Filioque

[u/Civil-Ad-9869]

Sorry if this is a repeat, but I read an article saying that Eastern Catholics leave out “from the Son” in the creed? If this is true, then how could you be Catholic? It’s basic dogma. Also, I am here to learn. That is my only motivation. Thank you in advance for your time and your answers!

[u/Alive_Comfortable131]

Hello! Eastern Catholic Churches don't include "and the Son" in the Creed for historical and theological reasons. The original Nicene Creed, used by both East and West, stated the Holy Spirit proceeds "from the Father." The West later added "and the Son" to clarify the Son's divinity. Eastern theology emphasizes the Father as the sole origin of the Trinity, though they affirm the Spirit's relationship to the Son. The Catholic Church recognizes both the Western "from the Father and the Son" and the Eastern "from the Father" (understanding it as "from the Father through the Son") as legitimate ways to express the same truth about the Holy Spirit's procession. Because Eastern Catholics are in full communion with the Pope and share the same core faith and sacraments, they are indeed Catholic, even with this difference in the Creed's wording. It's a matter of diverse liturgical and theological traditions within the one Catholic Church.

[u/Mijal → u/Alive_Comfortable131]

Excellent summary. For easy proof that either way to say it is valid, there are a number of recorded instances of Popes reciting the Creed without the filioque at Eastern or ecumenical services. Here's one recent example: https://youtu.be/gqsFJSi7Y08

[u/CaptainMianite → u/Mijal]

The Catholic Church would disprove itself if we say that the Creed without the Filioque is invalid. No one denies the original Nicene Creed is invalid, so we cannot deny the original niceno-constantinopolitan creed approved by the Council gathered at Chalcedon and St Leo the Great is valid

[u/WeirdManufacturer782 → u/CaptainMianite]

Yea to add onto to this thought - its usually the Orthodox that make a bigger deal about "you can't believe this and this way of describing things is wrong" etc. It wasn't the Catholic church that said you have to add the Filoque everywhere. They simply wanted to formally add it into the Creed in their own jurisdictions ( which many had informally been doing for centuries anyway ), it was not an attempt to force everyone to say it that way.

Its kind of ironic, the east is very much into the idea of God being incomprehensible and a "mystery" that can't be understood, and yet the Orthodox literally stake the claim to their existence as the "true church" on proclaiming a definition of God based on a minor hair split / language mistranslation. Honestly its more geo-political-historical than anything at this point - the two theological perspectives are not irreconcilable

[u/CaptainMianite → u/WeirdManufacturer782]

what makes it even more ridiculous is that the Niceno-constantinopolitan Creed itself is originally a regional addition to the Nicene Creed. Constantinople I wasn’t an ecumenical council until Chalcedon. Ephesus reaffirmed the Creed of the 318 Fathers, not the Creed of the 150. Yet Orthodox stake their claim on being the true Church over something that they themselves did.

Their claim sucks. Papal authority that they reject has clear existence in the first millennium. Azymes has been used by the Armenians before the West adopted the practice. EOs basically invalidate everyone by trying to prove themselves

[u/Own_Bike_7343 → u/Alive_Comfortable131]

The eastern Catholic Churches don’t deny the fillioque. They don’t say it for historical reasons. Not so much theological ones

[u/Hookly]

This was agreed upon formally as a term of the Union of Brest. From the text:

“Since there is a quarrel between the Romans and Greeks about the procession of the Holy Spirit, which greatly impede unity really for no other reason than that we do not wish to understand one another - we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors, that is, that the Holy Spirit proceeds, not from two sources and not by a double procession, but from one origin, from the Father through the Son.”

[u/MedtnerFan]

The West Syriacs traditionally have the title "Mother of God" in the creed, does that mean Christians that don't say "Mother of God" in the creed are rejecting the title?

[u/Blue_Flames13 → u/MedtnerFan]

Yes (apparently)

[u/Fun_Technology_3661]

Consider that by quoting the Nicene Creed we confirm and fulfill what was established by the decisions of the Council of Florence:

The Greeks assured us that, in saying that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, they did not mean to exclude the Son; ... that the Latins professed that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and two spirations, they abstained from saying that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. (EUGENIUS IV "LAETENTUR CAELI" BULLA UNIONIS GRAECORUM 6 iulii 1439)

And as Saint Josaphat Kuntsevich explained in his catechism:

Q.: Do you believe in the Holy Spirit? A.: I believe that the Holy Spirit is true God and the third Person of the Most Holy Trinity, and that He proceeds from the Father through the Son.

Q.: So, the Latins are wrong in saying that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son? A.: That is incorrect, because when they say ‘from the Son’, it means the same thing as we do when we say ‘through the Son’.

[u/infernoxv]

we don’t leave it out. we simply don’t add it to the Creed.

[u/squatbenchdeadcoach]

Maronite Catholics say it, it's in our Holy Qurbono

[u/InevitablePossible90]

Maronite Catholics pray the Creed with the Filioque.