Ecumenical Perspectives on the Filioque for the 21st Century

Myk Habets

• Publisher: T&T Clark
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9780567666055
• eBook ISBN: 9780567164711
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

The volume presents a range of theological standpoints regarding the filioque. With some contributors arguing for its retention and others for its removal, still others contest that its presence or otherwise in the Creed is not what is of central concern, but rather that how it should be understood is of ultimate importance. What contributors share is a commitment to interrogating and developing the central theological issues at stake in a consideration of the filioque, thus advancing ecumenical theology and inter-communal dialogue without diluting the discussion. Contributors span the Christian traditions: Roman Catholic, Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, and Pentecostal. Each of these traditions has its own set of theological assumptions, methods, and politics, many of which are on display in the essays which follow. Nonetheless it is only when we bring the wealth of learning and commitments from our own theological traditions to ecumenical dialogue that true progress can be made. It is in this spirit that the present essays have been conceived and are now presented in this form.

1

Introduction: Ecumenical Perspectives and the Unity of the Spirit

Myk Habets

If genuine ecumenical progress is to be made, it will be based upon theological agreement concerning the core mysteries of the faith – God, Incarnation, salvation – and only then will fruitful dialogue be had across the divisions of the Christian Church in areas where division still exists (ecclesiology especially). When the authority of Scripture is upheld, the conciliar consensus is adhered to, and filial love for one another is fostered; the Christian Church will then be able to enter into loving, gracious and truthful dialogue, fully intent on working towards the unity of the Spirit Eph. 4.3 engenders. The present work seeks to contribute to the unity of the Spirit by bringing theological perspectives from across the Christian traditions together to reflect on an issue central to each of the three mysteries mentioned above: namely the filioque.

Trinitarian theology in the first part of the twenty-first century has proved itself to be a remarkably profound and fecund enterprise and there are no signs of this ceasing any time soon. Theologians from across the Christian traditions have returned to the doctrine of the Trinity and are producing monographs, essays and articles on methods and models of God, and they are turning to patristic, medieval, Reformation and contemporary sources to do so. Contemporary theology is in a fortunate position as geographical boundaries become porous, denominational isolationism decreases, combined missional activity increases, ecumenical convictions strengthen and works originally written in Greek, Latin, Russian and French (to name but a few) are increasingly being translated into English. Perhaps for the first time in many centuries, if not for over a millennium, Christian theologians are in a position to speak with and hear theologians and theology from across the spectrum of the Church – East–West, Latin–Greek, North–South, Orthodox–Catholic–Protestant–Pentecostal – and let that influence the way each of them do theology. It is indeed a privileged time to be doing theology.

For all the strengths of this often touted ‘renaissance of Trinitarian theology’, we are only recently seeing the fruit of such theology being applied to other loci of the theological enterprise. The present work seeks to contribute to the unity of the Spirit by bringing perspectives of theologians from across the Christian traditions into one volume as they bring Trinitarian theology to bear upon the issue of the filioque. Contributors were asked to write from confessional perspectives and in such a way that significant theological proposals for addressing the complex issues surrounding the debates over how to interpret the filioque are offered. The intent is neither to merely repeat historical rhetoric nor to perpetuate the well-worn route of speaking past each other, but to move the Church forward in its theological reflection. Contributors were asked to focus on theological issues rather than the many historical issues also essential in a full and final ‘solution’ to the problem of the filioque. As such, the essays in this volume do not work towards one agreed solution or definition, nor do the contributors agree with each other over many of the details of the doctrine. Instead, each is rigorously Trinitarian, confessional and ecumenical; offering perspectives from across the range of monopatrist, filioquist and third-way positions.

While a number of works on the filioque have appeared in recent years, none have brought together scholars from across the Christian traditions into one volume with the intent of furthering the discussion since the WCC study edited by Lukas Vischer and published in 1981 as Spirit of God, Spirit of Christ.¹ The present study has loosely followed the structure of Vischer’s work and in conceiving the volume had in mind a similar goal to that work, to foster genuine theological dialogue across the traditions for the edification of the Church. We are all aware of the limitations of theology, of context and of time, and I am reminded of the words of Morris Inch, who, in his work on the Spirit wrote:

No final word with regard to the Holy Spirit ought to be considered final. In a manner of speaking, we are always attempting to discover what He has been up to lately. We may easily bypass the more significant developments in favour of what seems at the moment more striking, relevant, or legitimate. But the topics discussed are at least illustrative and to a degree representative. When taken together, they provide something of a mosaic – simplified, to be sure – of the time and trend.²

The following essays are grouped into three parts: in Part 1 the doctrine and the controversy of the Western insertion of the filioque clause into the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed from the sixth century is placed in its historical perspective. The historical, political, geographical, sociological and theological issues surrounding the insertion and its aftermath are convoluted and complex, and while this volume does not seek to address the historical questions in depth, a context is required in order to understand the theological issues at stake. Chapter 2, by Edward Siecienski, reduces his magnificent 355-page monograph on the same topic into a concise review of such issues. Such a context is further provided in Chapter 3 where veteran scholar of the Trinity, Paul Molnar, specifies the distinctly theological issues at hand in a classical or orthodox Trinitarian construct. In Chapter 4 David Guretzki takes a similar approach to establishing the theological context, this time from the perspective of the Free Church tradition, a notable exception to much ecumenical dialogue until quite recently.

In Part 2 theological perspectives on the filioque are offered from across a broad range of Christian traditions, each presenting important aspects and interpretations of the issues involved in the procession of the Spirit. In Chapter 5 Theodoros Alexopoulos appeals to what he argues is a very old usage of language; that the Spirit proceeds from the Father ‘through the Son’. He argues this is in line with the monopatrist theology of the East while adequately addressing the original intent of the insertion of the filioque into the Creed in the first place. Chapter 6 sees the first of two essays which appropriate the theology of the Protestant Reformer John Calvin as a means to further the dialogue. Brannon Ellis introduces Calvin’s idiosyncratic theology of the aseity of the Son and brings that to bear upon the issue at hand, while in Chapter 7 Christopher Holmes explicates Calvin’s office-Christology and explains how this has the potential to open up new possibilities in formulating an account of intra-divine relations. Chapters 8 and 9 have Free Church voices contributing to the discussion. David Wilhite offers a case for why Baptists should care about conciliar theology and what their contributions to such dialogue may constitute in Chapter 8, while in Chapter 9 Frank Macchia offers a Pentecostal reflection which centres on the correlation between baptism in the Spirit and the procession of the Spirit. Having Free Church voices involved in ecumenical theology is essential and these contributions to the volume enrich the final product.

Part 3 presents five chapters which open up new perspectives on the procession of the Holy Spirit, arguments intended to encourage the tradition to look in other directions than has been the case to date. None of the essays in this section are atraditional; rather, each seeks to resource ‘solutions’ to the filioque issue by appropriating resources from the past while challenging a number of long-held assumptions. The contributors in this section are equal-opportunity critics in that they take issue with aspects of both Eastern and Western construals of the Trinity and thus find the issue of the filioque unresolvable from within such parameters. Instead, each of the essayists argues for either an enrichment of the tradition, or a reappraisal of it, at certain key points. The Modern Church father, Robert Jenson, begins this section in Chapter 10 with a brief but profound proposal towards a more dynamic understanding of the Triune persons as a way to achieve clarity over the procession of the Holy Spirit. In Chapter 11 John C. McDowell seeks to present a thicker description of the Holy Spirit’s Triune presence, but one that carries out a kind of ‘conceptual therapy’ on any contemporary demand that the Spirit (or spirituality) does more in order to make itself relevant. Chapter 12 offers the most articulate and precise presentation yet of Fr. Thomas Weinandy’s seminal thesis of simultaneous and reciprocal personing of each of the divine persons in a way which sees a complementarity of the persons as subsistent relations due to the action of the Holy Spirit. In Chapter 13 Kathryn Tanner focuses upon a Trinitarian narration of Jesus’ life and death, which, she argues, has the potential to resolve the East–West controversies on the place of the Spirit within the life of the Trinity. In the process, she finds both Eastern and Western conceptions lacking. Finally, Chapter 14 by Myk Habets presents a case for a robustly perichoretic doctrine of Triunity and argues for a relational ontology of God and for a more inter-subjective account of the divine processions.

In offering this volume of perspectives on the divine processions, on the Trinity, and on the Holy Spirit, I am reminded of the wise words of Gary Badcock, a fine theologian and a keen ecumenist himself, who suggested that:

Perhaps even the term pneumatology needs to be reconsidered, since it enshrines in our theology the idea that logos and pneuma are entirely compatible, or even one and the same, in the sense that to know the Spirit is to have a logos of the Spirit, a doctrine of the Spirit. Can one speak rightly of a logos of pneuma or might we perhaps better speak in our theology of the Spirit in terms of love, and so, for example, of a love of the Spirit, a pneumatophilia?³

If a pneumatophilia is indeed possible, may this volume be a down payment in the hope of more to come.

Come Holy Spirit – renew the whole creation!

Notes

¹ Lukas Vischer (ed.), Spirit of God, Spirit of Christ: Ecumenical Reflections on the Filioque Controversy (Faith and Order Paper, no. 103; Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1981).

² Morris A. Inch, Saga of the Spirit: A Biblical, Systematic, and Historical Theology of the Holy Spirit (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985), p. 263.

³ Gary D. Badcock, Light of Truth & Fire of Love: A Theology of the Holy Spirit (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), p. 5.

Part One

The Filioque in Context: Historical and Theological

2

The Filioque: A Brief History

A. Edward Siecienski

I Introduction

If we accept Maximus’ Letter to Marinus as authentic,¹ then we must acknowledge that the dispute about the filioque is among the oldest ongoing debates in Christendom – older even than the question of papal primacy and predating the Reformation by close to a millennium. Over the centuries Greeks and Latins have written literally hundreds of volumes arguing that the Holy Spirit proceeds from ‘The Father alone’ or from the ‘Father and the Son’, maintaining that the opposing view was the worst kind of heresy to be avoided at all costs. Vladimir Lossky called the Latin doctrine of the filioque the ‘sole dogmatic grounds for the separation of East and West’² and Alexei Khomiakov once described the addition of the filioque to the creed of the Roman Church as an act of ‘moral fratricide’.³ Even today the filioque remains a stumbling block to the restoration of full communion between Christian East and West, despite the great progress that has been made by Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox scholars engaged in the ecumenical movement.

Before examining the work of twenty-first-century scholars on the filioque, the editor of this volume thought it would be helpful (dare I say, necessary) to examine briefly how the debate has progressed up to this point.⁴ After all, some of Christianity’s greatest minds, as well as some of her most vitriolic polemicists, have written on the subject of the procession – recognizing, integrating and even critiquing their contributions is an integral part of the modern-day ecumenical task. Contextualizing the modern-day debate this way might enable us to see how far we have come and how far we still need to go.

II The debate begins (646–1054)

There is little doubt that by the seventh century Christian East and West had begun to speak about the procession of the Holy Spirit using different, although not necessarily contradictory, concepts and categories.⁵ This is to some degree understandable – the biblical references to the Holy Spirit, especially in relation to the Father and the Son, are capable of varied interpretations.⁶ Very often the authors of the New Testament did not express themselves with a great deal of precision when it came to the Trinity⁷ and various ‘movements’ of Trinitarian revelation in the New Testament, if read without reference to the others, could lend themselves to diverse, and even incompatible, understandings of relationships within the Trinity.⁸

The Greek fathers, led by Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus, emphasized the notion that the hypostasis of the Father was defined by his unique role as unoriginate cause of the Son and Spirit, the former by generation and the latter by procession (ἐκπορɛύɛσθαι).⁹ While other fathers, chiefly Gregory of Nyssa and Cyril of Alexandria, also spoke of the Spirit’s eternal relationship to the Son (moving through him from the Father),¹⁰ the Greek tradition remained content with repeating the creedal affirmation of Nicea-Constantinople (381) – itself derived from the Scriptures (Jn 15.26) – that the Holy Spirit ‘proceeds from the Fat...

Table of contents

• Cover-Page
• Half-Title
• Dedication
• Title
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• List of Contributors
• Foreword Ecumenical Reception of Ecumenical Perspectives on the Filioque
• 1 Introduction: Ecumenical Perspectives and the Unity of the Spirit
• Part 1 The Filioque in Context: Historical and Theological
• Part 2 Developments in the Various Traditions
• Part 3 Opening New Possibilities: Origin, Action and Inter-subjectivity
• Index of Biblical References
• Author Index
• Subject Index
• Copyright