The distinguishing of the <span class="auto-link">[[Holy Spirit]]</span> from the Father and Son in the Godhead. Implied in the NT (e.g., John 15:26), it was asserted in the Niceno- Constantinopolitan Creed and first developed at length by the <span class="auto-link">[[Cappadocian Fathers]]</span>.* It signifies, as against the Macedonians, that the Spirit is not a “creature,” but that His being is eternally derived from the one fount of deity.

According to the doctrine of <em><span class="auto-link">[[Double Procession]]</span></em>, the Spirit proceeds from both Father and Son. In the Eastern Church, Didymus the Blind,* Epiphanius,* and Cyril of Alexandria* ascribed the origin of the Spirit to both Father and Son, without actually using the term “procession” of the Spirit. This was expressly denied by <span class="auto-link">[[Theodore of Mopsuestia]]</span>* and Theodoret.* The Western Church added the formula <em>Filioque</em> (Lat. = “and the Son”) to the clause in the Niceno- Constantinopolitan Creed, “the <span class="auto-link">[[Holy Ghost]]</span> which proceedeth from the Father.” This arbitrary interpolation was first introduced at the Third Council of Toledo* (589). Western Fathers who supported the doctrine include <span class="auto-link">[[Hilary of Poitiers]]</span>,* Jerome,* Ambrose,* and especially Augustine* in <em>De Trinitate</em>, but Pope Leo III* (795-816) refused to authorize the use of the clause. Controversy flared when Photius* of Constantinople asserted it was contrary to the teaching of the Fathers (c.866). The interpolation received official sanction in Rome by Benedict VIII (1017) and the East-West schism followed (1054). Mark of Ephesus repeated Photius's assertion at the <span class="auto-link">[[Council of Florence]]</span>* (1439), when there was agreement on a compromise statement, but it came to nothing, as have all subsequent negotiations.<br /><br />

Procession of The Spirit