*But what things soever he shall hear, he shall speak.* A Divine Person (unless He were possessed of two natures, like Jesus Christ) cannot be conceived to acquire anything except in His procession; for once He is a Divine Person He is infinite, and can receive nothing that He does not already possess. Hence whatever the Holy Ghost _heard_, He heard from all eternity, in proceeding from the Father and the Son.(103) Yet, though the Holy Ghost heard and hears from all eternity, the _future_ tense “shall hear” is used because there is question of knowledge _to be manifested in the future_.(104) *And the things that are to come he shall shew you.* Hence the Holy Ghost was to confer the gift of prophecy on the Apostles. As evidence that He conferred this gift upon them, see Acts xx. 29; St. Jude 17, 18, and The Apocalypse. 14. Ille me clarificabit: quia 14. He shall glorify me; de meo accipiet, et because he shall receive of annuntiabit vobis. mine, and shall shew _it_ to you. 14. *He shall glorify me. because he shall receive of mine* (ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ), *and shall shew it to you*. The Holy Ghost gave glory to Christ before men by showing that Christ was the Messias and Saviour of the world. This He did principally through the Apostles, by imparting to them (in so far it was necessary or useful for them) the knowledge which He had received from the Son, and especially, as the context here (verse 16) proves, the knowledge of future things. In the words, “He shall receive of mine,” we refer “mine” to the Son’s knowledge, which, however, _in reality_ does not differ in a Divine Person from His essence.(105) As we remarked already on verse 13, a Divine Person (having no other nature than the Divine), cannot be conceived to receive anything except in His procession; and hence when the Holy Ghost is here said to receive from the Son, we have a convincing proof that _He proceeds from the Son_. The schismatical Greeks attempted in two ways to get rid of the argument that is thus afforded for the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son. (_a_) First, they supplied πατρός after τοῦ ἐμοῦ, and thus represented Christ as saying that the Holy Ghost should receive from the Father. Hence they concluded that He proceeds only from the Father. But we say in reply—(1) that it is against the rules of Greek syntax that the possessive pronoun τοῦ ἐμοῦ should refer to a word not expressed in the phrase. (2) That all the fathers, Greek as well as Latin, referred τοῦ ἐμοῦ to _what is in the Son_ and not to the Father. (3) The context here Proves that τοῦ ἐμοῦ does not refer to the Father. For in verse 15 we have the pronoun repeated in the plural: “All things whatsoever the Father hath _are mine_ (ἐμά ἐστιν). Therefore I said, he shall receive of _mine_,” and it is plain that in both instances _mine_ refers to the same thing; hence not to the Father, but to what is in the Son, communicated from the Father.