De spiritu blasphemiae
by Richard of Saint Victor
Source text: Public Domain. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://migne.app/pl/196/de-spiritu-blasphemiae/
----------------------------------------

## On the Spirit of Blasphemy

[1185D]What is read in the Gospel concerning the spirit of blasphemy is obscure, as you say, and exceedingly perplexing. Yet you seek and await to hear from me what I think about it. But it is a perilous presumption to presume upon one's own talent in a matter that the most illustrious talents have left, [1186D] not untouched, but undefined. It belongs assuredly to the Lord alone to reveal things of this kind when, and to whom, he will. But to confess the truth, it seems to me very hard to fail your request altogether. Concerning this wrapping, then, if anything appears, let us speak by inquiring, not by defining. [1187A]There are those who confess that they do not know what the spirit of blasphemy is. Yet they boldly affirm that this kind of fault is altogether inexpiable, so much so that whoever has once fallen into it can thereafter in no way be saved. But there are also others, men of the highest authority, who believe no sin to be inexpiable save that which impenitence makes irremediable. Hence comes that estimation of those who think that, through impenitence, sin is committed against the Holy Spirit, because therein there is action specifically against him through whom is all remission of sins. There are those who think that this is the sin against the Holy Spirit: to despair of God's mercy on account of the enormity of one's crimes. But whoever is such — if he return again to the truth and truly repent — who would gainsay that pardon lies open to him? [1187B]Attend, therefore, that for men in despair impenitence alone shuts the way of salvation. And there are those who think that to have an obstinate mind is the sin against the Holy Spirit. According to them, obstinacy is the same as the utmost hardening of mind — one so hardened that he can thereafter not repent. But what takes from them the place of pardon in itself, except the pertinacity of impenitence? What, then, we have said of the despairing, let us say also of the obstinate: that impenitence shuts to them the way of salvation. But others too, who call the sin against the Spirit an irremediable evil, affirm that it comes about for this reason: that they are straightway so hardened that thereafter they cannot repent. But according to this they lack all remedy for the very reason that they cannot repent. Attend, therefore, that in this one point [1187C]the opinion of all these concurs: that impenitence alone makes sins insoluble.

It is to be noted, however, that though they say the impenitent sin against the Holy Spirit, yet they do not say that all the impenitent have the spirit of blasphemy. But according to that which in the holy Scriptures is specifically attributed — power to the Father, wisdom to the Son, but goodness to the Holy Spirit — according to this, I say, they say that to sin through weakness is to sin against the Father; but to sin through ignorance is to sin against the Son; while to sin through malice alone is to sin against the Holy Spirit. And those who sin through weakness or ignorance, as they have something of excuse in the fault, so they receive something [1187D]of remission in the penalty. But those who, sinning through malice alone, offend against the Holy Spirit, receive nothing of such remission, and it is not remitted to them in this world, nor in the world to come. For if they repent, full satisfaction is owed them; if they repent not, full damnation. But although those who sin through malice are said to sin against the Holy Spirit, yet not all such can be said — any more than all the impenitent — to have the spirit of blasphemy. From the Lord's words indeed we can weigh that this kind of fault is, above all others, detestable. Let us therefore inquire more diligently what that kind of sin is which is above all others the more detestable. Certain sins of men pertain specifically to one's own corruption, such as drunkenness and debaucheries; certain ones specifically to [1188A]injury of one's neighbor, such as murders and thefts; certain ones specifically to insult against God, such as blasphemy. But who does not know that insult against the Creator is more detestable than the rest?

But if someone blaspheme compelled by torments, or deceived through ignorance, who would deny that it is more tolerable than if he blaspheme led by malice alone? By malignity, then, blasphemy is worst of all. But there is in this kind a most wicked thing, in which malice grows to its height: when one delights in reproaches of God, and glories in them. What is blasphemy but the reviling of God? Now to this each one aspires which his vigor strives after, and greatly desires. What else, then, does the spirit of blasphemy seem to be than the affectation and desire of reviling God? [1188B]Someone wonders, and perhaps does not believe, that human corruptibility can yet ascend — nay, descend — to such a point of malice. But let him whom a thought of this kind assails hear what the Lord says of men of this kind: *But now they have hated both me and my Father [n: (Joan. XV)]*. Assuredly, what each one hates, this he disapproves, this he reviles, this he desires to be held in hatred and reviled by others also. Hence it is that those who were of this kind said of Christ that he had an unclean spirit [n: (Matth. III)]. Assuredly they did not say these things because they believed them to be true. For they continually saw done by him things that no one could do unless God were with him. Yet they said it for this reason: because against him whom they held in hatred they wished to stir up the hatreds and revilings of others. Attend, therefore, how contrary [1188C]these spirits are, the spirit of blasphemy and the Spirit of God. The spirit of blasphemy aspires to the hatred of God; the Holy Spirit inspires the love of God. For *the charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who has been given to us [n: (Rom. V)]*. You see, then, how the spirit of blasphemy is opposed to the Holy Spirit, and ever strives to the contrary. Of this spirit the Lord says that *it shall not be forgiven to men [n: (Matth. XII)]*. To the same effect looks that which he says elsewhere: *He who shall have blasphemed against the Holy Spirit has no forgiveness for ever, but shall be guilty of an everlasting sin [n: (Marc. III)]*. From these words of the Lord, as I believe, they draw the argument of their assertion who say the spirit of blasphemy to be altogether an irremediable evil. I believe that Augustine [1188D]read these things, yet understood them far otherwise than these do. As to what the Lord says through the Prophet: *I will turn them into the depth of the sea [n: (Psal. LXVII)]*, Augustine understands it of men in utter despair. But elsewhere he says that the Lord makes the obstinate into teachers in that he *sends his crystal like morsels [n: (Psal. CXLVII)]*. In the book of the Retractations he accuses, or rather excuses, himself, that in a certain place he had written less cautiously concerning the sin against the Holy Spirit — which nevertheless he had said by way of supposing rather than of affirming. There he openly says that of no one, however wicked, established in this life, is one to despair; nay rather, one is to pray for him, since not shamelessly is one prayed for of whom one does not despair. For what is it to say that there is a kind of sin for which a man may [not] obtain pardon? [1189A]what, I say, else is this to say than to teach a man of this kind to despair, and with Cain to say: *My iniquity is greater than that I should deserve pardon? [n: (Gen. III)]*. Who would dare to say that the measure of human malice exceeds the measure of divine mercy? The Psalmist says of the Lord: *That with him is plentiful redemption [n: (Psal. CXXIX)]*. But how, I ask, will it be plentiful, if there is a kind of sin that he never looses in anyone? Behold, according to certain men, the end of our misery is found from which no one is turned to the Lord — against that sentence in which it is said: *All the ends of the earth shall remember and be turned to the Lord [n: (Psal. XXI)]*. Would it not be better humbly to confess that one understands those words of the Lord but little, than by one's own exposition to drag some to despair? Is it not better to proceed to the [1189B]opinion of that great theologian of our time — I mean master Hugh — than to cut off from some the bridge of mercy, and cast them into the depth of despair? Above we have briefly touched upon it; now, according to its tenor, let us proceed to the consideration of the things to be explained.



## On the Spirit of Blasphemy (cont.)

According to the evangelist Matthew you hear the Lord saying: *Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men, but the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven; and whoever shall have said a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but he who shall have said it against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come [n: (Matth. XXI)]*. First he sets down the general sentence, then he excepts the things to be excepted. He sets down the things remissible, [1189C]he excepts the things irremissible. The blasphemy, he says, of the Spirit is not forgiven, because this evil, having in itself nothing of excuse, deserves to receive nothing of excusatory remission. What he said of this evil, the same he adds concerning any word uttered against the Holy Spirit: Whoever, he says, shall have said a word against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. What here are they to say who consign every man that blasphemes even once against the Spirit to eternal damnation! Are they to say that everyone who shall have said any word whatever against the Holy Spirit shall perish for ever? But if they shrink from saying this, let them expound to us how one ought to understand what is said of a word uttered against the Holy Spirit, that it shall not be forgiven in [1189D]this world, or in the world to come. For if they are to say that this evil is expiable, yet in some respect irremissible, let them see whether the same may be said of the spirit of blasphemy. For it is one thing for a sin to be inexpiable, and another, in the sense here taken, to be irremissible. The sin of the devil is inexpiable, which can be purged by no remedy; but that sin of man may not incongruously be called irremissible for which there is no relaxation of the penalty such as comes to pass in sins that are actually similar. Behold, one and the same blasphemy one man commits from compulsion, another from some deception, a third from malignity alone. Behold, in the three the fault, as to the action, is in every way alike. In two of them, nevertheless, it receives something of remission, because it has something of excuse. In the third [1190A]it receives no such remission, because it will have no excuse. The first of these sins against the Father, the second against the Son, the third (he to whom it is not forgiven) sins against the Holy Spirit; this is what the Lord says according to the evangelist Mark: *He who shall have blasphemed,* he says, *against the Holy Spirit has no forgiveness for ever [n: (Marc. III)]*. That remission is said to be given or not given according to the mutual regard of those receiving or not receiving it, ought to be understood of the same deed. For, concerning the most strict expiation, something is remitted for the same blasphemy to those who blaspheme against the Father and the Son, but nothing to those who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit. Well, then, is it said of him who shall have blasphemed against the Holy Spirit that he has no forgiveness for ever. For if he repent, nothing [1190B]is remitted to him of the fullness of the most strict expiation; if he repent not, nothing is remitted to him of the fullness of the most strict damnation. That this rightly comes to pass is consequently added, when he says: But he shall be guilty of an everlasting sin. What he says is as much as if he had said more openly: Therefore he has no forgiveness, nor even ought to have it, because he is not guilty of the kind of offense to which something ought to be remitted. But he is guilty of the worst offense of all, since he is guilty of an everlasting sin, and such that no determinate relaxation of remission ought to be made for him, as we have taught above — that is, to blaspheme against the Holy Spirit, to utter a word of blasphemy from malignity alone. But such blasphemy can never be an offense without a detestable and execrable hatred of God; and beyond doubt the hatred of God is an everlasting offense. [1190C]An everlasting offense is called that which never falls away, which is bound to be for ever. Assuredly, as the love of God never falls away, so the hatred of God never falls away: *Charity,* says the Apostle, *never falls away [n: (I Cor. XXIII)]*. What was said by the Apostle of the love of God can be said also of the hatred of God. And, as the love of God can rightly be called an everlasting merit, so the hatred of God is rightly called an everlasting offense. What is said of charity, that it never falls away, is not to be understood as though, once had, it cannot be lost, but that, contrary to the property of faith and hope, it does not cease to be for ever. So there are certain evils that have place only in this life, such as adulteries and thefts, and certain ones both in this life at once [1190D]and in the world to come. For he who departs from this life with hatred of God wastes away under the same disease for ever, and he who hates for ever offends for ever, and by offending without ceasing deserves to suffer without ceasing. He, therefore, who is guilty of hatred of God is guilty of an everlasting offense. But, as was shown above, the blasphemy which is against the Holy Spirit is never apart from hatred of God. Rightly, then, is it said of a blasphemer of this kind that he is guilty of an everlasting offense. But certain men add to what the Lord says something of their own which the Lord does not say. The Lord says that he is guilty of an everlasting offense; these men say that he is eternally guilty of an everlasting offense. For he who says that a man of this kind can by no reason merit pardon, does he not say that he is eternally guilty of an everlasting offense? [1191A]But perhaps these men gather this from that which they hear from the Lord's voice: He who shall have blasphemed against the Holy Spirit has no forgiveness for ever. But is not the same thing said by the same Lord of a word spoken against the Holy Spirit? He who shall have said, he says, a word against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. How many men, I ask, will be found who would dare to say that they have never said any word against the Holy Spirit? Are all the rest to be despaired of who do not presume to say this? Ought they to despair of themselves who dare not say this? But if by teaching of this kind an ox or an ass fall into the pit of despair, I fear lest the Lord of animals require the price of the animal-men from the hand of the [1191B]teacher — nay, of the caster-down.

But there are certain men temporally guilty of a temporal and transitory offense, and there are certain men eternally guilty of a temporal and transitory offense. Likewise there are others eternally guilty of an everlasting offense. Why should there not also be others temporally guilty of an everlasting offense? Adultery is actually committed in time and passes away, and constitutes the adulterer guilty, but temporally guilty if he shall have truly repented, but eternally so if he refuse to repent. He who passes from this life with hatred of God will be eternally guilty of an everlasting offense. So too the offense which, in the sense we have said, can be called everlasting, constitutes the one who truly repents guilty only for a time. Since indeed there can be men eternally guilty of a temporal offense according to divine justice, why should not some be believed [1191C]to be guilty for a time of an everlasting offense according to divine mercy? His tender mercies are over all his works. For nothing is more wonderful than his tender mercies, and for that very reason they are over all his works. Let us consider still further what Mark adds of his own to those things which the Lord had said: *Because they said,* he says, *He has an unclean spirit [n: (Marc. III)]*. In these words the evangelist seems to render the reason whence it came about that the Lord discoursed these things concerning the worst kind of blaspheming. [1192A]The evangelist shows, then, that the Lord taught them concerning the blasphemy which has no remission for this reason: because they said that he had an unclean spirit. Without any ambiguity that insult to Christ was a detestable blasphemy. But that word of blasphemy, I ask, was it against the very Son of man, or against the Holy Spirit? But if it is said to be against the Son of man, it will be a remissible word; if against the Holy Spirit, it will be irremissible. But if it is called a remissible word, it has nothing to do with that blasphemy which has no forgiveness for ever, and, according to what the evangelist subjoins, it answers nothing to the Lord's words which he set before. The coherence of the sayings therefore compels us to believe that the calumniators of Christ blasphemed against the Holy Spirit. What [1192B]then shall we say? Did they sin against him whom they did not revile, and not blaspheme against him whom they profaned by their words? Who is fit for these things? By authority, therefore, and at the same time from reason, we can plainly gather that the profaners of Christ blasphemed so wickedly not through ignorance, but through malice alone. They understood, without any ambiguity, that no one could work such signs unless God were with him. Since, therefore, they blasphemed through malice alone, they sinned against him to whom goodness is wont specifically to be attributed, and for that very reason, as to that kind of sin, they were unworthy of the alleviation and remission of the most bitter penalty. For, had they sinned through ignorance and offended against him who is the wisdom of God, in punishing the [1192C]sin it would have been dealt with them more leniently, and in it they would have received something of remission. From these words of the Lord it is manifestly gathered that certain things which are common to all the persons are appropriated to certain persons not without great mystery. Many things concerning these words of the Lord are still worthy of diligent investigation. But this we leave, better and more advisedly, to profounder talents. Concerning that which you asked of me I have said what I could. If I have become foolish, you have compelled me.
