|
State of the question. This article contains two
questions: whether the Holy Ghost proceeds from the
Son, which is the subject of dispute between the Greeks
and Latins, and whether the Holy Ghost proceeds from
the Son in such a way that if He did not proceed from the
Son He would not be distinguished personally from the
Son. Concerning this second question Scotus opposed
St. Thomas, who gave an affirmative reply. We shall
consider first the prior question particularly in its
speculative aspect since the positive aspect is treated in
the history of dogma.
Various errors and the definitions of the Church. Many
errors about the procession of the Holy Ghost have been
condemned by the Church. In the beginning the Eunomians
and the Macedonians denied that the Holy Ghost proceeded
from the Father, and they were immediately condemned by
the Council of Constantinople in 381. Later many
others attacked the teaching that the Holy Ghost
proceeded from the Son, namely, Theodoret (434),
the Monothelites and Iconoclasts (eighth century),
Photius (ninth century), and Michael Caerularius
(eleventh century), whom the Greek schismatics follow
until the present day. Photius, the impious usurper of
the Constantinopolitan see, who aspired to the supremacy
over the Church, found a pretext for attacking the
teaching of the Latin Church on this point in some
obscure texts of the Greek Fathers. Photius was
condemned by Nicholas I and seceded from communion with
the Latin Church. After his death union between the
Churches was restored, but the schism again broke out
because of the ambitions of Michael
Caerularius.[412] For many the difficulty arose
from the fact that many Greek Fathers said that the Holy
Ghost proceeded from the Father through the Son. This
turn of words provided the occasion for the Photians to
write against the doctrine of the Latin
Church.[413] In the present article St. Thomas
presents the principal difficulties of the Greeks, adding
that there is no basis for their stand either in Sacred
Scripture or in the ancient councils, in which the
question was not yet explicitly considered.
It should be said, moreover, that in the Latins,
concept of the Trinity, which begins with the unity of
nature rather than with the three persons, an easier
approach is made to the Filioque, especially if the
Latin doctrine is understood in the post-Augustinian
view, according to which the processions are after the
manner of intellection and love, for love follows
knowledge and proceeds from it inasmuch as nothing is
willed unless it is known. This point is not so clear in
the Greek concept, which starts with the three persons
instead of with the unity of nature.
To clarify the matter in opposition to Photius, the term
Filioque was added to the Nicene Creed, first in
Spain, then in France and Germany, and later was
accepted and approved by authority of the Roman
Pontiffs.[414] Finally under Pius X it was
declared: "It would be no less temerarious than
erroneous to entertain the opinion that the dogma of the
procession of the Son from the Holy Ghost can hardly be
proved from the words of the Gospels or from the faith of
the ancient Fathers."[415]
The Church has indeed defined that the Holy Ghost
proceeds from the Father and the Son "as from one
principle and by one single spiration."[416] The
Council of Florence declared: "We define that this
truth of faith be accepted and believed by all Christians
and that all shall profess that the Holy Ghost is
eternally from the Father and the Son and that He has
His essence and subsisting being at the same time from the
Father and the Son, and that He proceeds eternally from
both as from one principle and by one
spiration."[417] In the same council it was
defined: "The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and
the Son... . Whatever the Holy Ghost is or has He
has received simultaneously from the Father and the Son.
But the Father and the Son are not two principles of the
Holy Ghost but one principle just as the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghost are not three principles of
creatures but one principle."[418] These words,
"We proceeds by one spiration," were added in the
Council of Florence and in the Council of Lyons to
solve the difficulty of some Greeks who rejected the
formula ex Patre Filioque because they erroneously
thought that it implied two principles of the Holy
Ghost.
Whether there is a clear warrant in Scripture and
tradition for this definition of the Church.
The testimony of Scripture. No doubt exists that it is
clearly taught by the Scriptures that the Holy Ghost
proceeds from the Father: "But when the Paraclete
cometh..., who proceedeth from the Father,
"[419] "For it is not you that speak, but the
Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you."[420]
It is also clear from many passages of the New Testament
that the Holy Ghost proceeds also from the Son. We
prove this in three ways: 1. because the Holy Ghost is
said to be sent by the Son; 2. because the Holy Ghost
is said to receive something from the Son; 3. because
the Holy Ghost is called the Spirit of the Son.
In proving these three points we presuppose from the
formula of baptism and from similar texts already cited for
the three persons together that Holy Ghost and Spirit of
the Father are names not of a divine attribute but of the
third person. In these proofs we follow the chronological
order in which this truth was revealed, beginning with the
revelation of Christ Himself when He promised the Holy
Ghost.
1. The Holy Ghost is said to have been sent by the
Son as well as by the Father. "I will ask the
Father, and He shall give you another Paraclete, that
He may abide with you forever. The Spirit of
truth... shall abide with you."[421] Here
mention is made of another person, that is, another
Paraclete, distinct from Him who asks and from the
Father, who will send Him. "But the Paraclete, the
Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He
will teach you all things."[422] If the Father
sends the Holy Ghost in the name of the Son, the Son
also sends Him. This thought is more clearly expressed
in the following: "But when the Paraclete cometh, whom
I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth,
who proceedeth from the Father, He shall give testimony
of Me."[423] In the following chapter: "If I
go not, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I
go, I will send Him to you."[424]
St. Thomas' argument[425] is built on these texts
as follows: A mission or sending presupposes a certain
influence of the sender on him who is sent. This
influence of the sender is either in the nature of a
command, as when a master sends a servant, or in the
nature of counsel, as when a man sends his friend to
another, or in the nature of origin, as when leaves are
sent out by a tree. A divine person, however, is not
sent by command or counsel because these imply inferiority
since he who commands is greater and he who counsels is
wiser. Hence sending in God denotes nothing except the
procession of origin to a terminus where the person sent
was not before. If the Holy Ghost, therefore, is said
to be sent by the Father and the Son, He proceeds from
the Father and the Son. "The Father... is not said
to be sent for He does not have a terminus from which He
is or from which He proceeds."[426] In God,
then, a sending cannot take place without being a
procession, and the Holy Ghost, who was sent by the
Son, must proceed from the Son.[427]
2. The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son because He
is said to receive something from the Son. "But when
He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will teach you
all truth... . He shall glorify Me; because He
shall receive of Mine, and shall show it to you. All
things whatsoever the Father hath, are Mine. Therefore
I said, that He shall receive of Mine, and show it to
you."[428]
Here the Scriptures explicitly affirm that the Holy
Ghost, the Paraclete, receives something from the
Son. But in God one person cannot receive anything from
another except to proceed from that person because,
besides the relation of origin, all things are common to
the three persons. "In God receiving is not understood
in the same sense as in creatures... . For, since the
divine persons are simple, that which receives is not
different from that which is received... . Moreover,
the person who receives was not at some time lacking what
is received, because the Son had from eternity what He
received from the Father, and the Holy Ghost had from
eternity what He received from the Father and the
Son... . Therefore the Holy Ghost receives from the
Son as the Son receives from the Father. Therefore in
God to receive denotes the order of origin."[429]
Objection. "To receive of Mine" must be understood as
referring only to the communication of the knowledge of the
future because "and shall show it to you" follows
immediately.
Reply. The Holy Ghost appears as a divine person from
the other texts quoted and is therefore called the Spirit
of truth. But a divine person who is not incarnate cannot
receive the knowledge of futures except by receiving the
divine nature because in the divine nature this knowledge
is uncreated and identified with the divine nature. The
text confirms this argument in the words: "All things
whatsoever the Father hath, are Mine; therefore I said
that He shall receive of Mine." Here the reason is
assigned why the Holy Ghost proceeds also from the Son,
namely, because the Son has whatever the Father has,
including active spiration.
3. In several passages of the Scripture the Holy
Ghost is called the Spirit of the Son or the Spirit of
Christ Jesus: "God hath sent the Spirit of His Son
into your hearts, crying: Abba, Father."[430]
From the use of the word "sent" we see reference is made
to the Holy Ghost, sent by the Father and the Son on
Pentecost, who dwells in the hearts of the just, as
St. Paul frequently says.[431] Further
confirmation is found in St. Paul's words to the
Romans: "But you are not in the flesh, but in the
spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is
none of His."[432]
In this last text the Holy Ghost dwelling in the souls
of men is called the Spirit not only of the Father but
also of Christ, as in the words of Christ, "But when
the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the
Father."[433] Again in the Acts of the
Apostles, "They attempted to go into Bithynia, and
the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not."[434] From
these texts the following argument is constructed: here
the Holy Ghost is called the Spirit of the Son. But
he could not be so called unless He proceeded from the
Son just as He is called the Spirit of the Father
because He proceeds from the Father. In other words,
if the Greeks admit that the Spirit of the Father is the
Spirit proceeding from the Father, why do they not admit
that the Spirit of the Son is the Spirit proceeding from
the Son? This argument is found in the writings of St.
Augustine: "Why therefore do we not believe that the
Holy Ghost proceeds also from the Son since He is also
the Spirit of the Son?"[435]
The testimony of tradition. Is the procession of the
Holy Ghost from the Son explicitly found in tradition as
expressed by the Fathers?
Since the Greeks admit this doctrine is found in the
Latin Fathers, it will be sufficient to refer to the
Greek Fathers who wrote on the Trinity: St.
Athanasius, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Cyril of
Alexandria.[436]
St. Athanasius writing to Serapion said: "We find
that the same property that the Son has to the Father,
the Holy Ghost has to the Son."[437] In another
place St. Athanasius calls the Son "the font of the
Holy Ghost."[438] St. Gregory of Nyssa
explains this truth by a comparison: "The Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghost are like three lights of which
the second is lit by the first and the third by the
second."[439] St. Cyril of Alexandria is more
explicit: "since therefore the Holy Ghost dwelling in
us makes us comformable to the Father, He truly proceeds
from the Father and the Son, and it is clear from the
divine essence that He is essentially in it and proceeding
from it, just as the breath comes from the human mouth,
although this is a humble and unworthy illustration of such
a sublime thing."[440]
Many of the Greek Fathers explain this truth in a
slightly different manner, declaring that the Holy Ghost
proceeds from the Father through the Son. This
expression was explained by the Council of Florence with
the approval of the Greeks.[441]
The Church's doctrine on this point is found in the
synods and councils held prior to the Greek schism.
In the profession of faith presented by the bishops of
Africa to King Hunneric in the fifth century, we read:
"We believe that the unbegotten Father and the Son
begotten of the Father and the Holy Ghost, proceeding
from the Father and the Son, are of one
substance."[442] The synod of Alexandria approved
the letter in which St. Cyril wrote that the Holy
Ghost "proceeded from the Father and the Son, " and
this letter was later applauded by the Councils of
Ephesus, Chalcedon, and Constantinople (II).
In the ninth century the Roman Pontiffs approved the
addition of the Filioque to the creed; later with the
consent of the Greeks it was defined in the Fourth
Lateran Council,[443] and in the Council of
Florence.[444]
|
|