Filioque

.]]
 ya Andrei Rublev inayodokeza Utatu Mtakatifu.]]
**Filioque** ni neno la Kilatini lenye maana ya "na (kwa) Mwana".

Linapatikana katika Kanuni ya Imani inayotumiwa na Wakatoliki hasa katika ibada ya siku ya Jumapili mwishoni mwa liturujia ya Neno kama itikio la kukubali Neno la Mungu lililotangazwa.

Neno hilo liko mwanzoni mwa sehemu ya tatu ya Nasadiki, ambayo inakiri imani kwa Roho Mtakatifu:

"Nasadiki kwa Roho Mtakatifu, Bwana mleta uzima:
atokaye kwa Baba **na Mwana**.
Anayeabudiwa na kutukuzwa, pamoja na Baba na Mwana:
aliyenena kwa vinywa vya manabii."

Neno hilo ni maarufu kutokana na suala la teolojia lililojitokeza baada ya baadhi ya makanisa ya Kilatini kuliongeza (mwishoni mwa karne ya 6) katika Kanuni ya Imani ya Nisea-Konstantinopoli iliyoanza kutumika katikati ya Misa. 

Bila makubaliano ya kimataifa, neno hilo liliingizwa katika hiyo fomula rasmi ambayo ilipitishwa na Mtaguso wa kwanza wa Nisea (325) ikakamilishwa na Mtaguso wa kwanza wa Konstantinopoli (381) ili kubainisha imani sahihi ya Kanisa Katoliki dhidi ya uzushi, hasa wa Ario na wafuasi wake. 

Ndiyo sababu neno Filioque lilipingwa na Makanisa ya Kiorthodoksi kama upotoshaji wa imani juu ya mahusiano kati ya nafsi tatu za Mungu.

Suala hilo lilichangia sana farakano la miaka 1000 hivi kati ya Ukristo wa Mashariki na Ukristo wa Magharibi kwa sababu lilihusu kiini chenyewe cha imani, yaani fumbo la Utatu Mtakatifu.

Baada ya ekumeni kustawi katika karne ya 20, idara husika ya Kanisa Katoliki huko Vatikano iliweka wazi mwaka 1995 kwamba, kama maneno ya Kigiriki *καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ* ("na kwa Mwana") yangeongezwa kwa *ἐκπορεύομαι* yangekuwa ya kizushi kweli lakini neno *Filioque* si la kizushi likiongezwa kwa neno la Kilatini *procedit* kwa kuwa hilo si sawa na *ἐκπόρευμαι* 

Ni kwamba neno la Kigiriki *ἐκπόρευμαι* lina maana ya *kuvuviwa*, nalo linaeleza namna gani Roho Mtakatifu anatokana na Baba, tofauti na ile ya Mwana ambayo ni ya *kuzaliwa*. Kumbe neno la Kilatini *procedit* lina maana ya *kufuata, kuandamana na*, nalo linaeleza kwamba Roho Mtakatifu si nafsi ya kwanza; basi Wakristo waliotumia lugha hiyo waliona afadhali kuweka wazi kwamba si nafsi ya pili pia, bali ya tatu, baada ya Baba *na Mwana*. 

Itikio la Waorthodoksi kwa maelezo hayo linaweza kutia tumaini la uelewano kwa siku zijazo, huku majadiliano yakiendelea.Kamati ya pamoja ilitamka mwaka 2003 kwamba suala hilo halitoshi tena kudai farakano lidumu.

Kwa kuwa maneno yaliingizwa bila makubaliano na hayafai kuongezwa katika Kigiriki, Papa Yohane Paulo II na Papa Benedikto XVI walitumia kanuni ya imani ya Nisea-Kostantinopoli bila nyongeza walipoungana na Patriarki Dimitri I na Patriarki Bartholomayo I katika kukiri imani hadharani pamoja.

## Tanbihi 
## Marejeo
*"Filioque", article in the **Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church** Oxford University Press, 2005, p.&nbsp;614.
*David Bradshaw.  **Aristotle East and West: Metaphysics and the Division of Christendom**. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp.&nbsp;214–220.
*Laurent Cleenewerck.  **His Broken Body: Understanding and healing the schism between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches**. Washington, DC: Euclid University Press, 2008, pp.&nbsp;321–347.
*Joseph P. Farrell.  **God, History, & Dialectic: The Theological Foundations of the Two Europes and Their Cultural Consequences**. Bound edition 1997. Electronic edition 2008.
*Joseph P. Farrell translator The Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit by St Photius Publisher: Holy Cross Orthodox Press Language: English ISBN 978-0-916586-88-1
*John St. H. Gibaut, "The *Cursus Honorum* and the Western Case Against Photius", **Logos** 37 (1996), 35–73.
*Elizabeth Teresa Groppe.  '''Yves Congar's Theology of the Holy Spirit'''. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. See esp. pp.&nbsp;75–79, for a summary of Congar's work on the *Filioque*. Congar is widely considered the most important Roman Catholic ecclesiologist of the twentieth century. He was influential in the composition of several Vatican II documents. Most important of all, he was instrumental in the association in the West of pneumatology and ecclesiology, a new development.
*David Guretzki.**Karl Barth on the Filioque .** Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2009. ISBN 978-0-7546-6704-9. A close examination of Karl Barth's defense of the filioque and why his position is closer to an Eastern perspective than has typically been assumed.
*Richard Haugh.  **Photius and the Carolingians: The Trinitarian Controversy**. Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Company, 1975.
*Joseph Jungmann, S.J.  **Pastoral Liturgy**. London: Challoner, 1962. See "Christ our God", pp.&nbsp;38–48.
*James Likoudis.  **Ending the Byzantine Greek Schism**. New Rochelle, New York: 1992. An apologetic response to polemical attacks. A useful book for its inclusion of important texts and documents; see especially citations and works by Thomas Aquinas, O.P., Demetrios Kydones, Nikos A. Nissiotis, and Alexis Stawrowsky. The select bibliography is excellent. The author demonstrates that the *Filioque* dispute is only understood as part of a dispute over papal primacy and cannot be dealt with apart from ecclesiology.
*Bruce D. Marshall, "'**Ex Occidente Lux?**' Aquinas and Eastern Orthodox Theology", **Modern Theology** 20:1 (January 2004), 23–50. Reconsideration of the views of Aquinas, especially on deification and grace, as well as his Orthodox critics. The author suggests that Aquinas may have a more accurate perspective than his critics, on the systematic questions of theology that relate to the *Filioque* dispute.
*John Meyendorff. **Byzantine Theology**. New York: Fordham University Press, 1979, pp.&nbsp;91–94.
*Aristeides Papadakis.  **Crisis in Byzantium: The Filioque Controversy in the Patriarchate of Gregory II of Cyprus (1283–1289)**. New York: Fordham University Press, 1983.
*Aristeides Papadakis. **The Christian East and the Rise of the Papacy**. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1994, pp.&nbsp;232–238 and 379–408.
*Duncan Reid.  **Energies of the Spirit: Trinitarian Models in Eastern Orthodox and Western Theology**. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1997.
*A. Edward Siecienski.  '''The Use of Maximus the Confessor's Writing on the Filioque at the Council of Ferrara-Florence (1438–1439)**. Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Dissertation Services, 2005.
*A. Edward Siecienski. **The Filioque. History of a Doctrinal Controversy**. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
*Malon H. Smith, III.  **And Taking Bread: Cerularius and the Azyme Controversy of 1054**. Paris: Beauschesne, 1978. This work is still valuable for understanding cultural and theological estrangement of East and West by the turn of the millennium. Now, it is evident that neither side understood the other; both Greek and Latin antagonists assumed their own practices were normative and authentic.
*Timothy Kallistos Ware.  **The Orthodox Church**. New edition. London: Penguin, 1993, pp.&nbsp;52–61.
*Timothy [Kallistos] Ware. **The Orthodox Way**. Revised edition. Crestwood, New York: 1995, pp.&nbsp;89–104.
*[World Council of Churches] /Conseil Oecuménique des Eglises.  **La théologie du Saint-Esprit dans le dialogue œcuménique** Document # 103 [Faith and Order]/Foi et Constitution. Paris: Centurion, 1981.
*Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, **The Greek and Latin Traditions Regarding the Procession of the Holy Spirit** 
*Sergius Bulgakov. **The Comforter'''. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (June 2004) ISBN 978-0-8028-2112-6

## Viungo vya nje
* full-length article at OrthodoxAnswers.org 
* 
* Joint North American Orthodox-Catholic Statement 

Jamii:Roho Mtakatifu
Jamii:Utatu Mtakatifu