Expositio super symbolum Apostolorum

I believe in the Holy Spirit.

It seems superfluous, given what we said above, that the seven seals, that is, the seven conditions pertaining to Christ's human nature, are contained in this Creed. For no mention is made of the sending of the Holy Spirit. Hence some say that one of these was called the descent into hell. They also ask whether believing in the Father is one article, believing in the Son another, and believing in the Holy Spirit another. For according to the aforesaid rule they ought to pertain to one article, because they cohere with one another in such a way that one is understood in the other.

To this we say that they are distinct articles because we are moved to believe in the Father by one motion, in the Son by another; by one act of understanding I comprehend the Father to be the Father, by another the Son to be the Son, because just as there are diverse meanings of these names and diverse notions from which they are given, so there are diverse acts of understanding and diverse movements of faith for comprehending them, because, as Hilary says, just as words are successive in the one uttering them, so the movements of understanding are successive in the one understanding.

To this is reduced what is contained in the Nicene Creed, where it is said, "And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord."

Holy

is said against the demon, in whom the church of the malicious rather believes than in the Holy Spirit. And it is said so that the same power of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son might be noted. This is said against the heretics who said that the Father is supreme power, the Son the least, and the Holy Spirit none at all. It follows:

And the giver of life.

For he himself is the gift of the Father and the Son, in whom grace is given to the just, in this present life the grace of life, in the future the life of glory.

Who proceeds from the Father and the Son.

For by one spiration they breathe forth the Holy Spirit, and he proceeds equally from the Son as from the Father. This is said against those heretics who denied that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. This, however, can be proved by many testimonies. The Greeks, however, say that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father. They say this because Truth itself in the Gospel says, "The Spirit who proceeds from the Father,"¹ and does not add "and from the Son." And because in the first composition of the Creed only the Father is commemorated, and not the Son, in these words, "And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father, who together with the Father and the Son is to be co-adored and co-glorified," at the end of which Creed it is added, "Whoever shall teach or preach otherwise, let him be excommunicated." Therefore they call us anathematized because we say the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, which is not contained there.

We, however, determining this matter, say that Truth does not deny that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, but says he proceeds from the Father in order to suggest that the authority of proceeding rests with the Father, because the fact that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, he has this from the Father. When it is said, "whoever shall teach otherwise," "otherwise" is taken as meaning something opposed, not merely something different, as if it were said: whoever shall teach the opposite.

But when "and the Son" is said, this states not something opposed or contrary, but something added for the sake of explanation. Thus the Greeks appear opposed to the religion of the Christian faith. We can, however, call them different, not opposed. For they say that "the Holy Spirit is the spirit of the Son" is something different from "proceeds from the Son." For although they differ from us in wording, they do not differ in meaning. It follows:

Who together with the Father and the Son is at once adored and glorified,

that is, he is consubstantial with the Father and the Son.

Who spoke through the prophets.

This is said against the heretic Montanus, who said that the prophets spoke with a phantom spirit, in the manner of the possessed, whereas it was actually the Holy Spirit who spoke through them. For sometimes he spoke through someone and not in that person, as through Balaam and Caiaphas, because the Holy Spirit was in neither of them. Caiaphas and Balaam spoke from the Holy Spirit but not in the Holy Spirit. Sometimes he speaks in someone and not through someone, as when he speaks in some holy person by internal inspiration, yet this is not outwardly uttered in words. Hence David says, "I will hear what he shall speak."²