“We Believe in the Holy Spirit” —The Nicene Creed for Noncreedal Christians, Post #14

 

 

And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, and Giver of Life,

Who proceeds from the Father [Western Churches: “And the Son”],

Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified,

Who spoke by the Prophets; ...

                As we near the end of this series of reflections on the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed that I’ve undertaken during this 1700^th anniversary year of the Council of Nicaea, it is time to reflect on the Creed’s statement concerning the Holy Spirit. It is here, in this declaration concerning the Holy Spirit, that controversy enters the picture, a controversy that has divided the Eastern churches from the Western churches to this day. I have placed the divisive words in brackets. Those words are “and the Son,” which in Latin reads filioque.  For non-creedal Christians, this debate may seem rather intramural, but from an ecumenical perspective, it holds deep importance.

                Before we get to the statement on the Holy Spirit as found in the Creed received at Constantinople in 381, we need to take note of the original statement from 325. In the original version, all that was confessed was this: “And in the Holy Spirit.”  There is no definition, simply a confession of belief in the Holy Spirit. The focus of Nicaea was on Christology, such that the Holy Spirit was essentially an afterthought. We have the rudiments of a trinitarian theology, but not a fully developed understanding. But by 381, greater attention was given to the Holy Spirit. One of the leading contributors to that conversation was Basil of Caesarea, one of the Cappadocian Fathers. His contribution that led to the expansion of the confession in 381 is rooted in his response, along with others, to the ongoing Arian Controversy, which continued to rage after 325. As the controversy played out, people began to ask, “What about the Holy Spirit?”  As David Anderson points out in his introduction to Basil’s book On the Holy Spirit, while the Arians argued against the divinity of the Holy Spirit as a way of undermining the trinitarian orthodoxy, Basil responded by writing a book that affirmed the divinity of the Holy Spirit as a way of affirming the orthodoxy of the Trinity by affirming that all three persons share the same divine nature. Thus, Anderson writes: “Once this is accomplished, it is much easier to determine what is orthodoxy and what is not. So his primary objective in this treatise is to clear up the muddle—a muddle which he denounces as the end-product of vanity and pride, caused by those who dare to utter clever-sounding words about God without loving truth in their hearts, who refuse to measure their own opinions with the yardstick of the Church’s faith, who admit of no absolute standard outside themselves” [On the Holy Spirit, p. 9].

The question the Cappadocians and others wrestled with was whether the Holy Spirit should be considered God, especially since the Holy Spirit isn’t fully revealed in the biblical texts. Gregory of Nazianzus, the friend of Basil and Gregory of Nyssa, writes in Oration 31:

 To this I may compare the case of Theology, except that it proceeds the reverse way. For in the case by which I have illustrated it the change is made by successive subtractions; whereas here perfection is reached by additions. For the matter stands thus. The Old Testament proclaimed the Father openly, and the Son more obscurely. The New manifested the Son, and suggested the Deity of the Spirit. Now the Spirit Himself dwells among us, and supplies us with a clearer demonstration of Himself. For it was not safe, when the Godhead of the Father was not yet acknowledged, plainly to proclaim the Son; nor when that of the Son was not yet received to burden us further (if I may use so bold an expression) with the Holy Ghost; lest perhaps people might, like men loaded with food beyond their strength, and presenting eyes as yet too weak to bear it to the sun's light, risk the loss even of that which was within the reach of their powers; but that by gradual additions, and, as David says, Goings up, and advances and progress from glory to glory, the Light of the Trinity might shine upon the more illuminated. For this reason it was, I think, that He gradually came to dwell in the Disciples, measuring Himself out to them according to their capacity to receive Him, at the beginning of the Gospel, after the Passion, after the Ascension, making perfect their powers, being breathed upon them, and appearing in fiery tongues. And indeed it is little by little that He is declared by Jesus, as you will learn for yourself if you will read more carefully. I will ask the Father, He says, and He will send you another Comforter, even the spirit of Truth. This He said that He might not seem to be a rival God, or to make His discourses to them by another authority. Again, He shall send Him, but it is in My Name. He leaves out the I will ask, but He keeps the Shall send, then again, I will send,—His own dignity. Then shall come, the authority of the Spirit. [Oration 31.26 New Advent]

I include this lengthy statement by Gregory as a way of addressing the development of a Trinitarian theology that included a more robust statement concerning the Holy Spirit.

                Now, the work of the Cappadocians and others led to the Council of Constantinople to further develop the confession concerning the Holy Spirit. The first addition to this confession is to declare that the Holy Spirit is the “Lord, the giver of life.” The assumption we see present in scripture is that God is the creator, as declared in Genesis 1. Whether you embrace creatio ex nihilo or not, God is understood to be the creator. But, we see a reference to the Spirit present in that very chapter, as the ruach (Wind, Breath, Spirit) blows across the deep. Then in 2 Corinthians 3:6, we have this statement, that while “the letter kills, the Spirit gives life.” There is more to this than I can share here, but this is the first expansion.

                The next phrase defines the relationship of the Holy Spirit to God the Father (and to the Son). The eastern version, which is likely the original, invites us to confess that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. With this statement, the Creed defines the connection of the Spirit to the Godhead. The original statement, without the filioque, reflects Jesus' word concerning the Paraclete in John 15:26, where Jesus speaks of the Spirit of truth being the one “who comes from the Father.”  Thus, even as the Son is begotten not made, the Spirit proceeds from the Father. Later on, some, especially in the West, felt that this statement did not fully reflect the biblical testimony, and therefore argued for a “double procession,” such that the Spirit proceeds from the Father “and the Son.” The filioque appears for the first time, so it seems, at the Council of Toledo in 585, and became commonplace by 800 in the Holy Roman Empire. Over time, East and West went their own ways, each justifying its own position.

When it comes to the division of the church over the filioque, both sides have their reasons for their choices. The question is whether this is worth fighting over. Luke Timothy writes that “the difference is at best a nuance, at most an emphasis on one set of testimonies in Scripture against another set of testimonies (often appearing, as I have shown, in the same writings)” [Johnson, The Creed, pp. 250-251]. In my view, it would seem best to go with the earlier version, which is the version embraced by the East. But I’m open either way, especially since, as a Disciple, I am not bound by a creedal statement, even if, as I have shared, I can with many Disciples affirm the Creed as an appropriate summary of the faith, even if not definitive.

                The next phrase further defines the connection between the Holy Spirit and the rest of the Godhead. Whether the Spirit proceeds from just the Father or from the Father and Son, the Spirit, along “with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified.” If the Father and Son are worshipped, if the Spirit is a member of the Godhead, then the Spirit will receive worship and glory. As Basil of Caesarea writes of the glory of the Holy Spirit: “If wherever God is, the Spirit is present also, what nature shall we presume Him to have? An all-encompassing nature, or a nature confined to particular places, as we have described the nature of the angels? No one would say the latter. He is divine in nature, infinite in greatness, mighty in his works, good in His blessings; shall we not exalt Him; shall we not glorify Him?” What is said of the Spirit is also said of the Father and the Son [Basil of Caesarea, On the Holy Spirit, Ch. 23; pp. 85-86].  

                Finally, it is said of the Spirit that the Spirit “spoke by the prophets.” This statement affirms the role of the Spirit in inspiring the prophets as they brought a word to the people from God. In 1 Corinthians 12, Romans 12, and Ephesians 4, we hear of the gift of prophecy, a gifting of the Holy Spirit. The words of the prophets is said to be the word of the Lord, and this is inspired by God. In John 14, Jesus speaks of the coming of the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in Jesus’ name to teach his followers everything and remind them of what Jesus had taught (Jn. 14:26). In Acts 2, on the Day of Pentecost, Peter draws from Joel 2 to explain what was happening in their midst. The message Peter shared, from Joel, is that in the last days God will pour out the Spirit on all flesh. Therefore, the sons and daughters of the people will prophesy (Acts 2:17-18). Luke Timothy Johnson writes of this final statement regarding the Spirit, that “In some sense, everything else that is stated by the creed relies on the truthfulness of this affirmation, for if in the speech of humans—including what is said not just in words but also in actions and lives—God has not truly disclosed God’s ‘word’ or ‘will’ or ‘self,’ then the entire notion of divine revelation is empty, and everything we think we have learned from it is a delusion” [Johnson, Creed, p. 236]. Might I add here, if God is still speaking, then surely this requires the action of the Holy Spirit.  

                The doctrine of the Trinity developed in stages. We see references in Scripture that can be drawn upon to provide a foundation for such a view of God. The first stage in this development focused on the question of Jesus’ identity: is he divine or not? If divine, in what way? It is only after these conversations were held that attention was given to the Holy Spirit. The key figures in that development are the Cappadocian Fathers, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus. Throughout the years, the Holy Spirit has often been the forgotten member of the Trinity. That began to change in the early 20th century with the birth of Pentecostalism. As time has progressed, greater attention has been paid to the Spirit, especially when it comes to questions of the gifts of the Spirit. For more on that conversation, I would point readers to my book Unfettered Spirit: Spiritual Gifts for the New Great Awakening, 2^nd edition (Energion, 2021).