Yet in the seventh century, the synods of Spain, and afterwards of France, improved or corrupted the Nicene creed, on the mysterious subject of the third person of the Trinity.

[3] In the long controversies of the East, the nature and generation of the Christ had been scrupulously defined; and the well-known relation of father and son seemed to convey a faint image to the human mind.

The idea of birth was less analogous to the Holy Spirit, who, instead of a divine gift or attribute, was considered by the Catholics as a substance, a person, a god; he was not begotten, but in the orthodox style he _proceeded_.
Did he proceed from the Father alone, perhaps _by_ the Son?
or from the Father _and_ the Son?
The first of these opinions was asserted by the Greeks, the second by the Latins; and the addition to the Nicene creed of the word _filioque_, kindled the flame of discord between the Oriental and the Gallic churches.

In the origin of the disputes the Roman pontiffs affected a character of neutrality and moderation: [4] they condemned the innovation, but they acquiesced in the sentiment, of their Transalpine brethren: they seemed desirous of casting a veil of silence and charity over the superfluous research; and in the correspondence of Charlemagne and Leo the Third, the pope assumes the liberality of a statesman, and the prince descends to the passions and prejudices of a priest.

[5] But the orthodoxy of Rome spontaneously obeyed the impulse of the temporal policy; and the _filioque_, which Leo wished to erase, was transcribed in the symbol and chanted in the liturgy of the Vatican.