Catholic argument too:
“For one is directly from the first Cause, and another by that which is directly from the first Cause; so that the attribute of being Only-begotten abides without doubt in the Son, and the interposition of the Son, while it guards His attribute of being Only-begotten, does not shut out the Spirit from His relation by way of nature to the Father.”
Son, directly, Holy Spirit, by that which is directly, and a relationship basis.
That’s actually a very bad translation, and it would be a mistake to read the
Filioque into the Greek original. In the original Greek, it makes no mention of first cause, only being from the first. That sentence actually reads, “Τὸ μὲν γὰρ προσεχῶς ἐκ τοῦ πρώτου ὥστε καὶ τὸ Μονογενὲς ἀναμφίβολον ἐπὶ τοῦ Υιοῦ μένειν καὶ τὸ έκ τοῦ Πατρός εἶναι τὸ Πνεῦμα μὴ αμφιβάλλειν, τῆς τοῦ Υιοῦ μεσιείας καὶ αὐτῷ τὸ Μονογενὲς φυλλατοὺσις, καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τῆς φυσικῆς πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα σχέσεως μὴ ἀπειργούσις.” (
PG 45, pg 134) This passage is better translated as, “The one is directly from the first and the other is through the one who is directly from the First with the result that the Only-begotten remains the Son and does not negate the Spirit’s being from the Father since the middle position of the Son both protects His distinction as Only-begotten and does not exclude the Spirit from His natural relation to the Father.”
Shiranui’s reading of this letter is actually quite correct. Gregory of Nyssa never once ascribes causality to the Son, reserving that to the Father alone. He is instead trying to differentiate between the way we say that the Son and the Holy Spirit are caused by the cause, because if they were caused in the same way, they would be the same hypostasis. So what does he mean exactly by this ‘through’ and ‘middle position’? We can find some other things from this very treatise which explain what those mean from an Orthodox perspective.
For example, when detailing the unity of operation in the Godhead, he writes: But in the case of the Divine nature we do not similarly learn that the Father does anything by Himself in which the Son does not work conjointly, or again that the Son has any special operation apart from the Holy Spirit; but every operation which extends from God to the Creation, and is named according to our variable conceptions of it, has its origin from the Father, and proceeds through the Son, and is perfected in the Holy Spirit. For this reason the name derived from the operation is not divided with regard to the number of those who fulfil it, because the action of each concerning anything is not separate and peculiar, but whatever comes to pass, in reference either to the acts of His providence for us, or to the government and constitution of the universe, comes to pass by the action of the Three, yet what does come to pass is not three things. We may understand the meaning of this from one single instance. From Him, I say, Who is the chief source of gifts, all things which have shared in this grace have obtained their life. When we inquire, then, whence this good gift came to us, we find by the guidance of the Scriptures that it was from the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Yet although we set forth Three Persons and three names, we do not consider that we have had bestowed upon us three lives, one from each Person separately; but the same life is wrought in us by the Father, and prepared by the Son, and depends on the will of the Holy Spirit. Since then the Holy Trinity fulfils every operation in a manner similar to that of which I have spoken, not by separate action according to the number of the Persons, but so that there is one motion and disposition of the good will which is communicated from the Father through the Son to the Spirit (for as we do not call those whose operation gives one life three Givers of life, neither do we call those who are contemplated in one goodness three Good beings, nor speak of them in the plural by any of their other attributes); so neither can we call those who exercise this Divine and superintending power and operation towards ourselves and all creation, conjointly and inseparably, by their mutual action, three Gods. For as when we learn concerning the God of the universe, from the words of Scripture, that He judges all the earth Romans 3:6, we say that He is the Judge of all things through the Son: and again, when we hear that the Father judges no man , we do not think that the Scripture is at variance with itself—(for He Who judges all the earth does this by His Son to Whom He has committed all judgment; and everything which is done by the Only-begotten has its reference to the Father, so that He Himself is at once the Judge of all things and judges no man, by reason of His having, as we said, committed all judgment to the Son, while all the judgment of the Son is conformable to the will of the Father; and one could not properly say either that They are two judges, or that one of Them is excluded from the authority and power implied in judgment);— so also in the case of the word “Godhead,” Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God, and that very power of superintendence and beholding which we call Godhead, the Father exercises through the Only-begotten, while the Son perfects every power by the Holy Spirit. . .and also in this paragraph:If, then, every good thing and every good name, depending on that power and purpose which is without beginning, is brought to perfection in the power of the Spirit through the Only-begotten God, without mark of time or distinction (since there is no delay, existent or conceived, in the motion of the Divine will from the Father, through the Son, to the Spirit): and if Godhead also is one of the good names and concepts, it would not be proper to divide the name into a plurality, since the unity existing in the action prevents plural enumeration. And as the Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe 1 Timothy 4:10, is spoken of by the Apostle as one, and no one from this phrase argues either that the Son does not save them who believe, or that salvation is given to those who receive it without the intervention of the Spirit; but God who is over all, is the Saviour of all, while the Son works salvation by means of the grace of the Spirit, and yet they are not on this account called in Scripture three Saviours (although salvation is confessed to proceed from the Holy Trinity): so neither are they called three Gods, according to the signification assigned to the term “Godhead,” even though the aforesaid appellation attaches to the Holy Trinity.Now what he is pointing out is that in will and action, there is a distinctive ordering of the persons, as all energies flow from the Father, through the Son and are perfected in the Spirit. Furthermore, this ordering is eternal, as God has always willed and acted. In this way, and in this way alone, the Spirit can be said to be through the Son (as the mediate position of the Son is an eternal one mediating the energy coming from the Father and going to be perfected in the Spirit), but the Spirit absolutely cannot be said to be from the Son or caused from the Son, as this mediate position is non-causal.
) His hypostasis?
