The following post is a reading reflection
on a journal article entitled “Why
All the Fuss about Filioque? Karl Barth and Jurgen Moltmann on the Procession
of the Spirit” by Warren McWilliams.
In the previous article that I read for this assignment the
evangelical theologian Clark H. Pinnock voiced his opposition to the filioque. Pinnock believes that the
addition of this phrase by the Western church was an abuse of power.[1] He believes that the creed was better before it,
and that removing it would be “healing to the divided church.”[2] Likewise, in this current article Reformed
theologian Jurgen Moltmann also opposes the filioque
and believes that returning to the original form of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan
creed would help end the schism between the East and the West.[3] McWilliams goes on to show in this article that
the World Council of Churches also takes this point of view and has recommended
that all churches recognize the Nicene creed without the filioque as normative.[4]
There is something that seems a little odd to me in this sentiment. If the Roman
Catholic Church were to retract the filioque
then I could see it as plausible that a significant step towards repairing
relations with the East could possibly be made, since those two communions have
a fair bit in common; however, I cannot see it doing the same for any Protestant communion. It is worth nothing that the Eastern Orthodox Synod of
Jerusalem (1672) condemned Protestants as heretical on many points.[5] The filioque is probably one of the lesser
issues between Protestants (of those who follow the creed) and Eastern Orthodox.
I also wonder if it is not at least a little ironic that
Christians who do not believe in baptismal regeneration are taking strong issue
with the filioque, but not with, “I
acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins.”[6] There is also the question
of who speaks for Protestantism.
As is probably evident I have become a little cynical when it comes to
the achievement of Christian unity, but I am certainly not against working towards
unity with other Christian denominations. I am happy to see such efforts and
fruit in my own denomination.[7] Christians should seek
unity and agreement wherever we can, but I am skeptical that rolling back the
clock on the filioque would have the
results for which Pinnock, Moltmann, and others are hopeful.
______________________________
[1] Clark H. Pinnock, Flame of Love: A Theology of the Holy Spirit (Downers Grove:
IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 197.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Warren McWilliams, “Why all the Fuss about the Filioque? Karl Barth and Jurgen Moltmann on the Procession of the
Spirit,” Journal of the National
Association of Baptist Professors of Religion (date and issue unknown): 173.
[4] Ibid., 180.
[5] The article at the following link shows instances of the historic opinion of
Eastern Orthodoxy against both Roman Catholicism and Protestantism: “Are
Protestantism and Roman Catholicism Heretical?,” Orthodox Christian Information Center, accessed 25 June 2016, http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/prot_rc_heresy.aspx.
[6] Responses #6 and #7 of the discussion at the following link give a nice explanation of the Reformed view of this phrase: http://www.puritanboard.com/showthread.php/39146-The-Nicene-Creed-quot-One-Baptism-quot
[7] See the following links for some nice examples of ecumenical work by confessional Lutherans with Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and other Lutherans:
[7] See the following links for some nice examples of ecumenical work by confessional Lutherans with Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and other Lutherans:
No comments:
Post a Comment