For having mentioned thrones, the Apostle depicted the cherubim by another name, expressing in the Hellenic language an obscure Hebrew word by a more well-known name. Hearing that God sits on the cherubim, the Apostle called these powers thrones of Him who sits on them. But also the seraphim in Isaiah (Isaiah 6:2), by whom the mystery of the Trinity is clearly preached, when, astonished at the babbling of each Person in the Trinity, they miraculously howled this word: "holy," are contained in the list of those mentioned, called by the word "powers" in the great Paul, and even before that in the Prophet David.

For he says: "Bless the Lord, all His might, His servants, who do His will" (Psalm 102:21). Isaiah, instead of saying: "Bless," wrote the very words of the blessing: "Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts: fill the whole earth with His glory" (Isaiah 6:3). And that the servants are these forces that do the will of God, the Prophet gave to understand this in the cleansing of sins, which by the will of the Sender was accomplished by one of the seraphim (Isaiah 6:6-7).

For this is the ministry of these spirits, to be sent out for the salvation of those who are being saved. This, it seems to me, having understood and ascertained that the same thing is signified by different names in the two prophets, and having chosen the most famous saying, the divine Apostle called the seraphim powers, so that there would be no pretext left for the slanderers to assert that the Holy Spirit was omitted from the list of creatures along with one of them.

For of the one it is said according to what has already been proved, and of the other it is silent, as can be ascertained from what is named by Paul, who numbered all creation in the plural, and mentioned the one in the singular; for this is proper to the Holy Trinity – to be proclaimed singularly: one Father, one Son, one Holy Spirit. Yet all that is named in the Apostle is expressed in a multitude: "principalities, powers, dominions, powers," so as not to give rise to the assumption that the Holy Spirit is among them.

But Paul is silent about the ineffable, and he does it beautifully. For he was able to hear in paradise "ineffable words" (2 Cor. 12:4), and to refrain from interpreting the inexpressible in words when speaking of anything inferior. 24. The enemies of the truth dare to touch upon the unspeakable greatness of the Spirit, insulting creation by reducing it to baseness, as if not having heard how God the Word Himself, handing over to His disciples the mystery of the knowledge of God, said that in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, the life of those who are regenerated is accomplished, and is communicated to them, and through this the Spirit, uniting with the Father and with Himself, excluded from the concept of creation; so that a pious and godly thought about Him is formed, both when Paul at the mention of creation was silent and did not mention the Spirit, and when the Lord, at the mention of the life-giving power, united the Holy Spirit to the Father and to Himself.

Thus, our teaching, guided by the Holy Scriptures, places the Only-begotten and the Holy Spirit above creation, and, according to the words of the Saviour, presupposes to contemplate them by faith in a blessed, life-giving, and uncreated nature; so that the supreme creature, according to our belief, one in the primacy and in the whole perfect nature, in no way admits of the concept of a minority, although the leader of the heresy truncates the indefinable by the invention of this minority, as if belittling and shortening the perfection of the Divine essence, when he asserts that he sees in it both greater and less.

Therefore let us see what Eunomius adds in order to what has been said. After saying that "it must necessarily be assumed that some essences are less, and others are greater," and that some are in the first rank, and that by some difference in size and dignity they are raised to preference, while others are degraded according to the lowest degree of nature and dignity, he added the following: "To such a difference they reach as far as they do; for it is not lawful to call by one and the same action that by which God created the angels, or the stars, and the heavens, or man; but to the extent that some deeds are higher and preferable to other deeds, so much will one action be superior to another, convinced that the same actions produce the identity of deeds, and different deeds indicate different actions."

Therefore, I think that the writer himself could not easily say that it was he who wrote this; The meaning of what has been said is so obscured by the impenetrability of the expression that no one will be able to discern comfortably in this mud what is the purpose of those who express themselves in this way. For the expression: "they come to such a difference as things reach," some recognize as the saying of some pagan fable, a soothsayer, who confuses words in order to deceive his hearers.

If, following what has been discussed so far, it is necessary to guess what Eunomius wants to prove here, then this is proved: as many differences as there are between one deed and another, so much will be recognized as a mutual difference in actions. Therefore, what matters are spoken of here cannot be found in what has been said. For if Eunomius speaks of what is seen in creation, then I do not know what connection this has with the previous one.

Since the question is about the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, is it appropriate for Eunomius to speak naturally about earth, water, air, fire, about the differences of animals, to describe them in words, to depict deeds that are older and preferable to other works, and not without reason to assert that one action is more excellent than another? If, however, he calls the Only-begotten Son and the Holy Spirit works, then of what again does he speak of the differences of actions by which these works are accomplished?

And what are the very actions by which others are exceeded? For he did not explain what he meant by ascent, by which one action, as he says, is superior to another; Nothing is said about the nature of actions either, but even now he has not reached anything definite, just as he does not assert that action is something realized, just as he does not prove that it is a certain unrealized movement of the will.

For the meaning of what has been said, completely left in the middle between the one and the other supposition, inclines to each of these concepts. Eunomius adds that it is not permissible to call one and the same action by which God created the angels, or the stars, and the heavens, or man. Again, by what necessity or connection did he add this to what has been said, or what is especially proved by this?

Unless actions differ from one another in so far as there is a mutual difference in deeds, he proves that not everything is the work of one and the same, but the other is brought into being by another. But I do not see this. From the Scriptures we have learned that everything is the work of One: the heavens, and the angel, and the stars, and man, and everything that is conceivable in creation. The teaching of their dogma asserts that the Son and the Spirit are not the work of one thing, but just as the Son is the work of the action that follows the first essence, so the Spirit is again another matter of the first thing.

Therefore, what do the heavens, and the man, and the angel, and the star, now united in the word, have in common with what they affirm, let Eunomius himself or one of the accomplices of his ineffable wisdom say. For this impiety is clearly revealed in what has been said, and on what this impiety is based is even disagreeable with itself. For it is manifestly impious to think that in the Holy Trinity there is seen as much difference as is observed in the heavens, which encompass all creation, and in one man or in one star visible in heaven.