Chapters 19–26

Chapter XIX. Against those who assert that the Spirit ought not to be glorified

48.  “Be it so,” it is rejoined, “but glory is by no means so absolutely due to the Spirit as to require His exaltation by us in doxologies.”  Whence then could we get demonstrations of the dignity of the Spirit, “passing all understanding,” if His communion with the Father and the Son were not reckoned by our opponents as good for testimony of His rank?  It is, at all events, possible for us to arrive to a certain extent at intelligent apprehension of the sublimity of His nature and of His unapproachable power, by looking at the meaning of His title, and at the magnitude of His operations, and by His good gifts bestowed on us or rather on all creation.  He is called Spirit, as “God is a Spirit,” and “the breath of our nostrils, the anointed of the Lord.”  He is called holy, as the Father is holy, and the Son is holy, for to the creature holiness was brought in from without, but to the Spirit holiness is the fulfilment of nature, and it is for this reason that He is described not as being sanctified, but as sanctifying.  He is called good, as the Father is good, and He who was begotten of the Good is good, and to the Spirit His goodness is essence.  He is called upright, as “the Lord is upright,” in that He is Himself truth, and is Himself Righteousness, having no divergence nor leaning to one side or to the other, on account of the immutability of His substance.  He is called Paraclete, like the Only begotten, as He Himself says, “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another comforter.”  Thus names are borne by the Spirit in common with the Father and the Son, and He gets these titles from His natural and close relationship.  From what other source could they be derived?  Again He is called royal, Spirit of truth, and Spirit of wisdom.  “The Spirit of God,” it is said “hath made me,” and God filled Bezaleel with “the divine Spirit of wisdom and understanding and knowledge.”  Such names as these are super-eminent and mighty, but they do not transcend His glory.

49.  And His operations, what are they?  For majesty ineffable, and for numbers innumerable.  How shall we form a conception of what extends beyond the ages?  What were His operations before that creation whereof we can conceive?  How great the grace which He conferred on creation?  What the power exercised by Him over the ages to come?  He existed; He pre-existed; He co-existed with the Father and the Son before the ages.  It follows that, even if you can conceive of anything beyond the ages, you will find the Spirit yet further above and beyond.  And if you think of the creation, the powers of the heavens were established by the Spirit, the establishment being understood to refer to disability to fall away from good.  For it is from the Spirit that the powers derive their close relationship to God, their inability to change to evil, and their continuance in blessedness.  Is it Christ’s advent?  The Spirit is forerunner.  Is there the incarnate presence?  The Spirit is inseparable.  Working of miracles, and gifts of healing are through the Holy Spirit.  Demons were driven out by the Spirit of God.  The devil was brought to naught by the presence of the Spirit.  Remission of sins was by the gift of the Spirit, for “ye were washed, ye were sanctified,…in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the holy Spirit of our God.”  There is close relationship with God through the Spirit, for “God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father.”  The resurrection from the dead is effected by the operation of the Spirit, for “Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created; and Thou renewest the face of the earth.”  If here creation may be taken to mean the bringing of the departed to life again, how mighty is not the operation of the Spirit, Who is to us the dispenser of the life that follows on the resurrection, and attunes our souls to the spiritual life beyond?  Or if here by creation is meant the change to a better condition of those who in this life have fallen into sin, (for it is so understood according to the usage of Scripture, as in the words of Paul “if any man be in Christ he is a new creature”), the renewal which takes place in this life, and the transmutation from our earthly and sensuous life to the heavenly conversation which takes place in us through the Spirit, then our souls are exalted to the highest pitch of admiration.  With these thoughts before us are we to be afraid of going beyond due bounds in the extravagance of the honour we pay?  Shall we not rather fear lest, even though we seem to give Him the highest names which the thoughts of man can conceive or man’s tongue utter, we let our thoughts about Him fall too low?

It is the Spirit which says, as the Lord says, “Get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing:  for I have sent them.”  Are these the words of an inferior, or of one in dread?  “Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.”  Does a slave speak thus?  And Isaiah, “The Lord God and His Spirit hath sent me,” and “the Spirit came down from the Lord and guided them.”  And pray do not again understand by this guidance some humble service, for the Word witnesses that it was the work of God;—“Thou leddest thy people,” it is said “like a flock,” and “Thou that leadest Joseph like a flock,” and “He led them on safely, so that they feared not.”  Thus when you hear that when the Comforter is come, He will put you in remembrance, and “guide you into all truth,” do not misrepresent the meaning.

50.  But, it is said that “He maketh intercession for us.”  It follows then that, as the suppliant is inferior to the benefactor, so far is the Spirit inferior in dignity to God.  But have you never heard concerning the Only-begotten that He “is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us”?  Do not, then, because the Spirit is in you,—if indeed He is at all in you,—nor yet because He teaches us who were blinded, and guides us to the choice of what profits us,—do not for this reason allow yourself to be deprived of the right and holy opinion concerning Him.  For to make the loving kindness of your benefactor a ground of ingratitude were indeed a very extravagance of unfairness.  “Grieve not the Holy Spirit;” hear the words of Stephen, the first fruits of the martyrs, when he reproaches the people for their rebellion and disobedience; “you do always,” he says, “resist the Holy Ghost;” and again Isaiah,—“They vexed His Holy Spirit, therefore He was turned to be their enemy;” and in another passage, “the house of Jacob angered the Spirit of the Lord.”  Are not these passages indicative of authoritative power?  I leave it to the judgment of my readers to determine what opinions we ought to hold when we hear these passages; whether we are to regard the Spirit as an instrument, a subject, of equal rank with the creature, and a fellow servant of ourselves, or whether, on the contrary, to the ears of the pious the mere whisper of this blasphemy is not most grievous.  Do you call the Spirit a servant?  But, it is said, “the servant knoweth not what his Lord doeth,” and yet the Spirit knoweth the things of God, as “the spirit of man that is in him.”

Chapter XX. Against those who maintain that the Spirit is in the rank neither of a servant nor of a master, but in that of the free

51.  He is not a slave, it is said; not a master, but free.  Oh the terrible insensibility, the pitiable audacity, of them that maintain this!  Shall I rather lament in them their ignorance or their blasphemy?  They try to insult the doctrines that concern the divine nature by comparing them with the human, and endeavour to apply to the ineffable nature of God that common custom of human life whereby the difference of degrees is variable, not perceiving that among men no one is a slave by nature.  For men are either brought under a yoke of slavery by conquest, as when prisoners are taken in war; or they are enslaved on account of poverty, as the Egyptians were oppressed by Pharaoh; or, by a wise and mysterious dispensation, the worst children are by their fathers’ order condemned to serve the wiser and the better; and this any righteous enquirer into the circumstances would declare to be not a sentence of condemnation but a benefit.  For it is more profitable that the man who, through lack of intelligence, has no natural principle of rule within himself, should become the chattel of another, to the end that, being guided by the reason of his master, he may be like a chariot with a charioteer, or a boat with a steersman seated at the tiller.  For this reason Jacob by his father’s blessing became lord of Esau, in order that the foolish son, who had not intelligence, his proper guardian, might, even though he wished it not, be benefited by his prudent brother.  So Canaan shall be “a servant unto his brethren” because, since his father Ham was unwise, he was uninstructed in virtue.  In this world, then, it is thus that men are made slaves, but they who have escaped poverty or war, or do not require the tutelage of others, are free.  It follows that even though one man be called master and another servant, nevertheless, both in view of our mutual equality of rank and as chattels of our Creator, we are all fellow slaves.  But in that other world what can you bring out of bondage?  For no sooner were they created than bondage was commenced.  The heavenly bodies exercise no rule over one another, for they are unmoved by ambition, but all bow down to God, and render to Him alike the awe which is due to Him as Master and the glory which falls to Him as Creator.  For “a son honoureth his father and a servant his master,” and from all God asks one of these two things; for “if I then be a Father where is my honour? and if I be a Master where is my fear?”  Otherwise the life of all men, if it were not under the oversight of a master, would be most pitiable; as is the condition of the apostate powers who, because they stiffen their neck against God Almighty, fling off the reins of their bondage,—not that their natural constitution is different; but the cause is in their disobedient disposition to their Creator.  Whom then do you call free?  Him who has no King?  Him who has neither power to rule another nor willingness to be ruled?  Among all existent beings no such nature is to be found.  To entertain such a conception of the Spirit is obvious blasphemy.  If He is a creature of course He serves with all the rest, for “all things,” it is said “are thy servants,” but if He is above Creation, then He shares in royalty.

Chapter XXI. Proof from Scripture that the Spirit is called Lord

52.  But why get an unfair victory for our argument by fighting over these undignified questions, when it is within our power to prove that the excellence of the glory is beyond dispute by adducing more lofty considerations?  If, indeed, we repeat what we have been taught by Scripture, every one of the Pneumatomachi will peradventure raise a loud and vehement outcry, stop their ears, pick up stones or anything else that comes to hand for a weapon, and charge against us.  But our own security must not be regarded by us before the truth.  We have learnt from the Apostle, “the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into the patient waiting for Christ” for our tribulations.  Who is the Lord that directs into the love of God and into the patient waiting for Christ for tribulations?  Let those men answer us who are for making a slave of the Holy Spirit.  For if the argument had been about God the Father, it would certainly have said, ‘the Lord direct you into His own love,’ or if about the Son, it would have added ‘into His own patience.’  Let them then seek what other Person there is who is worthy to be honoured with the title of Lord.  And parallel with this is that other passage, “and the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do towards you; to the end He may establish your hearts unblamable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all His saints.”  Now what Lord does he entreat to stablish the hearts of the faithful at Thessalonica, unblamable in holiness before God even our Father, at the coming of our Lord?  Let those answer who place the Holy Ghost among the ministering spirits that are sent forth on service.  They cannot.  Wherefore let them hear yet another testimony which distinctly calls the Spirit Lord.  “The Lord,” it is said, “is that Spirit;” and again “even as from the Lord the Spirit.”  But to leave no ground for objection, I will quote the actual words of the Apostle;—“For even unto this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament, which veil is done away in Christ.…Nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.  Now the Lord is that Spirit.”  Why does he speak thus?  Because he who abides in the bare sense of the letter, and in it busies himself with the observances of the Law, has, as it were, got his own heart enveloped in the Jewish acceptance of the letter, like a veil; and this befalls him because of his ignorance that the bodily observance of the Law is done away by the presence of Christ, in that for the future the types are transferred to the reality.  Lamps are made needless by the advent of the sun; and, on the appearance of the truth, the occupation of the Law is gone, and prophecy is hushed into silence.  He, on the contrary, who has been empowered to look down into the depth of the meaning of the Law, and, after passing through the obscurity of the letter, as through a veil, to arrive within things unspeakable, is like Moses taking off the veil when he spoke with God.  He, too, turns from the letter to the Spirit.  So with the veil on the face of Moses corresponds the obscurity of the teaching of the Law, and spiritual contemplation with the turning to the Lord.  He, then, who in the reading of the Law takes away the letter and turns to the Lord,—and the Lord is now called the Spirit,—becomes moreover like Moses, who had his face glorified by the manifestation of God.  For just as objects which lie near brilliant colours are themselves tinted by the brightness which is shed around, so is he who fixes his gaze firmly on the Spirit by the Spirit’s glory somehow transfigured into greater splendour, having his heart lighted up, as it were, by some light streaming from the truth of the Spirit.  And, this is “being changed from the glory” of the Spirit “into” His own “glory,” not in niggard degree, nor dimly and indistinctly, but as we might expect any one to be who is enlightened by the Spirit.  Do you not, O man, fear the Apostle when he says “Ye are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you”?  Could he ever have brooked to honour with the title of “temple” the quarters of a slave?  How can he who calls Scripture “God-inspired,” because it was written through the inspiration of the Spirit, use the language of one who insults and belittles Him?

Chapter XXII. Establishment of the natural communion of the Spirit from His being, equally with the Father and the Son, unapproachable in thought

53.  Moreover the surpassing excellence of the nature of the Spirit is to be learned not only from His having the same title as the Father and the Son, and sharing in their operations, but also from His being, like the Father and the Son, unapproachable in thought.  For what our Lord says of the Father as being above and beyond human conception, and what He says of the Son, this same language He uses also of the Holy Ghost.  “O righteous Father,” He says, “the world hath not known Thee,” meaning here by the world not the complex whole compounded of heaven and earth, but this life of ours subject to death, and exposed to innumerable vicissitudes.  And when discoursing of Himself He says, “Yet a little while and the world seeth me no more, but ye see me;” again in this passage, applying the word world to those who being bound down by this material and carnal life, and beholding the truth by material sight alone, were ordained, through their unbelief in the resurrection, to see our Lord no more with the eyes of the heart.  And He said the same concerning the Spirit.  “The Spirit of truth,” He says, “whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him:  but ye know Him, for He dwelleth with you.”  For the carnal man, who has never trained his mind to contemplation, but rather keeps it buried deep in lust of the flesh, as in mud, is powerless to look up to the spiritual light of the truth.  And so the world, that is life enslaved by the affections of the flesh, can no more receive the grace of the Spirit than a weak eye the light of a sunbeam.  But the Lord, who by His teaching bore witness to purity of life, gives to His disciples the power of now both beholding and contemplating the Spirit.  For “now,” He says, “Ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you,” wherefore “the world cannot receive Him, because it seeth Him not,…but ye know Him; for he dwelleth with you.”  And so says Isaiah;—“He that spread forth the earth and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and Spirit to them that trample on it”; for they that trample down earthly things and rise above them are borne witness to as worthy of the gift of the Holy Ghost.  What then ought to be thought of Him whom the world cannot receive, and Whom saints alone can contemplate through pureness of heart?  What kind of honours can be deemed adequate to Him?

Chapter XXIII. The glorifying of the enumeration of His attributes

54.  Now of the rest of the Powers each is believed to be in a circumscribed place.  The angel who stood by Cornelius was not at one and the same moment with Philip; nor yet did the angel who spoke with Zacharias from the altar at the same time occupy his own post in heaven.  But the Spirit is believed to have been operating at the same time in Habakkuk and in Daniel at Babylon, and to have been at the prison with Jeremiah, and with Ezekiel at the Chebar.  For the Spirit of the Lord filleth the world, and “whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?”  And, in the words of the Prophet, “For I am with you, saith the Lord…and my spirit remaineth among you.”  But what nature is it becoming to assign to Him who is omnipresent, and exists together with God?  The nature which is all-embracing, or one which is confined to particular places, like that which our argument shews the nature of angels to be?  No one would so say.  Shall we not then highly exalt Him who is in His nature divine, in His greatness infinite, in His operations powerful, in the blessings He confers, good?  Shall we not give Him glory?  And I understand glory to mean nothing else than the enumeration of the wonders which are His own.  It follows then that either we are forbidden by our antagonists even to mention the good things which flow to us from Him. or on the other hand that the mere recapitulation of His attributes is the fullest possible attribution of glory.  For not even in the case of the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and of the Only begotten Son, are we capable of giving Them glory otherwise than by recounting, to the extent of our powers, all the wonders that belong to Them.

Chapter XXIV. Proof of the absurdity of the refusal to glorify the Spirit, from the comparison of things glorified in creation

55.  Furthermore man is “crowned with glory and honour,” and “glory, honour and peace” are laid up by promise “to every man that worketh good.”  There is moreover a special and peculiar glory for Israelites “to whom,” it is said “pertaineth the adoption and the glory…and the service,” and the Psalmist speaks of a certain glory of his own, “that my glory may sing praise to Thee;” and again “Awake up my glory” and according to the Apostle there is a certain glory of sun and moon and stars, and “the ministration of condemnation is glorious.”  While then so many things are glorified, do you wish the Spirit alone of all things to be unglorified?  Yet the Apostle says “the ministration of the Spirit is glorious.”  How then can He Himself be unworthy of glory?  How according to the Psalmist can the glory of the just man be great and according to you the glory of the Spirit none?  How is there not a plain peril from such arguments of our bringing on ourselves the sin from which there is no escape?  If the man who is being saved by works of righteousness glorifies even them that fear the Lord much less would he deprive the Spirit of the glory which is His due.

Grant, they say, that He is to be glorified, but not with the Father and the Son.  But what reason is there in giving up the place appointed by the Lord for the Spirit, and inventing some other?  What reason is there for robbing of His share of glory Him Who is everywhere associated with the Godhead; in the confession of the Faith, in the baptism of redemption, in the working of miracles, in the indwelling of the saints, in the graces bestowed on obedience?  For there is not even one single gift which reaches creation without the Holy Ghost; when not even a single word can be spoken in defence of Christ except by them that are aided by the Spirit, as we have learnt in the Gospels from our Lord and Saviour.  And I know not whether any one who has been partaker of the Holy Spirit will consent that we should overlook all this, forget His fellowship in all things, and tear the Spirit asunder from the Father and the Son.  Where then are we to take Him and rank Him?  With the creature?  Yet all the creature is in bondage, but the Spirit maketh free.  “And where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”  Many arguments might be adduced to them that it is unseemly to coordinate the Holy Spirit with created nature, but for the present I will pass them by.  Were I indeed to bring forward, in a manner befitting the dignity of the discussion, all the proofs always available on our side, and so overthrow the objections of our opponents, a lengthy dissertation would be required, and my readers might be worn out by my prolixity.  I therefore propose to reserve this matter for a special treatise, and to apply myself to the points now more immediately before us.

56.  Let us then examine the points one by one.  He is good by nature, in the same way as the Father is good, and the Son is good; the creature on the other hand shares in goodness by choosing the good.  He knows “The deep things of God;” the creature receives the manifestation of ineffable things through the Spirit.  He quickens together with God, who produces and preserves all things alive, and together with the Son, who gives life.  “He that raised up Christ from the dead,” it is said, “shall also quicken your mortal bodies by the spirit that dwelleth in you;” and again “my sheep hear my voice,…and I give unto them eternal life;” but “the Spirit” also, it is said, “giveth life,” and again “the Spirit,” it is said, “is life, because of righteousness.”  And the Lord bears witness that “it is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing.”  How then shall we alienate the Spirit from His quickening power, and make Him belong to lifeless nature?  Who is so contentious, who is so utterly without the heavenly gift, and unfed by God’s good words, who is so devoid of part and lot in eternal hopes, as to sever the Spirit from the Godhead and rank Him with the creature?

57.  Now it is urged that the Spirit is in us as a gift from God, and that the gift is not reverenced with the same honour as that which is attributed to the giver.  The Spirit is a gift of God, but a gift of life, for the law of “the Spirit of life,” it is said, “hath made” us “free;” and a gift of power, for “ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you.”  Is He on this account to be lightly esteemed?  Did not God also bestow His Son as a free gift to mankind?  “He that spared not His own Son,” it is said, “but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?”  And in another place, “that we might truly know the things that are freely given us of God,” in reference to the mystery of the Incarnation.  It follows then that the maintainers of such arguments, in making the greatness of God’s loving kindness an occasion of blasphemy, have really surpassed the ingratitude of the Jews.  They find fault with the Spirit because He gives us freedom to call God our Father.  “For God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into” our “hearts crying Abba, Father,” that the voice of the Spirit may become the very voice of them that have received him.

Chapter XXV. That Scripture uses the words “in” or “by,” ἐν, cf. note on p. 3, in place of “with.”  Wherein also it is proved that the word “and” has the same force as “with.”

58.  It is, however, asked by our opponents, how it is that Scripture nowhere describes the Spirit as glorified together with the Father and the Son, but carefully avoids the use of the expression “with the Spirit,” while it everywhere prefers to ascribe glory “in Him” as being the fitter phrase.  I should, for my own part, deny that the word in [or by] implies lower dignity than the word “with;” I should maintain on the contrary that, rightly understood, it leads us up to the highest possible meaning.  This is the case where, as we have observed, it often stands instead of with; as for instance, “I will go into thy house in burnt offerings,” instead of with burnt offerings and “he brought them forth also by silver and gold,” that is to say with silver and gold and “thou goest not forth in our armies” instead of with our armies, and innumerable similar passages.  In short I should very much like to learn from this newfangled philosophy what kind of glory the Apostle ascribed by the word in, according to the interpretation which our opponents proffer as derived from Scripture, for I have nowhere found the formula “To Thee, O Father, be honour and glory, through Thy only begotten Son, by [or in] the Holy Ghost,”—a form which to our opponents comes, so to say, as naturally as the air they breathe.  You may indeed find each of these clauses separately, but they will nowhere be able to show them to us arranged in this conjunction.  If, then, they want exact conformity to what is written, let them give us exact references.  If, on the other hand, they make concession to custom, they must not make us an exception to such a privilege.

59.  As we find both expressions in use among the faithful, we use both; in the belief that full glory is equally given to the Spirit by both.  The mouths, however, of revilers of the truth may best be stopped by the preposition which, while it has the same meaning as that of the Scriptures, is not so wieldy a weapon for our opponents, (indeed it is now an object of their attack) and is used instead of the conjunction and.  For to say “Paul and Silvanus and Timothy” is precisely the same thing as to say Paul with Timothy and Silvanus; for the connexion of the names is preserved by either mode of expression.  The Lord says “The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.”  If I say the Father and the Son with the Holy Ghost shall I make, any difference in the sense?  Of the connexion of names by means of the conjunction and the instances are many.  We read “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost,” and again “I beseech you for the Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, and for the love of the Spirit.”  Now if we wish to use with instead of and, what difference shall we have made?  I do not see; unless any one according to hard and fast grammatical rules might prefer the conjunction as copulative and making the union stronger, and reject the preposition as of inferior force.  But if we had to defend ourselves on these points I do not suppose we should require a defence of many words.  As it is, their argument is not about syllables nor yet about this or that sound of a word, but about things differing most widely in power and in truth.  It is for this reason that, while the use of the syllables is really a matter of no importance whatever, our opponents are making the endeavour to authorise some syllables, and hunt out others from the Church.  For my own part, although the usefulness of the word is obvious as soon as it is heard, I will nevertheless set forth the arguments which led our fathers to adopt the reasonable course of employing the preposition “with.”  It does indeed equally well with the preposition “and,” confute the mischief of Sabellius; and it sets forth quite as well as “and” the distinction of the hypostases, as in the words “I and my Father will come,” and “I and my Father are one.”  In addition to this the proof it contains of the eternal fellowship and uninterrupted conjunction is excellent.  For to say that the Son is with the Father is to exhibit at once the distinction of the hypostases, and the inseparability of the fellowship.  The same thing is observable even in mere human matters, for the conjunction “and” intimates that there is a common element in an action, while the preposition “with” declares in some sense as well the communion in action.  As, for instance;—Paul and Timothy sailed to Macedonia, but both Tychicus and Onesimus were sent to the Colossians.  Hence we learn that they did the same thing.  But suppose we are told that they sailed with, and were sent with?  Then we are informed in addition that they carried out the action in company with one another.  Thus while the word “with” upsets the error of Sabellius as no other word can, it routs also sinners who err in the very opposite direction; those, I mean, who separate the Son from the Father and the Spirit from the Son, by intervals of time.

60.  As compared with “in,” there is this difference, that while “with” sets forth the mutual conjunction of the parties associated,—as, for example, of those who sail with, or dwell with, or do anything else in common, “in” shews their relation to that matter in which they happen to be acting.  For we no sooner hear the words “sail in” or “dwell in” than we form the idea of the boat or the house.  Such is the distinction between these words in ordinary usage; and laborious investigation might discover further illustrations.  I have no time to examine into the nature of the syllables.  Since then it has been shewn that “with” most clearly gives the sense of conjunction, let it be declared, if you will, to be under safe-conduct, and cease to wage your savage and truceless war against it.  Nevertheless, though the word is naturally thus auspicious, yet if any one likes, in the ascription of praise, to couple the names by the syllable “and,” and to give glory, as we have taught in the Gospel, in the formula of baptism, Father and Son and Holy Ghost, be it so:  no one will make any objection.  On these conditions, if you will, let us come to terms.  But our foes would rather surrender their tongues than accept this word.  It is this that rouses against us their implacable and truceless war.  We must offer the ascription of glory to God, it is contended, in the Holy Ghost, and not and to the Holy Ghost, and they passionately cling to this word in, as though it lowered the Spirit.  It will therefore be not unprofitable to speak at greater length about it; and I shall be astonished if they do not, when they have heard what we have to urge, reject the in as itself a traitor to their cause, and a deserter to the side of the glory of the Spirit.

Chapter XXVI. That the word “in,” in as many senses as it bears, is understood of the Spirit

61.  Now, short and simple as this utterance is, it appears to me, as I consider it, that its meanings are many and various.  For of the senses in which “in” is used, we find that all help our conceptions of the Spirit.  Form is said to be in Matter; Power to be in what is capable of it; Habit to be in him who is affected by it; and so on.  Therefore, inasmuch as the Holy Spirit perfects rational beings, completing their excellence, He is analogous to Form.  For he, who no longer “lives after the flesh,” but, being “led by the Spirit of God,” is called a Son of God, being “conformed to the image of the Son of God,” is described as spiritual.  And as is the power of seeing in the healthy eye, so is the operation of the Spirit in the purified soul.  Wherefore also Paul prays for the Ephesians that they may have their “eyes enlightened” by “the Spirit of wisdom.”  And as the art in him who has acquired it, so is the grace of the Spirit in the recipient ever present, though not continuously in operation.  For as the art is potentially in the artist, but only in operation when he is working in accordance with it, so also the Spirit is ever present with those that are worthy, but works, as need requires, in prophecies, or in healings, or in some other actual carrying into effect of His potential action.  Furthermore as in our bodies is health, or heat, or, generally, their variable conditions, so, very frequently is the Spirit in the soul; since He does not abide with those who, on account of the instability of their will, easily reject the grace which they have received.  An instance of this is seen in Saul, and the seventy elders of the children of Israel, except Eldad and Medad, with whom alone the Spirit appears to have remained, and, generally, any one similar to these in character.  And like reason in the soul, which is at one time the thought in the heart, and at another speech uttered by the tongue, so is the Holy Spirit, as when He “beareth witness with our spirit,” and when He “cries in our hearts, Abba, Father,” or when He speaks on our behalf, as it is said, “It is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of our Father which speaketh in you.”  Again, the Spirit is conceived of, in relation to the distribution of gifts, as a whole in parts.  For we all are “members one of another, having gifts differing according to the grace that is given us.”  Wherefore “the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee; nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you,” but all together complete the Body of Christ in the Unity of the Spirit, and render to one another the needful aid that comes of the gifts.  “But God hath set the members in the body, every one of them, as it hath pleased Him.”  But “the members have the same care for one another,” according to the inborn spiritual communion of their sympathy.  Wherefore, “whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.”  And as parts in the whole so are we individually in the Spirit, because we all “were baptized in one body into one spirit.”

62.  It is an extraordinary statement, but it is none the less true, that the Spirit is frequently spoken of as the place of them that are being sanctified, and it will become evident that even by this figure the Spirit, so far from being degraded, is rather glorified.  For words applicable to the body are, for the sake of clearness, frequently transferred in scripture to spiritual conceptions.  Accordingly we find the Psalmist, even in reference to God, saying “Be Thou to me a champion God and a strong place to save me” and concerning the Spirit “behold there is place by me, and stand upon a rock.”  Plainly meaning the place or contemplation in the Spirit wherein, after Moses had entered thither, he was able to see God intelligibly manifested to him.  This is the special and peculiar place of true worship; for it is said “Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place…but in the place the Lord thy God shall choose.”  Now what is a spiritual burnt offering?  “The sacrifice of praise.”  And in what place do we offer it?  In the Holy Spirit.  Where have we learnt this?  From the Lord himself in the words “The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth.”  This place Jacob saw and said “The Lord is in this place.”  It follows that the Spirit is verily the place of the saints and the saint is the proper place for the Spirit, offering himself as he does for the indwelling of God, and called God’s Temple.  So Paul speaks in Christ, saying “In the sight of God we speak in Christ,” and Christ in Paul, as he himself says “Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me.”  So also in the Spirit he speaketh mysteries, and again the Spirit speaks in him.

63.  In relation to the originate, then, the Spirit is said to be in them “in divers portions and in divers manners,” while in relation to the Father and the Son it is more consistent with true religion to assert Him not to be in but to be with.  For the grace flowing from Him when He dwells in those that are worthy, and carries out His own operations, is well described as existing in those that are able to receive Him.  On the other hand His essential existence before the ages, and His ceaseless abiding with Son and Father, cannot be contemplated without requiring titles expressive of eternal conjunction.  For absolute and real co-existence is predicated in the case of things which are mutually inseparable.  We say, for instance, that heat exists in the hot iron, but in the case of the actual fire it co-exists; and, similarly, that health exists in the body, but that life co-exists with the soul.  It follows that wherever the fellowship is intimate, congenital, and inseparable, the word with is more expressive, suggesting, as it does, the idea of inseparable fellowship.  Where on the other hand the grace flowing from the Spirit naturally comes and goes, it is properly and truly said to exist in, even if on account of the firmness of the recipients’ disposition to good the grace abides with them continually.  Thus whenever we have in mind the Spirit’s proper rank, we contemplate Him as being with the Father and the Son, but when we think of the grace that flows from Him operating on those who participate in it, we say that the Spirit is in us.  And the doxology which we offer “in the Spirit” is not an acknowledgment of His rank; it is rather a confession of our own weakness, while we shew that we are not sufficient to glorify Him of ourselves, but our sufficiency is in the Holy Spirit.  Enabled in, [or by,] Him we render thanks to our God for the benefits we have received, according to the measure of our purification from evil, as we receive one a larger and another a smaller share of the aid of the Spirit, that we may offer “the sacrifice of praise to God.”  According to one use, then, it is thus that we offer our thanksgiving, as the true religion requires, in the Spirit; although it is not quite unobjectionable that any one should testify of himself “the Spirit of God is in me, and I offer glory after being made wise through the grace that flows from Him.”  For to a Paul it is becoming to say “I think also that I have the Spirit of God,” and again, “that good thing which was committed to thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us.”  And of Daniel it is fitting to say that “the Holy Spirit of God is in him,” and similarly of men who are like these in virtue.

64.  Another sense may however be given to the phrase, that just as the Father is seen in the Son, so is the Son in the Spirit.  The “worship in the Spirit” suggests the idea of the operation of our intelligence being carried on in the light, as may be learned from the words spoken to the woman of Samaria.  Deceived as she was by the customs of her country into the belief that worship was local, our Lord, with the object of giving her better instruction, said that worship ought to be offered “in Spirit and in Truth,” plainly meaning by the Truth, Himself.  As then we speak of the worship offered in the Image of God the Father as worship in the Son, so too do we speak of worship in the Spirit as shewing in Himself the Godhead of the Lord.  Wherefore even in our worship the Holy Spirit is inseparable from the Father and the Son.  If you remain outside the Spirit you will not be able even to worship at all; and on your becoming in Him you will in no wise be able to dissever Him from God;—any more than you will divorce light from visible objects.  For it is impossible to behold the Image of the invisible God except by the enlightenment of the Spirit, and impracticable for him to fix his gaze on the Image to dissever the light from the Image, because the cause of vision is of necessity seen at the same time as the visible objects.  Thus fitly and consistently do we behold the “Brightness of the glory” of God by means of the illumination of the Spirit, and by means of the “Express Image” we are led up to Him of whom He is the Express Image and Seal, graven to the like.