I would like to take a crack of the whip here:
Resolving the discrepancies in Western and eastern Fathers:
We know what Hypostases are: Instances of an ousia.
Instantiation is basically when the essence becomes an hypostasis.
So, in order to provide a clearer understanding of the Trinity based on the Cappadocian fathers:
Can we not say that:
As the sole fount of the Hypostases of Trinity and Fount of Divinity, the Father from all eternity instantiates his own essence in the Hypostasis of the Son, and this is the Generation of the Son, his being begotten.
That, being of his Essence by Nature, and of his Hypostasis through instantiation, he is consubstantial with the Father. His particular Hypostasis has not a separate nature from the Father, but the very same Nature, albeit, he is a different instance of that nature, via Generation, from the Father's own Hypostasis by causation.
Since the Hypostasis of the Father, and the Hypostasis of the Son are consubstantial, we say the Holy Spirit is nothing other than the instantiation of the Common Nature of the Father and the Son via Procession. BUT Since the Father alone is cause, the Father alone instantiates the Common essence of Father and Son as the Hypostasis of the Holy Spirit.
Therefore, St. Photius the great speaks truly, when he says the Spirit proceeds from the Father alone. That is, from his Hypostasis alone, being caused by the Father alone. For the Father alone is cause, instantiating the Spirit, by way of Procession, from the common nature of the Father and the Son, which is one.
Nevertheless, the Latin Fathers are not wrong when they overwhelmingly affirm the Spirit takes Substantively from the Father and the Son and has his existence from the Father through the Son. This is because it is the nature of both the Father, and the Son which is instantiated as a SINGLE Hypostasis.
Therefore, it is accurate to Say, "The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son" understood as, the Spirit is Instantiated by the Father from the essence of the Father and the Son.
It is also accurate to Say "The Spirit Proceeds from the Father through the Son" understood as "The Father instantiates the Spirit from his own essence which is communicated to the Hypostasis of the Son, Through whom, and in whom the same essence passes and penetrates."
And it is also accurate to say "The Spirit proceeds from the Father alone." That is "The Father alone instantiates the Spirit, which is the instantiation of the one common essence of the Father and the Son, for the Father alone is cause."
Understanding Hypostasis, Ousia, and Instantiate in this way, and understanding the Father's Causality as instantiation (Through Generation and Procession), I cannot help but see this as resolving all the different fathers, east and west who appear at times to say Diametrically opposed things. Here, Isidore of Seville and Photius the great lock arms as brothers, not through a compromise, or a middle way, but through understanding that an Hypostasis is an instance of an essence, and that one God, the Father, is the Author of these Instantiations alone.
your thoughts?
Some quotes from the Latin Fathers that seem difficult, but when read in light of what I said, make sense:
"David sings in the psalm [35:10], saying: 'For with You is the font of Life;'because jointly with the Father the Son is indeed the source of the Holy Spirit."
St. Athanasius
"Everything the Spirit has, He has from the Word (para tou Logou)."
St. Athanasius
"Concerning the Holy Spirit I ought not to be silent, and yet I have no need to speak; still, for the sake of those who are in ignorance, I cannot refrain. There is no need to speak, because we are bound to confess Him, proceeding, as He does, from Father and Son."
St. Hilary Poitiers
"Accordingly He receives from the Son, Who is both sent by Him, and proceeds from the Father. Now I ask whether to receive from the Son is the same thing as to proceed from the Father. But if one believes that there is a difference between receiving from the Son and proceeding from the Father, surely to receive from the Son and to receive from the Father will be regarded as one and the same thing."
St. Hilary of Poitiers
"For just as "No one knows the Father except the Son, nor the Son except the Father" [Mt 11:27], so I dare to say that no one knows the Spirit except the Father and the Son, that is, the one from Whom He proceeds and the one from Whom He receives, and that no one knows the Son and the Father except the Holy Spirit, He Who truly glorifies, Who teaches all things, Who is from the Father and the Son."
St. Epiphanios Salamis
"While we confess the invariable character of the nature, we do not deny the difference in respect of cause, and that which is caused, by which alone we apprehend that one Person is distinguished from another; — by our belief, that is, that one is the Cause, and another is of the Cause; and again in that which is of the Cause we recognize another distinction. For one is directly from the first Cause, and another through that which is directly from the first Cause; so that the attribute of being Only-begotten abides without doubt in the Son, and the mediation 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."
St. Gregory of Nyssa
"The Spirit is assuredly in no way changeable; or even if some think Him to be so infirm as to change, the disgrace will be traced back to the divine nature itself, if in fact the Spirit is from God the Father and, for that matter, from the Son, being poured forth substantially from both, that is to say, from the Father through the Son."
St. Cyril Alexandria
"The Holy Spirit is called God because He proceeds from the Father and the Son and has Their essence."
"There is, however, this difference between generation of the Son and the procession of the Spirit, that the Son is begotten of One, but the Spirit proceeds from Both."
"One thing which is consubstantial with two could not at once proceed from them and be in them, unless the two from which it proceeds were one."
St. Isidore of Seville.
All of these difficult passages, which on the surface contradict a Strict Photian understanding of the Holy SPirit's procession (From The Father Alone). are really no contradiction at all if we keep in mind this one word and memorize it "Instantiation." The Father's begetting of the Son is an act of Instantiation, because the Hypostasis of the Son is the Result, and the hypostasis is an instance of the essence. So begetting the Son must be instantiation of his Hypostasis. The Same with Procession: The Father Spirates the Spirit, breathing him forth, and this act of Spiration and Procession must be an act of instantiation, because the result is the existence of the Spirit's Hypostasis. This is through the Son, precisely because the Father and the Son have the Same Nature. So, the Father Generates the Son, Instantiating his Hypostasis, and the Son, receiving his Hypostasis from the Hypostasis of the Father, and from his essence, communicates this one and same essence to the Spirit, who is Instantiated by the Father alone, from his essence that his communicated to and through the Son.
THoughts, criticism? My goal is to use the cappadocian fathers understanding of Hypostasis and Ousia, and the Idea of Instantiation (Hypostasis coming into being from essence) while taking the latin fathers seriously, and not shying away from them, and believing them to harmonize with St. Photios the Great.