Review of Rethinking the Filioque with the Greek Fathers

Maspero, Giulio. Rethinking the Filioque with the Greek Fathers. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2023. PP. xii, 314, $41.79 (hardcover)

This book is an exceptional contribution to the ecumenical dialogue, a step toward mutual understanding. I recommend this book for systematic theology students interested in the development of the doctrine of the Trinity and the Filioque clause.

Fr. Guilo Maspero is a Roman Catholic priest and a professor of systematic theology at the Pontifical University. Beginning as a researcher in quantum chaos, he has since moved to the field of trinitarian theology, focusing his research on the work of Gregory of Nyssa. In this book, Rethinking the Filioque with the Greek Fathers, Fr. Maspero takes the reader into an “immersive experience” of the theological and philosophical world of the Greek Fathers; his goal is to examine the significance and development of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit and the Filioque clause.

Fr. Maspero articulates three objectives in the book: 1) to track the development of the Filioque clause and its significance for the doctrine of the Spirit; 2) to highlight the significance of the Greek fathers’ responses to the Pneumatomachian’s objections; and 3) to understand the basis of the conflict between the Byzantine world and the Augustinian tradition regarding the psychological analogy of the Trinity. For Fr. Maspero, clarifying the limited metaphysical categories available to Augustine from the Latin tradition should form the basis for an ecumenical proposal on the second procession.

The central and most comprehensive part of the book is its first five chapters, which cover the period from Origen to the Cappadocians, and a sixth chapter that confirms the thesis of the book by examining translations of the Cappadocians’ works and some writings in the Syriac tradition. The last two chapters extend the discussion beyond and track the development of the doctrine in the East, comparing it with the Augustinian tradition.

Fr. Maspero warns against “isolated quotations” when we tend to quote authors without context. Instead, Fr. Maspero takes his readers on a journey to the historical context of the Greek Fathers; his goal is to help the reader listen to the Fathers from within their context, using their languages, concepts, and categories. Fr. Maspero shows the reader the importance of the Father’s emphasis on the Son’s active role in the procession of the Spirit as they responded to various challenges to the orthodox faith.

The Christian revelation and the mystery of the Trinity, on the one hand, and the challenges of heretical movements on the other hand, demanded expansions, corrections, and transformation in existing philosophical models and logical categories. The journey with Fr. Maspero will begin with Origen and his “imperfect success.” Origen was successful because he overcame the limitations of categories in Greek philosophy. He responded to the gnostic and stoic, and he provided a model with an ontological gap between the Trinity and creation. Due to his linguistic and metaphysical limitations, Origen’s success was imperfect as his model sharply subordinated the Logos and the Spirit from the Father.

Following Origen, Fr. Maspero will track the development of the doctrine of the Trinity among the Greek Fathers, from the logos-theology of the apologist to the physics-theology of Athanasias to the Schesis-theology of Gregory of Nyssa. Basil is noted for distinguishing between economy and immanence, and Gregory the Nazianzus for coining the word ekporeutōs, to describe the procession of the Spirit. Fr. Maspero lists three principles that governed this development: 1) the relationship of the Spirit to the Father and the Son, 2) the role of the Son in the procession of the Spirit, and 3) the monarchy of the Father.

Fr. Maspero warns against “isolated quotations” when we tend to quote authors without context. Instead, Fr. Maspero takes his readers on a journey to the historical context of the Greek Fathers; his goal is to help the reader listen to the Fathers from within their context, using their languages, concepts, and categories.

To respond to Gnosticism, Arianism, and Pneumatomachianism, the Greek Fathers needed to modify and stretch the philosophical categories and metaphysical conception of their world. The Fathers needed to adjust or improve their Trinitarian models, modify Platonist and Aristotelian categories, and distinguish between the immanent and economic. To do this, they coined new Greek words, and used different images like fire, kingdom, and glory to describe the relations in the Trinity.

Fr. Maspero’s work also shows how moving from one language to another, like Greek to Syriac, will affect linguistic ability and require using different themes or emphasizing different nuances to describe the same doctrine. Further, Fr. Maspero shows how the absence of some metaphysical tools and philosophical categories in the Latin tradition, like the ontological statute of relation to substance, forced Augustine to an anthropological emphasis; a move that will lead to misunderstanding and miscommunication between the East and West.

This book is an exceptional contribution to the ecumenical dialogue, a step toward mutual understanding. I recommend this book for systematic theology students interested in the development of the doctrine of the Trinity and the Filioque clause. Also, I recommend this book for students working on historical theology, especially those interested in the interaction between philosophical categories and theology in the Greek Fathers.

Minor critics:

First, it was very clear from Fr. Maspero’s research that the Greek Fathers maintained an active role for the Son in the procession of the Spirit, but it was clear also that, in many places, they avoided using the term “proceed” to describe it. The Fathers sometimes preferred to distinguish the role of the Son by using other terms. Further, as Fr. Maspero stated, the Fathers didn’t want to violate the monarchy of the Father, which may be one reason why they were reluctant to use the term explicitly. I was hoping Fr. Maspero would elaborate on this and show if there are other reasons behind this reluctance.

Second, the theological epistemology of this research, as described by Fr. Maspero, is “apophatic.” He explained how the mystery is beyond our knowledge or words. The Greek Fathers needed to expand and challenge their metaphysical conceptions and vocabulary to describe the mystery better. However, I felt the theme was detached from the book’s central thesis; I was expecting “apophaticism” to be integrated into the narration more naturally than how it was presented.

Third, while two primary objectives of Fr. Maspero were covered in the first part of the book, the third objective regarding the “misunderstanding” between the Byzantine world and the Augustinian tradition is very ambitious, and Fr. Maspero only pointed to the issue without sufficiently treating it.