§15. Lastly he displays at length the folly of Eunomius, who at times speaks of the Holy Spirit as created, and as the fairest work of the Son, and at other times confesses, by the operations attributed to Him, that He is God, and thus ends the book.

He goes on to add, “Neither on the same level with the Father, nor connumerated with the Father (for God over all is one and only Father), nor on an equality with the Son, for the Son is only-begotten, having none begotten with Him.” Well, for my own part, if he had only added to his previous statement the remark that the Holy Ghost is not the Father of the Son, I should even then have thought it idle for him to linger over what no one ever doubted, and forbid people to form notions of Him which not even the most witless would entertain. But since he endeavours to establish his impiety by irrelevant and unconnected statements, imagining that by denying the Holy Spirit to be the Father of the Only-begotten he makes out that He is subject and subordinate, I therefore made mention of these words, as a proof of the folly of the man who imagines that he is demonstrating the Spirit to be subject to the Father on the ground that the Spirit is not Father of the Only-begotten. For what compels the conclusion, that if He be not Father, He must be subject? If it had been demonstrated that “Father” and “despot” were terms identical in meaning, it would no doubt have followed that, as absolute sovereignty was part of the conception of the Father, we should affirm that the Spirit is subject to Him Who surpassed Him in respect of authority. But if by “Father” is implied merely His relation to the Son, and no conception of absolute sovereignty or authority is involved by the use of the word, how does it follow, from the fact that the Spirit is not the Father of the Son, that the Spirit is subject to the Father? “Nor on an equality with the Son,” he says. How comes he to say this? for to be, and to be unchangeable, and to admit no evil whatsoever, and to remain unalterably in that which is good, all this shows no variation in the case of the Son and of the Spirit. For the incorruptible nature of the Spirit is remote from corruption equally with that of the Son, and in the Spirit, just as in the Son, His essential goodness is absolutely apart from its contrary, and in both alike their perfection in every good stands in need of no addition.

Now the inspired Scripture teaches us to affirm all these attributes of the Spirit, when it predicates of the Spirit the terms “good,” and “wise,” and “incorruptible,” and “immortal,” and all such lofty conceptions and names as are properly applied to Godhead. If then He is inferior in none of these respects, by what means does Eunomius determine the inequality of the Son and the Spirit? “For the Son is,” he tells us, “Only-begotten, having no brother begotten with Him.” Well, the point, that we are not to understand the “Only-begotten” to have brethren, we have already discussed in our comments upon the phrase “first-born of all creation430    See above, §8 of this book..” But we ought not to leave unexamined the sense that Eunomius now unfairly attaches to the term. For while the doctrine of the Church declares that in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost there is one power, and goodness, and essence, and glory, and the like, saving the difference of the Persons, this man, when he wishes to make the essence of the Only-begotten common to the creation, calls Him “the first-born of all creation” in respect of His pre-temporal existence, declaring by this mode of expression that all conceivable objects in creation are in brotherhood with the Lord; for assuredly the first-born is not the first-born of those otherwise begotten, but of those begotten like Himself431    Or, “not the first-born of beings of a different race, but of those of his own stock.”. But when he is bent upon severing the Spirit from union with the Son, he calls Him “Only-begotten, not having any brother begotten with Him,” not with the object of conceiving of Him as without brethren, but that by the means of this assertion he may establish touching the Spirit His essential alienation from the Son. It is true that we learn from Holy Scripture not to speak of the Holy Ghost as brother of the Son: but that we are not to say that the Holy Ghost is homogeneous432    ὁμογενῆ, “of the same stock”: the word being the same which (when coupled with ἀδελφὸν) has been translated, in the passages preceding, by “begotten with.” with the Son, is nowhere shown in the divine Scriptures. For if there does reside in the Father and the Son a life-giving power, it is ascribed also to the Holy Spirit, according to the words of the Gospel. If one may discern alike in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit the properties of being incorruptible, immutable, of admitting no evil, of being good, right, guiding, of working all in all as He wills, and all the like attributes, how is it possible by identity in these respects to infer difference in kind? Accordingly the word of godliness agrees in affirming that we ought not to regard any kind of brotherhood as attaching to the Only-begotten; but to say that the Spirit is not homogeneous with the Son, the upright with the upright, the good with the good, the life-giving with the life-giving, this has been clearly demonstrated by logical inference to be a piece of heretical knavery.

Why then is the majesty of the Spirit curtailed by such arguments as these? For there is nothing which can be the cause of producing in him deviation by excess or defect from conceptions such as befit the Godhead, nor, since all these are by Holy Scripture predicated equally of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, can he inform us wherein he discerns inequality to exist. But he launches his blasphemy against the Holy Ghost in its naked form, ill-prepared and unsupported by any consecutive argument. “Nor yet ranked,” he says, “with any other: for He has gone above433    ἀναβέβηκε: the word apparently is intended by Eunomius to have the force of “transcended”; Gregory, later on, criticizes its employment in this sense. all the creatures that came into being by the instrumentality of the Son in mode of being, and nature, and glory, and knowledge, as the first and noblest work of the Only-begotten, the greatest and most glorious.” I will leave, however, to others the task of ridiculing the bad taste and surplusage of his style, thinking as I do that it is unseemly for the gray hairs of age, when dealing with the argument before us, to make vulgarity of expression an objection against one who is guilty of impiety. I will just add to my investigation this remark. If the Spirit has “gone above” all the creations of the Son, (for I will use his own ungrammatical and senseless phrase, or rather, to make things clearer, I will present his idea in my own language) if he transcends all things wrought by the Son, the Holy Spirit cannot be ranked with the rest of the creation; and if, as Eunomius says, he surpasses them by virtue of priority of birth, he must needs confess, in the case of the rest of creation, that the objects which are first in order of production are more to be esteemed than those which come after them. Now the creation of the irrational animals was prior to that of man. Accordingly he will of course declare that the irrational nature is more honourable than rational existence. So too, according to the argument of Eunomius, Cain will be proved superior to Abel, in that he was before him in time of birth, and so the stars will be shown to be lower and of less excellence than all the things that grow out of the earth; for these last sprang from the earth on the third day, and all the stars are recorded by Moses to have been created on the fourth. Well, surely no one is such a simpleton as to infer that the grass of the earth is more to be esteemed than the marvels of the sky, on the ground of its precedence in time, or to award the meed to Cain over Abel, or to place below the irrational animals man who came into being later than they. So there is no sense in our author’s contention that the nature of the Holy Spirit is superior to that of the creatures that came into being subsequently, on the ground that He came into being before they did. And now let us see what he who separates Him from fellowship with the Son is prepared to concede to the glory of the Spirit: “For he too,” he says, “being one, and first and alone, and surpassing all the creations of the Son in essence and dignity of nature, accomplishing every operation and all teaching according to the good pleasure of the Son, being sent by Him, and receiving from Him, and declaring to those who are instructed, and guiding into truth.” He speaks of the Holy Ghost as “accomplishing every operation and all teaching.” What operation? Does he mean that which the Father and the Son execute, according to the word of the Lord Himself Who “hitherto worketh434    S. John v. 17” man’s salvation, or does he mean some other? For if His work is that named, He has assuredly the same power and nature as Him Who works it, and in such an one difference of kind from Deity can have no place. For just as, if anything should perform the functions of fire, shining and warming in precisely the same way, it is itself certainly fire, so if the Spirit does the works of the Father, He must assuredly be acknowledged to be of the same nature with Him. If on the other hand He operates something else than our salvation, and displays His operation in a contrary direction, He will thereby be proved to be of a different nature and essence. But Eunomius’ statement itself bears witness that the Spirit quickeneth in like manner with the Father and the Son. Accordingly, from the identity of operations it results assuredly that the Spirit is not alien from the nature of the Father and the Son. And to the statement that the Spirit accomplishes the operation and teaching of the Father according to the good pleasure of the Son we assent. For the community of nature gives us warrant that the will of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is one, and thus, if the Holy Spirit wills that which seems good to the Son, the community of will clearly points to unity of essence. But he goes on, “being sent by Him, and receiving from Him, and declaring to those who are instructed, and guiding into truth.” If he had not previously said what he has concerning the Spirit, the reader would surely have supposed that these words applied to some human teacher. For to receive a mission is the same thing as to be sent, and to have nothing of one’s own, but to receive of the free favour of him who gives the mission, and to minister his words to those who are under instruction, and to be a guide into truth for those that are astray. All these things, which Eunomius is good enough to allow to the Holy Spirit, belong to the present pastors and teachers of the Church,—to be sent, to receive, to announce, to teach, to suggest the truth. Now, as he had said above “He is one, and first, and alone, and surpassing all,” had he but stopped there, he would have appeared as a defender of the doctrines of truth. For He Who is indivisibly contemplated in the One is most truly One, and first Who is in the First, and alone Who is in the Only One. For as the spirit of man that is in him, and the man himself, are but one man, so also the Spirit of God which is in Him, and God Himself, would properly be termed One God, and First and Only, being incapable of separation from Him in Whom He is. But as things are, with his addition of his profane phrase, “surpassing all the creatures of the Son,” he produces turbid confusion by assigning to Him Who “breatheth where He willeth435    S. John iii. 8,” and “worketh all in all436    1 Cor. xii. 6.,” a mere superiority in comparison with the rest of created things.

Let us now see further what he adds to this “sanctifying the saints.” If any one says this also of the Father and of the Son, he will speak truly. For those in whom the Holy One dwells, He makes holy, even as the Good One makes men good. And the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are holy and good, as has been shown. “Acting as a guide to those who approach the mystery.” This may well be said of Apollos who watered what Paul planted. For the Apostle plants by his guidance437    If we read κατηχσέως for the καθηγησέως of Oehler’s text we have a clearer sense, “the Apostle plants by his instruction.”, and Apollos, when he baptizes, waters by Sacramental regeneration, bringing to the mystery those who were instructed by Paul. Thus he places on a level with Apollos that Spirit Who perfects men through baptism. “Distributing every gift.” With this we too agree; for everything that is good is a portion of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. “Co-operating with the faithful for the understanding and contemplation of things appointed.” As he does not add by whom they are appointed, he leaves his meaning doubtful, whether it is correct or the reverse. But we will by a slight addition advance his statement so as to make it consistent with godliness. For since, whether it be the word of wisdom, or the word of knowledge, or faith, or help, or government, or aught else that is enumerated in the lists of saving gifts, “all these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will438    1 Cor. xii. 11.,” we therefore do not reject the statement of Eunomius when he says that the Spirit “co-operates with the faithful for understanding and contemplation of things appointed” by Him, because by Him all good teachings are appointed for us. “Sounding an accompaniment to those who pray.” It would be foolish seriously to examine the meaning of this expression, of which the ludicrous and meaningless character is at once manifest to all. For who is so demented and beside himself as to wait for us to tell him that the Holy Spirit is not a bell nor an empty cask sounding an accompaniment and made to ring by the voice of him who prays as it were by a blow? “Leading us to that which is expedient for us.” This the Father and the Son likewise do: for “He leadeth Joseph like a sheep439    Ps. lxxx. 1.,” and, “led His people like sheep440    Ps. lxxvii. 20.,” and, “the good Spirit leadeth us in a land of righteousness441    Cf. Ps. cxliii. 10..” “Strengthening us to godliness.” To strengthen man to godliness David says is the work of God; “For Thou art my strength and my refuge442    Cf. Ps. xxxi. 3,” says the Psalmist, and “the Lord is the strength of His people443    Ps. xxviii. 8.,” and, “He shall give strength and power unto His people444    Ps. lxviii. 35..” If then the expressions of Eunomius are meant in accordance with the mind of the Psalmist, they are a testimony to the Divinity of the Holy Ghost: but if they are opposed to the word of prophecy, then by this very fact a charge of blasphemy lies against Eunomius, because he sets up his own opinions in opposition to the holy prophets. Next he says, “Lightening souls with the light of knowledge.” This grace also the doctrine of godliness ascribes alike to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost. For He is called a light by David445    Ps. xxvii. 1., and from thence the light of knowledge shines in them who are enlightened. In like manner also the cleansing of our thoughts of which the statement speaks is proper to the power of the Lord. For it was “the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the express image of His person,” Who “purged our sins446    Heb. i. 3..” Again, to banish devils, which Eunomius says is a property of the Spirit, this also the only-begotten God, Who said to the devil, “I charge thee447    Cf. S. Mark ix. 25,” ascribes to the power of the Spirit, when He says, “If I by the Spirit of God cast out devils448    S. Matt. xii. 28.,” so that the expulsion of devils is not destructive of the glory of the Spirit, but rather a demonstration of His divine and transcendent power. “Healing the sick,” he says, “curing the infirm, comforting the afflicted, raising up those who stumble, recovering the distressed.” These are the words of those who think reverently of the Holy Ghost, for no one would ascribe the operation of any one of these effects to any one except to God. If then heresy affirms that those things which it belongs to none save God alone to effect, are wrought by the power of the Spirit, we have in support of the truths for which we are contending the witness even of our adversaries. How does the Psalmist seek his healing from God, saying, “Have mercy upon me, O Lord, for I am weak; O Lord, heal me, for my bones are vexed449    Ps. vi. 3.!” It is to God that Isaiah says, “The dew that is from Thee is healing unto them450    Is. xxvi. 19 (LXX.)..” Again, prophetic language attests that the conversion of those in error is the work of God. For “they went astray in the wilderness in a thirsty land,” says the Psalmist, and he adds, “So He led them forth by the right way, that they might go to the city where they dwelt451    Ps. cviii. 4–7.:” and, “when the Lord turned again the captivity of Sion452    Ps. cxxvi. 1..” In like manner also the comfort of the afflicted is ascribed to God, Paul thus speaking, “Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who comforteth us in all our tribulation453    2 Cor. i. 3, 4..” Again, the Psalmist says, speaking in the person of God, “Thou calledst upon Me in trouble and I delivered thee454    Ps. lxxxi. 17..” And the setting upright of those who stumble is innumerable times ascribed by Scripture to the power of the Lord: “Thou hast thrust sore at me that I might fall, but the Lord was my help455    Ps. cxviii. 13.,” and “Though he fall, he shall not be cast away, for the Lord upholdeth him with His hand456    Ps. xxxvii. 24.,” and “The Lord helpeth them that are fallen457    Ps. cxlvi. 8..” And to the loving-kindness of God confessedly belongs the recovery of the distressed, if Eunomius means the same thing of which we learn in prophecy, as the Scripture says, “Thou laidest trouble upon our loins; Thou sufferedst men to ride over our heads; we went through fire and water, and Thou broughtest us out into a wealthy place458    Ps. lxvi. 10, 11..”

Thus far then the majesty of the Spirit is demonstrated by the evidence of our opponents, but in what follows the limpid waters of devotion are once more defiled by the mud of heresy. For he says of the Spirit that He “cheers on those who are contending”: and this phrase involves him in the charge of extreme folly and impiety. For in the stadium some have the task of arranging the competitions between those who intend to show their athletic vigour; others, who surpass the rest in strength and skill, strive for the victory and strip to contend with one another, while the rest, taking sides in their good wishes with one or other of the competitors, according as they are severally disposed towards or interested in one athlete or another, cheer him on at the time of the engagement, and bid him guard against some hurt, or remember some trick of wrestling, or keep himself unthrown by the help of his art. Take note from what has been said to how low a rank Eunomius degrades the Holy Spirit. For while on the course there are some who arrange the contests, and others who settle whether the contest is conducted according to rule, others who are actually engaged, and yet others who cheer on the competitors, who are acknowledged to be far inferior to the athletes themselves, Eunomius considers the Holy Spirit as one of the mob who look on, or as one of those who attend upon the athletes, seeing that He neither determines the contest nor awards the victory, nor contends with the adversary, but merely cheers without contributing at all to the victory. For He neither joins in the fray, nor does He implant the power to contend, but merely wishes that the athlete in whom He is interested may not come off second in the strife. And so Paul wrestles “against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places459    Eph. vi. 12.,” while the Spirit of power does not strengthen the combatants nor distribute to them His gifts, “dividing to every man severally as He will460    1 Cor. xii. 11.,” but His influence is limited to cheering on those who are engaged.

Again he says, “Emboldening the faint-hearted.” And here, while in accordance with his own method he follows his previous blasphemy against the Spirit, the truth for all that manifests itself, even through unfriendly lips. For to none other than to God does it belong to implant courage in the fearful, saying to the faint-hearted, “Fear not, for I am with thee, be not dismayed461    Is. xli. 10.,” as says the Psalmist, “Yea though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death I will fear no evil, for Thou art with me462    Ps. xxiii. 4..” Nay, the Lord Himself says to the fearful,—“Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid463    S. John xiv. 27,” and, “Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith464    S. Matt. viii. 26.?” and, “Be of good cheer, it is I, be not afraid465    S. Mark vi. 50,” and again, “Be of good cheer: I have overcome the world466    S. John xvi. 33.” Accordingly, even though this may not have been the intention of Eunomius, orthodoxy asserts itself by means even of the voice of an enemy. And the next sentence agrees with that which went before:—“Caring for all, and showing all concern and forethought.” For in fact it belongs to God alone to care and to take thought for all, as the mighty David has expressed it, “I am poor and needy, but the Lord careth for me467    Ps. xl. 20..” And if what remains seems to be resolved into empty words, with sound and without sense, let no one find fault, seeing that in most of what he says, so far as any sane meaning is concerned, he is feeble and untutored. For what on earth he means when he says, “for the onward leading of the better disposed and the guardianship of the more faithful,” neither he himself, nor they who senselessly admire his follies, could possibly tell us.

Προστίθησι δὲ τούτοις ὅτι « οὔτε κατὰ τὸν πατέρα οὔτε τῷ πατρὶ συναριθμούμενος: εἷς γάρ ἐστι καὶ μόνος πατὴρ ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων θεός, οὔτε τῷ υἱῷ συνεξισούμενος: μονογενὴς γάρ ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς οὐδένα ἔχων ὁμογενῆ ». ἐγὼ μὲν εἴ γε τοῦτο μόνον τῷ λόγῳ προσέθηκε, τὸ μὴ εἶναι πατέρα τοῦ υἱοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, μάταιον καὶ οὕτως « ἂν » ᾤμην τοῖς παρὰ μηδενὸς ἀμφισβητουμένοις ἐμφιλοχωρεῖν, ἐκεῖνα περὶ αὐτοῦ νοεῖν κωλύοντα, ἅπερ οὐδ' ἂν τῶν ἄγαν τις ἀνοήτων ὑπονοήσειεν. ἐπειδὴ δὲ διὰ τῶν ἀνοικείων τε καὶ ἀπροσκόλλων κατασκευάζειν ἐπιχειρεῖ τὴν ἀσέβειαν, δι' ὧν μὴ εἶναι λέγει τοῦ μονογενοῦς πατέρα τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, διὰ τούτων ἀποδεικνύειν οἰόμενος τὸ εἶναι ὑποτεταγμένον καὶ ὑποχείριον, τούτου χάριν εἰς ἔλεγχον τῆς ἀνοίας αὐτοῦ τῶν ῥημάτων τούτων τὴν μνήμην ἐποιησάμην, ὃς οἴεται ἀποδεικνύειν ὑποτεταγμένον τῷ πατρὶ τὸ πνεῦμα, διότι οὐκ ἔστι πατὴρ τοῦ μονογενοῦς τὸ πνεῦμα. ἐκ ποίας γὰρ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀνάγκης κατασκευάζεται ὡς, εἰ μὴ πατὴρ εἴη, καὶ ὑποτετάχθαι πάντως; εἰ μὲν οὖν ἀποδέδεικτο ταὐτὸν εἶναι τῷ σημαινομένῳ πατέρα καὶ τύραννον, ἀκόλουθον ἦν περὶ τὸν πατέρα νοηθείσης τῆς τυραννίδος ὑποτετάχθαι λέγειν τὸ πνεῦμα τῷ κατὰ τὴν ἐξουσίαν προέχοντι. εἰ δὲ διὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἡ πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν σχέσις νοεῖται μόνη, οὐδὲν δὲ τυραννικὸν καὶ ἐξουσιαστικὸν νόημα διὰ ταύτης τῆς φωνῆς παρεισάγεται, πῶς ἀκολουθεῖ τῷ μὴ εἶναι πατέρα τοῦ υἱοῦ τὸ ὑποτετάχθαι τὸ πνεῦμα; « οὔτε τῷ υἱῷ », φησί, « συνεξισούμενον ». πῶς ταῦτά φησι; τὸ γὰρ « ἄφθαρτ »όν τε καὶ ἄτρεπτον καὶ κακοῦ παντὸς ἀνεπίδεκτον καὶ ἀεὶ ὡσαύτως ἐν τῷ ἀγαθῷ διαμένον οὐδεμίαν ἔχει παραλλαγὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος. ἐπίσης γὰρ τὸ τοῦ πνεύματος ἄφθαρτον τῆς φθορᾶς ἠλλοτρίωται καὶ τὸ τῇ φύσει ἀγαθὸν ὡσαύτως τοῦ ἐναντίου κεχώρισται καὶ τὸ ἐν παντὶ ἀγαθῷ τέλειον ὁμοίως ἀνενδεῶς ἔχει τοῦ πλείονος. ταῦτα δὲ πάντα λέγειν περὶ τοῦ πνεύματος ἡ θεόπνευστος διδάσκει γραφή, ἀγαθὸν καὶ σοφὸν καὶ ἄφθαρτον καὶ ἀθάνατον καὶ πάντα τὰ ὑψηλὰ καὶ [τὰ] θεοπρεπῆ νοήματά τε καὶ ὀνόματα προσμαρτυροῦσα τῷ πνεύματι. εἰ οὖν ἐν οὐδενὶ τούτων ἠλάττωται, [ἐν] τίνι τὸ ἄνισον τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος διαμετρεῖ ὁ Εὐνόμιος; « Μονογενὴς γάρ ἐστι », φησίν, ὁ « υἱός, οὐδένα ἔχων ἀδελφὸν ὁμογενῆ ». ἀλλὰ περὶ τοῦ μὴ δεῖν μετὰ ἀδελφῶν νοεῖν τὸν μονογενῆ ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῷ περὶ τοῦ πρωτοτόκου πάσης κτίσεως διειλήφαμεν. τὸ δὲ παρὰ τούτου νῦν διὰ κακουργίας προσριφὲν τῷ λόγῳ προσήκει μὴ παραδραμεῖν ἀνεξέταστον. τοῦ γὰρ ἐκκλησιαστικοῦ δόγματος μίαν ἐν πατρί τε καὶ υἱῷ καὶ πνεύματι ἁγίῳ δύναμίν τε καὶ ἀγαθότητα καὶ οὐσίαν καὶ δόξαν καὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα κηρύσσοντος πλὴν τῆς κατὰ τὰς ὑποστάσεις διαφορᾶς, οὗτος ὅταν μὲν βούληται κοινοποιῆσαι πρὸς τὴν κτίσιν τοῦ μονογενοῦς τὴν οὐσίαν, πρωτότοκον αὐτὸν λέγει πάσης τῆς κτίσεως κατὰ τὴν προαιώνιον ὕπαρξιν, ἀδελφὰ τοῦ κυρίου πάντα τὰ ἐν τῇ κτίσει νοούμενα διὰ τῆς φωνῆς ταύτης εἶναι ἀποφαινόμενος: ὁ γὰρ πρωτότοκος οὐ τῶν ἑτερογενῶν, ἀλλὰ τῶν ὁμογενῶν πάντως ἐστὶ πρωτότοκος: ὅταν δὲ τῆς πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν συναφείας ἀποσχίζῃ τὸ πνεῦμα, μονογενῆ αὐτὸν λέγει, μὴ ἔχοντα ἀδελφὸν ὁμογενῆ, οὐχ ἵνα ἄνευ ἀδελφῶν αὐτὸν νοήσῃ, ἀλλ' ἵνα διὰ τούτου κατασκευάσῃ περὶ τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν ἀλλότριον. τὸ μὲν γὰρ μὴ λέγειν ”ἀδελφὸν” τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον παρὰ τῆς γραφῆς μεμαθήκαμεν: τὸ δὲ μὴ δεῖν « ὁμογενὲς » τῷ υἱῷ λέγειν τὸ πνεῦμα οὐδαμόθεν ἐκ τῶν θείων ἀποδείκνυται λόγων. εἰ γὰρ ἡ ζωοποιὸς δύναμις ἐν πατρὶ καὶ υἱῷ ἀποδείκνυται καὶ πνεύματι ἁγίῳ κατὰ τὴν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου φωνήν, εἰ τὸ ἄφθαρτόν τε καὶ ἄτρεπτον καὶ τὸ κακοῦ παντὸς ἀνεπίδεκτον, εἰ τὸ ἀγαθὸν καὶ τὸ εὐθὲς καὶ τὸ ἡγεμονικὸν καὶ τὸ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν ἐνεργοῦν καθὼς βούλεται, εἰ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα ὡσαύτως ἔστιν ἰδεῖν ἐπὶ πατρός τε καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ πνεύματος ἁγίου, πῶς ἔστι διὰ τῆς ἐν τούτοις ταὐτότητος τὸ ἑτερογενὲς ἐννοῆσαι; οὐκοῦν τὸ μὴ δεῖν ἀδελφότητά τινα περὶ τὸν μονογενῆ θεωρεῖν ὁ τῆς εὐσεβείας συντίθεται λόγος, τὸ δὲ μὴ εἶναι τῷ υἱῷ ὁμογενὲς τὸ πνεῦμα, τῷ εὐθεῖ τὸ εὐθές, τῷ ἀγαθῷ τὸ ἀγαθόν, τῷ ζωοποιῷ τὸ ζωοποιόν, τοῦτο τῆς αἱρετικῆς κακουργίας ἐκ τῆς τοῦ λόγου ἀκολουθίας σαφῶς ἀποδέδεικται. τί οὖν διὰ τούτων κολοβοῦται ἡ μεγαλειότης τοῦ πνεύματος; οὐδὲν γάρ ἐστι τὸ πλεονασμὸν ἢ ὕφεσιν ἐμποιῆσαι δυνάμενον ἐκ τῶν θεοπρεπῶν νοημάτων, ὧν πάντων κατὰ τὸ ἴσον ἐπιλεγομένων τῷ τε υἱῷ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι παρὰ τῆς ἁγίας γραφῆς ἐν τίνι βλέπει τὸ ἄνισον οὐκ ἂν εἰπεῖν ἔχοι. ἀλλὰ γυμνὴν καὶ ἀκατάσκευον καὶ μηδεμιᾶς ἠρτημένην ἀκολουθίας τὴν κατὰ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος προφέρει ἀσέβειαν. « Οὔτε μὴν ἄλλῳ », φησί, « τινὶ συντασσόμενον: ἁπάντων γὰρ ἀναβέβηκε τῶν διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ γενομένων ποιημάτων γενέσει καὶ φύσει καὶ δόξῃ καὶ γνώσει, ὡς πρῶτον ἔργον καὶ κράτιστον τοῦ μονογενοῦς μέγιστόν τε καὶ κάλλιστον ». ἐγὼ δὲ τὸ μὲν ἀπαίδευτον καὶ συρφετῶδες τῆς λέξεως ἄλλοις κωμῳδεῖν καταλείψω, ἀπρεπὲς εἶναι κρίνων πρεσβυτικῇ πολιᾷ τὴν ἐν τοῖς ῥήμασιν ἀπαιδευσίαν προφέρειν τῷ ἀσεβοῦντι εἰς τὸν προκείμενον λόγον. ἐκεῖνο δὲ προσθήσω τῇ ἐξετάσει. εἰ πάντων ἀναβέβηκε τῶν τοῦ υἱοῦ „« ποιημάτων »„ τὸ πνεῦμα (χρήσομαι γὰρ αὐτοῦ τῇ σεσολοικισμένῃ ταύτῃ καὶ ἀνοήτῳ φωνῇ, μᾶλλον δὲ πρὸς τὸ σαφέστερον διὰ τῆς ἐμαυτοῦ λέξεως παραστήσω τὸ νόημα), εἰ πάντων προέχει τῶν παρὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ γεγονότων, ἀσύντακτόν ἐστι τῇ λοιπῇ κτίσει τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον: καὶ εἰ πλεονεκτεῖ δέ, καθώς φησιν ὁ Εὐνόμιος, τῷ πρὸ τῶν ἄλλων γενέσθαι, ἀνάγκη πᾶσα καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς ἄλλης κτίσεως τὰ τῇ γενέσει κατὰ τὴν τάξιν προήκοντα τῶν ἐφεξῆς αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν προτιμότερα. ἀλλὰ μὴν τῆς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου κατασκευῆς ἡ τῶν ἀλόγων προϋπέστη φύσις. οὐκοῦν κατασκευάσει πάντως διὰ τούτων προτιμοτέραν εἶναι τῆς λογικῆς οὐσίας τὴν ἄλογον. οὕτω καὶ ὁ Κάϊν τοῦ Ἄβελ κρείττων κατὰ τὸν τοῦ Εὐνομίου λόγον δειχθήσεται, προτερεύων τῷ χρόνῳ κατὰ τὴν γένεσιν, οὕτω καὶ τῶν ἐκ τῆς γῆς φυομένων ἁπάντων ἐλάττων καὶ καταδεεστέρα ἡ τῶν ἄστρων φύσις ἀναδειχθήσεται: τὰ μὲν γὰρ τῇ τρίτῃ τῶν ἡμερῶν ἐκ τῆς γῆς ἐξανέτειλεν, οἱ δὲ μεγάλοι φωστῆρες καὶ τὰ ἄστρα πάντα κατὰ τὴν τετάρτην γεγενῆσθαι παρὰ τοῦ Μωϋσέως ἱστόρηνται. ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδεὶς οὕτως ἀνόητος, ὡς τῶν οὐρανίων θαυμάτων τὴν γηΐνην πόαν προτιμοτέραν διὰ τὰ τοῦ χρόνου πρεσβεῖα λογίσασθαι ἢ τῷ Κάϊν δοῦναι κατὰ τοῦ Ἄβελ τὰ νικητήρια ἢ ὑποζεῦξαι τοῖς ἀλόγοις τὸν ἄνθρωπον τὸν μετ' ἐκεῖνα γενόμενον. οὐκ ἄρα νοῦν ἔχει τινὰ τὸ παρὰ τούτου λεγόμενον, ὅτι διὰ τὸ πρὸ τῶν ἄλλων γενέσθαι τὸ πνεῦμα προτιμοτέραν ἔχει τῶν ἐφεξῆς γεγονότων τὴν φύσιν.
Ἴδωμεν δὲ καὶ οἷα χαρίζεται τῇ δόξῃ τοῦ πνεύματος ὁ τῆς πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν κοινωνίας ἀπομερίσας. « εἷς γάρ », φησίν, « καὶ οὗτος ὢν καὶ πρῶτος καὶ μόνος καὶ πάντων προύχων τῶν τοῦ υἱοῦ ποιημάτων κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν καὶ τὴν φυσικὴν ἀξίαν, πᾶσαν ἐνέργειαν καὶ διδασκαλίαν ἐξανύων κατὰ τὸ δοκοῦν τῷ υἱῷ, πεμπόμενος ὑπ' αὐτοῦ καὶ παρ' αὐτοῦ λαμβάνων καὶ ἀναγγέλλων τοῖς παιδευομένοις καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας ἡγούμενος. πᾶσάν » φησιν « ἐνέργειαν καὶ διδασκαλίαν ἐξανύειν » τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον. ποίαν ἐνέργειαν; πότερον ἐκείνην ἣν καὶ ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς κατὰ τὸν τοῦ κυρίου λόγον ἐνεργεῖ ὁ ἕως ἄρτι ἐργαζόμενος τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην σωτηρίαν ἢ ἄλλην τινὰ παρὰ ταύτην; εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἐκεῖνα ἐργάζεται, τὴν αὐτὴν ἐκείνῳ πάντως δύναμίν τε καὶ φύσιν ἔχει, καὶ τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἑτερογενὲς ἐπὶ τοῦ τοιούτου χώραν οὐκ ἔχει. ὡς γὰρ εἴ τι τὰ τοῦ πυρὸς ἐνεργοίη λάμπον τε καὶ θερμαῖνον ὡσαύτως, πῦρ ἐστι πάντως, οὕτως εἰ τὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἔργα τὸ πνεῦμα ποιεῖ, τῆς αὐτῆς αὐτῷ πάντως φύσεως εἶναι ὁμολογεῖται. εἰ δὲ ἄλλο τι παρὰ τὴν σωτηρίαν ἡμῶν ἐνεργεῖ καὶ εἴς τι τῶν ἐναντίων ἐπιδείκνυται τὴν ἐνέργειαν, ἄλλης φύσεώς τε καὶ οὐσίας διὰ τούτων ἐπιδειχθήσεται. ἀλλὰ μὴν ζωοποιεῖν ὁμοίως πατρί τε καὶ υἱῷ τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτὸς ὁ λόγος διαμαρτύρεται. οὐκοῦν τὸ μὴ ἀπεξενῶσθαι πάντως τῆς τε τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τῆς τοῦ υἱοῦ φύσεως τὸ πνεῦμα διὰ τῆς ταὐτότητος τῶν ἐνεργημάτων παρίσταται. καὶ πρὸς « τὸ » « ἐνέργειαν καὶ διδασκαλίαν ἐξανύειν τὸ πνεῦμα κατὰ τὸ δοκοῦν τῷ υἱῷ » οὐ μαχόμεθα: ἓν γὰρ βούλημα εἶναι πατρός τε καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ πνεύματος ἁγίου ἡ τῆς φύσεως κοινωνία διαμαρτύρεται, ὥστε εἰ ἐκεῖνο βούλεται τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, ὃ δοκεῖ τῷ υἱῷ, ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ θελήματος σαφῶς παρίστησι τὴν τῆς οὐσίας ἑνότητα.
Ἀλλὰ « πεμπόμενος », φησίν, « παρ' αὐτοῦ καὶ παρ' αὐτοῦ λαμβάνων καὶ ἀναγγέλλων τοῖς παιδευομένοις καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας ἡγούμενος ». εἰ μὴ προειρήκει ταῦτα περὶ τοῦ πνεύματος, πάντως ἂν περί τινος τῶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διδασκάλων ταῦτα λέγεσθαι ὁ ἀκούων ἐνόμισε. ταὐτὸν γάρ ἐστιν τῷ πέμπεσθαι τὸ ἀποστέλλεσθαι καὶ τὸ μηδὲν οἴκοθεν ἔχειν, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς χάριτος λαμβάνειν τοῦ ἀποστέλλοντος καὶ διακονεῖν τοῖς διδασκομένοις τὰ ῥήματα καὶ καθηγεῖσθαι τῆς ἀληθείας τοῖς πλανωμένοις. ταῦτα γὰρ πάντα καὶ τῶν νῦν ποιμένων τε καὶ διδασκάλων ἐστί, πέμπεσθαι λαμβάνειν ἀναγγέλλειν διδάσκειν ὑποτίθεσθαι τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ἅπερ χαρίζεται τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἁγίῳ Εὐνόμιος. εἰπὼν δὲ πρὸ τούτων ὅτι « καὶ εἷς ἐστι καὶ πρῶτος καὶ μόνος καὶ πάντων προύχων », εἰ ἕως τούτου τὸν λόγον ἔστησεν, συνήγορος ἂν τῶν τῆς ἀληθείας ἐφάνη δογμάτων. εἷς γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐστιν ὁ ἀχωρίστως ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ θεωρούμενος καὶ πρῶτος ὁ ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ καὶ μόνος ὁ ἐν τῷ μόνῳ. ὡς γὰρ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τὸ ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἷς ἐστιν ἄνθρωπος, οὕτως καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ θεὸς εἷς ἂν κυρίως ὀνομασθείη θεὸς καὶ πρῶτος καὶ μόνος, χωρισθῆναι ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐν ᾧ ἐστιν οὐ δυνάμενος. νῦν δὲ προσθεὶς τὸ « πάντων προύχων τῶν τοῦ υἱοῦ ποιημάτων » ἀνατροπὴν θολερὰν τὸν βλάσφημον ἑαυτοῦ λόγον ἀπέδειξε, τῷ ὅπου θέλει πνέοντι καὶ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν ἐνεργοῦντι τῇ πρὸς τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν ποιημάτων συγκρίσει παρέχων τὰ προτιμότερα.
Ἴδωμεν δὲ καὶ ὅσα τούτοις προσέθηκεν. « ἁγιάζων », φησίν, « τοὺς ἁγίους ». τοῦτο καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ πατρός τε καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ τις λέγων ἀληθῶς ἐρεῖ: ἐν οἷς γὰρ ἂν γένηται ὁ ἅγιος, ἁγίους ποιεῖ, ὡς καὶ ὁ ἀγαθὸς ἀγαθοὺς ἀπεργάζεται: ἅγιος δὲ καὶ ἀγαθὸς ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, καθὼς ἀποδέδεικται. « μυσταγωγῶν », φησί, « τοὺς προσιόντας τῷ μυστηρίῳ ». τοῦτο καλῶς ἔχει λέγειν περὶ Ἀπολλῶ τοῦ τὴν φυτείαν Παύλου ποτίζοντος. φυτεύει μὲν γὰρ διὰ τῆς κατηχήσεως ὁ ἀπόστολος, ποτίζει δὲ βαπτίζων ὁ Ἀπολλὼς διὰ τῆς μυστικῆς ἀναγεννήσεως προσάγων τοὺς παρὰ Παύλου κατηχουμένους τῷ μυστηρίῳ. οὐκοῦν εἰς τὸ ὁμότιμον ἄγει τῷ Ἀπολλῷ « τὸ πνεῦμα » τὸ διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος τελειοῦν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους. « διανέμων », φησί, « πᾶσαν δωρεάν ». τούτῳ καὶ ἡμεῖς συντιθέμεθα. πᾶν γάρ, ὅτιπέρ ἐστιν ἀγαθόν, τῶν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος δωρεῶν μερίς ἐστι. « συνεργῶν », φησί, « τοῖς πιστοῖς εἰς κατανόησιν καὶ θεωρίαν τῶν διατεταγμένων ». τῶν παρὰ τίνος διατεταγμένων μὴ προσθεὶς ἀμφίβολον τὸν λόγον ἐποίησεν, εἴτε ὀρθῶς εἴτε καὶ ὡς ἑτέρως ἔχει. ἀλλ' ἡμεῖς τῇ εὐσεβείᾳ τὸ εἰρημένον προσάξωμεν δι' ὀλίγης προσθήκης. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ εἴτε λόγος σοφίας εἴτε λόγος γνώσεως εἴτε πίστις εἴτε ἀντίληψις εἴτε κυβέρνησις εἴτε τι ἕτερον ἐν τοῖς σῴζουσιν ἡμᾶς ἀναγέγραπται, ταῦτα πάντα ἐνεργεῖ τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα, διαιροῦν ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ καθὼς βούλεται, τούτου ἕνεκεν οὐκ ἀποβάλλομεν τοῦ Εὐνομίου τὸν λόγον, εἰπόντος συνεργεῖν τὸ πνεῦμα τοῖς πιστοῖς « πρὸς κατανόησιν καὶ θεωρίαν τῶν » παρ' αὐτοῦ « διατεταγμένων » τοῦ πνεύματος διὰ τὸ πάντα ἡμῖν τὰ ἀγαθὰ διδάγματα παρ' αὐτοῦ διατετάχθαι. « ὑπηχῶν », φησίν, « εὐχομένοις ». τούτου τοῦ ῥητοῦ τὴν διάνοιαν μωρὸν ἂν εἴη κατὰ σπουδὴν ἀπελέγχειν, αὐτόθεν πᾶσιν ἐπίσης τοῦ γελοίου τε καὶ ἀνοήτου τῆς λέξεως ταύτης προφαινομένου. τίς γὰρ οὕτω παράφορος καὶ τῆς διανοίας ἐξεστηκώς, ὡς ἀναμεῖναι παρ' ἡμῶν μαθεῖν, ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι κώδων ἢ πίθος διάκενος τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, οἷόν τινι πληγῇ τῇ φωνῇ τοῦ εὐχομένου ὑπηχῶν καὶ δονούμενος; « ὁδηγῶν », φησί, « πρὸς τὸ συμφέρον ». τοῦτο καὶ ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς ὁμοίως ποιεῖ. ὁδηγεῖ γὰρ ὡσεὶ πρόβατον τὸν Ἰωσήφ, καὶ ὡδήγησεν ὡς πρόβατα τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἀγαθὸν ὁδηγεῖ ἡμᾶς ἐν γῇ εὐθείᾳ. « κρατύνων », φησί, « πρὸς εὐσέβειαν ». θεοῦ ἔργον ὁ Δαβὶδ εἶναι λέγει τὸ ἐν εὐσεβείᾳ κρατύνειν τὸν ἄνθρωπον: Κραταίωσις γάρ μου καὶ καταφυγή μου εἶ σύ, φησὶν ὁ προφήτης, καὶ Κύριος κραταίωμα τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτοῦ, καὶ Αὐτὸς δώσει δύναμιν καὶ κραταίωσιν τῷ λαῷ αὐτοῦ. οὐκοῦν ταῦτα εἰ κατὰ τὸν προφητικὸν εἴρηται νοῦν, τῆς θεότητος τοῦ πνεύματος μαρτυρία ἐστίν: εἰ δὲ ἐναντιοῦται τῇ προφητείᾳ, δι' αὐτοῦ τούτου κατηγορεῖται ἡ βλασφημία, ὅτι τοῖς ἁγίοις προφήταις ἀντιδοξάζει τῷ λόγῳ. εἶτά φησι « φωτίζων τὰς ψυχὰς τῷ φωτὶ τῆς γνώσεως ». ταύτην ὡσαύτως τὴν χάριν πατρί τε καὶ υἱῷ καὶ πνεύματι ἁγίῳ ὁ τῆς εὐσεβείας ἀνατίθησι λόγος. ἐκεῖνος γὰρ φωτισμὸς παρὰ τοῦ Δαβὶδ ὀνομάζεται καὶ ἐκεῖθεν τὸ φῶς τῆς γνώσεως τοῖς φωτιζομένοις ἐγγίνεται. ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ἡ κάθαρσις τῶν λογισμῶν ἴδιον, ὥς φησιν ὁ λόγος, τῆς τοῦ κυρίου δυνάμεως: τὸ γὰρ ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως τὸν καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐποιήσατο τὸ δὲ « ἀπείργειν τοὺς δαίμονας », ὃ τοῦ πνεύματος ἴδιόν φησιν ὁ Εὐνόμιος, τοῦτο καὶ ὁ μονογενὴς θεὸς ὁ λέγων τῷ δαίμονι ὅτι Ἐγὼ ἐπιτάσσω σοι, προσμαρτυρεῖ τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ πνεύματος λέγων Εἰ δὲ ἐγὼ ἐν πνεύματι θεοῦ ἐκβάλλω τὰ δαιμόνια: ὥστε οὐκ ἔστι καθαίρεσις τῆς δόξης τοῦ πνεύματος ἡ τῶν δαιμόνων ἀναίρεσις, ἀλλὰ σύστασις τῆς θείας αὐτοῦ καὶ ὑπερεχούσης δυνάμεως. « Νοσοῦντας », φησί, « θεραπεύων, ἀρρωστοῦντας ἰώμενος, θλιβομένους παρακαλῶν, ὀκλάζοντας ἀνορθῶν, πονοῦντας ἀνακτώμενος ». ταῦτα τῶν εὐσεβούντων περὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματός ἐστι τὰ ῥήματα: οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἄλλῳ τις ἀναθείη τούτων ἑκάστου τὴν ἐνέργειαν πλὴν τῷ θεῷ. εἰ τοίνυν ἅπερ οὐδενός ἐστι ποιεῖν ἢ θεοῦ μόνου, ταῦτα τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ πνεύματος ἐνεργεῖσθαι διαβεβαιοῦται ἡ αἵρεσις, ἔχομεν ὑπὲρ ὧν σπουδάζομεν καὶ τὴν παρὰ τῶν ἐχθρῶν μαρτυρίαν. πῶς παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ προφήτης ζητεῖ τὴν ἴασιν λέγων Ἐλέησόν με, κύριε, ὅτι ἀσθενής εἰμι, ἴασαί με, κύριε, ὅτι ἐταράχθη τὰ ὀστᾶ μου; τῷ θεῷ λέγει ὁ Ἠσαΐας ὅτι Ἡ δρόσος ἡ παρὰ σοῦ ἴαμα αὐτοῖς ἐστιν, καὶ τὴν τῶν πλανωμένων ἐπιστροφὴν θεοῦ ἔργον εἶναι ἡ προφητεία μαρτύρεται: Ἐπλανήθησαν γάρ, φησίν, ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ἐν ἀνύδρῳ, καὶ ἐπήγαγεν ὅτι Καὶ ὡδήγησεν αὐτοὺς εἰς ὁδὸν εὐθεῖαν, τοῦ πορευθῆναι εἰς πόλιν κατοικητηρίου: καὶ Ἐν τῷ ἐπιστρέψαι κύριον τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν Σιών. ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ἡ τῶν θλιβομένων παράκλησις εἰς θεὸν ἀναφέρεται, οὕτως εἰπόντος τοῦ Παύλου Εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὁ παρακαλῶν ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ θλίψει ἡμῶν. καὶ ὁ προφήτης ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ θεοῦ φησιν Ἐν θλίψει ἐπεκαλέσω με καὶ ἐρρυσάμην σε. ἡ δὲ τῶν ὀκλαζόντων ἀνόρθωσις μυριοτρόπως ὑπὸ τῆς γραφῆς εἰς τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ δύναμιν ἀναφέρεται: Ὠσθεὶς ἀνετράπην τοῦ πεσεῖν, καὶ ὁ κύριος ἀντελάβετό μου, καὶ Ὅταν πέσῃ, οὐ καταρραχθήσεται, ὅτι κύριος ἀντιστηρίζει χεῖρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ Κύριος ἀνορθοῖ κατερραγμένους. ἡ δὲ τῶν πονούντων ἀνάκτησις τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ φιλανθρωπίας τὴν ὁμολογίαν ἔχει, εἴπερ ὃ παρὰ τῆς προφητείας ἐμάθομεν καὶ οὗτος ἐνόησε, καθὼς ὁ λόγος φησὶν ὅτι Ἔθου θλίψεις ἐπὶ τῶν νώτων ἡμῶν, ἐπεβίβασας ἀνθρώπους ἐπὶ τὰς κεφαλὰς ἡμῶν, διήλθομεν διὰ πυρὸς καὶ ὕδατος, καὶ ἐξήγαγες ἡμᾶς εἰς ἀναψυχήν.
Μέχρι μὲν οὖν τούτου διὰ τῆς τῶν ἐχθρῶν μαρτυρίας ἀποδείκνυται τὸ μεγαλεῖον τοῦ πνεύματος: ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἐφεξῆς πάλιν τῷ αἱρετικῷ βορβόρῳ τὸ καθαρὸν τῆς εὐσεβείας καταμολύνεται. φησὶ γὰρ περὶ τοῦ πνεύματος ὅτι « τοῖς ἀγωνιζομένοις ὑποφωνεῖ », τοῦτο δὲ τῆς ἐσχάτης ἀνοίας τε καὶ ἀσεβείας τὴν κατηγορίαν ἔχει. ἐν γὰρ τοῖς σταδίοις οἱ μὲν ἀγωνοθετοῦσι τοῖς μέλλουσι τὴν ἀθλητικὴν ἰσχὺν ἐπιδείκνυσθαι, οἱ δὲ τῇ δυνάμει καὶ τῇ τέχνῃ τῶν ἄλλων προέχοντες ὑπὲρ τῆς νίκης ἀθλοῦσι, πρὸς τοὺς κατ' ἀλλήλων ἀγῶνας ἀποδυόμενοι, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ταῖς εὐνοίαις πρὸς τοὺς ἀγωνιστὰς μεριζόμενοι, ὅπως ἂν ἔχωσιν ἕκαστος περί τινα τῶν ἀθλητῶν σπουδῆς τε καὶ διαθέσεως, ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς συμπλοκῆς ὑποφωνοῦσιν ἢ τὸ προϊδεῖν τὴν λαβὴν ἢ τὸ μνησθῆναι παλαίσματος ἢ τὸ φυλάξαι διὰ τῆς τέχνης ἑαυτὸν ἀκατάπτωτον. εἰς τίνα τοίνυν τάξιν τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καθίστησιν ὁ Εὐνόμιος, ἐκ τῶν εἰρημένων κατανοήσατε. ἐν γὰρ τοῖς σταδίοις τῶν μὲν ἀγωνοθετούντων, τῶν δὲ κρινόντων τὴν νόμιμον ἄθλησιν, τῶν δὲ ἀγωνιζομένων, τῶν δὲ τοῖς ἀγωνιζομένοις ὑποφωνούντων, οἵτινες ὁμολογοῦνται πολὺ τῶν ἀθλούντων εἶναι καταδεέστεροι, ὡς ἕνα τῶν ἐκ τοῦ δήμου θεωμένων ἤ τινα τῶν τοῖς ἀθληταῖς ὑπηρετουμένων τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ὁρᾷ ὁ Εὐνόμιος, ὃ μήτε ἀγωνοθετεῖ μήτε κρίνει τὴν νίκην μήτε πρὸς τὸν ἀντίπαλον ἀγωνίζεται, ἀλλὰ δι' ὑποφωνήσεως συνεργεῖ μὲν πρὸς τὴν νίκην οὐδέν (οὔτε γὰρ συναγωνίζεται οὔτε τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸ τοῦτο δύναμιν ἐμποιεῖ), βούλεται δὲ μόνον μὴ δεύτερον δειχθῆναι τῶν ἀντιπάλων τὸν παρ' αὐτοῦ σπουδαζόμενον. καὶ Παῦλος μὲν ἀγωνίζεται πρὸς τὰς ἀρχάς, πρὸς τὰς ἐξουσίας καὶ πρὸς τοὺς κοσμοκράτορας τοῦ σκότους καὶ πρὸς τὰ πνευματικὰ τῆς πονηρίας ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις: τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τῆς δυνάμεως οὐκ ἐνισχύει τοὺς ἀθλητὰς οὐδὲ διανέμει τοῖς ἀθληταῖς τὰ χαρίσματα, διαιροῦν ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ καθὼς βούλεται, ἀλλὰ μέχρι τοῦ ὑποφωνεῖν τοῖς συμπλεκομένοις τὴν δύναμιν ἔχει.
Πάλιν φησὶ « δειλανδροῦντας θρασύνων ». ἀλλ' οὗτος μὲν ἀκολουθεῖ κατὰ τὸν ἑαυτοῦ λόγον τῇ προλαβούσῃ κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος βλασφημίᾳ, φανεροῖ δὲ καὶ διὰ τοῦ ἐχθροῦ στόματος ἑαυτὴν ἡ ἀλήθεια. οὐδενὸς γάρ ἐστιν ἑτέρου θάρσος ἐμποιεῖν τοῖς δειλαινομένοις ἢ θεοῦ μόνου, λέγοντος τῷ δειλιῶντι Μὴ φοβοῦ, μετὰ σοῦ γάρ εἰμι, μηδὲν εὐλαβοῦ, ὥς φησιν ὁ προφήτης: Ἐὰν γὰρ πορευθῶ ἐν μέσῳ σκιᾶς θανάτου, οὐ φοβηθήσομαι κακά, ὅτι σὺ μετ' ἐμοῦ εἶ. ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ δεσπότης πρὸς τοὺς δειλιῶντάς φησι Μὴ ταρασσέσθω ἡ καρδία ὑμῶν μηδὲ δειλιάτω, καὶ Τί δειλοί ἐστε, ὀλιγόπιστοι; καὶ Θαρσεῖτε, ἐγώ εἰμι, μὴ φοβεῖσθε, καὶ Θαρσεῖτε πάλιν, ἐγὼ νενίκηκα τὸν κόσμον. οὐκοῦν καὶ ἄκοντος τοῦ Εὐνομίου δι' αὐτῆς τῆς πολεμίας φωνῆς δείκνυσιν ἑαυτὴν ἡ ἀλήθεια. συμφωνεῖ δὲ καὶ ὁ ἐφεξῆς τῷ προάγοντι λόγος. « ἁπάντων », φησί, « κηδόμενος καὶ πᾶσαν φροντίδα καὶ πρόνοιαν εἰσφερόμενος ». μόνου γάρ ἐστιν ὡς ἀληθῶς τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ κήδεσθαι καὶ φροντίζειν ἁπάντων, οὕτως εἰπόντος τοῦ μεγάλου Δαβὶδ Ἐγὼ δὲ πτωχός εἰμι καὶ πένης, κύριος φροντιεῖ μου. εἰ δὲ τὸ λειπόμενον ἄνευ διανοίας ἐν ψόφῳ διακένων ῥημάτων διακεκρότηται, μηδεὶς αἰτιάσθω, ὁρῶν αὐτὸν ἐν τοῖς πλείοσι πάσης ἔμφρονος διανοίας ἄτονόν τε καὶ ἀπαίδευτον: τί γὰρ νοῶν φησιν « εἰς προσαγωγὴν τῶν εὐνουστέρων καὶ φυλακὴν τῶν πιστοτέρων », οὔτ' ἂν αὐτὸς εἴποι οὔτε οἱ τὰ ἐκείνου ἀνοήτως θαυμάζοντες.