afterwards in the whole Church, as Ananias testifies in the same book; "Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints-that call on thy name." (m) And to make it more clearly understood, that "all the fulness of the Godhead dwelleth bodily in Christ," the Apostle confesses that he had introduced among the Corinthians no other doctrine than the knowledge of him, and that this had been the only subject of his preaching. (n) What a remarkable and important consideration is it, that the name of the Son only is preached to us, whereas God commands us to glory in the knowledge of himself alone? (0) Who can dare to assert that he is a mere creature, the knowledge of whom is our only glory? It must also be remarked, that the salutations prefixed to the epistles of Paul implore the same blessings from the Son as from the Father; whence we learn, not only that those things, which our heavenly Father bestows, are obtained for us by his intercession, but that the Son, by a communion of power, is himself the author of them. This practical knowledge is unquestionably more certain and solid than any idle speculation. For then the pious mind has the nearest view of the Divine presence, and almost touches it, when it experiences itself to be quickened, illuminated, saved, justified and sanctified.

XIV. Wherefore the proof of the Deity of the Spirit must be derived principally from the same sources. There is no obscurity in the testimony of Moses, in the history of the creation, that the Spirit of God was expanded on the abyss or chaos;(p) for it signifies, not only that the beautiful state of the world which we now behold owes its preservation to the power of the Spirit, but that previously to its being thus adorned, the Spirit was engaged in brooding over the confused mass. The declaration of Isaiah bids defiance to all cavils; "And now the Lord God, and his Spirit hath sent me."(9) For the Holy Spirit is united in the exercise of supreme power in the mission of Prophets, which is a proof of his Divine majesty. But the best confirmation, as I have remarked, we shall derive from familiar experience. For what

(m) Acts ix. 13, 14.
(p) Gen. i. 2.

(n) 1 Cor. ii. 2.
(9) Isaiah xlviii. 16.

(0) Jer. ix. 24.

the Scriptures ascribe to him, and what we ourselves learn by the certain experience of piety, is not at all applicable to any creature. For it is he who, being universally diffused, sustains and animates all things in heaven and in earth. And this very thing excludes him from the number of creatures, that he is circumscribed by no limits, but transfuses through all his own vigorous influence, to inspire them with being life and motion; this is clearly a work of Deity. Again, if regeneration to an incorruptible life be more important and excellent than any present life, what must we think of him from whose power it proceeds? But the Scripture teaches in various places, that he is the author of regeneration by a power not derived, but properly his own; and not of regeneration only, but likewise of the future immortality. Finally, to him, as well as to the Son, are applied all those offices which are peculiar to Deity. For he "searcheth even the deep things of God,"(r) who admits no creature to a share in his councils. He bestows wisdom and the faculty of speech:(s) whereas the Lord declares to Moses, that this con only be done by himself.(t) So through him we attain to a participation of God, to feel his vivifying energy upon us. Our justification is his work. From him proceeds power, sanctification, truth, grace, and every other blessing we can conceive: since there is but one Spirit, from whom every kind of gifts descends. For this passage of Paul is worthy of particular attention; "there are diversities of gifts, and there are differences of administrations, but the same spirit:"(u) because it represents him, not only as the principle and source of them, but also as the author: which is yet more clearly expressed a little after in these words; "All these worketh that only and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will." For if he were not a subsistence in the Deity, judgment and voluntary determination would never be ascribed to him. Paul, therefore, very clearly attributes to the Spirit divine power, and thereby demonstrates him to be an hypostasis or subsistence in God.

XV. Nor does the Scripture, when it speaks of him, refrain

(r) 1 Cor. ii. 10, 16.
(t) Exod. iv. 11.

(s) 1 Cor. xii. 8.
(u) 1 Cor. xii. 4, &c.

from giving him the appellation of God. For Paul concludes that we are the temple of God, because his Spirit dwelleth in us. (v) This must not be passed over without particular notice; for the frequent promises of God that he will choose us for a temple for himself receive no other accomplishment, than by the inhabitation of his Spirit in us. Certainly, as Augustine excellently observes, "If we were commanded to erect to the Spirit a temple of wood and stone, forasmuch as God is the sole object of worship, it would be a clear proof of his divinity; how much clearer, then, is the proof, now that we are commanded, not to erect one, but to be ourselves his temples?" And the Apostle calls us sometimes the temple of God, and sometimes the temple of the Holy Spirit, both in the same signification. Peter, reprehending Ananias for having "lied to the Holy Ghost," told him, that he had "not lied unto men, but unto God." (w) And where Isaiah (x) introduces the Lord of hosts as the speaker, Paul (y) informs us that it is the Holy Spirit who speaks. Indeed, while the Prophets invariably declare that the words which they utter are those of the Lord of hosts, Christ and the Apostles refer them to the Holy Spirit; whence it follows, that he is the true Jehovah, who is the primary author of the prophecies. Again, God complains that his anger was provoked by the perverseness of the people; Isaiah, in reference to the same conduct, says, that "They vexed his Holy Spirit." (z) Lastly, if blasphemy against the Spirit be not forgiven, either in this world or in that which is to come, (a) whilst a man may obtain pardon who has been guilty of blasphemy against the Son, this is an open declaration of his Divine majesty, to defame or degrade which is an inexpiable crime. I intentionally pass over many testimonies which were used by the fathers. To them there appeared much plausibility in citing this passage from David, "By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth;" (b) to prove that the creation of the world was the work of the Holy Spirit, as well as of the Son. But since a repetition of the same thing twice is

(v) 1 Cor. iii. 16. vi. 19. 2 Cor. vi. 16.
(x) Isaiah vi. 9.

(a) Matt. xii. 31.

(y) Acts xxviii. 25. Mark iii. 29. Luke xii. 10.

(w) Acts v. 3, 4.
(z) Isaiah lxiii. 10.

() Psalm xxxiii. 6.

common in the Psalms, and in Isaiah "the Spirit of his mouth" means the same as "his word," this is but a weak argument. Therefore I have determined to confine myself to a sober statement of those evidences on which pious minds may satisfactorily rest.

XVI. As God afforded a clearer manifestation of himself at the advent of Christ, the three Persons also then became better known. Among many testimonies let us be satisfied with this one: Paul connects together these three, Lord Faith and Baptism, (c) in such a manner as to reason from one to another. Since there is but one faith, hence he proves that there is but one Lord; since there is but one baptism, he shews that there is also but one faith. Therefore if we are initiated by baptism into the faith and religion of one God, we must necessarily suppose him to be the true God into whose name we are baptized. Nor can it be doubted but that in this solemn commission, "Baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," Christ intended to testify, that the perfect light of faith was now exhibited. For this is equivalent to being baptized into the name of the one God, who hath clearly manifested himself in the Father, Son, and Spirit: whence it evidently appears, that in the Divine Essence there exist three Persons, in whom is known the one God. And, truly, since faith ought not to be looking about hither and thither, or to be wandering through the varieties of inconstancy, but to direct its views towards the one God, to be fixed on him, and to adhere to him; it may easily be proved from these premises, that if there be various kinds of faith, there must also be a plurality of gods. Baptism being a sacrament of faith, confirms to us the unity of God, because it is but one. Hence also we conclude, that it is not lawful to be baptized, except into the name of the one God; because we embrace the faith of him, into whose name we are baptized. What then was intended by Christ, when he commanded baptism to be administered in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, but that one faith ought to

(c) Ephes. iv. 5.

be exercised in the Father, Son, and Spirit? and what is that but a clear testimony, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, are the one God? Therefore, since it is an undeniable truth, that there is one God, and only one, we conclude the Word and Spirit to be no other than the very Essence of the Deity. The greatest degree of folly was betrayed by the Arians, who confessed the divinity of the Son, but denied him to possess the substance of God. Nor were the Macedonians free from a similar delusion, who would explain the term "spirit" to mean only the gifts of grace conferred upon man. For as wisdom, understanding, prudence, fortitude, and fear of the Lord, proceed from him: so he alone is the Spirit of wisdom, prudence, fortitude, and piety. Nor is he himself divided according to the distribution of his graces: but, as the Apostle declares, how variously soever they are divided, he always remains one and the same. (d)

XVII. On the other hand also we find in the Scriptures a distinction between the Father and the Word, between the Word and the Spirit: in the discussion of which the magnitude of the mystery reminds us that we ought to proceed with the utmost reverence and sobriety. I am exceedingly pleased with this observation of Gregory Nazianzen; “I cannot think of the one, but I am immediately surrounded with the splendour of the three; nor can I clearly discover the three, but I am suddenly carried back to the one." Wherefore let us not imagine such a trinity of persons, as includes an idea of separation, or does not immediately recal us to the unity. The names of Father, Son, and Spirit, certainly imply a real distinction; let no one suppose them to be mere epithets, by which God is variously designated from his works: but it is a distinction, not a division. The passages already cited shew, that the Son has a property, by which he is distinguished from the Father; because the Word had not been with God, or had his glory with the Father, unless he had been distinct from him. He likewise distinguishes the Father from himself, when he says, "that there is another that beareth witness of him."(e) And to the same effect is what is declared in another place,