“Why does the Holy Spirit proceed only from the Father? Because that is the formulation used in the only place it is mentioned in scripture?”
I suppose only God knows the answer to that one, Padre. Of course, the 2nd Ecumenical Council added the phrase about the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father (only) to the Nicene Creed. That in and of itself is enough for me and all other Orthodox so far as I know. The filioque clause was never approved by any council accepted in the East. The problem which the filioque raises is that it denigrates the monarchy of the Father. Is that heresy? Some Orthodox certainly thought and think so. And if it is, its embrace by the West could explain at least in part what has happened in the West since the Great Schism. Personally, I don’t think it is even approaching a primary cause. I’m with BXVI; the Greek version is normative, dogmatic and is the one which should be used in catechesis. The filioque is almost a Western example of theologumenon, a pious, non-dogmatic, widely held belief. But certainly both BXVI and I could be wrong.
Here is a link to a very Orthodox speech given many years ago by a noted Greek theologian, John Kalomiros. It lays out an Orthodox view of what happened to Christinaity and why. It’s worth the read:
http://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/the-river-of-fire-kalomiros/
The “Farewell Discourse” (John 14 - 16) is clear that the Spirit proceeds from the Father at the intercession of the Son.
The historic Gospel pericope for the Day of Pentecost in the West was John 14:15:
“If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever. This is the Spirit of truth” (NRSV)
This passage was relegated to one Eastertide Sunday every third year in the “reforms” brought about by Vatican II.
The change was unfortunate because its frequent use in the Pauline Missal’s Lectionary (and it various Protestant derivatives) served to keep burning a small ember of concience that there just might be something unscriptural about the Filioque.
Serious question and not a gotcha, since I obviously have no history in this...How do you see possible that denigrating the monarchy of the Father could lead to a penchant for splitting into denominations, as happened in the West?