Holy Resurrection
YouTube
St. Maximus the Greek Refutes the Filioque and Latin Innovations
18:16
What the video says
St. Maximus the Greek responds to Nicholas the Latin by examining key doctrinal disagreements: the Filioque, Saturday fasting, mandatory clerical celibacy, and unleavened bread. He argues these Latin innovations contradict apostolic and patristic tradition, citing canons and the Holy Fathers.
The treatise begins with a recitation of the Nicene Creed without the Filioque, affirming it as the Orthodox faith of the ancient forefathers. St. Maximus then refutes the Latin justification for the Filioque, particularly their appeal to Christ's breathing on the disciples, demonstrating from Scripture and St. John Chrysostom that this was a partial gift preparing for Pentecost, not evidence of eternal procession from the Son.
He further argues that the Son's possession of the Spirit in essence does not imply causation of hypostatic procession, a property belonging to the Father alone, and appeals to the consensus of the first seven ecumenical councils and early popes who upheld them.
Key moments
- St. Maximus the Greek examines principal disagreements between Orthodox and Latin doctrine: Filioque, Saturday fasting, priestly celibacy, unleavened bread, arguing they contradict ancient tradition.
- Specific arguments: Filioque lacks patristic foundation; Saturday fasting violates Apostolic Canons; mandatory celibacy contradicts Apostles and Sixth Ecumenical Council; unleavened bread derives from Jewish practice and is condemned by canons.
- St. Maximus writes in response to a request about when/how Latins separated, their use of unleavened bread, and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
- He frames the discourse as a spiritual struggle for truth, quoting Psalm 4:3 against hard-heartedness and love of falsehood.
- He recites the Nicene Creed (without Filioque) as the apostolic, patristic, Orthodox faith of the ancient forefathers.
- He refutes the Latin claim that the Filioque was added from foresight, addressing their two proofs based on Christ's bestowals of the Spirit before Pentecost.
- He demonstrates from Scripture and St. John Chrysostom that Christ's breathing on the disciples gave partial gifts (authority to forgive sins, power over demons) as preparation for the full outpouring at Pentecost, not evidence of eternal hypostatic procession from the Son.
- He argues the Son possesses the Spirit in essence and natural communion, not as cause of procession; this property belongs to the Father alone, and the early popes and ecumenical councils upheld this teaching, anathematizing any alteration of the fathers' dogmas.
This post presents the first part of St. Maximus the Greek's treatise "Response to Nicholas the Latin," a detailed polemic against several Latin doctrinal and liturgical innovations. Written in response to inquiries about the Latin separation from Orthodoxy, the work addresses four principal points of contention: the Filioque clause, Saturday fasting, mandatory clerical celibacy, and the use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist.
St. Maximus begins by reciting the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed without the Filioque, affirming it as the apostolic faith of the ancient fathers. He then systematically dismantles the Latin justification for the Filioque, particularly their appeal to Christ's breathing on the disciples in John 20:22. Drawing on Scripture and the exegesis of St. John Chrysostom, he demonstrates that this act conferred a partial, preparatory gift of the Spirit — authority to forgive sins and power over demons — ahead of the full outpouring at Pentecost, and does not constitute evidence of the Spirit's eternal hypostatic procession from the Son.
St. Maximus argues that while the Son possesses the Spirit by essence and natural communion, the property of causing the Spirit's procession belongs to the Father alone. He appeals to the consensus of the first seven ecumenical councils and early Roman popes who upheld this teaching and anathematized any alteration of the patristic dogmas.
The treatise frames the dispute as a spiritual struggle for truth, warning against hard-heartedness and love of falsehood.
Main points
- St. Maximus the Greek responds to Nicholas the Latin, addressing the Filioque, Saturday fasting, mandatory clerical celibacy, and unleavened bread as innovations contrary to apostolic and patristic tradition.
- He affirms the Nicene Creed without the Filioque as the Orthodox faith of the ancient forefathers.
- He refutes the Latin use of John 20:22 (Christ breathing on the disciples) as proof of the Filioque, showing via St. John Chrysostom that this was a partial, preparatory gift for Pentecost, not eternal procession.
- He argues the Son possesses the Spirit by essence, not as cause of hypostatic procession; causation belongs to the Father alone, per the consensus of the first seven ecumenical councils and early popes.
- The work presents the doctrinal dispute as a spiritual struggle for truth, citing canons and the Holy Fathers against Latin deviations.