5th Century North African Bishops on the Holy Ghost

 From the Reply of the Orthodox North African Bishops to the King of the Vandal Barbarian Arians in 484 in Carthage: 

"We are enjoined by a royal command to provide an account of the Catholic Faith which we hold.  So we are setting out to indicate briefly the things which we believe and proclaim, aware of our lack of ability but supported by Divine Assistance.  We recognize, then, that the first thing we must do is give an explanation of the Unity of the Substance of the Father and the Son, which the Greeks call 'Homousion.'  Therefore: we acknowledge the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the Unity of the Divine Nature in such a way that we can say with a faithful confession that the Father Subsists as a Distinct Person, and the Son Equally Exists in His Own Person, and that the Holy Spirit retains the Distinctiveness of His Own Person, not asserting that the Father is the same as the Son, nor confessing that the Son is the same as the Father or the Holy Spirit, nor understanding the Holy Spirit in such a way that He is the Father or the Son; but we believe the Unbegotten Father, and the Son Begotten of the Father, and the Holy Spirit Proceeding from the Father, to be of One Substance and Essence, because the Unbegotten Father and the Begotten Son and the Holy Spirit Who Proceeds, have One Divine Nature in Common; nevertheless, there are Three Distinct Persons.

In the Synodal Confession of the North African Fathers we do not read any mention of a Double-Procession; in the long reply given by the Bishops, they speak of the Holy Spirit as Proceeding from the Father.  Further down in the Synodal Confession, they a section explicitly speaks on the Holy Spirit and says:

  And so let us summarize what we have said.  If the Holy Spirit Proceeds from the Father, if He sets free, if He is the Lord and Sanctifies, if He created together with the Father and the Son, if He Gives Life, if He has foreknowledge together with the Father and the Son, if He is everywhere and fills all things, if He lives in the elect, if it is proclaimed of Him 'thus says the Holy Spirit' [Acts 21:11], if He appoints Prophets, if He sends Apostles, if He places Bishops in authority, if He is the Comforter, if He dispenses all things as He will, if He washes and justifies, if He kills those who put Him to the test, if one who blasphemes Him will have remission neither in this age nor the one to come, something which is thoroughly appropriate to God: all this being the case, why do people doubt that He is God, since He reveals what He is by the greatness of His works?  One Who is not different to the Father and the Son in the Strength of His works is certainly not different to Them in Majesty. 

In vain do they deny the title 'Divine' to One Whose Power they cannot refuse to acknowledge, in vain to they prohibit me from venerating with the Father and the Son Him Whom I am driven to acknowledge Together with the Father and the Son.  If He, Together with the Father and the Son, bestows on me the remission of sins, and bestows sanctification and eternal life, it would be thoroughly ungrateful and wicked of me where I not to ascribe Him Glory with the Father and the Son.  Or: if He should not be worshipped with the Father and the Son, He should therefore not be acknowledge in Baptism.  But if the words of the Lord and the Tradition of the Apostles makes it quite clear that He is to be acknowledged, lest the Faith be only half complete, who will prohibit me from worshipping Him?  For I shall also make due supplication to One in Whom I am ordered to believe.  Therefore, I shall adore the Father, I shall adore the Son, and I shall adore the Holy Ghost, with one and the same veneration."