[kosta50]

Was the doctrine of the Filioque, the "Double Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son," declared to be a dogma of faith in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), the Second Council in Lyons (1274) and the Council of Florence (1438-1445)?

"Any references to the procession of the Spirit from the Father and the Son does not imply heretical teaching that there is a double origin of the Spirit.

That is made perfectly clear from the proceedings of the Council of Florence refrenced above:

For when Latins and Greeks came together in this holy synod, they all strove that, among other things, the article about the procession of the holy Spirit should be discussed with the utmost care and assiduous investigation. Texts were produced from divine scriptures and many authorities of eastern and western holy doctors, some saying the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, others saying the procession is from the Father through the Son.All were aiming at the same meaning in different words.

The Greeks asserted that when they claim that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, they do not intend to exclude the Son; but because it seemed to them that the Latins assert that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and two spirations, they refrained from saying that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

The Latins asserted that they say the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son not with the intention of excluding the Father from being the source and principle of all deity, that is of the Son and of the holy Spirit, nor to imply that the Son does not receive from the Father, because the holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, nor that they posit two principles or two spirations; but they assert that there is only one principle and a single spiration of the holy Spirit" [Council of Florence, Session 6—6 July 1439]

And has that pronunciation of dogma been rescinded in the Catholic church?

What dogma? The Catholic Church does not, and never did teach double origin of the holy Spirit. That is something taught only by heretics.

[dangus]

Thanks, Kosta, that’s a perfect explanation.

[jo kus]

The Greeks asserted that when they claim that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, they do not intend to exclude the Son; but because it seemed to them that the Latins assert that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and two spirations, they refrained from saying that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

The Latins asserted that they say the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son not with the intention of excluding the Father from being the source and principle of all deity, that is of the Son and of the holy Spirit, nor to imply that the Son does not receive from the Father, because the holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, nor that they posit two principles or two spirations; but they assert that there is only one principle and a single spiration of the holy Spirit" [Council of Florence, Session 6—6 July 1439]

Good job, Kosta. Seems we believe the same thing, said differently. I think the confusion was over "Theology" vs. "Economy".

Regards,

Joe