CHAPTER XXII

DEBATE CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE HOLY GHOST. IT IS DECIDED THAT HE IS TO BE CONSIDERED CONSUBSTANTIAL WITH THE FATHER AND THE SON

A QUESTION was renewed at this juncture which had previously excited much inquiry, namely—whether the Holy Ghost is or is not to be considered consubstantial with the Father and the Son. Lengthened 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 from the other two Persons of the Trinity, and that. He is but the Minister, and the third Person of the Trinity in point of dignity and order. Those, on the contrary, who believed that the Son is consubstantial with the Father, believed also that the Spirit is consubstantial with the Father and the Son. This doctrine was zealously maintained in Syria by Apollinarius, bishop of Laodicea; in Egypt, by Athanasius, the bishop; and, in Cappadocia and in Pontus, by Basil and Gregory. The bishop of Rome, on hearing that this question was agitated with great acrimony, and that the contention seemed daily to increase, 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 an end was put to the debate.