So, according to you, the Roman Church believes that the Holy Spirit is a "non-person" and establishes "semi-Sabellianism" in our Symbols of Faith (NB: the filioque is also contained in the 1998 Profession of Faith required of all Latin-rite bishops and many others under Can. 833 of the Code of Canon Law)! Why in the world do you remain in communion with us heretics?
"From the Father through the Son" means that the Son is principle of the Spirit together with the Father, as St. Thomas says: "Therefore, because the Son receives from the Father that the Holy Ghost proceeds from Him, it can be said that the Father spirates the Holy Ghost through the Son, or that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father through the Son, which has the same meaning ... if we consider the persons themselves spirating, then, as the Holy Ghost proceeds both from the Father and from the Son, the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father immediately, as from Him, and mediately, as from the Son; and thus He is said to proceed from the Father through the Son." (I q. 36 a. 3)
This was discussed and agreed upon at the Ecumenical Council of Florence, which decreed in Laetentur coeli: "we declare that what the holy Doctors and Fathers say, namely, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, tends to this meaning, that by this it is signified that the Son also is the cause, according to the Greeks, and according to the Latins, the principle of the subsistence of the Holy Spirit, as is the Father also."
The Melkite Church believes there were only Seven Ecumenical Councils
Bishop Elya disagrees with you. Why should I take your word about the Melkites over that of a Bishop of your Church?
Bishop Elya was but one member of the Melkite Holy Synod. He was one of two bishops of the 24 member of the Holy Synod who agreed to Abp. Zoghby's initiative to reunite with Orthodoxy. If you read We Are All Schismatic, Zoghby says as much.
If tagging a council with the term ecumenical makes it so, how do you deal with the fact ... [that] the council of 879 declared itself ecumenical.
The Council of 879 was not a valid Council - Pope John VIII rejected it and apparently St. Photius was again excommunicated. The acts as they've come down seem to be partially forged (e.g., a fake letter from John VIII rejecting the filioque as heretical) - check the article on this Council in the New Catholic Encyclopedia and this article by Philip Blosser on the Council of 879-880
You probably have never read Fr. Francis Dvornik's "The Photian Schism" because he completely debunks this myth. The Council of 869 was annulled by John VIII.
One author's work is not definitive. The link I gave you discusses Fr. Dvornik's work. St. Photios' story is not as clear-cut as you want to make it out to be. (I have not yet obtained Fr. Dvornik's book on this although I do intend to do it at some point).
Of course, Fr. Dvornik also says that the East did accept Roman primacy as based on Mt. 16:18. Funny that you don't mention that. Or is his work only okay when it agrees with how you want things to be?
You didn't reply before: why are you in communion with semi-Sabellian heretics like me and Pope Benedict XVI who "depersonalize" the Holy Spirit?