Order of Contents
On Greek Orthodox Systematic Theology
Contra Greek Orthodoxy
On the Filioque Clause & the Procession of the Spirit from the Son 18+
On Greek Orthodox Systematic Theology
Niesel, Wilhelm – Pt. 2, ‘The Gospel & the Orthodox Church’ in Reformed Symbolics: a Comparison of Catholicism, Orthodoxy & Protestantism tr. David Lewis (Oliver & Boyd, 1962), pp. 121-168
Contra Greek Orthodoxy
Aquinas, Thomas – Contra the Errors of the Greeks
eds. Lehner, Muller, Roeber – The Oxford Handbook to Early Modern Theology, 1600-1800 (Oxford, 2016), pt. 3, ‘Theology & the Others’
ch. 32, The Churches of the East & the Enlightenment, pp. 499-516
ch. 33, Orthodox Influences on Early Modern Western Theologies, pp. 517-32
On the Filioque Clause & the Procession of the Spirit from the Son
Augustine – Opera, tome 8, column 498
Anselm – On the Procession of the Holy Spirit
Richard of St. Victor – On the Trinity Buy
Richard (d. 1173). On this work, see Todd D. Vasquez, The Art of Trinitarian Articulation: A Case Study on Richard of St. Victor’s de Trinitate PhD diss. (Loyola University, 2009).
Daillie, John – p. 331 ff. in A Treatise on the Right Use of the Fathers in the Decision of Controversies... 2nd ed. (d. 1670; 1675; Philadelphia, 1856)
Daillie was a French Reformed minister and theologian in Paris.
Turretin, Francis – Question 31, ‘Did the Holy Spirit Proceed from the Father & the Son? We affirm.’ in Institutes of Elenctic Theology, vol. 1, 3rd Topic, pp. 308-11
“Since breathing virtue is numerically one in the Father and the Son, it is not good to say that in this respect the Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son (as if he was principally from the Father, but secondarily and less principally from the Son). If the mode of subsisting is considered (according to which the Father is the fountain of deity from whom the Son emanates), not improperly in this sense is he said to proceed from the Father through the Son (as to the order and mode of procession).” – section 8, p. 310
van Mastricht, Peter – Theoretical-Practical Theology (RHB), vol. 2, bk. 2, ch. 27, section 20, ‘4. Does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father and the Son?’, pp. 582-4
De Moor, Bernardinus – A Continuous Commentary on John Marck’s Compendium of Didactic & Elenctic Christian Theology, vol 1 (Leiden, 1761-71), ch. 5, section 11
Bray, Gerald – ‘The Filioque Clause in History & Theology’ Tyndale Bulletin, 34 (1983), 91-144
Daley, Brian E. – “Revisiting the ‘Filioque’: Roots & Branches of an Old Debate’ Pro Ecclesia 10, no. 1 (2001): 31-62
Pugliese, Marc – ‘How Important is the Filioque for Reformed Orthodoxy?’ Westminster Theological Journal 66 (Spring 2004), pp. 159–77
Dr. Pugliese is Associate Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at the Romanist, Saint Leo University in Florida. Dr. Pugliese is sympathetic to Reformed Orthodoxy and the Filioque clause.
This essay was originally spurred by the question of whether a minister, in 2002, in a prominent, conservative reformed denomination in America, should be able to take exception to the filioque clause in the Westminster Confession of Faith.
“First, the essay will summarize the question and what really is at stake in the question. It will then briefly summarize the chief arguments against the filioque. After presenting the dilemma of affirming or denying the filioque, the essay will move into a section arguing for the importance of the filioque in orthodox Reformed theology.”
Pugliese interacts with: Photius, Calvin, Pearson, Turretin, C. Hodge, Berkhof, L.S. Chafer, J.I. Packer, W. Grudem, Karl Rahner. There is a section on pp. 163-5 documenting the notion of filioque in the early Church, showing that “the intention behind the filioque was a part of Christian theology practically from its incipience…” Pugliese also states: “every great Reformed confession that deals at length with the Trinity contains the Double Procession.”
Kieser, Ty – ‘Is the Filioque an Obstacle to a Pneumatologically Robust Christology?: A Response from Reformed Resources’ Journal of Reformed Theology 12, no. 4 (2018): 394-412
Barth, Paul – ‘The Holy Spirit Proceeds from the Father & the Son’ 2021 36 paragraphs
Swete, H.B. – On the History of the Doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit, from the Apostolic Age to the Death of Charlemagne (Cambridge, 1876) 260 pp.
Synopsis of Pure Theology, Disputation 9, §16 & 19
“The personal order among the Persons requires Him to proceed from both, which order would otherwise be destroyed, and the Holy Spirit would not then be the third Person, but would be placed in the same order and series with the Son, and would be placed over against Him, as it were. Finally, the intrinsic relation and respect requires this, which otherwise would not exist between the Son and the Spirit:
But in order to put the controversy between the Greeks and Latins in its proper place and settle it, some have conveniently said, in keeping with the phraseology of some ancient authors, that the Father spirates the Holy Spirit through the Son, and that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son. For by that manner of speaking it is shown that He comes from both; and the mode of subsistence is shown, too; that is to say, He proceeds in a mediate and subordinate way from the Father through the Son. Thereby the Greeks’ position is not destroyed, namely that the one and even personal principle of the spiration and procession of the Holy Spirit is the Father—because the Father precedes in origin and order. To be precise: their position of the personal starting point is the Father on account of the Father’s antecedence in origin and rank. And hereby both the relationship and subordination of the Spirit to the Son is established (John 15:16 and 16:14-15).”
Body of Divinity, II.xvi, p. 214
“To deny the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son, is a grievous error in divinity, and would have grated the foundation, if the Greek Church had so denied the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son, as that they had made an inequality between the Persons. But since their form of speech is, ‘That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Son, and is the Spirit of the Son,’ without making any difference in the consubstantiality of the Persons, it is a true, though an erroneous Church in this particular. Diverse learned men think, that a filio [by the Son] & per filium [through the Son] in the sense of the Greek Church, was but a question in modo loquendi, ‘in manner of speech,’ and not fundamental.”
Peter van Mastricht
Theoretical-Practical Theology (RHB), vol. 2, bk. 2, ch. 27, section 20, ‘4. Does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father and the Son?’, p. 583
“There are many who think that both the ancient and especially the more recent Greeks intend nothing other than that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, through the Son. Thus their opinion would be more tolerable, since the Father works all things through the Son, and in this way the controversy would almost fade into a mere contest over words.”
Andreas J. Beck
‘God, Creation & Providence in Post-Reformation Reformed Theology’ in ed. Muller et al., Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology (Oxford, 2016), p. 205
Petavius – Dogmata theologica, vol. 1, tome 2, bk. 7, pp. 362-440
Gerhard – Loca Communia, tome 1, ‘Of the Holy Spirit’, ch. 4, pp. 158-164
Theologiæ Dogmaticæ, vol. 1, bk. 2, ch. 1, §52, pp. 396-401
Isagoge ad Theologiam universam, bk. 2, ch. II, § 5, vol 1, pp. 463b-465
Buddeus was Lutheran. Both of these sections are on the history of the dispute.
Spanheim – Decadum Theologicarum V, § X, number 4 in Works, vol 3, cols. 1224-1225
Alting, Heinrich – Theologia problematica nova, locus 3, problem 39, pp. 238-239
Hoornbeek – Summa Controversiarum, bk. 11, pp. 851-854
Voet, Gisbert – p. 86, section 4, mid. of Bk. 1, ch. 9, ‘Of Public & Private Disputations’ in Exercises & a Library on the Study of Theology (Utrecht, 1644)
Lampe – Dissertationum philologico-theologicarum, vol. 2, Disputation 6, chs. 6-7, ‘Of the Holy Spirit’, § 25, pp. 211-212 & 224-38
Stapfer – Theologicæ polemicæ, vol. 1, ch. 3, §1136-1139
Latin Articles Contra Greek & Eastern Orthodoxy
Hoornbeek, Johannes – 11. ‘Of Greeks & Orientals’ in A Sum of Controversies in Religion with Infidels, Heretics & Schismatics (Utrecht, 1653; 1676), p. 833 ff.
Spanheim, Francis – ‘Select Controversies with the Modern Greeks & Orientals: a Historical Dissertation on the State of the Oriental Church & their Dissension from the Latins, or the Pontificate’ ToC in A Historical-Theological Chain of Select Controversies on Religion, even with the Greeks, Orientals, Jews & the Recent Anti-Scripturalists [Rationalists] [Plus Many Other Sects], in which the Fonts of Errors are Opened (Leiden, 1683), pp. 369-472
Vitringa, Sr., Campegius – The Doctrine of the Christian Religion… (d. 1722)
vol. 6, Ch. 24, ‘Of the Sacraments of the New Covenant’, ‘Of the Sacraments of Greeks’, pp. 520-524
vol. 7, Ch. 24, ‘Of Baptism’, ‘Of the Baptism of the Greeks’, pp. 181-204
vol. 8, Ch. 24, ‘Of the Lord’s Supper’, ‘Of the Sacred Supper of the Greeks’, pp. 423-634
Stapfer (1708-1775) was a professor of theology at Bern. He was influenced by the philosophical rationalism of Christian Wolff, though, by him “the orthodox reformed tradition was continued with little overt alteration of the doctrinal loci and their basic definitions.” – Richard Muller
“The sense of several kinds or levels of error manifests itself in Stapfer’s massive Institutiones… Stapfer’s system, as its subtitle indicates, adopts a scientific arrangement by moving from those adversaries who deny the principia of Christianity [God, his providence and Scripture] (the infidels and unbelievers called Atheists, Deists, Epicureans, Pagans and Naturalists), to those who accept either of the principia (Jews, Moslems, Socinians, and Latitudinarians or Indifferentists), to those who accept both principia but attack fundamental articles (Papists, Fanatics, Pelagians, Remonstrants [Arminians], and Anabaptists), to those, finally, who agree on fundamentals but who differ on nonfundamental articles (the Greek Orthodox and the Lutherans)… the latter two groups… are not viewed as heretics but as schismatics from the Reformed faith.
For Stapfer, the Greeks and the Lutherans represent the problem of errors around and beyond fundamentals; neither is to be classed as a heresy. The Greeks deny the doctrine of the procession of the Spirit from the Son as well as the Father, but they do not deny the doctrine of the Trinity. Stapfer here recognizes the historical problem of the insertion of the filioque [clause] into the [Nicene] creed, but relies on biblical warrants to justify the doctrine [ch. 19, sections 38-45]… Stapfer sees… a danger of weakening the doctrine of the Trinity…” – Muller, PRRD (2003) 1.423-4