16,951
edits
Changes
Filioque
,link
'''''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'''''."
== History ==
It is useful to note that a regional council in Persia in 410 introduced one of the earliest forms of the ''filioque'' in the Creed; the council specified that the Spirit proceeds from the Father "and from the Son." Coming from the rich theology of early East Syrian Christianity, this expression in this context is authentically Eastern. Therefore, the ''filioque'' cannot be attacked as a solely Western innovation, nor as something created by the Pope.
In the West, St. [[Augustine of Hippo]] taught that the Spirit came from the Father ''and'' the Son, though subordinate to neither. His theology was dominant in the West until the Middle Ages, including his [[Triadology|theology of the Trinity]]. Other Latin Fathers fathers also spoke of the Spirit proceeding from both the Father and the Son. While familiar in the West, this way of speaking was virtually unknown in the Greek-speaking, Byzantine Eastern Roman Empire. 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 it, 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 Empirefell, with the exile of Romulus Augustulus, the last emperor. Chaos followed.
===The "Photian" Schism===
Within a couple of generations, in 858, a new situation came to pass. The Byzantine 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, violating 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 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.
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 emperorand by the request of Ignatius himself, to whom Photius had been reconciled. In 879-880, he was officially restored to his seeand 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 Eastern 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,'' although it was an accusation based on a false reading of the Latin understanding.
===Rome accepts Filioque as valid in Latincapitulates to Filioquist pressure===In the ninth century, Pope [[Leo III of Rome]] agreed with the ''filioque'' phrase theologically but was opposed to adopting it in Rome, in part because of his loyalty to the received [[tradition]]. (He also knew that the Greeks resented the new Roman Empire in the West and Charlemagne in particular; the Pope wanted to preserve Church unity. ) In fact, Leo had the traditional text of the Creed, without the ''filioque'', displayed publicly, having the original text engraved on two silver tablets, at the tomb of St. [[Apostle Peter|Peter]]. In any case, during the time of Pope Leo's leadership, 795-816, there was no Creed at all in the Roman Mass.
Later, in 1014, the German Emperor Henry II of the Holy Roman Empire visited Rome for his coronation and found that the Creed was not used during the Mass. At his request, the bishop of Rome added the Creed, as it was known in the West with the ''filioque'', after the Gospel. At this time, the papacy was very weak and very much under the influence of the Germans. For the sake of survival, the Pope needed the military support of the Emperor. This was the first time the Creed phrase was used in the [[Mass]] at Rome.
Thus, over nearly six centuries, dispute over the ''filioque'' had not divided the Church definitively; for the most part, in spite of cultural and linguistic conflicts, the Eastern and Western Churches remained in [[full communion]].
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 accepting the theology of 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 for exclusive use in the Roman liturgy, apart from an [[Ecumenical Council]].
===Attempted reunions and the ''Filioque'' after the Schism===
In the thirteenth century, [[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, Eastern 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 getting avenging the 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," even though and of course the Western church's major "endowment" from the sack of Constantinople was done against spoils carried away now still largely rests in the will hands of the PopeVatican.
For much of the 14th century, there were two bishops, each claiming to be Pope, each excommunicating the followers of the other. The Great Western Schism concluded with yet a third individual claiming to be Pope and the Council of Constance. The East could hardly seek reconciliation with a Western Church divided against among itself. (In the middle of the century, about a third of Western Europe died of the Black Death with no help from . People were more concerned about the Eastplague than about Church unity.)
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, and 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 agreed and bishops, except [[Mark of Ephesus]] 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, Rome and the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches Church were back in communion. However, the reconciliation achieved at Florence was soon destroyed, founded as it was on a compromise of faith. Numerous Eastern Orthodox faithful and bishops rejected the union even though it was decided by an ecumenical council. 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.
===Recent discussions and statements===
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.)
Recently, an important, agreed statement has been made by the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation, on [[October 25]], 2003. This document ''The Filioque: A Church-Dividing Issue?'', provides an extensive review of [[Scripture]], history, and [[theology]]. Especially critical are the recommendations of this consultation, for example:
#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.
In the judgment of the consultation, the question of the ''filioque'' is no longer a "Church-dividing" issue, one which would impede full reconciliation and full communion, once again. It still stands for the bishops and faithful of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches to review this work and to make whatever decisions would be appropriate.
==The ''Filioque'' as heresy==
There has never been a specific conciliar statement in the Eastern [[Orthodox Church]]es that which defined the ''filioque'' as [[heresy]]. That being said, however, it has been regarded as heretical by multiple Orthodox saints, including Ss. [[Photius the Great]], [[Mark of Ephesus]], and [[Gregory Palamas]] (the three Pillars of Orthodoxy). At the [[Third Ecumenical Council]] and the [[Eighth Ecumenical Council|"Photian" council of 879-880]] (both of which councils Rome ratifiedsigned onto), all changes to the theology of the Creed are anathematized. It was Further, it is explicitly denounced as heretical by the non-ecumenical, 1848 ''[[Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs]]''.
There are a number of reasons traditionally cited for the definition of the ''filioque'' as heretical, including the following:
*The justifications for including the ''filioque'' in the Creed—bolstering the divinity of the Son and emphasizing the unity of the Trinity—are redundant, given the original wording of the Creed. That is, the Son already is described as "light of light, very God of very God," and so forth. The Spirit also "with the Father and Son together is worshiped and glorified." Additionally, the Creed itself begins with a statement of belief in "one God."
*Some misinterpret the The ''filioque'' as distorting distorts Orthodox [[Triadology]] by making the Spirit a subordinate member of the Trinity. Traditional Triadology consists in the notion 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. This interpretation does not *Given the previous objection, howeverthe repercussions to the acceptance of the ''filioque'' into church life are potentially massive. Because how we relate to God is significantly affected by what we believe about him, take into consideration false beliefs lead to damaging spirituality. One objection often raised about Filioquist theology is that it undermines the two kinds role of procession believed by both Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians as expressed by Stthe Holy Spirit in the Church. Thus, with his role being denigrated, his traditional ministries are effaced or replaced. Maximus The Church's unity becomes dependent on an office, spirituality becomes adherence to the letter of the Confessorlaw rather than its spirit, sacraments come to be understood in terms of validity, and a spirit of legalism prevails.
===Objections on canonical and historical grounds===
*Though not really a question of heresy, a common objection is to the means of interpolating inserting the ''filioque'' into the Creed. That is, unlike the original adoption of the Creed at [[First Ecumenical Council|Nicea]] and its subsequent revision at [[Second Ecumenical Council|Constantinople]], the decision to interpolate include the ''filioque'' into in the Creed for use in the Latin Church was not done by an [[Ecumenical Council]]. Rather, it was initially inserted by the Third Synod of Toledo, Spain (589). *Rome resisted the inclusion of the ''filioque'' for centuries. Leo III, the Pope of Rome at the time the ''filioque'' began its history in Western theology, strongly advised against its inclusion, to combat Arianismeven though he agreed with the soundness and validity of the doctrine contained in ''filioque''. Later, however, which had arrived there from Rome contradicted its previous more Orthodox stance by the East with promulgation of the Goths''filioque'', thus anathematizing its own spiritual forebears.
==External links==
[[Category:Heresies]]
[[it:Filioque]]
[[ro:Filioque]]