|
A QUESTION was renewed at this juncture which had previously
excited much inquiry and now more; namely, whether the Holy Ghost is
or is not to be considered consubstantial with the Father and the
Son?
Many contentions and debates ensued on this subject, similar to those
which had been held concerning the nature of God the Word. Those who
asserted that the Son is dissimilar from the Father, and those who
insisted that He is similar in substance to the Father, came to one
common opinion concerning the Holy Ghost; for both parties maintained
that the Holy Ghost differs in substance, and that He is but the
Minister and the third in point of order, honor, and substance.
Those, on the contrary, who believed that the Son is consubstantial
with the Father, held also the same view about the Spirit. This
doctrine was nobly maintained in Syria by Apolinarius, bishop of
Laodicea; in Egypt by Athanasius, the bishop; and in Cappadocia
and in the churches of Pontus by Basil and Gregory. The bishop of
Rome, on learning that this question was agitated with great
acrimony, and that it of course was augmented daily by controversies,
wrote to the churches of the East and urged them to receive the
doctrine upheld by the Western clergy; namely, that the three
Persons of the Trinity are of the same substance and of equal
dignity. The question having been thus decided by the Roman
churches, peace was restored, and the inquiry appeared to have an
end.
|
|