[quote="St_Nephi, post:15, topic:324826"]
If the chalice was withheld in order to combat a heresy, but now hundreds of years after the stomping out of that heresy the chalice was reintroduced, why couldn't the same be done with the Filioque in the creed? As I understand it, it was added to combat a heresy, which today no longer exists. For the sake of ecumenism, couldn't the Catholic Church now abolish the Filioque as it has outlived its utility?
Well, first off, it wasn't originally done to combat a heresy -- as I mentioned upthread, the development happened earlier, but was later formalized in response to a heresy.
In any case, withholding the chalice was simply a matter of a liturgical practice. Since the Church determines the standards for liturgy, it can decide whether to withhold the chalice or not, and it can change this standard as the situation requires.
However, doctrine is another thing altogether: it is an expression of the truth, as revealed by God. When the Church decides on a point of doctrine, it will never go back again and say, "nope, we didn't really mean that". Instead, that doctrinal stance becomes a permanent part of the Church's teaching. The Church may later modify its expression of that truth, to clarify its position and avoid misunderstanding, but the doctrinal teaching can't ever be 'vetoed' or 'abolished'. The statement that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son is exactly this sort of doctrinal teaching. So, no matter what the situation, the Church cannot decide to get rid of it for the sake of expediency.
In any case, there has been much discussion between the Catholic Church and Orthodox leaders that debate*filoque*; the issue now is the endorsement of the various ecclesiastical authorities on this iss.e