ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Doctrine Of Filioquism

The Roman Church teach the doctrine of Filioquism: that the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father AND the Son. Is this teaching found in Holy Scriptures, and the consensus Witness of the Early Church Fathers or was it ADDED by Rome to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed without any authority?

Join Our Christian Friendship and Take The Who Is Jesus Bible Quiz
 ---Ignatius on 6/30/10
     Helpful Blog Vote (1)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



Mark
No I don't hate any one. For the rcc has been coming up with lame - phony ideas since the rcc was founded. The Man - made trin rcc & her offspring daughters trin churches Are here Matt.15 v 9 & came from here 2nd.Cor.11 v's 14 - 15 then to here Rev.17 v's 4 - 6.

They are NOT an elect of God.
---Lawrence on 8/7/10


Lawrence, I am oppose to many doctrines in the RCC but you take the cake, why do you have such hate for them? Almost all answers you give are anti-trinitariam, or anti-catholic. Very little comes from you concerning other topics. Is there a reason why you come down so hard to them? Does your denomination teach that? And by the way, what denomination are you from?
You do know that many of God's Elect are going to be coming from within the RCC right?
---MarkV. on 8/5/10


For filioquism Is another teaching that came from here 2nd.Cor.11 v's 14 - 15 another False Man - made conception idea from the trin rcc. There's no end to the devils deceiving ideas.
---Lawrence on 8/3/10


\\What does " Whom I will send to you from my Father" ?

Father and Son! \\

The Spirit proceeds from the Father in eternity.

The Spirit is sent by the Son in time.
---Cluny on 7/8/10


This verse only proves my point, Ruben. In fact, I had it in mind in my post.

Note that Jesus NEVER said that He sends the Holy Spirit "from the Father and Myself", or that the Holy Spirit thus proceeds.
---Cluny on 7/7/10


What does " Whom I will send to you from my Father" ?

Father and Son!

Acts 2:33:

"Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear."
---Ruben on 7/8/10




"But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not his." (Romans 8:9)

So, not only has Jesus sent the Holy Spirit, but the Bible calls the Holy Spirit "the Spirit of Christ", as well as "the Spirit of God".
---Bill_bila5659 on 7/8/10


||Passage John 15:26:

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me"(JHN 15:26)
---Ruben on 7/7/10||

This verse only proves my point, Ruben. In fact, I had it in mind in my post.

Note that Jesus NEVER said that He sends the Holy Spirit "from the Father and Myself", or that the Holy Spirit thus proceeds.
---Cluny on 7/7/10


\\In Jesus own words in the same verse he also said "To whom I will send"
---Ruben on 7/6/10\\

Nobody denies that the Spirit is sent IN TIME by the Son.

But that's not the same thing as His eternal procession from the Father.

---Cluny on 7/6/10

But you can applied that the procession is from the Father and the Son in that verse.

Passage John 15:26:

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me"(JHN 15:26)
---Ruben on 7/7/10


\\In Jesus own words in the same verse he also said "To whom I will send"
---Ruben on 7/6/10\\

Nobody denies that the Spirit is sent IN TIME by the Son.

But that's not the same thing as His eternal procession from the Father.

Just like the Father's begetting the Son in eternity is NOT the same thing as the Son's being born in time from the Virgin by the Holy Spirit.
---Cluny on 7/6/10


Suffice it to say that Jesus said that the Comforter proceeds from the Father.

Do we need to change Jesus's own words?
---Cluny on 7/2/10

Nuff said. Thank you Cluny.
---larry on 7/4/10


In Jesus own words in the same verse he also said "To whom I will send"
---Ruben on 7/6/10




Cluny:

Filoquism does not deny that the Comfortor proceeds from the Father - it merely adds that he ALSO proceeds from the Son. I don't recall Jesus using the word "Only" here, so his wording does not necessary preclude filioquism.

I also don't recall him attaching any particular importance to this statement (unlike many of his other teachings). I have yet to hear anyone on this blog to show any reason why this question is, in itself, an important one, any more than other unimportant questions like "Did Jesus have blue eyes?".
---StrongAxe on 7/6/10


\\filioquism is simply a philosophical unbiblical concept
---Rhonda on 7/3/10\\

This is one of the few things you say I can agree with, Rhonda.

Are you ever going to explain what you mean by "religious christianity" with which you're so obsessed?
---Cluny on 7/4/10


The roman religion is not Christian, therefore it is irrelevant what nonChristian doctrines they teach to their idolaters.
---Eloy on 7/4/10


Suffice it to say that Jesus said that the Comforter proceeds from the Father.

Do we need to change Jesus's own words?
---Cluny on 7/2/10

Nuff said. Thank you Cluny.
---larry on 7/4/10


As I said before, it is pride one against the other, East against West. And yes, many books have been written about the subject, but they are written by man with a purpose. Even the creeds were incorporated by man. As for the people in the councils deciding the issue, we don't know who was moved by the Holy Spirit, and who was not, will never know, what if the one's that voted against the issue, were the one's directed by the Spirit? But the majority voted against it? Because we know that not every man thinks the same, feels the same or knows the same as another. What if God wanted to permit the issue to enter for the purpose of bringing the Truth later? What we have are the results of things that happened a long time ago and decided by man.
---MarkV. on 7/4/10


to understand antichrist doctrine called filioquism one must understand True Christians submit to The Father in Heaven through Christ ONLY believing in EVERY WORD from Holy Scriptures to do Gods will

religion simply replaced Gods will to mans will and following the precepts of the church at Rome ...or for those PROTESTants following whatever doctrines they liked from their MOTHER dismissing ones they didn't like and adopting new ones ...this is why there is massive deception and chaos in religious christianity they no longer seek to do Gods Will by The Word who is Christ Jesus ...by following doctrines created by man they simply follow another Jesus 2Corin 11:3-4
---Rhonda on 7/4/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


In Orthodoxy, infallibility rests with the Church.
*****

For True Christians infallibility is ONLY The Fathers and Christs ONLY

church are the called out ones - remember Christs church is spiritual it is not actually a PLACE

for infallibility to "rest with" the called out ones (Church) then ALL these physical people called out from the world its traditions and systems to follow Christ are infallible an absolute contradiction to Holy Scripture as death is most certain of physical men ...Christ does not rule the earth now and HIS Kingdom is NOT of this world ...seeing flesh and blood do not inherit the Kingdom of God infallibility is ONLY with God

filioquism is simply a philosophical unbiblical concept
---Rhonda on 7/3/10


God's spirit always existed,...Jesus's "works" were finished even then.

Ezekiel 39:29
"when I pour out my Spirit upon the house of Israel".

Hebrews 4:3
"his works were finished from the foundation of the world".

...but God's spirit wasn't given TO US until Jesus was glorified (WE ARE NOT JEWS).

John 7:39
"for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified".

Acts 2:17
"last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon ALL FLESH" (there is a difference between "all flesh" and "Israel").

Jesus is ALL THREE (God in TOTALITY/ENTIRETY,...what some call "trinity").
---more_excellent_way on 7/3/10


\\So in a way you are like Protestantism being your own Pope!\\

In Orthodoxy, infallibility rests with the Church.

In Protestantism, judging from various posting here, infallibility rests with the individual believer.

Big difference.
---Cluny on 7/3/10


Ruben:

There is a difference between allowing different groups to have their own autonomy, and although they are not subordinate to superiors in a heiarchy, are still held accountable to their peers, and different groups being totally autonomous and being accountable to no-one.

The former is the model that existed in the new testament churches. The latter is what happens with many denominations (end even more so, with cults) today.
---StrongAxe on 7/2/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


In any case, you're proving a point I made elsewhere: Protestantism is riddled with Filioquism, which they picked up from their mother Rome.

In Orthodoxy, when you're not going to change anything, nobody has to be infallible.
---Cluny on 7/2/10

Even if you wanted too you have no one who is infallible. That's why Kallistos Ware in his book (Orthodox Church,penguin books, 255-8) says there is no practical way for the Orthodox to call or agree upon an ecumenical council. Thus why Orthodoxy have only the First seven councils which by the way the Catholic Church Acknowledge but not the only Seven. So in a way you are like Protestantism being your own Pope!
---Ruben on 7/2/10


\\ Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds "from the father through the son" or "from the father and the son" seems like splitting insignificant hairs. \\

There have been books written on this issue from both sides, and it's not something that can be adequately treated in 125 words.

Suffice it to say that Jesus said that the Comforter proceeds from the Father.

Do we need to change Jesus's own words?
---Cluny on 7/2/10


Cluny:

I don't see how the whole "Filoque" issue (whether pro or con) has anything to do with the deity of God. If it does, please explain to me just HOW. Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds "from the father through the son" or "from the father and the son" seems like splitting insignificant hairs. The fact that the three are mentioned separately at all indicates that they are, at in some sense of the word, all distinct (for example, the Holy Spirit descending on Jesus at his baptism, Jesus saying he could not send the comforter until he left, etc., Jesus not knowing the day or the hour, which only the Father knows, etc.) However, this does not say that they aren't God.
---StrongAxe on 7/2/10


\\Strongaxe, I've studied this issue myself and what I find is that this issue that was included by the Roman Church, really is splitting hairs at best, and only adds ammunition to the heretics who love to attack the deity of God.\\

Attacking the Deity of God?

Isn't that like attacking the felinity of cats?

In any case, you're proving a point I made elsewhere: Protestantism is riddled with Filioquism, which they picked up from their mother Rome.

In Orthodoxy, when you're not going to change anything, nobody has to be infallible.
---Cluny on 7/2/10


Send a Free Birthday Wishes Ecard


Ruben-

"through the Son" is not same as "from the Father and the Son".


In IC.XC.,
---Ignatius on 7/1/10

The Church Fathers from the West and the East all said it means the same thing:

Accordingly He receives from the Son, Who is both sent by Him, and proceeds from the Father. Now I ask whether to receive from the Son is the same thing as to proceed from the Father. But if one believes that there is a difference between receiving from the Son and proceeding from the Father, surely to receive from the Son and to receive from the Father will be regarded as one and the same thing."
Hilary of Poitiers,On the Trinity,8:20(A.D. 357),in NPNF2,IX:143
---Ruben on 7/2/10


Because God and everything in/about Him is INTEGRAL (all ONE and the same...IN HIM), devotion, relationship, worship/praise/prayer and our walk with Him are all THE SAME as each other (there is no separation of any of those).

"Doctrines"/teachings are senseless/meaningless (as Strongaxe said, so did Paul). Our whole devotion should be the same as our worship, relationship, and praise. You could be dead-blind, crazy, and stupid, but as long as you sincerely love God as you know love, and depend on "Christ and Him crucified", then you will have all that The Lord gives.

1 Corinthians 2:2
"For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified".
---more_excellent_way on 7/2/10


Strongaxe, I've studied this issue myself and what I find is that this issue that was included by the Roman Church, really is splitting hairs at best, and only adds ammunition to the heretics who love to attack the deity of God. You can hear David, Scott, and the rest, licking their chops right about now. There is great separation of pride between the East and the West, and the inclusion of "Father and Son" gave the East more to complain about the West. They claim they are the real Church since they did not change anything. And have another reason to argue against the West and their pope.
That issue changes nothing about the Godhead. Changes nothing about our faith, or our standing with God.
---Mark_V. on 7/2/10


I asked this question in the other blog where this question first occurred, but no nobody replied, so I'm going to ask it again here:

Why is this question important? What aspects of our belief does this affect, and how does this affect our thinking, our relationship to God, our faith, and our actions? If it's important, it's important that we know why.

And if it doesn't affect any of these in any way, then this question is just meaningless hair-splitting, much like asking "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" or "was Mary left handed?" or "Did Jesus have straight or curly hair?"
---StrongAxe on 7/2/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


Ruben-

"through the Son" is not same as "from the Father and the Son". As Cluny stated "'Through'is a preposition, not a conjunction."

Personally, I find the first to be Orthodox if and only if it is understood in a Orthodox manner. The second implies that the Holy Spirit proceeds in that He originates from the Son. That's heresy. The Father has always been understood as being the unoriginate source (aitia)(the Arch) of the Son and Spirit.

As I understand, the RCC is now claiming that they agree with this and that she meant "through the Son". Is this true Ruben? What do you mean? Are you claiming a double procession of the Spirit? Denying the Father's Monarchy?

In IC.XC.,
---Ignatius on 7/1/10


oh...i see...this is a rock 'em, sock 'em fight between the RCCs and the Orthodox.

At least, this one may avoid being turned into another Sabbath or following the commandments blog.
---aka.joseph on 7/1/10


Ruben-

The original Nicene Creed did not contain the clause "and the son". That was ADDED later by the Third Council of Toledo in 589 and then officially by Rome centuries later, even though Eastern Theologians and several Roman Popes OBJECTED to the addition and the doctrine itself claiming that it was a innovation and that it confuses the Hypostases of the Holy Trinity and subordinates the Spirit.

Pope Leo III, in 809, denounced the addition of the Filioque and forbade its use. He also had the Creed of the First and Second Ecumenical Councils, without the Filioque, engraved upon two silver plates, in Greek and in Latin.

In IC.XC.,

---Ignatius on 7/1/10


Ignatius * Ruben,

Ecumenical Councils,


Ignatius,

First two ecumenical councils did not teach that the Holy Spirit only proceeds from the Father. The Nicene Creed of 325 A.D. says the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.II Constantinople (553) writes: We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith." And the Council of II Nicea 787 states :"[I]n the Holy Spirit, Lord and giver of Life, proceeding from the Father through the Son."
---Ruben on 7/1/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


I am no Theologian, I am so unworthy to be one. However, when several Western Fathers began to teach the Filioguism (even before the Schism), it was innocent. Fathers such as Saint Augustine wanted to refute Arianism. However, many Eastern Theologians and Roman Popes saw a problem with the clause. Trinitarian issues are complex, difficult, and reflect a mystery. They must be dealt with with extreme patience, and a committed exploration of the other side.

But what happened instead, ultimately, was that due to the rise of papal supremacy, one man ended up thinking he had the power to make the decision for all, and instead of listening to those who raised concerns (the Eastern bishops) he excommunicated them.

In IC.XC.,
---Ignatius on 7/1/10


"Through" is a preposition, not a conjunction.

As far as the quote from St. Augustine, he's not the universal solvent he became in the West. (He is one of the earliest to write extensively and voluminously in Latin.) Orthodoxy considers him to be simply one among many.
---Cluny on 7/1/10

Augustine

"[The one] from whom principally the Holy Spirit proceeds is called God the Father. I have added the term `principally' because the Holy Spirit is found to proceed also from the Son" (ibid. 15:17:29 [ca. A.D. 416]).
---Ruben on 7/1/10


Ruben,

Saint Augustine and Saint Cyril of Alexandra, although Saints in the Eastern Orthodox Church (and we highly esteem Saint Cyril of Alexandra), there teachings must be taken as whole with the rest of the Fathers, the dogmatic decrees of the Holy Ecumenical Councils, there Canon Law, and Scriptures (i.e., John 15:26). I am not denying that SOME of the Fathers held to the belief that the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father and the Son.

Why did Rome officially added the clause to the Holy Creed centuries AFTER and made it a DOGMA, even though she had no authority of during such, and the Ecumenical Councils forbid any changes to the Creed without any summoning of a Council?

In IC.XC.,
---Ignatius on 7/1/10


I know many here are not aware of the theological doctrine of "filiogusim". Protestants are UNAWARE of one of their problems, which they got from their Mother Church, Rome.


Ruben,

"From Church Fathers East and West: "

Not quite. There was never a consensus among the Father on the Holy Spirit procession. That's my point. The MAJORITY of them rejected Filioguism, which by the way, Rome had NO authority to add such clause into Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, per Canon Law. The moment she did, she broke away from the Tradition of the Church. And before Rome added it (Which is was one of the causes of the Great Schism) officially, several Rome Popes was AGAINST adding it.

In IC.XC.,
---Ignatius on 7/1/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


\\"[T]he goodness of [the divine] nature, the holiness of [that] nature, and the royal dignity reach from the Father through the only-begotten [Son] to the Holy Spirit. (The Holy Spirit 18:47 [A.D. 375]).\\


"Through" is a preposition, not a conjunction.

As far as the quote from St. Augustine, he's not the universal solvent he became in the West. (He is one of the earliest to write extensively and voluminously in Latin.) Orthodoxy considers him to be simply one among many.
---Cluny on 7/1/10


In fairness to Rome, Filioquism originated elsewhere, namely in Persia in 410.

For centuries, the Popes did their best to suppress this teaching.

Pope Leo III had the Nicene Creed WITHOUT FILIOQUE engraved on plates of silver in both Latin and Greek so there would be no doubt as to the authentic text of the Creed.

After the schism of Pope Nicholas, Pope John VIII wrote to Patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople, calling Filioque a soul-destroying heresy. But he also said that there were otherwise devout people who simply didn't know any better, and it would be better to try to wean them from it without making an issue of it.
---Cluny on 7/1/10


Ahhh??? And where is St. Augustine when we need him.

Good blog!
---John on 6/30/10


Right here,

Augustine



"[The one] from whom principally the Holy Spirit proceeds is called God the Father. I have added the term `principally' because the Holy Spirit is found to proceed also from the Son" (ibid. 15:17:29 [ca. A.D. 416]).
---Ruben on 7/1/10


From Both scriptures and Church Fathers East and West:

Basil


"[T]he goodness of [the divine] nature, the holiness of [that] nature, and the royal dignity reach from the Father through the only-begotten [Son] to the Holy Spirit. (The Holy Spirit 18:47 [A.D. 375]).

Cyril of Alexandria

"Since the Holy Spirit when he is in us effects our being conformed to God, and he actually proceeds from the Father and Son, it is abundantly clear that he is of the divine essence, in it in essence and proceeding from it" (Treasury of the Holy Trinity, thesis 34 [ca. A.D. 424]).

Hilary
Basil
Epiphanius
Ambrose
Gregory of Nyssa
---Ruben on 7/1/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Insurance


I never heard of the word. Basic understanding about God's spirit is that....

God's attitude of holiness is so intense that it....
............LIVES. We need to have an 'attitude of peace' so that God's spirit can train US to have an attitude of HOLINESS.

If you've ever heard of the "doctrine of Christ" (the real name for N.T. scripture), we are told that if we abide in it, we will have BOTH the Father and the Son (the spirit is also there, He is ONLY with BOTH). In the old testament, worshippers only had "Father",....."SON" was not given yet.

2 John 1:9
"does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God, he who abides in the doctrine has BOTH the Father and the Son".
---more_excellent_way on 7/1/10


The Holy Spirit may not be a "man" in the strictest sense of that word, but, He is referred to in male terms in Scripture. He has feelings, and will, and is just as much a being as either the Father or the Son. God doesn't have a "source of power," He IS the source of all power. I don't know the answer to the original question here Ignatius, but I am interested to see what others have to say also.
---tommy3007 on 7/1/10


The devil 2nd.Cor.11 v's 14 - 15 gave man the idea for the Man - made trin - rcc in the first place with other Ungodly ideas, with nero to root out ( kill out with the great crusades ) the early Church, The One God Jesus name Church of The Living God according to Acts 2 v's 37 - 41 which Fulfills Matt.28 v's 19 - 20.
The One God Jesus name Church of The Living God according to Acts 2 v's 37 - 41 which Fulls Matt.28 v's 19 - 20 Is Alive & well today, even I am one of those. The devil didn't get us all. We Are the Church that is hated of mankind for Jesus name.
Luke 21 v 17.

The Man - mades beginning with the trin - rcc, here Matt.15 v 9 Is an abomination to Almighty God.

---Lawrence on 7/1/10


candice - Jesus said to abide (live) in Him and He will abide in You. Jesus was a man talking about the Truth of Him living in you no a man.
---aka.joseph on 7/1/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Refinance


What is meant by 'proceeded'? If that means 'sent by', then ok. If that means 'to be born of', then no.

The Spirit of God was mentioned in OT scripture in several places but mainly in the beginning. Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Another issue...In scripture, it appears that all three were Witness to each other from the beginning. If by 'Son' (Jesus), they mean God incarnate, then the Word (Jesus, who was in the beginning) could not have been in the beginning. This is false also.

The Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit was, is, and always will be.
---aka.joseph on 7/1/10


Gal 4:6b God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
Rom 8:9-10 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ [be] in you, the body [is] dead because of sin, but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness.
1Pet 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
But: John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
---micha9344 on 7/1/10


Ahhh??? And where is St. Augustine when we need him.

Good blog!
---John on 6/30/10


Never heard of that word or expression.Curious to see what others think. however the holyspirit comes from God only. It is his energy "source" the comforter that is with us ,those of us truly accepting Jesus & following God. The H.S. is not a man, for a man can't dwell inside us.
---candice on 6/30/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates




Copyright© 1996-2012 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.
[Mall |Christian Blogs |Bible Quizzes |Free Ecards |Articles |RSS |Terms |Christian Advertising]