By Henry Aloysius Barry
The so-called Greeks quote St. John Damascene to sustain their cause. They found their argument on the words: "we say that the Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Spirit of the Father; but we do not say that the Holy Ghost is of—from —the Son, though we call Him the Spirit of the Son." As a matter of fact, St. John has clearly expressed himself on the procession dia, through the Son, so as to set forth what is consistent with the other Fathers—"the Spirit is the Spirit of the Son, not that He proceeds from Him but through Him from the Father; only the Father is the cause." (primordial.) The saint wishes to convey the idea —"through" the Son that the Son is the principium of the Holy Ghost by the spirative force communicated to the Son. St. Thomas puts St. John Damascene on the catalogue of the so-called Greeks on this point. St. Thomas says, "the allegation that the Holy Ghost does not proceed from the Son was first introduced by the Nestorians, as appears from a certain symbol of the Nestorians condemned by the synod of Ephesus. Theodoret Nestorian followed this error and after Mm many others among whom was Damascene, wherefore, in this matter his opinion is not to be followed." (I. Quest xxxvi. art. 2, respond. 3.) Taking a gloomy view of St. John Damascene's testimony, we must remember as yet there was no solemn definition of the Church on the point. Suppose for one reason or another, say, for example, he had not sufficiently compared the views of the Eastern Doctors and was so led into an error, more material after all than real, inasmuch as the Fathers have frequently said that the Holy Ghost proceeds dia, through the Son—in any case he is only one doctor against a host and could not, of course, count against overwhelming opposition. Franzlein is of the opinion that if St. Thomas could have had the advantage of subsequent demonstrations of Greek theologians such as Beccus, Demetrius, Cydonius, Bessario and the rest he would not so easily have admitted that St. John Damascene was discordant. Many places in the saint's writings tell us that the Holy Ghost proceeds by the Son in such a way as to be the opposite of the Eutychian heresy, which held as blasphemous the Cyrilian definition that the Holy Ghost has His existence from the Father by the Son. The saint is far from inculcating any other production by the Son save the natural and most divine. "It remains to be explained in what sense Damascene and other Greek Doctors have taught that the Holy Ghost has not His existence perfilium, whilst with united voices they proclaim that the Father produces the Holy Ghost by the Son or that the Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son. They therefore deny that the Holy Ghost exists by the Son. (1) By any special action as distinct from the paternal; (2) Lest the Spirit would be taken in the sense in which Eunomius understood it, namely, a created thing and effect; (3) Lest the Spirit by this procession from the Son, as was understood by Apollonius, would be held as less than the Son; (4) Or finally lest the Son would be considered the primordial cause of the Spirit. On the other hand, they teach that the Holy Ghost progresses by the Son so that the Son is regarded as not without part in that natural action whereby the Father pours forth the Spirit and that the Divine Nature, by origin communicated to the Son before the Holy Ghost, will retain its natural fecundity in the Son, which begins from the Father Who alone is the Fount, the Virtue, the Well, the Principle, and therefore is called the Author of the Holy Ghost.
The so-called Greeks quote St. John Damascene to sustain their cause. They found their argument on the words: "we say that the Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Spirit of the Father; but we do not say that the Holy Ghost is of—from —the Son, though we call Him the Spirit of the Son." As a matter of fact, St. John has clearly expressed himself on the procession dia, through the Son, so as to set forth what is consistent with the other Fathers—"the Spirit is the Spirit of the Son, not that He proceeds from Him but through Him from the Father; only the Father is the cause." (primordial.) The saint wishes to convey the idea —"through" the Son that the Son is the principium of the Holy Ghost by the spirative force communicated to the Son. St. Thomas puts St. John Damascene on the catalogue of the so-called Greeks on this point. St. Thomas says, "the allegation that the Holy Ghost does not proceed from the Son was first introduced by the Nestorians, as appears from a certain symbol of the Nestorians condemned by the synod of Ephesus. Theodoret Nestorian followed this error and after Mm many others among whom was Damascene, wherefore, in this matter his opinion is not to be followed." (I. Quest xxxvi. art. 2, respond. 3.) Taking a gloomy view of St. John Damascene's testimony, we must remember as yet there was no solemn definition of the Church on the point. Suppose for one reason or another, say, for example, he had not sufficiently compared the views of the Eastern Doctors and was so led into an error, more material after all than real, inasmuch as the Fathers have frequently said that the Holy Ghost proceeds dia, through the Son—in any case he is only one doctor against a host and could not, of course, count against overwhelming opposition. Franzlein is of the opinion that if St. Thomas could have had the advantage of subsequent demonstrations of Greek theologians such as Beccus, Demetrius, Cydonius, Bessario and the rest he would not so easily have admitted that St. John Damascene was discordant. Many places in the saint's writings tell us that the Holy Ghost proceeds by the Son in such a way as to be the opposite of the Eutychian heresy, which held as blasphemous the Cyrilian definition that the Holy Ghost has His existence from the Father by the Son. The saint is far from inculcating any other production by the Son save the natural and most divine. "It remains to be explained in what sense Damascene and other Greek Doctors have taught that the Holy Ghost has not His existence perfilium, whilst with united voices they proclaim that the Father produces the Holy Ghost by the Son or that the Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son. They therefore deny that the Holy Ghost exists by the Son. (1) By any special action as distinct from the paternal; (2) Lest the Spirit would be taken in the sense in which Eunomius understood it, namely, a created thing and effect; (3) Lest the Spirit by this procession from the Son, as was understood by Apollonius, would be held as less than the Son; (4) Or finally lest the Son would be considered the primordial cause of the Spirit. On the other hand, they teach that the Holy Ghost progresses by the Son so that the Son is regarded as not without part in that natural action whereby the Father pours forth the Spirit and that the Divine Nature, by origin communicated to the Son before the Holy Ghost, will retain its natural fecundity in the Son, which begins from the Father Who alone is the Fount, the Virtue, the Well, the Principle, and therefore is called the Author of the Holy Ghost.
