HOLY
412
HOLY
5i4 Tou uioO expresses directly the order according to
which tlie l'"ather ami the .Son are the principle of the
Holy tihost, and impUes their equality as principle;
the Latin formula expresses directly this equality, and
implies the order. As the Son Himself proceeds from
the Father, it is from the Father that He receives,
with everything else, the virtue that makes Him the
principle of the Holy Ghost. Thus, the Father alone
is principium absque priiwipio, ahla &vapxos irpoKa-
rapKTiKiQ. and, comparatively, the Son is an interme-
diate principle. The distinct use of the two prepo-
sitions, ix (from) and Sid (through), implies nothing
else. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the
Greek theologians Blcmmidus, Beccus, Calecas, and
Bessarion called attention to this, explaining that the
two particles have the same signification, but that
from is better suited to the First Person, Who is the
source of the others, and through to the Second Person,
Who comes from the Father. Long before their time
St. Basil had written (De Spir. S.,_viii, 21, in P. G.,
XXXn, KKi): "The expression Si oD expresses ac-
knowledgment of the primordial principle [rij! wpoKa-
TapKTiKTis ahlasY'; and St. Chrysostom (Hom. v in
Joan., n. 2, in P. G., LIX, .56): "If it be said through
Him, it is said solely in order that no one may imagine
that the Son is not generated ". It may be added that
the terminology used by the Eastern and Western
writers, respectively, to express the idea is far from
being invariable. Just as Cyril, Epiphanius, and other
Greeks affirm the Procession ex utroque, so several
Latin writers did not consider they were departing
from the teaching of their Church in expressing them-
selves like the Greeks. Thus TertuUian (Contra
Prax., iv, in P. L., II, 182): "Spiritum non ahunde
puto quam a Patre per Filium"; and St. Hilary (De
Trinit., lib. XII, n. 57, in P. L., X, 472), addressing
himself to the Father, protests that he wishes to adore,
with Ilim and the Son, "Thy Holy Spirit, Who comes
from Thee through Thy only Son '. And yet the
same writer had said, a "little higher (op. cit., lib. II,
29, in P. L., X, 69), "that we must confess the Holy
Ghost coming from the Father and the Son", a clear
proof that the two formulce were regarded as sub-
stantially equivalent.
B. Proceeding both from the Father and the Son, the Holy Ghost, nevertheless, proceetls from Them as from a single principle. This truth is, at the very least, insinuated in the passage of John, xvi, 1.5 (cited aliove), w-here Christ establishes a necessary connexion between His own sharing in all the Father has and the Procession of the Holy Ghost. Hence it follows, indeed, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the two other Persons, not in so far as They are distinct, but inasmuch as Their Divine perfection is numerically one. Besides, such is the explicit teaching of ecclesi- astical tradition, which is concisely put by St. August ine (De Trin., lib. V, c. xiv, in P. L.,'XLII,"921) : " .\s the Father and the Son are only one God and, relatively to the creature, only one Creator and one Lord, so, relatively to the Holy fihost. They are only one prin- ciple. " This doctrine was defined in the following words by the Second (Kciimenical Council of Lyons [Denzinger, "Enchiri<lion " (1908), n. 460]: "We confess that the Holy Ghost proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one principle, not by two spirations, but by one single spiration." The teaching was again laid down by the Council of Florence (ibid., n. (iOl). and by Eugene IV in his Bull "Cantata Domino" (ibid., n. 70:5 sq.).
C. It is likewise an article of faith that the Holy Ghost does not proceed, like the Second Person of the Trinity, by way of generation. Not only is the Sec- ond Person alone called Son in the Scriptures, not only is He alone said to be begotten, but He is also called the onh/ Son of God: the ancient symbol that bears the name of Saint Athanasius states expressly that
" the Holy Ghost comes from the Father and from the
Son, not made, not created, not generated, but pro-
ceeding". As we are utterly incapable of otherwise
fLxing the meaning of the mysterious mode affecting
this relation of origin, we apply to it the name spira-
tion, the signification of which is principally negative
and by way of contrast, in the sense that it affirms a
Procession peculiar to the Holy Ghost and exclusive
of filiation. But though we distinguish absolutely
and essentially between generation and spiration, it
is a very delicate and difficult task to say what the
difference is. St. Thomas (I, Q, xxvii), following
St. Augustine (De Trin., XV, x.xvii), finds the expla-
nation and, as it were, the epitome, of the doctrine in
the principle that, in God, the Son proceeds through
the Intellect and the Holy Ghost through the Will.
The Son is, in the language of Scripture, the image of
the Invisible God, His Word, His uncreated wisdom.
God contemplates Himself and knows Himself from
all eternity, and, knowing Him.self, He forms within
Himself a substantial idea of Himself, and this sub-
stantial thought is His Word. Now every act of
knowledge is accomplished by the production in the
intellect of a representation of the oliject known;
from this head, then, the process offers a certain analogy
with generation, which is the production by a living
being of a being partaking of the same nature; and
the analogy is only so much the more striking when
there is question of this act of Divine knowledge, the
eternal term of which is a substantial being, consub-
stantial with the knowing subject. As to the Holy
Ghost, according to the common doctrine of theolo-
gians. He proceeds through the will. The Holy
Spirit, as His name indicates, is Holy in virtue of His
origin. His spiration ; He comes therefore from a holy
principle; now holiness resides in the will, as wi.'^dora
IS in the intellect. That is also the reason why He is
so often called par excellence, in the writings of the
Fathers, Love and Charity. The Father and tlio Son
love one another, from all eternity, with a ))crfi'Ct,
ineffable love; the term of this infinitely fruitful
mutual love is Their Spirit, Who is co-eternal and con-
substantial with Them. Only, the Holy Ghost is not
indebted to the manner of His Procession precisely for
this perfect resemblance to His principle, in other
words for His consubstantiality; for to will or love
an object does not formally imply the iinuluction of
its immanent image in the soul that loves, but rather
a tendency, a movement of the will towards the thing
loved, to be united to it and enjoy it. So, making
every allowance for the feebleness of our intellects in
knowing, and the unsviitability of our words for ex-
pressing the mysteries of the Divine life, if we can
grasp how the word generation, freed from all the im-
perfections of the material order, may be applied by
analogy to the Procession of the Word, so we may see
that the term can in no way be fittingly applieil to the
Procession of the Holy Ghost.
V. The Filioque. — Having treated of the part taken by the Son in the Proce.ssion of the Holy Ghost, we come next to con.^ider the introduction of the ex- pression Filioque into the Creed of Con.stantinople. The author of the addition is unknown, but the fir.st trace of it is found in Spain. The Filioque was suc- cessively introduceil into the Symbol of the Covmcil of Toledo in 447. tlien, in pursuance of an order of another synod held in the .same i)lace (589), it was inserted in the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. Ad- mitted likewise into the Symbol Quicumque, it began to appear in France in the eighth century. It was chanted in 767, in Charlemagne's chapel at Gentilly, where it was heard by ambassadors from Constantine Copronymus. The Greeks were astonished and pro- tested, explanations were given by the Latins, and many discussions followed. The .\rchbishop of .\qui- leia. Paulinus, defended the addition at the Council of Friuli, in 796. It was afterwards accepted by a
