Athanasius on the Holy Spirit (Part I)
The Trinity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
For nearly two millennia, orthodox Christians have affirmed this doctrine. The Trinity contains perfect unity and perfect distinction; and each member is co-equal and co-eternal. Indeed, this is a great mystery! Yet if any one member of the Trinity receives the least of our attention, I suspect it is the Spirit. Who is He, and what is His role in the triune Godhead?
The early church father from Alexandria, Egypt, Athanasius (c. 296/298-373) helps us think through these questions. While we often remember him for his Christian classic On the Incarnation and his work in Christology, we would do well to consider his work on the Spirit as well.[1]
Over the next two articles, we’ll consider Athanasius’ work on the doctrine of the Spirit (pneumatology): His person in Part I, and His role and work in redemption in Part II.
Prolegomena: Faith in God’s Word
To the surprise of some, Athanasius does not begin his study of the Spirit with the Spirit. No, instead, much like Augustine (354-430) and Anselm (c. 1033-1109) after him, Athanasius begins with the role of faith in the Bible as foundational to any theological discussion. In many ways echoing Athanasius, Augustine would go on to say, “I believe in order to understand,” and Anselm still later, “For I do not seek to understand in order to believe, but I believe in order to understand.”
“Divinity is not handed down to us by demonstration of words, as it says (cf. 1 Cor. 1:17), but in faith and through pious reasoning undertaken with reverence,” Athanasius writes.[2] By “pious reasoning,” Athanasius means that which “is anchored in the patterns of scriptural narrative and symbols.”[3] In other words, we must look to Scripture as God’s Word and believe what it says.
The reason we look to Scripture is because we alone are inadequate to the task of studying God. We can’t even comprehend the created order, much less an infinite God.[4] Athanasius points out, “[E]ven Solomon, who attained a share of wisdom surpassing all, saw that is impossible for men to find out these things.”[5] In addition, Scripture is authoritative for at least three reasons:
(1) The Holy Spirit Has Authored It: The Spirit “speaks in the saints [in] words inspired by him in them.”[6]
(2) The Holy Spirit Gives Its Component Parts Agreement:[7] “Since it is one and the same Spirit, from whom are all distinctions, and [the Scripture] is indivisible by nature—because of this surely the whole is in each, and as determined by service the revelations and the distinctions of the Spirit pertain to all and to each severally.”[8]
(3) The Holy Spirit Uses It in Service to Christ: “[A]ccording to the reserved need, each [Scripture] frequently, when the Spirit takes over, serves the Word.”[9]
In summary, if we’re going to study pneumatology, we must recognize our own inadequacy and instead see Scripture as reliable and trustworthy in this pursuit.
The Person of the Holy Spirit
In considering the Spirit’s person, Athanasius begins with a Trinitarian theology, exploring what the Trinity is, and how Scripture illustrates it through metaphor. He will conclude that the Spirit is co-equal with the Father and Son, and that He shares in their attributes and work.
a. The Holy Trinity
Athanasius begins by pointing out that Scripture presents the Spirit in the context of a Trinity. He writes, “[T]he Son is said [in Scripture] to be Son of the Father, and the Spirit of the Son is said to be the Spirit of the Father. Thus, there is one Godhead of the Holy Trinity, unto which there is also one faith.”[10] And again, “It is Trinity not only in name and linguistic expression, but Trinity in reality and truth.”[11] For Athanasius, if Scripture’s witness is true, then we must accept that it presents God in Trinity as composed of the Father, Son, and Spirit.
As such, the Trinity contains perfect distinction and perfect unity (Jn. 14:10-11; Rom. 15:18-19).[12] Athanasius especially highlights the latter here: “Such being the correlation and unity of the Holy Trinity, who would dare to separate the Son from the Father, or the Spirit from the Son or from the Father himself?”[13] And again, the “nature of the Holy Trinity” is “truly indivisible and homogeneous.”[14] In other words, when we consider the Holy Spirit, we must always do so in reference to the Trinity.
b. Metaphors
Athanasius proceeds to illustrate the Trinity through the Scripture’s metaphors or symbols. Thus rather than explaining the Trinity in his own words, Athanasius lets Scripture speak for itself.[15] Some of the metaphors he highlights include:
Fountain: The Father is the Fountain (Jer. 2:13), the Son the River (Ps. 65:10), and the Spirit the means by which believers drink from the River (1 Cor. 12:13; cf. 1 Cor. 10:4). “[W]hen we are given to drink of the Spirit, we drink Christ.”[16]
Light: The Father is the Light (1 Jn. 1:5), the Son the Radiance (Heb. 1:3), and the Spirit the Enlightener (Eph. 1:17; Jn. 1:9).
Wisdom: The Father is the “Only Wise One” (Rom. 16:27), the Son His Wisdom (1 Cor. 1:24), and the Spirit the “Spirit of Wisdom” (Ps. 146:7-8; Jn. 20:22; 1 Jn. 4:12-13).[17]
Father and Life: The Father is the Father, the Son the Son, and the Spirit the one Who makes believers “sons” or “children of God” (Rom. 8:15; Jn. 1:12). The Son is Life (Jn. 14:6), and the Spirit makes believers alive in the Spirit (Rom. 8:11), making Christ live in them (Gal. 2:19-20).[18]
No one metaphor can completely describe God in Trinity, as it will either err on the side of unity without adequately capturing distinction, or on the side of distinction with adequately capturing unity—and how could it, since it is a human device attempting to describe an infinite God? Athanasius recognizes this when he says that these metaphors are mere “remedies,” and not solutions for “grasping” the “impossibility” of “these matters.”[19] That said, if we recognize their limitations, such metaphors can serve to illustrate the Trinity’s essence, attributes, and/or work.
c. Co-equality
Since Scripture presents God as Trinity and illustrates it with metaphors, Athanasius would remind us that the Spirit is therefore co-equal in nature with the Father and Son—not any more or any less God. He explains that Scripture holds that the Spirit is Jesus’ own Spirit, or as he puts it, the “Spirit of the Word” (cf. Gal. 4:6),[20] and the “Spirit of the Son.[21] In other words, a being’s spirit doesn’t contain any more or less essence than its being.
He writes further, “[The] Spirit has the same relation of nature and order with respect to the Son that the Son has with respect to the Father.”[22] And again, “[T]o the disciples, [the Lord] show[ed] his deity and majesty and signifying that he was not less than the Spirit but equal.”[23] These points lead Athanasius to affirm the co-equality of the three members of the Godhead, including the Spirit.
Athanasius then seeks to apply these principles to his own historical context. The Council of Nicaea (325) had affirmed God the Father, Son, and Spirit; and though it had explicitly stated that Jesus has the same essence or substance (homoousios) with the Father, it had not made this explicit link with the Spirit.[24] In consideration of this omission, Athanasius writes, “[T]he Spirit is one and belongs to the one Word, and accordingly belongs to the one God and is of the same being (homoousion).”[25] Athanasius’ use of the term homoousion is not incidental here.
However, not only does the Spirit’s being attest to His divinity, but so do His attributes. Whereas His ontology concerns Who He is in His essence, His attributes concern what He’s like in His person.
d. Attributes
Scripture ascribes to the Spirit adjectives like eternal, inalterable, and unchangeable. For example, Athanasius writes, “That the Spirit is above creation and other than the nature of originated beings, but rather belongs to divinity, is something that can also be gleaned from the fact that the Holy Spirit is unchangeable and inalterable.”[26]
However, if Scripture doesn’t give as much explanation to the Spirit’s attributes as perhaps we’d like, Athanasius has a rather clever hermeneutical solution. In essence, by pointing to 2 Corinthians 3:16-17, which states, “[T]he Lord is Spirit,” Athanasius ascribes Jesus’ attributes specifically to the Spirit.[27] Therefore, whatever attributes are true of Jesus are also true of the Spirit. Again, Athanasius highlights the Trinity’s perfect unity in this move.
Conclusion
Athanasius is instructive for us today for several reasons. He doesn’t treat Scripture as if it bears our burden of proof. Instead, he takes seriously its propositional nature on its face. He lets it speak for itself, and he is not uncomfortable with some degree of mystery.
Additionally, he seeks to apply Biblical orthodoxy specifically to his historical, space-time context, as we see in his post-Nicaea work. Thus we see that theology is not without implication for the times in which we live. In Part II, we’ll look more closely to the Spirit’s role and work in salvation.
____________________
[1] For an overview of the Christian classics, I recommend the book Reading the Christian Spiritual Classics.
[2] Athanasius, Letters to Serapion on the Holy Spirit (1:15-33), in Khaled Anatolios, Athanasius: The Early Church Fathers (New York: Routledge, 2004), 219 (hereafter referred to as Letters).
[3] Anatolios, Athanasius, 276, endnote 19.
[4] Letters, 215, 217.
[5] Ibid., 217.
[6] Athanasius, A Letter of Athanasius, Our Holy Father, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Marcellinus on the Interpretation of the Psalms, in Robert C. Gregg (trans.), Athanasius: The Life of Antony and The Letter to Marcellinus (Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1980), 127; cf. 105 (hereafter referred to as Marcellinus).
[7] Marcellinus, 106.
[8] Ibid., 107.
[9] Ibid., 107.
[10] Letters, 215-16.
[11] Letters, 227; cf. 219, 227, 232.
[12] Ibid., 219.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid., 216.
[15] Ibid., 219.
[16] Ibid., 218.
[17] Ibid.; cf. 224.
[18] Ibid., 219.
[19] Letters, 220.
[20] Athanasius, On the Council of Nicaea (De Decretis), in Anatolios, 210.
[21] Anatolios., Orations Against the Arians, in Anatolios, 144.
[22] Letters, 220.
[23] Athanasius, Athanasius’ Orations against the Arians, Book 1, in William G. Rusch (trans., ed.), The Trinitarian Controversy (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), 114 (hereafter referred to as Orations in Rusch).
[24] See our article by Jesse Owens, “Ancient Orthodoxy: The Importance of Chalcedon in Your Local Church,” to explore the value of these early church creeds and councils in our contemporary churches.
[25] Letters, 227.
[26] Letters, 225.
[27] Orations in Rusch, 74. Some of the other passages Athanasius considers includes 1 Corinthians 2:11, 1 Peter 3:4, James 1:17, and Wisdom 1:5; 12:1.
Recent Comments