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]

If such is the doctrine concerning Him when followed out16    ἐφεξῆς., let the same inquiry be made concerning the Son and the Father as well. Do you not confess17    Reading ὁμολογεῖς a perfection of glory in the case of the one as in the case of the other? I think that all who reflect will allow it. If, then, the honour of the Father is perfect, and the honour of the Son is perfect, and they have confessed as well the perfection of honour for the Holy Spirit, wherefore do these new theorists dictate to us that we are not to allow in His case an equality of honour with the Father and the Son? As for ourselves, we follow out the above considerations and find ourselves unable to think, as well as to say, that that which requires no addition for its perfection is, as compared with something else, less dignified; for when we have something wherein, owing to its faultless perfection, reason can discover no possibility of increase, I do not see either wherein it can discover any possibility of diminution. But these men, in denying the equality of honour, really lay down the comparative absence of it; and so also when they follow out further this same line of thought, by a diminution arising from comparison they divert all the conceptions that devotion has formed of the Holy Spirit; they do not own His perfection either in goodness, or omnipotence, or in any such attribute. But if they shrink from such open profanity and allow His perfection in every attribute of good, then these clever people must tell us how one perfect thing can be more perfect or less perfect than another perfect thing; for so long as the definition of perfection applies to it, that thing can not admit of a greater and a less in the matter of perfection.

Εἰ δὴ τοιοῦτόν ἐστιν, ἐφεξῆς ὁ λόγος καὶ περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ τὸ ἴσον διασκεψάσθω καὶ περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ὡσαύτως. ἆρ' οὐχὶ τὸ τέλειον ὁμολογεῖ τῆς τιμῆς καὶ ἐπὶ τούτου καὶ ἐπ' ἐκείνου; πάντας οἶμαι τοὺς νοῦν ἔχοντας τοῖς εἰρημένοις συνθήσεσθαι. εἰ οὖν τελεία τοῦ πατρὸς ἡ τιμή, τελεία δὲ καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ, προσεμαρτυρήθη δὲ καὶ τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι τῆς τιμῆς τὸ τέλειον, διὰ τί νομοθετοῦσιν ἡμῖν οἱ καινοὶ δογματισταὶ μὴ δεῖν ὁμολογεῖν ἐπ' αὐτοῦ πρὸς πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν τὸ ὁμότιμον; ἡμεῖς μὲν γὰρ τοῖς ἐξητασμένοις ἑπόμενοι τὸ μηδεμιᾶς προσθήκης εἰς τελείωσιν προσδεόμενον ἀτιμότερον ἑτέρου τινὸς οὔτε λέγειν οὔτε νοεῖν δυνάμεθα. οὗ γὰρ τὸ πλεονάζον οὐκ ἐξευρίσκει ὁ λόγος διὰ τὸ ἀνελλιπές τε καὶ τέλειον, ἐν τίνι καταλήψεται αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐλάττωσιν, οὐχ ὁρῶ. οἱ δὲ ἀπαγορεύοντες τὸ ὁμότιμον δογματίζουσι πάντως τὸ ἀτιμότερον. καὶ πάσας καὶ ὡσαύτως κατὰ τὴν αὐτὴν ἀκολουθίαν διὰ τῆς κατὰ τὴν σύγκρισιν ἐλαττώσεως ἐπὶ τὸ ἐναντίον τὰς εὐσεβεῖς ὑπολήψεις περὶ τοῦ πνεύματος παρατρέψουσι μὴ ἐν ἀγαθότητι μηδὲ ἐν δυνάμει μηδὲ ἐν ἄλλῳ τινὶ τῶν εὐσεβῶς περὶ αὐτοῦ λεγομένων συμμαρτυροῦντες τὸ τέλειον. εἰ δὲ τὸ πρόδηλον τῆς ἀσεβείας ἐκκλίνοντες τὸ ἐν παντὶ τῷ κατὰ τὸ ἀγαθὸν λεγομένῳ νοήματι τέλειον ὁμολογοῦσιν, εἰπάτωσαν οἱ σοφοί, πῶς τελείου τέλειον ἢ τελειότερόν ἐστιν ἢ ἀτελέστερον: ἕως γὰρ ἂν ὁ τῆς τελειότητος ἐφαρμόζηται λόγος, οὔτε τὸ πλέον οὔτε τὸ ἔλαττον ἐν τῇ τοῦ τελείου ἐννοίᾳ ὁ λογισμὸς οὗτος παραδέχεται.