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]

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 think that no one who can in any way be reckoned amongst Christians will deny that statement. What then? Is that life-giving power in the water itself which is employed to convey the grace of Baptism? Or is it not rather clear to every one that this element is only employed as a means in the external ministry, and of itself contributes nothing towards the sanctification, unless it be first transformed itself by the sanctification; and that what gives life to the baptized is the Spirit; as our Lord Himself says in respect to Him with His own lips, “It is the Spirit that giveth life;” but for the completion of this grace He alone, received by faith, does not give life, but belief in our Lord must precede, in order that the lively gift may come upon the believer, as our Lord has spoken, “He giveth life to whom He willeth.” But further still, seeing that this grace administered through the Son is dependent on the Ungenerate Source of all, Scripture accordingly teaches us that belief in the Father Who engendereth all things is to come first; so that this life-giving grace should be completed, for those fit to receive it, after starting from that Source as from a spring pouring life abundantly, through the Only-begotten Who is the True life, by the operation of the Holy Spirit. If, then, life comes in baptism, and baptism receives its completion in the name of Father, Son, and Spirit, what do these men mean who count this Minister of life as nothing? If the gift is a slight one, they must tell us the thing that is more precious than this life. But if everything whatever that is precious is second to this life, I mean that higher and precious life in which the brute creation has no part, how can they dare to depreciate so great a favour, or rather the actual Being who grants the favour, and to degrade Him in their conceptions of Him to a subject world by disjoining Him from the higher world of deity38    “Whether or not the Macedonians explicitly denied the Divinity of the Holy Ghost is uncertain; but they viewed Him as essentially separate from, and external to, the One Indivisible Godhead. The ‘Nicene’ Creed declares that He is the Lord, or Sovereign Spirit because the heretics considered Him to be a minister of God; and the Supreme Giver of Life, because they considered Him a mere instrument by which we receive the gift.”—Newman’s Arians, note p. 420.. Finally, if they will have it that this bestowal of life is a small thing, and that it means nothing great and awful in the nature of the Bestower, how is it they do not draw the conclusion which this very view makes inevitable, namely, that we must suppose, even with regard to the Only-begotten and the Father Himself, nothing great in Their life, the same as that which we have through the Holy Spirit, supplied as it is from the Father through the Son?

Ἔπειτα καὶ τοῦτο σκοπήσωμεν. τῷ ἁγίῳ βαπτίσματι_ τί διὰ τούτου πραγματευόμεθα; ἆρ' οὐχὶ τὸ ζωῆς μετέχειν οὐκέτι θανάτῳ ὑποκειμένης; οὐδένα [ἂν] ἀντειπεῖν οἶμαι τῷ λόγῳ τόν γε καὶ ὁπωσοῦν ἐν Χριστιανοῖς ἀριθμούμενον. τί οὖν; ἆρ' ἐν τῷ ὕδατι ἡ ζωοποιός ἐστι δύναμις τῷ συμπαραλαμβανομένῳ πρὸς τὴν τοῦ βαπτίσματος χάριν: ἢ παντὶ δῆλον ὅτι τοῦτο μὲν τῆς σωματικῆς ἕνεκεν διακονίας παρείληπται οὐδὲν παρ' ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς τὸν ἁγιασμὸν εἰσφερόμενον, εἰ μὴ μεταποιηθείη διὰ τοῦ ἁγιάσματος: τὸ δὲ ζωοποιοῦν τοὺς βαπτιζομένους τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστι, καθώς φησιν ὁ κύριος περὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦτο λέγων τῇ ἰδίᾳ φωνῇ ὅτι Τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστι τὸ ζωοποιοῦν. ζωοποιεῖ δὲ οὐκ αὐτὸ μόνον εἰς τὴν τελείωσιν τῆς χάριτος ταύτης διὰ τῆς πίστεως λαμβανόμενον, ἀλλὰ χρὴ τὴν εἰς τὸν κύριον προϋποκεῖσθαι πίστιν, δι' ἧς ἡ ζωτικὴ χάρις τοῖς πιστεύσασι παραγίνεται, καθὼς εἴρηται παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου ὅτι Οὓς θέλει ζωοποιεῖ. ἀλλ' ἐπειδὴ καὶ ἡ διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ διακονουμένη χάρις ἤρτηται τῆς ἀγεννήτου πηγῆς, διὰ τοῦτο προηγεῖσθαι τὴν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς πίστιν ὁ λόγος διδάσκει τοῦ ζωογονοῦντος τὰ πάντα, καθώς φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος, ὡς ἂν ἐκεῖθεν ἀφορμηθεῖσαν τὴν ζωοποιὸν χάριν καθάπερ ἐκ πηγῆς τινος τὴν ζωὴν πηγαζούσης διὰ τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ, ὅς ἐστιν ἡ ἀληθὴς ζωή, τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ τοῦ πνεύματος τελειοῦσθαι τοῖς ἀξιουμένοις. εἰ οὖν ἡ ζωὴ διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος, τὸ δὲ βάπτισμα ἐν ὀνόματι πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ πνεύματος ἁγίου τὴν τελείωσιν ἔχει, τί λέγουσιν οἱ τὸ παρεκτικὸν τῆς ζωῆς ἀντ' οὐδενὸς λογιζόμενοι; εἰ γὰρ μικρὰ ἡ χάρις, εἰπάτωσαν τὸ τῆς ζωῆς τιμιώτερον. εἰ δὲ πᾶν ὅτιπέρ ἐστι τίμιον τῆς ζωῆς ἐστι δεύτερον, ἐκείνης λέγω τῆς ὑψηλῆς καὶ τιμίας, ᾗ κατ' οὐδὲν ἐπικοινωνεῖ ἡ ἄλογος φύσις, πῶς τολμῶσι τὸ τηλικοῦτον χάρισμα, μᾶλλον δὲ αὐτὸ τὸ παρεκτικὸν τοῦ χαρίσματος κατασμικρύνειν ταῖς ἑαυτῶν ὑπολήψεσι καὶ κατασπᾶν εἰς τὴν ὑποχείριον φύσιν [τῆς] θείας τε καὶ ὑψηλῆς διαζεύξαντες; εἶτα καὶ εἰ μικρὸν τὸ τῆς ζωῆς λέγουσι χάρισμα, ὡς μηδὲν διὰ τούτου σεμνόν τε καὶ μέγα τῇ φύσει τοῦ χαριζομένου ἐμφαίνεσθαι, πῶς οὐ λογίζονται τὸ ἀκόλουθον, ὅτι ὁ αὐτὸς ἀναγκάσει λόγος καὶ περὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς καὶ περὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ πατρὸς μηδὲν ὑποτίθεσθαι μέγα τῆς αὐτῆς ζωῆς, ἣν διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ἔχομεν, διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς χορηγουμένης;