sign in sign up
<<
Home , Filioque, Monophysitism, Sacrament, Spanish Adoptionism, Synod, Synod of Arles

The Clause Politics and Passion - What is Filioque? Intro

It has been apparent to me the Filioque Clause is an issue in a number of historical contexts, and often laid to one side as a theological issue of no great consequence.

During the course of three weeks I want to discuss what it is, how it came about, some of which may be speculation, most of which will be well anchored in history.

I will discuss the theology of it, though that is not the key point, but rather to understand how it has played out in history and why it has been important. A General Premise

It is easy to confine History to being a WHERE and WHEN it was done is study of dates and places. also clearly of relevance to our understanding Logically it must be more than that, if we are to learn from it and hopefully My criticism of much of history as we preclude ourselves from repeating it. have been taught it is that it fails to address things happen. This requires us to understand WHO WHY did it. Sometimes that requires some I would argue that much of the speculation. reason why the lesson of history is Also we need to understand WHAT that do not learn the lesson of history was done. is that we do not consider the WHY question properly. The general acceptance of the Marxist Analysis of History has in a way taken a simple maxim as Reason the reason for all history. I contend that this, whilst often helpful, is inadequate and that much

Marxist analysis of history contends of history requires more than this to properly that the root of all action is the control understand it. of productive resources.

When we try to analyse the conflicts of the contemporary world whilst from a contemporary western perspective we may prefer to remove religion and ideology from the cause, this view is not shared by all.

My argument is not that the Marxist analysis is wrong, simply that it is not sufficient to understand all of history. The Filioque is a single word which translates in English as ‘and the Son’. Filioque The clause was first used in the Nicene in One word in latin, three in English Rome on the 14th of February 1014 for the of Henry II as when Benedict VIII was Pope.

This set in course a chain of events that lead to a splitting of the east and west in 1054.

In today’s Church of the 2.2 billion 1.2 billion are and 350 million are Eastern Christians, and this remains central of that divide, and the allied questions of and authority on the Church. Short History of the Nicene Creed 293 AD Diocletian established the Tetrarchy as a means of managing the Empire which was essentially too large to manage. 306 AD on the death of his father Constantius, Constantine was acclaimed Augustus in York by the Creeds Councils and Controversy is the sub-title to any study of Early legions. Church History, however as it is the background to this, here is the short course. 312 AD returning to Rome Constantine was Triumphant at the battle of Milvian Bridge and became Caesar Augustus effectively drawing a close to the Tetrarchy.

314 AD the Edict of Milan which proclaimed a new religious pluralism for the Republic, and made legal for the 1st time.

325 AD The is called to resolve the and publishes the 1st Nicene Creed. Constantine is a complex person, and whilst his impact of Christianity is huge, his attitude is more Constantine complex.

He did not acknowledge a Christian faith until the or Sinner last year of his life when he was baptised by 335.

As Caesar he was Pontifex Maximus (the great bridge builder) of the Roman Pagan Cults.

His new capital - Nova Romanum - later called (and later Istanbul) was dedicated to the Christian God under the patronage of the Virgin Mother of God.

Christianity at the time of the Edict of Milan may have claimed as many as 8% of the Empire’s inhabitants. Constantine attributed the success at Milvian Bridge to the Christian God.

Constantine regarded Christianity as a desirable religion, and saw that it could bind the whole Empire in a single religion and empire. This was theme picked up in Augustine Civitas Dei.

His Mother, Helena, and his wife, were Christians.

He seems to have little interest in the outcome of the Council of Nicaea, but is rather more concerned that the matter be resolved. Eusebius who baptised him ten years after the Council was (or at least had been) an Arian. One of the consequences of Constantine’s favourable treatment of Christians is that it became attractive, rather than detrimental and the Nicaea I Church felt the need to firm up the boundaries.

The First Oecumenical Council The Creed provided a against who argued that there was a time when the Son 325 AD was not.

Arius and his followers were banished, yet within ten years they seem to have been able to return.

In terms of stopping the Council was a complete disaster. Constantine probably didn’t care what the result of the Council was, but rather that peace inside Christianity helped peace in the Empire. Following the council there was some peace, and Between the the Arians seemed to slowly be restored from exile. Councils Another group arose called the The period 325 - 381 who argued that the Spirit was a creation of the Son and not divine as such but creature.

The three great theologians of the period, the worked hard against this and against the resurgence of Arianism.

Ultimately a new Council (The first Council of Constantinople) was called in the East, (not including Rome), who sent an observer, and who later affirmed the decisions of the Council, thereby making it an . The major work of the Council was to revisit the Constantinople 1 Creed of the Council of Nicea, and the creed from 381 AD this Council is the basic text established henceforth as the Nicene Creed.

Significantly it fleshed out the Christological section of the Creed, essentially giving Arians no place to call home in the Creed. A lot of this was based on the understanding of the first 18 verses of John’s .

It also fleshed out the section dealing with the , to affirm the divinity of the Holy Spirit based on an understanding from John 14 and 15. I believe in One God Nicene Creed The Father almighty … - in Summary One Lord, , the only Son of At this stage (381) the Creed very clearly does not have the filioque God… inserted. The Holy Spirit, , the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father ( ) who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets

I believe in one holy catholic & apostolic church I acknowledge one ... I look for the resurrection for the dead ... The of was that Jesus was the union of the Flesh and the Word, and as such was not actually the divine Son of God, so rejecting the title (the God bearer) to the Virgin Mary. This is about the origins of the Nestorian Church which is is alive today and continues to prosper East of The Heresy flourished East of , and in 435 Antioch. a Council was called at Ephesus to address this, the lead opposition being .

The Nestorians had modified the Nicene Creed to fit their beliefs, and the proclaimed on all who would add to or take away from the Nicene Creed.

The council met two days before Antioch arrived and this led to some bad blood, though Antioch subscribed to the decisions of the Council. Following the Council of Ephesus there was a lot of consideration about the nature of the person of Jesus. Cyril of Alexandria was accused of teaching the This has a great deal of bearing on the origins of the Oriental Orthodox - often Monophysite Heresy, suggesting that the body of called the Coptic Orthodox Church Jesus was human and the divine.

It is generally agreed today that Cyril’s position was actually , that though Jesus had a human and a divine soul, these were coalesced in one will.

Anyway it led to another Council The Council of met in 451 and Council of shades of Ephesus the matter of Cyril's Chalcedon teaching was dealt with before he arrived, and so he was not able to defend his position.

The Christology of the Church based on the Nicene Creed, was further This Council affirmed the Nicene Creed and hammered out and the Christology of the anathemas of Ephesus. the Council is accepted almost universally as correct orthodox teaching. The essence of the Christology is that Jesus was complete and perfect in both Godhead and Humanity, completely reconciled in the one person. So the Nicene Creed has been affirmed by three of the Great Ecumenical Councils of the Church, and anathemas declared and affirmed on any So is that it who would change the Creed, henceforth by two of them.

The only significant change to the Nicene Creed since that time has been the insertion of the ? filioque, and from here we will be moving into an area where some of the matter must be speculation, because we know where we got to, but we don’t actually know all the detail as to how it happened. The theological position taken by the Nicene Theological Fathers is called single procession. By about Sideline 420 we know that was speaking of the procession of the Spirit from the

Sorry to break the historical telling Father and the Son. His argument based on however it seems that to make sense John 29 where Jesus breathed on the disciples of so of this it is important to add a Theological Note. and said receive the Holy Spirit.

Augustine was careful to point out that where the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son, in the first instance the Spirit had proceeded from the Father.

This argument was well received in the West and not so much in the East, fearing anything that impacted on the Monarchical Integrity of the Father - and we believe in One God. Even Wikipedia will tell you that the filioque 3rd Council of clause was added by the local Council in Iberia.

Toledo - 579 The Council was significant because Reccared renounced Arianism and embraced the catholic In a sense this is a furphy to the discussion however it has to be faith. addressed as there is a lot of literature that simply lays the insertion at the foot of this Council. The record of the council can be accessed here:

http://www.benedictus.mgh.de/quellen/chga/chga _045t.htm

If you do a [CTRL] + [F] search for filioque you will not find it. If you search more carefully you will find the Nicene Creed twice without the filioque, and the affirmation of the anathemas of Ephesus. Leander, of Seville, was a follower of Background Augustine. to Toledo Leovigild was the Arian King whose capital was

We think of Spain and Portugal, but in in Toledo. His son Hermenegild was this period this was the Iberian converted to catholic (non-arian) Christianity and Peninsular with a multitude of dynasties and groupings, and the refused to receive the from an Arian borders with Gaul were extremely fluid. Bishop. He died - as a result of opposition to his Father - and his Father died shortly after.

Leander, who had been in exile, quickly returned and ensured Reccared’s assent to the throne, and Reccared embraced the Chalcedonian Christianity.

This lead to the Third Council in Toledo and the embrace of the Catholic Faith in the Iberian Peninsular. It makes no sense at the Council where Reccared embraced the Catholic Faith that they would also change the Creed of that faith. So Why Not Adding the Filioque says nothing of Arianism, which The modern practice of including the Nicene Creed in the Eucharistic Reccared was renouncing, so it has to be owes something of the practice to the problematic at best, and realistically unlikely. Third of Toledo.

The Council did mandate that the Creed be sung or said on Sundays and Feast days thereby increasing the use of the Creed, and no doubt sending the copy monks into overdrive to produce endless more copies of it to be used in the liturgy.

The use of the Creed more regularly expanded from Iberia into Gaul and throughout the Christian World from this Synod. It seems likely that there was a failure in version So What control. In the copy room a group of monks at the tables recorded the text as it was read out. Next? It would seem in the seventh century (600’s) the What happens next requires some speculation filioque slipped into common usage in Iberia and Gaul.

The Synod of Hatfield some assert represented it’s introduction to England, but this is not documented and the Bishop, Theodore came from Tarsus so even more unlikely.

By the middle of the 8th Century we know that Peppin the Short (’s Father) thought it was in the original and accused the Byzantines of dropping it. This is described as an assembly of Frankish Council of nobles and near Paris. Gentilly 767 The King, , was almost

This is an odd meeting of several certainly there. One matter they addressed nobles, and including Peppin the Short was the filioque, and it seems that they decried and they decried the Byzantine Church the Byzantine Church for having “dropped it”.

There is little record of the meeting, and probably not a formal meeting of the Church as such, however one must presume from the record that by the stage the French at least and absorbed the filioque as normal practice. Frankfurt This Synod marks the solid entry of Charlemagne to the Filioque Debate. The Synod 794 decreed that the Filioque should be included in the Nicene Creed.

Enter Charlemagne The reason given for this was to combat the Heresy of Spanish on the Iberian Peninsula.

Politically it may well have been to mark the clear distinction from the .

In a way he is stamping the position he has inherited from his father with greater authority. Hot on the heels of the Synod of Frankfurt is the Synod of Friuli. To a large extent this is about a now lost group in Northern Italy, loyal to the Friuli 796 of Aquileia.

The Synod of Friuli The Synod affirmed the inclusion of the Filioque and moved the Nicene Creed from the traditional position in the liturgy before the to the now accepted western position after / Homily.

Leo III was Pope, declined to assent to the Filioque. Charlemagne is another complex person in this story. Often painted as the all glorious Christian King, he may well have also been quite politically Charlemagne edgy and certainly had a vision of a Holy Roman Empire (or perhaps the extension of Frankish Interests through Europe and Asia Minor).

In 800, as a result of some securing of the he was crowned Holy Roman Emperor.

After several attempts at having the Pope adopt the Filioque, Leo III dropped the Creed, from the liturgy in Rome. Leo was happy to have Charlemagne defend the faith and the Papal States, but not to be told what the faith was.

Leo III was very aware the the Byzantines were already edgy on this subject. This is a bit like the boy who won’t take no for an Aix-la-Chapelle answer. From a council outside of Paris emissaries 809 were sent to the Pope to ask if it was OK for them to continue to use the Filioque as they would need to change the chants etc if they were forced to Another attempt drop it.

The Pope’s mind on the matter seems to have been clear, and the French seem simply to have ignored this and continued.

At this stage Pope Leo III ordered two silver shields be made with the words of the Nicene Creed (one in Latin, One in Greek) to be hung outside the tomb of Peter. This was to ensure the unity of the Church, and no doubt trying to be clear to the Franks, and to the Byzantines. This is more of an historical Note. Pilgrimages Jerusalem to the Holy Land had become the fashionable tourist destination, from both East and West. 847 John, an Eastern Monk enquired of the Pope Leo IV if the filioque should be said.

Pope Leo IV confirmed what Pope Leo III had said, and advised that the Filioque should not be used.

The cross cultural encounters between East and West in the Holy Land are almost certainly the fertile ground that gave birth to the enquiry. Photius I is one of the great heroes of , well educated, with a library that was legendary in its time. Photius I In 858 Bardos claimed the throne in dodgy Patriarch of Constantinople 858-867 and 877-886 circumstances and Ignatios, the Patriarch of Constantinople, refused him entry to . Bardos organised for Photius to be ordained and replace Ignatios.

Pope Nicholas I deposed Photius and reinstated Ignatius. In 863. In 866 Photius responded by excommunicating the Pope for the Heresy of double procession. In 867 Bardos died by the sword and Photius was deposed. Ignatios held a fairly similar line to Photius, however the schism was brought to a close. Ignatios died in 877 and Photius again became the Patriarch of Constantinople. In 879 Pope John VIII acknowledged Photius as the Patriarch of Constantinople, which had a lot to do with the Pope’s lessened influence due to Bulgaria’s independence. In 886 the Byzantine Emperor dies and Photius was deposed and replaced by the new Emperor’s brother, Stephen.

The Patriarchy of Photius left indelibly an intransigence in the East on the matter of the Filioque, and Photius work - The Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, is an absolute rant attacking it on every side.

Although not used in Rome, the Carolingian push was well understood and this was a battle-line. It is perhaps a background to the next step. The Saeculum dark period in Papal History from 904-964, where the Holy Office was largely treated as any other Obscurum Noble Family on the Italian Peninsula. The Popes were largely fairly worldly, essentially related, and some indeed reasonably carnal.

John XII was said to have spent his life in wantonness and adultery, and died in flagrante.

The was followed by the Crescenti Popes still very much in the family, though a little better behaved.

In 1012 the Tusculan Popes began with Benedict VIII, who happened to be the nephew of John XII. The Papal States were an important consideration during the period, and no doubt provided a good deal of funding for the Papacy. At the beginning of Papal States the 11th Century the Papal States were under pressure. On the one hand the Saracen in the South were pressing in the South whilst Normans were putting pressure on the Northern parts of the Papal States.

Benedict found a solution to this in the protection of a new Holy Roman Emperor, Henry II from Germany.

Henry was accustomed to the Creed with the Filioque being part of the liturgy, and Benedict VIII allowed this, seeming to regard it as a small request, for the securing of the Papal States. The Coronation of Henry II as Holy Roman 14 February Emperor was remarkable because it was the first time that the Filioque was used in Rome. 1014 The East protested, called foul, and demanded A day that changed the world. that the Filioque be dropped.

Benedict argued he was the Pope, and it was within his authority, as the holder of the keys, to change the Creed. The East argued that he was first by way of honour, but bound by holy Tradition and the Councils of the Church, and most especially by the creed of the Councils.

Both sides of this discussion became increasingly and dogmatically entrenched in their position over the next forty years through a number of Popes and Patriarchs. There are two principal schools of thought in relation Theological to authority on the Church.

Sidenote 1] Petrine Theory Based on authority conferred on Peter as recorded The development of the Petrine Theory in Matthew 16:18-19 is about how authority is exercised in the Church, and what the nature of that authority might be. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of , and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

How this was understood at the 1st and 2nd councils is significant in developing the understanding that this authority was held by the Bishop of Rome. 2] Conciliar or Collegial Authority

Matthew 20:25-27 Jesus called them to him and said, ‘You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. It will not be so among you; but whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant.

In Acts 1:15 Peter takes the lead in relation to the replacement of Judas, however in Acts 15, James is seen as the senior spokesman and interpreter of the council in resolving the crisis over circumcision. The council discussed and decided and James as 1st among equals declares that decision. Council of Nicea 325. At the Council the Bishop of Rome takes a significant role as the Bishop at the heart of empire - and Constantine was involved and participated in the Council.

Council of Constantinople some discussion was had about who took pride of place, and it was decided that Constantinople ranked 2nd, only after Rome, and an early Petrine theory was advanced to support this position.

The Patriarchs all subscribed to the decision of the Councils, Nicaea (Rome, Ephesus, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria) and at Constantinople (Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria).

Together they spoke the mind of the whole church. The Schism in the time of Photius had pressed the point as to the Authority of Rome, and the authority of Emperors. Could a Patriarch excommunicate another Patriarch without the authority of a Council?

Whilst this was patched up, there remained a disquiet in the East about the Western attitude to the Filioque, and a mistrust of the Popes who wielded authority with respect for the Holy Tradition and the Great Councils of the Church.

This all weighed heavily into the exchanges that followed the inclusion of the Filioque in the Nicene Creed in Rome. Following the 1014 inclusion of the Filioque, three key issues of distinction in practice between East and West came to the fore, firstly the filioque, 1053 - 1054 secondly the use of , and thirdly the universal sovereignty of the Bishop of Rome.

In 1053 Churches in Southern Italy were forced at the edit of Leo IX to adopt western practice or close. In response Michael 1 Celarius (Patriarch of Constantinople) forced the closure of latin churches in Constantinople.

Leo despatched Cardinal Humbert to the east to strip Celarius of his title Ecumenical Patriarch and require him to the accept the universal authority of the Pope, and further requiring is assistance in dealing with assaults by the Normans. The mission was doomed, and Cardinal Humbert in the pope’s name entered Hagia Sophia as Cerularius was celebrating the Holy and 1054 slapped a bull of on the .

Cardinal Humbert was unaware that Leo IX had died, so a dead Pope excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople, who replied by excommunicating the dead Pope, and removing Rome from the Diptychs.

The Great Schism had come to pass and the Church was split in two.

This division remains to this day as the largest split in Christianity, running even deeper and more profoundly than the . The 2nd Council of Lyon was called by Gregory X 1274 to restore the schism of 1054. The conceded the Filioque. However it is not quite that Lyon 2 simple.

Since 1054 The practice of the The 4th Crusade happened in 1203-4 and this had Western Church (Roman) has been to call its councils Ecumenical as the resulted in great devastation to Constantinople. East does not recognise the universal And the following this the Latin Byzantine period sovereignty of the Pope. ensued, failing in 1261, but leaving the Empire still but bankrupt.

The concession was poorly received in the East and was revoked on the death of Emperor Michael in 1282.

To what extent it was a genuine attempt and re-union or an attempt to extend Latin influence is perhaps a matter of opinion. Nonetheless it clearly failed. At this time Constantinople was under great 1431-1445 pressure from the Ottoman Turks and delegates to the Council agreed in exchange for support Florence from Rome to acquiesce on the matter of the Filioque. The Council began in Basel, Switzerland, called by Pope Martin V. Pope Eugene IV opened it and met This concession was badly received, and never resistance. So he moved it to , Italy in 1438 because of the election of accepted by the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Felix V. In 1439 the bubonic Antioch, and when Rome failed in the delivery of plague forced the Council to move to Florence where it was closed in 1447. meaningful support and Constantinople fell in 1453, The Church in Constantinople also abandoned the Filioque.

Part of the failure to deliver support related to depleted finances in the Papal Coffers and the Venetians wanted some of the outstanding accounts paid first. This was the first Council to declare the infallibility Vatican 1 of the Pope as .

1869-1870 There are a number of considerations to this for a Papal Statement to be accorded the infallible status, including the form of the words, the consistency with scripture and established teaching, and spoken ex-cathedra.

In it has been used sparingly, and many would think the current holder of the office is not seem likely to speak in such a way. This Council marked a significant change in the Vatican II liturgical practice of the , and since Vatican II in the vernacular language has 1962-65 become the normal practice. This of course had been a big issue at the reformation.

The Church also committed itself to work towards reconciliation and reunification of the whole Church.

At the end of the Council, December 1965, in a joint statement by the Pope Paul VI and the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I there was a mutual lifting of the of 1054. On the 9th of April 2017 a bomb was exploded in April 2017 St Mark’s Alexandria. St Mark’s is the Cathedral of the Coptic Pope, Tawadros II, and a Church St Marks established by St Mark, - The Coptic (Oriental Orthodox) Church. Maybe in tiny steps we move closer to a reconciliation of Christian Communities. On the 30th of April 2017 year there was a non-denominational service for the victims, and of historic importance that brought together in one place (St Peter’s Cairo)

● (Roman Catholic) ● Pope Tawadros (Oriental Orthodox) ● Pope Theodore (Greek Orthodox) ● Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. Three Popes and a Patriarch Whilst for the Orthodox it is said that a 1000 years is live yesterday passing, and that they have an aversion to innovation, The Roman Now has undergone significant change since the Great Schism.

The key issues between the two Churches are:

● The Authority of the Pope ● The Filioque Clause

Rome seems happy to allow the absence of the Filioque as a variant for its Eastern friends, however less inclined to move on the authority of the Pope.

The Orthodox will rattle off a number of smaller matters, however this is the big stuff. Processional theology ultimately in part is driven by the understanding to the , which is not to be understood as hierarchy, but as a mutual Procession indwelling, neither confounding the persons not dividing the substance. This is the theology behind the theory What the Latin world calls mystery the Greek world says is ineffable.

There is no doubt that the idiomatic difference between Greek and Latin have proved many strains, and the discussion of procession is clearly one of those. This is part of where it comes unstuck. For the Procession East the term proceeds from implies the sense of origin. and Origin In the West the term implies a point of departure.

In retail shopping in Australia, you might say that you bought something from a shop, though of course it came from a manufacturer originally.

It is hard to imagine why this has caused so much grief. The variation is in part the idiosyncratic nature of language. And whilst we can see the issue, getting around it can sometimes be difficult.

For the East the oneness of God demands that all things find origin in . If I drink the from the bottle, I might say that The Wine the wine proceeds from the bottle. This is a single procession. Analogy If I drink the wine from the glass, then I might say that the wine proceeds from the glass, though I should also acknowledge that in the first place the wine has proceeded from the bottle, and this might be seen as a double procession.

Can the wine proceed from the bottle without proceeding to the glass? The Orthodox answer to that is yes.

Whilst it may seem that may be the Western Answer as well, yet it is not always clear that this is the Western Answer. In the English Speaking world, part of it comes done to the meaning of the word ‘and’.

AND And is used in the sense of And/Or such as we use in boolean logic.

It was a dark and stormy night. Yes it was dark and also stormy. If one of these conditions is false then it is not true.

And can also be used in the sense of and also.

XYZ is naughty and nice. This does not require them to be be both at a given time, when they may be naughty or nice.

I do understand this and have not explained it well. ● 1123 - 1st , enforced clerical celibacy a further demarcation from the East. ● 1139 - 2nd Lateran Council, pronounced Sidetrack anathemas on all who did not accept double procession. What happened in Western Theology ● 1179 - 3rd Lateran Council, ⅔ majority of following the Great Schism is of note cardinals required for papal election. and possibly an insight into the human condition. ● 1215 - 4th Lateran Council, One universal

These Council are all called Church and Outside the Church there is no Ecumenical Councils by the Catholic . Church based on the understanding that they are the whole Church ● 1245 - 1st Council of Lyons, with support of Constantinople and Antioch against the mongol invasion of Europe. ● 1274 - 2nd Council of Lyons, and a failed attempt at re-union ● 1311 - , with Alexandria and Antioch against various . ● 1414 - Council of Vienne to do with resolving a division in the western Church ● 1431 - , attempted re-union with the East (Constantinople) ● 1512 - 5th Lateran Council, attempt to stem the tide of reformation in Europe. ● 1545 - , dogmatic expression The big change happens at Vatican II of the Counter Reformation, defence of a when there is a rethink about the approach to other Churches. ranges of Catholic , the position of

There is a major rethink of the the Pope, preserving the truth and traditions of the 4th Lateran Council, and whilst of the deposit of faith, and of course not wanting to go back on it, there is a major effort to re-understand what it condemnation of reformers. means. ● 1869 - 1st Vatican Council, affirmed the infallibility of the Sovereign Pontiff. ● 1962 - 2nd Vatican Council, set the Mass in the Common Tongue, pledged to work for re-unification, and concluded with the lifting of the 1054 excommunications. East Meets West

There have been many meetings between Constantinople and Rome as the leaders of both Churches try to find a common path.

When they meet, they have often publicly said the Nicene Creed together, without the Filioque.

Maybe before 2054 this 1000 years will be like yesterday passing. Christianity came to England most probably in the first century by way of the Phoenician Trade Route - tine mines at Glastonbury. In the second England century it was established.

We have not looked at England yet, The Synod of (French Mediterranean) in and as it has some relevance to Australia, a brief discourse on the 314 was attended by six English Bishops. English record seems sensible, for completeness. Sarum (near Salisbury) was a major centre and the liturgy developed from there - Sarum Rite - may well have been fairly Eastern - perhaps influenced by Ephesus.

Around 600 Augustine was sent to ‘convert the English’, founded a centre at Canterbury, and spent a great deal of time brokering deals with the existing Church to celebrate on the right day. Over the following 400 years the Church flourished and the Sarum rite largely survived with the latin date for Easter.

In 1017 the Danes invaded under Canut - who It is probable that the Filioque was was Christian and appointed the English used England at times between 700 and 1066, and enforced following the Stigand as his personal priest. Norman invasion. In 1052 Edward the Confessor appointed Stigand and the Pope Excommunicated him on the ground that he had not given up the Bishopric of Winchester.

In 1066 with the authority of the Pope and carrying his banners William the Norman conquered England, and over the next two years replaced the English Bishops with Normans and Italians, Stigand died of starvation in gaol. The Western (Roman) Rite was enforced. It is interesting to note that the Reformers did not take on the Filioque, when they were ready to take the Pope on on all manner of other matters. Reformation We certainly know that some of them at least thought about it, and Constantinople at one stage was talking with the Lutheran Church and it would have been on the radar there.

It may be that they felt they had enough on the plate already, or perhaps they were comfortable with it as it had been with them for 500 years, or perhaps they were concerned about the exotic nature of liturgy in the East.

It could be it suited a perception of the Gospel in line with the reformed position. Since the the 1830’s there has been ongoing Anglican dialogue between Anglicans and the East.

Orthodox ● 1976 - The Moscow Agreement recommended that Anglicans Drop it ● 1978 - The recommended that member Churches consider dropping it. ● 1988 - Lambeth Conference recommended members further consider dropping it. ● 2006 - Cyprus Statement recommended Anglicans discontinue its use. ● 2008 - Lambeth Conference suggests member Churches not include the Filioque.

There has been a limited response, perhaps a quarter of Anglicans have dropped it. The Uniting Church dropped the Filioque in the Uniting early 80’s from their first significant liturgical revision after union. Church (au) Their statement of faith endorses a theology of double procession, however the liturgy conforms to the Nicene Creed of the 1st Council of Constantinople.

It is possible that the UCA had expected more kudos than they got from the Orthodox for this step that they took, which was a big step for them. However remains a deep mystery, and a thousand years is like yesterday passing. I recall an occasion with friends uttering the phrase kyrie eleison and one of our friends said ‘I don’t speak latin’. Language Every language has nuances that only make sense if you get the nuance, and translating that nuance is hard.

Complex thought only extends the complexity and Greek and Latin are in themselves complex enough already.

For the Greek the notion of procession conveys a sense of origin more profoundly that it does in Latin. The saga of the Filioque also tells us something Human about human behaviour, rather a lot in a way.

Behaviour It seems to have happened by accident, almost as a typo.

Once it was accepted by powerful people, it was promoted, and perhaps not only in it’s own right, but also as a way of establishing boundaries and showing others they were wrong.

From little things big things grow. It can take a long time to fix a little mistake.

Winning is not the same as being right. For the Orthodox a thousand years is like yesterday passing. John 14:26 John’s Jesus said: the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you Gospel everything, and remind you of all that I have said

John 15:26 Jesus said: When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who comes from the Father, he will testify on my behalf.

John 20:22-23 Jesus breathed on them and said ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.’

The principle is to not expound one part of scripture that it be repugnant to another. Procession & Trinity

The Orthodox view of Procession entails a single procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father.

This shows in a diagram all things flowing from the Father inside the compass of Love, The Son begotten and the Spirit Proceeding Incorrect View

Though this is what it sounds like, this is not a proper western view of the procession, though it is the view that a simple reading of the Filioque suggests.

It was something that the Early Fathers particularly avoided saying in light of the pneumatomachi.

This is what the east thinks that the west may be saying. Western View

It remains that part of the Eastern View of Procession is the implication of origin, and for them all things must find origin in the Father.

Theologically the East may be more comfortable with this view. Hierarchical View

This is one of the ideas that worries in east in the expression of the Filioque. The nature of the Trinity viewed in the West as a Mystery and in the East as Ineffable, must start from the premise that no mortal can ever expect to fully comprehend the greatness of God.

Show we a worm who can understand a man and I will show you a man who can understand the Trinity. (John Wesley) Interesting the current round of Anglican Theology of Orthodox dialogues have decided to give themselves a break from discussing the Filioque Humanity and are now focussing discussions on the Theology of the Human Person.

Partly this is in order to find new areas of broad agreement in order to build better relationships and partly because as we understand the human person better so we might better understand the creator.

There is a bit of watch this space here at the moment as this work is in early stages and none of these things move quickly. Original A Mistake in Et in Spíritum Sanctum, Dóminum et vivificántem: Qui ex Patre procédit. Latin? Qui cum Patre et Fílio simul adorátur et conglorificátur: Qui locútus est per prophétas. It is easy to accept the notion of a textual corruption if you allow for a mid step. Possible Mid Step The mid step would be a simple textual corruption with the replication Et in Spíritum Sanctum, Dóminum et vivificántem: of the et Filio from the line below Qui ex Patre et Fílio procédit. following Patre. Qui cum Patre et Fílio simul adorátur et conglorificátur: Filioque then simply tidies the language. Qui locútus est per prophétas.

Final Redaction NOTE: I can not prove any of this, however it does make sense given Et in Spíritum Sanctum, Dóminum et vivificántem: that the usual story does not stack up. Qui ex Patre Filióque procédit. Qui cum Patre et Fílio simul adorátur et conglorificátur: Qui locútus est per prophétas. It is easy in looking at history to ascribe poor Honourable motivation to people. Sometimes this is fair and maybe sometimes not. Persons Constantine was working for the stability of a huge Empire including Britain and Egypt, a swath of the North African Coast, Palestine and the Levant, Greece, Italy, Spain and .

Charlemagne clearly accepted the Filioque as true and part of his received truth, and it seems he was keen to expand Christianity and Franking Interest.

Benedict perhaps felt a greater need to protect the Papal States (? the family home) than to preserve Christian Unity.

I think we should remember that they were all trying their best as they understood it. Australia Many Nations

We often speak of Aboriginals as a single entity, and it makes about as much sense as talking about Europeans without recognising the diversity and complexity that existed.

Within our own region we stand in the place where the Awabakal people walked about, and nearby we have Biripi, Darkinjung, Garingai, Geawegal, Kamilaroi, Worimi and Wonnarua Peoples, with whom they rivaled, traded, and engaged in cultural exchange.

This has always been a land of many nations. Was the Spirit of God present in the dreamtime long before the liberation of the Gospel was proclaimed in the name of Jesus Christ Australia accompanied by men in chains?

This is a matter of thought and Discussing this can be a bit challenging. reflection

One question here is ‘whence comes the spirit’.

A second question is do we accept ‘Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus’ (Outside the Church No Salvation) and if so what do we mean by it.

Both of these questions challenge you to think about your view of God. The Muruwari lived between Cunnamulla in Qld, south to the northern bank of the Barwon River near Brewarrina, NSW. Muruwari They believed Bida-Ngulu (‘forehead of fire’) was

The obvious connection with the creator of all things. Bida-Ngulu lived in the sky and Christian Story here leaves rise to a his great gift to men & women was a dhuwidi, or living question in terms of how we deal with this. spirit. He gave them totems, which remained their spiritual affiliation since the Dreamtime. To maintain life, he left good spirits which they believed hovered close to them. People spoke to these Muruwari spirits, sometimes singing songs asking for rain, good hunting, or plant growth.

Bida-Ngulu had a son called Ngulu-Bida who helped him care for the tribe. Unlike his father who lived in the sky, Ngulu-Bida lived, camped and behaved like a human being, but when help was needed, his wisdom and superiority were outstanding. Aboriginal is inextricably linked to land, Aboriginal “it’s like picking up a piece of dirt and saying this is where I started and this is where I’ll go. The Spirituality land is our food, our culture, our spirit and identity.”

None of the hundreds of Aboriginal languages contains a word for “time”.

Aboriginal spirituality is deeply linked to the land which “owns” Aboriginal people. All objects are living and share the same soul or spirit Aboriginal people share. It is easy to see mixing traditions of faith and How culture as simply belying the truth that either carried, and ending up with nothing. Big is God? On the other hand we don’t see God as simply the maker of Christians, but the maker of all things.

The word for Spirit rhua is suggestive of word or breath or wind.

Genesis could be read as ‘In the beginning when God was already creating, the breath of God brooded over the waters’.

Is it possible that this same spirit has moved in the dreamtime and guided the historic inhabitants of this land? 1st Century Roman Poet Juvenal is generally credited with the earliest reference to the Black Swan. Like so much of his work it was satirical. Black Swan European scientists established ‘scientifically’ that all swans were white. The Dutch captain Willem de Vlamingh sailed up the West Australian Swan River, on the January 10, 1697 he met the improbable, to his mind the impossible.

We know that there are Black Swans and it is easy for us miss the importance of this. Aboriginal people always knew about Black Swans. The problem is when what you know is true is radically overturned it is confronting, disturbing, and also an opportunity to grow, but it is quite unsettling. Thank you for being part of this presentation.

I am not sure it went exactly where I thought it Thankyou was going to go, however it has been challenging to look at the wide spectrum of issues surrounding the one phrase - perhaps the greatest ‘typo’ in history.

Hopefully it has given us something to reflect on, not simply in history, but also in human nature and in our contemporary world.

We don’t know how this controversy will end, however we live in a age with more signs of hope of its resolution than we have seen for hundreds of years.