For if it is related that he who is called the prince of Tyre was among the saints, and was without stain, and was placed in the paradise of God, and adorned also with a crown of comeliness and beauty, is it to be supposed that such an one could be in any degree inferior to any of the saints? For he is described as having been adorned with a crown of comeliness and beauty, and as having walked stainless in the paradise of God: and how can any one suppose that such a being was not one of those holy and blessed powers which, as being placed in a state of happiness, we must believe to be endowed with no other honour than this? But let us see what we are taught by the words of the prophecy themselves. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 4

Ezekiel describes the prince of Tyre as beautiful, rich, and wise.

"By your wisdom and understanding you have gained wealth for yourself
and amassed gold and silver in your treasuries." (Ezekiel 28:4)

With such strength each of us might be tempted to think ourselves god-like.

So I give thanks for my failures, foibles, and foolishness.

It is awareness of weakness that has brought me intimacy with God.

Now we find in the prophet Ezekiel two prophecies written to the prince of Tyre, the former of which might appear to any one, before he heard the second also, to be spoken of some man who was prince of the Tyrians. In the meantime, therefore, we shall take nothing from that first prophecy; but as the second is manifestly of such a kind as cannot be at all understood of a man, but of some superior power which had fallen away from a higher position, and had been reduced to a lower and worse condition, we shall from it take an illustration, by which it may be demonstrated with the utmost clearness, that those opposing and malignant powers were not formed or created so by nature, but fell from a better to a worse position, and were converted into wicked beings; that those blessed powers also were not of such a nature as to be unable to admit what was opposed to them if they were so inclined and became negligent, and did not guard most carefully the blessedness of their condition. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 4)

The twenty-eighth chapter of Ezekiel includes two separate prophecies regarding the Prince of Tyre. The first begins:

“‘In the pride of your heart
you say, “I am a god;
I sit on the throne of a god
in the heart of the seas.”
But you are a mere mortal and not a god,
though you think you are as wise as a god.

The second continues:

“‘You were the seal of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
carnelian, chrysolite and emerald,
topaz, onyx and jasper,
lapis lazuli, turquoise and beryl.
Your settings and mountings[c] were made of gold;
on the day you were created they were prepared.
You were anointed as a guardian cherub,
for so I ordained you.
You were on the holy mount of God;
you walked among the fiery stones.
You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created
till wickedness was found in you.
Through your widespread trade
you were filled with violence,
and you sinned.
So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God,
and I expelled you, guardian cherub,
from among the fiery stones.
Your heart became proud
on account of your beauty,
and you corrupted your wisdom
because of your splendor.
So I threw you to the earth;
I made a spectacle of you before kings.

But that we may not appear to build our assertions on subjects of such importance and difficulty on the ground of inference alone, or to require the assent of our hearers to what is only conjectural, let us see whether we can obtain any declarations from holy Scripture, by the authority of which these positions may be more credibly maintained. And, firstly, we shall adduce what holy Scripture contains regarding wicked powers; we shall next continue our investigation with regard to the others, as the Lord shall be pleased to enlighten us, that in matters of such difficulty we may ascertain what is nearest to the truth, or what ought to be our opinions agreeably to the standard of religion. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 4)

Scripture offers the collected wisdom of 25 centuries and aspects of oral tradition at least twice as long.

It is a wisdom regarding the relationship of God with creation and between God and specific men and women.

Through history, story, and poetry scripture shows us how and why this relationship can be complicated or advanced.

The image is of St. Matthew and the Angel by Carvaggio.

In like manner also will it be the case with the powers and virtues, in none of which was wickedness subsequent or posterior to their first existence. Those also whom the apostle termed rulers and princes of the darkness of this world, are said, with respect to their rule and occupation of darkness, to fall not from perversity of intention, but from the necessity of their creation. Logical reasoning will compel us to take the same view with regard to wicked and malignant spirits and unclean demons. But if to entertain this view regarding malignant and opposing powers seem to be absurd, as it is certainly absurd that the cause of their wickedness should be removed from the purpose of their own will, and ascribed of necessity to their Creator, why should we not also be obliged to make a similar confession regarding the good and holy powers, that, viz., the good which is in them is not theirs by essential being, which we have manifestly shown to be the case with Christ and the Holy Spirit alone, as undoubtedly with the Father also? For it was proved that there was nothing compound in the nature of the Trinity, so that these qualities might seem to belong to it as accidental consequences. From which it follows, that in the case of every creature it is a result of his own works and movements, that those powers which appear either to hold sway over others or to exercise power or dominion, have been preferred to and placed over those whom they are said to govern or exercise power over, and not in consequence of a peculiar privilege inherent in their constitutions, but on account of merit. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 3)

Freedom is fundamental to creation.

Choice is our shared inheritance.

Goodness and wickedness are the consequence of how we choose.

In the habit and discipline of our choosing we ascend or descend a ladder of merit.

There is an orderliness to this, it is true?

Moreover, also, whether those which are called thrones or seats gained that stability of happiness at the same time with their coming forth into being, so as to have that possession from the will of the Creator alone; or whether those which are called dominions had their dominion conferred on them, not as a reward for their proficiency, but as the peculiar privilege of their creation, so that it is something which is in a certain degree inseparable from them, and natural. Now, if we adopt the view that the holy angels, and the holy powers, and the blessed seats, and the glorious virtues, and the magnificent dominions, are to be regarded as possessing those powers and dignities and glories in virtue of their nature, it will doubtless appear to follow that those beings which have been mentioned as holding offices of an opposite kind must be regarded in the same manner; so that those principalities with whom we have to struggle are to be viewed, not as having received that spirit of opposition and resistance to all good at a later period, or as falling away from good through the freedom of the will, but as having had it in themselves as the essence of their being from the beginning of their existence. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 3)

Born good or become good?

Born bad or become bad?

What is the nature of the moral universe?

With what are we contending? What is possible? What is impossible?

How have we arrived at our current circumstance and what does that suggest regarding the future?

In order, now, that our first inquiry may begin with the names themselves, let us consider whether the holy angels, from the period of their first existence, have always been holy, and are holy still, and will be holy, and have never either admitted or had the power to admit any occasion of sin. Then in the next place, let us consider whether those who are called holy principalities began from the moment of their creation by God to exercise power over some who were made subject to them, and whether these latter were created of such a nature, and formed for the very purpose of being subject and subordinate. In like manner, also, whether those which are called powers were created of such a nature and for the express purpose of exercising power, or whether their arriving at that power and dignity is a reward and desert of their virtue. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 3)

Angels, principalities, and powers are three species of creation.

In each of these what is the interplay of rationality and sinfulness?

Are any of these privileged with a different genus of rationality than humankind?

This is an effort to analyze the fantastic (Greek: phantastikós, meaning able to present or show to the mind).

Yet for Origen, Thomas Aquinas, and many others understanding angels was not to indulge in fantasy.

The image shows the assumption of the virgin by Francesco Botticini with three hierarchies and nine orders of angels.

After the enumeration, then, of so many and so important names of orders and offices, underlying which it is certain that there are personal existences, let us inquire whether God, the creator and founder of all things, created certain of them holy and happy, so that they could admit no element at all of an opposite kind, and certain others so that they were made capable both of virtue and vice; or whether we are to suppose that He created some so as to be altogether incapable of virtue, and others again altogether incapable of wickedness, but with the power of abiding only in a state of happiness, and others again such as to be capable of either condition. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 3)

What is the nature of the moral universe?

Can rationality ever be separated from choice?

Can the power to choose avoid the possibility of error?

Is rationality, fully developed, sufficient for virtue?

Is virtue a source of - or challenge to - happiness?

And certainly, in a place where we have been discussing the subject of rational natures, it is not proper to be silent regarding ourselves, who are human beings, and are called rational animals; nay, even this point is not to be idly passed over, that even of us human beings certain different orders are mentioned in the words, The portion of the Lord is His people Jacob; Israel is the cord of His inheritance. Other nations, moreover, are called a part of the angels; since when the Most High divided the nations, and dispersed the sons of Adam, He fixed the boundaries of the nations according to the number of the angels of God. And therefore, with other rational natures, we must also thoroughly examine the reason of the human soul. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 2)

Origen is almost certainly referring to Deuteronomy chapter 31, verses 8-9 near the start of the Song of Moses:

When the Most High apportioned the nations,

when he divided humankind,

he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the gods,

the Lord's own portion was his people,

Jacob his allotted share.

The word used at the close of verse 8 - meaning gods, angels, even sons of Israel - is not entirely clear in the original Hebrew.

But there was a clearly a sense that all peoples shared in God's design and blessing.

After the principalities, certain powers also are named with whom we have to wrestle, and carry on a struggle even against the princes of this world and the rulers of this darkness. Certain spiritual powers of wickedness also, in heavenly places, are spoken of by Paul himself. What, moreover, are we to say of those wicked and unclean spirits mentioned in the Gospel? Then we have certain heavenly beings called by a similar name, but which are said to bend the knee, or to be about to bend the knee, at the name of Jesus; nay, even things on earth and things under the earth, which Paul enumerates in order. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 2)

To be rational - alone - is often to choose badly.

The wicked of scripture are sufficiently rational to recognize Jesus and even to honor him, but they choose another way.

I recognize Jesus. I honor Jesus. I often choose another way. Am I wicked?

The New Testament Greek most often translated as wicked is poneros meaning to be full of labors, hard pressed, or troubled with intense desire. There is the suggestion of being so oppressed or obsessed as to be diseased.

There are at least nineteen Hebrew words translated as wicked. The most frequent use in the Old Testament is aven meaning to exert oneself in vain.

To be wicked is to expend time, energy, and effort on that which is unfruitful or not well-matched to reality. Yes, I am often wicked.

Now the titles of these beings have to be explained, that we may know what they are of whom we have to speak. The name, then, of Devil, and Satan, and Wicked One, who is also described as Enemy of God, is mentioned in many passages of Scripture. Moreover, certain angels of the devil are mentioned, and also a prince of this world, who, whether the devil himself or some one else, is not yet clearly manifest. There are also certain princes of this world spoken of as possessing a kind of wisdom which will come to nought; but whether these are those princes who are also the principalities with whom we have to wrestle, or other beings, seems to me a point on which it is not easy for any one to pronounce. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 1)

I have chosen to give scripture authority. The authority I grant it is as a source of ancient wisdom, poetic insight, and spiritual intelligence.

By engaging scripture as a source of these strengths, I try to step beyond my own limited experience and my intelligence.

Outside of scripture I do not give much attention to evil, my own or any external examples.

I see and hear dramatic examples of what must be called evil. I am inclined, however, to give more attention to the symptoms rather than the source of evil.

Origen is using scripture to try to help us better perceived the origin of evil.

The image is of hell by Hieronymus Bosch.

Then, in the next place, we must know that every being which is endowed with reason, and transgresses its statutes and limitations, is undoubtedly involved in sin by swerving from rectitude and justice. Every rational creature, therefore, is capable of earning praise and censure: of praise, if, in conformity to that reason which he possesses, he advance to better things; of censure, if he fall away from the plan and course of rectitude, for which reason he is justly liable to pains and penalties. And this also is to be held as applying to the devil himself, and those who are with him, and are called his angels. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 2)

To be rational is to choose: to be able to distinguish good from evil and the ability to do one or the other.

When we choose the good we progress. When we choose evil we regress.

Evil is any departure from rectitude and justice. I wonder if this is the same as righteousness and justice, tsedeq and mishpat?

Good is to advance unique potential of each and all.

Good is to recognize the profound possibilities in each person, including yourself, and to participate in society in a manner that honors these possibilities.

There are certain holy angels of God whom Paul terms ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation. In the writings also of St. Paul himself we find him designating them, from some unknown source, as thrones, and dominions, and principalities, and powers; and after this enumeration, as if knowing that there were still other rational offices and orders besides those which he had named, he says of the Saviour: Who is above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come. From which he shows that there were certain beings besides those which he had mentioned, which may be named indeed in this world, but were not now enumerated by him, and perhaps were not known by any other individual; and that there were others which may not be named in this world, but will be named in the world to come. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 1)

I have known mostly St. Michael and St. Raphael, archangels.

The first I have known on his mount rising from the sea just off Normandy and in a modest chapel in Santa Fe. The second I know mostly through the book of Tobit.

Michael, Michel, Miguel is strikingly handsome, strong, and sensual. His name aptly means "Who Is Like God". But he has added a question mark, implying that no one is like God.

Raphael - or "God Heals" - travels among us unrecognized, helping in modest, yet essential tasks. Where Michael intervenes directly despite my doubt or delay, Raphael patiently enables my intervention.

Each are aspects of my understanding of God.

After the dissertation, which we have briefly conducted to the best of our ability, regarding the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, it follows that we offer a few remarks upon the subject of rational natures, and on their species and orders, or on the offices as well of holy as of malignant powers, and also on those which occupy an intermediate position between these good and evil powers, and as yet are placed in a state of struggle and trial. For we find in holy Scripture numerous names of certain orders and offices, not only of holy beings, but also of those of an opposite description, which we shall bring before us, in the first place; and the meaning of which we shall endeavour, in the second place, to the best of our ability, to ascertain. (Book I, Chapter 5, Part 1)

Do I believe in angels or devils?

Poetically, they certainly are part of my reality. They have as much influence as, say, Abraham Lincoln or Adolf Hitler. They are at least as real as these historical figures.

More practically I have personally encountered the angelic and the satanic, fortunately more of the latter than the former. But each had taken human form.

I encounter each tendency in myself.

Do I believe in the heavenly host? Do I believe in satanic armies?

I will listen to Origen.

The image is St. Michael Vanquishing Satan by Raphael.

But in our desire to show the divine benefits bestowed upon us by Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which Trinity is the fountain of all holiness, we have fallen, in what we have said, into a digression, having considered that the subject of the soul, which accidentally came before us, should be touched on, although cursorily, seeing we were discussing a cognate topic relating to our rational nature. We shall, however, with the permission of God through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, more conveniently consider in the proper place the subject of all rational beings, which are distinguished into three genera and species. (Book I, Chapter 4, Part 2)

How are we in relationship with God?

Based on the evidence of nature and scripture of which I am aware, God invites a relationship characterized by essential freedom, great opportunities, innate limitations, profound joy, and compassion in sorrow.

If we accept the invitation, God walks with us. Through this relationship our experience of freedom and opportunity is expanded, we better understand our limitations, and God shares in our joy and sorrow.

If we do not accept the invitation God remains nearby, does not withdraw freedom, opportunity, or limitation, and leaves us whatever joy and sorrow comes our way.

The choice is ours. God has already taken the initiative. We are left to respond, yes or no.

Let us apply this now to the case of those who have devoted themselves to the knowledge and wisdom of God, whose learning and diligence incomparably surpass all other training; and let us contemplate, according to the form of the similitude employed, what is the acquisition of knowledge, or what is its disappearance, especially when we hear from the apostle what is said of those who are perfect, that they shall behold face to face the glory of the Lord in the revelation of His mysteries. (Book I, Chapter 4, Part 1)

The "Apostle" usually references Paul. My scriptural knowledge is is not sufficient to be sure of what epistle or verse to which Origen is pointing. But in the second letter to the Corinthians we read of Moses encountering God face-to-face and putting on a veil so that the Israelites could look upon his face. Paul explains, "When one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed." Suggesting what we encounter when face to face with Jesus.

In the fourth chapter of the second letter, Paul continues:

1 Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart. 2 Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,”[a] made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ.

7 But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us. 8 We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; 9 persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed. 10 We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. 11 For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that his life may also be revealed in our mortal body. 12 So then, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you.

13 It is written: “I believed; therefore I have spoken.”[b] Since we have that same spirit of[c] faith, we also believe and therefore speak, 14 because we know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead will also raise us with Jesus and present us with you to himself. 15 All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God.

16 Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. 17 For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. 18 So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

It is not our purpose to adduce or to notice here those accidents which are occasioned by any injury or weakness, for they do not apply to our present illustration. According to our point of view, then, so long as that geometer or physician continues to exercise himself in the study of his art and in the practice of its principles, the knowledge of his profession abides with him; but if he withdraw from its practice, and lay aside his habits of industry, then, by his neglect, at first a few things will gradually escape him, then by and by more and more, until in course of time everything will be forgotten, and be completely effaced from the memory. It is possible, indeed, that when he has first begun to fall away, and to yield to the corrupting influence of a negligence which is small as yet, he may, if he be aroused and return speedily to his senses, repair those losses which up to that time are only recent, and recover that knowledge which hitherto had been only slightly obliterated from his mind. (Book I, Chapter 4, Part 1)

Will a master geometer simply forget what he knows? He may not advance further, but the knowledge persists and can be retrieved.

A physical skill will atrophy from neglect or age, but knowledge tends -- unless subjected to accident -- to persist once it is truly mastered.

I am not be a spiritual master, but I cannot imagine how I would lose the spiritual knowledge I now have, or even how I might push it entirely out of mind.

With closer attention and self-sacrifice I could know much more and advance more quickly... and in advancing I might put aside old knowledge for new.

And in any case, the new knowledge would come less from my "habits of industry" and much more from the grace of God.

To exhibit the nature of defection or falling away, on the part of those who conduct themselves carelessly, it will not appear out of place to employ a similitude by way of illustration. Suppose, then, the case of one who had become gradually acquainted with the art or science, say of geometry or medicine, until he had reached perfection, having trained himself for a lengthened time in its principles and practice, so as to attain a complete mastery over the art: to such an one it could never happen, that, when he lay down to sleep in the possession of his skill, he should awake in a state of ignorance. (Book I, Chapter 4, Part 1)

I expect the analogy will be given a spiritual application.

One might awaken ill, still terribly tired, or deeply depressed. In any of these conditions the skill might persist but be applied haphazardly.

No matter how great our mastery, if we have a stroke we may awaken stripped of our prior skills.

But besides all this, I am uncomfortable with the implication that the spiritual person "trained himself."

There is a place for self-discipline. But much more fruitful is opening to God's love, surrendering to God's purpose, and adapting to God's unfolding reality.

For, in this way, he who is such as his Creator wished him to be, will receive from God power always to exist, and to abide for ever. That this may be the case, and that those whom He has created may be unceasingly and inseparably present with Him, Who IS, it is the business of wisdom to instruct and train them, and to bring them to perfection by confirmation of His Holy Spirit and unceasing sanctification, by which alone are they capable of receiving God. In this way, then, by the renewal of the ceaseless working of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in us, in its various stages of progress, shall we be able at some future time perhaps, although with difficulty, to behold the holy and the blessed life, in which (as it is only after many struggles that we are able to reach it) we ought so to continue, that no satiety of that blessedness should ever seize us; but the more we perceive its blessedness, the more should be increased and intensified within us the longing for the same, while we ever more eagerly and freely receive and hold fast the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. (Book I, Chapter 2, Part 8)

I do not believe we are brought to perfection, certainly not through any wisdom that can be taught.

We are, I hope, forgiven and cleansed by the love and grace of God.

Origen is being entirely reasonable. But he is applying reason to what is beyond reason.

And this I consider is Paul's meaning, when he says that to some is given the word of wisdom, to others the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit. And while pointing out the individual distinction of gifts, he refers the whole of them to the source of all things, in the words, There are diversities of operations, but one God who works all in all. Whence also the working of the Father, which confers existence upon all things, is found to be more glorious and magnificent, while each one, by participation in Christ, as being wisdom, and knowledge, and sanctification, makes progress, and advances to higher degrees of perfection; and seeing it is by partaking of the Holy Spirit that any one is made purer and holier, he obtains, when he is made worthy, the grace of wisdom and knowledge, in order that, after all stains of pollution and ignorance are cleansed and taken away, he may make so great an advance in holiness and purity, that the nature which he received from God may become such as is worthy of Him who gave it to be pure and perfect, so that the being which exists may be as worthy as He who called it into existence. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 8)

"So that the being which exist may be as worth as He who called it into existence."

How have we made being into a noun? Into an it?

To be is surely an action, a "state of being", a verb.

It is as verb, not as noun, that we are in relationship with God.

It is verb - the great I AM -- not as noun, that God is in relationship with us.

Having made these declarations regarding the Unity of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, let us return to the order in which we began the discussion. God the Father bestows upon all, existence; and participation in Christ, in respect of His being the word of reason, renders them rational beings. From which it follows that they are deserving either of praise or blame, because capable of virtue and vice. On this account, therefore, is the grace of the Holy Ghost present, that those beings which are not holy in their essence may be rendered holy by participating in it. Seeing, then, that firstly, they derive their existence from God the Father; secondly, their rational nature from the Word; thirdly, their holiness from the Holy Spirit—those who have been previously sanctified by the Holy Spirit are again made capable of receiving Christ, in respect that He is the righteousness of God; and those who have earned advancement to this grade by the sanctification of the Holy Spirit, will nevertheless obtain the gift of wisdom according to the power and working of the Spirit of God. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 8)

This is potentially helpful. It is a concise, precise summary of how Origen views three aspects of God working together, just as my eye, brain and hand also works together.

Is it equally helpful to offer the following? By participating in the wisdom of God, we can more fully experience the teachings and example of the Son, and become ambassadors of the Holy Spirit.

If supported with scriptural evidence and reasonable argument this might be as helpful. It would not, however , be anything close to the same. Origen is interweaving a purposeful neo-Platonism into his argument.

Is this neo-Platonic framework helpful? Sometimes, yes. Often, no. There is in the framing a tendency toward abstraction that, it seems to me, distracts from rather than amplifies the meaning of Jesus.

The Trinity is interesting. Loving our neighbor is closer to holy.

There is also a special working of God the Father, besides that by which He bestowed upon all things the gift of natural life. There is also a special ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ to those upon whom he confers by nature the gift of reason, by means of which they are enabled to be rightly what they are. There is also another grace of the Holy Spirit, which is bestowed upon the deserving, through the ministry of Christ and the working of the Father, in proportion to the merits of those who are rendered capable of receiving it. This is most clearly pointed out by the Apostle Paul, when demonstrating that the power of the Trinity is one and the same, in the words, There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit; there are diversities of administrations, but the same Lord; and there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God who works all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. From which it most clearly follows that there is no difference in the Trinity, but that which is called the gift of the Spirit is made known through the Son, and operated by God the Father. But all these works that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every one severally as He will. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 7)

The Trinity is, at least for me, a potentially helpful framework by which to more carefully consider the diversity of God's characteristics.

When treated poetically and creatively the Trinity can enliven our understanding and deepen our faith.

But if treated mechanistically or prescriptively the Trinity deadens and darkens our perception of the divine.

God is our God, there is no other.

Let no one indeed suppose that we, from having said that the Holy Spirit is conferred upon the saints alone, but that the benefits or operations of the Father and of the Son extend to good and bad, to just and unjust, by so doing give a preference to the Holy Spirit over the Father and the Son, or assert that His dignity is greater, which certainly would be a very illogical conclusion. For it is the peculiarity of His grace and operations that we have been describing. Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification, as it is written in the Psalm: By the word of the Lord were the heavens strengthened, and all their power by the Spirit of His mouth. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 7)

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are hypostases - or aspects, or characteristics, or expressions - of one ousia - or whole or being.

There is no substantive difference between an action of the Holy Spirit and that of the Father or Son. Just as when my hand or foot or eye moves it is accurate to say I have moved.

It is ousia that we worship. The hypostases are attributes we have identified to help us better understand (hypostases is literally "beneath-standing"). But it is the Being - the ultimate and eternal "I am" - that is God.

And therefore it is said, No man can say that Jesus is Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. And on one occasion, scarcely even the apostles themselves are deemed worthy to hear the words, You shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you. For this reason, also, I think it follows that he who has committed a sin against the Son of man is deserving of forgiveness; because if he who is a participator of the word or reason of God cease to live agreeably to reason, he seems to have fallen into a state of ignorance or folly, and therefore to deserve forgiveness; whereas he who has been deemed worthy to have a portion of the Holy Spirit, and who has relapsed, is, by this very act and work, said to be guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 7)

The Greek blasphemos originally meant to speak evil, slander, or do harm through speaking. It came to be understood as saying or doing what is harmful to God.

In the third chapter of Mark, Jesus is quoted as saying, "Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin." (New International Version)

The key to understanding the meaning of Jesus may be in his use of "guilty." The Greek is enochos meaning to be bound, under obligation, or subject to; in the original Greek it was most often used my someone held by, possessed with love and zeal for anything.

So we might hear Jesus saying, "Whoever speaks falsely regarding the holy spirit cannot be unbound, but through this eternal error is kept in bondage."

But the implication, at least for me, is bondage to the holy spirit.

Lastly, for this reason was the grace and revelation of the Holy Spirit bestowed by the imposition of the apostles' hands after baptism. Our Saviour also, after the resurrection, when old things had already passed away, and all things had become new, Himself a new man, and the first-born from the dead, His apostles also being renewed by faith in His resurrection, says, Receive the Holy Spirit. This is doubtless what the Lord the Saviour meant to convey in the Gospel, when He said that new wine cannot be put into old bottles, but commanded that the bottles should be made new, i.e., that men should walk in newness of life, that they might receive the new wine, i.e., the newness of grace of the Holy Spirit. In this manner, then, is the working of the power of God the Father and of the Son extended without distinction to every creature; but a share in the Holy Spirit we find possessed only by the saints. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 7)

Does renewal welcome grace or does grace welcome renewal?

In my own experience the Holy Spirit - the opportunity for grace - is always at hand, but I often keep it at arms length.

When I no longer keep my distance - whether the cause be fatigue, despair, or invitation - the Holy Spirit is with me and I am renewed.

Which comes first, the wine or the wineskin?

In those days the juice was fermented in the wineskin. To ask which comes first obscures that it is the encounter of each that results in transformation.

But if this is to be understood as spoken of the Spirit of God, since Adam also is found to have prophesied of some things, it may be taken not as of general application, but as confined to those who are saints. Finally,also, at the time of the flood, when all flesh had corrupted their way before God, it is recorded that God spoke thus, as of undeserving men and sinners: My Spirit shall not abide with those men for ever, because they are flesh. By which, it is clearly shown that the Spirit of God is taken away from all who are unworthy. In the Psalms also it is written: You will take away their spirit, and they will die, and return to their earth. You will send forth Your Spirit, and they shall be created, and You will renew the face of the earth; which is manifestly intended of the Holy Spirit, who, after sinners and unworthy persons have been taken away and destroyed, creates for Himself a new people, and renews the face of the earth, when, laying aside, through the grace of the Spirit, the old man with his deeds, they begin to walk in newness of life. And therefore the expression is competently applied to the Holy Spirit, because He will take up His dwelling, not in all men, nor in those who are flesh, but in those whose land has been renewed. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 7)

I turn to scripture for understanding. I accept scripture as revelation. I use scripture as a source of profound truth.

It is my experience and understanding that scripture is best engaged creatively rather than analytically, as poetry rather than algorithm, to open up rather than to close down.

I naturally seek definition. But in dealing with the fullness of God's reality definition is a false comfort. It is not possible to define the infinite.

And this is the meaning of the expression, that men have no excuse for their sin, viz., that, from the time the divine word or reason has begun to show them internally the difference between good and evil, they ought to avoid and guard against that which is wicked: For to him who knows to do good, and does it not, to him it is sin. Moreover, that all men are not without communion with God, is taught in the Gospel thus, by the Saviour's words: The kingdom of God comes not with observation; neither shall they say, Lo here! Or, lo there! But the kingdom of God is within you. But here we must see whether this does not bear the same meaning with the expression in Genesis: And He breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul. For if this be understood as applying generally to all men, then all men have a share in God. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 6)

Yet my reason is often insufficient to discern the wholeness of my reality.

Not recognizing the whole I make choices that unleash a wide range of unintended consequences.

Especially in seeking to do good, I have caused evil.

In some cases - perhaps most - I have failed to use the fullness of reason available to me.

God-given reason has been corrupted by pride, impatience, and sloth.

But there is also an abundance of possibilities that exceed the grasp of my reason.

I am left depending much more on grace than reason.

That declaration also in the Gospel, If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin, renders it manifest and patent to all who have a rational knowledge of how long a time man is without sin, and from what period he is liable to it, how, by participating in the word or reason, men are said to have sinned, viz., from the time they are made capable of understanding and knowledge, when the reason implanted within has suggested to them the difference between good and evil; and after they have already begun to know what evil is, they are made liable to sin, if they commit it. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 6)

Innate to reason is the ability to distinguish between good and evil.

To distinguish between these is also to be able to choose between them.

When we can discern good from evil and fail to choose the good, we have rejected our own fundamental nature and distanced ourself from God.

The image is the Tree of Knowledge

That the working of the Father and the Son operates both in saints and in sinners, is manifest from this, that all who are rational beings are partakers of the word, i.e., of reason, and by this means bear certain seeds, implanted within them, of wisdom and justice, which is Christ. Now, in Him who truly exists, and who said by Moses, I Am Who I Am, all things, whatever they are, participate; which participation in God the Father is shared both by just men and sinners, by rational and irrational beings, and by all things universally which exist. The Apostle Paul also shows truly that all have a share in Christ, when he says, Say not in your heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (i.e., to bring Christ down from above;) or who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what says the Scripture? The word is near you, even in your mouth, and in your heart. By which he means that Christ is in the heart of all, in respect of His being the word or reason, by participating in which they are rational beings. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 6)

Jesus, the Christ, the Son is with each of us, this moment, and accessible to us in our cultivation of reason wisdom, and justice.

The Creator, Ultimate Reality, our Father is with each of us now and forever.

In those ways that we engage in wisdom, reason, and justice - and I will add love - so we participate with the Father and Son.