33
edits
Changes
m
no edit summary
'''''Filioque''''' is a Latin word meaning "and the Son" which was 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'''''."
Its inclusion 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 NicaeaNicea]] 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, and most as an eternal cause of the Spirit. Most in the [[Orthodox Church]] consider this inclusion latter reading to be a [[heresy]].
The description of the ''filioque'' as a heresy was iterated most clearly and definitively by the great [[Church Fathers|Father]] and [[Pillars of Orthodoxy|Pillar]] of the Church, St. [[Photius the Great]], in his ''On the Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit''. He describes it as a heresy of [[Triadology]], striking at the very heart of what the Church believes about God.
==Preliminary Issues: A Summary of Historical Terms==
=== Early Linguistic Uncertainty ===
It should first be noted that much confusion over this topic historically may be due to philosophical and terminological gaps which had to be filled in order to accurately discuss God--and not misconstrue Him. Over time, within Orthodoxy (especially with the help of Sts. Athanasios and Gregory of Palamas), an ideological framework seems to have emerged.
=== The 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 speaking. These attributes (all acquired through time) have no relation to what John Doe actually ''is'' by nature (i.e. a human being).<ref>This distinction was clarified by St. Athanasius, but "was further refined by St. Basil the great and 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 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 Church has held from the beginning. Below, each reality heads a list of terms which historically have been used in attempts to express each said reality.
==== Who God Is: ====
References the [[Trinity]]: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
* '''person'''
* '''hypostasis''' - (''lit.'' “standing~under”); from the 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 preferred Latin term)
* '''homoousion''' - (''lit.'' same + essence/being; from Greek ''ὁμοούσιος'' [ὁμός + οὐσία + -ῐος])
==== What God Does: ====
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"<ref>"The West" is an over-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 and around fallen Western Rome accepted heterodox beliefs. Hence the Antiochian Archdiocese, in particular, has within its jurisdiction a canonical Western Rite. </ref> and which underly the ''filioque''.
== History ==
===The "Photian" Schism===
Within a couple of generations, in 858, a new situation came to pass. The Eastern Emperor Michael III removed [[Ignatius I 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 abdicate. 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, 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]]—most notably, the ''filioque''. Photius' response cited the ''filioque'' as proof that Rome had a habit of overstepping its proper limits.
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 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 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]].
===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, 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 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.
===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:
*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, even though he agreed with the soundness and validity of the doctrine contained in ''filioque''. Later, however, Rome contradicted its previous more Orthodox stance by the promulgation of the ''filioque'', thus anathematizing its own spiritual forebears.
==External links==
*[[Wikipedia:Filioque External Links: an Online Bibliography]]
*[http://wwwhome.geocitiescomcast.comnet/trvalentine~t.r.valentine/orthodoxorthodoxy/filioque.html Filioque Page], by Thomas Ross Valentine
*[http://www.romanity.org/htm/rom.17.en.the_filioque_in_the_dublin_agreed_statement_1984.01.htm The Filioque in the Dublin Agreed Statement 1984], by Fr. [[John S. Romanides]]
*[http://agrino.org/cyberdesert/Pelikan.htm The Filioque], by Prof. [[Jaroslav Pelikan]]
[[Category:Heresies]]
[[it:Filioque]]
[[ro:Filioque]]
