The Filioque: Arguments For/Against and a Compromise

In this video, I discuss the filioque clause in the Nicene Creed, which added the phrase "and the Son" to the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father. It eventually led to the Great Schism of 1054. Here I discuss the arguments for and against the clause, plus a modern compromise solution proposed by T. F. Torrance.
Enjoy my work? Buy me a coffee: www.buymeacoffee.com/MorrisonSDM
Recommended reading:
My book, "T. F. Torrance in Plain English" (chapter 5) - amzn.to/3fuTwX1
Jürgen Moltmann, "The Trinity and the Kingdom" - amzn.to/3nski6X
Jürgen Moltmann, "The Church in the Power of the Spirit" - amzn.to/3A5se2V
T. F. Torrance, "Trinitarian Faith" - amzn.to/3KlihTJ
T. F. Torrance, "The Christian Doctrine of God, One Being Three Persons" - amzn.to/3I5TJw6
**Please note that all Amazon links are associate links, wherein I receive a percentage of your total purchase.

[@ekristinab]

to me "through the Son" makes the most sense. it's clear and concise, and it also seems a lot more firmly rooted in the Bible and how the Holy Spirit is described

[@NUKE.2024]

awesome presentation. I learned a couple new words!

[@danstoian7721]

9:51 The real problem is actually, and Torrance writes about this, the Eastern-Orthodox wrong understanding of the "Monarchy of the Father". The Cappadocian Fathers were basically subordinating the Son and The Spirit to the Father. For them, they are diving beings, but not God. For God the Father alone is "without cause (aitía)". The real solution is for the Eastern-Orthodox to affirm the the whole, undivided Trinity is the godhead and without cause, not just the Father alone!

[@jdwagman]

From the perspective of a behavioral scientist; The Filioque was not the real reason for the schism; it was just an excuse.

[@danstoian7721]

4:45 I'm sorry but I really don't understand all the hate for the Filioque. If the procession from the Son is implied, and I agree with that. Why deny it? This is like "Let's have communion less often, so it will be special", if it's special, let's have it more often! I feel sort of betrayed because I see it as one sided towards Eastern-Orthodox. How is the affirmation of Filioque "subjugating to the Son" sin both Father and Son are affirmed. And how is it suddenly not subjugation to the Father, if the Father alone is affirmed?

[@matthewmckoy955]

I don’t really get your analogy, brother. Often, or always, the speciality of a celebration is determined by the rarity of it’s occasion. That is why a blood moon, a birthday, Christmas, Easter, etc. is special, because of 1. The meaning and 2. It’s rarity

[@matthewmckoy955]

It is already implied that the Son receives the Holy Spirit through the Father as there can be no Father with no son, so the double procession (from my understanding of this video, this is my first time hearing of the Filioque) is absolutely unnecessary

[@danstoian7721]

@@matthewmckoy955 But that's the thing, the Filioque does not imply a double procession. It affirms the spiration of the Spirit from the Father and the Son as from one principle.

[@danstoian7721]

@@matthewmckoy955 True! Something can be special because it's rare. But it doesn't have to be rare because it's special.