latin fathers on spirit.pdf

7/27/2019 Latin Fathers on Spirit.pdf

1/20

THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THELATIN FATHERSby THE REV. PROFESSOR JOHN H. S. BURLEIGHFOR the first tw o cen turies of its existence Chr istianity was,even in the W est, a Greek thin g. D om itian m ight findChristian victims among members of the reigning family, butTacitus could still regard the Christians of Rome as the off-scourings of the eastern provinces. T he lan guag e of the R om anChurch was Greek throughout the second century A.D., thelanguage of Bible, Creed and W orship. How ever R om an infeeling Clement might be his letter to the Corinthians was inGreek; and Hermas' Shepherd was meant for home consump-tion. D uring the centu ry nearly all the leading C hristians fromthe East appear to have visited Rome bringing their ideas asto a sort of clearing house; and towards the end of it BishopVictor of Rome, a genuine Roman, had still to struggle with

Theodotus the Tanner from Byzantium, and Blastus andFlorinus from Asia. U nd er his successors Ze phyrin us a ndCallistus theological controversy was still carried on in Greek,but their opponent Hippolytus seems to have been the lastGreek-speaking Fa the r of the R om an C hu rch . Similarly inGaul the Christians of Lyons and Vienne were Greek migrantsfrom Asia, and their bishop, 180-200, Irenaeus, was a productof Asia, the authentic voice of Christian Ephesus.When we remember the rather self-conscious efforts ofCicero, Varro and Lucretius, Vergil and Horace, to naturaliseliterary and philosophical culture, i.e. Greek culture, in theWest by giving it a Latin dress, it is perhaps worthy of passingremark that the equally significant translation of Christianityinto Latin took place unnoticed. W hen was the ancient R om anCreed first said in Latin ? No doubt early, for Irenaeus showsthat for Christians Babel had been really overcome at Pentecost,

and that it was perfectly natural for the Creed, at least, to beprofessed in all languages. But when w as Sc riptu re first tra ns -lated into L ati n? Little notice seems to hav e been taken of" 3


2/20

i i 4 SCOTTISH JOURN AL OF THEOLOGYthis surely important step until Jerome proposed to prepare anew translation of the OT from the original Hebrew.At all eventsif we except Minucius Felix who in any casehandles only the themes appropriate to monotheism generallyand not to Christianity specificallyit was in Tertullian thatChristian theology acquired a Latin voice and perhaps a Latinaccent. Tertu llian w as, it app ears, as much at home in Greekas in Lati n a nd composed his earliest works in Greek. Mostof the controversies in which he took part belonged primarilyto the Greek wor ld. In de ed D r Prestige insists th at in histheology he remained more Greek than Latin, at least in thesense that his work is coloured by philosophic rather than bylegal ideas . W hy , the n, did he choose to theologise in L at in ?Was he another Cicero who hoped to serve his fellow Latinsby making available to them in their own tongue the doctrinesof the Greek Fathers ? Or rather, perhaps, another Lucretiuspenetrated by a sense of the importance of the message, deter-mined at all hazards, in spite of all difficulties, to declare anddefend it in the speech of his countrymen ? Difficulties indeedthere were in making p lain Latin express the subtleties of Greek.But Tertullian unlike Lucretius or even Augustine two cen-turies late r makes no apology for his da rin g. If a new word isrequired he boldly coins one or, occassionally, simply trans-literates the Greek wo rd. T he works of Irenae us and H ippo -lytus were before him and he uses both probably (certainlyIrenaeus, cp. Adv. Valentinianos), but he is no mere translator.His robust faith finds expression in vigorous Latin, creative notonly linguistically bu t also theologically. H e is 'th e M aster ' ofCyprian and all the Latin Fathers, to whom may be tracedtheir characteristic terminology especially in the Doctrines ofthe T rinit y. As regards th e Doctrine of the Spirit he is aboveall the Latin Geistesmensch for whom the Spirit is more than adoctrine, is life itself. I make no apology for devoting most ofmy time to Tertull ian.

Tertullian was a convert from heathenism, but unhappilyhe tells us no thin g abo ut his conversion. How interesting hisConfessions would have been ! But tha t it was a tremendo usspiritual experience for him is clear from all his early writings.Two of these, particularly, seem to reflect it directly, DePoenitentia and De Baptistno. Repentance, he says, is a necessary


3/20

THE HOLY SPIR IT IN THE LATIN FATHERS 115prelude to Baptism, without which Baptism avails nothing.'We are not washed in order that we may cease sinning, butbecause we have ceased from sinning, and in heart have beenwashed already' (De Baptismo 6). Repentance leads on toBaptism which is the sign and seal of repentance, even as itseals faith in the Fathe r, Son and H oly Spirit. It makes cleanthe heart and prepares it for the Holy Spirit with His celestialblessings, in a word for salvation. W ha t wonders God canperform by simple inexpensive means. The re is no thing com-moner than water, but by it God has appointed that man maybe cleansed not only physically bu t also spiritua lly. As theSpirit hovered upon the waters at Creation, so after the invo-cation of God on the water the Spirit works through water atBaptism. 'No t indeed in the w ater do we receive the H olySpirit, but under the influence of the angel (a reference to thepool of Bethesda) we are by the water of Baptism cleansed andprepared for the Holy Spirit. '

By Tertullian's time the ceremonies of Christian initiationhad been extended to include not only water-Baptism, but alsounction 'whereby our bodies are anointed even as Christ alsowas "th e An ointed O n e " '. The n follows Imposition of H and sby the chief priest or bishop with invocation of the Spirit 'whowillingly descends from the Father on our cleansed and blessedbodies' even as He descended on Christ after His Baptism inthe shape of a Dove. It migh t app ear th at Ter tullian connectsthe gift of the Spirit, i.e. the principle of the Christian's super-natural life, not with Baptism in the ordinary sense but withthe laying on of the bishop's hand s, i.e. with Confirmation.But, as D r Lam pe has pointed o ut, this is not the only doc trinein Tertu llian . H e can say as definitely th at Baptism confersthe Spirit, e.g. in De Baptismo 10, when he explains thatChristian Bap tism differs from the Bap tism of Jo h n preciselyin that it not only gives the forgiveness of sins, but also confersthe Holy Spirit. Th is positive benefit could no t have beenbestowed until after the Ascension when Christ had completedHis redeeming work; 'until the efficacy of the font had beenestablished through the Passion and Resurrection of Christ,whereby our death is destroyed and our life restored'.

At whatever point in the initiatory ceremonies the HolySpirit was receivedand Tertullian is manifestly inconsistent


4/20

n 6 SCOTTISH JOURNAL OF THEOLOGYabout this unless he uses the word Baptism and even aqua andlavacrum to include the m all he is in no dou bt th at in Christianinitiation man receives not only a preparatory forgiveness ofsins committed up to that point, but also, positively, that Spiritof God which he first received when God breathed into Adamthe bre ath of life and then lost thro ug h sin. 'By the in troductioninto us and the conservation in us of the Holy Spirit we are allthe temples of God' (De Cultu femin. I I . I ; cp. i Cor. 6.19). Butthe Spirit may be lost or driven away, as, for example, by theperturbations caused by undue anxiety about worldly posses-sions or by fears occasioned by external circumstances. 'W herethere is no patience the Spirit cannot continue' (D e Patientia 1).Or the Spirit is disturbed by the passions excited by thespectacles of the amphitheatre (D e Sped. 15).

As a baptised Christian Tertullian found himself a memberof a Spirit-filled c om mun ity. In a well-known chapter (39) ofthe Apology, on Christian worship, he describes Christians as'a body (corpus) knit together by a common religious profes-sion, by unity of discipline, and the bond of a common hope'.See how the Christians love one another, even the heathenrem ark. Th ey are read y to die for one another, an d feelthemselves as bre thre n w ho know God as their comm on Fa ther,and have dru nk in one Spirit of holiness. Am ong them thereare no disputes about property. T he y-a re one in mind an dsoul, and share their earthly goods with each other, practisingcom munism in all things excep t in wives. All this finds its fullexpression in the Agape.This is of course Apologetic, and Tertullian has to admitth at failures do occur within the Christian comm unity. In hisearly period he is prepared to allow a second (but last!)repentance. In De Poenitentia (7 ff) he describes with apparent,if deprecating, approval the process of ecclesiastical penance,as we must call it, whereby the Christian who has committedpost-baptismal sin may be restored to the community and toassurance of forgiveness and salvation. A very severe an dhumbling process it is, consisting of public confession, fasting,lying in sackcloth and ashes, rolling before the feet of thepresbyters, and kneeling to God's dear ones, beseeching theirintercession with God . N aturally eno ugh some were unwillingto unde rgo such a process. W hy should they b e, cries Te rtullian .


5/20

THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LATIN FATHERS 117Surely it is worth while to submit to humiliation if therebyforfeited salvation may be restored 'if by tem po ral mo rtificationeternal punishments may be discharged'a revealing phrase!But furthermore, there is no reason to be ashamed of suchhumiliation when it takes place 'among brethren and fellow-servants, where there is commo n hop e, fear, joy , grief, suffering,because there is a common Spirit from a common Lord andFa the r'. 'W hen you cast yourself at the bre thre n's knees youare entreating Christ', for the Church is in a sense ChristHimself, animated by one Spirit that comes from God.

Nevertheless, many were unwilling or unable to see it in thisway. Th is ha d been a difficulty even in the times of H erm as50-100 years earlier, who led the Church to find a partialsolution. Now the Ch urch was increasing rapid ly in num ber s.Tertullian, the Apologist, makes a strong point of this increase,but to Tertullian the enthusiast and rigorist it constituted areal problem, for the Church generally seemed driven to relaxits discipline. Just at this point Montanism appeared in Car-thage as elsewhere with its testimony against compromise,proclaiming that the Church must keep itself unspotted fromthe world. For a timesome years perhaps it appears t ha tthe rigorists worked within the Church and only after a periodof dispute and contention voluntarily withdrew from its fellow-ship, on disciplinary not on doctrinal grounds, as followers ofthe Paraclete arrogating to themselves the designation of Pneu-matics by contrast to the Psychics who refused to recognise theNew Prophecy. Th is classification, characte ristic of V alen -tinian gnosticism goes back indeed to St. Pau l. H ere was theparting of the ways, when, in Troeltschian language, the ex-clusive sect parted company with the relatively inclusiveCatholic C hu rch . Te rtullian we nt with the sectarians, thereb yremaining simply true to his original Christian convictions.

Some of Tertullian's writings seem to reflect the period oftension before the final separation say 207-212. If so, theysupport the view that the controversy was mainly disciplinary.In the two books Ad Uxorem he had allowed second marriageto be lawful on the strength of 1 Cor. 7.39, but he clearly re-garded it very unfavourably. In De Exhortatione Castitatis hedeclares it to be very like fornication. I t is indeed pe rm ittedby the Apostle by way of indulgence, but, if good, there is a


6/20

i i 8 SCOTTISH JOURN AL OF THEOLOGYbetter way, and in advising the better way, St. Paul adds, 'Ithink I have also the Spirit of God', which makes the advice acom m and . An d Tertu llian goes on to quo te 'the holy prophetessPrisca' as saying: 'Purity is harmonious, and they see visionsan d he ar m anifest visions, as salu tary as they are secret'. Inthe somewhat later De Monogamia Tertullian's view has ha rdened.'W e recognise one ma rriage as we acknowledge one Go d.' Bynow the break has occu rred. T he Catholics are now dub bedPsychics who have not the Spirit and cannot understand theApostle, who spoke in the Spirit, and the New Prophecy is de-fended against the ch arge of inventing burdensom e novelties.Another disciplinary controversy is revealed in De Virginibusvelandis where 'the followers of the Paraclete', still within theCh urch , take a stricter view tha n the general body. An evenmore serious problem was set about the same time by thesoldier who in 211 at a military festival refused to wear alaurel crown, saying that he was a Christian, so bringingpunishment on himself and possibly provoking a renewal ofpersecution of Christians generally. T he clergy condem ned thesoldier as too hasty and rash, too eager for martyrdomfor amere matter of dress he had brought trouble on the bearers ofthe Christian nam e. No thing in Scripture forbade the donningof a laurel crown. H ere was an old problem , as old as themartyrdom of Polycarp, as the Book of Revelation perhaps.Polycarp and the Catholic Church deprecated the action ofenthusiasts who voluntarily sought martyrdom and sometimeslost courage to go thro ug h with it. Ap peal was made to thesaying of our L ord (M att. 10.23) : 'When they persecute you inone city, flee to ano the r'. Tertu llian deals with the problem inDe Corona Militis, which may mark his final break with theC hu rch . A t any rate he fiercely attacks the clergy. Th ey arelions in time of peace, deer in times of war. T he only Scripturetext that comes into their head is that just quoted justifyingflight in persecution . In fact they have turned th eir backs onScriptu re and rejected the prophecies of the Holy Spirit. Thereis already a trait of fanaticism discernible in the Apology whenTertull ian speaks of the blood of the marty rs as seed. Th iscomes to full expression in his later Montanist tract De Fuga inPersecution*, when app eal is m ade to man y passages of Scripture,not all very relevant; but also to 'an utterance of the Spirit'


7/20

THE HOLY SPIR IT IN TH E LATIN FATHERS 119(attributed to Maximilla?) which 'incites all almost to go andoffer themselves in m arty rdo m , not to flee from it. . . . Seeknot to die on brid al beds . . . no r in soft fevers, b u t to die themartyr's death, that He may be glorified who has sufferedfor you.'It was in De Pudicitia that Tertullian made his fiercest on-slaught on the Catholic discipline in the name of the Paraclete.Callistus, bishop of Rome had communicated to the Church ofNorth Africa his decision, in virtue of the power of the keysgiven to Peter, to extend the range of ecclesiastical penance tocover all sexual sins. De Pudicitia is Te rtullian's indigna nt reply,addressed apparently to the bishop of Carthage who hadaccepted the lead of Rome, and who is addressed as 'ApostolicSir', perhaps sarcastically as Callistus is called Pontifex Maximus.'We excommunicate digamists as bringing infamy upon theParaclete by the irregula rity of their discipline. . . . W e doomadulterers and fornicators to pour forth tears barren of peace,and to regain from the Church no ampler return than thepublication of their disgrace', i.e. they are to continue in life-long penance without hope of absolution and readmission tocom munion. For such severity he appe als, in pa rticu lar, totwo Sc riptu re passages. (1) Acts 15.28-9, the decision of theApostolic Council, 'It seemed good to the H oly Spirit and to us'to cond emn fornication. T o subvert tha t decision is to denythat even the Apostle had the Paraclete (worse, but on a parwith the denial that the new prophets had the Paraclete). It isto break the agreement, made by the Holy Spirit Himself torelease men from obedience to the whole law in return for strictobservance of a part of it (De Pud. 12). (2) 1 Co r. 5.3-5, whenPaul delivers the fornicator to Satan for the destruction of theflesh in order t ha t th e spirit m ight be saved in the d ay of theLord Jesus. T he question is w ha t spirit is referred to he re . If it isthe m an's own spirit, w ha t Pau l is saying is th at while the m an 'sspirit may be saved it cannot be reunited to his flesh at theResurrection, but must continue in penal separation; for hisflesh ha d perished 'substantially', wh en b y his sin he h ad lostthe effects of his baptism . But Te rtu llian rejects this interpre-tation in favour of a still more arb itrary one . T he Spiritreferred to is the Spirit which is accounted to exist in theCh urch (i.e. in all its mem bers) a nd w hich mu st be kep t 'saved',


8/20

iao SCOTTISH JOUR NAL OF THEOLOGYi.e. uncontaminated by association with fornicators, till theday of the Lord {De Pud. 13).Tertullian holds (21) that God, God alone, can remit mortalsins, 'sins against Himself an d His Tem ple '. Such forgivenessis no mere matter of discipline such as bishops may exercise,who preside over their churches ministerially not imperiallyand who exhibit neither the prophetic nor the Apostoliccharacterfor all their claims. It is a ma tter of Divine power,which God may indeed exercise but only through those towhom He gives spiritual power, e.g. Apostles and Prophets.Certainly the Church has power to forgive sinsno one holdsthat more firmly than do the followers of the Paracletebutthe Church which is properly and in principle the Spirit Him-self in whom is the Trinity of the one DivinityFather, Sonand Holy Spirit ; Ecclesia Spiritus per spiritalem hominem, nonEcclesia numerus espicoporum. (He concedes no forgiving powerto martyrsthe martyr atones for his own sin aloneunlikethe African enthusiasts of the next generation.)

Tertullian accepts the current designation of Montanism asthe New Prophecy, but he constantly rebuts the charge that itintroduces novelties. Certain ly of doc trinal novelty there couldbe no question; the Paraclete only confirmed his orthodoxy.All his anti-heretical works except De Praescriptione belong tohis Montanist period, and even on the question of authority henever seriously modifies the teach ing of th at book. In DePraescriptione the supreme doctrinal authority is held to be theApostles who taught only what they had received from Christ,and only did so after they had received the Holy Spirit, leadingthe m into all tru th . The y could not therefore be igno rant ofany thin g or teach any error. Their testamen t is final. Hisappeal to the Apostles is in practice, of course, an appeal totheir writings, to the New Testament, and to the Old Testa-m ent w hich they also used, bu t he does no t oppose the a utho rityof Scrip ture to the auth ority of the Chu rch . Fa r from it. T heChurch alone, he declares, may interpret its own Scriptures.Heretics may not intermeddle here, and it is useless to arguewith them ab out Scripture interpretation. Such disputationsonly upse t brain and stom ach . Fa ith saves, not skill in theScriptures, which is a curious art; and the Rule of Faith statesthat Christ sent as His Vicar the Power of the Holy Spirit to


9/20

THE HOLY SPIR IT IN TH E LATIN FATHERS 121lead believers, the Apostles primarily, but also their disciplesafter them , into all tru th . T h e app ea l is, thus, to the ApostolicChurch, above all to the Church of Rome, founded by threenot by two Apostles (for he strangely included the ApostleJohn) preserving their Creed, Sacraments and complete Bible,and adm itting no gainsayers. But tho ug h Tertu llian followsIrenaeus here, and even challenges the heretics to produce alist of bishops going back to the Apostles or to Apostolic men,he does not attribute to the bishop a charisma veritatis, doctrinalinfallibility. A bishop may fall from the ru le of faith (3) . Hisfinal authority in fact is neither Scripture nor the Church butthe Spirit, who dwelt in the Apostles, and who must dwell alsoin those who would truly understand and interpret theirwritings. This Spirit he came to den y tha t the Catholics orPsychics possessed at all. Even in De Praescriptione room is leftfor the teaching of De Pudicitia that there is an Ecclesia Spiritusnot ident ical wi th the Ecclesia numerus episcoporum. W e m i g h tcompare Tertullian's doctrine here with Calvin's TestimoniumSpiritus Sancti internum, for as with Calvin so with Tertullianthe Spirit is the Interpre ter of Scrip ture. It is true he quo testhe 'Prophets' once or twice, but never places their utteranceson a pa r with the Apostolic Scriptures as auth orita tive . Th eysupport rather than add to, let alone contradict the Scriptures.The Religion of the Spirit is not opposed by Tertullian to theReligion of Authority.

It was in the sphere of Christian Ethics that the new pro-phecy could be accused of innov ation, an d the burd enso menovelties they were accused of imposing were four. (1) N osecond marriage; (2) more and more rigorous fasts; (3) noforgiveness for sexual sins, and (4) no flight in persecution.On all these points Tertullian's views hardened, though theycannot be said to have changed fundamentally. W ha t chan gethere was, was due, he claims, to the teaching of the HolySpirit enabling him to reach a deeper understanding of theApostolic precepts, and their implications; but he also seemsto argue that discipline was inevitably laxer when the Churchwas in its infancy, and that now the Spirit demands a sternerobedience. W hethe r the Montanists were innovators or strictconservatives can perhap s never be finally decided. O ne thin gis clear about Tertullian. He was temperamentally a rigorist


10/20

122 S C O T T I S H J O U R N A L O F T H E O L O G Yan d an en thusiast. H e believed th at the Holy Spirit was stillat work in the Church, and he craved for obvious signs,charism ata, as in the Apostolic age. T he M ontanist phenom enatestified to this, no t always very nicely. In De Anima he tells usthat in his community, 'which like the Apostles acknowledgesspiritual charismata, there is a sister who is favoured withsundry gifts of revelations, which she experiences in the spiritby ecstatic vision amidst the sacred rites of the Lord's Day inthe ch ur ch '. Bu t fortunately she wa ited till the service wasfinished before she related her experience and then her reportwas carefully tested. T he pa rticu lar vision here recordedofa corporeal soul does no t wh et the appe tite for m ore. Perhap sit is worth remarking that this long treatise on psychology hasalmost nothin g to say ab ou t the H oly Spirit. But it is unfortunatethat his Six Books on Ecstasy are not extant, for they must havethro w n considerable light on this aspect of M ontan ism. T heChurch was now tending to deprecate ecstasy, at any ratein living 'prophets', to believe that the age of 'signs' was over,and to see the Spirit safely canalised in official channels, andmore or less identified with the charity that covers a multitudeof sins an d therefore the bon d of un ity. Perhap s indeedthis was what St. Paul was pleading for in i Cor. 13, and itseems most Christian an d congenial to us today . Perhap s inTertullian's writings we may observe more of the works of theflesh th an of the fruits of the Spirit as described in G al. 5.Nevertheless it is clear that his doctrine of the Spirit will be noabstract theological rationalisation or product of exegeticalingenuity, but a reflection of an intense experience, individualand communal, not to be met with again on a large scale untilthe days of the English Puritans.

The occasion to deal systematically with the doctrine of theSpirit was given to Tertullian by the propagation in Carthageof the ideas of the Monarchian Praxeas'a man in other re-spects of a restless disposition, above all inflated with the prideof confessorship simply and solely because he had had to bearfor a short time the inconvenience of imprison ment'. H e firstbrought Monarchian heresy from Asia to Rome, and had suchinfluence with the then bishop of Rome as to induce him towithdraw his recognition of the prophetic gifts of Montanus,Prisca and Maximilla, and his letters of communion with the


11/20

THE HOLY SPIR IT IN THE LATIN FATHERS 123M ontanist Churches of Asia and Ph rygia. Praxeas thus ren-dered the devil a twofold service in Rome; he banished theParaclete an d crucified the Fath er. H e ha d inde ed beenrefuted at Rome and had made his peace with the Church ofthe Psychics, but his errors, particularly his Patripassianism,still had much support among the simple.Praxeas did not touch the doctrine of the Spirit. His prob lemhad been to reconcile the 'monarchy' of God, i.e. Monotheismwith Christian belief in the divinity of the Saviour, and thishe did quite simply. Th e On e Lord Alm ighty Creator hadHimself been bo rn of the Virg in M ary, Him self suffered, an dwas Himself the Jesus Ch rist of history. Th is view entirelysatisfied the simple, 'always the majority of believers', whosuspected of ditheism or tritheism those who distinguish tooclearly between Father, Son and Holy Spirit; and were apt tobe proud of the slogan, 'W e m aintain the Mo na rchy '. Th erewas, of course, no question that from the beginning Christianshad professed faith in Father, Son and Holy Spirit, cp. thebaptismal Creed and Form ula. This was comm on to Catholicand M ontanist alike. 'W e as we hav e always do ne ', writesTertullian, 'and more especially since we have been betterinstructed by the Paraclete wh o leads men into all truth . . .believe there is one sole Go d, who has also a Son. . . . W hosent from heaven from the Father the Holy Spirit, the Para-clete, the Sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in theFather, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost.' But jus t howwere these three related ?Tertullian begins by explaining the word M onarc hy. Itmeans simply the Rule of One, and does not exclude theemployment by the One Ruler of agents of government, a son,e.g. or other officers. God administers His gov ernm ent thro ug hhosts of angels without it ceasing to be a monarchy; much lessis His monarchy destroyed when He uses His Son and theHoly Spirit, sharers, unlike the angels, in the Fa the r's substance,pledges of His love, instrum ents of His mighty po wer. Th eyhave no other source than the Fa ther from whom they 'proceed'and whose bidding they perform and to whom they return.Scripture clearly distinguishes between the Three persons; aswhen it is said that the Son will pray the Father to give anotherComforter. Fa the r an d Son are unum not unus (John 10.30).


12/20

124 SCOTTISH JOURNAL OF THEOLOGYW e do not say that there are two Gods, but, to avoid sayingthat the Father was born and suffered, which it is not lawfulto believe for it has not been so handed down, 'we, especiallywho are disciples of the Paraclete and not of men, do indeeddefine th at th e Fath er an d Son are tw o; and w ith the addition ofthe Holy Spirit there are three, according to the princip le of theeconomy, which makes numeration necessary' (Adv. Prax. 13).Here Tertull ian has used a word which, in this special sense,he shares with his contemporary Hippolytus alone, from whomindeed he may have borrowed it. He introduces it at the verybeginning oAdv. Praxean and repeats it several times usually asa correlative to m onarc hia. Latins proudly chan t the Greekword 'monarchia' as something they can fully understand, whileeven Greeks, e.g. Praxeas, refuse to understand oikonomia.Sometimes he translates oikonomia into the Latin dispensatio,and in its first introduction he seems to explain it by a recitationof the Rule of Faith, including the historic facts of the Incar-nation, and the sanctification of believers. This might suggesta Trinity manifest in the historic acts of Redemption, after themanner of Sabellius, but that would be no answer to Praxeas;and elsewhere in the treatise it is clear that oikonomia hasreference to the Divine Nature itself. This is clear particularlyin the chapter where he contrasts his doctrine with that ofValentinus. Valentinus taug ht tha t the Divine nXqpwfjLa con-tained a multitude of Aeons, thirty in fact, each emanation(TT/OOJSOATJ : prolatio) proceeding from the one that had precededit, and all ultimately owing their origin to 'the Father ' . ButValentinus puts so great a distinction between (at any rate)the lowest aeon (i.e. Sophia) and the Father, that it cannotknow Him and perishes from its desire to know Him . 'With usthe Son (who is also known as Sophia) alone knows and revealsthe Fa th er.' Nevertheless with this correction, Tertullian canadopt the Valentinian term probole, prolatio; and he also usesillustrations w hich ce rtainly occur in Plotinus in an emanationalsense: the root, the tree, the fruit, which are three things fromone point of view, but are one from another point of view.Similarly with the Sun, the ray of light, and its apex. In likemanner the Trinity flowing down from the Father by closelyinterconnected steps (gradus) causes no disturbance to themonarchy and protects the 'status' of the Economy. Tertullian


13/20

THE HOLY SPIR IT IN THE LATIN FATHERS 125is less careful than Origen who rejected outright the Gnosticand Platonic idea of emanation, and worked with the concepts,Begotten-Unbegotten. Te rtullian's Economic Trin ity maytherefore be described, with Dr Prestige, as Organic Mono-theism, where unity is conceived of as a kind of TrXtfpiofxa richerand fuller than a mathem atical point. T he Econom y of R e-demptive History is grounded in an ontological Economy inwhich Unity is 'distributed' into a Trinity of personae, Father,Son an d Holy Spirit, three in degree (gradus) form (forma)fashion (species) but one in substance, status and power, sus-ceptible of being numbered but not divided (2). The treatiseends as it began with the accepted creed as far as the articleon the Spirit. 'M ean tim e (the Son, hav ing performed Hisredemptive work) has poured out the gift He received from theFather, even the Holy Spirit, being the third Name in theGodhead and the third Degree of the Divine Majesty, thePreacher of the Sole M ona rchy of Go d, bu t also the In terp rete rof the Economy, and, if any one will receive His words in theNew Prophecy, the Leader into all truth, as it is found in theFather and the Son and the Holy Spirit, according to theChristian mystery (sacram entu m ).' Te rtullian of course doesnot say that the doctrine of the Divine Economy was a Mon-tanist revelation. All he means is th at his Mon tanism ha dsimply intensified his ortho dox y. For him the H oly Spirit ismore than the inner light, more than the esprit de corps of anenthusiastic sect.

In the 200 years that separate Augustine from Tertullianmu ch has taken place in the theological wo rld. Theo logicalterms have acquired a certain precision and the period ofexperimen tation is over. The long pro tracted A rian contro-versy had been concerned chiefly with the doctrine of the Son;but the subsidiary Macedonian and Eunomian heresies hadraised questions regarding the Holy Spirit and had called forthfrom Basil the first dog matic treatise on the subject. T h e La tinshad followed afar off, content with Tertullian's Una SubstantiaTres Personae. In De Fide et Symbolo, an ear ly lec ture on theCreed, Augustine remarks th at by comparison with the doctrineof the Son the doctrine of the Spirit had received but littleattention, and in De Trin. he makes a similar remark with


14/20

126 SCOTTISH JOURNAL OF THEOLOGYregard to Latin writers. He does not mention Tertullian, oreven Ambrose who had written a treatise De Spiritu Sancto,mainly an ada ptatio n from the Greeks. He does quote a phraseof Hilary, which, however, he finds requires clarification.O ne may feel that in De Trin. Augustine treats his subject asa purely intellectual problem, attempting, as Dr Hodgson says,'to arrive at a deeper understanding' of the data of Scripture(I should prefer to say of the statements of the Catholic Creed)'in accordance with the canons of rational tho ught ' . But thereis a religious interest too , coloured, it may be, by Neoplatonism,appearing conspicuously at the beginning of Book iv, but else-where too (cp. xn . 13 ff).

Happiness for man consists in fruitio Dei, for God is man'ssummum bonum. So long as we sojourn as pilgrims on this earthwe are exiled from the unchangeable joy. We must return bydespising and turning away from worldly temporal things, andby coming to know and love imm utable and eternal things. Allthis the Platonists hav e seen clearly enough . 'The re are somewho think themselves capable of being cleansed by their ownvirtuousness so as to contemplate God and dwell in Him . . .because they have been able to penetrate with the eye of themind beyond created things, and to reach the light of imm utabletruth . . . to understand immutable substance . . . and theyderide many Christians for not beings able to do this.' (Cf.Confessions where he says the Platonists have seen the blessedcountry but have not been able to arrive at it.) M an 's situation'here', Augustine realises, is much more desperate than thePlatonists imagine. We must have help from heaven 'suited toour estate'unmerited graceto cleanse our sins, heal ourdisease and give us the good will. This is what Christianitybrings. The Incarnation, Death and Resurrection of Christboth make salvation possible and demonstrate its possibilityby revealing th at God loves us. These redem ptive acts quickenin us faith and hope and Amor Dei which is the motive power(pondus) of our return to Him who is our Highest Good. InChrist, as the Apostle says (Col. 2.3) 'are hid all the treasuresof wisdom and k n o w l e d g e ' . Per ipsum tendimus per scientiam(knowledge of mundane things, including the philosophicvirtues and even the earthly life, death and Resurrection ofChrist) ad sapientiam (knowledge of eternal things and of un-


15/20

THE HOLY SPIR IT IN THE LATIN FATHERS 127changeable truth and being) and thereby to fruitio Dei. Thereseems to be no place in this scheme for the Holy Spirit inaddition to God and His Word, God Transcendent and GodImmanent, Creative, sustaining and illuminating His creaturesand by grace redeeming them . T ho ug h not averse, as Te r-tullian was, to philosophic 'seeking', finding it encouragedindeed in the words 'Seek and ye shall find', Augustine makesnothing at all of the text, so dear to Te rtullia n, which speaks ofthe mission of the Paraclete to lead into all tru th . It rath ersuggests a question whether the teaching of the Son was notsufficient for salva tion! A nd tho ug h he quotes the passage in1 Co r. 12 which speaks of the manifestation of the Sp irit ingifts of wisdom, knowledge, faith, healings, miracle, prophecy,tongues, it seems to hav e little mean ing for him . T h e externalsigns at least are no longer expected, and certainly no longerpresent any problem s. Don atists may be classed with Enthu siasts,as by Knox, but not after the manner of the Montanists.

Nevertheless Augustine does take the mission of the HolySpirit seriously. Can onical Scripture of bo th Testam ents is'the writing of the Sp irit'. H e inspired the Prop hets, givingthem power to foretell the future, as the philosophers couldnot do, by enabling them to see the eternal and immutablecauses of all things (iv.22 ). H e cam e as a Dove at the Baptismof Jesus, an d as tongues of fire at P entecostnot being inc arn atein these things, as the Son was in His human formbut usingcorporeal visible things to disclose His presence to humansenses. T he Sp irit was bestowed by Ch rist on His Apostles asHis greatest gift, an d on the C hu rch . H e is transm itted b y the'Church's Rulers'not indeed that they themselves bestow theSpirit. 'T he Ch urch preserves the custom of the Apostles wh olaid hands on their converts with invocation of God who alonecan bestow this gift' (xv.46); who however does not do so atthe behest of schismatical bishops, for against the DonatistsAugustine claims a monopoly of the Spirit for the CatholicChurch.Moreover the working of the Spirit is to be seen in what wemay call individual religious experience (xv.31-2): 'The HolySpirit makes us to abide in Go d an d God in us . . . influences am an with love to God and his neig hbo ur. H e is the suprem egift of God without whom all other gifts profit nothing, not


16/20

i28 SCOTTISH JOURNAL OF THEOLOGYeven faith.' W itho ut the Holy Spirit we can not love God , foras Paul says (Rom. 5.5) 'Amor Dei is shed abroad in our heartsby the H oly Spirit which is given un to us '. This was indeed aluminous text for Augustine, perhaps the most meaningful, asit is the most frequently quoted, of all texts referring to theHo ly Spirit. I t was his sheet-anchor against Don atism andPelagianism. Au gustine would wa rmly agree tha t 'Every virtuewe possess and every victory won and every thought of holinessare His alo ne '. This deeply-felt perso nal religious experiencemust be held to underlie all he says about the Spirit in DeTrinitate, though it is with the metaphysical implications of theexperience that he is mainly concerned.

According to Catholic teaching the One Only True God is aTrinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, of one and the samesubstance in indivisible equ ality. T he Fa the r is God , the Son isGod, the Spirit is God, yet are there not three Gods but oneG o d : Una Substantia Tres Personae as the Latins say, though theGreeks have a different formula fiia ovola rpels vTroardacis. Asliterally translated into Latin una essentia tres substantiaethiswo uld be offensive, b u t it can be explained harmlessly. M uch ofthis terminology is of course not Scriptural, and yet it has hadto be employed in order to make clear what Scripture meansto say som ething in ord er to avoid silenceor heresy. In anycase Scripture is in many ways enigmatic 'In order to exerciseus it has caused those things to be sought into which do not lieup on the surface, bu t are to be scrutinised in the hidden dep ths',by dint of much arbitrary exegesis, it must be added.In any case we must begin with the Scriptural revelation,an d this has of course to do with Go d's manifestations in history.We might say that the One Divine substance breaks by refrac-tion into Three Persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, when itenters history an d thus comes within hu m an cognisance. Butth at wou ld be Sabellian heresy. O n the other hand explanationm ight be sought in some form of subordinationism . Scriptureitself speaks of the Son and of the Spirit as having been 'sent'by the Father, or in the latter case 'from the Father by theSon', while it never speaks of the Father as 'sent'. (11.20).(But who were the three men who appeared to Abraham atMamre and who were addressed by him in the singular as 'myL or d'? ) Au gustine denies th at this implies sub ordina tion.


17/20

THE HOLY SPIR IT IN TH E LATIN FATHERS 129The 'sender' is in reality the Triune God. The Son is 'sent'in forma send, but in His eternal form as Son of God He is also'send er'. Likewise in His temp ora l manifestations the Sp iritis 'sent', but He is 'apudse Deus, co-eternal with the Father andthe Son before He was given to anyo ne . Nor is H e less th an theybecause they give and He is given, for He Himself gives Him-self as being God' (xv.36). Augustine again and again rejectsall subordinationism, except such as may be said to lurk in theidea that the Father is the source or principium from whom bothSon an d Spirit are derived in their several ways, albeit etern ally.Th eir visible tempora l manifestations recorded in Scripture revealthe natu re of the invisible eterna l God head as inherently triu ne .God is one eternal invisible immutable substance, not,however, like the Plotinian First Hypostasis, w ithou t a ttri bu tes :only His attributes are not accidents in the technical sensei.e. separable from His substance. Est quod habet. H e is, in thefull Plotinian sense, immutably; but He is Spirit 'eternal,immortal, incorruptible, immutable, living, wise, powerful,beautiful, righteous, good, blessed,' and the adjectives are assubstantive as the nou n. Nevertheless Scriptu re speaks also ofthe Son as begotten of the Fath er, and of the Spirit as proceedingfrom the Father; He has a Son but is not the Son; and, just asthe beg etting of the Son has no reference to the b irth of Jesu sof the Virgin, so the Procession of the Spirit has no referenceto Pentecost or to any other temporal 'sending' of the Spirit.No doub t 'it is difficult to distinguish genera tion from processionin that co-eternal and equal, incorporeal and ineffably un-changeable and indivisible T rin ity ' (xv .48). 'N ot un til wereach the blissful abode shall we understand, with a mind thatdoes not reason but simply contemplates, why the Holy Spiritis not a Son though He proceeds from the Father' (xv.45).'Let him who can understand the timeless generation of theSon from the Father understand also the timeless procession ofthe Ho ly Spirit from b o th ' (xv .47). Nevertheless we believe,on the authority of Scripture, that there are eternal relationssubsisting within the Godhead between Three Persons, knownas Father, Son and Holy Spirit, each one possessing equallyand substantially all the divine attributes, and each one per-sonal as possessing the faculties of memory, understanding andwill that constitute personality in the ordinary human sense,


18/20

ISO S C O T T I S H J O U R N A L O F T H E O L O G Ybut distinguishable as Unbegotten, Begotten and Proceeding,an d thus related by Filiation and Procession. T h at the Spiritis persona l for Augu stine in the same sense th at the F athe r andthe Son are personal admits of no doubt.T h e distinction in relation Fathe r-Son , is clear enoug h. Itha d been thoro ugh ly discussed for a century. But Holy Spiritis not a distinctive nam e. Fa the r and Son are both Holy andbo th Sp irit. Ind eed the T rinity might be called the Ho lySpirit, as wh en Scrip ture says 'God is a Sp irit'. Yet S cripturealso speaks of 'the Spirit of God' and 'the Spirit of Christ' sothat there is a Holy Spirit, properly so called, who is not theTrinity but is in the Trinity, and is the Spirit both of theFa the r an d of the Son. To be sure the Lord said tha t the Spirit'proceedeth from the Father', but Augustine remarks that thisdoes not necessarily exclude His procession also from the Son.In De Trin. he insists on the filioque which was to lead to mis-understanding with the Greeks and to play a part in the subse-qu en t Schism. H e is most careful, however, to m ain tain theidea of the Fath er as the unita ry source. Does not the Son oweall that He has or is to the Father, including the fact that theHoly Spirit proceeds also from Him ? There is one principiumnot two, which was the all-important matter for the Greeks.

But if the Holy Spirit is not a distinctive name, neither doesit express the relation of the Sp irit to Fath er a nd Son. Scriptureand reverence both rule out any attempt to press further theanalogy of the family; and Augustine searches the Scriptures,both Old Testament and New Testament, for an appropriatedesignation. An d of course he finds one. T he word mostcommonly associated with the Spirit in the Bible is 'gift'(donum, munus). To be sure in the New Testament the referenceis usually to 'gifts' of the Spirit, special endowments given toindividual Christians for the edification of the Church, anddiffering from ind ivid ua l to ind ivid ual . But in Acts (2.38, 8.20,10.45, I I * I 7 ) t n e phrase is used, 'the gift of the Holy Spirit',surely significantly, for the author is interested in the trans-mission of the H oly Sp irit (cp. Luke 11.13: 'If ye being evilknow how to give good gifts unto your children how muchmore shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to themtha t ask H im ?' ). H ere then is the required term . Relativelyto the Father the Holy Spirit is His Gift, and Augustine,


19/20

THE HOLY SPIR IT IN TH E LATIN FATHERS 131throughout his works, even the earlier ones can refer to theSpirit w ithou t exp lana tion as simply 'the Gift'. But of course'Gift' is relative not only to the giver but also to the receiver,in this case to indiv idua l m en in history. Th is raises the ques-tion whether the Holy Spirit existed before He was 'given'.Augustine has various suggestions to m ake . From all eternityGod might have purposed in du e time to give this 'Gift'. Inany case there is a difference between Donum and Donatum. Athing m ay be called a gift before it is actu ally given. At allevents the Spirit was Donabile before there was anyone to wh omH e might be given. Curiously, there is no suggestion th at H emight be the Gift of the Father to the Son, not even by way ofrepudiation.

A gift of course may be anything at all, for the word initself has no specific content, and Augustine goes on to give itcontent by further designating the H oly Sp irit as Love (caritas).A special interest attaches to his endeavour in this direction,as it has given rise to some misun derstanding. In v. 12, wh ereit is explained that the name Holy Spirit denotes what theFa ther an d the Son have in comm on (holiness and spirituality)he says 'The Holy Spirit is a certain communio of the Fatheran d the S on '. In Book v.i he discusses the question why theSon is called the Wisdom of the Father, seeing that both areequally wise, and that Wisdom is among the substantial attri-butes of the Godhead, and therefore common to all ThreePersons. H e goes on to consider (vi.7) th e Holy Sp irit, begin-ning with the assertion that He too is of the same substanceand equal in attribute s with the Fa the r and the Son. 'Butwhether He is the unity of the Father and the Son, or theholiness or the love of both, manifestly He is not one of thetwo' but a third 'throug h whom b oth are joined, throug h w homthe Begotten is loved by the Begetter and loves Him that begotH im .' 'The Holy Spirit, wh atever H e is, is something com mo nto the Father and the Son, but that communio itself is con-substantial and co-ete rnal. If it m ay fitly be called amicitia letit be so called, but it is more aptly called cantos.' He concludes:'Therefore there are not more than three, one who loves Himwho is from Himself, and One who loves Him from whom Heis, and love (dilectio) itself.' Again towards the end of Book vm(vm. 10-14) there is an analysis of Love (dilectio) and he con-


20/20

132 SCO TTISH JOU RN AL O F THEOLOGYeludes: 'There are three things (at various levels of being) Heth at loves, th at wh ich is loved and lov e.' The re is no do ub tth at Aug ustine has a certa in fondness for this formula. H eplays about with it at great length, if rather inconclusively, inBooks ix and x , and h e returns to it in xv.2 7. 'T he H oly Spiritaccording to the Holy Scriptures is neither of the Father alonenor of the Son alone, but of both, and so intimates to us amutual love wherewith the Father and the Son reciprocallylove one anoth er' as we also are com mand ed to love one anoth er.

Nevertheless Augustine does not draw the conclusion, thatsome have drawn from these passages, that the Holy Spirit isimp ersona l. No r can there be any question of distributingthe Divine attribu tes amo ng the Thre e Persons. Even if thename Wisdom is specially given to the Son, the Word of God,the Father and the Spirit are alike and equally Wisdomnotth at there are three 'Wisdom s' bu t one Divine W isdom. Simi-larly with Love. In this case Sc riptu re nowhere says the HolySpirit is Love, which would of course have settled the question.What it says is, 'God is love' (1 John 4), and the question is, isthe Father or the Son or the Holy Spirit or the Trinity itselfLo ve? W itho ut do ub t Love, like W isdom, is an attrib ute of theG odh ead a nd therefore of the Th ree Persons equally. But acareful study of 1 Jo h n 4 can produc e the result required. Hereit is written not only that 'God is Love', but also that 'Love isof God', thereby excluding the Father who is not said to be ofGo d. M oreover it is written 'If we love one anothe r we dwellin God and He in us because He hath given us of His Spirit'.Therefore the Holy Spirit who is God of God is the God who isLove.

This is no doubt rather desperate exegesis, but the point ofit is made clear when Augustine goes on to link it with whatPau l says in 1 Cor. 13. The re it is said that the greatest of allthe gifts of the Sp irit is love. Now the Spirit would no t bespecially called 'Th e Gift' unless H e were Love. Love, there-fore, which is of God and is God is the appropriate name forthe Holy Spirit by whom, being 'given' to us, the love of Godis shed abroad in our hearts. Amor Dei, not that by which Heloved us but that by which we love Him, God's supreme andindispensable gift, is given to us by and with the Holy Spirit.Here we feel the pulse of Augustine's religious life.

latin fathers on spirit.pdf

Documents