72. There is the famous Irenæus,  6  † c. 200. and Clement of Rome;  7  † 100. Dionysius of Rome,  8  † 269. and, strange to say, Dionysius of Alexandria, in his second Letter to his namesake, on “Conviction and Defence,” so concludes. I will give you his very words. “Following all these, we, too, since we have received from the presbyters who were before us a form and rule, offering thanksgiving in the same terms with them, thus conclude our Letter to you. To God the Father and the Son our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Holy Ghost, glory and might for ever and ever; amen.” And no one can say that this passage has been altered. He would not have so persistently stated that he had received a form and rule if he had said “  in the Spirit.” For of this phrase the use is abundant: it was the use of “  with ” which required defence. Dionysius moreover in the middle of his treatise thus writes in opposition to the Sabellians, “If by the hypostases being three they say that they are divided, there are three, though they like it not. Else let them destroy the divine Trinity altogether.” And again: “most divine on this account after the Unity is the Trinity.”  9  Dionysius was Patriarch of Alexandria a.d. 247–265. Basil’s “strange to say” is of a piece with the view of Dionysius’ heretical tendencies expressed in Letter ix. q.v. Athanasius, however, (De Sent. Dionysii) was satisfied as to the orthodoxy of his predecessor. Bp. Westcott (Dict. C. Biog. i. 851) quotes Lumper (Hist. Pat. xii. 86) as supposing that Basil’s charge against Dionysius of sowing the seeds of the Anomœan heresy was due to imperfect acquaintance with his writings. In Letter clxxxviii. Basil calls him “the Great,” which implies general approval. Clement, in more primitive fashion, writes, “God lives, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.”  10  Clem. Rom., Ep. ad Cor. lviii. Bp. Lightfoot’s Ap. Fathers, Pt. I. ii. 169. And now let us hear how Irenæus, who lived near the times of the Apostles, mentions the Spirit in his work “Against the Heresies.”  11  Irenæus is near the Apostles in close connexion, as well as in time, through his personal knowledge of Polycarp. Videhis Ep. to Florinus quoted in Euseb., Ecc. Hist. v. 20. In his work On the Ogdoad, quoted in the same chapter, Irenæus says of himself that he τὴν πρωτὴν τῶν ᾽Αποστολῶν κατειληφέναι την διαδοχήν “had himself had the nearest succession of the Apostles.” “The Apostle rightly calls  carnal them that are unbridled and carried away to their own desires, having no desire for the Holy Spirit,”  12  The reference is presumably to 1 Cor. ii. 11 and iii. 1. and in another passage Irenæus says, “The Apostle exclaimed that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of the heavens lest we, being without share in the divine Spirit, fall short of the kingdom of the heavens.” If any one thinks Eusebius of Palestine  13  i.e.Eusebius of Cæsarea, the historian, so called to distinguish him from his namesake of Nicomedia. cf. Theodoret, Ecc. Hist. i. 1. The work is not extant. It may be that mentioned by Eusebius in his Præp. Evang. vii. 8, 20 under the title of περὶ τῆς τῶν παλαιῶν ἀνδρῶν πολυπαιδίας. worthy of credit on account of his wide experience, I point further to the very words he uses in discussing questions concerning the polygamy of the ancients. Stirring up himself to his work, he writes “invoking the holy God of the Prophets, the Author of light, through our Saviour Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit.”

[72] Εἰρηναῖος ἐκεῖνος, καὶ Κλήμης ὁ Ῥωμαῖος, καὶ Διονύσιος ὁ Ῥωμαῖος, καὶ ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεὺς Διονύσιος, ὃ καὶ παράδοξον ἀκοῦσαι, ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ πρὸς τὸν ὁμώνυμον ἑαυτοῦ ἐπιστολῇ περὶ ἐλέγχου καὶ ἀπολογίας οὕτω τὸν λόγον ἀνέπαυσε. Γράψω δὲ ὑμῖν αὐτὰ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς τὰ ῥήματα. «Τούτοις, φησί, πᾶσιν ἀκολούθως καὶ ἡμεῖς, καὶ δὴ παρὰ τῶν πρὸ ἡμῶν πρεσβυτέρων τύπον καὶ κανόνα παρειληφότες, ὁμοφώνως αὐτοῖς προσευχαριστοῦντες: καὶ δὴ καὶ νῦν ὑμῖν ἐπιστέλλοντες καταπαύομεν. Τῷ δὲ Θεῷ Πατρὶ καὶ Υἱῷ τῷ Κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ σὺν τῷ ἁγίῳ Πνεύματι δόξα καὶ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, ἀμήν.» Καὶ ταῦτα οὐκ ἄν τις εἴποι μεταγεγράφθαι. Οὐ γὰρ ἂν οὕτω διετείνατο, τύπον καὶ κανόνα παρειληφέναι λέγων, εἴπερ ἐν τῷ Πνεύματι εἰρηκὼς ἦν: ταύτης γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς ἡ χρῆσις πολλή. Ἀλλ' ἐκεῖνο ἦν τὸ τῆς ἀπολογίας δεόμενον. Ὅς γε καὶ κατὰ μέσον που τῆς γραφῆς, οὕτως εἴρηκε πρὸς τοὺς Σαβελλιανούς: «Εἰ τῷ τρεῖς εἶναι τὰς ὑποστάσεις, μεμερισμένας εἶναι λέγουσι, τρεῖς εἰσι κἂν μὴ θέλωσιν: ἢ τὴν θείαν Τριάδα παντελῶς ἀνελέτωσαν.» Καὶ πάλιν: «Θειοτάτη γάρ, διὰ τοῦτο, μετὰ τὴν μονάδα καὶ ἡ Τριάς.» Ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ Κλήμης ἀρχαϊκώτερον: «Ζῇ, φησίν, ὁ Θεός, καὶ ὁ Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον». Εἰρηναῖος δέ, ὁ ἐγγὺς τῶν ἀποστόλων γενόμενος, πῶς ἐμνήσθη τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐν τῷ πρὸς τὰς αἱρέσεις λόγῳ, ἀκούσωμεν. «Τοὺς δὲ ἀχαλιναγωγήτους, φησί, καὶ καταφερομένους εἰς τὰς ἑαυτῶν ἐπιθυμίας, μηδεμίαν ἔχοντας ἐπιθυμίαν θείου Πνεύματος, δικαίως ὁ ἀπόστολος σαρκικοὺς καλεῖ.» Καὶ ἐν ἄλλοις ὁ αὐτός φησιν: «Ἵνα μὴ ἄμοιροι θείου Πνεύματος γενόμενοι, ἀποτύχωμεν τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν, ἐπεβόησεν ὁ ἀπόστολος μὴ δύνασθαι τὴν σάρκα βασιλείαν οὐρανῶν κληρονομῆσαι.» Εἰ δὲ τῷ καὶ ὁ Παλαιστινὸς Εὐσέβιος ἀξιόπιστος διὰ πολυπειρίαν, κἀκείνου τὰς αὐτὰς φωνὰς ἐπιδείκνυμεν ἐν τοῖς ἐπαπορήμασι περὶ τῆς τῶν ἀρχαίων πολυγαμίας. Λέγει γὰρ οὕτω παρορμῶν ἑαυτὸν ἐπὶ τὸν λόγον: «Τὸν τῶν προφητῶν ἅγιον Θεὸν φωταγωγὸν διὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ σὺν ἁγίῳ Πνεύματι καλέσαντες.»