Basil (330-378) in his On the Holy Spirit, defended the divinity of the Holy Spirit thusly:
In no other instance of that which is unwritten, then
this must not be received. But if the greater number of our mysteries are
admitted into our constitution without written authority, then, in company with
the many others, let us receive this one. For I hold it apostolic to abide also
by the unwritten traditions. "I praise you," it is said, "that
ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances as I delivered them to
you;" and "Hold fast the traditions which ye have been taught whether
by word, or our Epistle." One of these traditions is the practice which is
now before us, which they who ordained from the beginning, rooted firmly in the
churches, delivering it to their successors, and its use through long custom
advances pace by pace with time. If, as in a Court of Law, we were at a loss
for documentary evidence, but were able to bring before you a large number of
witnesses, would you not give your vote for our acquittal? I think so; for
"at the mouth of two or three witnesses shall the matter be established."
And if we could prove clearly to you that a long period of time was in our
favour, should we not have seemed to you to urge with reason that this suit
ought not to be brought into court against us? For ancient dogmas inspire a
certain sense of awe, venerable as they are with a hoary antiquity. I will
therefore give you a list of the supporters of the word (and the time too must
be taken into account in relation to what passes unquestioned). For it did not
originate with us. How could it? We, in comparison with the time during which
this word has been in vogue, are, to use the words of Job, "but of
yesterday." I myself, if I must speak of what concerns me individually,
cherish this phrase as a legacy left me by my fathers. It was delivered to me
by one who spent a long life in the service of God, and by him I was both
baptized, and admitted to the ministry of the church. While examining, so far
as I could, if any of the blessed men of old used the words to which objection
is now made, I found many worthy of credit both on account of their early date,
and also a characteristic in which they are unlike the men of to-day--because
of the exactness of their knowledge. Of these some coupled the word in the
doxology by the preposition, others by the conjunction, but were in no case
supposed to be acting divergently,--at least so far as the right sense of true
religion is concerned. (Basil, On the Spirit, 29.71 [NPNF2 8:44-45]
= PG 34:200-1)
Interestingly, Basil does
not defend such a central doctrine based on the final authority of the Bible,
instead, as one commentator noted,
Basil’s primary basis for
the defense of the Holy Spirit’s divinity was the unwritten Tradition expressed
in liturgy of the Church rather than Scripture. The Tradition consisted of the
liturgical phrase ‘Glory be to the Father with the Son together with the Holy
Ghost.’ This doxology is not in Scripture, though the teaching is coincident
with it, and provides Basi with this central argument for the deity of the Holy
Spirit. (Joseph Gallegos, “What did the Church Fathers Teach Concerning Scripture,
Tradition and Church Authority?,” in Not By Scripture Alone: A Catholic
Critique of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura, ed. Robert A.
Sungenis [2d ed.; State Line, Pa.: Catholic Apologetics International
Publishing, Inc., 2013], 420)
Here are the relevant portions
of PG 34:200-1:
.jpg)
.jpg)
To Support this Blog: