(a) The term means "and from the Son" and refers to the phrase in the Western version of the Nicene Creed which says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

Eastern Orthodox Creed: And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of the Life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son is equally worshipped and glorified, Who spoke by the Prophets:

Western Creed: We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets.

(b) Originally this was not in the confessions agreed to at Nicaea (325) and Constantinople (381). It seems to have been first inserted at the local Council of Toledo (in Spain, 589) and in spite of opposition gradually established itself in the Frankish churches, and was officially endorsed by the Church of Rome in 1017. Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, denounced it in the ninth century, and it formed the main doctrinal issue in the rupture between East and West in 1054. Details in Ware.

(c) Among the fathers Hilary, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, Epiphanius, and Cyril of Alexandria may be cited in its favor; Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret against it; with the Cappadocians occupying the middle ground of "from the Father through the Son."

(d) On the Eastern side two points may be made. First, the relevant verse in John (15:26) speaks only of a proceeding from the Father.

The original phrase of the Symbol of Faith: "We believe ... in the Holy Spirit ... who proceeds from the Father" is directly from John 15:26.

Second, the addition never had ecumenical approval and could appear to imply that the Western churches modify the universal faith of the early church with impunity.

Third, the Eastern churches have always emphasized that the Father is the primal source of unity in the trinity; this gets disrupted by the filioque.

(e) Two points may also be made in favor of the filioque. First, it enabled the West to distinguish the Son from the Spirit.

This concept of "divine simplicity" creates a problem for Augustine. The names "Father" and "Son" express a clear relationship: the Father is unbegotten and the Son is begotten. But where does the Holy Spirit fit? There cannot be more than one means of generation of Divine Persons in the Godhead as that would be a distinction contrary to "divine simplicity". But if the Son and the Holy Spirit are both generated by the Father by the same means of generation, they would both be Sons. Augustine's "solution" (namely, assuming the filioque), conceived within the Neoplatonic framework, was brilliant— but it was the wisdom of philosophy.

Second, the Son as well as the Father sends the Spirit in John 15:26, and by analogy with this relationship to us we are justified in inferring that the Spirit proceeds from both Father and Son in the intratrinitarian relationship.

But, to this, the Orthodox object: Because Roman Catholicism has altered the ancient Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Faith and now teaches that the Holy Spirit's eternal procession is from both the Father and the Son, it is commonplace for Roman Catholic translations of the Bible to distort the plain meaning [or the original Greek text]. Here's how two popular Roman Catholic translations handle the passage (John 15:26).

There is nothing wrong with the New Jerusalem Bible's translation. The use of "issues from" instead of "proceeds" is a fine translation of ekporeuetai, but by footnoting "issues from" and stating this does not refer to the Holy Spirit's eternal procession (His ultimate origin from all eternity) but only to the sending of the Holy Spirit into the world (in time), it simply denies the truth. The New American Bible (deliberately?) distorts the passage using the verb "comes" in place of the far more accurate (and traditional) "proceeds". This mistranslation obscures the clear meaning of the Greek text. Its comment is essentially the same as the New Jerusalem translation: a denial of the clear meaning in favour of the Roman Catholic error. . . . These Roman Catholic translations would have one believe there is nothing in Scripture that explicitly reveals the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit.

(f) Ecumenical Consequences

Anglicans and the WCC favor the removal of the Filioque from the Creed--Anglicans and the WCC seem to be determined to follow the course contained in a declaration suggested to the Anglican Churches which begins as follows: "We recognize both traditions of Trinitarian theology, Western and Eastern, as valuable in themselves and as bringing out complementary aspects of the truth . . ." [ 20 ].

 

Assignment: (2) What steps have been taken by my denomination (or the WCC) toward addressing/healing these three wounds?

How to find out where your denomination stands regarding the filioque controversy:

1. Person-to-person inquiry

2. Library search

3. Internet search