|
Information:
| Feast Day: |
January 2 |
| Born:
|
329 at Caesarea, Asia Minor (modern
Turkey)
|
| Died: |
14 June 379 |
| Patron of: |
Cappadocia, Hospital
administrators, Reformers, Monks, Education,
Exorcism, Liturgists |
|
|
Bishop of Caesarea, one of the most
distinguished Doctors of the Church, born probably 329; died
1 January, 379. He ranks after Athanasius as a defender of
the Oriental Church against the heresies of the fourth
century. With his friend Gregory of Nazianzus and his
brother Gregory of Nyssa, he makes up the trio known as "The
Three Cappadocians", far outclassing the other two in
practical genius and actual achievement.
St. Basil the Elder, father of St. Basil the Great, was the
son of a Christian of good birth and his wife, Macrina (Acta
SS., January, II), both of whom suffered for the faith
during the persecution of Maximinus Galerius (305-314),
spending several years of hardship in the wild mountains of
Pontus. St. Basil the Elder was noted for his virtue (Acta
SS, May, VII) and also won considerable reputation as a
teacher in Caesarea. He was not a priest (Cf. Cave, Hist.
Lit., I, 239). He married Emmelia, the daughter of a martyr
and became the father of ten children. Three of these,
Macrina, Basil, an Gregory are honoured as saints; and of
the sons, Peter, Gregory, and Basil attained the dignity of
the episcopate.
Under the care of his father and his grandmother, the elder
Macrina, who preserved the traditions of their countryman,
St. Gregory Thaumaturgus (c. 213-275) Basil was formed in
habits of piety and study. He was still young when his
father died and the family moved to the estate of the elder
Macrina at Annesi in Pontus, on the banks of the Iris. As a
boy, he was sent to school at Caesarea, then "a metropolis
of letters", and conceived a fervent admiration for the
local bishop, Dianius. Later, he went to Constantinople, at
that time "distinguished for its teachers of philosophy and
rhetoric", and thence to Athens. Here he became the
inseparable companion of Gregory of Nazianzus, who, in his
famous panegyric on Basil (Or. xliii), gives a most
interesting description of their academic experiences.
According to him, Basil was already distinguished for
brilliancy of mind and seriousness of character and
associated only with the most earnest students. He was able,
grave, industrious, and well advanced in rhetoric, grammar,
philosophy, astronomy, geometry, and medicine. (As to his
not knowing Latin, see Fialon, Etude historique et
litteraire sur St. Basile, Paris, 1869). We know the names
of two of Basil's teachers at Athens, Prohaeresius, possibly
a Christian, and Himerius, a pagan. It has been affirmed,
though probably incorrectly, that Basil spent some time
under Libanius. He tells us himself that he endeavoured
without success to attach himself as a pupil to Eustathius
(Ep., I). At the end of his sojourn at Athens, Basil being
laden, says St. Gregory of Nazianzus "with all the learning
attainable by the nature of man", was well equipped to be a
teacher. Caesarea took possession of him gladly "as a
founder and second patron" (Or. xliii), and as he tells u (ccx),
he refused the splendid offers of the citizens of
Neo-Caesarea, who wished him to undertake the education of
the youth of their city.
To the successful student and distinguished professor,
"there now remained", says Gregory (Or. xliii), "no other
need than that of spiritual perfection". Gregory of Nyssa,
in his life of Macrina, gives us to understand that Basil's
brilliant success both as a university student and a
professor had left traces of worldliness and
self-sufficiency on the soul of the young man. Fortunately,
Basil came again in contact with Dianius, Bishop of
Caesarea, the object of his boyish affection, and Dianius
seems to have baptized him, and ordained him Reader soon
after his return to Caesarea. It was at the same time also
that he fell under the influence of that very remarkable
woman, his sister Macrina, who has meanwhile founded a
religious community on the family estate at Annesi. Basil
himself tells us how, like a man roused from deep sleep, he
turned his eyes to the marvellous truth of the Gospel, wept
many tears over his miserable life, and prayed for guidance
from God: "Then I read the Gospel, and saw there that a
great means of reaching perfection was the selling of one's
goods, the sharing of them with the poor, the giving up of
all care for this life, and the refusal to allow the soul to
be turned by any sympathy towards things of earth" (Ep.
ccxxiii). To learn the ways of perfection, Basil now visited
the monasteries of Egypt, Palestine, Coele-Syria, and
Mesopotamia. He returned, filled with admiration for the
austerity and piety of the monks, and founded a monastery in
his native Pontus, on the banks of the Iris, nearly opposite
Annesi. (Cf. Ramsay, Hist. Geog. of Asia Minor, London,
1890, p. 326). Eustathius of Sebaste had already introduced
the eremitical life into Asia Minor; Basil added the
cenobitic or community form, and the new feature was
imitated by many companies of men and women. (Cf. Sozomen,
Hist. Eccl., VI, xxvii; Epiphanius, Haer., lxxv, 1; Basil,
Ep. ccxxiii; Tillemont, Mem., IX, Art. XXI, and note XXVI.)
Basil became known as the father of Oriental monasticism,
the forerunner of St. Benedict. How well he deserved the
title, how seriously and in what spirit he undertook the
systematizing of the religious life, may be seen by the
study of his Rule. He seems to have read Origen's writings
very systematically about this time, for in union with
Gregory of Nazianzus, he published a selection of them
called the "Philocalia".Basil was drawn from his retreat
into the area of theological controversy in 360 when he
accompanied two delegates from Seleucia to the emperor at
Constantinople, and supported his namesake of Ancyra. There
is some dispute as to his courage and his perfect orthodoxy
on this occasion (cf. Philostorgius, Hist. Eccl., IV, xii;
answered by Gregory of Nyssa, In Eunom., I, and Maran,
Proleg., vii; Tillemont, Mem., note XVIII). A little later,
however, both qualities seem to have been sufficiently in
evidence, as Basil forsook Dianius for having signed the
heretical creed of Rimini. To this time (c. 361) may be
referred the "Moralia"; and a little later came to books
against Eunomius (363) and some correspondence with
Athanasius. It is possible, also, that Basil wrote his
monastic rules in the briefer forms while in Pontus, and
enlarged them later at Caesarea. There is an account of an
invitation from Julian for Basil to present himself a court
and of Basil's refusal, coupled with an admonition that
angered the emperor and endangered Basil's safety. Both
incident and and correspondence however are questioned by
some critics.
Basil still retained considerable influence in Caesarea, and
it is regarded as fairly probable that he had a hand in the
election of the successor of Dianius who died in 362, after
having been reconciled to Basil. In any case the new bishop,
Eusebius, was practically placed in his office by the elder
Gregory of Nazianzus. Eusebius having persuaded the
reluctant Basil to be ordained priest, gave him a prominent
place in the administration of the diocese (363). In ability
for the management of affairs Basil so far eclipsed the
bishop that ill-feeling rose between the two. "All the more
eminent and wiser portion of the church was roused against
the bishop" (Greg. Naz., Or. xliii; Ep. x), and to avoid
trouble Basil again withdrew into the solitude of Pontus. A
little later (365) when the attempt of Valens to impose
Arianism on the clergy and the people necessitated the
presence of a strong personality, Basil was restored to his
former position, being reconciled to the bishop by St.
Gregory of Nazianzus. There seems to have been no further
disagreement between Eusebius and Basil and the latter soon
became the real head of the diocese. "The one", says Gregory
of Nazianzus (Or. xliii), "led the people the other led
their leader". During the five years spent in this most
important office, Basil gave evidence of being a man of very
unusual powers. He laid down the law to the leading citizens
and the imperial governors, settled disputes with wisdom and
finality, assisted the spiritually needy, looked after "the
support of the poor, the entertainment of strangers, the
care of maidens, legislation written and unwritten for the
monastic life, arrangements of prayers, (liturgy?),
adornment of the sanctuary" (op. cit.). In time of famine,
he was the saviour of the poor.
In 370 Basil succeeded to the See of Caesarea, being
consecrated according to tradition on 14 June. Caesarea was
then a powerful and wealthy city (Soz., Hist. Eccl., V, v).
Its bishop was Metropolitan of Cappadocia and Exarch of
Pontus which embraced more than half of Asia Minor and
comprised eleven provinces. The see of Caesarea ranked with
Ephesus immediately after the patriarchal sees in the
councils, and the bishop was the superior of fifty
chorepiscopi (Baert). Basil's actual influence, says Jackson
(Prolegomena, XXXII) covered the whole stretch of country
"from the Balkans to the Mediterranean and from the Aegean
to the Euphrates". The need of a man like Basil in such a
see as Caesarea was most pressing, and he must have known
this well. Some think that he set about procuring his own
election; others (e. g. Maran, Baronius, Ceillier) say that
he made no attempt on his own behalf. In any event, he
became Bishop of Caesarea largely by the influence of the
elder Gregory of Nazianzus. His election, says the younger
Gregory (loc. cit.), was followed by disaffection on the
part of several suffragan bishops "on whose side were found
the greatest scoundrels in the city". During his previous
administration of the diocese Basil had so clearly defined
his ideas of discipline and orthodoxy, that no one could
doubt the direction and the vigour of his policy. St.
Athanasius was greatly pleased at Basil's election (Ad
Pallad., 953; Ad Joann. et Ant., 951); but the Arianizing
Emperor Valens, displayed considerably annoyance and the
defeated minority of bishops became consistently hostile to
the new metropolitan. By years of tactful conduct, however,
"blending his correction with consideration and his
gentleness with firmness" (Greg. Naz., Or. xliii), he
finally overcame most of his opponents.
Basil's letters tell the story of his tremendous and varied
activity; how he worked for the exclusion of unfit
candidates from the sacred ministry and the deliverance of
the bishops from the temptation of simony; how he required
exact discipline and the faithful observance of the canons
from both laymen and clerics; how he rebuked the sinful,
followed up the offending, and held out hope of pardon to
the penitent. (Cf. Epp. xliv, xlv, and xlvi, the beautiful
letter to a fallen virgin, as well as Epp. liii, liv, lv,
clxxxviii, cxcix, ccxvii, and Ep. clxix, on the strange
incident of Glycerius, whose story is well filled out by
Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, New York, 1893, p.
443 sqq.) If on the one hand he strenuously defended
clerical rights and immunities (Ep. civ), on the other he
trained his clergy so strictly that they grew famous as the
type of all that a priest should be (Epp. cii, ciii). Basil
did not confine his activity to diocesan affairs, but threw
himself vigorously into the troublesome theological disputes
then rending the unity of Christendom. He drew up a summary
of the orthodox faith; he attacked by word of mouth the
heretics near at hand and wrote tellingly against those
afar. His correspondence shows that he paid visits, sent
messages, gave interviews, instructed, reproved, rebuked,
threatened, reproached, undertook the protection of nations,
cities, individuals great and small. There was very little
chance of opposing him successfully, for he was a cool,
persistent, fearless fighter in defence both of doctrine and
of principles. His bold stand against Valens parallels the
meeting of Ambrose with Theodosius. The emperor was
dumbfounded at the archbishop's calm indifference to his
presence and his wishes. The incident, as narrated by
Gregory of Nazianzus, not only tells much concerning Basil's
character but throws a clear light on the type of Christian
bishop with which the emperors had to deal and goes far to
explain why Arianism, with little court behind it, could
make so little impression on the ultimate history of
Catholicism.
While assisting Eusebius in the care of his diocese, Basil
had shown a marked interest in the poor and afflicted; that
interest now displayed itself in the erection of a
magnificent institution, the Ptochoptopheion, or Basileiad,
a house for the care of friendless strangers, the medical
treatment of the sick poor, and the industrial training of
the unskilled. Built in the suburbs, it attained such
importance as to become practically the centre of a new city
with the name of <he kaine polis> or "Newtown". It was the
mother-house of like institutions erected in other dioceses
and stood as a constant reminder to the rich of their
privilege of spending wealth in a truly Christian way. It
may be mentioned here that the social obligations of the
wealthy were so plainly and forcibly preached by St. Basil
that modern sociologists have ventured to claim him as one
of their own, though with no more foundation than would
exist in the case of any other consistent teacher of the
principles of Catholic ethics. The truth is that St. Bail
was a practical lover of Christian poverty, and even in his
exalted position preserved that simplicity in food and
clothing and that austerity of life for which he had been
remarked at his first renunciation of the world.
In the midst of his labours, Basil underwent suffering of
many kinds. Athanasius died in 373 and the elder Gregory in
374, both of them leaving gaps never to be filled. In 373
began the painful estrangement from Gregory of Nazianzus.
Anthimus, Bishop of Tyana, became an open enemy, Apollinaris
"a cause of sorrow to the churches" (Ep. cclxiii),
Eustathius of Sebaste a traitor to the Faith and a personal
foe as well. Eusebius of Samosata was banished, Gregory of
Nyssa condemned and deposed. When Emperor Valentinian died
and the Arians recovered their influence, all Basil's
efforts must have seemed in vain. His health was breaking,
the Goths were at the door of the empire, Antioch was in
schism, Rome doubted his sincerity, the bishops refused to
be brought together as he wished. "The notes of the church
were obscured in his part of Christendom, and he had to fare
on as best he might,—admiring, courting, yet coldly treated
by the Latin world, desiring the friendship of Rome, yet
wounded by her reserve,—suspected of heresy by Damasus, and
accused by Jerome of pride" (Newman, The Church of the
Fathers). Had he lived a little longer and attended the
Council of Constantinople (381), he would have seen the
death of its first president, his friend Meletius, and the
forced resignation of its second, Gregory of Nazianzus.
Basil died 1 January, 379. His death was regarded as a
public bereavement; Jews, pagans, and foreigners vied with
his own flock in doing him honour. The earlier Latin
martyrologies (Hieronymian and Bede) make no mention of a
feast of St. Basil. The first mention is by Usuard and Ado
who place it on 14 June, the supposed date of Basil's
consecration to the episcopate. In the Greek "Menaea" he is
commemorated on 1 January, the day of his death. In 1081,
John, Patriarch of Constantinople, in consequence of a
vision, established a feast in common honour of St. Basil,
Gregory of Nazianzus, and John Chrysostom, to be celebrated
on 30 January. The Bollandists give an account of the origin
of this feast; they also record as worthy of note that no
relics of St. Basil are mentioned before the twelfth
century, at which time parts of his body, together with some
other very extraordinary relics were reputed to have been
brought to Bruges by a returning Crusader. Baronius (c.
1599) gave to the Naples Oratory a relic of St. Basil sent
from Constantinople to the pope. The Bollandists and
Baronius print descriptions of Basil's personal appearance
and the former reproduce two icons, the older copied from a
codex presented to Basil, Emperor of the East (877-886).
By common consent, Basil ranks among the greatest figures in
church history and the rather extravagant panegyric by
Gregory of Nazianzus has been all but equalled by a host of
other eulogists. Physically delicate and occupying his
exalted position but a few years, Basil did magnificent and
enduring work in an age of more violent world convulsions
than Christianity has since experienced. (Cf. Newman The
Church of the Fathers). By personal virtue he attained
distinction in an age of saints; and his purity, his
monastic fervour, his stern simplicity, his friendship for
the poor became traditional in the history of Christian
asceticism. In fact, the impress of his genius was stamped
indelibly on the Oriental conception of religious life. In
his hands the great metropolitan see of Caesarea took shape
as the sort of model of the Christian diocese; there was
hardly any detail of episcopal activity in which he failed
to mark out guiding lines and to give splendid example. Not
the least of his glories is the fact that toward the
officials of the State he maintained that fearless dignity
and independence which later history has shown to be an
indispensable condition of healthy life in the Catholic
episcopate.
Some difficulty has arisen out of the correspondence of St.
Basil with the Roman See. That he was in communion with the
Western bishops and that he wrote repeatedly to Rome asking
that steps be taken to assist the Eastern Church in her
struggle with schismatics and heretics is undoubted; but the
disappointing result of his appeals drew from him certain
words which require explanation. Evidently he was deeply
chagrined that Pope Damasus on the one hand hesitated to
condemn Marcellus and the Eustathians, and on the other
preferred Paulinus to Meletius in whose right to the See of
Antioch St. Basil most firmly believed. At the best it must
be admitted that St. Basil criticized the pope freely in a
private letter to Eusebius of Samosata (Ep. ccxxxix) and
that he was indignant as well as hurt at the failure of his
attempt to obtain help from the West. Later on, however, he
must have recognized that in some respects he had been
hasty; in any event, his strong emphasis of the influence
which the Roman See could exercise over the Eastern bishops,
and his abstaining from a charge of anything like usurpation
are great facts that stand out obviously in the story of the
disagreement. With regard to the question of his association
with the Semi-Arians, Philostorgius speaks of him as
championing the Semi-Arian cause, and Newman says he seems
unavoidably to have Arianized the first thirty years of his
life. The explanation of this, as well as of the
disagreement with the Holy See, must be sought in a careful
study of the times, with due reference to the unsettled and
changeable condition of theological distinctions, the lack
of anything like a final pronouncement by the Church's
defining power, the "lingering imperfections of the Saints"
(Newman), the substantial orthodoxy of many of the so-called
Semi-Arians, and above all the great plan which Basil was
steadily pursuing of effecting unity in a disturbed and
divided Christendom.
|
