Augustine of Hippo 354-430 Augustine of Hippo situated on the Mediterranean Coast in today’s Algeria (354 - 430). He studied in Carthage (Tunisia), and was a latin rather than a greek speaker. He went to Rome to further his career, and to Milan and under the influence of Ambrose was baptised, and ultimately ordained, before becoming Bishop of Hippo Regius in his native Algeria. The issue of the Pneumatomachi was clearly relevant in the church in his early days. Augustine’s theology of the Spirit is sometimes characterised as ‘Procession through the Son’. Augustine was a prolific writer across a very broad spectrum of matters both theological and political. As for the Son to be born is to be from the Father, so for the Son to be sent is to be known in his origin from the Father. In the same way, as for the Holy Spirit to be the gift of God is to proceed from the Father, so to be sent is to be known in his procession from the Father. What is more, we cannot deny that the Spirit also proceeds from the Son... I cannot see what he could otherwise have meant when, breathing on the faces of the disciples, the Lord declared: " Receive the Holy Spirit”* Augustine was a profound influence of the theology of the Church as it was expressed at Chalcedon. With much of the outward trappings of the Roman Empire crumbling, Augustine saw the Church as the Spiritual City of God. Augustine is also often quoted as an authority in arguments for a theology of Double Procession. [With the Father and the Son] the Holy Spirit, too, exists in this same unit of substance and equality. For whether He be the unity of the Father and the Son, or Their holiness, or Their love, or Their unity because He is Their love, or Their love because He is Their holiness, it is clear that He is not one of the Two, since it is by Him that the Two are joined, by Him that the Begotten is loved by the Begetter, and in turn loves Him who begot Him. And yet it is not without reason that in this Trinity only the Word of God is called Son, only the Gift of God the Holy Spirit, and only He of whom the Word is begotten and from Whom principally the Holy Spirit proceeds is called God the Father. I have added the term "principally" because the Holy Spirit is found to proceed also from the Son. But this too the Father gave the Son, not as if the Son did not already exist and have it, but because whatever the Father gives the Son, He gives by begetting. He so begat Him, then, that the Gift might proceed jointly from Him, and so that the Holy Spirit would be the Spirit of both (XV, 17:29).* Augustine is not easy going, (and not all that easy to read either!) however perhaps here it can be seen, that on the one hand he proposes a notion of double procession yet the point is made that the Holy Spirit proceeds principally from the Father. Augustine also wrote ‘On the Faith and the Creed’ where he argues for the value of the Creed as a source of instruction, and avoids any suggestion that it has any shortcomings or inadequacies. The implication is that if you open the creed to change you open it to the possibility of heresy creeping in. And it must be our aim, by pious and careful watchfulness, to provide against the possibility of the said faith sustaining any injury in us, on any side, through the fraudulent artifices [or, cunning fraud] of the heretics.* I suspect those who have come after and have relied on Augustine for the approach they have taken may have missed something of this primacy of procession from the Father that he implies. Whilst Augustine does speak of the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son, it is clear he sees this as one spiration, not two. It is also to be noted that Augustine was not especially well accepted in the East, and this in part may be because he wrote in Latin. At the same time the battles in the West were still to do with Arians and others. I also don’t think that Augustine was especially rejected in the East, so much as not so well known in the East. I suspect some of what followed Augustine and developed the theology of double procession a bit further was when the East saw a problem. *Augustine - on the Trinity Aquinas 1255-1274 Objection 2. Further, In the creed of the council of Constantinople (Can. vii) we read: "We believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Life-giver, who proceeds from the Father; with the Father and the Son to be adored and glorified." Therefore it should not be added in our Creed that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son; and those who added such a thing appear to be worthy of anathema. Reply to Objection 2. In every council of the Church a symbol of faith has been drawn up to meet some prevalent error condemned in the council at that time. Hence subsequent councils are not to be described as making a new symbol of faith; but what was implicitly contained in the first symbol was explained by some addition directed against rising heresies. Hence in the decision of the council of Chalcedon it is declared that those who were congregated together in the council of Constantinople, handed down the doctrine about the Holy Ghost, not implying that there was anything wanting in the doctrine of their predecessors who had gathered together at Nicaea, but explaining what those fathers had understood of the matter. Therefore, because at the time of the ancient councils the error of those who said that the Holy Ghost did not proceed from the Son had not arisen, it was not necessary to make any explicit declaration on that point; whereas, later on, when certain errors rose up, another council [Council of Rome, under Pope Damasus] assembled in the west, the matter was explicitly defined by the authority of the Roman Pontiff, by whose authority also the ancient councils were summoned and confirmed. Nevertheless the truth was contained implicitly in the belief that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father. Thomas Aquinas - Summa Theologica - First Part - The Blessed Trinity I accept your point absolutely that there is no singular 'Eastern Mindset' on the Holy Trinity, or very much else. Sometimes I think they are like Anglicans with more adjectives! None the less the East has consistently and inherently preferred and understanding of single procession. One of the problem I honestly face in looking at some of this is quite simply I am not always sure how much of Aquinas was written under Lateran pressure, and the Lateran Understanding of Thomas's work employed at Florence perhaps exacerbated this. And the reality is that in all of this there was a lot of politics and survival at stake.
I like both points of view because they are both probably right and potentially wrong as is almost everything to do with The Holy Trinity when we make any attempt to quantify or qualify. Notice I have avoided adding 'quantify' it, or them, he, she or both because all would be wrong. For there is only ONE GOD. We know that God is 'Spirit', John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." KJV The ESV even gives "God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” So God (Theos) is not even 'a spirit' as in KJV. Just spirit. Just spirit because there is only one, being self existent. That same spirit which hovered over the primal 'waters' before anything other than itself existed. The I AM which itself exists and sustaines the existence of everything else. In this sense EVERYTHING proceeds from The Spirit of God. And that Spirit is The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit, uncreated, all one, eternal, equal in glory, incomprehensible, almighty, God, and Lord of all. αὐτός STRONG’S NUMBER:g0846 Dictionary Definition : αὐτός autos; from the particle αὖ au (perhaps akin to the base of 109 through the idea of a baffling wind) (backward); the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative 1438) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other persons: — her, it(-self), one, the other, (mine) own, said, (self-), the) same, ((him-, my-, thy- )self, (your-)selves, she, that, their(-s), them(-selves), there(-at, - by, -in, -into, -of, -on, -with), they, (these) things, this (man), those, together, very, which. Compare 848. AV (5118) - him 1947, them 1148, her 195, it... Though God is referred to as 'he' by the KJV we cannot even assume GOD to be 'male' because the word John puts into the mouth of Jesus Christ concerning the true nature of God is in fact ambiguous. It can mean not just he but also she, it, they him, their, them, those, which, etc. So we should begin to appreciate that what we are dealing with in our human understanding is the incomprehensible and the impossible of description using words of any human language. It is easier to define a thousand things that God is not than it is to stipulate a single thing that God is, using the words of human language. Which is why we can worship God only truthfully in spirit. Rom.8:26. "Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words." RSV. Once again we have the word αὐτός translated in the RSV as 'himself' but actually meaning in the original Greek FAR FAR more than just that. αὐτός STRONG’S NUMBER:g0846 Dictionary Definitiong0846. αὐτός autos; from the particle αὖ au (perhaps akin to the base of 109 through the idea of a baffling wind) (backward); the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative 1438) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other persons: — her, it(-self), one, the other, (mine) own, said, (self-), the) same, ((him-, my-, thy- )self, (your-)selves, she, that, their(-s), them(-selves), there(-at, - by, -in, -into, -of, -on, -with), they, (these) things, this (man), those, together, very, which. Compare 848. AV (5118) - him 1947, them 1148, her 195, it... .