The Doctrine of "Filioque" in the Catholic Church
“qui ex Patre Filioque procedit”
(“who proceeds from the Father and the Son”)
This short Latin phrase from the Nicene Creed has been at the center of theological discussions for centuries. Let’s break it down word by word:
1. qui
- Meaning: “who”
- Usage: A relative pronoun that refers back to Spiritum Sanctum — the Holy Spirit.
2. ex
- Meaning: “from” / “out of”
- Usage: A preposition that expresses origin or source.
3. Patre
- Meaning: “the Father” (ablative case of Pater)
- Usage: Together with ex, it means “from the Father.”
4. Filioque
- Origin: Filius = “Son” + -que = “and”
- Meaning: “and from the Son”
- Grammar: Ablative case (like Patre) because it shares the same preposition ex.
5. procedit
- Verb Root: procedere = “to proceed, to go forth”
- Form: 3rd person singular → “he proceeds” (referring to the Spirit).
Full Translation:
qui ex Patre Filioque procedit → “who proceeds from the Father and the Son.”
Historical research: How the Filioque Formulated?
The Creed was set at Nicaea (325) and expanded at Constantinople (381).
Several centuries later, in Spain, Christians were struggling against Arianism, a teaching that denied the full divinity of Christ. To emphasize that the Son was truly divine, the bishops at the Third Council of Toledo (589) added the phrase Filioque. Their new version of the Creed said that the Spirit proceeds from “the Father and the Son.”
In the 8th and 9th centuries, Frankish kings and theologians strongly supported the Filioque. They thought it protected the truth about Christ. Pope Leo III (around the year 800) agreed with the idea but refused to add it to the Creed. He even had the Creed engraved on silver plaques in both Latin and Greek without the Filioque, to show respect for the original wording.
Meanwhile, Eastern Christians in Constantinople and other places were shocked that the West had begun using a different Creed. For them, the Father alone was the source of the Spirit. Saying the Spirit came from both the Father and the Son seemed to confuse the unique role of the Father.
By the 9th century, the issue became a heated debate. Patriarch Photius of Constantinople accused the West of heresy for altering the Creed. The Council of 879–880 in Constantinople reaffirmed the Creed without Filioque.
For centuries, Rome still resisted officially changing the Creed in the liturgy. But in the year 1014, during the coronation of Emperor Henry II, Pope Benedict VIII finally allowed the Filioque to be sung in the Creed in Rome. From then on, it became the normal practice in the Catholic Church.
Later councils, like the Council of Lyons (1274) and the Council of Florence (1439), tried to explain the theology more carefully. They said that the Spirit comes from the Father and the Son “as from one principle,” meaning the Father remains the main source, but the Son is involved. Some Eastern bishops accepted this explanation at Florence, but most of their churches later rejected it.
Why the Coptic Church Refused the Filioque?
- It violates the original Creed (Ephesus 431).
- Scripture says the Spirit proceeds from the Father (John 15:26).
- Patristic tradition teaches the Father as sole source.
- It introduces theological confusion about the Trinity.
- It reflects papal overreach rather than conciliar agreement.
The Council of Ephesus (431) explicitly forbade any additions or subtractions from the Creed.
The Filioque was first used in Spain (6th century) against Arianism, then spread to Frankish lands, and was officially inserted in Rome only in the 11th century.
Canon 7 of the Council of Ephesus — “It is unlawful for any man to bring forward, or to write, or to compose a different faith as a rival to that established by the holy Fathers.”
Scriptural Witness
The Bible always presents the Father as the unique source (arche) of the Godhead:
- John 15:26 — “But when the Comforter comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.”
- The Son sends the Spirit in time (mission), but the Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father (procession).
St. Cyril of Alexandria, Thesaurus, PG 75, 585 — “The Holy Spirit flows forth from God the Father, but not as the Son does, for He is not begotten, but proceeds.”
Preserving the Distinction of the Divine Persons
- The Father is the sole cause (aitia) in the Trinity.
- The Son is eternally begotten of the Father.
- The Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father.
Adding “and the Son” confuses the relationships:
- It risks making the Spirit dependent on both Father and Son as a “double origin.”
- This undermines the Father’s unique role as the sole source.
St. Athanasius, Letters to Serapion (I.20) — “The Spirit is not begotten; rather He is the Spirit of the Father, proceeding from Him.”
Theological Consequences
- In Coptic and Eastern theology, the Trinity is understood as one God, three Persons, with the Father as the eternal source.
- The Filioque risks making the Spirit into a “product” of Father and Son, diminishing His full personhood.
- It also shifts balance in the Trinity, leading to Western theological emphases on legalism and hierarchy, versus the Coptic/Eastern emphasis on mystery and communion.
St. Gregory of Nazianzus, Oration 34.10 — “The Spirit is truly Spirit, coming forth from the Father indeed, but not after the manner of the Son; for it is not by generation, but by procession.”
Papal Authority vs. Conciliarity
- The unilateral addition of Filioque was also tied to the rise of papal supremacy in the West.
- For the Copts, the faith is safeguarded by councils, not by papal decrees.
- Thus, both the content (theology) and the method (authority) of the Filioque are rejected.
Pope Shenouda III, The Nature of Christ — “The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father only. This is the explicit text of the Creed which we received from the Councils. To add anything is to betray the faith.”
Ecumenical Movement
1- Rome officially recognizes that Filioque is not part of the original Creed.
2- Eastern Catholic Churches are encouraged to use the Creed in its original form—without Filioque.
3- Papal practice in ecumenical settings reflects this recognition—omitting the Filioque when praying together with Eastern traditions.
World Council of Churches (WCC)
In 1979, the WCC formed a study group on the Filioque issue. They recommended:
“That the original form of the Creed, without the Filioque, should everywhere be recognized as the normative one and restored, so that the whole Christian people may be able … to confess their common faith in the Holy Spirit.”
the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea.
“It should be noted that the Filioque, which is found in the current Western versions of the Creed, is not part of the original text of the Nicene‑Constantinopolitan Creed…”
“The Roman Catholic Church consists of the Eastern Catholic Churches as well and those Churches still keep the ancient Creed without filioque. In fact, they are encouraged to do so by Rome.”