By Henry Aloysius Barry
CHAPTER XVII. THE GREEK FATHERS AND THE "FILIOQUE.
As it were not enough for the stubborn race of men to have once rent in twain the seamless mantle of the Nazarene, it is deplorable that there should have been still further rupture in the Church and especially such a significant one as involved and still involves in its disintegration such vast millions as profess the Greek faith with the harrowing prospect of its influence widening in the far reaching tracks of the prowling but silent, patient and aggressive Russian bear. That the Greek wing of the Church should tear itself away from its orthodox moorings when in tranquility and peace Peter's bark lay at quiet anchorage in the Dardanelles it were, indeed, important to have surveyed. But that the Greeks, furthermore, should have shattered the cable that linked them in sacred belief to a long line of illustrious saints challenges credibility; yet, it is a sad fact which constitutes one of the world's most curious phenomena. The lesson of the Jewish—prospectively —and Roman nations losing their nationhood in collision with the chair of Peter had been lost upon them. The pity of it all is heightened by the broader, sentimental view point when we recall in addition to its saint-ship the philosophy, the chivalry, the poetry and art of the Grecian people. Chrysostom, Basil, Plato, Socrates, Homer, Praxiteles, Demosthenes—what names!
"Thus may the Greeks review their native shore, Much famed for generous deeds, for beauty more." —Illiad III. . . . O once of mortal fame O Greeks! if yet ye can deserve the name.— xiv.
But to the point: In the Council of Florence it was argued out whether the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and Son and also whether it was right to make addition to the Nicene Creed. We have seen that, given the former, there could be no question of the latter. The important thing then is whether the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Son also— "Mlioque." The Church has defined it and of course we must profess that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son also. At the same time we will consider the Greek Fathers, having in mind to show that they too have held this doctrine and to lay bare the utter arbitrariness and folly of their schismatical and heretical descendants. St. Epiphanius puts it with mathematical clearness: —"We believe that Christ is of the Father, God of God, and that the Spirit is of Christ or, in other words, we believe the Spirit is of the two, as Christ asserts when He says, 'Who proceedeth from the Father,— (John xv, 26)—and 'He shall receive of Mine,'" (xvi, 14,) (in, Ancor. num. 67.) Nothing could be more plain or emphatic I say. The saint asserts that the Holy Ghost proceeds from Christ, as Christ from the Father, that is God from God. He asserts, besides, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from both. The saint quotes the words, "He shall receive of Mine," which the Latins employ against the Greeks and which Gennadius, Bessario and before them, John Beccus, patriarch of Constantinople, had made use of. (Collect, sentent. de. sp. sanct. cap. v.)— (Petavius. Dog. Theology, iii, p. 274.)
CHAPTER XVII. THE GREEK FATHERS AND THE "FILIOQUE.
As it were not enough for the stubborn race of men to have once rent in twain the seamless mantle of the Nazarene, it is deplorable that there should have been still further rupture in the Church and especially such a significant one as involved and still involves in its disintegration such vast millions as profess the Greek faith with the harrowing prospect of its influence widening in the far reaching tracks of the prowling but silent, patient and aggressive Russian bear. That the Greek wing of the Church should tear itself away from its orthodox moorings when in tranquility and peace Peter's bark lay at quiet anchorage in the Dardanelles it were, indeed, important to have surveyed. But that the Greeks, furthermore, should have shattered the cable that linked them in sacred belief to a long line of illustrious saints challenges credibility; yet, it is a sad fact which constitutes one of the world's most curious phenomena. The lesson of the Jewish—prospectively —and Roman nations losing their nationhood in collision with the chair of Peter had been lost upon them. The pity of it all is heightened by the broader, sentimental view point when we recall in addition to its saint-ship the philosophy, the chivalry, the poetry and art of the Grecian people. Chrysostom, Basil, Plato, Socrates, Homer, Praxiteles, Demosthenes—what names!
"Thus may the Greeks review their native shore, Much famed for generous deeds, for beauty more." —Illiad III. . . . O once of mortal fame O Greeks! if yet ye can deserve the name.— xiv.
But to the point: In the Council of Florence it was argued out whether the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and Son and also whether it was right to make addition to the Nicene Creed. We have seen that, given the former, there could be no question of the latter. The important thing then is whether the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Son also— "Mlioque." The Church has defined it and of course we must profess that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son also. At the same time we will consider the Greek Fathers, having in mind to show that they too have held this doctrine and to lay bare the utter arbitrariness and folly of their schismatical and heretical descendants. St. Epiphanius puts it with mathematical clearness: —"We believe that Christ is of the Father, God of God, and that the Spirit is of Christ or, in other words, we believe the Spirit is of the two, as Christ asserts when He says, 'Who proceedeth from the Father,— (John xv, 26)—and 'He shall receive of Mine,'" (xvi, 14,) (in, Ancor. num. 67.) Nothing could be more plain or emphatic I say. The saint asserts that the Holy Ghost proceeds from Christ, as Christ from the Father, that is God from God. He asserts, besides, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from both. The saint quotes the words, "He shall receive of Mine," which the Latins employ against the Greeks and which Gennadius, Bessario and before them, John Beccus, patriarch of Constantinople, had made use of. (Collect, sentent. de. sp. sanct. cap. v.)— (Petavius. Dog. Theology, iii, p. 274.)
