Wednesday, October 06, 2010

Old Rome vs. New Rome 2: Filioque

2. Filioque: The Procession of the Holy Spirit
A. Meaning of the Dogma
1. The Catholic dogma of Filioque ("and the Son") means that in the ontological Trinity, the hypostasis of the Father, through and with the hypostasis of the Son, eternally spirates the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit in one spiration as from one principle (cf. Denzinger 460, 463, 691, 1084). The Orthodox, at the very most, will grant, following Patriarch Gregory II the Cypriot of Constantinople (1283-1289; †1290) [PG 142:1233-1245], who was a fervent unionist until the accession of the anti-Catholic emperor Andronicus II Palaeologus (1282-1328; †1332),{1} that the Holy Spirit, "not as hypostasis but as inhypostatizing the energy" of the Godhead, is eternally manifested through the hypostasis of the Son.{2}

B. Patristic Consensus
2. Many Eastern Church Fathers and all the Latin Church Fathers since Bishop St. Hilary of Poitiers explicitly teach that the Father and the Son both spirate the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit.{3} Since the Greek and Latin Fathers did not disagree in matters of faith, they taught the same truth about the procession of the Holy Spirit; when Metropolitan Mark of Ephesus (1392-1445) was faced with the Patristic evidence at the Ecumenical Council of Florence, his only way out of submitting to Catholic teaching was to make the absurd proposal that the writings of the Latin Fathers were corrupt and interpolated.{4} How could the Greek Fathers have held an understanding of the procession of the Holy Spirit antithetical to the unanimous understanding of the Latin Fathers who openly professed Filioque, with whom they were in communion for centuries, and whom the Eastern Orthodox venerate as saints? That is why Mark's appeals to Sts. Dionysius the Areopagite,{5} Justin Martyr,{6} Athanasius the Great,{7} Gregory the Theologian,{8} and John of Damascus{9} are misplaced. The teaching of Catholic Church, unlike that of the Eastern Orthodox Church, does justice to the Greek and Latin Fathers.

St. Basil the Great (329-379)
3. Let us look at the witness of the Cappadocians first. Even though Bishop St. Basil the Great of Caesarea emphasizes that the hypostatic properties are unique and incommunicable,{10} he expressly teaches that the Father and the Son spirate the Holy Spirit in Against Eunomius 3:1;{11} the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son is no prejudice to the clear distinction of the hypostatic properties. Strong internal and external evidence shows the disputed passage to be genuine.{12}

St. Gregory the Theologian (329-390)
4. Although Archbishop St. Gregory the Theologian of Constantinople puts great emphasis on the monarchy of the Father,{13} his vague allusion to the Holy Spirit's dependence on the Son in the Trinitarian τάξις,{14} his analogy of the Trinity as sun-ray-light,{15} and his teaching that the Holy Spirit is the mean between the Father and Son{16} all imply not merely that the Holy Spirit is eternally energetically manifested through the Son, but that He has His being from the Father and the Son. Filioque becomes necessary to distinguish the hypostases of the Holy Spirit and the Son when we give just consideration to the holy archbishop's axiom that the hypostases are distinguished from each other in their relations of origin to one another.{17} His teaching that the Father is ἅναρχος, the Son is ἀρχὴ, and the Holy Spirit is τὸ µετὰ τῆς ἀρχῆς, implies that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.{18} Finally, his statement that the Holy Spirit is "composed of both" the Father and the Son means that the Father and the Son spirate the Holy Spirit.{19}

St. Gregory of Nyssa (335-394)
5. Bishop St. Gregory of Nyssa expressly teaches that the Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son on the level of hypostasis.{20} For the holy bishop, existing in an ungenerated way does not include the idea of being the sole spirator of the Holy Spirit. The Son's mediation in the hypostatic procession of the Holy Spirit, which is necessary to distinguish the Holy Spirit from the hypostasis of the Son,{21} consists in, as the saint's analogy to the flame and torches reveals,{22} the Son cooperating with the Father in spirating the Holy Spirit as from one principle.

Other Eastern Fathers
6. Archbishop St. Athanasius the Great of Alexandria (Doctor) (295-373) teaches the Catholic doctrine when he says that the Father and the Son are, together, the source of the Holy Spirit;{23} that the Holy Spirit is the drink flowing from the Father as fountain and the Son as river;{24} that the Spirit has everything He has from the Son;{25} and that the Holy Spirit has the same relation to the Son as the Son has to the Father;{26} i.e., a relationship of origin. He furthermore says that the Holy Spirit is in God the Father through the Son{27} and that the Holy Spirit is the Image of the Son{28} and "the sweet savor and the form of the Son."{29}

7. His episcopal predecessor, Archbishop St. Dionysius the Great of Alexandria (190-265), likewise supports the Catholic view when he says that the Father is the primordial source "whence" the Holy Spirit proceeds, and that the ekporeusis of the Holy Spirit occurs "through" the Son.{30} His expression that the Holy Spirit is in the hands of the Father and the Son signifies that the Father and the Son are one principle of the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit.{31}

8. Bishop St. Epiphanius of Salamis (Syro-Malabar Doctor){32} (320-403) distinguishes the hypostases of the Son and the Holy Spirit, Who share the two-hypostasis description "from the Father," by adding that the Son is from the Father alone, whereas the Holy Spirit is not another Son because He proceeds hypostatically from the Father and the Son.{33} He describes the hypostatic origination of the Holy Spirit as ekporeusis from the Father and receiving from the Son,{34} because while the Father is the "principium originale," the Son is "principium ex principio."{35} The saint states that "the Holy Spirit is the fount from the fount, from the Father and the Only-Begotten Son;"{36} that "the Father always existed... [and] the Holy Spirit always breathes forth from the Father and the Son;"{37} the Holy Spirit "subsists from the Father through the Son;"{38} and that the Holy Spirit is "the middle between the Father and the Son, proceeding from the Father and the Son, and named third," which facts are predicates of the Holy Spirit qua hypostasis.{39}

9. Archbishop St. Cyril of Alexandria (Doctor of the Incarnation) (378-444) is no less explicit. He says that the Holy Spirit is "poured forth substantially from both, that is to say, from the Father through the Son;"{40} that the Spirit is naturally "proper to," in, "and from" the Son and not only the Father;{41} and that "the Spirit exists from [the Son] and in Him by nature."{42} St. Cyril did not cease to teach this with these formulas, even after his controversy with Bl. Bishop Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457).{43} While many learned authors think that Bl. Theodoret positively erred in this matter,{44} others argue that his expression in his counter-anathema to St. Cyril's ninth anathema "probably intend[s] to deny only the creation of the Holy Ghost by or through the Son," against the Macedonians.{45}

Later Eastern Fathers
10. Monk St. Maximus the Confessor of Constantinople (580-662) says
{46}{47}{48}{49}{50}

11. Eastern Orthodox polemicists quote Hieromonk St. John of Damascus (Doctor of the Assumption) (676-479) as expressly denying the Catholic dogma.{9} It is one thing to say that the Holy Spirit does not have existence from the Son simply and absolutely, and another to say that the Holy Spirit does not have existence from the Son as from the προκαταρτικὴν αἰτία/αἰτίας ἀχρόνως/principium primordiale/principium originale/principium primum. A priori, it is highly likely that St. John writes in the latter sense, or else he would be at odds with the consensus of the saintly Fathers before him. The saint testifies that the Father "is, ... through the Word, the Producer of the revealing Spirit."{51} Three of his other statements indicate that the Holy Spirit, qua hypostasis, indeed proceeds from the Son: the Holy Spirit, qua hypostasis, is (1) the Image of the Son{52} (there is a relationship of origin between an image and its prototype{53}); (2) the fruit of the Son, Who is the branch from the root (the Father){54}; and (3) "God, being between the unbegotten and the begotten, and united to the Father through the Son."{55}


The Latin Fathers
12.

The Popes Prior to and Right After the Photian Schism
13. He asks [Mystagogy §89 in PG 102:381A,383A], "Which of these bishops of [Old] Rome, by life, thought or teaching, altered the profession of immortal life by saying the heretical and diseased word [Filioque]?" Several popes prior to the Photian schism openly professed the Catholic dogma, and even if they did not add the syllables to the Creed, "no pope ever objected to the doctrine that it taught" [C. Scourtis, "Eastern Schism" in NCE 5:24]. Among these men were Popes St. Damasus I (366-384), St. Leo I the Great (Doctor) (440-461), St. Hormisdas (514-523), St. Gregory I the Great (Doctor) (590-604), St. Martin I the Martyr (649-655), Adrian I (772-795), and St. Leo III (795-816).

Mystagogy §84 in PG 102:368B,369B: "Gregory [the Dialogist] and Zacharias, bishops of [Old] Rome ... openly and clearly taught that the All-Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father [i.e., alone]. … They added the following words a little later: 'The Paraclete--the Spirit--proceeds from the Father and abides in the Son,' Gregory in Latin and Zacharias by correct translation into Greek."

Pope St. Gregory the Great, however, affirms what St. Photius categorically denied. The holy pontiff states the following: "it is certain that the comforting Spirit always proceeds from the Father and the Son" [Dialogues 2:38 in PL 76:204; qtd. in Fr. Jugie, p. 219]; "the Spirit, even in substance, flows from the Son" [Morals 2:92 in PL 75 ; qtd. in Fr. Jugie, p. 218 & Siecienski, p. 70]; "The Spirit of the Father and the Son Who issues from both … proceeds ever from the Father" [Morals 30:17 in PL 76:534; qtd. in Fr. Jugie, p. 218 & Siecienski, p. 70]; and that the Holy Spirit's procession from the Father and the Son in time corresponds to His eternal hypostatic procession from the Father and the Son [Homily 28 on John 20:21; qtd. in Siecienski, p. 70].

14. I pray that what I have written so far is a sufficient answer to the query of Gregory of Cyprus: "Where have the God-bearing Fathers said that God the Father is, through the Son, the cause of the Spirit? Where do they say that the Paraclete has its existence from the Son and through the Son? Again, where do they say that the same Paraclete has its existence from the Father and from the Son?"

C. The First Seven Ecumenical Councils and the Addition to the Creed

15.

D. Scriptural Justification
Since the Son sends the Holy Spirit [Jn 15:26], He must have some authority over the Holy Spirit. But it cannot be authority of dominion (e.g., King St. Vladimir I the Great rules Russia), superiority (e.g., John is holier than Jack), or seniority (e.g., a general is ranked higher than a colonel) [SCG 4:24]. Therefore the authority must be one of origin, so that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

St. Photius said that "ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λήμψεται" ("He shall receive of Mine") in Jn 16:14 does not mean that the Holy Spirit receives the divine substance from the Son [Mystagogy §29 in PG 102:309C], but that the Holy Spirit receives the divine substance from the Father alone (from Him that is Mine) [Mystagogy §22 in PG 102:301B]. See how this is contrary to the statements of Sts. Hilary of Poitiers (Doctor), Athanasius the Great (Doctor),{25} Basil the Great (Doctor),{11} Cyril of Jerusalem (Doctor), Ambrose the Great (Doctor), Epiphanius of Salamis (Syro-Malabar Doctor),{34} Augustine the Great (Doctor of Grace), and Cyril of Alexandria (Doctor of the Incarnation).

Mystagogy §22 in PG 102:301B: The Savior did not say, "He will receive from Me," rather, "He will receive from all that which is Mine." ... What other hypostasis, from Whom the Spirit is said to receive, could be meant other than the Father? Because it cannot be—-as has been recently contended against God--that He receives from the Son, and it certainly cannot be from the Spirit Who Himself does the receiving! ... even schoolboys who have just begun attending school know the expression "from me" indicates him who speaks, whilst the phrase "from that which is mine" means another hypostasis, bound intimately in union to the speaker, but doubtless a different hypostasis than the one speaking.
Mystagogy §29: not in order to say that the Spirit will proceed from Himself, nor does He do so that the divine substance may be understood. ... the "Mine" to which He refers is the Father because the things that are Mine are in the Father. ... the Spirit receives from the Father because that which is from the Father is "that which is Mine." So I say that whenever "that which is Mine" is said, it is necessary for us to raise our thoughts to that which is the Son's, that is, the Father, and not to turn them to any other hypostasis.

E. Theological Justification

Mystagogy §7: But concerning the procession of the Spirit from the Son, who formerly received it? For the procession of the Spirit from the Son is not contained in the procession from the Father. If we say this, then what does the Spirit gain which He did not already possess in His procession from the Father?

F. St. Photius and the Beginning of Bitter Controversy over the Monarchy of the Father and Incommunicable Hypostatic Properties
Mystagogy §4: since it is claimed that He proceeds from two hypostases, the Spirit is brought to a double cause, thereby obscuring the simplicity of the Most High. Does it not follow from this that the Spirit is therefore composite? How then is the Trinity simple? But, on the other hand, how shall the Spirit not be blasphemed if, proceeding from the Son, He in turn has no equality by causing the Son? O impiously bold tongue, corrupting the Spirit's own proper dignity!

When Catholics say one principle of the Holy Spirit, they use "principle" indeterminately. See Aquinas, Summa Theologica I, q. 36, art. 4, ad 4. The term "principle" of the Holy Spirit is a substantive name (a form with an accompanying suppositum), so even though the Father and the Son are two supposita spirating, They are not two principles because They are one form, God. See ibid., ad 7.

Mystagogy §19: In general, aside from the properties characteristic of a specific hypostasis, whenever some property is truly possessed by any hypostasis other than the one first possessing it, the property shared by those hypostases belongs to the essence in order to not join that property to a specific hypostasis.

G. The Ecumenical Council of Florence

And so I pray, brothers and sisters, that this post will suffice to answer the threefold question of St. Photius the Great [Mystagogy §5 in PG 102:284AB,285A], who died a Catholic: "Who of our sacred and renowned Fathers said the Spirit proceeds from the Son? Did any synod, acknowledged as ecumenical, proclaim it? Which assembly of priests and bishops, inspired of God, affirmed this understanding of the Holy Spirit?" Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us poor sinners. Amen.

Notes to Section 2
{1} "Under the Emperor Michael VIII Palaeologus (1259-82), [Gregory of Cyprus] strongly supported the movement for reunion with Rome. However, in 1283 he changed his position; he supported the Emperor Andronicus II, took part in the synod that condemned John Beccos, and wrote against Beccos." Chiovaro, F. "Gregory II Cyprius, Patriach of Constantinople." New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 6, 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale, 2003. p. 478. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. Fordham University Libraries. 2 Sept. 2010.
{2} a. Fr. Yves Congar, O.P., I Believe in the Holy Spirit, vol. III, p. 63. The statement of St. Gregory Palamas illustrates well the Eastern Orthodox "dogma": "When you hear him (that is, Cyril of Alexandria) say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the two, because He comes essentially from the Father through the Son, you should understand his teaching in this sense: it is the powers and essential energies of God which pour out, not the divine hypostasis of the Spirit." -- St. Gregory Palamas, Apodictic Treatises 2:20, qtd. in Fr. Congar, pp. 63-64.
b. On Palamas as a saint in the Catholic Church despite his reputation as a fierce anti-Catholic, see Huysman, Will R. "The Catholic Cult of St. Gregory Palamas: Answer to a Friend." The Banana Republican. 18 Jun. 2010. 16 Sept. 2010 <http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.com/2010/06/catholic-cult-of-st-gregory-palamas.html>.
{3} Gill, Fr. Joseph, and B. L. Marthaler "Filioque." New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 5, 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale, 2003. p. 720. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. Fordham University Libraries. 2 Sept. 2010.
{4}
{5} a. "The Father is sole Fountain of the superessential Deity, since the Father is not Son, nor the Son, Father; since the hymns reverently guard their own characteristics for each of the supremely Divine Hypostases." -- St. Dionysius the Areopagite, On the Divine Names 2:5 in PG 3:641D. The Father and the Son sharing in the active spiration of the Holy Spirit is no prejudice to the Father being the only Unbegotten source of divinity, as explained throughout this article, especially section F. Active spiration is not a hypostatic property of God the Father.
b. Regarding the genuineness of the writings attributed to St. Dionysius the Areopagite (†96), see Huysman, Will R. "The Writings of St. Dionysius the Areopagite." The Banana Republican. 22 Mar. 2010. 24 Sept. 2010 <http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.com/2010/03/writings-of-st-dionysius-areopagite.html>.
{6} Mark of Ephesus, in his July 1440 "Encyclical Letter to All the Orthodox," quotes St. Justin Martyr as stating, "As the Son is from the Father, so is the Spirit from the Father." Mark chides the Greek Catholics for saying that the Son proceeds from the Father immediately, whereas the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father mediately, which he contrasts with the position of St. Justin Martyr. We rightly confess with reference to "the persons themselves spirating" that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father immediately, as from Him, and mediately, as from the Son," and that, with reference to "the spirative power," the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son immediately; see St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica I, q. 36, art. 3, ad 1.
{7} The Father is "the sole unbegotten and sole fount of divinity" = "μόνος ἀγέννητος, καὶ μόνος πηγὴ θεότητος." -- St. Athanasius the Great, On the Eternal Divine Existence of the Son and the Holy Spirit and Against the Sabellians 2 in PG 28:97BC. See n. 4a above.
{8} a. In Oration 31:8, St. Gregory points out that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father," as "our Savior Himself" declares. Here St. Gregory does not say that the Holy Spirit "proceeds" from the Father and the Son, because εκπόρευσις has always been used, even by the Eastern Fathers after the Cappadocians who expressly taught the idea of Filioque, to indicate the relationship of origin of the Holy Spirit to the sole ἀρχὴ-ἄναρχος and πηγή of the Godhead, the Father. εκπόρευσις cannot be used in connection with the Son, because the Son is not unoriginate, but rather is begotten from the Father. Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. "The Father as the Source of the Whole Trinity: The Procession of the Holy Spirit in Greek and Latin Traditions." Catholic Culture. <http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=1176>.
b. Mark of Ephesus, in his July 1440 "Encyclical Letter to All the Orthodox" quotes one of St. Gregory's statements on the monarchy (see n. 13 below) to show that the Son does not spirate the Holy Spirit. If the Father is the only cause, Mark argues, the Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Son. However, St. Gregory uses "cause" in a narrower sense than proponents of Filioque do when they say that the Father and the Son are one "principle" of the Holy Spirit, and he does not teach that the Son does not participate in the spiration of the third hypostasis of the Trinity. See Fr. Martin Jugie, A.A. (†1954), De processione spiritus sancti ex fontibus revelationis et secundum orientales dissidentes (Rome: Istituto Grafico Tiberino, 1936), p. 165.
c. St. Gregory the Theologian means that the Father is the only hypostasis of the Trinity Who does not take His origin from another; this hypostatic property of being the ungenerated generator does not include the notion of being the sole spirator of the Holy Spirit, as St. Gregory's other statements show; see Fr. Jugie, De Processione, p. 165. Several codices of Oration 34 have "ingenerateness" instead of causality; the two words are synonyms for St. Gregory; see ibid. Moreover, in Oration 41:9 in PG 36:441C, he says, "All that the Father has the Son has also, except being Unbegotten;" qtd. by Fr. Jugie in ibid.
{9} a. St. John of Damascus says in An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 1:8 [PG 94:832B] "And we do not speak of the Spirit as from the Son: but yet we call Him the Spirit of the Son." In 1:12 of the same work [PG 94:849B], St. John adds, "And we speak also of the Spirit of the Son, not as though proceeding from Him, but as proceeding through Him from the Father. For the Father alone is cause."
b. When St. John of Damascus says that the Spirit does not proceed ἐκ (from) the Son, the great defender of icons is not rejecting Filioque. The Son is not the αἰτία in the sense of προκαταρτικὴν αἰτία/αἰτίας ἀχρόνως/principium primordiale/principium originale/principium primum (Fr. Jugie, p. 190) because He receives His fecundity from the Father, to paraphrase Fr. Congar, p. 136.
c. The above explanation is that of the most learned theologians and historians of dogma regarding St. John's statements like "non tamen ex ipso existentiam habens" from his Homily on Holy Saturday [Greek in PG 96:605B]. See Fr. Dionysius Petavius, S.J. Dogmata theologica, vol. II: De Trinitate, Book VII, Chapter 17, §8, p. 763 and Fr. Jugie, De Processione, p. 190. Basilios Cardinal Bessarion (1403-1472) says the following in his Refutation of the Syllogistic Chapters of Mark of Ephesus, Chapter 37 [PG 161:240AB], qtd. in A. Edward Siecienski, Filioque: History of a Doctrinal Controversy, p. 164: "That the Son is not the cause of the Spirit we can also say, for we understand the meaning of cause in the strictest sense, as used in the Greek idiom, whereby cause always is understood as the primordial first cause." In other words, several Eastern Fathers rightly say that the Son is not the cause because they use "cause" in the sense of προκαταρτικὴν αἰτία or αἰτίας ἀχρόνως, which can only be the Father; cf. Fr. Jugie, De processione, p. 148.
{10} "In God, whatever appertains to nature is common … but the Hypostasis is known by the character of paternity, or filiation, or sanctifying power." St. Basil the Great, Epistle 214:4 in PG 32:789. Sts. Gregory the Wonderworker of Neocaesarea, Athanasius the Great of Alexander (Doctor), Gregory the Theologian, Cyril of Alexandria (Doctor of the Incarnation), Eulogius, and John of Damascus (Doctor of the Assumption) teach the same truth. Bermejo, A. M. "Properties, Divine Personal." New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 11, 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale, 2003. p. 755. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. Fordham University Libraries. 3 Sept. 2010.
{11}
Even if the Holy Spirit is third in dignity and order, why need He be third also in nature? For that He is second to the Son, having His being from Him and receiving from Him and announcing to us and being completely dependent on Him, pious tradition recounts; but that His nature is third we are not taught by the Saints nor can we conclude logically from what has been said.
St. Basil the Great, Against Eunomius 3:1 in PG 29B:655A,C.
{12} See the documentation in the footnotes of Huysman, Will R. "The Cappadocian Fathers and Filioque" nn. 13-25. The Banana Republican. 6 Jan. 2010. 2 Sept. 2010 <http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.com/2010/01/cappadocian-fathers-and-filioque.html>.
{13} "All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality." -- St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration 34:10 in PG 36:252A.
{14} "If ever there was a time when the Father was not, there was a time when the Son was not. If ever there was a time when the Son was not, then there was a time when the Spirit was not." -- St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration 31:4 in PG 36:137A. See Fr. Jugie, De processione pp. 162-163.
{15} St. Gregory compares the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit to "the sun and a ray and a light" in Oration 31:32 in PG 36:169B. The analogy St. Gregory uses implies that the Father and the Son act together to give existence to the Holy Spirit, because the globe of the sun is the unbegotten source, which, through and with the ray, produces the light; see Fr. Jugie, De Processione, p. 161.
{16} The Holy Spirit "is between the Unbegotten and the Begotten". -- St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration 31:8. See Fr. Jugie, De Processione, p. 162.
{17} "The difference of manifestation, if I may so express myself, or rather of Their mutual relations one to another, has caused the difference of Their Names." -- St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration 31:9 in PG 36:141C. The relations of which St. Gregory speaks are clearly relations of origin; see Fr. Jugie, De processione, p. 163. For St. Gregory to be consistent with his own maxim and be able to distinguish the hypostases of the Son and the Holy Spirit, there must be, besides the relation between the Father and the Son and the relation between the Father and the Holy Spirit, a relation of origin between the Son and the Holy Spirit. The order of names tells us that the Son does not proceed from the Holy Spirit, so it must be the case that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son; see ibid.
{18} St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration 42:15 in PG 36:476AB. See Fr. Jugie, De Processione, p. 161.
{19} In Oration 31:2 in PG 36:136A, St. Gregory the Theologian expressly states that the Holy Spirit is "ἐξ μφοῖν συνημμένον." According to patrologist Dr. Otto Bardenhewer (†1935), the sense of the Theologian's words is that the Father and the Son both compose, so to speak, the Holy Spirit, i.e., the Father and the Son both produce or spirate the Holy Spirit. See Otto Bardenhewer, D.D., Ph.D. Patrology: The Lives and Works of the Fathers of the Church. Translated by Thomas J. Shahan, D.D. (B. Herder: St. Louis, 1908), p. 292, <http://www.archive.org/details/patrologyliveswo00bardrich>.
{20}
as the Son is bound to the Father, and, while deriving existence from Him, is not substantially after Him, so again the Holy Spirit is in touch with the Only-begotten, Who is conceived of as before the Spirit's subsistence only in the theoretical light of a cause. Extensions in time find no admittance in the Eternal Life; so that, when we have removed the thought of cause, the Holy Trinity in no single way exhibits discord with itself.
St. Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius 1:22 in PG 45:464BC. See Fr. Jugie, De processione p. 158.
{21} a.
While we confess the invariable character of the nature, we do not deny the difference in respect of cause, and that which is caused, by which alone we apprehend that one Hypostasis is distinguished from another; — by our belief, that is, that one is the Cause, and another is of the Cause; and again in that which is of the Cause we recognize another distinction. For one is directly from the first Cause, and another through that which is directly from the first Cause; so that the attribute of being Only-begotten abides without doubt in the Son, and the mediation of the Son, while it guards His attribute of being Only-begotten, does not shut out the Spirit from His relation by way of nature to the Father.
St. Gregory of Nyssa, "To Ablabius on Not Three Gods" in PG 45:133BC.
b.
For both the Son came forth from the Father, as the Scripture says, and the Spirit proceeds from God and from the Father. But just as being without cause pertains to the Father alone, and cannot be made to agree with the Son and the Spirit, so also, conversely, being from a cause, which is peculiar to the Son and the Spirit, is not of such a nature as to be contemplated in the Father. Now, as it is common to the Son and the Spirit to exist in a not-ungenerated way, in order that no confusion arise as to the underlying subject, one must again seek out the unconfused difference in their properties, so that both what is common may be preserved, and what is proper to each may not be confused. For the one is called by Holy Scripture "the Only-Begotten Son of the Father," and the word leaves His property at that; but the Spirit both is said to be from the Father, and is further testified to be from the Son. For, it says, "if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His" [Romans 8:9]. Therefore the Spirit, Who is from God, is also the Spirit of Christ; but the Son, Who is from God, neither is nor is said to be "of the Spirit," nor does this relative order become reversed.
St. Gregory of Nyssa, Sermon 3 on the Lord's Prayer in Johannes F. Callahan, ed. Gregorii Nysseni De oratione dominica; De beatitudinibus (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1992), p. 42. The best manuscripts say "from the Son" and not "of the Son;" e.g., the seventh century Vatican 2066 discovered by Cardinal Angelo Mai (†1854); see Fr. Jugie, De processione, pp. 160-161.
{22}
Where in each case activity in working good shows no diminution or variation whatever, how unreasonable it is to suppose the numerical order to be a sign of any diminution, or any variation with respect to nature. It is as if a man were to see a divided flame burning on three torches (and we will suppose that the cause of the third light is the first flame, kindling the end torch by transmission through the middle one), and were to maintain that the heat in the first exceeded that of the others; that that next it showed a variation from it in the direction of the less; and that the third could not be called fire at all, though it burnt and shone just like fire, and did everything that fire does. But if there is really no hindrance to the third torch being fire, though it has been kindled from a previous flame, what is the philosophy of these men, who profanely think that they can slight the dignity of the Holy Spirit because He is named by the Divine lips after the Father and the Son?
St. Gregory of Nyssa, Against the Macedonians on the Holy Spirit 6 in PG 45:1308AB. See Fr. Jugie, De processione, p. 155.
{23} "David sings in the psalm [35:10], saying: 'For with You is the Font of Life;' because jointly with the Father the Son is indeed the source of the Holy Spirit." = "Πατρὶ ὄντα τὸυ Υιὸν τὴν πηγὴν τοῦ ἀγίου Πνεὐματος." -- St. Athanasius the Great, On the Incarnation of the Word Against the Arians 9 in PG 26:1000A.
{24} a. "As the Father is the fountain and the Son is called river, we are said to drink of the Spirit." -- St. Athanasius the Great, Letter 1:19 to Serapion (Shapland 111) in PG 26:573CD. See Fr. Jugie, De processione, p. 126.
b. Lest anyone object that this temporal mission has nothing to do with the eternal procession, I quote St. Athanasius as implying that the economy points to the inner life of the Trinity: the Holy Spirit "is said to proceed from the Father, because it is from the Word, Who is confessed to be from the Father, that it shines forth and is sent and is given" [Letter to Serapion 1:20 (Shapland 117) in PG 26:580A]. We do not understand the Holy Spirit's eternal ekporeusis from the Father except in light of the temporal mission from the Son (Shapland p. 117 n. 16), and the other texts cited show that St. Athanasius has in mind also that the Father and the Son both eternally give existence to the Holy Spirit; see Fr. Jugie, p. 73.
{25} "For He, as has been said, gives to the Spirit, and whatever the Spirit has, He has from the Word" = "Αὐτὸς γἀρ, ὥσπερ εἵρηται, τῷ Πνεύματι δίδωσι, καὶ ὄσα ἓχει τὸ Πνεῦμα παρἀ τοῦ Λόγου ὲχει." -- St. Athanasius the Great, Orations Against the Arians 3:25:24 in PG 26:376A. What else does God the Holy Spirit, being simple, have besides His perfect existence? This Athanasian statement means that the Spirit has His existence from the Word; see Fr. Jugie, De processione, p. 82. This means that, pace Patriarch Gregory II the Cypriot of Constantinople, we say of the Holy Spirit not only "a Filio existere," but "a Filio existentiam habere," to use the words of Fr. Jugie, p. 195.
{26} "The Spirit has to the Son the same proper relationship as we have known the Son to have to the Father. And as the Son says, 'All things whatsoever the Father hath are Mine' [Jn 16:15] so we shall find that through the Son all these things are in the Spirit also." -- St. Athanasius the Great, Letter 3:1 to Serapion (Shapland 170) in PG 26:625B. The Holy Spirit, therefore, has His divine existence, i.e., "all things," from the Father through the Son; see Fr. Jugie, De processione, p. 136.
{27} "The Spirit is not outside the Word, but being in the Word, through Him is in God." = "Οὐ γἁρ ἐκτὀσ ἐστι τοῦ Λὀγου τὁ Πνεῦμα, ἀλλἁ, ἐν τῷ Λόγω ὄν, ἐν τῷ Θεῷ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐστιν." -- St. Athanasius the Great, Letter 3:5 to Serapion (Shapland 175) in PG 26:633A. See Fr. Jugie, ibid.
{28} "As the Son is in the Spirit as in His own image, so also the Father is in the Son." -- St. Athanasius the Great, Letter 1:20 to Serapion (Shapland 115) in PG 26:577B. See Fr. Jugie, ibid.
{29} "This unction [the Holy Spirit] is a breath of the Son, so that he who has the Spirit says, 'We are a sweet savor of Christ' [2 Cor 2:15]. … But if the Spirit is the sweet savor and the form of the Son, it is clear that the Spirit cannot be a creature; for the Son also, 'being in the form' [Phil 2:6] of the Father, is not a creature." -- St. Athanasius the Great, Letter 3:3 to Serapion (Shapland 172) in PG 26:628D-629A.
{30} "I added the Holy Spirit, but at the same time I further added both whence and through Whom He proceeded." -- St. Dionysius the Great of Alexandria, qtd. in St. Athanasius the Great, On the Opinion of Dionysius 17 in PG 25B:504C. See Fr. Jugie, p. 102.
{31} "But in their hands is the Spirit, Who cannot be parted either from Him that sent or from Him that conveyed Him..." -- St. Dionysius the Great of Alexandria, qtd. in St. Athanasius the Great, On the Opinion of Dionysius 17 in PG 25B:505A. See Fr. Jugie, ibid.: "Haec locutio significat communitatem possessionis et unitatem principii relate ad Spiritum Sanctum."
{32} The Greek Orthodox Kontakion in Tone Four says that Sts. Epiphanius and Germanus "burned the tongues of the godless with the sacred teachings which they most wisely expounded to all those who in Orthodox belief;" see http://www.oca.org/FStropars.asp?SID=13&ID=101356.
{33}
But someone will say, "Therefore we are saying that there are two Sons. And how then is He the Only-begotten?" Well then. "Who art thou that repliest against God?" [Rom 9:20]. For if he calls the one Who is from Him the Son, and the one Who is from both [παρ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων] the Holy Spirit, which things we understand by faith alone, from the saints—-full of light, givers of light, they have their operation full of light…
St. Epiphanius of Salamis, The Well-Anchored Man 71 in PG 43:148B.
{34}
For just as "No one knows the Father except the Son, nor the Son except the Father" [Mt 11:27], so I dare to say that no one knows the Spirit except the Father and the Son, that is, the one from Whom He proceeds and the one from Whom He receives, and that no one knows the Son and the Father except the Holy Spirit, He Who truly glorifies, Who teaches all things, Who is from the Father and the Son.
St. Epiphanius of Salamis, The Well-Anchored Man 73 in PG 43:153A.
{35} See Fr. Jugie, p. 183, where the holy theologian discusses the Letter of St. Maximus the Confessor to Marinus the Presbyter of Cyprus.
{36} "τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ πηγὴν ἐκ πηγῆς, ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Μονογενοῦς τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἄγιον." -- St. Epiphanius, Against Heresies 69:54 in PG 42:285D; qtd. in Fr. Jugie, p. 145. Notice that since St. Epiphanius says "fount" in the singular, the Father and the Son are one principle of the Holy Spirit; see ibid.
{37} "Τοίνυν Πατὴρ ἦν ἀεὶ, καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα ἐκ Πατρὸς καὶ Υἰοῦ πνέει." -- St. Epiphanius, The Well-Anchored Man 75 in PG 43:157A; qtd. in ibid.
{38} "τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἄγιον … ἐκ Πατρὸς δι᾽ Υἱοῦ ὑφεστῶτα." -- St. Epiphanius, Against Heresies 73:16 in PG 42:433AB; qtd. in ibid., p. 144.
{39} St. Epiphanius, The Well-Anchored Man 8 in PG 43:29C-32A; qtd. in ibid., p. 145.
{40} "τὸ οὐσιωδῶς ἐξ ἀμφοῖν ἤγοθν ἐκ Πατρὸς δι᾽ Υἱοῦ προχεόμενον Πνεῦμα." -- St. Cyril of Alexandria, On Worship in Spirit and Truth 1 in PG 68:148A. Qtd. in Fr. Jugie, p. 140.
{41}
For, in that the Son is God, and from God according to nature (for He has had His birth from God the Father), the Spirit is both proper to Him and in Him and from Him, just as, to be sure, the same thing is understood to hold true in the case of God the Father Himself.
St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Prophet Joel 35 in PG 71:377D. Qtd. in Fr. Jugie, p. 140.
{42} "Thus, Paul knows no difference of nature between the Son and the Holy Spirit, but because the Spirit exists from Him and in Him by nature, He calls Him by the Name of Lordship." = "Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς, κατὰ τὴν τοῦ Παύλοθ φωνὴν, Κύριον δὲ τὸ Πνεῦμα καλεἴ, οὐδεμίαν ἄρα φύσεως οἷδε διαφορὰν τοῦ Υἰοῦ καὶ Πνεύματος, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ φυσικῶς ὑπάρχον τῷ τῆς κυριότητος ὀνόματι καλεἳ." -- St. Cyril of Alexandria, Thesaurus 34 in PG 75:576B. Cf. Thesaurus 34 in PG 75:600D: "Therefore, when Christ lays down the law, He lays it down that His Spirit naturally exists in Him and from Him." = "Νομοθετοῦντος τοιγαροῦν τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὠς ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ ὲξ αὐτοῦ φυσιχῶς ὐπἀρχον τὸ Πνεῦμα αὐτὸ νομοθετεῖ."
{43} a. Although he inferred that St. Cyril's statements were of a "quite" different meaning that those of St. Augustine, the Orthodox Fr. John Meyendorff (1926-1922) admitted that "after that incident, which took place about 430, Cyril did not give up either his theology or his vocabulary." "La Procession du Saint-Esprit chez les péres orientaux," Russie et Chrétienté (1950), p. 165; qtd. in Fr. Congar, p. 36.
b. On the sanctity of Bl. Theodoret and his status as a Church Father, see Huysman, Will R. "Bl. Theodoret Is a Church Father." The Banana Republican. 25 Aug. 2009. 2 Oct. 2010 <http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.com/2009/08/bl-theodoret-is-church-father.html>.
{44} Fr. Jugie, pp. 171-172 lists Cardinal Hugo Etherianis (1115-1182), Manuel Calecas (†1410), Cardinal Basilios Bessarion (1403-1472), Cardinal St. Robert Bellarmine, S.J. (Doctor) (1542-1621), Fr. Dionysius Petavius, S.J. (1583-1652), Leo Allatius (1586-1669), Fr. John Garnerius, and Cardinal Joseph Hergenröther (1824-1890).
{45} a. Maas, Anthony. "Filioque." The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 6. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909. 3 Oct. 2010 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06073a.htm>.
b. Fr. Jugie, p. 171, lists Monk Michel Le Quien, O.S.B. (1661-1733), Cardinal Johann Baptist Franzelin, S.J. (1816-1886), and Fr. Theodore De Régnon, S.J. (1831-1893).
{46}
{47}
{48}
{49}
{50}
{51} An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 1:12 in PG 94:848D.
{52} "The Son is the Father's Image, and the Spirit the Son's, through which Christ dwelling in man makes him after His own Image." -- St. John of Damascus, An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 1:13 in PG 94:856B.
{53} Dialectics 6 in PG 94:548C; qtd. in Fr. Jugie, p. 189.
{54} "The Father is the root, the Son is the branch, the Spirit is the fruit." -- St. John of Damascus, On Heresies in PG 94:780B; qtd. in Fr. Jugie, p. 125.
{55} An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 1:13 in PG 94:856B.
{56}

No comments: