Pillar of Orthodoxy by the Church was St. [[Mark of Ephesus]], who followed in the footsteps of the previous Pillar of Orthodoxy, St. [[Photius the Great]].

Officially and publicly, the Roman Rome and the Orthodox Church were back in communion. However, the reconciliation achieved at Florence was soon destroyed, founded as it was on a compromise of faith. Numerous Orthodox faithful and bishops rejected the union, saying that the council's teachings were incorrect and therefore not ecumenical. Moreover, after the Turks [[Fall of Constantinople|conquered Constantinople in 1453]], they fostered separation from the West, which remained an adversary to Islamic political and military dominance. Furthermore, the patriarch, Gennadius, was also one of the bishops who had repudiated the reunion of Florence on his own initiative.

Dialogue on this and other subjects is continuing. The ''filioque'' clause was the main subject discussed at the 62nd meeting of the [[North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation]], which met at [[Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology (Brookline, Massachusetts)]] from [[June 3]] through [[June 5]], 2002, for their spring session. As a result of these modern discussions, it has been suggested that the Orthodox could accept an "economic" ''filioque'' that states that the Holy Spirit, who originates in the Father alone, was sent to the Church "through the Son" (as the [[Holy Spirit|Paraclete]]), but this is not official Orthodox doctrine. It is what the Fathers call a ''[[theologoumenon]]'', a theological opinion. (Similarly, the late Edward Kilmartin, S.J., proposed as a ''theologoumenon'' a "mission" of the Holy Spirit to the Church.)

*[http://wwwhome.geocitiescomcast.comnet/trvalentine~t.r.valentine/orthodoxorthodoxy/filioque.html Filioque Page], by Thomas Ross Valentine