It may indeed be undignified to give any answer at all to the statements that are foolish we seem to be pointed that way by Solomon’s wise advice, “n

 What then is the charge they bring against us? They accuse us of profanity for entertaining lofty conceptions about the Holy Spirit. All that we, in f

 What then, shall be our way of arguing? We shall answer nothing new, nothing of our own invention, though they challenge us to it we shall fall back

 We can confirm our argument by material instances. Fire naturally imparts the sense of heat to those who touch it, with all its component parts one

 If, then, the Holy Spirit is truly, and not in name only, called Divine both by Scripture and by our Fathers, what ground is left for those who oppose

 For the plea will not avail them in their self-defence, that He is delivered by our Lord to His disciples third in order, and that therefore He is est

 Since, then, it has been affirmed, and truly affirmed, that the Spirit is of the Divine Essence, and since in that one word “Divine” every idea of gre

 But if all must shrink from that, as going even beyond the most revolting blasphemy, then a devout mind must accept the nobler names and conceptions o

 If such is the doctrine concerning Him when followed out , let the same inquiry be made concerning the Son and the Father as well. Do you not confess

 If, then, they agree that the Holy Spirit is perfect absolutely, and it has been admitted in addition that true reverence requires perfection in every

 In what sort of manner, then, can you honour the Deity? How can you heighten the Highest? How can you give glory to that which is above all glory? How

 The heavens proclaim the glory of God , and yet they are counted poor heralds of His worth because His Majesty is exalted, not as far as the heavens,

 What means, then, this lowering and this expanding of their soul, on the part of these men who are enthusiastic for the Father’s honour, and grant to

 “Yes,” replies one of them, “but we have been taught by Scripture that the Father is the Creator, and in the same way that it was ‘through the Son ’ t

 What shall we answer to this? That the thoughts of their hearts are so much idle talk, when they imagine that the Spirit was not always with the Fathe

 The view which is consistent with all reverence is as follows. We are not to think of the Father as ever parted from the Son, nor to look for the Son

 If, on the contrary, this Spirit has the impulse to work, but some overwhelming control hinders His design, they must tell us the wherefore of this hi

 This is the view we take, after the unprofessional way usual with us and we reject all these elaborate sophistries of our adversaries, believing and

 But with regard to service and worship, and the other things which they so nicely calculate about, and bring into prominence, we say this that the Ho

 But if there is any of them who rejects this statement, and this idea involved in the very name of Divinity, and says that which, to the destruction o

 These destroyers of the Spirit’s glory, who relegate Him to a subject world, must tell us of what thing that unction is the symbol. It not a symbol of

 Again, let us look at it in this way. Kingship is most assuredly shown in the rule over subjects. Now what is “subject” to this Kingly Being? The Word

 For notice the amount of absurdity involved in the other alternative all things that we can think of in the actual creation have, by virtue of all ha

 Then let us look to this too. In Holy Baptism, what is it that we secure thereby? Is it not a participation in a life no longer subject to death? I th

 So that if these despisers and impugners of their very own life conceive of the gift as a little one, and decree accordingly to slight the Being who i

 If, then, every height of man’s ability falls below the grandeur of the Spirit (for that is what the Word means in the metaphor of “footstool”), what

 On the contrary the Holy Spirit is, to begin with, because of qualities that are essentially holy, that which the Father, essentially Holy, is and su

 If such, then, is the greatness of the Spirit, and whatever is beautiful, whatever is good, coming from God as it does through the Son, is completed b

 But you will say, “When I think of the Father it is the Son (alone) that I have included as well in that term.” But tell me when you have grasped the

 Do they too, then, mean this by their worship? Well, is it anything but absurdity to think that it is wrong to honour the Holy Spirit with that with w

 [Translation lacking]

The view which is consistent with all reverence is as follows. We are not to think of the Father as ever parted from the Son, nor to look for the Son as separate from the Holy Spirit. As it is impossible to mount to the Father, unless our thoughts are exalted thither through the Son, so it is impossible also to say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are to be known only in a perfect Trinity, in closest consequence and union with each other, before all creation, before all the ages, before anything whatever of which we can form an idea25    πρὸ πάσης καταληπτῆς ἐπινοίας.. The Father is always Father, and in Him the Son, and with the Son the Holy Spirit. If these Persons, then, are inseparate from each other, how great is the folly of these men who undertake to sunder this indivisibility by certain distinctions of time, and so far to divide the Inseparable as to assert confidently, “the Father alone, through the Son alone, made all things”; the Holy Spirit, that is, being not present at all on the occasion of this making, or else not working. Well, if He was not present, they must tell us where He was; and whether, while God embraces all things, they can imagine any separate standing-place for the Spirit, so that He could have remained in isolation during the time occupied by the process of creating. If, on the other hand, He was present, how was it that He was inactive? Because He could not, or because He would not, work? Did He abstain willingly, or because some strong necessity drove Him away? Now, if He deliberately embraced this inactivity, He must reject working in any other possible way either; and He Who affirmed that “He worketh all things in all, as He wills26    1 Cor. xiii. 6.,” is according to them a liar.

ἡ γὰρ εὐσεβὴς διάνοια τοῦτον ἔχει τὸν τρόπον: οὔτε πατὴρ χωρὶς υἱοῦ ποτε ἐννοεῖται οὔτε υἱὸς δίχα τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος καταλαμβάνεται. ὡς γὰρ ἀμήχανόν ἐστιν ἀνελθεῖν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα μὴ διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ ὑψωθέντα, οὕτως ἀδύνατόν ἐστι κύριον Ἰησοῦν εἰπεῖν μὴ ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ: οὐκοῦν ἀκολούθως τε καὶ συνημμένως ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ἀεὶ μετ' ἀλλήλων ἐν τελείᾳ τῇ τριάδι γνωρίζονται καὶ πρὸ πάσης κτίσεως καὶ πρὸ πάντων αἰώνων καὶ πρὸ πάσης καταληπτῆς ἐπινοίας ἀεὶ πατὴρ ὁ πατήρ ἐστι καὶ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ ὁ υἱὸς καὶ μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον. εἰ οὖν ἀχωρίστως ταῦτα μετ' ἀλλήλων ἐστίν, τίς ἡ ματαιότης τῶν ἐν καιρῷ τινι διαχωρίζειν ἐπιχειρούντων τὸ ἄτμητον καὶ διαιρεῖν τὸ ἀχώριστον, ὥστε τολμᾶν λέγειν: Μόνος ἐποίησεν ὁ πατὴρ διὰ μόνου τοῦ υἱοῦ τὰ πάντα, τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς δημιουργίας ἢ μὴ παρόντος ἢ μὴ ἐνεργοῦντος, εἰ μὲν γὰρ οὐ παρῆν, εἰπάτωσαν ποῦ ἦν, πάντα τοῦ θεοῦ διειληφότος, εἴ τινα ἰδιάζουσαν τῷ πνεύματι στάσιν ἐπινοοῦσιν, ὥστε ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ κεχωρισμένως εἶναι κατὰ τὸν τῆς κτίσεως χρόνον: εἰ δὲ παρῆν, πῶς ἀνενέργητον ἦν; τῷ μὴ δύνασθαί τι ποιεῖν ἢ τῷ μὴ βούλεσθαι; ἑκουσίως ἀπολειπόμενον ἢ ὑπό τινος βιαιοτέρας ἀνάγκης ἐλαυνόμενον; εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἐκ προαιρέσεως τὴν ἀργίαν ἠσπάζετο, οὐδὲ ἐν ἄλλῳ τινὶ πάντως τὸ ἐνεργεῖν καταδέχεται, καὶ ψευδὴς κατ' αὐτοὺς ὁ λέγων, ὅτι πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν ἐνεργεῖ καθὼς βούλεται.