What does it mean that the Holy Spirit proceeds "through the Son?"

[Gabriel12]

Hi Gabriel and welcome to CF and to TAW.

I think what abacabb means is that the question you are answering is not the one they are asking. Which is ok.

I think what they are getting at is discussing Rome's reasoning and justification for their attempts to modify the Nicene Creed, which was a statement the early Church made to set forth basic Christian belief in defense against all the heresies that were arising at that time. Our Church is an ancient one - we are still in communion with the existing Churches mentioned in Scripture (except Rome, which became Catholicism).

The 3 Persons of the Holy Trinity are the Father, Who is the eternal Source; the Son Who is begotten of the Father (our Lord Jesus Christ, Who was incarnate, crucified, resurrected, etc.); and the Holy Spirit.

I'll let someone else comment on the Economy of Salvation. But I think they were really asking about Rome changing the Creed and later attempts to justify having done so.

Again, welcome to CF. If you have any questions about the forums, please feel free to ask. God be with you.

 

[Lukaris]

“..the Son and the Holy Spirit are regarded as not unoriginate, and yet as from all eternity. They are not unoriginate because the Father is their origin & source; but They are eternal in that They coexist with the Father, the one begotten by Him and the other proceeding from Him from all eternity.” St Thalassios (7th c. AD) Philokalia vol.2, 4th Century (groups of texts).

I know we confess that the Holy Spirit spoke through the prophets but I think the Son did on a few occasions. For ex. Isaiah 48:16, “Come near to Me, hear this. I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; From the time that it was, I was there; And the Lord God and His Spirit Have sent Me.” (NKJV).

I typed out the NKJV because I think it is more precise than the CF linked translation (which is good & I am so glad we have otherwise).

 

[abacabb3]

the procession through the Son is economic. the Spirit's eternal relation to the Son is He rests within Him.

What does rest within Him mean and what's its relation to the Spirit's eternal origins?

 

[ArmyMatt]

What does rest within Him mean and what's its relation to the Spirit's eternal origins?

we don't know, only that resting in the Son has nothing to do with His cause, which is from the Father alone. all we can say is that it is distinct.

 

[truefiction1]

“through the son” is the most important part. No one gets to heaven except through Me. Christ is the connection to God. Christ is the giver of the Holy Spirit. Christ is the savior of sins. Christ is our way into the trinity. To be one with them.

When they say these things, they speak of God's relationship to all that which exists outside of the Uncreated One, the Holy Trinity. We cannot speak about the relationships between the uncreated Persons, Whose very mode of existence is unfathomable, in this way, because it's not possible for us to understand them.

 

[disciple Clint]

Hey guys, I was reading Tertullian's and Hippolytus' early speculation on the doctrine of the Trinity and I was interested that as early as Tertullian, was not only the doctrine of Christ's humanity AND divinity explicitly defended, so was the idea of God being one essence and three distinct persons. Reading Tertullian, he used the term "through the Son" to speak of the Spirit's eternal procession.

However, I have noticed that Photius in the Mystagogy does not really do justice to the term "through the Son" when we discuss of how the Holy Spirit was eternally proceeded from the Father before time. St Photius only treats the temporal procession of the Spirit through the Son (i.e. after the Resurrection, Christ sends the Spirit...but obviously this has nothing to do with the Spirit's eternal generation).

St Basil in On the Holy Spirit writes:

"Thus the way of the knowledge of God lies from One Spirit through the One Son to the One Father, and conversely the natural Goodness and the inherent Holiness and the royal Dignity extend from the Father through the Only-begotten to the Spirit. Thus there is both acknowledgment of the hypostases and the true dogma of the Monarchy is not lost" (CHap 47).

St John of Damascus in An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith writes: "And the Holy Spirit is the power of the Father revealing the hidden mysteries of His Divinity, proceeding from the Father through the Son in a manner known to Himself, but different from that of generation." (Chapter 12).

My question is what does this mean? St Gregory of Nyssa used the following example to show how the Spirit proceeds through the Son:

It is as if a man were to see a separate flame burning on three torches (and we will suppose that the third flame is caused by that of the first being transmitted to the middle, and then kindling the end torch).

So, if the eternal procession of the Spirit is akin to a third torch getting a flame from a second torch, whose flame was received from the first torch...how is this different than the RC doctrine that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and Son. Granted, both torches are not lighting the Spirit at the same time so to say, but going by Gregory of Nyssa's example, the flame does make its way from the Father through the Son to the Spirit.

It would be like me saying I took the train through Germany and France before I made it to Spain, or I proceeded from Germany and France to get to Spain. Sure, I was in Germany first, but the word "and" does not undo that proceeded from two points to get to a third.

Did St Photius deal with the is of eternal procession?

Filioque | Catholic Answers

 

[truefiction1]

Filioque | Catholic Answers

Again, the article fails to distinguish between economic and eternal, denying that there's any difference, and even stating that the economic (external) expresses the eternal (internal) relationships between the Divine Persons. This claim is rejected by the Church, and for very important reasons, whether the believer can comprehend these reasons or not.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Filioque | Catholic Answers

this is also inaccurate to Rome's own history. "from the Son" and "through the Son" didn't always mean the same thing to them.

 

[TheLostCoin]

this is also inaccurate to Rome's own history. "from the Son" and "through the Son" didn't always mean the same thing to them.

Which is why the Roman Catholic Church also forced certain Byzantine Catholic Churches to put the "Filioque" in the Creed before the Vatican II reforms.

It's in the past, and they thought what they were doing was morally right, but it's further evidence that the understanding of "through the Son" vs. "from the Son" was different.

 

[TheLostCoin]

we don't know, only that resting in the Son has nothing to do with His cause, which is from the Father alone. all we can say is that it is distinct.

How is the Holy Spirit eternally resting in the Son from the Father different than the Holy Spirit eternally processing from the Father through the Son?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Which is why the Roman Catholic Church also forced certain Byzantine Catholic Churches to put the "Filioque" in the Creed before the Vatican II reforms.

It's in the past, and they thought what they were doing was morally right, but it's further evidence that the understanding of "through the Son" vs. "from the Son" was different.

absolutely. plus, 2 Lyons (I think) condemns anyone who doesn't have the filioque in the Creed.

 

[ArmyMatt]

How is the Holy Spirit eternally resting in the Son from the Father different than the Holy Spirit eternally processing from the Father through the Son?

the former is true even before Creation. the latter occurs since God created, as it is through the Incarnate Logos that the Spirit proceeds into Creation, but from the Father as the Spirit's sole cause.

 

[TheLostCoin]

Another quick question: how do the Orthodox interpret Revelation 22:1?

EDIT: Not Revelation 22:22 (that doesn't exist), Revelation 22:1.

 

[TheLostCoin]

the former is true even before Creation. the latter occurs since God created, as it is through the Incarnate Logos that the Spirit proceeds into Creation, but from the Father as the Spirit's sole cause.

Okay, but what I'm wondering is if the Holy Spirit eternally is from the Father and rests in the Son - eternally - how is it that the Procession of the Spirit through the Son isn't eternal but merely temporal?

 

[TheLostCoin]

Also, what is the difference between hypostatic, eternal, and essential relations?

 

[truefiction1]

B

Okay, but what I'm wondering is if the Holy Spirit eternally is from the Father and rests in the Son - eternally - how is it that the Procession of the Spirit through the Son isn't eternal but merely temporal?

Because "creation" is not eternal. Creation has a beginning, so the Spirit proceeding to the creation of things that exist "in time", is not an eternal procession, it is an "economic" procession. Eternity, none of us can grasp, as we can not grasp the essence of God or the manner of the relationships between the Persons of the Godhead.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Okay, but what I'm wondering is if the Holy Spirit eternally is from the Father and rests in the Son - eternally - how is it that the Procession of the Spirit through the Son isn't eternal but merely temporal?

it's temporal because Creation is not eternal.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Also, what is the difference between hypostatic, eternal, and essential relations?

hypostatic means personal, so that's how the Three Persons relate to each other. these relations are eternal in that all Three are eternal. not sure what an essential relation is, as an essence doesn't relate but a hypostasis does.

 

[TheLostCoin]

The Filioque controversy has always been one that's difficult to grasp for me, so thanks!

I think I understand to a greater degree what the problems of the Filioque are (still don't fully understand it, but it's much clearer what the problem is).

 

[abacabb3]

we don't know, only that resting in the Son has nothing to do with His cause, which is from the Father alone. all we can say is that it is distinct.

Father, forgive me, but I am really trying to understand what the fathers are writing about and I don't remember the term "resting" being used by them. So I really don;t get it. I do get the Holy Spirit has no principle cause other than the Father, but the Son (according to the Father's) has some sort of role in the Son's procession that pertains to origins and I just want to know whether our theology has changed is not addressing what some of these father;s or writings about or what's going on here