The Council of Nicaea in 325 as depicted in a fresco in Salone Sistino at the Vatican. / Credit: Giovanni Guerra (1544-1618), Cesare Nebbia (1534-1614) e aiuti, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Vatican City, Apr 3, 2025 / 13:00 pm (CNA).
The Vatican on Thursday released a historical document to recognize the opening of the Council of Nicaea, convened during the pontificate of Pope Sylvester I in 325.
The International Theological Commission (ITC) published the in-depth document “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior: The 1,700th Anniversary of the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea” to highlight the significance of the Church’s first ecumenical council, which defended the divinity of Jesus Christ as a profession of faith amid the spread of the Arian heresy.
“This anniversary occurs within the jubilee year, centered on the theme ‘Christ Our Hope,’ and it coincides with a shared celebration of Easter for Christians in both the East and the West,” the ITC press release stated.
The commission said on Thursday that the Nicene Creed “stands at the heart of the Church’s faith.”
“It is a source of living water to draw upon even today to enter into Jesus’ gaze and, in him, into the gaze that God, Abba, has toward all his children and toward the whole of creation.”
Emphasizing that the document is not just a historical record or a “text of academic theology,” the Vatican’s theological commission said the publication responds to Pope Francis’ desire to promote fraternity among Christians and inspire greater participation of Catholic faithful within local Churches.
“It was in Nicaea that the Church’s unity and mission were first expressed emblematically at a universal level (and from here, it draws its designation as an ecumenical council) through the synodal form of that ‘walking together’ which is proper to the Church,” the ITC shared on Thursday.
“Nicaea stands as an authoritative reference point and inspiration in the synodal process in which the Catholic Church is involved today, in its commitment to live a conversion and reform marked by the principle of relationship and reciprocity for mission,” the press release stated.
Answering Pope Francis’ call to proclaim faith in Jesus Christ in a world scourged by the “tragedy of war along with countless anxieties and uncertainties,” the theological commission said the Nicaea Council publication can be used as a dynamic resource for Christian evangelization.
“The document highlights the relevance of these resources for a responsible and shared way of addressing the epochal change that is having a global impact on culture and society,” the press release stated. “The faith professed at Nicaea opens our eyes to the explosive and enduring newness of the coming of the Son of God among us.”
A special “study day” on the document will take place on May 20 at the Pontifical Urbaniana University in Rome.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
St. Peter’s Basilica / Simone Savoldi / Unsplash (CC0)
Rome Newsroom, Oct 2, 2022 / 03:00 am (CNA).
The world’s newest bishops gathered in Rome last month to learn more about what it means to be a Catholic bishop.
While the week’s presentations spanned a range of topics, three U.S. bishops who attended told CNA that synodality emerged as a key theme.
The Vatican’s annual formation course, sometimes known by the nickname “baby bishop school,” was canceled for two years because of the COVID-19 pandemic — making the 2022 edition the largest yet, with approximately 330 participating bishops across two sessions.
“People kind of picture baby bishop school as nuts and bolts, like ‘how to be a bishop.’ It’s not that at all,” Bishop Erik Pohlmeier of the Diocese of St. Augustine, Florida, told CNA at the end of the course.
“It’s kind of whatever the Church is talking about at that time, bringing that to the bishops that are coming on board,” he said. “The synodal process has been … a hallmark of conversation for the last couple of years, so now as we’re new bishops … the reflections revolved around that.”
The seminar’s first session was primarily attended by bishops consecrated in 2019 and 2020, while the second session was mostly those who joined the ranks in 2021 and the first part of 2022.
Thirty-nine U.S. bishops and auxiliary bishops attended, divided between the two weeks.
Pohlmeier was the freshest U.S. bishop to join. He was ordained a bishop on July 22 — just two days after his 51st birthday and seven weeks before arriving in Rome for the Sept. 12–19 course.
Speaking to CNA in Rome on Sept. 19, Pohlmeier said that as a new bishop, there are many things you do not know, but that’s where one’s fellow bishops come in.
“Every bishop knows other bishops,” he explained, like the bishop of the diocese where they served as a priest. “And they’re always, I mean to a person, helpful.”
Bishop Gregory Gordon, the first-ever auxiliary bishop of Las Vegas, Nevada, told CNA on Sept. 19 that the U.S. bishops’ conference also organizes meetings between bishops of the same ordination year, or “class,” as a way to build fraternity and create a network of support.
Bishop Gregory Gordon greets Pope Francis at the end of the course Sept. 19, 2022. Vatican Media
While the formal theme of this year’s seminar was how to announce the Gospel in changing times, Pohlmeier, Gordon, and Bishop Louis Tylka of Peoria, Illinois, said the unofficial topic of the week was synodality.
What they talked about
“We’re in the midst of the synod,” Tylka, who attended the seminar Sept. 1–8, told CNA by phone from his diocese. So the course, he added, focused on questions such as: “What does it mean to be a synodal Church? What is the ministry of the bishop in relation to that?”
Care for the planet and one’s neighbor, themes important to Pope Francis’ pontificate, were also a major part of the seminar, Tylka said.
The week’s presentations also covered child protection and the sexual abuse crisis.
“That’s one of those things that I think we will take home, saying we will be very, very careful not to neglect,” Gordon said.
Some talks, Pohlmeier noted, were directly about synodality and what it means. At the same time, those of a more practical nature, such as canon law for bishops, “would always include some comment on the synodal approach.”
“You’re going to get different articulations of what that means depending on who you talk to, but in general, my understanding is that it is more of a listening posture,” the St. Augustine bishop said.
A bishop takes a photo of Pope Francis during their encounter on Sept. 19, 2022. Vatican Media
Bishop Gordon said Pope Francis himself modeled this listening attitude in their meeting with him on the final day of formation.
In the nearly two-hour meeting, he said most of the time was spent with the pope answering the bishops’ questions. “So you finished the course, [the pope] said. You’ve heard a lot already… Now I want to hear from you.”
This was Gordon’s big takeaway from the week: “It has to go back to the Holy Father’s words to us as he was answering our own questions, you know, asking us to exercise that episcopal closeness.”
The week also included time for communal prayer, Mass, adoration, and confession.
Bishop Tylka of Peoria said his personal opinion is that “a big part of synodality is the willingness and openness to create space for people to share their stories, to share their own encounters with Christ, to share their own experiences of how life is going.”
“So I think the role of the bishop clearly is to model that openness and that willingness to engage in dialogue,” he said.
This was my small group for discussion on Synodality! What an amazing group of bishops from around the world. Such a rich discussion on the Church! pic.twitter.com/fIOPLXwnfo
But there is also a lighter side to being a new bishop, as Pohlmeier evidenced with an amusing scene from the end of the week.
“Here we are, brand new and so … we got instructions on what we’re supposed to wear to meet the pope,” Pohlmeier said.
He explained that bishops in the Latin Church have two main styles of a full-length garment called a cassock. The new bishops were told to meet the pope. They should wear a black cassock with red trim, a purple fascia, and a purple zucchetto. (There is also a purple cassock with red trim for special liturgical events.)
Pohlmeier said it was funny to watch the bishops get ready for Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica and, afterward, the meeting with Pope Francis. Many of them were helping each other figure out where each piece of the complicated attire went — including the tall headpiece, called a mitre, which bishops wear to denote their office.
Today I joined the celebration in St Peter’s for the beatification of Blessed John Paul I. The rain did not dampen the joy of lifting up the ‘Smiling Pope.’ Humbled to be with the universal Church for such a celebration. pic.twitter.com/08AtzMUlMd
“Guys are literally opening up bags that haven’t been opened with miters from right there, from Euroclero,” Pohlmeier said, pointing over his shoulder in the direction of a clerical supply store next to St. Peter’s Square.
“You could see everybody that bought one this morning because they all matched,” he chuckled. “There were several people that were literally opening it up and pulling it out of the package and trying to get it on straight, and get things attached right, and not sure what clips go where and what’s right.”
“Those kinds of things are funny,” Pohlmeier said, “but nobody just tells you, ‘OK, buy this stuff, here’s what you need.’”
St. Peter’s Dome. / Credit: dade72 via Shutterstock
Vatican City, Jan 4, 2024 / 10:10 am (CNA).
The Vatican’s doctrine office issued a response on Thursday to “clarify the reception of Fiducia Supplicans” amid widespread international backlash to the Vatican’s recent declaration on same-sex blessings.
Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), published a five-page press release on Jan. 4 that refers to Fiducia Supplicans as “perennial doctrine” and underlines that pastoral blessings of couples in irregular situations should not be “an endorsement of the life led by those who request them.”
Fernández said that the responses he has received from bishops’ conferences around the world to the declaration highlight “the need for a more extended period of pastoral reflection” and that what is expressed in these bishops’ statements “cannot be interpreted as doctrinal opposition because the document is clear and definitive about marriage and sexuality.”
“There is no room to distance ourselves doctrinally from this declaration or to consider it heretical, contrary to the Tradition of the Church, or blasphemous,” the cardinal said, pointing to a few paragraphs in the text of the original declaration that affirms the Church’s doctrine on marriage. You can read the full text of the press release at the bottom of this story.
Some bishops have welcomed the declaration, some are approaching it with caution, and others are refusing to implement it.
In the press release, published in six languages, Fernández provides one “concrete example” of what the spontaneous “pastoral blessings” might look like in practice, explaining that they should only last “about 10 or 15 seconds.”
“Since some have raised the question of what these blessings might look like, let us look at a concrete example: Let us imagine that among a large number making a pilgrimage a couple of divorced people, now in a new union, say to the priest: ‘Please give us a blessing, we cannot find work, he is very ill, we do not have a home and life is becoming very difficult: May God help us!” he said.
“In this case, the priest can recite a simple prayer like this: ‘Lord, look at these children of yours, grant them health, work, peace, and mutual help. Free them from everything that contradicts your Gospel and allow them to live according to your will. Amen.’ Then it concludes with the sign of the cross on each of the two persons.”
Fernández said that priests giving these types of blessings should “not impose conditions” or “enquire about the intimate lives of these people.”
He added that “this non-ritualized form of blessing, with the simplicity and brevity of its form, does not intend to justify anything that is not morally acceptable.”
“It remains clear, therefore, that the blessing must not take place in a prominent place within a sacred building, or in front of an altar, as this also would create confusion,” Fernández added in the clarification.
The press release did not mention anything about cases in which priests have already violated the terms stipulated in the Fiducia Supplicans declaration, which requires that blessings be spontaneous and cannot be a “blessing similar to a liturgical rite that can create confusion.”
The cardinal emphasized that the “real novelty of this declaration” is “the invitation to distinguish between two different forms of blessings: ‘liturgical or ritualized’ and ‘spontaneous or pastoral.’”
“The central theme … is to have a broader understanding of blessings and of the proposal that these pastoral blessings, which do not require the same conditions as blessings in a liturgical or ritual context, flourish. Consequently, leaving polemics aside, the text requires an effort to reflect serenely, with the heart of shepherds, free from all ideology,” he said.
The DDF’s press release says that the same-sex blessing declaration may require more time for its application “depending on local contexts and the discernment of each diocesan bishop with his diocese.”
“In some places, no difficulties arise for their immediate application, while in others it will be necessary not to introduce them, while taking the time necessary for reading and interpretation,” Fernández said.
The cardinal added that it is fine that some bishops have, for example, established that priests perform these blessings only in private, so long as this is “expressed with due respect for a text signed and approved by the Supreme Pontiff himself, while attempting in some way to accommodate the reflection contained in it.”
The clarification also notes that in countries where there are “laws that condemn the mere act of declaring oneself as a homosexual with prison and in some cases with torture and even death, it goes without saying that a blessing would be imprudent.”
The press release was signed by Fernández and Monsignor Armando Matteo, the secretary for the doctrinal section of the dicastery.
“We will all have to become accustomed to accepting the fact that, if a priest gives this type of simple blessings, he is not a heretic, he is not ratifying anything nor is he denying Catholic doctrine,” it said.
“We can help God’s people to discover that these kinds of blessings are just simple pastoral channels that help people give expression to their faith, even if they are great sinners. For this reason, in giving a blessing to two people who come together to ask for it spontaneously, we are not consecrating them nor are we congratulating them nor indeed are we approving that type of union.”
Vatican City, Jan 17, 2021 / 06:00 am (CNA).- Pope Francis said Sunday that great joy is found when one offers his life in service to God’s call.
“There are different ways of carrying out the plan that God has for each of us, which is always a plan of love. … And the greatest joy for every believer is to respond to this call, to offer all of himself at the service of God and his brothers and sisters,” Pope Francis said in his Angelus address Jan. 17.
Speaking from the library of the Vatican’s Apostolic Palace, the pope said that each time that God calls someone it is “an initiative of His love.”
“God calls to life, He calls to faith, and He calls to a particular state in life,” he said.
“God’s first call is to life, through which He makes us persons; it is an individual call because God does not make things in sets. Then God calls us to faith and to become part of His family as children of God. Lastly, God calls us to a particular state in life: to give of ourselves on the path of marriage, or that of the priesthood or the consecrated life.”
In the live video broadcast, the pope offered a reflection on Jesus’ first encounter and call of his disciples Andrew and Simon Peter in the Gospel of John.
“The two follow Him and remained that afternoon with Him. It is not difficult to imagine them seated asking Him questions and above all listening to Him, feeling their hearts inflamed ever more while the Master spoke,” he said.
“They sense the beauty of the words that respond to their greatest hope. And all of a sudden they discover that, even though it is evening, … that light that only God can give burst within them. … When they leave and return to their brothers, that joy, this light overflows from their hearts like a raging river. One of the two, Andrew, tells his brother Simon – whom Jesus will call Peter when he meets him: ‘We have found the Messiah.’”
Pope Francis said that God’s call is always love and should always be responded to only with love.
“Brothers and sisters, faced with the call of the Lord, which can reach us in a thousand ways even through people, happy or sad events, sometimes our attitude can be one of rejection: ‘No, I’m afraid” — rejection because it seems contrary to our aspirations; and also fear, because we consider it too demanding and uncomfortable: ‘Oh I won’t make it, better not, better a more peaceful life… God there, I am here.’ But God’s call is love, we must try to find the love that is behind every call, and respond to it only with love,” he said.
“At the beginning there is an encounter, or rather, there is ‘the encounter’ with Jesus who speaks to us of His Father, He makes His love known to us. And then the desire to communicate it to the people we love will spontaneously arise within us too: ‘I met Love.’ ‘I met the Messiah.’ ‘I met God.’ ‘I met Jesus.’ ‘I found the meaning of life.’ In a word: ‘I found God.’”
The pope invited each person to remember the moment in his life in which “God made himself present more strongly, with a call.”
At the end of his Angelus address, Pope Francis expressed his closeness to the people of the island of Sulawesi, Indonesia, which was hit by a strong earthquake on Jan. 15.
“I pray for the dead, for the wounded and for those who have lost their homes and jobs. May the Lord comfort them and support the efforts of those who are committed to helping,” the pope said.
Pope Francis also recalled that the “Week of Prayer for Christian Unity” will begin Jan. 18. This year’s theme is “Remain in my love and you will bear much fruit.”
“In these days, let us pray together so that Jesus’ desire may be fulfilled: ‘That all may be one.’ Unity is always superior to conflict,” he said.
We read: “It was in Nicaea that the Church’s unity and mission were first expressed emblematically at a universal level (and from here, it draws its designation as an ecumenical council) through the synodal form of that ‘walking together’ which is proper to the Church…”
“Walking together” as successors of the Apostles, so also and therefore excluding (!) Arianism.
The faith expressed at Nicaea is the opening revelation to the world depicting Christ as God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God. A truth that remains indelible and resistible to modification.
“The faith expressed at Nicaea is the opening revelation to the world depicting Christ as God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God. A truth that remains indelible and resistible to modification.”
As does the Filioque, which in affirming The Unity of The Holy Ghost, In The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Complementary Eternal Love, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, affirms the fact that there is only One Divine Son Of God, thus The Spirit Of Perfect Love Between The Father And His Only Son, Must Proceed From Both The Father And The Son, for both The Father And The Son, Exist, In Essence,
As A Communion Of Eternal Divine Love.
Well done for this magnificent and well-worded reminder!
But did you notice that the document from the International Theological Commission only mentioned the Filioque once, in order to repudiate it very bluntly?
Everything suggests that it should be sacrificed on the altar of ecumenism, and this seems to me to be an offense to the good Catholic people, an incredible regression, and I fear even worse, since it is written in paragraph 12 “The Father also gives everything to the Spirit,” which is a radical novelty in Catholic tradition, and I wonder if this might not be heresy because of the confusion it creates between the two persons, the Son and the Spirit, since they are supposed to be distinguished by their mode of procession from the Father.
What do you think?
Possibly more troublesome might be the initial wording about “synods” [of bishops!], but this term (appearing 51 times), too, as it is used, and as it is explicitly clarified especially in n. 113 which recalls “Apostolic Tradition” (in contrast with today’s unmentioned and mixed town hall meetings).
Also, about the filioque inserted into the Creed, here’s a history:
The filioque (the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father “and from the Son”) was present in the ancient texts and put forth by the Synod of Aachen in 809 (I think I’ve read, by Charlemagne in response to rekindled Arianism in Iberia), and introduced universally in Rome only in 1014. It was adopted by the Greeks and the Latins at the Councils of Lyon (II, 1274), and Florence (1438-1445) where it was initially agreed that the Greek “through the Son” did not differ essentially from “from the Son.” But the Greeks back home quickly disagreed—likely inflamed in part by the long memory of the earlier destruction of Constantinople by the Latin Crusaders in 1204? (Following the loss of a weakened Constantinople to Islam in 1453, the Eastern Church has disintegrated into local national Churches.)
SUMMARY: Councils [and real synods] are what the Church DOES, not what the Church IS (Benedict XVI). How always to better do communio/ecclesial assemblies remains a distinctly different work in progress.
I note that your casual rebuttal of my assertion sidesteps three major problems:
1) The Filioque is indeed set aside by the ITC text through the quotation of a very explicit ecumenical text (in note 8), whereas this document was supposed to contribute to putting Christ, and therefore the Son of God, back at the center.
2) Even though the Filioque is set aside, the statement “The Father also gives everything to the Spirit” (in n.12) is an assertion that implicitly refutes it, which is why it makes absolutely no sense in the Catholic tradition. You will find no trace of it anywhere except in Orthodox “literature.”
3) This serious doctrinal difficulty has not been noted anywhere in the Catholic media. ND’s commentary is almost unique in linking both the ITC text and the Filioque.
I think we are faced with a serious difficulty here, and I look forward to reading your response, as I have no doubt that you will recognize the surprising nature of this observation, whatever conclusions may be drawn from it.
PS: Charlemagne was indeed responsible for the spread of the Filioque in the Christian West, but precisely because he categorically rejected the “per Filium.”
Fn. 8: “Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, ‘The Greek and the Latin Traditions Regarding the Procession of the Holy Spirit’: «The Catholic Church acknowledges the conciliar, ecumenical, normative and irrevocable value, as expression of the one common faith of the Church and of all Christians, of the Symbol professed in Greek at Constantinople in 381 by the Second Ecumenical Council. No profession of faith peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition can contradict this expression of the faith taught and professed by the undivided Church» (Eng. trans. from: L’Osservatore Romano, 13 September 1995).”
I do see your point, but it is still not clear why the ITC language about the added Filioque risks contradiction—rather than remaining a non-contradictory clarification or development.
At a general audience on Nov. 7,1990, Pope John Paul II was still able to conclude with the optimism that “the formula ‘Filioque’ does not constitute an essential obstacle to the dialogue itself and to its development, which all hope for and pray for in the Holy Spirit” (“The Filioque Debate,” in The Pope Speaks, Our Sunday Visitor, 36:2, March/April 1971). In the article—about development—he cites Gospel passages (prior to ‘Orthodox literature’) and the long history of the debate, and refers to both sides (the East: Ephraim, Athanasius, Basil, Epiphanius, Cyril of Alexandria, Maximus, John Damascene; The West: Tertullian, Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, Aquinas).
Recalling the high point, short-lived, when a common definition was adopted by both the Greeks and the Latins in 1439: “In the name of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, with the approval of this sacred and universal Council of Florence, we establish that this truth of faith must be believed and accepted by all Christians: and thus all must profess that the Holy Spirit IS ETERNALLY OF THE FATHER AND THE SON [caps added], that He has His existence and His subsistent being FROM THE FATHER AND THE SON together, and that He proceeds from the one and from a single principle and from a single spiration [….] We establish…that the explanation given of the expression ‘Filioque’ has been added to the Creed licitly and with reason, in order to render the through clearer and because of the incumbent needs of those times.”
My non-professional (evasive?) and overarching thought is, that within earthbound history, the culture of the West seems to need more precise and explicit clarifications, while the culture of the East remains more levitated and atmospheric. About the challenges of history in the West, the (schismatic) East remains apart from not only Florence but all of the other twenty-one ecumenical councils after the first seven.
After a thousand years, maybe there’s a place for partly cross-cultural (?) dialogue on the Filioque.
Let’s be clear: the Filioque is not “added,” it is set aside by the ITC document.
What is added is the idea, which is absolutely contradictory to the Filioque, that “the Father also gives everything to the Spirit.”
This is unprecedented in Catholic doctrine because it is incompatible with the way the Filioque has always been understood since Augustine.
Do you see the problem now?
1700th anniversary of the Ecumenical Council of
325-2025
Preliminary note
In the course of its tenth quinquennium, the International Theological Commission chose to carry out an in-depth study of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea and its dogmatic relevance today. The work was carried out by a special Sub-Commission, chaired by Fr. Philippe Vallin and composed of the following members: Mgr Antonio Luiz Catelan Ferreira, Mgr Etienne Vetö, I.C.N., Fr. Mario Ángel Flores Ramos, Fr Gaby Alfred Hachem, Fr. Karl-Heinz Menke, Prof. Marianne Schlosser, and Prof. Robin Darling Young.
General discussions on this subject took place both at the various meetings of the Sub-Commission and at the plenary sessions of the Commission itself, held in the years 2022-2024. This text was put to the vote and unanimously approved in forma specifica by the members of the International Theological Commission at the plenary session of 2024. The document was then submitted for approval to its President, His Eminence Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, who, after receiving the favourable opinion of the Holy Father, Pope Francis, authorised its publication on 16 December 2024. ‘
We read: “It was in Nicaea that the Church’s unity and mission were first expressed emblematically at a universal level (and from here, it draws its designation as an ecumenical council) through the synodal form of that ‘walking together’ which is proper to the Church…”
“Walking together” as successors of the Apostles, so also and therefore excluding (!) Arianism.
The faith expressed at Nicaea is the opening revelation to the world depicting Christ as God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God. A truth that remains indelible and resistible to modification.
“The faith expressed at Nicaea is the opening revelation to the world depicting Christ as God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God. A truth that remains indelible and resistible to modification.”
As does the Filioque, which in affirming The Unity of The Holy Ghost, In The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Complementary Eternal Love, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, affirms the fact that there is only One Divine Son Of God, thus The Spirit Of Perfect Love Between The Father And His Only Son, Must Proceed From Both The Father And The Son, for both The Father And The Son, Exist, In Essence,
As A Communion Of Eternal Divine Love.
Well done for this magnificent and well-worded reminder!
But did you notice that the document from the International Theological Commission only mentioned the Filioque once, in order to repudiate it very bluntly?
Everything suggests that it should be sacrificed on the altar of ecumenism, and this seems to me to be an offense to the good Catholic people, an incredible regression, and I fear even worse, since it is written in paragraph 12 “The Father also gives everything to the Spirit,” which is a radical novelty in Catholic tradition, and I wonder if this might not be heresy because of the confusion it creates between the two persons, the Son and the Spirit, since they are supposed to be distinguished by their mode of procession from the Father.
What do you think?
“…repudiate it bluntly”?
As you report, the term filioque does appear only once (n.4, in connection with accurately noted “misunderstandings”), but it is hardly repudiated. For the meaning but not the term, see n. 13 “[….] he is the Spirit of the Father and Spirit of the Son (Gal 4:6; Rom 8:9) [….]”. Here’s the link: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_doc_20250403_1700-nicea_en.html
Possibly more troublesome might be the initial wording about “synods” [of bishops!], but this term (appearing 51 times), too, as it is used, and as it is explicitly clarified especially in n. 113 which recalls “Apostolic Tradition” (in contrast with today’s unmentioned and mixed town hall meetings).
Also, about the filioque inserted into the Creed, here’s a history:
The filioque (the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father “and from the Son”) was present in the ancient texts and put forth by the Synod of Aachen in 809 (I think I’ve read, by Charlemagne in response to rekindled Arianism in Iberia), and introduced universally in Rome only in 1014. It was adopted by the Greeks and the Latins at the Councils of Lyon (II, 1274), and Florence (1438-1445) where it was initially agreed that the Greek “through the Son” did not differ essentially from “from the Son.” But the Greeks back home quickly disagreed—likely inflamed in part by the long memory of the earlier destruction of Constantinople by the Latin Crusaders in 1204? (Following the loss of a weakened Constantinople to Islam in 1453, the Eastern Church has disintegrated into local national Churches.)
SUMMARY: Councils [and real synods] are what the Church DOES, not what the Church IS (Benedict XVI). How always to better do communio/ecclesial assemblies remains a distinctly different work in progress.
I note that your casual rebuttal of my assertion sidesteps three major problems:
1) The Filioque is indeed set aside by the ITC text through the quotation of a very explicit ecumenical text (in note 8), whereas this document was supposed to contribute to putting Christ, and therefore the Son of God, back at the center.
2) Even though the Filioque is set aside, the statement “The Father also gives everything to the Spirit” (in n.12) is an assertion that implicitly refutes it, which is why it makes absolutely no sense in the Catholic tradition. You will find no trace of it anywhere except in Orthodox “literature.”
3) This serious doctrinal difficulty has not been noted anywhere in the Catholic media. ND’s commentary is almost unique in linking both the ITC text and the Filioque.
I think we are faced with a serious difficulty here, and I look forward to reading your response, as I have no doubt that you will recognize the surprising nature of this observation, whatever conclusions may be drawn from it.
PS: Charlemagne was indeed responsible for the spread of the Filioque in the Christian West, but precisely because he categorically rejected the “per Filium.”
Fn. 8: “Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, ‘The Greek and the Latin Traditions Regarding the Procession of the Holy Spirit’: «The Catholic Church acknowledges the conciliar, ecumenical, normative and irrevocable value, as expression of the one common faith of the Church and of all Christians, of the Symbol professed in Greek at Constantinople in 381 by the Second Ecumenical Council. No profession of faith peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition can contradict this expression of the faith taught and professed by the undivided Church» (Eng. trans. from: L’Osservatore Romano, 13 September 1995).”
I do see your point, but it is still not clear why the ITC language about the added Filioque risks contradiction—rather than remaining a non-contradictory clarification or development.
At a general audience on Nov. 7,1990, Pope John Paul II was still able to conclude with the optimism that “the formula ‘Filioque’ does not constitute an essential obstacle to the dialogue itself and to its development, which all hope for and pray for in the Holy Spirit” (“The Filioque Debate,” in The Pope Speaks, Our Sunday Visitor, 36:2, March/April 1971). In the article—about development—he cites Gospel passages (prior to ‘Orthodox literature’) and the long history of the debate, and refers to both sides (the East: Ephraim, Athanasius, Basil, Epiphanius, Cyril of Alexandria, Maximus, John Damascene; The West: Tertullian, Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, Aquinas).
Recalling the high point, short-lived, when a common definition was adopted by both the Greeks and the Latins in 1439: “In the name of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, with the approval of this sacred and universal Council of Florence, we establish that this truth of faith must be believed and accepted by all Christians: and thus all must profess that the Holy Spirit IS ETERNALLY OF THE FATHER AND THE SON [caps added], that He has His existence and His subsistent being FROM THE FATHER AND THE SON together, and that He proceeds from the one and from a single principle and from a single spiration [….] We establish…that the explanation given of the expression ‘Filioque’ has been added to the Creed licitly and with reason, in order to render the through clearer and because of the incumbent needs of those times.”
My non-professional (evasive?) and overarching thought is, that within earthbound history, the culture of the West seems to need more precise and explicit clarifications, while the culture of the East remains more levitated and atmospheric. About the challenges of history in the West, the (schismatic) East remains apart from not only Florence but all of the other twenty-one ecumenical councils after the first seven.
After a thousand years, maybe there’s a place for partly cross-cultural (?) dialogue on the Filioque.
Let’s be clear: the Filioque is not “added,” it is set aside by the ITC document.
What is added is the idea, which is absolutely contradictory to the Filioque, that “the Father also gives everything to the Spirit.”
This is unprecedented in Catholic doctrine because it is incompatible with the way the Filioque has always been understood since Augustine.
Do you see the problem now?
‘ INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION
Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour
1700th anniversary of the Ecumenical Council of
325-2025
Preliminary note
In the course of its tenth quinquennium, the International Theological Commission chose to carry out an in-depth study of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea and its dogmatic relevance today. The work was carried out by a special Sub-Commission, chaired by Fr. Philippe Vallin and composed of the following members: Mgr Antonio Luiz Catelan Ferreira, Mgr Etienne Vetö, I.C.N., Fr. Mario Ángel Flores Ramos, Fr Gaby Alfred Hachem, Fr. Karl-Heinz Menke, Prof. Marianne Schlosser, and Prof. Robin Darling Young.
General discussions on this subject took place both at the various meetings of the Sub-Commission and at the plenary sessions of the Commission itself, held in the years 2022-2024. This text was put to the vote and unanimously approved in forma specifica by the members of the International Theological Commission at the plenary session of 2024. The document was then submitted for approval to its President, His Eminence Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, who, after receiving the favourable opinion of the Holy Father, Pope Francis, authorised its publication on 16 December 2024. ‘
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_doc_20250403_1700-nicea_en.html