“The orthodox Old Catholics removed the filioque in the 19th and 20th centuries to appease the Orthodox; if given the opportunity, at the right time in the right way, I think Anglicanism should do the same, and restore the original Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.”

The phrase “to appease” as a justification for modifying our Creeds alarms me. Charlemagne may not have had the authority to modify the creed, but we, not being an ecumenical council anymore than him, have no more authority to reverse the modification which has been previously accepted anymore than he did.

The fact that the filioque was eventually (after a lot of debate) accepted across the Western tradition means we have a lot of precedent to overturn before we could remove it. Only a council comparable to the Nicene in its Ecumenism could provide a justification for doing so (newsflash: we are in no position to create such a council)

It is a shame that the Easterns choose this issue to keep us apart, we can boast that we have put forth a good effort towards ecumenism with them and we should continue to do so, but we cannot hastily modify our creeds for their appeasement’s sake. This would be an extralegal innovation, and it would rightly be perceived as doctrinal anarchy (an allegation Anglicanism already suffers from). It would fracture the Anglican Communion more than it would help with Eastern relations.

Furthermore, the history may be complicated, but on Sunday, the only quality of the filioque that should matter to us is simply whether or not it is true, and thank God it is.