תמונות בעמוד

Ambrose, in other things, did it in this. He says, in general, that “in whatever the Trinity acts, it operates inseparably, because there is one operation of the Trinity, as it is one substance, essence, and will.” * “ The whole Trinity," he says, “ reconciled us to itself, as the whole Trinity made the Word flesh.” + He says, that “ the appearances of God in the Old Testament, might be of God in general, or of the whole Trinity, or of the Father, Son, or Spirit, according to the circumstances of the passage.” I

"The voice from heaven, • I have glorified it, and will glorify it again,' was from the whole Trinity." He says he was the first who taught that doctrine.

This doctrine of the joint operation of all the persons in the Trinity, though most conspicuous in Ambrose and Austin, is not peculiar to them ; it appears in Epiphanius and Basil. “ All works,” says the former, “ are the joint production of the Father, Son, and Spirit.” || “In every operation,” says Basil, “ the Holy Spirit co-operates with the Father and the Son.” We find the same in Theophylact, who says, “ Where there is one person of the Holy Trinity, there

Idacius Clarus shews at large, that “all the attributes of the Father, Son, and Spirit, are common; as those of God, Lord, holy, prince, king, judge, true, just, strong. They are all judges, they all operate, they are all lofty. They have in

[ocr errors]

are all." **

* “ Quicquid operatur Trinitas sancta inseparabiliter hæc eadem operatur, quia una est Trinitatis operatio sicut una est substantia, essentia, et voluntas." Ques. tiunculæ ex Libris de Trinitate, Opera, III. p. 1038. (P.)

+ “Trinitas enim nos sibi reconciliavit, per hoc quod solum Verbum carnem ipsa Trinitas fecit." De Fid. C. ii. Opera, III. p. 217. (P.)

1 " Tam enim quæsitum atque tractatum est, in illis antiquis corporibus, formis, et visis, non tantummodo Patrem, nec tantummodo Filium, nec tantummodo Spiritum Sanctum apparuisse, sed aut indifferenter dominum Deum qui Trinitas ipsa intelligitur aut quamlibet ex Trinitate personam, quam lectionis textus indiciis circumstantibus significaret." De Trinitate, L. iii. C. i. Opera, III. p. 281. (P.)

§ “ Omnes quos legere potui qui ante me scripserunt de Trinitate, quæ est Deus, divinorum librorum veterum et novorum Catholici tractatores, hoc intenderunt secundum scripturas docere, quod Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, unius ejusdemque substantiæ inseparabili æqualitate divinum insinuent unitatem.--Nec eandem Trinitatem dixisse de cælo: Tu es Filius meus: sive cum baptizatus est à Johanne, sive in montem quum cuin illo erant tres discipuli: aut quem sonuit vox, dicens: Et clarificavi et iterum clarificabo: sed tantummodo Patris vocem fuisse ad filium factum quamvis Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, sicut inseparabiles sunt.” Ibid. L. i. C. iv. p. 242. (P.)

| Παντα γαρ τα εργα οσα εςιν, αμα εκ πατρος, και υια, και αγια πνευματος γεγε: was. Hær. Ixxi. Opera, I. p. 832. (P.)

Η “Ουίω δε αν το συναφες και αδιαιρείον κατα πασαν ενεργειαν απο πατρος και διο, τα àyou avevwałos Sidamateuns. De Spiritu Sancto, C. xvi. Opera, II. p. 324. (P.)

** Ενθα γαρ μια υποτασις της αγιας τριαδος, εκει και αι λοιπαι. In Rom. C. viii. Opera, II. p. 75. (P.)


common, the appellations of fire, light, good, great, virtue, fountain, river,” c&., and thus he proceeds to near a hundred instances. *

Cyril of Alexandria proves this doctrine from our Saviour's saying, that he could do nothing without the Father ; meaning, he says, that “ he was consubstantial with him ; having equal power, the same will, and the same co-operation.” +

SECTION IV. Of the Arguments for the Divinity of the Holy Spirit.

The reasoning of the fathers concerning the divinity of the Holy Spirit lies in a much smaller compass than that concerning the divinity of the Son. One principal reason of this is, that so little mention is made of the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures, and still less that can possibly be construed into an evidence of his being a divine person. This is a circumstance that could not escape notice, and which required to be accounted for by the orthodox. Among others, Epiphanius has advanced a reason which is curious enough. "It goes upon the idea of the Holy Spirit being that person of the three which immediately dictated the Scriptures. He says, that “ the Holy Spirit says little concerning himself, that he might not commend himself; the Scriptures being written to give us examples." I I imagine, however, that the good fathers would not have been sorry if the Holy Spirit had been less observant of this punctilio; as it would have made the defence of their favourite doctrine of the Trinity much easier than, in the present state of things, they found it to be. For it was constantly observed by their adversaries, that the Holy Spirit is never once called God in all the New Testament.

Antiquity, also, and the established forms of public worship, were, in that age, strongly urged against the novel doctrine of the divinity of the Spirit. Basil parti

Bib. Pat. V. p. 419. (P.)

+ "Non potest enim Filius facere à seipso quid, visi accipiat posse à Patre. Quoniam autem æqualis operis et roboris se esse novit, ostendit quod unam ac eandem habeat cum ipso Patre substantiam, et ipse adoptat per se ad facienda, una volitione ad quodlibet simul vadens cum genitore, et ad opus consilium in oinnibus, communibus quibusdam divinitatis legibus, simul concedens. De Trinitate, L. vi. Opera, II. p. 464. (P.)

1 Και ένα μη τις ειπη, εκεν το εςι το πνευμα, επειδη περι ενος και ένας διηγειθαι και ουκ εδει το πνευμα αυτοσυνατον αυτο γενεσθαι εαυτο" αει γαρ φυλατίείαι η θεια γραφη Úgypapallos ojuse yoveitam. Hær. liii. Opera, I. pp. 475, 485. (P.)

cularly complains of his having been pressed by this argu

. ment, though he endeavours to defend himself; saying, that the authority of Gregory Thaumaturgus, his predecessor in the see of Neocæsarea, and whose memory was almost idolized in that country, was not against him, as his adversaries pretended. He likewise urges the authority of Firmilian. * But of this the people must have been as good judges as the bishop.

We have happily preserved to us the established forms of prayer and benediction in the writings of Justin Martyr, who, in his account of the administration of the Lord's Supper, says, that the minister “offers praise and glory to the Father of all, in the name of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”+ Again, he says, “ For every thing that we eat we give thanks to the Maker of all things, by his Son Jesus Christ, and by the Holy Spirit.” I

Moreover, in the Apostolical Constitutions, composed, probably, in the fourth century, according to what was supposed to have been the practice of the earliest ages, it is said, that “ God alone is to be worshipped by Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit.”8

With respect to the argument from the Scriptures, Basil contents himself with saying, that “ many things were received on the authority of apostolical tradition, and that there was no more reason to reject this than those.” ||

As the personality of the Spirit was very much questioned, Epiphanius says, that “ he assumed the form of a dove, at the baptism of our Saviour, on purpose to shew that he had a real person.” It was acknowledged, however, by Austin and others, that the Holy Spirit assumed the form of a dove body. *

“Εκ τοινυν των Γρηγοριο, και ο νυν αντιλεγομενος τροπος της δοξολογιας εςιν, εκ της εκεινε παραδοσεως τη εκκλησια πεφυλαγμενος και ου πολυς ο πονος μικρον κινηθενλι την επι τελoις πληροφοριαν λαβειν ταυτην και Φιρμιλιανω το ημεζερω μαρτυρεσι την πιςιν οι λογοι ους κατελιπε. De Spiritu Sancto, C. xxix. Opera, I. p. 360. (Ρ.)

* Και ουλως λαβων, αινον και δοξαν το πατρι των όλων, δια τα ονόματος το υιου, και τα πνευματων τε αγια, αναπεμπει. Αpol, i. p. 96. (Ρ.)

1 Επι πασι δε δις προσφερομεθα ευλογεμεν τον ποιητης των παντων, δια του υιε αυτου Ιησου Χριςου, και δια πνευματος του αγια. Ιbid. p. 97. (Ρ.)

και Θεον παντοκρατορα ένα μονον υπαρχειν, παρ' όν αλλος ουκ εςι και αυτον μονον σεβειν και προσκυνειν, δια Ιησου Χριςου του κυριου ημων, εν τω παναγιω πνευματι. L. vi. C. xiv. p 943. (Ρ.)

|| Προς γε μην το αμαρτυρον και αγραφον ειναι την, συν τω πνευματι, δοξολογιαν, εκεινο λεγομεν οτι ει μεν μηδεν έτερον αγραφον, μηδε τετο παραδεχθητω· ει δε τα πλεισα των μυςικων αγραφως ημιν εμπολιτευεται, μετα πολλων ετερων και τουτο καταδεξωμεθα. De Spiritu Sancto, C. xxiii. Opera, II. p. 357. (P.)

Η Δια τουλο καιπερ αυτου του πνευματG» το αγιου σωμα μη φορεσαντος, εν είδει σεριςερας σχηματίζεται, όπως δειξη σου και ελεγξη σου την πλανην, ότι ενυποςαλον εςι το πνευμα καθ' εαυτο, και ενυποςαίος και παθηρ, και ενυποςαλος και μονογενης.

Hær. lxii. (Opera, ΙΙ. p. 517. (Ρ.)

[ocr errors]

on this occasion, as well as of fire on the day of Pentecost for a time only, and not permanently, as Christ did his

It should seem, therefore, that this could not be a proof of permanent personality.

As Athanasius was the great asserter of the divinity of the Spirit, and of his being consubstantial with the Father, the reader will be desirous of seeing some of his arguments, and the following are a specimen of them.

“ The Spirit, he says, “ must be consubstantial with the Father and the Son, because, according to Paul, the Spirit of God searches all things, even the deep things of God.”† “ Their folly is to be wondered at, who, not admitting the Son of God to be a creature, in this thinking very justly, yet think the Spirit of the Son to be a creature." 14" This,” says he,“ is admitting a duality, not a trinity.” S Basil also calls the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Christ. ||

The capital argument for the divinity of the Spirit is, that the same things are ascribed to him as to God. This is urged by Epiphanius, who says, “ The Holy Spirit is God, because he does the same things that the Son does. Thus Christ is sent by the Father, and the Spirit is also sent; Christ speaks in the saints, and the Spirit also speaks in them; Christ baptizes, and the Spirit baptizes,” &c. I

One standing argument against the divinity of the Spirit, and a proof of his being a mere servant of the Father, and even of the Son, is his being said to be sent by them. But to this argument Ambrose says,

« The Son is sometimes said to be sent by the Spirit, as, · The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has sent me to preach the gospel to the poor,'&c. **

li John iv. 2+, it is said, “ God is a spirit;" but Ambrose read it, the Spirit is God; and he says, that this text so


« Non enim sicut Filius hominem assumpsit, ut sic in æternum permaneat, sic Spiritus Sanctus columbam vel ignem: sed factæ sunt illæ visiones de creatura inferiore, ad manifestandum Spiritum Sanctum quæ esse postea destiterunt." Quest. Ixv. Opera, IV. p. 679. (P.)

+ Λειπείαι λοιπον ομοεσιον ομολογείσθαι υπο σε το άγιον πνευμα πατρι και υιο" τανία γαρ τα τε Θεου και τα βαθη επιςαλαι το πνευμα το άγιον. Disp. cοn. Ar., Opera, I. p. 144. (P.)

1 Τελων γαρ και θαυμασειεν αν τις την ανοιαν, ότι τον υιον τε Θεου μη θελον7ες ειναι κτισμα, και καλως γε τείο φρονανίες, πως το πνευμα τα υιε κτισμα κών ακεσαι ηνεσχονία. Epist. ad Separion, Opera, I. pp. 174, 196. (P.)

και “Η γαρ ου τριας εςιν αλλα δυας. Ιbid. p. 175. (Ρ.)
|| Πνευμα και Χριςον τον αυθον ειναι. Ηom. Χxvii. Opera, I. p. 523. (Ρ.)
| Her. Ixxiv. Opera, I. p. 523. (P.)

** “ Ita et Filium Dei Spiritus misit. Dicit enim Filius Dei, Spiritus Domini super me, propter quod unxit me prædicare captivis remissionem, et cæcis visum.” De Spiritu Sancto, L. ii, Opera, IV. p. 254. (P.)

clearly proves the divinity of the Spirit, that the Arians erase it out of their books. * I do not find, however, that any

other writer mentions this circumstance. To advance the dignity of the Spirit, Job, the monk, says, “ That the Holy Scriptures call the whole Trinity by his name, in saying, God is a spirit.”

The arguments for the procession of the Spirit, either from the Father or the Son, or from both, lie in a small compass; for the whole depends upon his being said to be sent by either, or by both of them. Besides this, Austin says, that “our Saviour's imparting the Holy Spirit by breathing on his apostles, is a proof that the Spirit proceeds from him as well as from the Father.” I

It is remarkable, that the doctrine of the divinity of the Spirit was attacked with even more vigour than that of the divinity of Christ; the reason of which was, that, besides the Unitarians, the Arians joined in this attack; and being very numerous at the time of that controversy, and having sometimes the favour of the emperors, they spoke and wrote with great freedom.

We know less of the history of Macedonius, who was at the head of the opposition to the doctrine of the divinity of the Spirit, than that of Arius, or almost any other leader of

He is said not to have denied the personality of the Spirit; for Sozomen says, that “ he held the Spirit to be a person, but like one of the angels, subservient to the Father and the Son, whom he allowed to be consubstantial with each other.” The same is asserted by Nicephorus. || It appears from Athanasius, that they who held 'this opinion were also called Tropici. I That Macedonius, and his proper followers, did not deny the divinity of Christ, is evident

a seci.

* “ Quem locum ita expresse Ariani testificamini esse de Spiritu, ut eam de vestris codicibus auferatis: atque utinam de vestris, et non etiam de ecclesiæ codicibus tolleretis.Et fortasse hoc etiam in oriente fecistis. Et literas quidem potuistis abolere; sed fidem non potuistis auferre.De Spiritu Sancto, L. iii. C. xi. Opera, IV. p. 271. (P.)

* Και το αξιωμα δε τα πνευματος ή ιερα επαιρεσα γραφη, όλην την τριαδα τη του πνευμαίος εξονομαζει φωνη, ως το πνευμα ο Θεος. Phot. Bib. Sect. ccxxii. p. 623. (Ρ.)

I Neque enim flatus ille corporeus, cum sensu corporaliter tangendi procedens ex corpore, substantia Spiritus Sancti fuit, sed demonstratio per congruam significationem, non tantum à Patre, sed et à Filio procedere Spiritum Sanctum. De Trinitate, L. iv. C. xx. III. p. 313. (P.)

$ Το δε αγιον πνευμα, αμοιρον των αυτων πρεσβειων απεφαινείο, διακονον και υπηρελην καλων, και όσα περι των θειων αγελων λεγων τις. L. iv. Ć. xxvii. p. 173. (P.)

| Διακονον γαρ αυτο ειναι και υπεργον εισηγειτο, και βραχυ τι των αγίελικων διαφερον Tayuztw. L. ix. C. xlvii. I. p. 800. (P.)

“Οι δε Τροπικoι, το πνευμα και αυτοι, τοις κτισμασι συναριθμοσιν. Εpist. ad Serapion, Opera, I. p. 192. (P.)


« הקודםהמשך »