About the Holy Spirit

The treatise “On the Holy Spirit” (30 chapters) was written at the request of St. Basil the Great’s friend St. Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium, around 375 regarding the changes made by St. Vasily in the final doxology. Then they usually ended the prayers and hymns with the doxology “To the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit.” This formula was accepted by both the Arians and the Doukhobors, since it allowed for the possibility of explaining it in the sense of their teaching about the created subordination of the Son and the Spirit. To make such references impossible, St. Vasily began to preferentially use the doxology “Father with the Son and with the Holy Spirit.” The inseparable unity of the Persons of the Most Holy Trinity is obvious from the unity of Their actions in creation, where the Father is the original Cause, the Son is the creative Cause and the Holy Spirit is the perfect Cause: “Imagine the Three - the commanding Lord, the creating Word and the affirming Spirit.” The treatise sets out to prove that the Son and the Holy Spirit have equal honor with the Father, since They are of the same nature with Him. Compositionally, the essay is divided into 3 parts. The first part (chap. 1-8) is polemical in nature. The author's main opponent is an extreme Arian, in whose image Eunomius can easily be discerned. The second part (chap. 10-27) is a live dispute with an imaginary opponent, which means Eustathius of Sebaste. In chapter 27 of St. Basil defends the meaning of Tradition: “Of the dogmas and sermons observed in the Church, some we have in the teaching set forth in Scripture, while others that have come down to us from the Apostolic Tradition, we have accepted in secret. But both have the same power for piety...” To the objection that the doxology “with the Spirit” is not attested and not set forth in Holy Scripture, St. Vasily replies: “I consider it an apostolic rule to adhere to traditions not set forth in Scripture.” The third part (chap. 28-30) is structured in the form of an instructive conversation between the author and his favorite student. In the final chapter of St. Basil depicts the sad state of the Church, like a ship subjected to a terrible storm. It is the result of disrespect for paternal rules, the machinations of heretics, and rivalry between clerics, which is worse than open war. For reasons of economics, St. Basil the Great avoids using the concept of “consubstantial” in relation to the Holy Spirit, preferring “equal”, and does not openly call the Holy Spirit God, so as not to scare away those who are hesitant. The treatise expresses the idea of ​​unity of command in the Holy Trinity, and also examines the question of the sources of Christian doctrine. *The title of the work in Greek is Περί τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. *The title of the work in Latin is De Spiritu Sancto. Chapter 1. Preface, in which it is argued that research is necessary even in the least important parts of theology. I praised your skill in the study of God and diligence, I was extremely pleased with your insightful and sober reasoning, according to which you believe that even one speech pronounced about God, wherever a word about Him is needed, should not be left without research, O dear and most honorable head for me, Brother Amphilochius! For, having perfectly heeded the Lord’s instruction that “everyone...ask receives, and he who seeks finds” (Luke 11:10), with a well-crafted petition, it seems that you can arouse even the laziest to participate. But what I am more amazed about you is that you propose questions not to test others, as many do now, but to seek the truth itself. It is true that there are many people today who listen and question us, but it is very difficult to meet a loving soul who seeks the truth to heal ignorance. For many, questions like a hunting net and an enemy ambush contain a hidden and cunningly composed deception. They start speeches not with the intention of gaining something useful from them, but so that, as soon as they find the answers dissimilar to their desire, they recognize themselves as having a fair pretext for an attack. But if “wisdom is imputed to the foolish one who asks ... wisdom” (Proverbs 17:28), then what price will we assign to the “wise listener”, who was appointed by the prophet along with her as a “wonderful adviser” (Isaiah 3:3)? Of course, justice requires both to honor him with all approval and to lead him further, uniting with him in zeal, and sharing all labors with those who hasten to perfection. For not listening to theological words in passing, but making an effort to discover the hidden meaning in every utterance and in every syllable, is not the work of those who are careless in piety, but of those who know the purpose of our calling, because we are obliged to become like God as much as possible for human nature; comparison is impossible without knowledge, and knowledge is not acquired without instruction, but the beginning of the teaching is the word, and the parts of the word are syllables and sentences, and therefore to analyze even the syllables themselves does not mean moving away from the goal. And if the questions, as it would seem to others, are of little importance, then they are therefore not worthy of contempt; on the contrary, since the truth is difficult to grasp, we must follow it everywhere. For if both the arts and the understanding of piety are improved through gradual increments, then nothing introduced into knowledge should be neglected. And whoever ignores the first beginnings as something unimportant will never achieve the wisdom of the perfect. “Her” and “neither” (Matthew 5:37) are two syllables, however, these short sayings often contain the best of blessings - the truth, and the extreme limit of wickedness - a lie. And what else am I saying about this? Another, with one wave of his head while testifying about Christ, is already recognized as the performer of all piety. And if this is true, then what kind of theological statement is so unimportant that, whether it is good or not, in both cases it will not amount to much weight? If “one jot or one dot shall not pass away from the law” (Matthew 5:18), then will it be safe for us to transgress even in a little? And what you demanded of our discussion is both small and great - small in the brevity of what is said (which is why it is, perhaps, easily ignored), but great in the power of what is signified, like a mustard seed, which is smaller than any other seed that grows a bush, but when proper care is taken about it, with the development of the power hidden in it, it grows to a significant height. If anyone, seeing our (to use the psalmist’s expression) “mockery” (Ps 119:85) about syllables, laughs at this, then, having reaped the fruit of his laughter, let him himself recognize its uselessness. But we will not give up research, yielding to human reproaches and admitting that we were prompted by ridicule. Not only am I not ashamed of such objects as unimportant, but if, even if in a small way, I come close to their dignity, then I will consider myself happy, as having been honored with great things, and I will also say about the brother who worked with me in the study that this is no small gain for him. Therefore, although I see that for a few words it is necessary to endure a very great struggle, nevertheless, in the hope of rewards, I do not shy away from work, reasoning that the word will be fruitful for myself and will bring sufficient benefit to those listening. For this reason, with Himself, I will say this, the Holy Spirit, I begin to expound. And if you want me to establish myself on the path of the word, I will turn somewhat to the beginning of the proposed question. Recently, when I prayed with the people and concluded the praise to God and the Father in two ways, then with the words: “with the Son and with the Holy Spirit,” then with the words: “through the Son in the Holy Spirit,” some of those present rebelled against this, saying that I used strange sayings and, moreover, contradictory one another. But you, most of all for the benefit of these very people, and if they are completely incurable, for the safety of those who meet them, asked me to set forth a clear teaching about the power contained in these syllables. Therefore, of course, I must speak briefly, as far as possible, giving the word some beginning that is acceptable to everyone. Chapter 2. What is the beginning of the fact that heretics pay strict attention to syllables? The petty attentiveness of these people to syllables and sayings is not without cunning, as others would think, and does not lead to minor evil, but contains a deep and hidden plan against piety. They try to show the dissimilarity of the expressions used about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, in order to have in this a convenient proof of their difference in nature. For they have a long-standing false mentality, invented by the leader of this heresy, Aetius, who, in one of his letters, put it this way: “what is not the same by nature is not expressed in the same way, and vice versa, what is not equally expressed is not the same by nature.” And in witnessing this situation he involved the Apostle, who says: “There is one God the Father, of Whom are all things, ... and one Lord Jesus Christ, Who is all things” (1 Cor 8.6). “Therefore,” asserts Aetius, “as these sayings relate to each other, so must the natures they signify relate to. But the saying: “Imzhe” is not the same as the saying: “from Worthless”; therefore, the Son is not identical with the Father.” From this illness arose the mockery of these people about the sayings I proposed. From this, to God and the Father, as an exclusive inheritance, they assign the saying: “from Him,” and to the Son and God they separate the saying: “By Him,” and to the Holy Spirit the saying: “in Him,” and they say that this use of syllables never changes, so that, as has been said, from the difference of expressions the difference of nature is evident. But it was impossible for them to hide the fact that with this subtlety in distinguishing sayings they were trying to reinforce the wicked teaching. For they demand that the saying “from Him” signifies the Creator, the saying “By Him” means a servant or instrument, and the saying “in Him” shows time or place, and that the Creator of all things is no more worthy than an instrument, and the Holy Spirit turns out to be giving from Himself to the being of beings no more than what place or time brings. Chapter 3. That this subtle distinction of syllables is borrowed from external wisdom. They were led into this deception by the pickiness of external writers, in whom the words “from Him” and “By Him” (1 Cor. 8:6) were assimilated to objects separate by nature. For these writers think that the phrase “from Him” denotes a substance, and the phrase “By Him” expresses a tool, or a service action in general. It is better to say (for what prevents, after repeating all the teachings of the external ones, from briefly exposing the inconsistency with the truth and the disagreement with themselves of these heretics?), those who practiced in vain philosophy, variously explaining the essence of the cause, and dividing its general concept into particular meanings, say that some of the causes are primitive, others are assisted or co-culpable, and others have such a relationship to the work that not without them it it happens. For each of these causes they determine their own expression, so that the builder is designated differently, and the instrument differently. For the builder, in their opinion, the expression “from him” is appropriate, for in the true sense it is said that the bench came from the carpenter. The expression “to them” is fitting for a weapon, for they say that it was made with an axe, a drill, etc. And in a similar way, they believe that the expression: “from it” actually means substance, for the carpenter’s work is made of wood. The expression “according to it” means either a mental model or a model offered to the artist, because either, having outlined what is being built in the mind, the idea brings it to fruition, or, looking at the model offered to him, he arranges his work in its likeness 1 . But the expression: “for him” is considered a decent end, because the bench is made for people’s use. And the expression "in it" indicates time or place, for when was the bench made? - at such and such a time. And where? - in such and such a place. And time and place, although they do not participate in the work in the least, are nevertheless such that without them nothing can be produced, because the agents need both place and time. Having learned and marveled at these observations of vanity and “vain flattery,” the heretics transfer them to the simple and uncomplicated teaching of the Spirit, to the humiliation of God the Word, and to the denial of the Holy Spirit. And the saying, which among external writers is separated to mean inanimate tools or subordinate and completely low service, I mean the saying: “to them,” they did not find it difficult to apply to the Lord of all and, being Christians, were not ashamed to the Creator of creation to adopt the saying used about a saw or a hammer. Chapter 4. About the fact that in scripture the use of these syllables is not strictly observed. And we admit that the word of truth often uses these sayings, however, we affirm that the freedom of the Spirit is in no way enslaved by external limitations, but, taking into account each new case, changes expressions according to need. For the phrase “from it” does not necessarily mean substance, as outsiders think; on the contrary, it is more common for Scripture to use this phrase about the highest Cause, as in the following place: “there is one God,... all things are of Worth” (1 Cor. 8:6). And again: “all things (εκ του θεου) are from God” (1 Cor 11:12). However, the word of truth often uses this saying about matter, for example, when it says: “make ... an ark from (εκ) trees [that do not rot]” (Gen. 6:14). And: “Let thou make a lamp of (εκ) pure gold” (Exodus 25:31). And: “the first man from (εκ) the earth has a ring” (1 Cor 15:47). And: “thou art made of (εκ) clay, as I was also” (Job 33:6). But the heretics, as we noted, in order to show the difference of nature, although they borrowed the reason for distinction from external ones, however, not servilely servile to them in everything, they legitimized that this saying is befitting of the Father alone; on the contrary, according to the law of externals, they assigned the name of instrument to the Son, and to the Spirit - place (for they say: “in the Spirit”, and also say: “Son”). They adopted the saying to God: “from Him,” following in this not those who were strangers, but moving, as they themselves say, to the apostolic usage, because it is said: “You are of evil in Christ Jesus” (1 Cor. 1.30). And: “all things are from” (εκ) “God” (1 Cor 11:12). Therefore, what conclusion can be drawn from this subtle distinction? The fact that the nature of the cause is different, the nature of the tools is different, and the place is different, therefore, the Son is alien by nature to the Father, just as the instrument is alien to the artist, and the Spirit is also alien, since time or place is separate from the nature of the instruments or from the nature of the instruments acting. Chapter 5. About the fact that it is said about the Father: by Him, and about the Son: from Him, also about the Spirit. This is the reasoning of the heretics, and we will prove what was said above, namely, that it is unfair that the Father, having taken for Himself the saying: “from Him,” gave the Son the saying: “By Him,” and again, as if the Son, according to the legalization of the heretics, does not accept the Holy Spirit into the communion of the sayings: “from Him,” or: “By Him,” as distributed according to their new section. “There is one God and Father, from Whom are all things: ... and one Lord Jesus Christ, Who is all things” (1 Cor. 8:6). These are not the words of the law of the giver, but of the distinguishing Hypostasis. The Apostle said this not in order to introduce the idea of ​​​​the difference in nature, but so that the concept of the Father and the Son would not be fused. And that these sayings are not opposed to one another, and, like those placed in opposing ranks for battle, do not bring into conflict the very natures to which they are attached, this can be seen from the following. Blessed Paul combined both sayings about the same subject, saying: “For from Him, and by Him, and in Him are all things” (Rom. 11:36). And that this passage obviously refers to the Lord, anyone will say, even if they have delved somewhat into the intention of this saying. For the Apostle, presenting the words from the prophet Isaiah: “Who... has the mind of the Lord? or who will be His adviser? (Rom 11:34) - added: “For from Him, and by Him, and in Him are all things.” The prophet said this about God the Word, the Creator of all creation. You can learn this from his previous words. “Who measured water in a handful, and the sky in a span, and the whole earth in a handful? who put the mountains in measure, and the hills in weight? Who understands the mind of the Lord, and who is His counselor” (Isaiah 40:12–13)? The word: “who” here means not completely impossible, but rare, as in the saying: “Who will stand up to me against the wicked” (Ps 93:16)? And: “Who is a man, even his stomach” (Ps 33:13)? And: “Who will ascend to the mountain of the Lord” (Ps 23:3)? So, of course, it is said here: who is he who knows the mind of the Lord, and who is an accomplice of His counsel? – “The Father loves the Son, and shows everything to Him” (John 5:20). He contains the earth, and embraced it with a handful, Who put everything in order and improvement, Who gave the mountains balance, assigned a measure to the waters, determined its own order for every thing in the world; Who embraces the whole sky with a small part of His entire power, which the prophetic word allegorically called “span”. Therefore, by the way, the Apostle added: “from That, and by That, and in Him” (εις αυτον) “all sorts of things.” For “from Him,” according to the will of God and the Father, is the cause of the existence of creatures. “To them” all beings exist and are constituted, since the Creator gives to each creature everything necessary for its preservation. And therefore, of course, everything returns to Him (εις αυτον), with some kind of uncontrollable desire and with some kind of ineffable love, striving for the Author and Provider of life, according to what is written: “the eyes of all trust in You” (Ps 145:15). And again: “everyone looks forward to You” (Ps 103:27). And: “Thou openest Thy hand, and performeth every creature’s good pleasure” (Ps 144:16). If the heretics resist this explanation of ours, will any kind of reasoning save them from obvious contradiction of themselves? For if they do not agree that these three sayings: “from Him, by Him and in Him,” are said about the Lord, then, by all necessity, they must attribute them to God and the Father. And as a result of this, their distinction will clearly be undermined. For it is revealed that not only the saying: “from Him,” but also the saying: “By Him,” is applied to the Father. If the last of these sayings does not mean anything humiliating, why do they separate it from the Son as something inferior? And if it certainly expresses service, then let them answer: what prince has the God of glory and the Father of Jesus Christ as his servant? So they overthrow themselves, and our strength is respected in both cases. For if the thought prevails that the word is about the Son, then it will be found that the saying “from That” befits the Son. And if anyone stubbornly refers this prophetic saying to God, then he will again agree that the saying “Those” is befitting of God, and both sayings will have equal dignity, because they are used in equal force about God. In both cases, these sayings will turn out to be equally honest, as being used about one and the same Person. But let's return to our subject. The Apostle, writing to the Ephesians, says: “Now in truth, in love, let us grow up in Him all things, of whom Christ is the head, from which the whole body is assembled and put together in a decent way, with every touch of alms, according to the action of one part in measure, the regeneration of the body is created” (Eph 4:15-16). And also, in the Epistle to the Colossians, it is said to those who do not have knowledge of the Only Begotten: “not holding the head (that is, Christ), from which the whole body is supplied with ingredients and joints, the growth of God grows” (Col. 2:19). And we know that the head of the Church is Christ from another place in the Apostle, who says: “And Him I have given as head above all the Church” (Eph 1:22). And: “from (εκ) His fulfillment we have all received” (John 1:16). And the Lord Himself says: “What He will receive from Mine, and will tell you” (John 16:14). And in general, the attentive reader will discover various uses of this saying: “from Him.” For the Lord also says: “I smell the power that came from Me” (Luke 8:46). But similarly, about the Spirit, as we note, in many places the expression is used: “from Him.” For it is said: “Sow to the Spirit, from (εκ) the Spirit you will reap eternal life” (Gal. 6:8). And John says: “of this we understand that the Spirit abides in us, which he gave us to eat” (1 John 3:24). And the Angel says: “For that which is born in her of the (εκ) Spirit is Holy” (Matthew 1:20). And the Lord said: “that which is born of (εκ) the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6). This is the use of this saying. But it remains to show that Scripture and the saying: “By them” equally uses the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Of course, it would be unnecessary to bring evidence about the Son to this, because this is known, and opponents prove the same thing. But let us show that the expression “by Him” (δι ου) is also used about the Father. It is said: “God is faithful, who quickly called His Son into fellowship” (1 Cor 1:9). And: “Paul is the messenger of Jesus Christ by the will of God” (2 Cor 1:1). And again: “the same now shall a servant bear, but a son: if he be a son, and heir by God” 2 (Gal. 4.7). And: “as Christ has risen from the dead with the glory of the Father” (Rom. 6:4). And Isaiah says: “Woe to those who take deep counsel but not the Lord” (Isaiah 29:15). One can present many evidences that this saying is also used about the Spirit. It is said: “God has revealed it to us by the Spirit” (1 Cor 2:10). And in another place: “Keep a good testament by the Holy Spirit” (2 Tim 1:14). And again: “to whom the word of wisdom is given by the Spirit” (1 Cor 12:8). And we can say the same about the word: “in” (εν), namely, that Scripture allows the use of this word about God the Father. So in the Old Testament it is said: “about (εν) God we will create power” (Ps 107:14) And: “about (εν) I will take out my song to you” (Ps 71:6). And again: “in (εν) Your name I will rejoice” (Ps 89:17). And Paul says: “in God he created all things” (Eph 3:9). And: “Paul and Silvanus and Timothy, the churches of the sun are about (εν) God the Father” (2 Thess. 1:1). And: “if then I will hasten (εν τω θεληματι) of God to come to you” (Rom. 1:70). And: “boast,” he says, “about (εν) God” (Rom. 2:17). There are many other places that are not easy to list. But for us it is important to show not a lot of evidence, but to expose that heretics make such distinctions unfoundedly. And that the use of this syllable is accepted in Scripture about the Lord or about the Holy Spirit, this, as it is known, I will not prove. It must be said that for a reasonable listener a refutation of the heretical position, taken by contradiction, will be sufficient. For if, according to the reasoning of the heretics, the difference of expression proves the difference of nature, then let the identity of the sayings now force them to confess with shame an indifferent essence. But not only in theology is the use of these sayings varied, they often even change among themselves and in meaning, when one takes on the meaning of another. For example: “man is acquired by God” (Gen. 4:1), says Adam, instead of saying: from God. And in another place: “The great commandment of Moses...to Israel according to (δια) the commandment of the Lord” (Numbers 36:5). And again: “It is not God’s choice to eat food” (Gen. 40:8)? - says Joseph, talking about dreams with prisoners in prison, and obviously, instead of saying: “from God,” he said: “by God.” On the contrary, Paul uses the expression: “from Him” (εξ ου) instead of the expression: “By Him” (δι ου), when he says: “born of (εκ) a woman” (Gal. 4:4), instead of: “by a woman.” For in another place he clearly distinguished this, saying that it is common for a woman to be born of a husband, and for a husband to be born of a wife. “As the woman is from the man, to the man is the wife” (1 Cor 11:12). However, here, both showing the difference in usage, and at the same time correcting in passing the erroneous opinion of those who thought that the body of the Lord is spiritual, in proof that the God-bearing flesh was made up of our mixture, the Apostle preferred a more expressive phrase (for the word: “by a woman” would express the transitional concept of birth, and the saying: “from a woman”, sufficiently shows the communion of the nature of the one born with the one who gives birth). And in this he does not contradict himself, but only makes it clear that these sayings can easily give way to one another. And if what he definitely speaks about in the proper sense: “by him”, about that very thing is used: “from him”, then what is the basis for slandering piety to decisively divide the sayings among themselves? Chapter 6. Answer to those who assert that the Son is not with the Father, but after the Father, where the equality of glory is discussed. And of course, one cannot resort to excusing oneself by ignorance when they approach the word with such cunning and malicious intent, clearly indignant at us because together with the Father we perform glorification of the Only Begotten, and we do not separate the Holy Spirit from the Son. And that's why they don't call us! remakes, innovators, inventors of words, and other reproachful names! But not only am I not upset by their slander, but on the contrary, if their own harm did not cause me grief and incessant illness, I would be ready to say that I am grateful to them for the blasphemies that contribute to my bliss. For it is said: “Blessed are you when people revile you... For my sake” (Matthew 5:11). But this is why they are angry. “The Son,” they say, “is not with the Father, but after the Father, therefore “By Him,” and not “with Him,” should bring glory to the Father. For the saying “with Him” expresses equality, and the saying “With Him” shows a service action. But the Spirit, they say, should not be placed along with the Father and the Son, but below the Son and the Father, as not being of sole rank, but subordinate, not numberable, but countable.” And with such subtleties in the composition of sayings they distort the simplicity and artlessness of faith. Therefore, can such people excuse themselves as inexperience, but by their inquisitiveness they do not allow others to remain inexperienced? But first of all we will ask them about on what basis they say that the Son is after the Father? How junior in time, or in rank, or in dignity? But no one would be so senseless as to assert that the Creator of the ages is second in time, when there is no distance intervening in the natural union of the Son with the Father. And it is incongruous with the human concept to assert that the Son is younger than the Father, not only because the Father and the Son are mentally represented in a mutual relationship, but also because the second in time is called that which has a smaller distance from the present time, and the first again, which is further removed from the present time. For example, what happened under Noah is older than what happened to the Sodomites, because it is more distant from the present time, and the latter is later than the first, because it seems closer to the present. But the existence of Life, which surpasses all time and all ages, is measured by distance from the present. Wouldn’t it be not only impious, but also unreasonable beyond all measure, if we only imagine that, just as it is said about things having the beginning of being and perishable, that they are one before the other, in the same way God and the Father, compared with the Son and God, existing before the ages, surpasses Him? On the contrary, such a superiority of the Father in relation to eldership is inconceivable, because neither reflection nor concept extends in any way beyond the birth of the Lord, after John beautifully concluded understanding within the described limits in two words, saying: “in the beginning was the Word” (John 1:1). For this “be” is not a source for thinking, and the beginning is impregnable for ideas. No matter how much you delve into the past in thought, you will not come out of this: “be”, and no matter how much you try to see what is more original than the Son, you will not be able to become higher than the Beginning. And on this basis it is pious to imagine the Son together with the Father. If they represent some kind of lowering of the Son before the Father in relation to place, so that the Father sits higher, and the Son in order occupies a lower place, then let them admit it, and we will remain silent, because the incongruity is obvious by itself. For those who do not attribute omnipresence to the Father do not maintain consistency in their judgments, when a sound mind believes that God fills everything. And what the prophet said: “If I ascend into heaven, you are there; if I descend into hell, you are there” (Ps 139:8), those who divide up and down between the Father and the Son do not remember. But I will not say anything to expose the ignorance of those who attribute a place to the Incorporeal. Will their shamelessness, with which they rebel against Scripture and resist it, be helped in any way by what is said: “Sit at My right hand” (Ps. 109:1), and: “Sit at the right hand ... of the majesty of God” (Heb. 1:3)? The word “at the right hand” does not mean a lower place (as they understand), but a relationship to an equal, because the concept of the right hand is not taken sensually (otherwise God would have had a lower place), but on the contrary, Scripture expresses the splendor of honor to the Son by the honorable name of squatting. So it remains for them to say that this statement signifies the lowest degree of dignity. Therefore, let them know that Christ “is the power of God and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor 1:24), that He “is the image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15), and “the radiance of glory” (Heb 1:3), and that God the Father imprinted Him, completely depicting Himself in Him. Shall we really say that these and other similar testimonies, which are found in the whole of Scripture, are derogatory? Or do we admit that these are, as it were, certain proclamations by which the splendor of the Only Begotten and the equality of His glory with the Father are proclaimed? Let them hear how the Lord Himself clearly depicts the equal glory of the Son with the Father when he says: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). And again: “When the Son comes in the glory of the Father” (Mark 8:38). And: “Let them honor the Son as they honor the Father” (John 5:23). And: “We have seen His glory, as the glory of the only begotten from the Father” (John 1:14). And: “The only begotten... God 3, who is in the bosom of the Father” (John 1:18). The heretics, without even thinking about it, assign the Son a place assigned to his enemies. For the Father’s bosom is the seat suitable for the Son, and the footstool is the place for those who need to be humiliated. We have touched on this evidence in passing because we have a different purpose in mind. But you, having collected evidence at your leisure, can see for yourself the height of the glory and the superiority of the power of the Only Begotten. However, for a right-thinking listener the given evidence is not unimportant, unless someone understands in a carnal and base way the words: “right hand” and “womb” do not describe God as a place, do not invent a bodily outline, image and position for Him, which is very different from the concept of the simple, limitless and incorporeal. Not to mention that such a concept is equally low for both the Father and the Son. Why does one who argues in this way not only humiliate the dignity of the Son, but falls into the sin of blasphemy? For whatever he dares to say against the Son, he must apply the same to the Father. Whoever gives the Father the highest place to preside, but says about the Only Begotten Son that He sits lower, the result of such a structure of the mind will be all bodily accessories. And if such ideas are characteristic of people whose minds are clouded by wine and disturbed by insanity, then will it be pious that by nature, and by glory, and by dignity, He who is united with the Father, not together with the Father, should be honored with worship and glorified by those who have been taught by Him Himself, that “whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father” (John 5:23)? Because what shall we say? what just excuse will we have for ourselves at the terrible and common judgment for all creation, if after the Lord clearly announced that He would come “in the glory of the Father” (Matthew 16:27), and Stephen saw “Jesus standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7:55), and Paul testified by the Spirit about Christ that He “is at the right hand of God” (Rom 8:34), and the Father says: “Sit at the right hand of Me” ( Ps 109:1), and the Holy Spirit testifies that “sitting at the right hand... of the majesty of God” (Heb 8:1), will we bring down the One with the Throne and the Equal One to a lower degree from a state of equality? For I think that standing and sitting down expresses the unshakability and perfect constancy of nature, just as Baruch, showing the immobility and immutability of God’s presence, said: “You abid forever, but we perish forever” (Bar.3:3). And the gum of the country signifies equality of dignity. How is it not impudent to deprive the Son of fellowship in praise, as if He were worthy to be placed in the lowest degree of honor? Chapter 7. Answer to those who claim that it is proper to speak about the Son not: with Him, but: by Him. But they argue that “to say: “with Him” is completely strange and unusual, but the saying: “to Him”, and the word of Scripture is most characteristic, and is established in use among the brethren.” What shall we say to them about this? – Blessed are the ears that did not listen to you, and blessed are the hearts that were saved not wounded by your teachings! And I will tell you lovers of Christ that the Church knows both word usages, and that it does not reject any of them as excluding the other. For when we take into consideration the greatness of the nature in the Only Begotten and the excellence of His dignity, then we testify that He has glory “with the Father.” And when we imagine that He gives us blessings, and brings us ourselves to God, and makes Him ours, then we confess that this grace is accomplished “by Him” and “in Him.” Therefore, the saying “with Him” is characteristic of those who give praise, and the saying “To Him” is especially appropriate for those who give thanks. But it is also false that the phrase “with Him” should be eliminated from the use of the reverent. For this saying is used both in villages and in cities by all those who, firmly adhering to their customs, preferred venerable antiquity to newness, and kept the tradition of their fathers intact. And those who became bored with the ordinary and rebelled against the ancient, as against the outdated, seized on the innovations, just as lovers of clothes always prefer clothes of a new cut to those in common use. Among the villagers you will still find a saying that has been in use since ancient times, but among these experts, accustomed to debating words, words are forged according to new wisdom. Therefore, what our fathers said, we also say, that is, common glory to the Father and the Son, why, together with the Son, we bring praise to the Father. But it does not satisfy us that this is the tradition of the fathers, for the fathers also followed the intention of Scripture, taking as a basis the evidence that we brought to you from Scripture not long before. For the radiance is represented in thoughts together with glory, and the image - together with the Prototype, and the Son is necessary - with the Father, because neither the consistent connection of names, nor the nature of those named allows for any separation. Chapter 8. In what cases does the saying: “By Him” take place, and in what concept is it more characteristic of the saying: “with Him”, and at the same time an interpretation of how the Son receives the commandment, and how He is sent. Therefore, the Apostle, when he “gives thanks to God through Jesus Christ” (Rom. 1:8), and also says that “By them he received grace and apostleship for the obedience of faith in all nations” (Rom. 1:5), or that “By him... we found... in this grace, in which we stand and boast” (Rom. 5:2), then he depicts the benefits of Christ to us, since Christ Himself pours out on us from The Father's grace of gifts leads us by Himself to the Father. For with the words: “By Him we received grace and apostleship,” expresses the giving of blessings from Him, and with the words: “bringing by those who were found,” depicts our perception and appropriation to God, accomplished by Christ. Therefore, does confession of the grace He has wrought in us serve to diminish glory? Or would it be more fair to say that the description of good deeds is the proper content of doxology? Therefore, we find that Scripture, telling us about the Lord, gives Him more than one name, and not those only names that signify only His Divinity and greatness. But sometimes he uses names that show distinctive signs of nature, for he knows the name of the Son, “more than any name” (Phil 2:9), calls Him “true Son” (1 John 5:20), “Only Begotten God” (John 1:18), “by the power of God and wisdom” (1 Cor 1:24) and “the Word” (John 1:1 ). And again, because of the manifold gifts of grace to us, which from the riches of goodness, according to His manifold wisdom, He gives to those who demand, Scripture designates Him by thousands of other names, calling Him sometimes Shepherd, sometimes King, and also Physician, and also calling Him Bridegroom, Way, Door, Source, Bread, Ax, Stone. For these names do not mean nature, but, as I said, various modes of action, which, out of mercy for His own creation, He reveals to those who require, according to the nature of their need. For those who have resorted to His intercession and through patience have succeeded in loving-kindness, He calls sheep, and He recognizes Himself as the Shepherd of such sheep, who listen to His voice and do not heed strange teachings. For he says: “The sheep... hear my voice” (John 10:27). And it is called King for those who have already ascended high and have a need for legal governance. It is called the Door because through the righteousness of His commandments it leads to glorious deeds, and also safely brings into His court those who, through faith in Him, have resorted to the good of knowledge. This is why it is said: “By me if anyone enters, he will also come in and come out and find pasture” (John 10:9). It is called the Stone, as a protection for the faithful, strong, unshakable and unshakable than any stronghold. And in these cases, when, for example, it is called a Door or a Way, the most decent and significant use is given to the phrase: “To them.” However, as God and the Son, He has glory together with the Father (μετα πατρος και συν πατρι), because “at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of those in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth: and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil. 2:10–11). For this reason, we use both words, with one proclaiming His own glory, and with the other the grace bestowed upon us. For by Him all kinds of help are given to souls; according to each type of care, some distinctive name was invented. For when a blameless soul, “having no filth or vice, presents to Himself” (Eph. 5:27) as a pure virgin, he is called the Bridegroom, and when he receives a soul, wounded by cruel wounds from the devil, and heals it from a serious sinful illness, then he is called a Physician. Do such concerns about us really lead our thoughts to something base? or, on the contrary, do they surprise us at the great power and at the same time at the love of the Savior, because He was pleased to “suffer with our weaknesses” and was able to condescend to our very weakness? For the superiority of the fortress is proved not so much by the sky, and the earth, and the vastness of the seas, and the animals living in the waters and on the land, and the plants, and the stars, and the air, and the seasons, and the varied decoration of the universe, but rather by the fact that the incontainable God could, through the flesh, dispassionately enter into the struggle with death, in order to grant us dispassion through His own suffering. And if the Apostle says that “in all of these we are victorious for our beloved ones” (Rom. 8:37), then this expression does not mean some low service, but the help given in the power of the fortress. For He Himself, “having bound the strong man, spoiled his vessels” (Matthew 12:29), that is, us, whom the strong man used for every evil work, and He Himself made us vessels “useful to the Master,” through the preparation of what depends on us, for “every good work” (2 Tim 2:21). Thus, “by him... we were found” (Rom. 5:2) to the Father, we, who were delivered “from the power of darkness... to partake of the inheritance of the saints in the light” (Col. 1:12-13). Therefore, let us imagine the economy accomplished by the Son not as a forced service in slavish humiliation, but as a voluntary care, which the Son, out of goodness and love for mankind, in accordance with the will of God and the Father, applied to His own creation. And in this case, let us observe piety regarding everything that the Son has done, testifying to His perfect power and not in the least separating Him from the will of the Father. Thus, when the Lord is called “the way,” we are raised to a higher concept, and do not stop at what appears at first glance. For by the word “path” we mean progress in perfection, consistently and in order, achieved by deeds of righteousness and enlightenment of the mind, when we continually desire what is before us and strive for what is still lacking in us, until we reach the blessed end, that is, the knowledge of God, which the Lord gives to those who believe in Him. For our Lord is truly the good, steady and infallible path, leading to real good - to the Father. For he says: “No one will come to the Father except by Me” (John 14:6). And such is our ascent to God through the Son. But now it should be said how benefits are also given to us from the Father by the Son. Since every created nature, both visible and intelligible, needs God's care to support itself, then the Creator - the Word, the Only Begotten God, according to the need of each nature, providing it with His help, according to the requirement of necessity, increases the donations, as varied and for all that is beneficial due to the variety of those benefited, so commensurate with the nature of each creature. He enlightens those contained in the darkness of ignorance, and therefore is the true Light. He judges, measuring reward according to the merits of deeds, and therefore is a righteous Judge. “For the Father judges no one, but all judgment is given to the Son” (John 5:22). He raises from the fall those who from the heights of life have slipped into sin, and therefore there is a “resurrection” (John 11:25). Yet it works by the touch of power and the will of goodness. She grazes, enlightens, nourishes, guides, heals, resurrects, realizes what does not exist, supports the created. Thus, good things come to us from God through the Son, who acts in everyone with greater speed than a word could utter. Neither lightning, nor the rapid flow of light in the air, nor the quick blink of an eye, nor the movements of our very thoughts can be compared with this, but all this, in comparison with the speed of God’s action, has a disadvantage to a greater extent than in which the slowest of our animals are inferior in mobility, I will not say, to birds, or winds, or the swiftness of the heavens, but to the soaring of our mind itself. For what temporal extension is necessary for Him who bears “all things by the word of His power” (Heb. 1:3), and does not act bodily, does not require the aid of hands to create, but has the nature of creatures in all things submissive to His free will? This is what Judith says: “I thought, and what you thought came to pass” (Judith 9:5). However, so that the greatness of what is produced does not carry us away to the idea that the Lord is without beginning, what does the source Life say? “I live for the Father’s sake” (John 6:57). And what does God's Power say? “The Son cannot do anything for Himself” (John 5:19). And what does self-perfect Wisdom say? “The commandment... I accepted what I will give and what I will say” (John 12:49). With all this He raises us to the understanding of the Father, and turns the wonder of creation to the Father, so that we may know the Father through Him. For the Father is not intuited from the difference of deeds when he points to a separate action that actually belongs to the Father: “whatever he sees the Father doing,... the Son also does likewise” (John 5:19). But since the Only Begotten ascribes glory to Him, He gathers the wonder of creatures, with the greatness of His works, glorified by the Creator Himself and exalted by those who know in Him the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, “For whose sake is all things,... and for whose sake are all things” (Heb. 2:10). That is why the Lord says: “Mine is all Thine essence,” because the beginning of creation is raised to the Father, “and Thine is Mine” (John 17:10), because He receives from the Father that which becomes the cause of creation, not in the sense that the Son in action uses the help of the Father, and that the ministry of each task is entrusted to Him by special private orders - this would be slavish and excessively below Divine dignity, but in in the sense that the Word, having been filled with the Father’s blessings, having risen from the Father, creates everything in the likeness of the One who gave birth. For if there is no difference with Him in essence, then there will be no difference in power. And those who have equal strength will certainly have equal action. Christ is “God’s power and God’s wisdom” (1 Cor 1:24). Therefore, “all things were created by Him” (John 1:3), and “all things were created by Him and through Him” (Col 1:16), not in the sense that He performs some kind of instrumental and servile service, but in the fact that He creatively accomplishes the Father’s will. So, when he says: “I have not spoken from Myself” (John 12:49), and again: “As the Father spoke to Me, so I speak” (John 12:50), and: “the word that you heard is not Mine, but Him who sent Me” (John 14:24), and in another place: “As the Father commanded Me, so I do” (John 14:31), not as deprived of free will, or non-self-moving, or awaiting command in pre-agreed signs, uses words similar to these, but shows by them that His own will is united and inseparable from the will of the Father. Therefore, we will not take the so-called commandment as an imperative word pronounced by verbal organs, as if it were subordinate, and prescribing what the Son should do, but we will understand it in a divine way, as a message of the will, like the reflection of some image in a mirror, not passing from the Father to the Son in time. “For the Father loves the Son, and shows everything to Him” (John 5:20). Therefore, everything that the Father has belongs to the Son, not as something gradually arriving in Him, but as completely abiding in Him. And among people, who has learned art and, through long-term reflection, has ingrained in himself an unshakable skill towards it, can already act by itself according to the laws of knowledge that have formed in it. Is it really possible that God’s Wisdom, the Creator of all creation, always perfect, wise without teaching, God’s Power, He in Whom “all the treasures of wisdom and understanding are hidden” (Col. 2:3), has a need for a particular indication that would determine both the image and the measure of His actions? Will we, in the vanity of our thoughts, open a school, and make One presiding with the rank of a teacher, and the Other standing with the inexperience of a student, then, with a gradual increase in lessons, learning wisdom and succeeding in perfection? And in this case, if you know how to maintain the sequence of judgments, you will conclude from this that the Son is always learning and can never achieve perfection, because the wisdom of the Father is limitless, and in the limitless it is impossible to achieve the end. Therefore, anyone who does not agree that the Son from the beginning has everything cannot agree that He will ever reach perfection. But I am ashamed of the baseness of the concept to which I am led by the sequence of speech. Therefore, let us return again to the height of the word. “He who saw Me in the form of the Father” (John 14:9) saw not an imprint, not an image, because God’s nature does not allow for complexity, but the goodness of the will, which is contemplated in the Father and in the Son, as something accompanying the essence, similar and equal to it, or better yet, identical with it. What do the expressions mean: “having become obedient” (Phil 2:8), and: “he gave Him up for us all” (Rom 8:32)? This means that it was given from the Father to the Son to act through goodness for people. But listen to the following passages: “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law” (Gal. 3:13), and: “Because we are still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). Pay careful attention to the words of the Lord as well. When He taught us about the Father, then He Himself already uses sovereign and sovereign expressions, saying: “I want you to be cleansed” (Matthew 8:3), and: “Be silent, stop” (Mark 4:39), and: “I say to you” (Matthew 5:22, 28, 32); and: “Mute and deaf of soul, I command you” (Mark 9:25), and the like, so that from these expressions we may know our Lord and Creator, and from the previous ones we learn to know the Father of our Lord and Creator. Thus, from everything, the true teaching is proven that if the Father creates through the Son, then neither the creative power in the Father is represented as imperfect, nor the action of the Son is recognized as powerless, but the unity of the will is depicted. Therefore, the saying “By Him” contains the recognition of the original guilt, and is not taken to humiliate the producing cause. Chapter 9. Distinctive concepts of the Spirit, consistent with the teaching of Scripture. Let us now examine what our general concepts are about the Spirit, both those we have collected about Him from Scripture, and those taken from the unwritten tradition of the fathers. And, firstly, who, having heard the name of the Spirit, will not perk up in soul and be delighted in thought towards the Highest Nature? For He is called “the Spirit of God” (Matthew 3:16), and “the Spirit of truth, which proceeds from the Father” (John 15:26), “the right Spirit,” “the Sovereign Spirit” (Ps. 50:12, 14). The Holy Spirit is His main and proper name. And it, above all others, is the name of something incorporeal, purely immaterial and uncomplicated. Therefore, the Lord, in a conversation with his wife, who thought that God should be worshiped in a certain place, teaching her that the incorporeal is infinite, says: “The Spirit is God” (John 4:24). Therefore, hearing the word “Spirit” it is impossible to imagine in thought a nature that is limited, or subject to change and alteration, or generally similar to a creature, but, reaching out with thoughts to the Highest, it is necessary to imagine an intelligent essence, infinite in power, limitless in greatness, immeasurable over time or centuries, never lacking in the blessings that it has. Everything that needs sanctification is turned to the Holy Spirit; everything that lives virtuously desires Him, being, as it were, watered and assisted by His inspiration to achieve its own and natural end. He perfects others, but He Himself lacks nothing; He lives without renewal of strength, but is the Giver of life; He does not grow through addition, but is suddenly complete, established in Himself and omnipresent. He is the beginning of sanctification, mental light, which provides any rational power in the search for truth with some kind of evidence. He is unapproachable by nature, and convenient by goodness, although He fulfills everything by His power, yet He is communicated to only those worthy, and is not accepted by them to the same extent, but shares the action according to the measure of faith. He is simple in essence, diverse in strength, all present in everyone, and all everywhere. When shared, it does not suffer, and when they partake of it, it does not cease to be entirely, like the sun’s radiance, the one enjoying the pleasantness of which, as it were, alone enjoys it, while this radiance illuminates the earth and the sea and dissolves with the air. So the Spirit dwells in each of those who accept Him, as inherent in him alone, and sufficiently pours out complete grace to all, which those who partake enjoy according to the measure of their own acceptability, and not to the extent possible for the Spirit. The assimilation of the Spirit with the soul is not a local rapprochement (for can the incorporeal approach in a bodily way?), but the elimination of passions that entered the soul as a result of its attachment to the body, and alienated it from its affinity with God. Therefore, whoever has cleansed himself of the shame that he created in himself through sin, returned to natural beauty, and through cleansing, as it were, returned the ancient appearance to the royal image, he alone can approach the Comforter. And He, like the sun with which a pure eye meets, will show you in Himself the image of the Invisible. And in the blissful contemplation of the image you will see the indescribable beauty of the Prototype. Through the Spirit - the uplifting of hearts, the guidance of the weak, the improvement of the successful. The Spirit, shining forth cleansed from all filth, makes them spiritual through communication with Himself. And just as shiny and transparent bodies, when a ray of light falls on them, they themselves become luminous and cast off a new ray, so spirit-bearing souls, being illuminated by the Spirit, themselves become spiritual, and pour out grace on others. Hence - foreknowledge of the future, understanding of the sacraments, comprehension of the unseen, the distribution of gifts, heavenly residence, face-to-face with the angels, endless joy, abiding in God, becoming like God and the extreme limit of what is desired - deification. These are (if it is enough to offer a little out of many) our concepts of the Holy Spirit, which of the very words of the Spirit we have learned to convey to ourselves about His greatness, dignity and actions. Now we must turn to those who argue with us, and try to repel the objections that they offer us from false knowledge. Chapter 10. Answer to those who claim that the Holy Spirit should not be placed along with the Father and the Son. They say: “there is no need to put the Holy Spirit along with the Father and the Son, because He is both alien to Them by nature and inferior in dignity to Them.” – One can rightly answer them with the apostolic word: “It is fitting to obey God rather than man” (Acts 5:29). For if the Lord, giving the commandment of saving baptism, clearly commanded the disciples to baptize “all languages... in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19), not disdaining communication with the Spirit, but they say that it is not necessary to place the Spirit along with the Father and the Son, then are they not clearly opposing God’s command? If they claim that such a combination with the Lord does not mean any kind of communication and unity, then let them say how it is more appropriate to understand it, and what other, more characteristic, image of unity can they find? However, if the Lord, in commanding baptism, did not unite the Spirit with Himself and with the Father, then let us not be accused of this union, because we do not invent or say anything different with the Lord. And if there the Spirit is united with the Father and the Son, and no one reaches such shamelessness as to assert anything different, then in this case, let us not be accused of following what is written. But the preparation of battle is directed at us, every thought is directed at us, and the tongues of the blasphemers here throw arrows with greater intensity than the Christ-killers threw stones at Stephen. Let it not be hidden that their attacks have only a visible pretext in us, but in reality they are aimed at heights. Therefore, although they are apparently preparing shells and ambushes against us, they call on each other to help us in order to show everyone their experience or strength, yet the goal of their attacks is faith, and all opponents and enemies of sound teaching have one common intention - to shake the stronghold of faith in Christ, overthrowing and destroying the apostolic tradition. For this reason, as outwardly honest debtors, they loudly demand evidence from the Scriptures and reject the testimony of the fathers, which is not confirmed by Scripture, as having no force. But we will not deviate from the truth, we will not betray it out of timidity. For if the Lord betrayed the combination of the Holy Spirit with the Father as a necessary and saving dogma, they reason differently, separate, reject the Spirit and reduce Him to a servant nature, then isn’t it true that they place their blasphemy above the Master’s commandment? Therefore, leaving all disputes behind, let us consider together with them what we have at hand. Why are we Christians? - Everyone will say: by faith. How are we saved? Such that we are reborn, precisely, by the grace given in baptism. For how else can one be saved? – Really, having cognized this salvation, confirmed by the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, shall we deviate from the image of teaching that we have accepted? It would be worthy of great contrition if we now found ourselves further from our salvation than when we believed, if we now renounced what we then accepted. The loss is equal - whether to die without being worthy of baptism, or to accept a baptism in which one of the faithful is missing. And whoever does not forever preserve the confession that we made at our first introduction, when, freed from idols, we approached the living God, and whoever does not maintain it throughout his entire life as a safe repository, makes himself an alien to the promises of God, acting contrary to his own handwriting, which he gave in his confession of faith. For if baptism for me is the beginning of life, and this day, the day of rebirth, is the first of days, then it is obvious that the most precious thing is the word that I spoke in the grace of sonhood. So, will I, having been deceived by the convictions of such people, betray the tradition that brings me into the light, that gave me the knowledge of God, and through which I became a child of God, who had hitherto been an enemy of God because of sin? On the contrary, I wish for myself to go to the Lord with this confession, and I advise them to maintain an intact faith until the day of Christ, to keep the Spirit inseparable from the Father and the Son, observing the doctrine of baptism both in the confession of faith and in the fulfillment of glory. Chapter 11. That those who deny the Spirit are traitors To whom grief, to whom grief, to whom confusion and darkness, to whom eternal condemnation? Is it not the traitors who have renounced the faith? Where is the proof of renunciation? Is it not that they have rejected their own confessions? What did they confess? Or when was it confessed? They confessed that they believed in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. They confessed when, having renounced the devil and his angels, they uttered this saving word. Therefore, what decent name was found for them by the children of light? Are they not called traitors, as having violated the covenant of their salvation? What do I call someone who has renounced God? What do I call someone who renounces Christ? How else if not a traitor? What name would you like to give to one who has renounced the Spirit? Isn't it the same as what we give to a person who has betrayed his covenant with God? Therefore, when the confession of faith in the Spirit prepares us to be blessed for piety, and renunciation of the Spirit exposes us to condemnation for atheism, is it not scary to renounce Him now, not by fire, not by the sword, not by the cross, not by the scourge, not by the wheel, not by the instrument of torture, but by being deceived only by the false thinking and arguments of the Doukhoborists? I assure every person who confesses Christ and denies God that Christ will not benefit him, just like the one who calls on God but denies the Son, because his faith is vain. I also assure the one who rejects the Spirit that faith in the Father and the Son will turn into futility for him, and that he cannot have this faith if the Spirit is not present. For he who does not believe in the Spirit does not believe in the Son, and he who does not believe in the Son does not believe in the Father. “For the Lord Jesus cannot speak except by the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:3). And: “No one has seen God anywhere”: but “The Only Begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He is our confessor” (John 1:18). He who does not believe in the Spirit has no part in true worship. For there is no other way to worship the Son than in the Holy Spirit, and no other way to call on the Father than in the spirit of sonhood. Chapter 12. Answer to those who claim that baptism only into the Lord is sufficient. Let no one be deceived by the Apostle that, when mentioning baptism, he is often silent about the name of the Father and the Holy Spirit, and no one should conclude from this that it is not necessary to observe the calling of names. It is said: “The little ones... were baptized into Christ; put on Christ” (Gal. 3:27). And again: “as many as you were baptized into Christ, you were baptized into His death” (Rom. 6:3). This is because the name of Christ is a confession of everything, it points to the anointing God, and to the anointed Son, and to the anointing of the Spirit, as Peter teaches us in Acts: “Jesus, who was of Nazareth, ... God anointed him with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 10:38), and Isaiah: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, for whose sake I anointed” (Isaiah 61:1 ), and the Psalmist: “Because of Thy anointing, O God, Thy God is more than Thy partaker of the oil of gladness” (Ps. 44:8). Moreover, we see that the Apostle, speaking about baptism, sometimes mentioned one Spirit. For he says: “we are all baptized into one body...by one Spirit...” (1 Cor. 12:13). And with this, the following also agrees: “You are to be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5), and: “He who baptizes you with the Holy Spirit” (Luke 3:16). But on this basis no one will call baptism perfect, in which only the name of the Spirit is called. For it is necessary that tradition, communicated in life-giving grace, always remain inviolable. He who delivered our life from corruption gave us the power of renewal, which, although it has an inexplicable reason and lies in the sacrament, nevertheless brings great salvation to souls, therefore, to add or subtract anything means to clearly fall away from eternal life. And therefore, if the separation of the Spirit from the Father and the Son in baptism is dangerous for the baptizer, and not beneficial for the one receiving baptism, then how can we tear the Spirit away from the Father and Son with impunity? Faith and baptism are two methods of salvation, related and inseparable. For faith is accomplished by baptism, and baptism is founded on faith, and both are fulfilled by the same Names. Just as we believe in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, so we are baptized in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. And just as confession precedes, leading us into salvation, so baptism will follow, sealing our consent to confession. Chapter 13. Statement of the reason why Paul places angels with the Father and the Son. They say: “but something else is included with the Father and the Son, while it, of course, is not glorified with Them. So the Apostle included angels in the testimony he gives to Timothy, saying: “I will testify to you before God and... Jesus Christ and [His] elect” (1 Tim. 5:21). But we do not separate angels from other creatures, and do not agree to classify them with the Father and the Son.” And I, although this reasoning is not worth any answer (so at first glance the inconsistency is noticeable in it!), I will nevertheless say that another slave like himself can present as a witness before such a judge who is meek and condescending and, through special favor towards the defendants, proves the indisputability of the truthfulness of his trial. But from being a slave one can become free, be called the son of God and pass from death into life, not through anyone else, but only through Him who is by His nature God and free from the state of slavery. For how can he make one his own to God who is alien to him? How can one free one who is subject to the yoke of slavery? Therefore, both the spirit and the Angels are not mentioned in the same way, but the Spirit is named as the Lord of life, the Angels are added as assistants to slaves like them, and as faithful witnesses of the truth. For the saints are in the habit of giving God’s commandments in the presence of witnesses, as this same Paul says to Timothy: “Those things which...thou hast received from me by many witnesses, these things delivered unto faithful men” (2 Tim. 2:2). Now he is testified by the Angels, for he knows that the Angels will also be with the Judge when He comes in the glory of the Father to judge the universe in righteousness. For it is said: “Whoever confesses Me before men, and the Son of man confesses him before the angels of God, but whoever denies Me before men will be denied before the angels of God” (Luke 12:8–9). And Paul says in another place: “by the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with the angels” (2 Thess. 1:7). For this reason, he still testifies here before the Angels in order to prepare suitable evidence for the future judgment. And not only Paul, but everyone in general who has been entrusted with the ministry of the word, never ceases to testify, and calls even heaven and earth as witnesses, because now every work is being done before them, and in the future trial of life they will be together with those judged. For it is said: “He will call on the heavens from above and the earth to judge His people” (Ps. 49:4). Therefore, Moses, intending to offer people the words of God, says: “I will testify to you this day through heaven and earth” (Deut. 4:26). And again, uttering a song, he says: “See the heavens, and I will speak, and let the earth hear the words of my mouth” (Deut. 32:1). And Isaiah: “hear the heavens and tell the earth” (Is. 1:2). And Jeremiah describes some kind of frenzy of heaven into which it comes, hearing the incredible deeds of the people: “the heavens were horrified at this, and trembled greatly, ... for my people had done two evils” (Jer. 2:12–13). Therefore, the Apostle, knowing that angels were assigned to people as if they were schoolmasters and educators, called them as witnesses, and Joshua set up a stone as a witness to his words; and Jacob even “called the hill a witness” (Gen. 31:47). Jesus said: "It will be... a stone today for a witness in the last days... when you lie to the Lord your God” (Joshua 24:27). Perhaps he believed that by the power of God the stones would also emit a voice in denouncing the criminals, and if not, then at least everyone’s conscience would be wounded by the effect of the reminder. Thus, those to whom the dispensation of souls is entrusted prepare any witnesses whatsoever in order to present them later. But the Spirit, not by the demands of time, but by the communion of nature, is compared with God, not attracted to this by us, but joined by the Lord. Chapter 14. The objection that others were baptized into Moses and believed in him, and the answer to this objection, and at the same time about prototypes. But they say: “even if we are baptized into the Spirit, then even in this case it is unfair to put Him on an equal footing with God. For others were “baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea” (1 Cor. 10:2). And in a similar way, it is known that there was faith in people. For “the people believed... in God, and in Moses His saint” (Exodus 14:31). Why, they say, as a result of faith and baptism do you elevate and exalt the Holy Spirit so much above creation, when the same thing is testified about people? What can we say to this? That faith in the Spirit, and likewise baptism, is the same as in the Father and in the Son. And if there was faith and baptism in Moses and in the cloud, then as in the shadow and foreshadowing. But because the divine is prefigured by small and human things, of course, something small is not the very nature of the divine, which is often marked by the writing of prefigurations. For prototype is the expression of what is expected in likeness, by which the future is foreshadowed. So Adam is a prototype of the future Adam, and the stone is transformatively Christ, and water from the stone is a prototype of the life-giving power of the Word. For it is said: “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink” (John 7:37). And manna is a prototype of the life-giving bread that came down from heaven, and the serpent placed “on the banner” (Numbers 21:9) is a prototype of saving suffering completed by the cross; why those who looked at him were saved. So, of course, what is told about the deliverance of Israel serves as an indication of those saved by baptism. For the firstborn of the Israelites, like the bodies of those baptized, were saved by the grace given to those sealed with the blood, because the blood of the sheep is an image of the blood of Christ, and the firstborn is an image of the first-created. And since it is necessary in us, transmitted from one to another until the end, according to continuous succession, therefore, “in Adam we all die” (1 Cor. 15:22), and death reigned until the fulfillment of the Law and until the coming of Christ. The firstborn were preserved by God, and were not touched by the Destroyer - as an indication that we, who were made alive in Christ, no longer die in Adam. And the sea and the cloud, in the present, led to faith by the amazingness of the event, but in relation to the future, as prototypes, they signified future grace. “Whoever is wise will understand this” (Hosea 14:10), how does the sea serve as a representative baptism, excommunicating from Pharaoh, just as this font excommunicates from the torment of the devil? The sea has killed the enemy within itself, and here our enmity against God dies. The people came out of the sea unharmed, and we rise from the water as if alive from the dead, having been saved by the grace of Him who called us. And the cloud is the shadow of the gift given by the Spirit, and through the mortification of the members it extinguishes the flame of passions. So what? Is it really because they were baptized into Moses symbolically, and the grace of baptism is of little importance? In this case, nothing else in our sacraments will be great if we humiliate what is worthy in each according to its prototypes. In this case, God’s love for people, according to which God gave the Only Begotten Son for our sins, will not be something great and extraordinary, because Abraham did not spare his own son. And the suffering of the Lord is not glorious, because instead of Isaac, a ram served as a type of offering. And the descent into hell is not scary, because Jonah preceded death with three days and as many nights. The same thing is done by the one who in baptism compares reality with a shadow, who puts what they signify on a par with the prototypes, who, with Moses and the sea, suddenly thinks to undermine the entire gospel economy. For what is the remission of sins, what is the renewal of life in the sea? What spiritual gift was given through Moses? What kind of mortification of sin is there? They did not die with Christ, and therefore did not rise with Him. They did not put on the image of heavenly things, they did not bear in their body the deadness of Jesus, they did not put off the old man, they did not put on the new man, being renewed in knowledge, after the image of Him who created him. Why do you compare two baptisms, in which one name is common, but in reality there is as much difference as there can be between a dream and reality, between a shadow or images and what exists independently? But faith in Moses not only proves that faith in the Spirit is unimportant, but, on the contrary, according to the reasoning of these people, it further detracts from the confession of the God of all. For it is said: “People believed in God and in Moses, His saint.” So, Moses was placed together with God, and not with the Spirit, and was a prototype not of the Spirit, but of Christ, for in his legal service he then represented the Mediator of God and men. Moses did not serve as a prototype of the Spirit, interceding for the people before God, because the Law was given, having been “instituted by Angels, by the hand” of the Intercessor, at the suggestion of the people, who said: “Thou hast spoken to us, and let not God speak to us” (Exodus 20:19). Therefore, faith in Moses is traced back to the Lord, the Intercessor of God and men, who said: “If you believed Moses, you believed Me” (John 5:46). Is faith in the Lord really unimportant because it was signified by Moses? Likewise, the grace of the Spirit in baptism is not unimportant because another was baptized into Moses. Moreover, I can say that Scripture usually calls Moses and the Law, as in the following words: “Moses and the prophets have” (Luke 16:29). Therefore, the Apostle, meaning legal baptism, said: “being baptized into Moses.” So why do these people try to present the praise of our hope and the exceedingly abundant gift of God and our Savior, who renews our youth with renewal “like an eagle,” as something despicable, who attribute to reality that which belongs to the shadow and prototypes? Of course, it is common for an infant mind and some youth who really still needs milk not to know that great mystery of our salvation, which, in accordance with the preliminary method of teaching, and we, raised to perfection in the exercise of piety, begin first with the rudiments of knowledge, understandable to us and commensurate with our strengths, because the Master of our salvation is like the eye of a person who grew up in darkness, introduces us into the great light of truth after gradual habituation to it, because it spares our weakness. In the depths of the riches of His wisdom and the unexplored courts of understanding, He destined for us this easy and applicable guidance, teaching us first to see the shadows of objects and to look at the sun in water, so that, having suddenly begun to see pure light, we would not be darkened. On the same basis, the Law was invented, “which is... the shadow... of those who are to come” (Heb. 10:1), and the transfigurations of the prophets - these fortune-telling of the truth, for training the eyes of the heart, so that the transition from them to wisdom in the hidden mystery would be made more convenient for us. Enough of this about prototypes, and it is impossible to dwell on this subject any longer. Otherwise, more would be said about the extraneous than about the main thing. Chapter 15. Answer to the new objection that we are baptized into water, and at the same time about baptism. What else do they say besides this? For they are abundant in solutions. “We are baptized into water, but of course we do not prefer water to all creatures, or we do not give it the same honor as the Father and the Son.” Their reasoning is similar to the reasoning of angry people who, due to the clouding of their minds by passion, spare nothing to take revenge on the offender. But we will not be lazy to give an answer to this either, or we will teach those who do not know, or we will not give in to those who are malicious. Let's start a little higher. The economy of God and our Savior about man is a proclamation from a state of fall, and a return to communion with God from a state of alienation caused by disobedience. For this purpose is the coming of Christ in the flesh, the outlines of the gospel rules of life, for this purpose the suffering, the cross, burial, resurrection, so that a person, saved through the imitation of Christ, would accept this ancient sonhood. Therefore, for the perfection of life, imitation of Christ is necessary, that is, not only the examples of non-wrath, humility and long-suffering shown in the life of Christ, but also the death of Christ, as the imitator of Christ Paul says: “being conformed to His death, if I attain to the resurrection of the dead” (Phil 3:10-11). How then are we “in the likeness of His death? “Having been buried in Him through baptism” (Rom. 6:4–5). What is the image of the burial? And why is such imitation useful? Firstly, it is necessary that the order of the previous life be stopped. And this, according to the word of the Lord, is impossible for one “who is not born... again” (John 3:5, 7). For rebirth, as the name itself shows, is the beginning of a new life. Therefore, before starting a new life, it is necessary to put an end to the life that preceded it. Just as with those who run back and forth in the field, two opposite movements are separated by some stop and rest, so with a change in life it turned out to be necessary for death to serve as a medium between one life and the other, ending the previous life and laying the beginning of the next life. How do we descend into hell? Imitating the burial of Christ in baptism, because the bodies of those baptized in water are, as it were, buried. Therefore, baptism symbolically means the putting aside of carnal deeds, according to the word of the Apostle, who says: “circumcision was made with the circumcision without hands, in the cutting off of the body... flesh, in the circumcision of Christ, being buried by Him through baptism” (Col. 2:11). It is, as it were, the cleansing of the soul from the filth produced in it by carnal wisdom, according to what is written: “Wash me, and I will be whiter than snow” (Ps. 50:9). Therefore, we do not wash ourselves in the Jewish way at every defilement, but we know one saving baptism, because there is one death for the world, and one resurrection from the dead, of which baptism serves as an image. Therefore, the Lord, the Steward of our life, established with us a covenant of baptism, which has in itself the image of death and life, and the image of death is water, and the pledge of life is given by the Spirit. And thus, from this it becomes clear what we were looking for, that is, why water comes along with the Spirit. Since baptism assumes two goals: to destroy the sinful body so that it no longer bears the fruits of death, but to be revived by the Spirit and have fruit in holiness, then water represents death, taking the body as if into a tomb, and the Spirit imparts life-giving power, renewing our souls from sinful deadness into original life. This means “to be born again by water and the Spirit” (John 3), because our mortification is accomplished by water, and life is created in us by the Spirit. Therefore, the great sacrament of baptism is performed by three immersions, and equivalent invocations, so that the image of death is imprinted on us, and the souls of those baptized are enlightened through the tradition of the knowledge of God. Therefore, if there is any grace in water, then it is not from the nature of water, but from the presence of the Spirit. For “baptism is not the deposition of filth from the flesh, but the questioning of a good conscience with God” (1 Peter 3:21). Therefore, the Lord, preparing us for life after the resurrection, sets out the rules of the entire gospel life, legitimizing a disposition that is not angry, patient, not defiled by voluptuousness, not avaricious, so that we, according to our will, will fulfill in advance what belongs to the future age according to its nature. Why, if someone, defining the Gospel, says that it is the transformation of life after the resurrection, then, in my opinion, he will not err in the fidelity of the concept. Let us return to our goal. By the Holy Spirit - our restoration to paradise, entry into the heavenly kingdom, return to sonship, boldness to call God our Father, to be made partakers of the grace of Christ, to be called children of light, to partake of eternal glory, in a word, to acquire the fullness of blessing both in this and in the next age, when in ourselves, as in a mirror, we reflect the grace of those blessings that are destined for us according to the promises, and which through faith we enjoy as already real. For if this is the pledge, what is the perfect? and if this is the firstfruits, then what is the fullness of the whole? But the difference between the grace of the Spirit and baptism in water is also visible from the fact that John baptized with water into repentance, and our Lord Jesus Christ baptizes with the Holy Spirit. For John says: “I baptize you with water for repentance: but he who comes after me is strong against me. He is not worthy to bear the boots: He is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit and with fire" (Matthew 3:11), by fire baptism meaning the trial at trial, according to what was said by the Apostle: "every work... as it is, must be tested by fire," and also: "the day will reveal that it is revealed before by fire" (1 Cor. 3:13). And others, in deeds for piety, actually, and not imitatively, having accepted death for Christ, no longer had the need for their salvation in the symbol of water, having been baptized with their own blood. And I say this, not sweeping away baptism with water, but casting down the thoughts of those who land on the Spirit, uniting the incompatible, comparing the incomparable. Chapter 16. About the fact that in every concept the Holy Spirit is not separated from the Father and the Son, both in the creation of the mental world, and in the economy regarding people, and in the expected judgment. Let us return to what was said at the beginning, namely, that the Holy Spirit is completely inseparable in everything and inseparable from the Father and the Son. Paul, in that place of the letter to the Corinthians, where he discusses the gift of tongues, says: “Even if you all prophesy, someone unfaithful or ignorant will come in, be convicted by everyone, tortured by everyone;... the secret of his heart is revealed: and so he will fall on his face and worship God, proclaiming that truly God is with you” (1 Cor. 14:24-25). So, if through prophecy, which is produced as a result of the division of the gifts of the Spirit, it is recognized that God Himself is in the prophets, then let these people consider what place to give the Holy Spirit, and what is more fair: to place Him along with God, or to relegate Him to the ranks of creatures? And what Peter said to Sapphira: “What... will you agree to tempt the Holy Spirit?” “They did not lie to nature, but to God” (Acts 5:9, 4), shows that the same sin is both against the Holy Spirit and against God. And in the same way you can learn that the Spirit in every action is united and inseparable with the Father and the Son. Together with God, Who makes the division of actions, and with the Lord, Who makes the division of ministries, the Holy Spirit also resides, Who sovereignly manages the distribution of gifts according to the dignity of each. For it is said: “divisions of gifts are, and the same is the Spirit: and divisions of ministries are, and the same is the Lord: and divisions of actions are, and the same... God, working all in all... But all this,” continues the Apostle, “acts one and the same Spirit, dividing power to each as he wills” (1 Cor. 12:4-6, 11). However, from what the Apostle mentioned here, firstly, about the Spirit, secondly, about the Son, and thirdly, about God and the Father, one should not at all conclude that his order is perverted. The apostle took the attitude towards us as the beginning: because we, who accept the gift, first of all turn our thoughts to the Distributor, then we imagine the Sender, and then we raise our thoughts to the Source and Wine of goods. You can also know the communication of the Spirit with the Father and the Son from what was originally created. For the pure, spiritual and premium Powers are holy and are called holy, as having acquired holiness by grace given by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, although it is silent about how the heavenly Powers were created, because through one sensory medium the Creator who described the world-making revealed to us the Creator, yet you, having the ability to infer from the visible the invisible, glorify the Creator, by Whom (εν) “everything was created... whether visible,... even invisible..., if there were beginnings, if there were powers,... if there were powers, if there were thrones, if there were dominions” ( Col. 1:16), and what other rational, unnamed natures there are. In their creation, represent the original cause of what was created - the Father, and the creative cause - the Son, and the perfecting cause - the Spirit, so that the ministering spirits have existence by the will of the Father, are brought into existence by the action of the Son, and are brought into existence by the presence of the Spirit. The fulfillment of Angels is a shrine and abiding in a shrine. And let no one think that I am claiming that there are three superior Hypostases, and that the action of the Son is imperfect. For there is one Principle of beings, creating through the Son and working in the Spirit. And in the Father, who acts all in all, the activity is not imperfect, and in the Son the creation is not insufficient, if it is not completed by the Spirit. For neither the Father, who creates by one will, would have need of the Son, but still wants through the Son, nor the Son, acting like the Father, would have need of assistance, yet He also wants to do through the Spirit. “By the word of the Lord the heavens were established, and by the Spirit of His mouth was all their strength” (Ps. 32:6). The Word is not a significant modification in the air produced by verbal instruments, and the Spirit is not the vapor of the mouth expelled by the respiratory members, but “the Word, which in the beginning... is with God” (John 1:1), and the Spirit of the mouth of God is “the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father” (John 15:26). Therefore imagine the Three - the commanding Lord, the creating Word and the affirming Spirit. Since the affirmation shows inexorability, immutability and unshakable installation in goodness, what else will the affirmation mean if not accomplishment in a shrine? But holiness is not possible without the Spirit. For the heavenly Powers are not holy by nature, otherwise they would have no difference with the Holy Spirit. On the contrary, in proportion to the superiority of one over the other, they have from the Spirit a certain measure of holiness. Just as the concept of cauterization includes the concept of fire, but another is the cauterized substance, and another is fire, so in the heavenly powers their essence is airy, if one may say so, spirit or immaterial fire, according to what is written: “He makes His angels spirits, and His servants scorches fire” (Heb. 1:7), which is why they are limited in place and are visible, appearing to the saint in the form of their own bodies, but the shrine, being outside the essence, gives them perfection through the communication of the Spirit. They preserve their dignity by remaining in the good, as having freedom in choice, and never losing their incessant striving for the truly good. Therefore, if we mentally take away the Spirit, the angelic faces will be upset, the archangelic authorities will be destroyed, everything will come into confusion, their life will become unlawful, disorderly, and uncertain. For how can the Angels, without receiving power from the Spirit, say: “Glory to God in the highest” (Luke 2:14)? “No one can speak the Lord Jesus except by the Holy Spirit... and... no one can speak by the Spirit of God, Jesus is anathematized” (1 Cor 12:3). The latter could be said by crafty and resistant spirits, the fall of which proves the position that invisible forces are free, equally inclined towards virtue and vice, and therefore have a need for the help of the Spirit. I believe that Gabriel does not predict the future otherwise than by the foreknowledge of the Spirit, because prophecy is one of the gifts shared by the spirit, and he who received the command to tell the “man of desires” the secrets of knowledge (Dan 10:11) who, if not the Holy Spirit wise, could teach the hidden? Because the revelation of mysteries actually belongs to the Spirit, according to what is written: “God revealed it to us by the Spirit” (1 Cor. 2:10). Thrones and Dominions, Principalities and Powers, how could they lead a blessed life if they had not “before they saw the face of the heavenly Father” (Matthew 18:10)? And it is impossible to see without the Spirit. Just as at night, if you take the light out of the house, your eyes become blind, your strength remains inactive, the dignity of things is not recognized, but gold and silver are equally trampled underfoot out of ignorance, so it is not possible for intelligent ranks for their life to remain in accordance with the law without the Spirit, just as order in the army is impossible without a commander and harmony in the choir of the singers without a leader who brings them into harmony. As the Seraphim would have said: “holy, holy, holy” (Isaiah 6:3), if they had not been taught by the Spirit, how many times would the proclamation of this doxology be honorable? Therefore, if all His Angels praise God, and all His Powers praise Him, it is by the working of the Spirit. If thousands of thousands of Angels and tens of thousands of those serving stand before Him, then by the power of the Spirit they carry out the work of their ministry immaculately. Therefore, all this heavenly and ineffable harmony, both in the service of God and in the mutual agreement of the supermundane Powers, cannot be preserved except under the control of the Spirit. Thus, in creation, the Holy Spirit is inherent in creatures not gradually perfected, but from the moment of creation already perfect, and imparts to them from Himself grace for the perfection and replenishment of each creature (της υποστασεως). Who will argue against the fact that the dispensations for man, which through the goodness of God were accomplished by the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ, are finally filled with the Holy Spirit? Would you like to consider the Old Testament, the blessings of the patriarchs, the help given in the establishment of the law, prototypes, prophecies, valiant deeds in battle, miracles performed by the righteous, and then the whole economy of the coming of the Lord in the flesh, all this through the Spirit. Firstly, the Spirit is co-inherent in the very flesh of the Lord, having become its anointing, and inseparably abiding with it, according to what is written: “Over the unworthy you will see the Spirit descending and remaining... He is” My beloved Son (John 1:33), and: “Jesus, who was of Nazareth, God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 10:38). Then every action was performed in the presence of the Spirit. The spirit was also present in those who were tempted by the devil. For it is said: “Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness, to be tempted” (Matthew 4:1). The spirit was inseparably present in the one who performed miracles. For he says: “By the Spirit of God I will cast out demons” (Matthew 12:28). The spirit did not leave even the one who rose from the dead. For, renewing man, and again returning to him that grace that God breathed into him, and which man had destroyed, the Lord blew into the faces of the disciples, and what does he say about this? “Receive the Holy Spirit: Whose sins you forgive, their sins will be forgiven, and whose sins you hold, they will hold” (John 20:22–23). But isn’t the government of the Church clearly and indisputably carried out by the Spirit? For it is said: To him were given “the first churches, the apostles, the second the prophets, the third the teachers, then the powers, also the gifts of healings, intercessions, governments, the birth of tongues” (1 Cor. 12:28). For this order is established with the division of the gifts of the Spirit. And an attentive researcher can find that even during the expected appearance of the Lord from heaven, the Holy Spirit will not be inactive, as others think, but will appear together on the day of the revelation of the Lord, on which the Blessed and only Mighty One will judge the universe in righteousness. Who knows so little about the blessings that God has prepared for the worthy, so as not to know that the crown of the righteous is the grace of the Spirit, which will be communicated more abundantly and more fully when spiritual glory is shared with each one according to his valiant deeds? For in the lordships of the saints “the Father... has many mansions” (John 14:2), that is, many differences in merit. As “star differs from star in glory, so also does the resurrection of the dead” (1 Cor. 15:41–42). Therefore, sealed by the Holy Spirit on the day of deliverance and having preserved the first-fruits of the Spirit that they received pure and whole, they will only hear: “Good, good and faithful servant, for you were faithful in a little one, I will set you over many” (Matthew 25:21). And similarly, those who upset the Holy Spirit with the craftiness of their undertakings or who have not acquired anything for this will be deprived of what they received, and grace will be given to others. Or, as one of the Evangelists says, they will be “cut to pieces” completely (Luke 12:46), by cutting to pieces meaning the final alienation from the Spirit. For the body is not divided into parts, so that one part is punished and the other freed, because it seems like a fable and is not worthy of a righteous Judge to suppose that one half is punished by one half, who has sinned entirely. Likewise, it is not the soul that is cut in half, because it has completely and completely accepted sinful wisdom and collaborated with the body in evil. On the contrary, this cutting, as I said, is the alienation of the soul forever from the Spirit. For now the Spirit, although it has no fellowship with the unworthy, nevertheless, apparently, coexists in some way with those who were once sealed, awaiting their salvation upon conversion. And then he will be completely cut off from the soul that has desecrated His grace. Therefore, “there is... in hell... he who confesses, and “remembers in death.” God (Ps. 6:6), because the help of the Spirit no longer dwells there. How can one imagine that judgment would take place without the Holy Spirit, while the Word shows that He is also the reward of the righteous, when instead of a pledge the perfect will be given, and that the first condemnation of sinners will be that everything that they consider themselves to have will be taken away from them? But the most important proof that the Spirit is united with the Father and the Son is what was said that He has the same relationship with God as the spirit in him has with everyone. For it is said: “Who is the message of man who is in man, but the spirit of man living in him? In the same way, no one knows God’s message, but the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:11). And that's enough. Chapter 17. An answer to those who assert that the Holy Spirit is not numbered with the Father and the Son, but is only numbered by Him, and together with a brief statement of faith about the pious number. It is not easy to understand what they mean by this calculation (υπαριθμησις), and what meaning they give to this word. For everyone knows that it was introduced to them from worldly wisdom. But let's see if it has any relation to our subject. Those skilled in idle talk say that some names are general, and their meaning extends to many objects, while others are more personal, and they have some more specific power than others. For example, essence is a general name applied to everything, equally to animate and inanimate, and animal is a more proper name, and although it is applied to a smaller number of objects than the first, it is nevertheless applied to more than the names contained under it, for it embraces the nature of both rational and irrational animals. Again, the proper name of the animal is man, and this proper name is husband, and the proper name of husband is the proper name of each individually: Peter, or Paul, or John. So, is this what is meant by the word “counting” - the division of the general naming into the closest naming? But I don’t believe that they reached such stupidity and began to assert that the God of all, like some general concept, represented only in the mind and not having any independent existence, is divided into subjects, and then this division began to be called counting. Even those suffering from black bile will not say this. For this is not only impious, but also leads to a concept that is contrary to their own intention, because those being subdivided are of the same essence with that from which they are separated. But the very obviousness of the absurdity, apparently, makes it difficult for us to speak, and we do not find expressions to shame their foolishness, why, it seems, by their very madness they acquire some benefit for themselves. For just as it is impossible to inflict a strong blow on soft and flexible bodies for the very reason that they do not have perseverance, so it is impossible to give a strong reproof to those who are clearly insane. Therefore, the abomination of their wickedness remains to pass in silence, but love for brothers and the intolerable behavior of opponents do not allow silence. For what do they say? Look what expressions their arrogance has invented! “We affirm that it is proper for those of equal honor to be numbered, but for those of inferior dignity it is proper to be numbered.” What do you mean by this? I don't understand your strange wisdom. Is it that gold is counted with gold, but lead is not worthy of being counted with gold, but because of the cheapness of the substance it is counted with gold? And do you really attribute such power to number that it elevates the dignity of things of little value and degrades the dignity of things of high value? Therefore, gold will again be counted among precious stones, and of these latter, the less brilliant and small ones will be counted as more good-colored and large. But what won’t people say who don’t have time for anything other than talking or hearing something new? May those who vote in favor of wickedness be glorified henceforth, together with the Stoics and Epicureans! For how is it possible to count things of little value against things of great value? Why will the copper ovol be counted among the golden stater? Therefore, they say that, having them, we do not say: we have two coins, but: one and one. Which of these coins is counted? For the name of each is pronounced similarly. Therefore, if you count each coin separately, then in the same way of counting you will introduce equivalence. And if you combine them in numbering, then again, numbering both one with the other, you will unite them with dignity. And if the counting belongs to what is being counted secondly, then it depends on the counter to begin counting with the copper coin. But postponing the denunciation of ignorance for a time, let us turn our speech to the main subject. Do you affirm that the Son is numbered to the Father, and the Spirit to the Son, or do you attribute the number to the Spirit alone? For if you count the Son, then you renew the same teaching of wickedness and you will find yourself in this one utterance repeating indecent, lower degree of dignity, birth after birth, in a word, all of a sudden blasphemies against the Only Begotten, which would take more time to refute than can be devoted, in accordance with the present intention, moreover, this wicked teaching, to the best of our ability, has already been exposed by us in other times and other places. And if they believe that the numbering befits the Spirit alone, then let them know that the Spirit is pronounced with the Lord and the Son with the Father in the same way. For the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is taught equally (Matthew 28.19). Therefore, according to the phrase taught in baptism, as the Son relates to the Father, so the Spirit relates to the Son. And if the Spirit is placed along with the Son, and the Son is placed along with the Father, then it is obvious that the Spirit is placed along with the Father. Therefore, is it appropriate to say about names placed in the same connection that one of them is counted and the other is counted? In general, what thing has ever lost its nature through counting? On the contrary, do not things that are counted remain the same as they were from the beginning, and do we not apply number to things as a sign showing the multitude of subjects? Of the bodies, we count some, measure others, weigh others, and those that make up something continuous, we take those into measure, and those that are separate, we subject them to number, however, even if they are small, they can also be measured, but we conclude about heavy bodies by the inclination of the scales. But if we have invented for ourselves signs for the knowledge of quantity, then we have not yet changed the nature of the things signified. Therefore, just as we do not hang weighty substances from one another, even if it were gold or tin, and we do not measure those that are being measured, so, of course, we will not count those that are being counted. And if nothing else allows counting, then why do they say that it is fitting for the Spirit to be counted? But those suffering from the disease of paganism believe that if one thing is inferior to another either in the degree of dignity or in the subordination of essence, then it belongs to the inferior in this to be counted. Chapter 18. About how, in the confession of the three hypostases, we observe the pious dogma of unity of command, and at the same time rebuking those who claim that the Spirit is numbered. The Lord, telling us about the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, did not rename Them, for He did not say: into the first, second and third, or into one, two and three, but in the holy Names He gave us the knowledge of faith, leading to salvation. Therefore, what saves us is faith, and the number was invented as a sign showing the number of subjects. Meanwhile, people who derive harm from everything and use the ability to count against faith, and although they know that everything else does not change from the addition of number, yet in the reasoning of God's nature they are afraid of number, so that for its sake they do not transgress the measures in honoring the Comforter. But what is inaccessible, O wise ones, especially let it be greater than the number! So the ancient reverence of the Jews inscribed with special signs the unspoken name of God, and thereby showed its superiority over all names. And if we must count, then at least there is no need to damage the truth in this. Either silence the almost ineffable, or piously count the sacred. There is one God and Father, and one Only Begotten Son, and one Holy Spirit. We proclaim each of the Hypostases separately, but when it becomes necessary to count, then we will not allow ignorant counting to lead us to the concept of polytheism. We do not count through addition, from one making an increase to many, and saying: one, two, three, or: first, second, third. “I am God first, and I am still this” (Is. 44:6). We have never heard of the second God even until now. In worshiping God from God, we confess the distinction of the Hypostases, and remain under unity of command, without dividing theology into fragmented multitudes, because in God the Father and in God the Only Begotten we contemplate one, as it were, image, imprinted in the immutability of the Divinity. For the Son is in the Father, and the Father in the Son, because the Son is the same as the Father is, and the Father is the same as the Son, and in this they are one. Why, according to the distinctive property of Persons, is one and one, but according to the commonality of nature, Both are one. And why, although there is one and one, are there not two Gods? Because the image of kings is called king, and not two kings, for neither the power is cut, nor the glory is divided. Just as there is one principle ruling over us and one power, so our glorification is one, and not many, because the honoring of the image passes to the prototype. But what is imitatively an image here, is there naturally the Son. And just as in artificial works the likeness is in the image, so in God’s uncomplicated nature unity is in the communion of the Divine. But the Holy Spirit is one, and He is proclaimed separately; through the one Son He is united with the one Father and with Himself completes the revered and blessed Trinity. His unity with the Father and the Son is sufficiently expressed by the fact that He is not placed on a par with the multitude of creatures, but is pronounced separately. For He is not one among many, but one. Just as there is one Father and one Son, so there is one Holy Spirit. Therefore, He is as far removed from created nature as the individual is not like the composite and having many in itself. It is united with the Father and the Son insofar as the unit has properties with the unit. But not only from this are the proofs of His communication by nature taken, but also from those places where it is said that He is from God, not like everything else from God, but as coming from God, coming not through birth, like the Son, but as the Spirit of the mouth of God. Without a doubt, the lips are not a member, and the Spirit is not a dissipated breath, but on the contrary, the lips are understood to be divine, and the Spirit is a living essence, the mistress of the holy, from which, although His unity with God is revealed, the image of the procession remains inexplicable. He is also called the Spirit of Christ, as united with Christ by nature. Therefore, “if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His” (Rom. 8:9). Therefore, He alone worthily glorifies the Lord. For the Lord said: “He will glorify Me” (John 16:14), not as a creature, but as the “Spirit of truth,” clearly showing the truth in Himself, and as the Spirit of wisdom, in His greatness revealing Christ, God’s power and God’s wisdom. And as the Comforter, He shows in Himself the goodness of the Comforter who sent Him, and in His dignity reveals the greatness of the One from whom He came. Therefore, there is some kind of natural glory, like the glory of the sun - light, and there is some kind of external glory, judiciously rewarded to the worthy, according to free will. But this again is twofold. For it is said: “The son glorifies the father, and the servant his master” (Mal. 1:6). So, one of them, slave, is rewarded by the creature, and the other, I will say this, domestic (οικειακη), is accomplished by the Spirit. For the Lord, just as He said about Himself: “I have glorified You on earth, having done the work that You gave Me, that I might do it” (John 17:4), so also about the Comforter He says: “He will glorify Me, for He will receive it from Mine, and will tell it to you” (John 16:14). And just as the Son is glorified by the Father, Who says: “I have also glorified, and again I will glorify” (John 12:28), so the Spirit is glorified, because of communion with the Father and the Son, and according to the testimony of the Only Begotten, Who says: “All sin and blasphemy will be forgiven you by man: but what is blasphemed against the Spirit will not be forgiven” (Matthew 12:31). But as soon as, with the assistance of the enlightening power, we direct our gaze to the beauty of the Image of the invisible God and through it we are raised to the contemplation of the Proto-Image, which surpasses all beauty, the Spirit of knowledge is inseparably present with this, Who in Himself gives to the observers of the truth secret visual power to contemplate the Image, and does not show It outside of Himself, but in Himself introduces it into knowledge. For just as “no one knows... the Father... except the Son” (Matthew 11:27), so “no one can speak of the Lord Jesus, but in the Holy Spirit” 4 (1 Cor. 12:3). For it is not said: by the Spirit (δια πνευματος), but: “in the Spirit” (εν πνευματι). And: “The Spirit [is] God: and whoever worships Him is worthy to worship in Spirit and truth” (John 4:24), as it is written: “in Your light, that is, in the enlightenment of the Spirit, we will see light” (Ps. 35:10), “the true light that enlightens every person who comes into the world” (John 1:9). Therefore, the Spirit in Himself shows the glory of the Only Begotten, and in Himself communicates to the true worshipers the knowledge of God. Therefore, the path of knowledge of God is from the one Spirit, through the Only Begotten Son, to the one Father. And conversely, natural goodness, and natural holiness and royal dignity from the Father, through the Only Begotten, extend to the Spirit. In this way, the Hypostases are confessed, and the pious dogma of unity of command does not fall. And those who allow calculation, saying: first, second and third, let them be recognized as introducing the polytheism of Hellenic error into undefiled Christian theology. For this clever introduction of calculation does not lead to anything else, but only to confessing the God of the first, second and third. But for us the order proposed by the Lord is sufficient; whoever mixes it up will sin no less than these wicked people. So, enough has been said about the fact that natural communication is not in the least disrupted by calculation, as these people erroneously think. But let us indulge the stubborn and fussy person and concede that the second thing after something is called that in the sense of counting that something. And let's see what comes out of this situation. It is said: “The first man is ringed from the earth: the second man, the Lord is from heaven” (1 Cor. 15:47). And in another place it is said: “things that are spiritual are not first, but things that are natural, and then things that are spiritual” (1 Cor. 15:46). Therefore, if the second is counted to the first, and what is counted is of less value than that to which it is counted, then, according to you, a spiritual man is of little value than a soul, and a heavenly man is of less value than a earthly man. Chapter 19. Answer to those who claim that the Spirit should not be glorified. “Even so,” they say, “but it does not follow from this that glory necessarily belongs to the Spirit, which is why we must extol Him with praises.” So, where do we get evidence that the dignity of the Spirit is above all understanding, when they consider the communication with Him of the Father and the Son to be an inconclusive evidence of this dignity? At the very least, by paying attention to the signification of names, to the greatness of the actions of the Spirit and also to the benefits that He provides to us, or better yet, to all creation, we can, to some extent, form an understanding of the greatness of His nature and His ineffable power. He is called "Spirit" as: "The Spirit [is] God" (John 4:24), and: "The Spirit of our countenance, the anointed Lord" (Lam. 4:20). He is called Holy, just as the Father is holy and the Son is holy. For holiness is brought into creation from without, but in the Spirit holiness completes the nature, which is why He is not the one being sanctified, but the one who sanctifies. It is called good, just as the Father is good and He who is born of the Good is good. It is called “right”, as “the Lord God is right” (Ps. 91:16), because He is the original truth and the original truth, and due to the immutability of His essence, has no deviations and deviations in one direction or another. He is called the Comforter, just like the Only Begotten, who Himself says: “I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Comforter” (John 14:16). So the Spirit has names in common with the Father and the Son, and He has these names by natural unity with Them. Otherwise, why could he have? Also called “sovereign” and the Spirit of truth and the Spirit of wisdom. “The Spirit of God created me” (Job 33:4). And about Bezaleel it is said that God filled him with “the spirit of God of wisdom, and understanding, and knowledge” (Ex. 31:3). Such are the names, so high and great they are, yet they do not express any excess of glory! What are the actions? Inexpressible in greatness, innumerable in number. For how can we imagine in thought what is beyond the ages? What were the actions of the Spirit before the mental creature? How numerous are His benefits to creation? What is the power for the times to come? For the Spirit was, was before the ages, was one with the Father and the Son. Therefore, even if you imagine something beyond the centuries, you will find that it is after the Spirit. And if you imagine creation in your mind, then the heavenly powers were confirmed by the Spirit, and by confirmation, obviously, you should understand the inconvenience in the habit of good. For the Spirit has given the Powers both communion with God, and steadfastness towards sin, and abiding in bliss. The Coming of Christ! and the Spirit precedes. Appearance in the flesh! and the Spirit is not separated. The effects of powers, the granting of healings are from the Holy Spirit. Demons were cast out by the Spirit of God, the devil was brought into inaction - in the co-presence of the Spirit, atonement for sins - by the grace of the Spirit. For “you were washed” and “sanctified... in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and by the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor. 6:11). Our appropriation to God is through the Spirit. For “God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts,” “crying: Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:6). The resurrection from the dead is by the action of the Spirit. For “thou shalt follow Thy Spirit, and they shall be created, and renew the face of the earth” (Ps. 103:30). If by creation someone wants to understand the revival of what was destroyed, then is not the action of the Spirit great, Who arranges for us life from resurrection and restores our souls to spiritual life? And if creation is called the local transformation into the better of those who have fallen as a result of sin (for this word is used in this way according to the custom of Scripture, for example, when Paul says: “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17), then this local renewal and this transition from earthly and passionate life to heavenly life, accomplished in us through the Spirit, bring our soul to the extreme surprise. What are we afraid of after this? Is it really so that the excess of honor does not exceed dignity? Or, on the contrary, so as not to degrade the concept of the Spirit, although, apparently, we will say about Him the greatest things that can only be uttered by human thought and human language? This is what the Holy Spirit says, because this is what the Lord says: “descend and go with them, reasoning in nothingness: I have already sent them” (Acts 10:20). Are these really the words of the humiliated and despicable? “Set apart Barnabas and Saul for the work according to their calling” (Acts 13:2). Does a slave really say that? And Isaiah said: “The Lord has sent me, and His Spirit” (Isaiah 48:16). And: “the Spirit of the Lord came and taught them” (Is. 63:14). And the word: instruction, again, do not take it in a low meaning. For Scripture testifies that this is God’s work. It is said: “Thou hast taught Thy people like sheep” (Ps. 77:21), and: “Trained Joseph like a sheep” (Ps. 79:2), and: “Teach me to trust, and not to fear” (Ps. 77:53). Therefore, when you hear: “When the Comforter comes,” “He... will remember you... and guide you... into all truth” (John 16:13; John 14:26), then understand the word of instruction as you have been taught, and do not undermine the concept. But you say: “And he makes intercession for us” (Rom. 8:26). Therefore, as much as the petitioner is lower than the benefactor, the Spirit is far in dignity from God.” But have you not heard about the Only Begotten, that He is at the right hand of God, “and makes intercession for us” (Rom. 8:34)? Because the Spirit is in you (if only completely in you), and because he teaches and instructs us who are blinded to choose what is useful, do not distort the pious and holy belief about Him. For the extreme measure of ingratitude is to turn the benefactor’s love of humanity into an excuse for ingratitude. Therefore, “do not grieve the Holy Spirit” (Eph. 4:30). Hear what the first fruit of the martyrs, Stephen, says, reproaching the rebellious and insubordinate people. “You continually resist the Holy Spirit” (Acts 7:51), he says. And also Isaiah: “you angered the Holy Spirit... and turned to enmity against them” (Is. 63:10). And in another place: “the house of Jacob provoked the Spirit of the Lord” (Mic. 2:7). Doesn't this express sovereign power? I leave it to the reader to judge what concepts of the Spirit those who hear this should have. How about a tool, or something subordinate, equal to the creature and co-serving with us? Or is it very difficult for the pious to crawl towards such blasphemy with a single word? Do you call the Spirit a slave? But it is said: “a servant does not know what his Lord is doing” (John 15:15), and the Spirit is also “the message... of God”, just like “the spirit of man is in man” (1 Cor. 2:11). Chapter 20. In response to those who assert that the Spirit is neither in the rank of slave nor in the rank of master, but in the rank of the free. They say that “The Spirit is neither a slave nor a Lord, but is free.” The insensibility is amazing, the fearlessness of those who claim this is pathetic! What is there more to lament about them? Is it ignorance? or blasphemy? They humiliate theological dogmas with human examples, and they try to apply the local custom, according to which a different distinction of merits is made, to God’s ineffable nature, without reflecting that no one is a slave by nature among people. For people were either forcibly brought under the yoke of slavery, as in captivity, or were enslaved out of poverty, like the Egyptians to Pharaoh, or, according to some wise and mysterious economy, the worst of the children, by the word of the fathers, were condemned to serve as slaves to the most prudent and the best, and some truthful researcher of events would even call this not a condemnation, but a benefit. For for someone who, due to lack of prudence by nature, does not have a ruler in himself, it is more beneficial to become the property of another, so that he can be controlled by the understanding of the owner, like a chariot to which a driver is given, and a ship on which a helmsman sits at the helm. Therefore, Jacob, with the blessing of his father, is master of Esau, so that the foolish, not having his own guardian - the mind, against his will, takes advantage of the benefits of the prudent. And “The youth of Canaan will be a servant to the brethren” (Gen. 9:25), because he is incapable of learning virtue on his own, having as his father the senseless Ham. These are the reasons why slaves are here, and those who have escaped poverty, or war, or do not need the care of others are free. Therefore, although one is called a master, and another a slave, yet we are all co-servants, both by mutual equality of one with the other, and as the property of Him who created us. And what can you free from slavery? For suddenly he was created and prepared to be a slave. The heavenly ones do not rule over each other, because they do not have a passion for dominance, but all are submissive to God, they give due fear to Him as the Master, and due glory to Him as the Creator. For “the son glorifies the father, and the servant his master.” And God certainly requires one of the two. For he says: “If I am the Father, then where is My glory? and if I am the Lord, where is my fear” (Mal. 1:6)? And life would be very miserable if it were not under the supervision of the Lord. Those apostate forces who, having raised their necks against God Almighty, refuse slavery, do so not according to another structure of nature, but because of their disobedience to the Creator. Therefore, who do you call free? Is it the one who does not have a king over him? Is it the one who himself does not have the power to rule over another, and does not tolerate being ruled over? But there is no such nature among beings, and to think so about the Spirit is obvious impiety. Why, if He was created, then, without a doubt, He slaves along with all creatures. For it is said: “Everything is your work” (Ps. 119:91). And if He is higher than creation, then He is a partner in royal power. Chapter 21. Evidence from Scripture regarding the naming of the Spirit as Lord. And is it necessary, in disputes about humiliating concepts, to seek an inglorious victory with words, when, by presenting the most honorable concepts, one can prove the indisputable superiority of glory? But if we say what we have been taught by Scripture, then perhaps the Doukhobors will cry out loudly and strongly, and rush at us, covering their ears, taking stones, or turning into weapons everything that comes into anyone’s hands. However, we should not prefer our safety to the truth. So we found in the Apostle: “May the Lord straighten your hearts into the love of God and into the patience of Christ” for the sake of sorrows (2 Thess. 3:5). Who is this Lord who corrects into the love of God and for the sake of sorrows into the patience of Christ? Let those who enslave the Spirit answer us. If we were talking about God the Father, then it would certainly be said: “May the Lord correct you into His love.” And if it were spoken about the Son, then it would be added: to His patience. Therefore, let them find out what other person is worthy of honoring him with the name of Lord. And similar to this is what was said in another place: “May the Lord multiply you and abound in love... towards all, as we do towards you, so that your hearts may be established blameless in holiness before God and our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all His saints” (1 Thess. 3:12-13). Which Lord does the Apostle implore “before our God and Father, at the coming of our Lord, in the hedgehog of the heart” of all those in Thessaloniki “to establish blameless” as established “in holiness”? Let those who supply the Holy Spirit along with the ministering spirits sent into ministry answer us. But they can't answer anything. Therefore let them listen to other testimonies in which the Spirit is also clearly called Lord. It is said: “The Lord is the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:17). And again: “as from the Lord 5 the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:18). But so that there is no pretext for contradiction, I will offer the Apostle’s own saying: “even to this day the veil in the reading of the Old Testament remains unrevealed, the knowledge of Christ ceases... But when they turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away... But the Lord is the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:14-17). What does this mean? The fact that he who stops at the bare understanding of the letter and stagnates in the observance of the law, with such a Jewish interpretation of the letter closes his heart as if with some kind of veil, is subjected to this out of ignorance that the bodily observance of the law “ceases” at the coming of Christ, when the prototypes have already passed into reality. For the lamps become unnecessary when the sun appears, the law is ineffective and the prophecies fall silent, as soon as the truth has shone. Whoever was able to penetrate into the depths of legal understanding and, tearing apart the obscurity of the literal meaning like some kind of veil, ascended into the mysterious meaning, he imitates Moses, who, during an interview with God, took off his veil, and himself turning from the letter to the spirit. For this reason, the veil on the face of Moses corresponds to the obscurity of the subordinate teachings, while the conversion of Moses, and specifically the conversion to the Lord, corresponds to spiritual contemplation. Therefore, whoever discards the letter when reading the Law turns to the Lord (the Spirit is now called the Lord), and he becomes like Moses, whose face was glorified as a result of God’s appearance. Just as what lies along with colored substances is itself colored by the colored rays spreading around, so the one who has clearly entered into the Spirit is transformed from His glory to enlightenment, illuminating the heart with the truth of the Spirit, as if with some light. And this means being transformed from the glory of the Spirit into your own glory, not meagerly and not barely noticeably, but to the extent that is characteristic of one enlightened by the Spirit. Are you not ashamed, man, of the Apostle who says: “You are the church of God, and the Spirit of God lives in you” (1 Cor. 3:16)? Would he really ever agree to honor a slave’s dwelling with the name of a church? And what else? He who calls Scripture inspired by God because it was written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, is he really using language that insults and demeans the Spirit? Chapter 22. From the fact that the Spirit, like the Father and the Son, is inaccessible to contemplation, the conclusion about the natural communion of the Spirit with the Father and the Son. The superiority of nature in the Spirit is recognized not only from the fact that He has the same names and communion in actions with the Father and the Son, but also from the fact that, like Them, it is inaccessible to contemplation. What is said about the Father as surpassing human understanding, and what is said about the Son, the Lord says the same about the Holy Spirit. “Righteous Father, You do not know the world” (John 17:25), and what is called the world here is not the composition of heaven and earth, but this temporary life, subject to thousands of changes. And talking about Himself, he says: “It is still a little while, and the world will not see Me, but you will see Me” (John 14:19), and here again he calls the world those who are devoted to material and carnal life, trust in the truth with only their eyes and, not believing the resurrection, will never see our Lord with the eyes of their hearts. But He said the same thing about the Spirit. “The Spirit of truth, which the world cannot receive because it does not see Him, yet knows Him; but you know Him, because He abides in you” (John 14:17). For a carnal man, whose mind has not been trained in contemplation, or better yet, is completely buried, as in mud, in carnal wisdom, cannot look at the spiritual light of truth. Therefore, the world, that is, life enslaved to carnal passions, does not accept the grace of the Spirit, like a sick eye does not accept the light of the sun's rays. And to His disciples, about whom the Lord testified that they, following His teachings, have purity of life, He also gives the power to be seers and contemplatives of the Spirit. For he says: “You are already pure, because of the word that was spoken to you” (John 15:3). Therefore, “the world cannot receive Him, because it does not see Him: but you know Him, because He abides in you” (John 14:17). Isaiah says the same thing: “establish the earth and what is in it, and give breath to the people who are on it, and Spirit to those who walk 6 on it” (Is. 42:5). The prophet testifies about those who trample upon earthly things and about those who have risen above them that they are worthy of the gift of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, with what should we recognize Him Who is beyond the reach of the world, and whom we contemplate only as saints, because of the purity of their hearts? or what honors are due to Him? Chapter 23. That the enumeration of the things belonging to the Spirit is a glorification of Him. Regarding other Forces, we believe that each is located in a certain place. For the Angel who presented himself to Cornelius was not at Philip’s at the same time (Acts 8:26; Acts 10:3), and the Angel who spoke with the Accharias at the “altar of incense” (Luke 1:11) did not at the same time occupy his proper place in heaven. We believe about the Spirit that He acts at the same time in Habakkuk and in Daniel in Babylonia (Dan. 14, etc.), together with Jeremiah “in the treasure” (Jer. 20:2), and with Ezekiel on Chebar (Ezek. 1:1). “For the Spirit of the Lord fills the world” (Wis. 1:7). And: “How will I go from Your Spirit, and how will I flee from Your presence” (Ps. 139:7)? And the prophet says: “Before I am with you, says the Lord, and My Spirit is present in your midst” (Hag. 2:5–6). How should one recognize the nature of the One Who is omnipresent and co-essential with God? Is the nature of angels comprehensive or encompassed by particular places, as Scripture indicates? But no one will say the last. How can we not exalt and glorify Him who is divine in nature, incomprehensible in greatness, powerful in actions, good in actions? And I give glory in no other way than in counting the miracles that belong to Him. Therefore, either let these people order us not to remember the blessings bestowed by the Spirit, or let the description of what belongs to the Spirit be necessarily recognized as the performance of the highest doxology, for we cannot glorify God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and His Only Begotten Son, in any other way than by listing, to the best of our ability, His miracles. Chapter 24. Reproof of the incongruity of those who do not glorify the Spirit, borrowed from comparing Him with the glorified creatures. Moreover, man in general is crowned with glory and honor, and according to the promises, “glory and honor and peace are prepared for everyone who does good” (Rom. 2:10). There is some kind of glory that actually belongs to Israel, it is said: “their sonship, and glory,... and ministry” (Rom. 9:4). The psalmist also speaks of his own kind of glory: when “my glory will sing to You” (Ps. 29:13). And again: “Arise, my glory” (Ps. 107:3). And there is a certain “glory to the sun,... the moon,... and the stars” (1 Cor. 15:41), according to the word of the Apostle: “and the ministry of condemnation” is for glory (2 Cor. 3:9). With such a number of glorified people, do you want one Spirit to be glorified least of all? However, it is said that “the ministry of the Spirit is in glory” (2 Cor. 3:8). Why is He Himself unworthy of glorification? And although “great is the glory” of the righteous, according to the psalmist (Ps. 20:6), yet, in your opinion, there is no glory of the Spirit. How is it not an obvious danger to bring upon oneself an inevitable sin with such words? If a person who is saved by works of righteousness glorifies those who fear the Lord, then much less should he deprive the Spirit of the appropriate glory. You say: “let it be glorified, but not with the Father and the Son.” – What reason is there to invent a new place for the Spirit, leaving the one determined by the Lord, and to deprive Him of fellowship in the glory of Him Who is everywhere united to the Divinity, in the confession of faith, in the baptism of redemption, in the operation of powers, in the indwelling of saints, in the grace-filled gifts of the submissive? For in general there is no gift that would descend to creation without the Holy Spirit, so that, as we are taught in the Gospel by our Lord and Savior, even a simple word in defense of the faith of Christ cannot be spoken without the assistance of the Spirit (Matthew 10:20). I don’t know what kind of partaker of the Holy Spirit, losing sight of all this and forgetting about the communion of the Spirit in everything, would agree to tear Him away from the Father and the Son? And where do we fit Him in? to the creatures? But all creation is enslaved, but the Spirit liberates. For “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (2 Cor. 3:17). And since much can be said to confirm that the Holy Spirit should not be counted among created nature, I will postpone discussion of this until another time. For if, in accordance with the importance of the subject, we begin to present our own proofs and resolve the objections of our opponents, then a long speech will be required, and we could bore the readers with the verbosity of the book. Why, saving this for a special essay, I will stick to the real subject. So let's look at it in detail. The Spirit is good by nature, just as the Father is good and the Son is good, and the creation participates only in goodness in the election of the good. The Spirit knows the depths of God, and creation only through the Spirit receives the revelation of mysteries. The Spirit gives life together with God, who gives life to all things and the life-giving Son. For it is said: “He who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your dead body through His living Spirit in you” (Rom. 8:11). And again: “My sheep hear My voice... and I give them eternal life” (John 10:27–28). But it is also said: “The Spirit gives life” (1 Cor. 15:45). And it is also said: “The Spirit is life 7 for righteousness’ sake” (Rom. 8:10). And the Lord testifies that “the Spirit... gives life; the flesh profiteth nothing” (John 6:63). Therefore, how can we unite the Spirit, having made it alien to the life-giving power, to nature, which still requires life? Who is such a lover of disputes, so uninvolved in the heavenly gift, so little has tasted the good words of God, so deprived of eternal hopes that he places the Spirit outside the Divinity and ranks him with the creature? They say: “We have the Spirit as a gift from God. But the gift is never honored with equal honors with the Giver.” – It is true that the Spirit is the gift of God, but the gift of life (“the law,” it is said, “the Spirit of life... has set us free,” (Rom. 8:2)), and the gift of power (for “you will receive the power that the Holy Spirit has brought upon you,” (Acts 1:8)). So, is He really worthy of contempt for this? And did not God give the Son to people? It is said: “Who... did not spare His own Son, but gave Him up for us all: why then does He not also give us all things with Him” (Rom. 8:32)? And in another place the Apostle speaks about the mystery of the incarnation: “that we may know what has been given to us from God” (1 Cor. 2:12). Therefore, those who assert this have not surpassed the Jews in ingratitude, turning the very excess of goodness into a reason for blasphemy? They blame the Spirit for giving us the boldness to call God our Father. For “God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying: Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:6), so that His voice would become the own voice of those who received Him. Chapter 25. That Scripture uses the syllable “v” instead of the syllable “s”, and also that the syllable “and” is equivalent to the syllable “s”. “Why,” they say, “why did Scripture nowhere teach about the glorification of the Spirit with the Father and the Son, but carefully avoided this expression: “with the Spirit”, but always preferred, as a more decent, expression: to glorify “in the Spirit”? And I, for my part, would not say that the syllable “v” gives a meaning that is less honorable; on the contrary, I would note that, understood sensibly, it elevates understanding to a greater height. For we note that it is often placed instead of the syllable “s”. For example, “I will go into Your house: with burnt offerings,” instead of: “with burnt offerings” (Ps. 65:13). “And he brought... them out in silver and gold,” instead of: “with silver and gold” (Ps. 105:37). And: “you will not go out in our strength,” instead of: with our strength (Ps. 43:10). There are thousands of similar places. But, in a word, I would like to know from new wisdom what kind of doxology the Apostle performed with the saying: “in”, in the form in which these people pronounce it, as borrowed from Scripture? For nowhere did I find that it was said: “To You, the Father, be honor and glory, through Your only begotten Son in the Holy Spirit,” whereas today this doxology is more common among them, so to speak, than breathing itself. Although each of these sayings can be found individually, they will not be able to indicate them anywhere collectively in this particular order. Therefore, if they are looking for what is in Scripture, then let them indicate where they got what they say. And if they yield to custom, then let them not prevent us from doing the same. For we, finding both sayings in use among the faithful, use both, being confident that the glory of the Spirit is given equally to both. And those who distort the truth are more blocked by the prepositional phrase, which in Scripture, being used instead of the conjunction “and,” has a similar meaning, but is not so useful to opponents, which is why it is now being disputed by them. For it means one thing whether to say: Paul, and Silouan, and Timothy, or - Paul with Silouan and Timothy. In both forms of expression, the conjugation of names is observed in the same way. Therefore, if the Lord said: “Father and Son and Holy Spirit,” and I say: “Father and Son with the Holy Spirit,” then regarding the power of speech, what else will I say? But there is a lot of evidence about the pairing of Names through the conjunction: “and”. For it is said: “the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God,... and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit” (2 Cor. 13:13). And again: “I pray you... through our Lord Jesus Christ, and through the love of the Spirit” (Rom. 15:30). Therefore, if instead of “and” we want to use “s”, will we do something different? I don’t see any difference, unless someone, following cold grammatical rules, prefers the conjunction, as a conjugating particle and produces greater unity, but rejects the preposition as not having equal force. But if they demanded an account from us for this, then perhaps not many words would be needed to justify us. Now we are not talking about syllables, and not about the sound of this or that word, but about objects that have a very great difference in meaning and truth. For this reason, although the use of syllables is indifferent, they are planning to recognize some syllables as legal, and to expel others from the Church. But although the use of this preposition “with” at first glance seems obviously useful, however, I will show the reason why the Fathers, not without reasoning, accepted it into use. For besides the fact that this preposition is equivalent to the syllable: “and”, it exposes the evil wisdom of Sabelli, and like this syllable shows the difference between the Hypostases (as in the expressions: I and the Father “will come” (John 14:23), and: “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30)), it also serves as excellent evidence of eternal communion and unceasing unity. He who said that the Son is with the Father at the same time showed both the peculiarity of the Hypostases and the inseparability of communication. This can be seen when talking about people. The conjunction “and” expresses a common action, and the preposition “with” shows some kind of communication together. For example, Paul and Timothy sailed to Macedonia, and Tychicus and Onesimus were sent to the Colossians. From these words we learn that they did the same thing. But if they say that they both sailed and were sent one with the other, then we are informed that they completed the task together. Thus, this saying, more than any other, dispelling the wickedness of Sabelli, overthrows those who fall into the opposite wickedness, I mean those who, by temporary distances, separate the Son from the Father and the Holy Spirit from the Son. With the syllable “v”, the syllable “s” has this special difference that this latter depicts the mutual unity of those in communication, for example, swimming together, living together, or doing something together, and the syllable “v” expresses the attitude towards the place where they act. For when we hear about something floating or living in something, we immediately think of a boat or a house. This is the mutual difference between these prepositions in general word usage, but the hardworking can find even more, and I do not have the free time to enter into research on syllables. Therefore, since it has been proven that the preposition “with” gives a very clear concept of unity, make peace, if you wish, and stop cruel and fierce warfare with it. However, although this saying is so clear, however, if anyone in doxologies wants to conjugate names with the syllable “and” and glorify the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, as we are taught in the Gospel at baptism, let him glorify, no one contradicts this, if they want, we agree. But they would rather agree to lose their tongue than to accept this saying. This is what raises a fierce and irreconcilable war among us. They say: praise should be given to God in the Holy Spirit, and not to God and the Spirit, and with all their fervor they adhere to this saying, as derogatory for the Spirit. It is not useless to talk about him further. And it will be surprising for me if, after hearing this, they do not proclaim the speech itself to be a traitor who has gone over to defend the glory of the Spirit. Chapter 26. The fact that in whatever cases the preposition “in” is said, in all those cases it is also taken about the Spirit. Considering this simple and short saying, I believe that its meanings are numerous and varied. And in whatever cases the preposition “in” is said, in all those cases, as we find, it serves to compose the concept of the Spirit. So it is said that the image is in the substance, that the power is in the one capable of receiving it, that the skill is located in accordance with it, and the like. Therefore, the Holy Spirit, insofar as it is a fulfilling power for rational creatures, elevating them to the very heights, holds the concept of the image. For whoever no longer lives according to the flesh, but is led by the Spirit of God and is called the son of God, and is made conformed to the image of the Son of God, is called spiritual. And just as the power of vision is in a healthy eye, so is the activity of the Spirit in a purified soul. That is why Paul desires for the Ephesians to have their toes “enlightened” in the Spirit of wisdom (Eph. 1:18). And just as art is in the one who has learned it, so the grace of the Spirit is in the one who has accepted it, although it is always abiding, but not continuously active, because art is in the artist as a force, but it is brought into action only when he acts in accordance with the art. Likewise, the Spirit, although it always dwells in those who are worthy, nevertheless, in cases of need, it acts either in prophecies, or in healings, or in other actions of powers. Just as in bodies there is health or warmth, or in general freedom of bodily functions, so the spirit is often inherent in the soul, but it does not remain forever in those who, due to the inconstancy of the will, easily push away the grace they have received. Such was Saul, such were the seventy elders of the children of Israel, except for Eldad and Modad (for on them alone the Spirit was found to dwell (Num. 11:25-26)), such in general was everyone who was similar to them in his will. And just as the word in the soul is sometimes a thought of the heart, and sometimes pronounced with the tongue, so the Holy Spirit sometimes bears witness with the spirit and cries out in our hearts: “Abba Father”; then sometimes he speaks for us, according to what has been said: “You are not the one who speaks, but the Spirit of the Father speaks in you” (Matthew 10:20). Also, the Spirit, in relation to the division of gifts, appears as a whole in parts. For we are all members in one another’s understanding, and we have different gifts according to God’s grace given to us. Therefore, “the eye cannot tell the hand that you do not need it; or else be the head of your feet, which you do not need” (1 Cor. 12:21). But all the members, as together they constitute the body of Christ in the unity of the Spirit, mutually provide each other with the necessary benefit with their gifts, because God placed the members in the body, and each of them, as He pleased. Members care about the same thing for each other, according to the spiritual communication of their innate compassion. Therefore, “if one oud suffers, all the ouds suffer with him; if one oud is glorified, all the ouds rejoice with him” (1 Cor. 12:26). And as we are parts as a whole, so are we, each individual, in the Spirit, because we are all in one body baptized into one Spirit. Although it is strange to say, it is nevertheless true that the Spirit is often called the place of those who are sanctified. And such a way of speech, as it turns out, does not humiliate, but even more glorifies the Spirit, because Scripture, for the sake of clarity, often transfers to spiritual concepts and what is sensual in names. Therefore, we note that the psalmist also speaks about God: “become my protector in God... and in a fortified place 8 to save me” (Ps. 30:3). About the Spirit it is said: “This place is with Me, and you will stand on the stone” (Ex. 33:21). For what else is called here a place other than contemplation in the Spirit, in which, being Moses, he could consciously see God appearing to him? This is the place that is characteristic of true worship of God. For it is said: “Take heed to yourself, lest you offer your burnt offerings in every place except in the place which the Lord your God chooses” (Deut. 12:13–14). Therefore, what is a spiritual burnt offering? "Sacrifice of praise" (Ps. 49:14). In what place will we offer this sacrifice if not in the Holy Spirit? Where did we learn this? From the Lord Himself, Who says: “The true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth” (John 4:23). Seeing this place, Jacob said: “The Lord is in this place” (Gen. 28:16). Therefore the Spirit is truly the place of the saints. And the saint is the proper place of the Spirit, represents himself in the dwelling of the Spirit with God, and is called His church. Just as Paul speaks in Christ, for he says: “In the sight of God we speak in Christ” (2 Cor. 3:17), and Christ speaks in Paul, about which he himself says: “Seek temptations, who speaks in me” (2 Cor. 13:3), so in the Spirit he speaks mysteries, and the Spirit speaks in him again (1 Cor. 14:2). Therefore it is said of the Spirit that He dwells in creatures in such many parts and varied ways. In relation to the Father and the Son, it would be much more pious to say that He is not in Them, but coexists with Them. For about the grace of the Spirit, who lives in those who are worthy and works His actions in them, it is beautifully said that the Spirit abides in those who receive Him. And when pre-eternal existence and unceasing abiding with the Son and Father are considered, then names are required that show the eternal union. For those who are inseparably together with each other are called actually and truly co-existent. We say about heat that it resides in hot iron, but it resides in the fire itself. And health abides in the body, but life abides in the soul. Therefore, where there is personal, natural and inseparable communication, the preposition “with” is more expressive, which gives the concept of inseparable communication. And to whom the grace of the Spirit can approach and again move away from him, it is said in the proper and real sense that grace abides in him, although in those who receive it, due to their firm disposition to goodness, it often remains for a long time. Therefore, when we imagine the own dignity of the Spirit, then we consider Him with the Father and the Son, and when we understand the grace operating in its participants, then we say that the Spirit is in us. And the praise we offer in the Spirit does not serve as a confession of His dignity, but as an awareness of our own weakness. By this we show that even to glorify “we are not content from ourselves, but our contentment” (2 Cor. 3:5) in the Holy Spirit, in whom, having drawn strength, for the benefits shown to us, we give thanks to our God, according to the measure of our purity from sin, since more or less than each other we receive help from the Spirit to offer sacrifices of praise to God. Therefore, in the same way, we piously perform thanksgiving in the Spirit, although even this is not easy, so that someone can testify about himself: The Spirit of God is in me, and through His grace I give glory. For Paul’s words are fitting: “I imagine that I also have the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 7:40). And again: “Keep a good testament through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us” (2 Tim. 1:14). And one could say about Daniel that the Holy Spirit of God is in him (Dan. 5:11), and also about one who is like them in virtue. But here is another meaning, which also cannot be denied. As the Father is visible to us in the Son, so is the Son in the Spirit. Therefore, worship in the Spirit indicates the activity of our mind, performed as if in light, which you can understand from what was said to the Samaritan woman. For this woman, who, according to the local custom of the country, falsely thought that worship was determined by place, Our Lord, teaching, said that “it is worthy to bow down in Spirit and truth,” obviously meaning Himself by truth. Therefore, just as we say that there is worship in the Son, as in the image of God and the Father, so there is worship in the Spirit, since He shows in Himself the Divinity of the Lord. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is not separated from the Father and the Son in worship. For if you are outside the Spirit, then you cannot worship in any way, and if you are in the Spirit, then you will in no way separate Him from God, just as you will not separate the light from visible things. It is not possible to see the Image of the invisible God other than through the illumination of the Spirit. And whoever fixes his gaze on the image cannot separate the light from the image. For that which serves as the cause of vision, of necessity, is visible together with the objects visible through it. Therefore, with the illumination of the Spirit alone, we actually and properly see the radiance of the glory of God, and through the Image we are raised to that glory of which He is the image and coequal seal. Chapter 27. About where it came from, and what power the syllable “s” has, and together about the laws of the Church that are not set forth in Scripture. They say: “if the syllable “in” is actually proper to the Spirit and is sufficient to express any concept about Him, then why are you introducing this new syllable, saying “with the Spirit”, and not “in the Holy Spirit”, using both unnecessary and not legalized by the Church expressions? It was already said above that the syllable “in” is not exclusively assigned to the Holy Spirit, but is common to Him with the Father and the Son. I think that enough has been said about the fact that this statement not only does not take away any dignity from the Spirit, but on the contrary, it raises the thoughts of people who are not completely corrupt to an even greater height. It remains now, regarding the preposition “with,” to consider where it originated, what power it has, and to what extent it agrees with Scripture. Of the dogmas and sermons observed in the Church, some we have in the teaching set forth in Scripture, while others, which have come down to us from the apostolic tradition, we have accepted in secret. But both have the same power for godliness. And no one disputes the latter, even if he is somewhat knowledgeable in church decrees. For if we decided to reject customs not set forth in Scripture, as not having great power, then in an unnoticeable way we would distort the most important thing in the Gospel, or better yet, we would turn the sermon into an empty name. For example (let me first remind you of the first and most general), which of those who placed their trust in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ taught in writing to sign themselves with the sign of the cross? What Scripture taught us to turn to the east in prayer? Which of the saints left us in writing the words of invocation at the display of the 9 Bread of Thanksgiving and the Cup of Blessing? For we are not content with those words mentioned by the Apostle or the Gospel, but both before and after them we pronounce others, as having great power to perform the sacrament, having accepted them from teachings not stated in Scripture. Do we bless the water of baptism, the anointing oil, and even the person being baptized, according to what rules set out in Scripture? Is it not according to a silent and mysterious tradition? What else? Did any written word teach you how to anoint yourself with oil? Where does the triple immersion of a person being baptized come from? From what scripture are other things related to baptism taken - to deny Satan and his angels? Is it not from this unpublicized and hidden teaching, which our Fathers observed in unquestioning and modest silence, very well understanding that the venerability of the sacraments is protected by silence? What is not permissible for the uninitiated to even look at, would it be proper to display this teaching in writing? Or with what intention did Moses not make everything in the church accessible to everyone, but placed the defiled outside the holy enclosures, allowing entry into the first courtyard to those who were more pure, calling only the Levites worthy servants of God, and leaving the slaughter, burnt offerings and other sacred rites only to the priests, allowing one chosen one of them into the sanctuary, and not always, but on only one day in the year, and on this day assigning him a certain hour for entry, so that, out of inaccessibility and unfamiliarity, he would look with amazement at the Holy of Holies? Moses knew very well in his wisdom that what is trampled upon and given of its own accord is close to contempt, and what is taken out of use and rare naturally becomes the subject of intense search. In a similar way, the Apostles and Fathers, who at the beginning laid down the law concerning the Church, protected the venerability of the sacraments by secrecy and observance in silence. Because in general it is no longer a sacrament. which is divulged to the people and everyone they meet. This is the reason why things other than those set forth in Scripture have been handed down, so that the effortless knowledge of dogmas, out of habit of them, does not become despised by many. For one is dogma, and another is preaching. The dogma is kept silent, and the sermon is made public. But the appearance of silence is also the obscurity that Scripture uses, making the meaning of dogmas, for the benefit of the readers, difficult to understand. Therefore, during prayers, we all look to the east, but not many know that at the same time we are looking for the ancient fatherland, paradise, which “God planted in Eden on the east” (Gen. 2:8). On the first day of the week we perform prayers while standing upright, 10 but we don’t all know the reason for this. For not only, as those who have been resurrected with Christ and obligated to seek those on high, on Sunday with the erect position of the body during prayer we remind ourselves of the grace given to us, but we also do this because this day, apparently, is a kind of image of the age we are waiting for. Therefore, being the beginning of days, Moses calls it not first, but one. For it is said: “there was evening, and there was morning, one day” (Gen. 1:5), because the same day returns many times. Therefore, he is both one and eighth, representing the truly one and truly eighth day, which the psalmist mentioned in some of the inscriptions of the Psalms (Ps. 6:1, 11:1), that is, this state that will follow the present time, this unceasing, non-evening, unchanging day, this endless and ageless age. Therefore, the Church, of necessity, teaches her pupils to perform prayers standing on this day, so that with the frequent reminder of endless life, we do not neglect to provide ourselves with parting words for introducing ourselves into it. But all of Pentecost is a reminder of the resurrection expected in eternity. For the one and first day, multiplied seven times by the number seven, completes the seven weeks of the holy Pentecost, because, beginning with the first day of the week, it also ends with it, after the fifty-fold conversion of similar, middle days between them. Why does it imitate the century in a similar way, as if in a circular motion, starting with the same signs and ending with the same signs. On this Pentecost, church regulations taught us to prefer an upright position of the body in prayer, with this clear reminder, as if transporting our mind from the present to the future. But with every kneeling and bowing down from the earth, we actually show that through sin we fell to the earth and were called to heaven by the love of Him who created us. Not even a day will be enough for me to recount all the sacraments of the Church that are not set forth in Scripture. I'll leave the rest. But the very confession of faith in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is from what scriptures do we have? For if, in accordance with piety, on the basis of the tradition of baptism, being obliged to believe as we are baptized, we set forth a confession similar to baptism, then let them allow us, according to the same conformity, to give glory similar to faith. And if they reject this image of doxology as not set forth in Scripture, then let them give us the evidence set forth in Scripture for the confession of faith, and for everything else that we have calculated. Moreover, when there is so much that is not stated in Scripture, and it has such power in the mystery of piety, will they really not allow us one saying that came to us from the Fathers, which we found preserved as a result of unintentionally observed custom in the Churches intact, and which has an important basis, and provides no small reinforcement to the power of the sacrament? So, it has been said what the strength of each of these sayings is, let us also say in what they agree with each other and in what they differ, however, in such a way that they do not contradict one another, but each brings its own special thought to the teaching of piety. For the phrase “in” expresses something more relevant to us, and the phrase “with” proclaims the communication of the Spirit with God. Therefore, we use both words, with one expressing the dignity of the Spirit, and with the other proclaiming His grace in us. In this way we give glory to God both in the Spirit and with the Spirit, saying nothing on our own, but from the Lord’s teaching, which serves as our rule, transferring the speech to what is close to each other, consists of a mutual connection and has the necessary contact in the sacraments. For at baptism what is counted together must necessarily, as we think, be combined in faith. And we have made the confession of faith for ourselves as a kind of beginning and mother of doxology. But what should be done? Let them now teach us either not to baptize, as we were taught, or not to believe, as we were baptized, or not to praise, as we believed. Let someone prove to us either that in all this there is no mutual, necessary and continuous connection, or that innovation in this will not be the ruin of everything. But in every case they do not cease to proclaim this doxology: “with the Holy Spirit,” which is not attested, not set forth in Scripture, and the like. It has already been said that in relation to the power of speech it is the same thing - to say: “Glory to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” and: “Glory to the Father, and the Son with the Holy Spirit.” Therefore, just as it is impossible for anyone to reject or erase the syllable “and”, borrowed from the Lord’s own words, so nothing prevents him from accepting a syllable equivalent to it, which we showed above how much difference and similarity it has with the first. Our reasoning is also confirmed by the Apostle, who indifferently uses both sayings, and in one place says: “in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:11), and in another: “to those gathered together to you and to my spirit, with the power of the Lord ... Jesus” (1 Cor. 5:4), not supposing any difference in the use when pairing the names of either a conjunction or a preposition. Chapter 28. About the fact that opponents do not allow us to use about the Spirit and what Scripture says about people, namely, that they will reign with Christ. Let's see if we can come up with some kind of justification for our Fathers in such use. For those who initiated this use of words are more subject to blame than we are. So Paul, writing to the Colossians, says: “And you who were dead in transgressions and uncircumcision... made you alive to eat with Christ” (Col. 2:13). Has God really given life with Christ to the whole people and the Church, but the Holy Spirit has no life with Christ? If we think so wickedly, then why is it wrong, both in fact to eat by nature, and to bring confession together? Moreover, is it not extreme bitterness to confess about the saints that they are with Christ (since, without a doubt, Paul, having departed from the body, is restored to the Lord and, having been destroyed, is already with Christ (2 Cor. 5:8)), and not to yield to the Spirit, as much as he has the strength, so that He, on an equal basis with people, should be with Christ? Paul calls himself an “assistant” of God in the economy of the Gospel (1 Cor. 3:9), will we really, if we call the Holy Spirit an accomplice, through whom the Gospel bears fruit in every creature under the sun, will they begin to accuse us of wickedness for this? And it is clear that although the “life” of those who trusted in the Lord “is hidden with Christ in God: and when Christ appears, our life, then they also will appear with Him in glory” (Col. 3:3-4), however, the Spirit of life Himself, which freed us from the law of sin, is not at all with Christ, both in the secret and hidden life with Him, and in the manifestation of glory, which will be revealed as we wait. in the saints? We are “heirs... of God, heirs of Christ” (Rom. 8:17), and the Spirit is deprived of an inheritance and a part in communion with God and His Christ? And although “the Spirit itself obeys our spirit, for we are the children of God” (Rom. 8:16), yet we do not give the Spirit evidence of His communion with God, having been taught by the Lord that He has this communion? And what constitutes the height of madness, although through faith in Christ, and precisely through faith in the Spirit, we hope to rise with Christ and be seated “in the heavenly places” (Eph. 2:6), when the body of our humility is transformed from the spiritual to the spiritual, however, we do not give the Spirit a share, neither in the neighborhood, nor in the glory, nor in everything else that we ourselves have from Him, but even what, believing the undeceitful gift of the Promised One, we recognize ourselves as worthy, from all of this we do not concede anything to the Holy Spirit, as if all this is above His dignity! You always be with the Lord in accordance with your dignity, and you expect that “caught up... into the clouds to meet... in the air you will always be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:17), and yet you dispute that the Spirit is now with Christ, and if anyone numbers and compares Him with the Father and the Son, you expel him as an intolerant wicked man! I am ashamed to add other things, namely, that you hope to be glorified with Christ (because “we suffer with Him, that we also may be glorified with Him” (Rom. 8:17)), but you do not glorify the Spirit of holiness with Christ, as if He were unworthy and equal with you. You yourself hope to reign with Christ, but you reproach the Spirit of grace, giving Him the place of a slave and servant. And I don’t say this with the intention of just proving it. that we are equally obliged to glorify the Spirit, but in order to expose the ingratitude of those who do not repay Him even this, they even avoid the thought of wickedness that the Spirit has communion of glory with the Father and the Son. Who can touch this with a word without groaning? For isn’t it already obvious (so that even a child can see) that impoverishment of faith that the Lord threatened begins in the present? The indisputable has become doubtful. We believe in the Spirit and struggle with our own confession. We are baptized and confront again. As the ruler of life, we call on the Spirit and despise him as a slave similar to us. We accepted Him with the Father and the Son, and are dishonored as part of creation. Those who do not know without the Spirit “will pray for things” (Rom. 8:26), as soon as they are forced to say something worthy about the Spirit, as if they had examined His dignity, they begin to limit words that exceed the measure when they should have mourned their weakness, because we are not able to sufficiently express in words gratitude for what we experience in practice. For this surpasses all thought and exposes the weakness of the word, which is not equal in dignity to the smallest part of this, according to the word of the book inscribed: Wisdom. For it is said: “Exalt as much as you can; he will exceed more and more.” And by exalting Him you will be multiplied...: do not labor, for you cannot comprehend” (Sir. 43:32–33). Of course, you will give a terrible answer for such words, having heard from the true God that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is not forgiven (Matthew 12:31). Chapter 29. Enumeration of famous men in the Church who used the saying in their writings: p. And to the fact that the doxology: “with the Spirit” is not attested and not set forth in Scripture, we answer: if everything else that is not set forth in Scripture is not acceptable, then let this not be acceptable either. And if most of what concerns the sacraments is established among us, although this is not set forth in Scripture, then together with many other things we will accept this too. I consider it an apostolic rule to adhere to traditions not set forth in Scripture. For it is said: “I praise you, brethren, because you remember all my things, and keep the traditions that I gave you” (1 Cor. 11:2), and: “keep the traditions that you have learned, either by word or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:15). Especially one of these traditions is the doxology we are considering, which the original founders, who passed on to their successors, with continued use over time, rooted in the Churches as a long-term custom. And if, as before the court for lack of written evidence, we present you with many witnesses, will we really not receive a merciful verdict from you? And I hope to receive it. For “when there were two lips... and three witnesses, every word became” (Deut. 19:15). If we clearly prove to you that the statute of limitations is in our favor, then don’t you recognize that what we are asserting is fair, that we should not be subjected to trial? For the ancient dogmas inspire a kind of reverence and respect for themselves because of their age, as if for some kind of gray hair. Therefore, I will list for you the defenders of the teaching (and at the same time, of course, the order of time will be observed without indicating it), for the teaching did not receive its beginning from us. Where from? We really, in the words of Job, are as if “yesterday” (Job 8:9), in comparison with the time in which this custom continues. Therefore, I myself (if I need to say something of my own), as a fatherly heritage, I observe this saying, having borrowed it from my husband, who spent a lot of time in serving God, by whom I was baptized and introduced into church service. And after carefully searching to see if any of the ancient and blessed men had used these now disputed sayings, I found many who were both reliable in their antiquity and in the accuracy of their knowledge, not comparable to today’s teachers. And although some of them connected the speech in the doxology with a pretext, and others with a conjunction, they did not think of them as making any difference in their discussion of the direct concept of piety. And this is Irenaeus, and Clement of Rome, and Dionysius of Rome. And Dionysius of Alexandria 11, which is surprising to hear, in his second letter to his same name, “On Reproof and Defense,” concluded his word this way. But I will write down Dionysius’s own words for you. “In accordance with all this,” he says, “we, having borrowed the model and rule from the elders who lived before us, and unanimously offering thanksgiving with them, now conclude our letter to you. To God the Father and the Son our Lord Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit be glory and power forever and ever, amen.” And no one can say that this was forwarded after. Dionysius would not have strengthened the speech in this way, and says that he borrowed the model and rule if he had said: “in the Spirit,” because the use of this last phrase was common. And that speech required a reservation. Somewhere in the middle of the work, he said to the Sabellians: “If they claim that the Hypostases, as soon as There are three of them, are separate, then There really are three of them, even if the heretics did not want this, otherwise let them completely destroy the concept of the Divine Trinity.” And again: “For for this very reason, after the Unity, the Trinity is also divine.” And Clement says simply: “As God lives, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit.” But let us listen to how Irenaeus, who lived close to the Apostles, mentions the Spirit in his discourse against heresies. “And people who are unbridled,” he says, “and are carried away into their own lusts, and who do not desire God’s Spirit in the least, are rightly called by the Apostle (1 Cor. 3:3) “carnal.” And in another place he says: “So that we, having become unparticipated in God’s Spirit, do not lose the kingdom of heaven, the Apostle (1 Cor. 15:50) exclaimed that the flesh cannot “inherit the kingdom of God.” And if Eusebius of Palestine is reliable for anyone due to his extensive experience, then we will point out the same sayings in his bewilderment about the polygamy of the ancients. For, rousing himself to the word, he says this: “Calling the Holy God, the Enlightener of the prophets through our Savior Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit.” But we also found that with the Holy Spirit he gives glory in many conversations on the Psalms and Origen, a person who does not have a completely sound understanding of the Spirit in everything. However, he, respecting the power of custom, left pious sayings about the Spirit in many places. And in the sixth, as it seems, book of commentaries on the Gospel of John, he clearly confirmed that the Spirit is venerable, writing verbatim like this: “The water bath is a symbol of the cleansing of the soul, washed from all sinful filth, but nevertheless, for the one who devotes himself to the Divinity of the venerable Trinity, it in itself, by the power of invocations, has the beginning and source of gifts.” And also in the interpretation of the Epistle to the Romans he says: “The Holy Powers can receive into themselves the Only Begotten and the Divinity of the Holy Spirit.” So, I think, the firmness of tradition often forced people to contradict their own opinions. But Africanus, the writer of history, was not unaware of this type of doxology. For, it seems, in the fifth book of the abbreviated Temporary, he says this: “We, who have known the measure of these words, we, who are not unknown to the grace of faith, thank the Father, who gave to us, His relatives, the Savior of all and our Lord Jesus Christ. To him be glory and majesty with the Holy Spirit forever.” In other cases, you may not trust, or, if the place is fake, it is difficult to discover the deception, because the difference is in one syllable; but what is offered to us in long extracts makes malicious falsification impossible, and undoubtedly proves that the evidence is taken from the writings themselves. But what in another case would not, perhaps, be worth indicating, but for the accused of innovation is necessary for evidence due to the prescription of time, I will now present it. Our fathers chose not to accept the grace of the evening light in silence, but to immediately give thanks when it appeared. And we cannot say who is the author of these utterances of luminary thanksgiving; at least the people proclaim the ancient song, and no one recognized those as ungodly who say: “we praise the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit of God” 12. And if anyone knows the song of Athenogenes, which, instead of a preventive medicine, he left to his disciples when he himself hastened to the burnt offering; then he knows what opinion the martyrs had about the Spirit. And that's enough about this. Where will we give space to Gregory the Great and his words? Is it not with the Apostles and Prophets? I’m talking about a man who walked in the same Spirit with them, walked in the footsteps of the saints all his life, and carefully succeeded in the life of the gospel all his days. This is how I speak about him, otherwise we will violate the truth by not counting this soul among the members of God, this man, who, like some great luminous luminary, illuminated the Church of God, who, with the assistance of the Spirit, had a terrible power over demons, and received such grace in the words “in obedience to the faith of the Gentiles” (Rom. 1:5), that where there were seventeen before him Only a Christian man, having taught all the people in cities and villages the knowledge of God, led them to God. He turned the river flow back, commanding it in the great name of Christ, and he dried up the lake, which served the covetous brothers as a reason for war. And his predictions about the future are such that he is in no way inferior to other prophets. And of course, it would be a long time to retell all the miracles of this man, whom, due to the abundance of talents that were revealed in him through the action of the Spirit in all power in signs and wonders, even the very enemies of the truth called the second Moses. So in every word and deed, as if done by grace, some kind of light shone - a sign of heavenly power, invisibly accompanying him. And to this day the surprise of the native inhabitants towards him is still great; the firmly rooted memory of him is new and always fresh in the Churches, not fading even from time itself. Therefore, in the Church there they did not add any action, word, or any mysterious sign beyond those that he left. And because of this, much of what they did when they were established a long time ago seems insufficient, because those who successively built the house in those Churches did not agree to accept in addition anything that was sought after it. Therefore, one of Gregory’s institutions is the now disputed image of doxology, which, according to his tradition, has been preserved in the Church. And it doesn’t take much work to acquire an undoubted certificate of this with a little effort. Such was the faith of our Firmilian, as the words he left testify. And contemporaries claim about Meletius the Great that he was of the same opinion. And is it necessary to talk about the past? And now in the East, isn’t it by this alone that the pious are most recognized, distinguishing them by this saying, as if by some sign? And as I heard from one inhabitant of Mesopotamia, a man versed in the language and in the way of thinking intact, in their native dialect, even if anyone wanted, it is impossible to say otherwise, but according to the nature of the native language, it is necessary to pronounce a doxology with the conjunction “and”, and even better with the help of words equivalent to it. And we Cappadocians also express ourselves in our native dialect, because the Spirit then, during the division of languages, foresaw the benefit of such a way of expression. And almost the entire West, from Illyricum to the borders of the countries we inhabit, does not prefer this saying? Why am I an innovator and compiler of new sayings, when I have as leaders and defenders of this saying entire nations and cities, and customs that, with their antiquity, extend beyond the limits of human memory, and men who were the pillars of the Churches, distinguished by all knowledge and power of the Spirit? For this reason, these abusive hordes moved against me, every city, every village, and all distant countries became filled with slanderers! It is true that this is regrettable and painful for the hearts of those who seek peace, but since the rewards of patience in suffering for the faith are great, then in addition to this, let the sword threaten me, axes be sharpened against me, a fire stronger than that of Babylon be ignited, and all the instruments of torment be brought into action! For me, nothing is so scary as not being afraid of the threats that the Lord uttered against the blasphemers of the Spirit. Therefore, before well-minded people, what has been said will serve as a sufficient justification for what reasons I accept the saying, so pleasing and common to the saints, and so much confirmed by custom. For it turns out that from the very time the Gospel was proclaimed until now this saying has been used in the Churches, and, most importantly, in meaning it is pious and righteous. But what shall we prepare for our justification before the great judgment seat? What leads us to the glory of the Spirit is, firstly, the honor bestowed by the Lord Himself, who receives the Spirit to Himself and to the Father in baptism, secondly, the fact that each of us is led into the knowledge of God by the same secrecy, and finally, the fear of threats, which removes thought from any unworthy and humiliating opinion. But what will the opponents say? What justification will they find for their blasphemies, not being ashamed of the honor bestowed by the Lord and not fearing His threats? Of course, they have complete power to decide for themselves what they want, or even change their mind. And I, for my part, would like most of all for the good God to grant His peace, ruling the hearts of all, and so that those who gnash their teeth at me and are strongly opposed to me calm down in the spirit of meekness and love. If they have become completely enraged and become indomitable, then may He grant us the gift of generously enduring whatever we endure from them. Of course, for those who have in themselves the condemnation of death, it is regrettable not to suffer for their faith, but it is unbearable that they did not strive for it, because it is not so much difficult for fighters to receive a blow during the fight as not to be allowed into the field at all. Or maybe it was “a time to remain silent,” according to the words of the wise Solomon (Eccl. 3:7)? For, indeed, what is the use of shouting into the wind, when life is so greatly overwhelmed that the mind of everyone announced by the word, filled with deceptive false ideas, like the eye with dust, becomes confused, and everyone’s hearing is deafened by unbearable and unusual sounds, finally everything is in hesitation and in danger of falling? Chapter 30. Picture of the present state of the Churches. Therefore, what can we compare the present state with? Without a doubt, it is similar to a sea battle, into which men who were abusive and accustomed to sea battles entered with irritation against each other for long-standing grievances. Look at this image! How fearfully rows of ships rush from both sides, and when anger reaches its highest degree, they grapple and begin to fight! Suppose, if you like, that the ships are torn by a strong storm, that a momentary darkness, pouring out of the clouds, darkens everything visible, that it is impossible to distinguish between friends and enemies, and because of the confusion, the signs given to each other are not recognized. For greater clarity of the similarity, let us also assume that the sea is inflated, from the very depths it billows upward, that rapid rain is pouring from the clouds, that a terrible disturbance of the waves driven by the storm has begun, and then that the winds from everywhere tend to one point, and therefore the ships collide with each other with a crash, and those standing in battle formation are partly transferred to the enemies and, as a result of the struggle itself, pass into their power, and partly they are forced to push away together boats blown on them by the winds and resist the ships attacking them, and kill each other during the mutiny, produced both by envy of the superiority of others, and by the desire of each to gain the upper hand. Imagine, in addition to this, that the whole sea is filled with some kind of mixed and indistinguishable sounds, from the whistling winds, from the mutual impact of ships, from the noise of boiling waves, from the screams of those fighting, who express their passions in all sorts of voices, which is why the voice of neither the shipmaster nor the helmsman is heard, but some kind of terrible disorder and confusion is visible, and the excessiveness of the disaster with despair in life produces in them what they sin with perfect fearlessness. Add some kind of incurable madness of ambition to those on the ships, so that they do not leave a dispute among themselves about primacy when the ship is already sinking into the depths. Move now from this image to the very prototype of evil. Didn’t it seem in some way before that Arian heterodoxy, having separated from the Church of God to fight against it, alone, with its own strength alone, opposed us in the ranks of the enemy? But when, after long and cruel disputes, they entered into an open struggle with us: then the battle took on many forms and was divided into many parts, therefore, both due to general enmity and private suspicion, irreconcilable hatred settled in everyone. And isn’t this overwhelming of the Churches more ferocious than any sea disturbance? By him all the boundaries of the Fathers were moved, all the foundations and all the strongholds of dogmas were shaken. Everything placed on a rotten support sways and shakes. By attacking each other, we are overthrown by each other. Whoever is not cast down by the enemy is hurt by the defender. If the enemy is deposed and fallen, then your former protector advances on you. Until then, we have mutual communication only as long as we jointly hate our opponents. And as soon as the enemies have passed by, we already see enemies in each other. Moreover, who can count the number of shipwrecks? Some drown from the attacks of enemies, others from the secret malice of supporters, others from the lack of skill of managers. In another place, the Church with all its members suffered damage, like pitfalls crushed by heretical tricks; others, having recently been enemies of saving suffering, took up the helm and were wrecked. And are not the turmoil caused by the princes of this world stronger than any storm and any whirlwind, seducing peoples from the straight path? Truly, some kind of deplorable and sorrowful gloom surrounds the Church, after the Luminaries of the world, appointed by God to enlighten the souls of people, have been driven into captivity. And exorbitant competition against each other makes people insensitive when the fear of universal destruction is already close. For private hostility is stronger than general and national war, when the glory of defeating enemies is preferred to the common good, and the real intoxication of ambition is more valuable than the rewards that await later. Therefore, it doesn’t matter who, as best they can, raise their murderous hands against each other. And some rude cry of people, mutually clashing in their desire to argue, and an indistinct cry, and indistinguishable sounds of incessant rumors filled almost the entire Church, now with additions, now with subtractions, perverting the right dogma of piety. Some are carried away into Judaism through the fusion of Persons, and others into paganism through the opposition of Natures. The inspired Scripture is not enough for their rapprochement; the apostolic traditions do not resolve the mutual conditions of reconciliation between them. One limit of friendship is to speak to please each other, and one pretext for enmity is to disagree in opinions. And similarity in error is truer than any oath to participate in discord. Everyone is a theologian, although there are thousands of stains on his soul. That is why these remakes have a great abundance of assistants to carry out revolts. Therefore, self-important and lowly seekers who have rejected the dispensation of the Holy Spirit receive primacy in the Churches. And since the gospel rules have been brought into perfect unity by disorderly conduct, the indescribable crush around the presiding places forces every ambitious person to give him primacy. And because of such arrogance, a kind of terrible lack of command fell upon people, which is why the admonitions of those in authority became completely ineffective and in vain; everyone, in ignorant arrogance, argues that he is obliged not so much to listen to someone, but to rule over others himself. Therefore, I believed that silence was more useful than the word, because a human voice cannot be heard among such rumors. If the saying of Ecclesiastes is true that “the words of the wise... the chambers are heard” (Eccl. 9:17), then in the present state of affairs it would be very indecent to say this about these people. But this prophetic saying also holds me back: “Keep in mind at that time, for the time is evil” (Am. 5:13). Now some put their foot forward, others curse at the fallen one, and others applaud, but there is no person who, out of compassion, would give a hand to the one who slipped, although according to the old law, the one who passes by is not exempt from condemnation, seeing “the donkey of the enemy fallen under a burden” (Ex. 23:5). That is not what is being done today. From what? Because love has cooled in everyone, the unanimity of the brethren has disappeared, and the name of unanimity has become unknown, friendly exhortations have ceased, there is no Christian mercy anywhere, no compassionate tears anywhere. There is no one to support the weak in faith, but on the contrary, such mutual hatred flared up between fellow tribesmen that everyone rejoices at the fall of their neighbor more than their own good deeds. Just as during pestilences, even those who take care of their health with all care fall ill along with others, becoming infected from one treatment of the sick, so now we have all become similar to each other, the passion for arguing that has taken possession of our souls draws everyone into the competition of evil. That is why we have inexorable and cruel connoisseurs of failures, unappreciative and hostile judges of successes, and evil seems to have taken root to the point that we have become more unreasonable than dumb animals, for if they are of the same breed, they live in the same herd, and we have a cruel war with our domestic ones. One had to remain silent about all this, but one was drawn to something else by love, which “does not seek one’s own” (1 Cor. 13:5), and loves to overcome all the difficulties of time and circumstances. The Babylonian youths taught us to fulfill our duties, even if no one cared about piety. Even in the midst of the flames they sang songs to God, not discussing the multitude of those who reject the truth, but being content with each other when there were three of them. Therefore, we were not driven into inaction by the cloud of enemies, but, placing our trust in the help of the Spirit, we proclaimed the truth with all boldness. Otherwise, it would be the most disastrous of all, when the blasphemers of the Spirit so conveniently attack pious teaching, we, having such an intercessor and defender, would not serve the teaching, which from the tradition of the Fathers has been preserved in uninterrupted memory to us. But our jealousy was most aroused by the ardor of your unhypocritical love, the steadfastness and calmness of your disposition, which guarantee that what I said will not be disclosed to many, not because it is unworthy of publication, but so as not to throw pearls to swine. - And that's enough about that. And for you, if what has been said is enough, let there be a limit to the word about this. And if this seems insufficient, I will not envy you when, in a difficult study, you continue to increase your knowledge through uninteresting questions. For the Lord, either through us or through others, will fill what is lacking according to the knowledge that the Spirit imparts to those worthy of it. Εργασιαν; according to another reading: ενεργειαν (activity). According to the usual reading of this place: The Only Begotten Son. The Apostle in this place, as well as the Evangelist John in the place given below, reads: εν πνευματι. Απο Κιριου πνευματος, to the Slavs. from the Lord's Spirit. Ζωη in glory. lane lives (ζη) Εις τοπον οχυρον; from the Seventy: εις οικον καταφυγης - to the house of refuge. That is: to God the Father, as read in the Liturgy of St. Basil the Great in prayer during the trisagion hymn: Holy, Holy, Holy, etc. That is, without prostrations and kneeling. In the synodal manuscript of the works of St. Basil the Great, belonging to the 11th century (No. XXIII), this place reads like this: Λιονσιος, about και παραδοξον ακουσαι, etc. These words in the evening song: Quiet light, read like this: We sing to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit of God. You might be interested in: