from what Chrysostom says, with some degree of pleasantry. "The Arians suffering shipwreck, lost both the glory of Christ, and the power of the Holy Spirit: the Macedonians, striving to escape, lost half their lading."

The great weight of the opposition to the doctrine of the divinity of the Holy Spirit was in Asia Minor, where it was encountered by Basil, and the two Gregories; but it was so violent that it amounted to a kind of persecution. Nothing gives so much alarm to the people, as a change in the public offices in religion; and Basil seems to have given occasion to the violent outcry against him by singing glory to the Holy Spirit as well as to the Father and the Son. He speaks of his being persecuted on this account, in his treatise on the Holy Spirit. He speaks of the doctrine about the Holy Spirit as what interested all people. He represents it as a subject of universal discussion, even by women and eunuchs, by whom he was beset, assuming the character of judges, and not of learners."§ In another place, he complains of persons "teasing him with questions about the Holy Spirit, not with any view to information, but that if his answers should not please them, they might have a handle to make war against him." ||

He speaks of the zeal of his opponents in the strongest terms. "They would sooner," he says, "cut out their tongues than say Glory to the Holy Spirit. This is the cause of the most violent and irreconcileable war with us. They say that glory is to be given to God in the Holy Spirit, not to the Holy Spirit; and they obstinately adhere to this language concerning the Spirit, as expressing a low opinion of him."¶ "When I was lately praying before the people, and sometimes concluding with the doxology to the Father, with the Son and Holy Spirit, and sometimes through the Son in the Holy Spirit, some who were present said, that I used phrases which were not only new, but contradic

Οι Αρειανοι ναυαγησανίες, απώλεσαν και Χριςου δοξαν και άγιο πνευματος δυναμιν Μακεδονιανοι φιλονεικεσι μεν αναβηναι, το δε ήμισυ το φορτιο απωλεσαν. De Spiritu Sancto, Opera, VI. p. 220. (P.)

+ C. xxvi. Opera, 11. p. 361. (P.)

† Πασα γαρ ακοη νυν προς την ακρόασιν των λόγων των περι το άγιο πνεύματος arpeia. Hom. xxvii. Opera, I. p. 522. (P.)

§ Επειδη δε περιεςηκατε ἡμας, δικαςαι μαλλον η μαθηται, ἡμας δοκιμασαι βελομενοι, ουκ αυτοι τι λαβειν επιζητεντες. Ibid. pp. 523, 526. (Ρ.)

{ Αλλ' όπως εαν μη συμβαίνεσας τῇ ἑαυτων επιθυμία τας αποκρίσεις ευρωσι, ταύτην αφορμην δικαιαν εχειν δόξωσι το πολέμs. De Spiritu Sancto, Opera, II. p. 292. (Ρ.) Η Αλλα τας γλωσσας αν προοιντο μαλλον η την φωνην ταύ7ην δεξαινίο τελο μεν ουν εςιν, ὁ τον ακηρυκίον ἡμιν και ασπονδον πόλεμον επεγείρει· εν τῷ πνευματι, φησι, τῷ ἁγίῳ την δοξολογίαν αποδοίεον τῷ Θεῷ, εχι δε και τῷ πνεύματι, και εκθυμοίαία της φωνής ταυλης ὡς ταπεινης, το πνευματος περιεχονlαι. Ibid. II. C. xxv. p. 347. (Ρ.)

tory." He says that he was accused of novelty, and as an inventor of new phrases, and that they spared no kind of reproach, because he made the Son equal to the Father, and did not separate the Holy Spirit from the Son; † on which account," he says, " he applied to himself our Saviour's saying, Blessed are ye when men reproach you," &c. ‡ And speaking of his own resolution, he says, "We must obey God rather than man."§ These circumstances clearly shew that the great mass of the people exceedingly disliked the doctrine for which Basil contended. The same state of things appears also from the writings of Gregory Nazianzen, who says, "The heretics say, 'Who ever worshipped the Spirit, either of the ancients or moderns?" " ||

If what Jerome and others say, ¶¶ be true, that " Donatus agreed with the Arians, with respect to the Holy Spirit," it will be an argument of some weight in favour of the novelty of the orthodox opinion; for the Donatists were not distinguished from other Christians, with respect to the divinity of Christ.

One kind of argument used by the Macedonians, seems to have gravelled the orthodox exceedingly; as it affected the distinction between the Son and Spirit, which it has been seen they could never clearly make out; I shall recite the objection, as it is stated by Athanasius, Basil, and Didymus of Alexandria; and it is of a nature to relieve the dryness of these discussions.

"If the Spirit is not a creature, nor yet one of the angels, but proceeds from the Father, is he not also a son; so that he and the logos are brothers; and if he be a brother, how is the logos the only-begotten Son; and why are they not equal? But the Son is said to be begotten after the Father,

Προσευχομένῳ μοι πρώην μετα το λας, και αμφοτέρως την δοξολογίαν αποπληρεν τῷ Θεῷ και πατρι, νυν μεν μετα τε ὑια συν τῷ πνευματι τῷ ἁγίῳ, νυν δε δια το ύτε εν άγιῳ πνευματι, επέσκηψαν τινες των παρονίων, ξενίζεσαις ἡμας φωναις κεχρησθαι λέγονίες, και áμa @pos aλλnλaç væɛvarlıws exerais. De Spiritu Sancto, Opera, II. p. 293. (P.)

† Ότι μετα πατρος αποπληρεμεν τῷ μονογενει την δοξολογίαν, και το άγιον πνεύμα μη διίσωμεν απο το ὑις· ὅθεν νεωτεροποιος ήμας και καινοτομες και εφευρείας ῥημαίων, και τι γαρ εχι των επονειδίζων αποκαλέσιν. Ibid. C. vi. pp. 301, 304. (Ρ.)

† Ὧν τοσείον απεχω δυσχεραίνειν ταις λοιδορίαις, ώςε ει μη λυπην ἡμιν ενεποιεί και αδιαλειπτον οδύνην ἡ κατ' αυτές ζημια, μικρό αν ειπον και χαριν αυτοις της βλασφημίας ἔχειν, ὡς μακαρισμο προξενοις μακαριοι γαρ εςε, φησιν, όταν ονειδισωσιν ὑμας (και διώξωσι και είπωσι παν πονηρον ῥημα καθ' ὑμων ψευδομενοι) ένεκεν εμε. -Επι τείοις το πολεμικού τείο καθ' ἡμων συγκεκινηθαι ςιφος· πασαι δε πόλεις, και κωμαι και εσχαλιαί, πασαι Wanpers TWY μelegar diaboλar. C. xxvi. Opera, II. p. 861. (P.)

§ Προς ὃς δικαιον την των αποςόλων φωνην αποκρίνασθαι, ότι πειθαρχειν Θεῷ δει μαλλον na pars. Ibid. p. 313. (P.)

|| Άλλα τις προσεκύνησε το πνευματι, φησι· τις ην των παλαιών, η των νεων; Οr. xxxvii. Opera, p. 599. (P.)

¶ "Extant ejus multa, ad suam hæresim pertinentia, et de Spiritu Sancto liber, Ariano dogmati congruens." Catalogus Scriptorum, Opera, 1. p. 311. (P.)

and the Spirit is after the Son. If he be from the Father, why is he not said to be begotten, so that he is a Son, and not simply a Holy Spirit But if the Spirit is from the Son, is not the Father the grandfather of the Holy Spirit?"

"The Holy Spirit, if he be God," as the objection is stated by Basil, "must either be begotten or unbegotten. If he be unbegotten, he is the Father; if begotten, the Son; and if he is neither begotten nor unbegotten, he is a creature.""If the Holy Spirit is not created," as the objection is stated by Didymus, "he is either the brother of God the Father, and the uncle of Jesus Christ, or else he is the son of Christ, and the grandson of God the Father; or he himself is the son of God, and then Jesus Christ will not be the only-begotten Son. These," he says, "were usual topics of argument." + As no satisfactory answers could ever be given by the orthodox to these questions, which are calculated to set their doctrine in a very ridiculous point of light, it is no wonder that so long a space of time, aided by the authority of councils and emperors, was necessary to establish it.

One argument to prove that the Holy Spirit is a creature, was drawn from John i. 3, where it is said, that every thing was made by the logos, and without him nothing was made. But to this Ephiphanius answers, that the true reading was without him nothing was made that was made by him. § But this, besides suggesting no meaning at all, appears to have no authority besides his own.

In this controversy great stress was laid on the force of some Greek particles; as appears from Basil: "As it is said, 1 Cor. viii. 6, there is one God, the Father, of whom ( are all things; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom (d')

)

Ει μη κτισμα εςι, μηδε των αγΓελων εις εςιν, αλλ' εκ το πατρός εκπορεύείαι, εκεν ύιος εςι και αυτος· και δυο αδελφοι εισιν αυτός τε και ὁ λόγος" και ει αδελφος εςι, πως μονογένης ὁ λόγος, η πως ουκ ισοι, αλλ' ὁ μην, μετα τον πατέρα γεγεννηται, το δε, μετα τον διον ονομαζεται πως δε ει εκ τε πατρός εςιν, ου λεγεται και αυτο γεγεννήσθαι η ότι ύιος εςιν αλλ' απλώς πνεύμα άγιον ει δε του υιου εςι πνευμα, εκον παππῷος ἔγιν WYEUμATOS. Epist. ad Serapion, Opera, I. p 189. (P.)

πατηρ του

† Αγεννητον εςιν η γεννητον ει μεν γαρ αγεννητον, πατηρ ει δε γεννηῖον, ύιος· ει δε μηδελερον τελων, κτισμα. Hom. xxvii., Opera, I. p. 524. (Ρ.)

"Idcirco illud quod solent tractare prætereo, sacrilega adversus nos audacia proclamantes. Si Spiritus Sanctus creatus non est, aut frater est Dei Patris, aut patruus est unigeniti Jesu Christi: aut Filius Christi est, aut nepos est Dei Patris: aut ipse Filius Dei est, et jam non erit unigenitus Jesus Christus, cùm alterum fratrem habeat." De Spiritu Sancto, in Jerome's Works, VI. p. 234. (P)

§ Νομίζεσι δε παραγινωσκονίες, και μη voeνίες διαςελλειν την αναγνωσιν τινες εν τῷ ειπειν παντα δι' αυτο εγενετο, και χωρίς αυίς εγενετο υδεν ἕως ώδε απολιπενίες το ῥηλον, ὑπονοιαν βλασφημίας εις το πνεύμα το άγιον λαβονίες, σφαλλονίαι περι την αναγνωσιν και το απο το σφαλμαίος της αναγνώσεως σκαζεσιν εις βλασφημίαν τρεπομενοι· ή δε αναγνωσις έτως εχει παντα δι' αυτο εγενετο και χωρις αυτο εγενετο εδεν, ὁ γεγονεν εν αὐτῷ· τετεςι ότι 21 TI YEYOVE, di' AUTS eyeveTo. Ancoratus, Sect. lxxv. Opera, il. p. 80. (P.)

are all things; and one Holy Spirit, in whom (ev) are all things; they (that is, the heterodox) say, that the 'u and

are proofs of a different nature; and therefore, that the Son was avopoios (unlike) to the Father."*

Considering the violence with which this controversy was conducted, it shews great moderation in Gregory Nazianzen, to express himself so favourably concerning the Macedonians: for he says, "We admire their lives, but do not approve their faith." It is evident that Basil thought proper to yield, in some measure, to the times and the circumstances in which he found himself. That he might not exclude too great a number from communion, he advised that, without entering into nice distinctions, all those should be admitted who did not say that the Holy Spirit was a creature. ‡

CHAPTER X.

Of the Doctrine of the Trinity after the Council of Nice. AFTER the Council of Nice, we find a very different kind of orthodoxy from that which prevailed before. It was a maxim with the Antenicene writers, that the Son was inferior to the Father. They even expressed themselves, as has been seen, in the strongest manner upon this subject, and were solicitous so to do in order to remove the odium under which it is evident that the new doctrine of the divinity of Christ then lay. But as the Christian world, and especially both the philosophical and the governing part of it, began to relish this doctrine, (being one of which they were less ashamed, than of being the disciples of a mere man,) the Platonic doctrine of Christ being the logos of the Father was pursued to its just extent; and, accordingly, the Son was then pronounced to be of the same substance with the Father, and therefore equal to him in all respects.

At this, though nothing more than the natural consequence of the doctrine of Christ being the logos of the

• Εις Θεος και πατηρ εξ & τα παντα, και εις κυριος Ιησες Χριςος, δι' ὅ τα παντα, και *ν πνευμα άγιον, ἐν ᾧ τα παντα.— Ανομοιον δε τῷ εξ ου το δι' δυ, ανομοιος άρα καὶ τῷ warp. De Spiritu Sancto, Opera, II. p. 294. (P.)

† Ὧν τον βίον θαυμαζονίες, ουκ επαινέμεν παντη τον λόγον. Οr. xliv. Opera, p. 710. (P.)

1 Επει εν πολλα σημαία ηνοικίαι κατα το πνευματος το άγιο, και πολλαι γλώσσαι ηκονηνίαι εις την καλα αυτο βλασφημιαν, αξίεμεν ύμας, οσον εςιν εφ' ήμιν, εἰς ολιγον αριθμόν περίςησαι τις βλασφημώντας, και τις μη λέγοντας κτισμα το πνεύμα το άγιον BEXEσDaι EIS NOIVwvav. Ep. ceiii. Opera, III. p. 223. (P.)

Father, many revolted; and this circumstance, among others, contributed, no doubt, to the schism of the Arians; who, firmly retaining the former doctrine of the inferiority of the Son to the Father, and yet seeing the impossibility of holding this with that of his being the proper logos of the Father, maintained that he was a created logos, or simply a superangelic spirit, created (as was then the opinion) out of nothing, but still the maker of the world under God, as had been asserted of the former logos.

The alarm given by the new doctrine of the perfect equality of the Son to the Father was the greater, as, in the Sabellian controversy, it had been incautiously asserted, not only that Christ was inferior to the Father, but even of a different substance from him; for, as the learned Unitarians had talked of the divinity in the Father and that in the Son being the very same, their opponents had maintained, that it was quite different; and this language had been uniformly held till the rise of the Arian controversy; so that those bishops who deposed Paul of Samosata, and those who were assembled at Nice, held, in fact, quite opposite doctrines; the one saying, that the Son was not consubstantial with the Father, and the other that he was so. But at those different times they had different objects, and attended less to the propriety of their language than to contradict their opponents.

Notwithstanding the prevalence of the new doctrine, we perceive several remains of the old, viz. that of the Father being the sole fountain of Deity, which necessarily implied some kind of inferiority in the Son, both at the time of the Council of Nice and afterwards. Indeed, that great principle (which strongly militates against the doctrine of the equality of the Son) was never properly given up at any period; and in words it is, I believe, in general, maintained by those who are called orthodox in the present age. "There is one God," says Athanasius, "because there is one Father."* Basil also says, "There are not two Gods, because not two Fathers."† And Cyril of Alexandria acknowledges, that "when the Scriptures speak of one God, that name is to be applied to the Father only, with whom the Word was." But Pope Damasus, in the fourth century,

* Eis Oeoç åti kai walnp is. Contra Sabell. Opera, I. pp. 655, 656. (P.) + Qu duo Qεoi, aude yap duo watepes. Hom. xxvii. Opera, I. p. 521. (P.)

↑ "Quare quum unum Deum prædicare scripturam inveniamus, Patri solummodo id nomen vere attribuimus, apud quem erat Verbum." In Johan. C. iii. Opera, I. p. 603. (P.)