Thus, we must know that the Holy Spirit is the Comforter, teaching more than can be expressed in words, which is ineffable, so to speak, and which "cannot be told to man" (2 Corinthians 12:4), i.e., which cannot be expressed by human speech. It is said: "It is not allowed" (not allowed), and not "it is not allowed" – as we think – in the sense in which it is said in another place: "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable; all things are lawful for me, but not all things edify" (1 Corinthians 10:23), i.e., he says, what is lawful for us is what we have a right to, as a result of which we can have it. The Holy Spirit is called the Comforter (Paraclete) because of consolation, because the Paraclete means the Comforter. For whoever has been vouchsafed to participate in the Holy Spirit, having come to know the ineffable mysteries, undoubtedly receives consolation and joy of the heart. When, at the direction of the Holy Spirit, he comes to know the basis of everything that is being done – precisely why and how it is done – then, of course, his soul will no longer be troubled by anything and will not accept any feeling of sorrow; and then he is no longer afraid of anything, since, abiding in the Word and Wisdom of God, he calls Jesus Lord in the Holy Spirit. We have mentioned the Comforter and, to the best of our ability, explained how this name should be understood. But our Saviour is also called the Comforter (Paraclete) in the Epistle of John: "And if any man sinned, we have an Advocate (ragasletum) before the Father of Jesus Christ, the Righteous One: He is the propitiation for our sins" (1 John 2:1). Let us consider whether the name of the Paraclete is not connected with the name of the Paraclete in the application to the Saviour and in the application to the Holy Spirit. In relation to the Saviour, the Paraclete seems to mean an intercessor, since in Greek the Paraclete means both: both intercessor and comforter. Indeed, the following saying, "He is the propitiation for our sins," seems to give reason to understand the name of the Paraclete, in relation to the Saviour, in the sense of intercessor, for He, it is said, beseeches the Father for our sins. In relation to the Holy Spirit, the name of the Paraclete must be understood in the sense that He gives consolation to souls to whom He reveals the understanding of spiritual knowledge.

Chapter Eight

About the soul

After that, according to the requirements of the plan, we must investigate the doctrine of the soul in general, and, beginning with the lower ones, ascend to the higher beings. For no one, I think, doubts that there is a soul in every animal, even in those animals that dwell in the waters. And this conviction is indeed supported by the general opinion of all men; it is also confirmed by the authority of the Holy Scriptures, since it is said here that "God created great fishes, and every living creature of creeping things, which the waters brought forth, after their kind" (Gen. 1:21). On the basis of the general consciousness of reason, this conviction is affirmed by those who give a precise definition of the soul. According to their definition, the soul is a substance (of fantasy) and (ormetic), and this in Latin, although not quite accurately, can be expressed in the words: sensibilis and mobillis, i.e., sentient and mobile. But this concept of the soul can be applied, of course, to all animals, even to those living in water; it is also applicable to flying animals. Scripture reinforces the authority of another opinion when it says: "You shall not eat the blood of any body, for the life of every body is its blood," and you shall not eat the soul with its bodies (Lev. 17:13-14); here it is quite clearly shown that the blood of all animals is their soul. But it may be asked, How can the words that the life of all flesh is its blood be applied to bees, wasps, ants, as well as to oysters, snails, and other animals that dwell in water, which are devoid of blood, but yet, according to the clearest instruction of the Scriptures, animate? To this it must be answered, that in animals of this kind, the fluid in them, though of a different colour, has the same importance as that of red blood in other animals; For the colour (of the blood) does not matter, as long as the substance (of it) is vital. As for beasts of burden and cattle, there is no doubt about their animacy even in general opinion. The thought of the Holy Scriptures (about them) is also clear, because God says: "Let the earth bring forth a living creature after its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kind" (Gen. 1:24). Further, there can be no doubt about the animate nature of man; no one can even ask about it. But, nevertheless, the Holy Scriptures note that "God breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul" (Gen. 2:7). It remains to be examined of the angelic order and of the other divine and heavenly powers, as well as of the opposing powers: do these beings also have souls, or are they souls? Up to now we have found no authoritative indication in the Holy Scriptures that angels or any other ministering spirits of God have souls or are called souls; However, many people consider them animate. About God we find the following words: "I will set My face on the soul of him who eats blood, and I will cut it off from among his people" (Lev. 17:10), and in another place: "I can no longer endure the new moons and Sabbaths, the feast meetings; my soul hates your new moons and your feasts" (Isaiah 1:13-14). And in the twenty-first Psalm (it is known that this psalm, as the Gospel testifies, was written in the person of Christ Himself) it is said about Christ as follows: "But Thou, O Lord, depart not from me; My strength! hasten to help me; Deliver my soul from the sword, and my lonely one from dogs" (Psalm 21:20-21). There are many other testimonies about the soul of Christ in the flesh.

However, every question about the soul of Christ is eliminated by the doctrine of the Incarnation: for just as Christ truly had flesh, so truly did He also have a soul. It is difficult to understand and clarify only how the soul of God mentioned in the Scriptures is to be understood: for we confess God to be a simple being, without any admixture of any complexity; and yet the soul of God seems to be mentioned, in whatever sense we may understand it. There is no doubt about Christ. And therefore it does not seem to me absurd to say and think something similar about the holy angels and other heavenly powers, since this definition of the soul seems to be quite suitable for them as well. Indeed, who will deny that they are rationally sentient and mobile beings? If this definition of the soul as a substance rationally sensible and mobile is correct, then it seems to apply also to the angels: for what else is in them but rational feeling and motion? And that which is equally defined undoubtedly has one and the same substance. Paul points out that there is a natural man who, according to him, cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:14); to such a person, he says, the teaching of the Holy Spirit seems foolish, he cannot comprehend that which constitutes the object of spiritual discrimination. And in another place (the Apostle) says: "A natural body is sown, a spiritual body arises" (1 Cor. 15:44), showing that in the resurrection of the righteous there will be nothing natural. Therefore we ask, is there not a substance which is imperfect precisely because it is the soul? When we begin to discuss each individual object in order, we will also ask whether this substance is imperfect because it has fallen away from perfection, or whether it was created by God in this way. For if the natural man does not perceive the things of the Spirit of God, and in so far as he is a natural man, cannot even perceive the understanding of the better nature, that is, the divine nature, then perhaps for this reason Paul unites, unites with the Holy Spirit, more the mind than the soul, desiring to teach us in the most obvious way what it is like. than we can comprehend "which is of the Spirit," i.e., spiritual. I think that it is precisely this (the organ of spiritual comprehension) that the Apostle shows when he says: "I will pray in the spirit, I will also pray in the mind; I will sing with the Spirit, I will sing with the Mind" (ibid., 14.15). He does not say: "I will pray with my soul"; but – "with spirit and mind", and does not say: "I will sing with my soul", but – "I will sing with spirit and mind".

But perhaps it will be asked: if it is the mind that prays and sings in the spirit, then does not this very mind receive perfection and salvation, as Peter says: "Attaining at last by your faith the salvation of souls" (1 Peter 1:9). If the soul does not pray and sing with the spirit, then how will it hope for salvation? Or perhaps, having attained bliss, it will no longer be called a soul? But let us see if it will not be possible to answer this question in this way: As the Saviour came to save the lost, and that which was formerly called lost is no longer lost, as soon as it is saved: so perhaps that which is saved is called the soul, but when the soul is saved, it will be called (already) by the name of its most perfect part. It seems to some that it is possible to add the following (explanation).

(From a letter of Jerome to Avitus: "Therefore with infinite caution we must consider whether souls will not cease to be souls when they inherit salvation and attain a blessed life? Since the Lord and Saviour came to seek and save the lost, so that it would cease to be lost, so the soul that perished and for whose salvation the Lord came, having received salvation, may cease to be a soul. The following thought should be discussed in the same way. Just as the lost was not once lost, and there will be a time when it will not be lost: so, perhaps, the soul was not once a soul, and will not the time ever come when it will no longer be a soul?!"

From the letter of Justinian to Menas: "As the Saviour came to save that which was lost, and this lost thing, being saved, is no longer lost: so the soul which He came to save, as something lost, being saved, no longer remains a soul or (something) lost. The following should also be considered. Just as the lost was not once lost and will never be lost, so perhaps the soul was once (yet) not a soul, and there will be a time when it will not be (already) a soul").