Re: filioque in plain english
I Think that I would have to agree, that the Holy Spirit is not a composite. However if this is the case, and the Fathers are to be interpreted as speaking of the eternal procession of the Spirit through the Son, then it can be reasonably stated that everything that the Spirit has, Nature, Person, energies, existence Come through the son. But that the son is not the Source, Instead the Spirit like a Reservoir Flows (Proceeds) through a River (The Son) from a spring (The Father) .
if we say that on one thing proceeds through the Son and other things not, then we are doomed to composites.
However if this is true then it must be stated that no Father spoke of an eternal procession of the Spirit in anyway, I dont think anyone is of this opinion. If we state that they meant manifestations (to make known from what I gather) then we say that the Spirit is eternally made known through the Son. If this is true however, how do we reconcile this with statement that say that everything the Spirit has is through the Son?
I would like to hear your comments Mardukm on the use of ekporuesai at florence, If possible. As I always understood it this term was to be avoided like the plague in its attachement to the Phrase "and the son" as opposed to "through the Son." My question then what did florence mean? If I recall it was also recorded somewhere that the Greeks at lyon (?) sang the Filioque 3 times, was this with ekporuesai also?