TRINITY
54
TRINITY
like the Latins, conceived the Nature as logically
antecedent to the Persons. He understands the
term God as signifying the whole Trinity, and not,
as do the other Greeks, the Father alone: "When we
pray, whether we say, 'Kyrie eleison', or 'O God
aid us', we do not miss our mark: for we include the
whole of the Blessed Trinity in one Godhead" (De
Trin., II, xix, P. G., XXXIX, 736).
C. Mediate and Imynediate Procession. — The doc- trine that the Spirit is the image of the Son, as the Son is the image of the Father, is characteristic of Greek theology. It is asserted by St. Gregory Thaumatur- gus in his Creed (P. G., X, 986). It is assumed by St. Athanasius as an indisputable premise in his con- troversy with the Macedonians (Ad Scrap., I, x.x, xxi, xxiv; II, i, iv). It is implied in the comparisons employed both by him (Ad Scrap., I, xLx) and by St. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. xxxi, 31, 32), of the Three Divine Persons to the sun, the ray, the light; and to the source, the spring, and the stream. We find it also in St. Cyril of Alexandria ("Thesaurus assert.", 33, P. G., LXXV, 572), St. John Damascene ("Fid. orth.", I, 13, P. G., XCIV, 856), etc. This supposes that the procession of the Son from the Father is immediate; that of the Spirit from the Father is mediate. He proceeds from the Father through the Son. Bessarion rightly observes that the Fathers who used these expressions conceived the Divine Procession as taking place, so to speak, along a straight line (P. G., CLXI, 224). On the other hand, in Western theology the sj-mbohc diagram of the Trinity has ever been the triangle, the relations of the Three Persons one to another being precisely similar. The point is worth noting, for this diversity of symbolic representation leads inevitably to very different expressions of the same dogmatic truth. It is plain that these Fathers would have rejected no less firmly than the Latins the later Photian heresy that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone. (For this question the reader is referred to Holy Ghost.)
D. The Son.— The Greek theology of the Divine Generation differs in certain particulars from the Latin. Most Western theologians base their theory on the name. Logos, given by St. John to the Second Person. This they understand in the sense of "concept" (^verbiim menlale), and hold that the Divine Generation is analogous to the act by which the cre- ated intellect produces its concept. Among Greek writers this explanation is unknown. They declare the manner of the Divine Generation to be altogether beyond our comprehension. We know by revelation that God has a Son; and various other terms besides Son employed regarding Him in Scripture, such as Word, Brightness of His glory, etc., show us that His sonship must be conceived as free from any relation to material generation. More we know not (cf . Greg- ory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxix", § 8, P. G., XXXVI, 84; Cyril of Jerusalem, "Cat.", xi, 19; John Damascene, "Fid. orth.", I, viii, P. G., XCIV, 820). One ex-planation only can be given, namely, that the perfection we call fecundity must needs be found in God the Absolutely Perfect (St. John Dam., "Fid. orth.", I, viii, P. G., XCIV, 812). Indeed it would seem that the great majority of the Greek Fathers understood XA70S not of the mental thought, but of the uttered word ("Dion. Alex.", P. G., XXV, 513; Athanasius, ibid.; Cyril of Alexandria, "De Trin.", II, P. G., LXXV, 768). They did not see in the term a revelation that the Son is begotten by way of intellectual procession, but viewed it as a metaphor intended to exclude the material associations of human sonship (Gregory of Nyssa, "C. Eunom.", IV, P. G.,XLV, 624; Greg. Nazianzen, "Orat. xxx", § 20. P. G., XXXVl, 129; Basil, "Hom. xvi", P. G., XXXI, 477; C.\Til of Alexandria, "Thesaurus assert.", vi, P. G., LXXXV, 76).
We have already adverted to the view that the
Son is the Wisdom and Power of the Father in the
full and formal sense. This teaching constantly
recurs from the time of Origen to that of St. John
Damascene (Origen apud Athan., "De deer. Nic",
§ 27, P. G., XXV, 466; Athanasius, "Con. Arianos",
I, § 19, P. G., XXVI, 52; Cyril of Alexandria, "The-
saurus", P. G., LXXV, 44; John Damascene, "Fid.
orth.", I, -xii, P. G., XCIV, 849). It is based on the
Platonic philosophy accepted by the Alexandrine
School. This differs in a fundamental point from
the Aristoteleanism of the Scholastic theologians. In
Aristotelean philosophy perfection is always conceived
statically. No action, transient or immanent, can
proceed from any agent unless that agent, as statically
conceived, possesses whatever perfection is contained
in the action. The Alexandrine standpoint was other
than this. To them perfection must be sought in
dynamic activity. God, as the supreme perfection,
is from all eternity self-moving, ever adorning Him-
self with His own attributes: they issue from Him
and, being Divine, are not accidents, but subsistent
realities. To these thinkers, therefore, there was no
impossibility in the supposition that God is wise with
the Wisdom which is the result of His own immanent
action, powerful with the Power which proceeds from
Him. The arguments of the Greek Fathers fre-
quently presuppose this philosophy as their basis;
and unless it be clearly grasped, reasoning which on
their premises is conclusive will appear to us invalid
and fallacious. Thus it is sometimes urged as a
reason for rejecting Arianism that, if there were a
time when the Son was not, it follows that God must
then have been devoid of Wisdom and of Power — a
conclusion from which even Arians would shrink.
E. The Holy Spirit. — A point which in Western theology gives occasion for some discussion is the ques- tion as to why the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity is termed the Holy Spirit. St. Augustine suggests that it is because He proceeds from both the Father and the Son, and hence He rightly receives a name applicable to both (De Trin., xv, n. .37). To the Greek Fathers, who developed the theology of the Spirit in the light of the philosophical principles whi<'h we have just noticed, the question presented no difficulty. His name, they held, reveals to us His distinctive character as the Third Person, just as the names Father and Son manifest the distinctive characters of the First and Second Persons (cf. Greg- ory Thaum., "Ecth. fid.", P. G., X, 985; Basil, "Ep. ccxiv", 4, P. G., XXXII, 789; Gregory Naz., "Or. x.xv", 16, P. G., XXXV, 1221). He is airoa- ■yiinjs, the hypostatic holiness of God, the holiness by which God is holy. Just as the Son is the Wisdom and Power by which God is wise and powerful, so the Spirit is the Holiness by which He is holy. Had there ever been a time, as the Macedonians dared to say, when the Holy Spirit was not, then at that time God would have not been holv (Gregory Naz., "Orat. xxxi", 4, P. G., XXXVI, 138).
On the other hand, irxcC/ia was often understood in the light of John, xx, 22, where Christ, appearing to the Apostles, breathed on them and conferred on them the Holv Spirit. He is the breath of Christ (John Damascene, "Fid. orth.", 1, viii), breathed by Him into us, and dwelling in us as the breath of life by which we enjoy the supernatural life of God's children (Cyril of Alexandria, "Thesaurus", P. G., LXXV, 534, etc., cf. Petav., "De Trin", V, viii). The office of the Holy Spirit in thus elevating us to the supernatural order is, however, conceived in a manner somewhat different from that of Western theologians. According to Western doctrine, God bestows on man sanctifying grace, and consequent on that gift the Three Persons come to his soul In Greek theology the order is reversed: the Holy Spirit does not come to us because we have received
