NPNF2-08. Basil: Letters and Select Works - Holy Bible Institute

Enumeration of the illustrious men in the Church who in their writings have used the word“with.”kingdom of the heavens.” If any one thinks Eusebius of Palestine 1320 worthy of credit onaccount of his wide experience, I point further to the very words he uses in discussingquestions concerning the polygamy of the ancients. Stirring up himself to his work, hewrites “invoking the holy God of the Prophets, the Author of light, through our Saviour JesusChrist, with the Holy Spirit.”73. Origen, too, in many of his expositions of the Psalms, we find using the form ofdoxology “with the Holy Ghost.” The opinions which he held concerning the Spirit werenot always and everywhere sound; nevertheless in many passages even he himself reverentlyrecognises the force of established usage, and expresses himself concerning the Spirit interms consistent with true religion. It is, if I am not mistaken, in the Sixth 1321 Book of hisCommentary on the Gospel of St. John that he distinctly makes the Spirit an object of worship.His words are:—“The washing or water is a symbol of the cleaning of the soul which iswashed clean of all filth that comes of wickedness; 1322 but none the less is it also by itself,to him who yields himself to the God-head of the adorable Trinity, through the power ofthe invocations, the origin and source of blessings.” And again, in his Exposition of theEpistle to the Romans “the holy powers,” he says “are able to receive the Only-begotten, andthe Godhead of the Holy Spirit.” Thus I apprehend, the powerful influence of traditionfrequently impels men to express themselves in terms contradictory to their own opinions.1323 Moreover this form of the doxology was not unknown even to Africanus the his-461320 i.e.Eusebius of Cæsarea, the historian, so called to distinguish him from his namesake of Nicomedia.cf. Theodoret, Ecc. Hist. i. 1. The work is not extant. It may be that mentioned by Eusebius in his Præp. Evang.vii. 8, 20 under the title of περὶ τῆς τῶν παλαιῶν ἀνδρῶν πολυπαιδίας.1321 The quotation is from the Eighth Book.1322 cf. 1 Pet. iii. 21.1323 As to Origen’s unorthodoxy concerning the Holy Spirit St. Basil may have had in his mind such a passageas the following from the First Book of the De Principiis, extant in the original in Justinian, Ep. ad Mennam.Migne, Pat. Gr. xi. p. 150. ὅτι ὁ μὲν θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ συνέχων τὰ πάντα φθάνει εἰς εκαστον τῶν ὄντων μεταδιδοὺςἑκάστῳ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἰδίου τὸ εἶναι· ὢν γὰρ ἔστιν· ἐλάττων δὲ παρὰ τὸν πατέρα ὁ Υἱ& 232·ς φθάνει ἐπὶ μόνα τὰλογικά· δεύτερος γάρ ἐστι τοῦ πατρός· ἔτι δὲ ἧττον τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ἐπὶ μόνους τοὺς ἁγίους διικνούμενον·ὥστε κατὰ τοῦτο μείζων ἡ δύναμις τοῦ Πατρὸς παρὰ τὸν Υἱ& 232·ν καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον πλείων δὲ ἡ τοῦΥἱοῦ παρὰ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον The work does not even exist as a whole in the translation of Rufinus, whoomitted portions, and St. Jerome thought that Rufinus had misrepresented it. Photius (Biblioth. cod. viii.) saysthat Origen, in asserting in this work that the Son was made by the Father and the Spirit by the Son, is mostblasphemous. Bp. Harold Browne, however (Exposition of the xxxix. Art. p. 113, n. 1), is of opinion that ifRufinus fairly translated the following passage, Origen cannot have been fairly charged with heresy concerningthe Holy Ghost: “Ne quis sane existimet nos ex eo quod diximus Spiritum sanctum solis sanctis præstari. Patrisvero et Filii beneficia vel inoperationes pervenire ad bonos et malos, justos et injustos, prœtulisse per hoc Patri etFilio Spiritum Sanctum, vel majorem ejus per hoc asserere dignitatem; quod utique valde inconsequens est. Pro-241